It is by this hope, in part, that I am induced to write, as I should certainly myself be gratified and strengthened were I to read from the pen of another a letter similar to this which you have here. I am, Sir, with sincerity and respect, your obliged and obedient servant, E. S.

OFFICE OF DEACONS.

SIR, I had hoped that a question, which was asked by one of your correspondents, in a Number of your Magazine of the past year, with reference to the office and duties of a deacon, would have been replied to by some one more competent to the task. As no answer has appeared, I take leave to trouble you with a few remarks which oc

cur to me.

It appears to me that the directions which the church has given, in the rubrics contained in the various offices, coupled with the admonition to the deacons in the office for ordination, if attentively considered, may throw considerable light upon the subject. The admonition in the office for "the ordering of deacons" runs thus:-"It appertaineth to the office of a deacon, in the church where he shall be appointed to serve, to assist the priest in divine service, and specially when he ministereth the holy communion; and to help him in the distribution thereof; and to read the holy Scriptures and homilies in the church, and to instruct the youth, &c." From this quotation, the deacon's office, as regards the divine service and holy communion, is quite clear-viz., it is "to assist the priest in divine service," not to perform divine service in his absence. It is important to observe the force of the word "in." He is not to supply the place of the priest in divine service, as he may baptize in the absence of the priest; but he is to "assist the priest," not in his absence, but "in divine service." The supposition here manifestly is, as also throughout the liturgy, that the priest will always be present, although some part of the various offices may be performed by the deacon. It is also important to observe, that there is no office of public worship which can be entirely performed, without the omission of any part, except by a priest. On all hands it is acknowledged, that a deacon cannot pronounce the absolution, nor consecrate the blessed eucharist; and it is generally considered that the deacon has no authority to bless the people. And as one or other of these forms part of every office, it is obvious that the church always supposes the presence of the priest. Had it not been so, we should assuredly have found some directions for the performance of divine service by a deacon, who is not competent to the discharge of all the functions required in the celebration of the daily services.

We may now inquire what part of the several services may be performed by the deacon, when he assists the priest in divine service. The first question is, what is meant by the term minister? It appears to me, that the strict sense of the word is, the administrator of God's holy word and sacraments: the person to whom the ministry of

God's holy word and sacraments is committed; i. e., the presbyter, or priest, or, to use the common, although incorrect, expression, one who is in full orders, in opposition to the Atakovos, or assistant. That this is the true sense of the word minister will appear, by reference to the thirty-second and seventy-sixth canons. In the thirty-second canon it is forbidden to the bishop to make any person "a deacon and minister both together upon one day." And in the seventy-sixth canon it is declared, that "no man, being admitted a deacon or minister, shall from thenceforth voluntarily relinquish the same, &c." These authorities, it seems to me, leave no room to doubt what is meant by the word minister-viz., that minister and priest are synonymous. But if it be contended that there is a sense, in which the word minister signifies the officiating clergyman, the celebrant,-still, if I am right in saying that the church always supposes the presence of the priest, the expression minister must still be referred to the priest, and not to the deacon, who, as I have before shewn, is only the assistant.

What part of divine service, therefore, can the deacon perform? If what has been said furnishes any rule by which to ascertain this, it appears that the only parts of the morning and evening prayer which are not expressly assigned to the minister, or priest, are the psalms and the lessons.

And if we apply the same rule to the communion service, it will appear that the only parts of that office which the deacon may perform are as follows:

1. He may read the epistle and gospel, by virtue of his commission to read the holy Scriptures.

2. It is his duty to collect the alms and oblations, and to bring them to the priest, by whom alone they are to be placed on the altar.

3. And by virtue of the commission he received at his ordination, he may assist in the distribution of the holy mysteries to the people, although he may not deliver them to the clergy-not even to his own order, that duty being expressly assigned to the priest.

I am not aware of any authority where the duties of a deacon are expressly and distinctly set forth. But if Hooker, Bingham, Wheatley, and Palmer's Antiquities of the English Ritual be consulted, I think what is before stated would be found to be the result of all that may be collected from those sources.

