church depend in a great measure on the character of the deacons. It is no unfrequent thing to see a church torn to pieces by strife, and the labours of its minister rendered comparatively useless by the imprudence and ambition of those who sustain the diaconal office. A holy, prudent deacon is to a minister a most faithful and valuable coadjutor, and to a church a useful servant. On the other hand, an injudicious, unambitious, worldly man, who unfortunately sustains this office, is too often a plague to the minister and a curse to the church. "In our Dissenting churches," said Matthew Wilks, "we have no lord arch-bishops, but we have sometimes lord arch deacons."

Here is Mr. Jones or Mr. Smith, deacon of the Independent church, in the small markettown of By his industry and perseverance he has raised himself from a humble position to that which he now enjoys, and though a man of business habits he is quite uneducated. He lives in a good house, is on intimate terms with the rector of the parish, who always shakes hands with him when they meet. Occasionally he invites his minister to dine with him, and generally goes to sleep for an hour after dinner, and leaves his children to entertain his spiritual guide! But he contributes twenty pounds a year to the funds of the church, and therefore he has been elected a deacon. He is never seen at a prayer-meeting, or in the cottages of the poor; he passes the members of the church without speaking to them, or even recognising them; he opposes most of the plans of the minister for promoting the cause of Christ. There must be no preaching in the open air, for that is not respectable : cottage-meetings are low: he could not think of allowing his daughters to attend one: woe be to the minister if he should even hint at taking part in an Anti-State-Church meeting, and thus wounding the feelings of "my dear friend, the rector." Thus the minister feels himself hampered at every step he takes; and the church, feeling that it cannot well do without Mr. Jones' twenty pounds, too often suffers his domination and winks at his inconsistencies.

Now, if the New-Testament-law had been carried out in the election of deacons in this church, such a man would never have been chosen. Churches err by forgetting that there is a law for their guidance in this matter, but oftener they err by basely preferring the princi. ple of expediency to the law of Christ. either case nothing but mischief can be expected to ensue.

In

We hear a great deal about the inefficiency of Independent churches, and unhappily we can all point to some one or more distracted by strife and contention, where we look in vain for the lovely and loving spirit of the gospel. The people are broken up into factions, the deacons are divided amongst themselves, the minister is kept in a constant state of anxiety, and is finally driven away with his heart almost broken. The enemies of our faith and order point triumphantly to such exhibitions, and taunt us with the miserable working of our boasted principles. Now it ought not to be forgotten, that the efficiency of our principles depends on their being strictly followed; and they assume the possession of a large measure of piety in those who work them. Carried out to the letter by spiritual men, they are noble

principles, and must be efficient; but tampered with and prostituted to purposes of personal ambition, they are most licentious.

The diaconal office can only be a blessing when those who sustain it are elected in accordance with the New Testament law, and in the spirit of prayerfulness and solemnity.

We shall first of all endeavour to show who are the men who ought to be elected to this office; and, secondly, how they should be elected. The apostle Paul, in his first Epistle to Timothy, iii, 8-12, gives us a description of the men who ought to sustain this office.

They must be "grave;" that is, serious, sober-minded men, free from thoughtless levity of conduct, whose character shall be such as to secure respect and esteem.

They must be "not double-tongued ; " not hypocritical, saying one thing and meaning another; but must ever be characterised by transparency and sincerity.

It

They must "not be given to much wine." does not say that they are not to take wine at all, nor does it say they are to take it: it only makes it imperative that they are not to take much wine. A wine-bibbing-man who is prone to get a little "elevated" every day after dinner, is not the man whom the apostle would have chosen as a deacon.

They must "not be greedy of filthy lucre ;" not money-lovers, covetous, hard-hearted men, with no bowels of compassion. This is especially necessary, as they are to be entrusted with the property of the church, and have to apply its funds to the relief of the poor and needy. They are not to dole out the benefactions of the church with a niggardly hand. Many a minister, in his pecuniary dealings with a money-loving deacon, who has paid him his salary in a coarse and vulgar way, as though every penny had come out of his own pocket, has had reason to wish that this qualification were always insisted on. Churches, whatever you do, never elect a covetous man to be your deacon! They must "hold the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience;" they must be sound in their views of the Gospel, and holy in heart.

