The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1875-09-08

building to an ordinary congregation, or els'
in the classroom to congregation of stu
dents preparing to be preachers, this is mere
| ly question of manner in teaching. The
work done as pastor or as reader of divinity
is the same thing.
These blemishes being duly noted, it is
evident that the stress of Hookers defence
rests upon the Anglican principle, (see Ar
ticle W. that the Church is warranted to
decree, abolish, and amend rites and cere-
monies as she judges expedient; provided
only nothing be enacted by the Church
which is expressly forbidden in Scripture,
| and that such enactments of hers be not de-
clared to be "of faith, necessary to saliva
ton" By these two limitations, the found
ers of the Anglican Church considered that
they had sufficiently guarded themselves
against the evils Of the Roman theory Of
church power-with what success, let the de-
velopments of Ritualism say. 1t is precisely
at this point, the discretionary rights of the
Church, that, as all know, there lies the
cardo-precipuus" of the differences be-
tween Anglicanism and ourselves. They
hold the right of the Church to decree at
discretion all things not forbidden; we hold
the right of the Church to do only the things
commanded. Her discretion consists in
choosing among things commanded, what
seems, in view of the circumstances, to be
most suited to glorify God and edify the
saints. To attempt the discussion of this
long-standing controversy, would carry US
far aside from our course, and besides, it
would be doing poorly what has already been
often done with mastery ability. In dis
missing the topic, we venture the remark,
that we have little hope of any proposed
schemes of "reform," within the Protestant
Episcopal Church or elsewhere, which fail
to extirpate this root of all evil-the right of
the Church to change the apostolic consttu-
tion. Branches may be Topped off as they
become offensive; but like the hydra's heads,
they will multiply with battling facility
Our brethren must learn the full meaning of
the battle.cry of their own Chillingworth,
"The Bible! The Bible is the religion Of
Protestantsl" !" The only safe "reform" is
that elaborated with preGminent ability by
the great Reformer of Geneva. The exper-
iment has been fairly tried, and results sus-
tain our opinion. And if the Methodist
Episcopal Church has hitherto escaped the
seductions of Ritualism and Sacramentalism,
while retaining this doctrine of church pow
er in their symbols, we believe it due, under
God, to two causes-complete separation
from the historical associations and the ira
ditions of the mother Church, and to the
purifying influence of that amazing activity
which has made them the " Cavalry of Chris, !,
tianity.'
Hooker very properly does not lay ann
stress upon certain additional arguments
which have been advanced by Anglican apol-
ogists to sustain that theory of the deacon's
office. Such for example, are the alleged
preaching of two, at least, of the seven orig
inal deacons, and the "good degree" prom
ised as the reward of the faithful deacon in
l Tim. ill., 13. So far as the asserted preach
ing of Stephen is concerned, the record only
shows that he made mastery defence of
himself and of Christianity before the San
hedrim, in which ne seems to have been mi
raculously inspired, and that he was very
successful in his public arguments with the
Rabbins. More than this the facts of the
inspired history do not authorize, and in it
all we see nothing which unordained men
are incapable of doing with equal right. If
more be insisted upon, the reply is, that he
was evidently not appointed to preach by the
election spoken of in Acts vi, and nothing
is said of "aptness to teach, in the detailed
statement of the qualifications for the deacon
ship given by Paul in 1 Tim. iii. SIS. AS
to the case of Philip who administers bap-
tism to the Ethiopian eunuch, (Acts viii.,)
and afterwards appears as "Philip the Evan
gelist," (Acts xxi, as an English bishop (Dr.
Croft we'll puts the case, it is altogether un-
reasonable to suppose that Philip, the preach
er, was, during the time of his incessant
travels, holding the appointment of deacon
in Jerusalem, the duties of which, though
represented as very pressing, he would be
manifestly unable to discharge. The "gOOd
deqree" which the faithful deacon is to re-
ceive, according to Tim. iii. l9, carries
with it no necessary reference to his being
advanced to the presbyterate. (See Bishop
Ellicott's Critical Com. in loco.) And even
if it be assumed that kalon bathmon implies
ultimate advancement to the higher office,
(though deacons not being required to pos
sess certain qualifications for the eldership,
might be unfit for it in some cases. still this
does not effect our position. Let all such
as have the needful gifts be regularly called
by the election of the people, and ordained
thereunto by the presbyters. 1t is all pro-
per enough, and in no wise Inconsistent with
the scriptural teaching, that deacons, as
SUCH are appointed to the care Of matters
financial only.
A BAPTIST PAPER SAYS that " the truth is
that the Saviour himself over and over again
recognized and fellowshipped an order Of
nnimmersed preachers and the 'order' still