1 184). Dr. W. L. Alexander, in Kitto's Cyciopadia 8. v.), asserts that it is not easy to justify the assump- ion that the ** seven" were deacons in the later sense. ' Nothing can be drawn from the meaning of the word ^uiKovia as applied to their functions (ver. 1), or the ^ord ^uijcovoct a3 if this title had been originally de- lved from such a * serving of tables' as is here refer- red to, because these words are used in the N. TL with the utmost latitude of meaning, so as to include every Und of service rendered to the Church or cause of God on earth — the service of presbyters (2 Cor. xi, 28 ; Ephes. vi, 21 ; Col. i, 7, etc), of evangelists (1 Thess. Hi, 2), of aposties (Acts xx, 24; xxi, 19 ; Rom. xi, 18;
2 Cor. vi, 4, etc), of prophets (1 Peter i, 12), of angels (Heb. i, 14), of Christ himself (Rom. xv, 8), as well M service in temporal matters. Nor can much weight ^ attached to patristic testimony on this head, be- cause we have no clear declaration in fiivor of the po- sition assumed earlier thin that of the sixth General
II.— Ty
Council Qsi Trullo), held A.D. 680 ; all the earlier wit- nesses speak of the diaconate in connection with spir- itual services or the rites of the Church. ^ If, more- over, this was the institution of a permanent office in the Church, it seems somewhat strange that it should disappear- entirely from the history of the Church for many years, and come up agaUi, for the first time, in the form of an incidental notice in an epistle written in the latter half of the fint century. Taking the narrative in the Acts in its connection with the history of which it forms a part, the ai^ntment of the seven brethren has all the appearance of a temporary expe- dient to meet a peculiar emergency."
Some writers maintain that the office of the " seven" corresponded to that of the l^n, ehaaan, hi the Jewish Synagogue, the innipinit, or "minister," of the N. T. (Luke iv, 20 ; John vii, 82). This is the opmion of yitringa(i>e Syn, Vet. p. 895 sq. ; Bernard's Condensed Tr, p. 87 sq.), whose principle, that the order of the Christian churches was constructed on the model of the synagogues, led him to press the analogy between the two in every possible way. But for tiiis opinion there is no solid support. Titringa's main principle is itself unsound, for nothing can be more evident than that the aposties proceeded upon no prearranged scheme of Church policy, but instituted offices and appointed usages just as cb*cumstances required ; and, as respects the deacon's office, it cannot be shown that one of the duties pertaining to the office of chazzan in the synagogue belonged to it. As Hartmann remarks {Enge Verbmd, des A.T. mit d.N.p, 281), the chatzan wa»a mere -servant whose functions resembled those of our sexton or church officer •(Kitto, Cyclopadia, s. V. ; see also Neander, Planting and Training of the Christiofk Chwrch, Ryland's transhition, i, 84 sq.). See Stnaoooub.
8. But, whatever view may be taken of Acts vi, it appeara dear that the later church office (Phil, i ; 1 Tim. m) developed itself fix>m the office dedgnated in Acts vi, and may be traced back to it. 'Die func- tions of the deacon were primarily secular, but soon rose into spbltual unportance. Hence the " moral qualifi- cations described in 1 Tim. ill as necessary for the office of deacon are substantially the same as those of the bishop. The deacons, however, were not required to be * given to hospitality,' nor to be * apt to teach.' It was enough for them to ' hold the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.' They were not to gain their living by disreputable occupations (fu) aioxpoKtpditc), On offering themselves for their work they were to be sub- ject to a strict scrutiny (1 Tim. iii, 10), and, if this ended satisfoctorily, were to enter on it. It does not appear to have [necessarily] belonged to the office of a deacon to teach publicly in the church. The possession of any special x^P^^V^ (spiritual endowment) would lead naturally to a higher work and office, but tiie idea that the diaconate was but a probation through which a man had to pass before he could be an elder or bishop was foreign to the constitution of the Church of the first century. Whatever countenance it may receive from the common patristic interpretation of 1 Hm. iii, 18 (comp. Estius and Hammond, ad loc), there can be littie doubt (as all the higher order of expositors have felt, comp. Wiesinger and Ellicott, ad loc.) that when Paul speaks of the kciKoq j^aOuSc, or 'good degree,' which is gained by those who Mo the office of a deacon well,' he refera to the honor which belongs essentially to the lower work, not to that which they were to find in promotion to a higher" (Smith, s. v.). On the other side, Dr. Thomas Scott says (Comment, on 1 Tim. iii, 8-18), " The deacons were primarily appointed to dispense the charity of the Church, and to manage its secular concerns. Tet they preached occasionally, or taught in private, or were readen in the public assem- blies, and pastors and evangelists were chosen fh)m among them. This interpretation has been contested,