They must be "proved" men; men whom the church has known, and in whom it can confide; not mere strangers, but those who have an established character for piety and zeal.

And they must be "blameless; " upright, honest, consistent, benevolent, and irreproachable; not men of doubtful character, but above suspicion.

They must "rule their children and their houses well." They must be masters at home. If they are not; if their children be disobedient and self-willed, this indicates on their part the absence of those qualifications which secure that respect and influence, without which no man should be a deacon.

Their wives must be "grave;" not foolish and trifling; "not slanderers;" not backbiters or tattlers, making mischief in the church; "sober," judicious, prudent, of sound mind; "faithful in all things."

Here, then, we have a description of those who ought to be appointed to the diaconal office, and a description, be it observed, which comes to us with all the sanction and solemnity of the law of Jesus Christ. It would be interesting to know how many of our churches follow this law to the letter in the choice of deacons.

Let us now glance at the manner in which they should be elected.

Now the first truth that strikes us is, that the election rests entirely with the church. The minister may neither recommend nor nominate. He has only to confirm the decision of the church, and appoint those whom the church has chosen. "Wherefore, brethren," said the apostles to the church, "look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business," Acts vi, 3. All ministerial dic. tation in this matter is unscriptural, and must be mischievous. Ministers have sometimes made themselves uncomfortable by exerting an indirect influence in favour of certain parties, thus interfering with the church's freedom, and causing heartburnings and jealousies.

When a church feels that it needs a new election of deacons, let its members meet together for special prayer to God touching this matter. We make great mistakes by not sufficiently acknowledging God. He, only, knows the heart; and He, only, can guide us to a wise and proper decision. Thus a spirit of solemnity will be excited, which will be favourable to a right course of action.

Let the members individually read with a prayerful spirit what the sacred writers say respecting the office of deacon, and be determined at all hazards to carry out the New Testament law in reference to the subject. Oh! that we had that holy confidence in our principles which we ought to have, and that entire obedience to Christ's law which would lead us conscientiously to do His will, whatever may be the result! Then we should not give a man the honours of the church simply because he is a rich man, or because he has great influence, or because it would be dangerous to offend him. But the man who possessed most of the qualifications required by the word of God, whether poor or rich, would be the man of our choice. Then most of the unpleasantness and strife

which too often succeed an election of deacons would be removed, and men of the right stamp would be secured for the office.

Let there be no canvassing among the members; this is invariably the cause of unhappi

ness.

Let every member be left to the free, uninfluenced exercise of his own judgment in the matter. Canvassing is a low, worldly thing, contrary to the spirit of the Gospel, and unworthy of the followers of the Lord Jesus.

Let the election be by ballot, and the votingpapers be examined by the retiring deacons, or by those already in office, assisted by the minister; and let the names of those who are chosen be mentioned to the church in alphabetical order.

Let the church bow to the decision of the majority of its members, and sustain those who are chosen to the office by prayerful co-operation in every good word and work.

Were these hints acted upon by all our churches, the results would soon be seen: we should have none of that petty squabbling which is so often connected with an election of deacons, and which makes both ministers and churches tremble when such an election is necessary. Let us all labour to exorcise from our churches the spirit of expediency, and act more and more in the spirit of stern and unyielding obedience to the law of Christ.

Yorkshire, August, 1851.

COLLECTION DAY.

SIR, Amid the multitude of subjects to which you have called the attention of the churches, if my memory does not fail me, you have never touched upon that of Collection Day. I hope, therefore, you will permit me to call your attention to some points connected with it. It is common, you are aware, to announce, the previous Lord's day, the Collection which it is intended to make on the next, I that the people may prepare suppose, for it. How far this proclamation may serve that purpose, I can hardly say; but as an officer of a church I know another effect which it has-it prevents not a few from appearing at all, on that occasion; so that it becomes, as the late venerable Mr. Parsons, of Leeds, was wont pleasantly to say, instead of "Collection Day, Dispersion Day."

