may serve to confirm this view of it is, the opposition between what would seem to have been their original title, and another order in the Church. They are called 'juniors' and 'young men, (νεώτεροι and νεανίσκοι,) terms so strongly opposed to presbyters or elders as to incline one at the first glance to consider them as expressive of the two orders of the ministry, the seniors and the juniors, (the πρεσβύτεροι διάκονοι and the Vewτepoι diákovoι ;) the two orders, in short, which at length received the fixed and perpetual titles of presbyters and deacons.

"Accordingly, there is no just ground for supposing, that when the same term deacon occurs in the Epistles of St. Paul, a different order of men is intended: first, because an office may preserve its original name long after the duties originally attached to it have been changed; and, secondly, because, whatever duties may have been added to the office of deacons, it is certain that the duty of attending to the poor was for several centuries attached to it. Even after the deacons ceased to hold the office of treasurers, and the Bishops began to receive the revenues of their respective sees, the distribution of that portion which was allotted to charity still passed through the hands of the deacons. Hence in a still later period, the title of cardinal deacon; and hence, too, the appro

priation of the term diaconia to those Churches wherein alms used to be collected and distributed

to the poor.

"Not that it is possible to point out, with any thing like precision, the course of duty which belonged to the primitive deacons. That it corresponded entirely with that of our present order of deacons is very unlikely, whatever analogy be allowed from their relative situation in the Church. As the Church during the greater part of the first century was a shifting, and progressive institution, their duties probably underwent continual change and modification. If we were to be guided, for instance, by the office in which we find the young men,' (veavioko,) engaged, when the dead bodies of Ananias and Sapphira were removed, we should say that they performed the business, which in the present day would devolve on the inferior attendants of our churches. If, again, we were to judge of their character from the occasion on which we find them acting as stewards of the Church fund, a higher station would be doubtless assigned to them, but still, one not more nearly connected with the ministry of the word, nor approaching more to the sphere of duty which belongs to our deacons. On the other hand, the instances of Stephen and Philip prove, that the title was applied to those who were engaged in

the higher departments of the ministry, although not in the highest.

"After all, it is most likely that the word deacon was originally applied, as its etymology suggests, to all the ministers of the Gospel establishment. But the Apostles having from the first a specific title, it more properly denoted any minister inferior to them,-any, however employed in the service of the Church. Between these, also, there soon obtained a distinction. If we suppose, then, that the seniors, or superior class, were distinguished by the obvious title of Elder deacons, (πρεσβύτεροι διάκονοι) the generic and unappropriated term "deacon" would devolve on the remaining class. And thus the present Order in the Church, to which that name is applied, may be truly asserted to be deacons in the apostolical and primitive sense of the word; and yet, nevertheless, much may be said about deacons, both in the New Testament and in the writings of the early fathers, which will not apply to them."

If any one should be disposed to think it a question of small moment whether Stephen and his companions were or were not the first Deacons ever appointed, let him consider that, however unimportant in itself, it is one which throws much additional light on the subject now before us, We not only find few and scanty

records of those details of the Church-government established by the Apostles, which, if they had designed to leave a model absolutely binding on all Christians for ever, we might have expected to find fully and clearly particularized, but also we find that a part even of what the inspired writers do record, is recorded incidentally only, for the elucidation of the rest of the narrative; and not in pursuance of any design to give a detailed statement of such particulars. Thus a further confirmation is furnished of the view that has been taken; viz. that it was the plan of the Sacred Writers to lay down clearly the principles on which Christian Churches were to be formed and governed, leaving the mode of application of those principles undetermined and discretionary.

evidence of

resulting

above

§ 12. Now what did the Holy Spirit design us Internal to learn from all this? In the first place the Gospel “he that hath ears to hear," may draw from it, from the as has been already observed, a strong internal views. evidence of the genuineness and of the inspired character of our Sacred Books; inasmuch as they do not contain what would surely have been found in the works of men (whether impostors or sincere) left to themselves to record whatever seemed interesting and important.

And this point of evidence presents itself to

Of Essentials a dis

lation in

Scripture to be expected.

the mind at once, before we have even begun to inquire into the particular object proposed in the omission; because we may be sure, in this case, that what did not come from Man must have come from God.1

But besides this we may fairly infer I think tinct reve- that what is essential is to be found clearly laid down in Scripture; and that those points which are either wholly passed over in silence (when they are such that we are certain from the nature of the case, the Apostles must have given some directions relative to them) or are slightly mentioned, imperfectly described, and incidentally alluded to, must belong to the class of things either altogether indifferent, or so far nonessential in their character that "it is not necessary" (as our 34th Article expresses it,) "they should be in all places one and utterly alike ;"— such in short that divine wisdom judged it best they should be left to the discretion of each Church in each Age and Country," and should be determined according to the principles which had been distinctly laid down by divine authority; while the application of those principles in particular cases, was left (as is the case with our moral conduct also)" to the responsible judgment of Man.