Chapter IX: The General Advantages of a Revival of the Office of Deacon, and the Special Call to it at the Present Day

1. A General revival of the office of deacon would be highly useful to the eldership. I need say nothing of the importance of this spiritual office in the Church of Christ, or of the immense benefits which the discharge of its duties has rendered to the Church and to society. At the same time, as at present administered, it admits of decided enlargement and improvement. The revival of the office of deacon would conduce to both, and that in a variety of ways. It cannot be doubted that one reason, especially in large towns, why many excellent men, when asked to join the eldership, decline to do so is the troublesome and oppressive charge of the poor, as they apprehend it, in which they would thereby involve themselves. They have no time for this, especially if they belong to the humbler classes of society, and have little taste or tact for it if in the higher; hence the services of many are lost to the eldership. I am informed, that in a town where there were but 50 elders to the charge of above 700 poor, there was no obtaining elders till relieved of the charge of the general, as distinguished from the poor in communion with the Church. The number was reduced to 150. Since this arrangement has been made—not a correct one, as we have shewn, in point of principle, so far as the poor are concerned, however proper in regard to the elder—there has been no difficulty in obtaining the aid of men excellently qualified for the discharge of spiritual duties. Had the elder no charge of the poor whatever, it may be believed that, for the same reason, the facilities for obtaining men of suitable qualifications, in all ranks, would be greatly multiplied.

But the revival of the office of deacon would not only add to the number of the eldership—itself an immense advantage—but it would improve the character and influence of those who hold the office of elder. Their appropriate spiritual calling is apt to suffer, from being mixed up with the management of temporalities. These are ready to absorb, and the poor are apt to carry prejudices—it may be unreasonable ones, created by the one administration against the other, and higher. This is finely expounded by Dr. Chalmers, in a part of his works to which reference has been already made. The more that a man holding a spiritual office can be separated from mere secular matters, the better. The apostles evidently acted upon this principle in instituting the office of deacon. At the same time, it is not so absolute as to preclude a union of offices where there are not men to fill both departments. It is plain that the apostles must themselves have manage the affairs of the poor previously to the appointment of deacons; and if so, it cannot, in case of necessity, be unlawful for ruling elders to discharge the same duty. Where possible, however, this should be avoided, and in the vast majority of cases, it may be easily and safely done. It may be noticed, that if the present discussion on the management of the poor in Scotland terminate in anything like a nearer approximation to the English poor-law system, it will be doubly necessary for the integrity of the office of elder to have a large body of deacons. Apart from this, there will be great danger of the office being seriously secularized, and that just at the very time it is rising in its spiritual character. A faithful deaconship would, by keeping up the habits of the people, often render a compulsory assessment necessary; while where it existed, their services would be peculiarly needed to shield the elder’s office from injury.¹

In addition to the advantage of making the elder more free for the exercise of his spiritual calling, and giving him to feel that he really is invested with an important spiritual office, which demands special attention, there is another advantage in this connexion, and that is, that the deaconship would prove an excellent nursery for the eldership. Men having tried in the one office, would, where otherwise qualified, enter with great effect upon the other. The apostle Paul evidently contemplated the deacon being a younger man than the elder, and, after being proved in the deaconship, rising to a higher office in the Church; nor where the election to the office of elder is popular, is there anything difficult or invidious in the advancement. If the appointment rested with the minister and elders, there might be difficulty. They might be satisfied in their own minds, that one who made an excellent deacon wanted the qualities to render him an equally excellent elder, and could not, therefore, propose him to the congregation; while they would feel it to be painfully invidious to pass over one who had served the deaconship well for many years, and to put younger men over his head. This invidiousness is prevented where the congregation elect to the eldership. We may be sure that they will not unnecessarily pass over a deacon who has been known or useful among them; and, supposing that a deacon is not so called, he will be much more easily reconciled to retain his deaconship, and discharge its duties, in which he excels, when it is the voice, not of an individual, but of the congregation, which decides. The deaconship, as affording an opportunity of knowing men’s character and qualifications, and proving their graces in various ways, is exceedingly valuable as a preparation for the eldership. It will secure a far larger number of efficient elders, particularly in considerable towns, where imperfect acquaintance of the members of the congregation one with another is one of the grand hindrances to a well-appointed staff of elders. A friend, who had sixteen deacons in his congregation, four of whom were lately called to the office of elder by the votes of the Christian people, remarks on the advantage to which I at present refer in these terms:

The early bringing in of men too young for the eldership to the habit of active usefulness, and if they approve themselves in the inferior office, preparing and pointing them out to the session and congregation as fit persons for the higher,—this I find a real advantage, and do not doubt that it might be carried to a great extent and to the best results.

So much for the influence of a revived deaconship on the eldership.