Sir, how is this? Surely it is not among the things of "good report," "virtue or praise." Persons may be poor, as many of the excellent of the earth are; but that is no reason they should turn their back upon the house of God, on such occasions. I do not refer, however, to those in straitened circumstances, but to individuals, who are well known to be placed amid those of comfort. The first and lowest view of the matter that strikes me, is that which relates to decency. How people well to do, can attend a place of worship, all the year round, and uniformly, or nearly so, withdraw when Collections are made for Schools, for Missions, for repairs of the Edifice, or the support of the Gospel, or some other object of Christian philanthropy, and on the next Sabbath, again, with the utmost complacency, show themselves, is to me quite incomprehensible on any principle which does not compromise self-respect, and personal honour.

But this, as I have said, is the lowest ground; the next view of the subject, it strikes me, touches on higher; it affects Christian principle. Here the matter presents itself to my mind in two aspects, to both of which the article of principle just referred to must be applied. We do not place all the subjects of contribution we have mentioned on the same level; if some be classed as bounty others must be viewed as debt. Where the Support of the Gospel is concerned, such conduct is decidedly unjust; it is a virtual robbery, and in direct contradiction to the law of Christ. We commend to all such the words of the Apostle: "Let

him that is taught in the word, communicate unto him that teaches in all good things." Again, in 1 Cor. ix. 14: "Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel." A little reflection would

show such people, that their course but ill agrees with these injunctions of the Divine Master. Was it not to such he said, "Be not deceived, God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap?" For people known to be in good circumstances to act such a part is, I repeat, as unjust as it is disgraceful. If all were to act such a part, what would be the issue to the cause of God? And if it be right, why should not all act it? And if it be wrong, why should these people of whom we are speaking? Would it not be the utter and speedy destruction of the kingdom of God upon earth?

Thus much for duty. But I said, while they neglect duty they sacrifice privilege; in this I refer to all those benevolent objects and institutions which stand connected with the cause of Christ. Their policy seems to be to make a profession of faith in the Gospel on the cheapest possible terms. Such people

must surely be very ignorant of the nature of Christian profession; they must have an imperfect conception of the doctrine of "works of faith and labours of love," and of the claims of the Son of God. I am quite at a loss to comprehend them; if they be the children of God by faith in Jesus-which in many cases seems doubtful-they must be the lowest in spiritual life; both the head and the heart must be in a condition the most seriously alarming, and far from even an approach to "the stature of perfect men in Christ." Such conduct is most unsaint like! It was not thus that He acted towards men, who, though rich, yet for our sakes became poor, that we through his poverty might become rich. It is not easy to see how men, who thus act towards him and his cause, can have any strong sense of his amazing goodness and of their own eternal obligations to him. It is very affecting, to see many of the human race so studious of a form of godliness while obviously destitute of its power. He who knew it well, and who, although a liar from the beginning, and the father of falsehood, for once spoke the truth when he said, "All that a man hath will he give for his life." This witness is true: and hence it was that, in the course of a few centuries, the

Romish Priesthood succeeded in possessing themselves of nearly all the property of Europe. How came they by it? It was given them as the price of life by ignorant, deceived, and deluded men, on the brink of eternity. Their cry was, "Give your property to the church, and go to heaven!" The price was promptly paid, and the givers went on into eternity, with a lie in their right hand as a passport to paradise, to learn, when too late, the moral deception which had been practised upon them in the name of religion!

This is one side of the picture; let us now look at the other. Protestantism comes with the true Gospel of the grace of God, preaching salvation without money and without price, as the gift of the free, infinite, and everlasting love of God. Men are invited, nay commanded, to "drink of the waters of life freely; the mass are indifferent; but a multitude profess to believe the testimony, to comply with the command, and to rejoice in the free and full salvation thus offered. It is presumed, that from the nature of the Gospel, and from the nature of man, the result will be to fill the heart of every believer with love to the Author and Finisher of faith, and that all subsequent existence will be devoted to his service and glory; and on these assumptions a variety of exhortations, commandments, and considerations are grounded, such as "The love of Christ constraineth us, because we thus judge, that if One died for all then were all dead; and that he died for all, that they who live, should not henceforth live to themselves, but unto him who died for them and rose again," 2 Cor. v. 14, 15. And again; "Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you? Ye are not your own, ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's." And again: "Whether ye eat or drink or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." Such is the declared result of the free salvation of the Gospel: while good works are not the cause, they are nevertheless the fruits of it, so much, and unalterably so, that if they do not follow the profession of the faith of the Gospel, their absence throws entire discredit upon such a profession. there be no works, it is because there is no faith; if there be no labours, it is because there is no love. The principle is infallible, and its results are uniform.

