The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1875-09-01

hands were too much preoccupled with the
outlines and leading principles OF Presbyte-
rian Church Government to allow OF his
stopping to elaborate the minuter questions
of internal polity. And besides, the diacon-
ate could not become matter of such vital
consequence before the interest of the Church
in missionary schemes had been revived after
long ages of neglect, and while she was con-
tnuing to receive aid from the State. Cal
wins doctrine, however, while expressed very
briefly, will be seen to be in accord with the
beet results of later thought 1t occasions
US some surprise to find absolute silence In
the able discussions Of Principal Cunning
ham. Prof. Addison Alexanders Essays on
Primitive Church Offices have nothing to say
of the Deacon. And even DR.. Bannerman's 8
elaborate volumes on the Church of Christ,
contain no more than hasty announcement
of the we'll known fact, that the four leading
types of Church polity-Papal, Anglican,
Presbyterian, and Congregational-agree in
recognizing the divine appointment of an Of
fee bearing the 2aG ~ Of - nIsat
5;;:'''' ;:.:''i'
books have pre- 49,
ton of the earlier Scott, *ra Their
conclusions, however, are .nbodied in the
First and Second Books of Discipline. And
citations from such authors as Rutherford
and Guthrie, show how much more impor-
tant the deacon was in their eyes, than in
the opinion of their successors in Scotland,
Ireland and America. Pref. Wilson Essay
on the Deacon, Pp. 10 as 81 asserts that
the placing of ecclesiast - funds in the
hands of deacons, was oDkchief ground of
objection to the First Book. The Court
party wished the funds to be handled by
civil functionary, it would seem. The Kirk
refused, and so the First Book of Discipline
never was adopted by the Government,
though it is claimed as standard by the
Church of Scotland. DR.. John Lorimer, of
the Established Church, in his little work on
the Deacon, calls attention to the use made
of this Office in the financial system of the
Free Church, and expresses the confident
opinion that much of their wonderful success
as Church enterprise is due to the wisdom
of those financial measures, suggested in the
main by DR.. Chalmers. Indications seem to
point toward revival of the seriptural office,
and these are linked to the need of free-will
offerings to carry on such enterprises as
Foreign Missions. And when Church and
State are once separated in' Scotland, as has
been done in Ireland, theeiiaconate will as
sumo its proper place as an arm of the
Church.
The venerable Owen, alone of all the great
masters, seems to have considered the func-
tions of the deacon in az j. bearings. And
this he has done with patient examina-
ton and thorough anal Scripture which
entite the greatest of e Purltans to the
surname of "The JudiciS2s," bestowed with
infinitely less merit upon the great Anglican,
Hooker. DR.. Ovens opinions coincide with
the citations affixed to this article.
Some discussion of the deacons Office may be
found in such treatises as thoA OF King McKerrow,
and DR.. Samuel Miller on the Ruling Elder. Prof
Wilson's Essay, already cited, seems to be the most
thorough. But DR.. a. W. Miller, of Charlotte N.
Co. has ably criticised defects in the Scottish Theory
adopted by Prof. Wilson, in two valuable contribu