2. The change would be beneficial to the minister. It would at once relieve, and strengthen, and encourage him. Even as matters stand, with all the aid which he derives from elders, there are many matters devolved upon him of a secular nature which he would rather wish to commit to the hands of deacons, as appropriate to them; and, besides this, it is comforting and animating for a pastor to be surrounded by a large body of intelligent men, interested in the poor and the financial affairs of the Church. He feels, that amid all his own difficulties and discouragements, he is not standing alone—that others are alive to his circumstances, and sympathise with him, and are forward to aid him—and that he can have their advice and cooperation in many matters which are otherwise fitted to distract and to burden. This is a source of comfort and strength, even though he may not, as pastor, have frequent occasion to call for the assistance.

3. Next, a revival of the office of deacon would interest a large body of men in the poor, and reflexly do good to the deacon himself. It is a common and melancholy saying, that one half of society do not know what the other half are doing, or how they subsist. This is not like the sympathy and benevolence of brothers—the children of the same Father. Nor is it good for the community. It creates a most injurious separation of ranks, which soon comes to be filled up with jealousies, alienations, and enmities, ready to break out on the first favourable opportunity. The office of deacon tends to amalgamate ranks, to soften differences, to prevent or correct pernicious misapprehensions. Besides this, to labour among the poor is to do good to one’s self. It teaches dependence upon God’s sovereignty, which maketh us to differ—calls forth gratitude to the kindness of Providence—awakens sympathy and regard for our suffering fellow-men—and is fitted to make one humble and denied to the world. It affords scope, too, for active Christian benevolence—a benevolence which it is not desirable should remain without an object, ever addressed from the pulpit, but never called into living operation in the world. When it is considered that deacons may generally be young men, the advantage of early bringing them into contact with the indigent, and preventing the growth of selfishness and worldliness, and exaggerated views of life, in an age peculiarly addicted to such evils, is the more important.

4. A fourth advantage of the revival of the office of deacon, would be the increased attention which the poor would receive, not only in the supply of their actual wants, but in other ways. Much of this cannot be expected at the hands of paid agents, generally appointed because they are stern to the poor, and will keep down pauperism, and appointed, too, independent of religious character. Such persons would naturally treat the poor either with great coldness and harshness, or would minister to their wants with a prodigality which would be very injurious. There is no sort of moral or religious security that they would act a different part. On the other hand, though private Christians may, and ought to do much more for the welfare of the poor, by personal exertions, than they usually attempt, yet these do not supersede the attentions of the deacon. Having no official or responsible public character, private individuals may care for the poor or not, by fits and starts, just as they please, and as suits their convenience. This is not satisfactory to the poor, nor is it fitted to gain the object in view. The grand thing is to join the advantages of both—the advantage of official responsibility and persevering application, with the intelligent sympathising kindness of the private Christian; and in the character and office of the Christian deacon these unite. It is evidently a matter of high moment and serious obligation, to do more for the poor, particularly in the large towns, and remote Highland and Island parishes, than is usually done, to enlarge, if necessary, the existing pecuniary provision; but above all, to take steps for raising their character, and with it their condition. Humanly speaking, it would be impossible to create, at once, a large body of men over the whole country, possessed of the character and position of the Christian deacon, without doing an immense service, directly or indirectly, to the families of the poor. The raising up of several thousand men, all interested in their indigent fellow-men and fellow-parishioners, could not fail to be immediately felt. It would prevent intemperance, and promote education, and economical habits, and domestic comfort; and, in short, render services of good, which at present we can scarcely conceive.

It is right to add, that a peculiar class of poor, who have special claims upon the attention of the Christian deacon, would naturally and greatly share in the advantages of a revival of the office—I mean, the poor saints. They should be cared for, not merely as ordinary poor, receiving a few shillings now and then: they should, so to speak, be watched over. The congregation, through the deacon, should see to it, that none of their members are in want of food or clothing, and so prevented from attending on the services of the sanctuary. Some hesitate about a revival of the office of deacon, in the apprehension that, with the eldership in active operation, there would be no work for the deacon. But let this important branch of Church duty be properly attended to, and there will be no want of pleasant and useful labour, even though the more general duties of the office were fewer than they are.

5. As a consequence of the whole, the Church would be strengthened in the affections of the people, and so fitted for growing usefulness. She would be surrounded by many thousand additional office-bearers, while the offices of minister and elder would, at the same time, be raised in efficiency,—in short, the Church should do more work, and the work would be better done; and, in these days, such a course is the grand condition of public favour and stability. Besides, the Church would receive the blessing of the poor man, which is of no small price; and yet better, she would be crowned with the approbation of her exalted Head. Not only seeking to do good, but to do good in the way of His appointment, His special smile would rest upon her labours.