If

Now it is with these facts staring

what extent there is room for oratory, speaking strictly, in the pulpit, our answer will assign to it a limited sphere. The immediate object of the orator is specific action; and indeed so directly does speech, in this instance, lead to action, that its seems rather action than words. Without understanding this we shall hardly appreciate or even admit the truth of the great Greek orator's thricetold injunction, according to which delivery is everything; for what is plainly untrue of speech in general may be quite true of the kind of speech called oratory. Whenever the object of a speech is to produce a definite action it may come within this class; and the more immediately the action is to follow, the more successful, relatively, will be the oration. Where the action to follow is inevitably postponed, or is of its nature continuous and enduring, it is usual to make use of an oath or pledge, taken under the influence of the oration, before the judgment has had time to resume its sovereignty; feeling and the orator's power still predominating. Peter the Hermit's preaching of the Crusaders, and Father Matthew's of Temperance, may be taken as examples. Oratory can do little to make a man repent or believe in any profound sense; but it may be most efficient in persuading him to submit to the external acts of baptism. It may thus be an invaluable weapon to the Romanist missionary, while the Protestant one will find it of little use. Indeed, in some of its aspects it seems to exert rather a physical than a rational influence, and to produce effects more nearly resembling those ascribed to Mesmerism than any others with which we are acquainted.

The strange manner in which an audience is brought into subjection to the speaker's will must have often suggested the analogy (if, indeed, it be not something even more nearly kindred) to which we have referred; the rather that a certain force of will, quite irrespective of power of thought, seems to belong to great orators. It will thus appear that the state of mind in his hearers desired by the orator is very different from that desired by the teacher; the one would rouse them to action, the other would still them to reflection.

We ought, perhaps, here to notice a very frequent modern use of oratory, where something different from immediate specific action is aimed at; that, namely, where the object is to inculcate a maxim, or to brand with a nickname.

431

The extent to which this remark applies both to political and to so-called religious meetings we leave our thoughtful readers to consider. One who well deserves to be listened to, has said, "The lower portion of the religious public in England scorns principles, delights in proper names. If it be so, we can well understand that here oratory may do much. It can deal easily with names, although hardly with principles. In the pulpit its most obvious use would seem to be found in what are called "Charity Sermons; that is, in those comparatively rare cases where the discourse is directed to the announced end. Beyond this, it may perhaps be said with truth, there is little room for it; unless upon extraordinary occasions, when it may be thought necessary to urge to some particular act; and it must be here said that, inasmuch as (to quote from a familiar treatise) "oratory contemplates the investigation of truth only as a secondary object," the frequent practice of it is extremely perilous to the mind; which, if at all abandoned to it, may lose the power of estimating, with any justice, the relative weight of the truths which it has been accustomed to value only in so far as they could be made to serve an immediate purpose.

We are now to come to a point at which it will be necessary for us to look at a very serious question. We have to consider what is the subject-matter of which the Christian preacher has to discourse; for according to our view of that will be our estimate of the required endowments. In the threshold our readers may be reminded that, however modern usage may have assigned to such words

as

"preach" and "sermon" a definite or even a technical meaning, we find nothing of the same sort in the New Testament, which contains no indication of anything nearly resembling a modern sermon; and in which the terms translated by the word "preach " and its derivatives, suggest chiefly either the public announcement and proclamation of a message, or the impromptu outpourings of intense spiritual intuitions, closely related, if not identical with those of the ancient prophets. Upon any discussion of the subject now alluded to we have no intention of here entering; it is enough if we are not prevented in our inquiry by any biblical objections.

Christianity has been variously regarded, but chiefly in one of three aspects; as being a system of doctrine,