These are strong recommendations for reviving the office of deacon at any time, but they are particularly important at the present day. After making every allowance for the danger to which even sagacious men are exposed, of exaggerating the social evils which may happen to prevail at a particular season, there seems every reason to conclude, that the combination of evils which at present presses upon society is not transitory. The increasing application of machinery to manufactures, and the improved methods of agriculture, are evidently forcing multitudes, who have not the means of emigration, into the ranks of poverty. However society may ultimately right itself, this is the present result, and there seems no probability that it will quickly disappear. In these circumstances, it is plain that some decided effort must be made to meet the wants of society. The country seems to be driving to one of those grand crisises which form epochs in history, and which can be encountered only by some simultaneous exertion of corresponding extent and power. To prevent, however, the reader being misled by exaggerated views, I have corrected, in Appendix V, some of the greatly over-coloured statements, in regard to the social condition of Glasgow and Scotland, which from time to time have been made. Still, the evils are alarming, and all intelligent, and especially Christian men, must look them steadfastly in the face. Whether a revival of the full duties of the Christian Church in regard to the poor, and that in the way of Christ’s appointment, by a large staff of deacons, however equal to meet the ordinary calls of indigence, would be adequate in such an emergency as the present—the fruit of the accumulating evils of years—may be doubtful. Still it is plainly a movement in the right direction; and it is unquestionable that, in this way at least, very much good would be accomplished. In a crisis so serious there is always danger that the hope of immediate relief may betray men into plans, not only defective, but ultimately injurious. There is peculiar hazard of this where personal and family suffering are involved. Benevolent men are willing even to sacrifice their speculative principles, or to hold them in abeyance, for the sake of supplying the wants of their destitute fellow-men. All this enhances the value of charity, in the scriptural way proposed, so much the more. Seeking out the old paths of the Word of God, and standing in them, we can never do mischief. We may not be able to accomplish at once all the good which is desirable or necessary, but we are in the right way, and must be ultimately successful.

Many, then, and peculiar are the advantages of reviving the office of deacon. Our present social disorders may have been intended, in the providence of God, in part, to call the attention of the Christian Church to this part of its duty. It is true that most Christian Churches do something for their poor, but they do not, in this respect, discharge their whole duty to all the poor, in the way or to the extent in which Christ requires it. Let the Christian Church listen to the voice of Providence, and be faithful to her trust and to the rule of Scripture. A high honour and distinguished reward await her if true to herself and to the poor. Discredit and reproach will attend her footsteps if, in such a crisis, the irreligious and the infidel can say, with truth, that the Christian Church did no more than the world, and that, in extraordinary circumstances, she felt and acted as if there were nothing peculiar.

I cannot suppose that any parties will be so unreasonable or infatuated as wilfully to throw obstacles in the way of the revival of the office of deacon. There may at first be a little jealousy in some quarters. In rural parishes some heritors may fear that, sympathizing too strongly with the poor, or bringing out their wants more fully than before, deacons may add to the parochial burdens in seeking to relieve them; and some elders may fear that their office will be superseded when that of the deacon comes into vigorous play; but the jealousies are equally unfounded. The deacon will ultimately, and that at no great distance of time, prevent pauperism; and instead of superseding, will improve the office of elder, and make it more efficient for its appropriate duties. These things are in accordance with experience. I happen to know a case where, on the revival of the office of deacon, a few years ago, there was a little unpleasant feeling at first among the parties referred to, from not correctly understanding the nature and operation of the deaconship; but soon a leading heritor made the deacon his private almoner, so satisfied was he with the change, and speedily the services of the deacon were appreciated by the elders, and were most valued by the most diligent and prayerful of the number.

I have spoken of the varied advantages of a revival of the office of deacon in the Christian Church. I little thought at the time that there was to be so speedy a revival of it in one branch of the Church, and far less of the particular way in which this was to be brought about, even by a disruption of the Established Church of Scotland; but it is a satisfaction to find, after the lapse of so many years, that events have verified the soundness of the general principles of this little work. It is pleasing to find that the office has been so extensively revived, and with such felt advantage. Though it has been mainly in the direction of maintaining the Christian Church, its pastors, school-masters, and Sabbath-schools, and other institutions, there can be little question that in this way the revived office has prevented much evil, even the evils of poverty, and conferred much social good on numbers throughout the land. There is still much room for the diligent exercise of the office. Whether there be any thought of a social crisis, to be apprehended now, as seemed to impend twenty years ago, or whether such symptoms have finally disappeared with propitious economic changes, both in Great Britain and Ireland, there is still scope for wise Christian philanthropy. Whether we look to the houses or the health of numbers of the people, or the state of crime, revealed by public registers, in particular districts, or occasional ebullitions of a low style of morals in the community generally, it is too evident that there is great need for the Christian philanthropist clothed with the influence and authority of the Church deacon. There is a special need for such labour at the present time. In addition to all the considerations also which have been suggested, it is to be remembered that there is marked encouragement in such work. Without raising the question, whether relatively the present times be better than the days of our fathers, there can be no doubt that there is a great amount of active benevolence and Christian philanthropy abroad in society, and that almost every form of evil is searched out, submitted to public attention, and vigorously assailed. Many plans for checking and correcting vice, and relieving suffering, have recently been put into operation, which were never thought of before—kinds of wickedness have been grappled with, which used to be given up as hopeless, and that with encouraging success. Even men who would not consider themselves, or be considered by others, as evangelical Christians, have been taking a warm interest in particular forms of philanthropic usefulness. The meetings of The Social Science Association are a proof of this. The Christian party have told upon the social reformers. They have quickened them, while the social reformers have, in their turn, in some direction stimulated the Christian philanthropist. How desirable, yea, imperative is it that the evangelical Church be fully abreast of the age in all social questions, finding evil out and applying the appropriate remedy! And how can she act so well as through a class of office-bearers clothed with authority? The Christian Church has been accused of being careless and indifferent upon social questions, from her superior concern for the directly religious, even the soul’s salvation. We do not believe that there is any just foundation for such a charge. On the contrary, we believe it could be shewn that Christian men, and the Christian Church, have been the leading originators and sustainers of efforts after social improvement, and that others have been drawn in, through their public appeals and the diffusion of their principles. Who is ignorant that the first great social reformer in our age,—the man who gave the impulse which many are variously carrying out at the present day, was Dr Chalmers? He was undoubtedly the first in modern times to apply Christianity to social and economic questions; and though the particular views on some points which he advocated were not accepted, yet the cause of social improvement was largely benefited by the general impulse which he communicated. Had it not been for his labours, social science would not have been occupying the position which it now holds. At the same time, there are still men who accuse the Christian Church of indifference to the merely temporal, and take the credit to themselves and their party of being the only friends of social reform. How important is it that the Christian Church shew she is not behind the age, that she fully sympathises in all befitting efforts to correct the evils and promote the amelioration of society,—that these not only harmonise with her higher mission, but that her higher mission furnishes the best and most sustained motives to social improvement in every form! In this way it may be hoped that causeless prejudices will be extinguished, and that the Christian Church, with its appropriate organisation, will be recommended and honoured.

There is the greater propriety in the revival of the office of deacon, and the application of it to social questions, when it is remembered how remarkable is the religious movement of the present time. Good men are rejoicing in an awakening more deep and extensive than has appeared for centuries. One of the interesting fruits is its influence on social morality. All who have had to do with the movement have marked this feature: even the world around are constrained to acknowledge it. The diminution of intemperance, and with it varied crimes, and the attention to education and efforts to recover educational neglect; the increase also in the contributions to the savings’ bank and to Christian objects, and kindred favourable manifestations, are all well known. These call for the guidance and encouragement of the Christian deacon, while they strikingly shew that it is through evangelical Christianity that the best and most stable fruits of social amelioration are to be reaped. The Church, in reviving the old organisation, is not dealing in mere hopes and conjectures of good. Already there has been cheering progress beyond what the most sanguine could have anticipated. I subjoin one or two facts of the social improvement, doubtless helped if not originated by the religious. In a poor destitute district of the Calton, a mission was lately established by a few Free Church students. Shortly after its establishment, I find the following notice of the social advantage:

A pence savings’ bank has been opened for the benefit of those residing in the district, and has been remarkably successful. It is open on every Saturday evening from seven to eight, and the money is lodged weekly in the National Security Savings’ Bank. The quarterly reports indicate a growing frugality among the people. At the end of September nearly £45 had been received at the credit of 336 depositors.

Penny and savings’ banks are recognised as part of the regular and almost essential machinery of home missions to the most neglected of the population, and their success is most encouraging. Hence, in the south, they have been warmly patronised by the Independents and Wesleyans, as well as by zealous ministers of the Church of England.

In the West Riding of Yorkshire, in a village of 2500, where ten or twelve shillings were all that were expected or weekly received, now a sum is obtained of £10 or £12; and observers state that the character of villages has visibly changed since the penny-bank system was introduced.

A friend, who has had the largest experience of home mission operations, (the Rev. Mr M‘Coll, of the Wynds, of Glasgow), speaking generally, says, in a note:

I have found our form of Presbyterian government most valuable in home-mission work, giving opportunities for training men in self-government, and of being advanced, as they are fit, to more responsible posts. I have made it a rule that every elder should first be a deacon, and that the deacon should pass through subordinate work—such as Sabbath-school teaching, visiting, collecting, &c.—so as both to be trained and tested.