Something might have been expected to be shewn by the practice of the church; but where irregularities prevail, as they do to some extent in the celebration of our ritual, so that scarcely two clergymen agree in practice, it is impossible to collect much from this source of information.

These observations naturally suggest the inquiry, What is to be done when there is no priest? I answer, it is irregular for the deacon to celebrate divine service at all without the priest. But a more important inquiry is this: Ought any parish to be committed to the care of a deacon alone?

In conclusion, allow me to say, I shall rejoice if these remarks should excite investigation into the subject, which is surely not unim

portant to the due celebration of the sublime services of our catholic and apostolic church. I by no means speak positively upon anything here advanced; but I believe what I have said to be in conformity with the directions and spirit of the catholic church. And I am sure that no effort, however humble, to act upon, and to induce others to act upon the apostle's rule, Παντα κατα ταξιν γενεσθω, will be deemed unworthy the consideration of those who desire the welfare of the church. I am, Sir, your obedient humble servant,

CATHOLICUS ANGLICAN US.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE HOLY COMMUNION.

SIR, A strict attention to the rubrics of our church is, doubtless, the duty, and ought to be the endeavour, of every sincere clergyman. Sometimes, however, a little exercise of the judgment may be required, lest by a too exclusive regard to the mere letter we violate the spirit and intention of the directions we profess to observe.

A rubric which appears to me to require some little care as to the manner of observing it, is that at the close of the Communion Service; which, speaking of the consecrated elements, directs, that "if any remain of that which was consecrated, it shall not be carried out of the church, but the priest and such other of the communicants as he shall then call unto him shall, immediately after the blessing, reverently eat and drink the same." Several good and obvious reasons may be assigned for this direction; but, in carrying it into practice, I would suggest: :

1. That it would be as well in all cases to take care that as little as possible be left.

2. That the priest call as few as may be, and those selected with judgment, (especially if by inadvertence much more than necessary has been consecrated.)

3. That he defer the distribution till the other communicants have retired from the church.

In that part of the country with which I am officially connected, it seems to be the custom for the priest to consecrate a great quantity both of bread and wine, without sufficient regard to the number of communicants, the consumption of which after the service is sometimes quite a matter of difficulty. In several parishes that I could name, it is the custom for the churchwardens, clerk, and four or five others, to assemble round the altar rails to receive the remains of the sacramental elements; and though I certainly never witnessed any actual indecorum, yet the handing about the bread, and passing a cup nearly full of wine from one to another, has not a reverend appearance; and I have heard jocular remarks made upon the subject, which it would be very desirable to avoid. I have reason also to believe, that some clergymen mistake the intention of the rubric so far as to imagine that a portion ought to be left, in order to comply with the direction of the church; whereas I understand that direction as only pointing out what is to be done under circumstances which will

sometimes occur, but the occurrence of which it is desirable to prevent as much as possible. For my own part, I always prefer consecrating twice, or three times if necessary, rather than run the risk of leaving more than myself, the clerk, or at most the churchwardens, can easily and without observation consume.

The custom observed in many places of offering the elements at the door of the church seems not amiss, but is not perhaps quite so closely in unison with the rubric.

the

Before I close I will just add, that I wish the archdeacons, or whoever has the power, would put a stop to the shameful practice of reading the Communion Service in the desk. One bad consequence is, that space within the communion-rails is in many churches little better than a pigstye in respect of cleanliness, being made a complete lumber room, and cleared out only three or four times a year when the sacrament is administered. Before I was ordained I made a sort of resolution never, under any circumstances, to comply with this custom; and whenever I am called to officiate in any church where the custom exists I always make a practice of going to the altar, and reading the service there from my own pocket Prayer Book.

Are we not also too apt to forget that it is the clergyman's duty to place the elements on the altar himself, and not to leave it to the sexton? I am, Sir, your obedient servant, A COUNTRY CURATE.

SUFFRAGAN BISHOPS.

SIR,-There is hardly a diocese in this kingdom in which its bishop does not occasionally, if not constantly, stand in need of assistance in the discharge of those duties which are purely episcopal. And it is matter of surprise, that our church should not have provided for this want by the appointment of suffragan bishops,-a highly useful order of ministers, countenanced and authorized by the practice of the earlier ages of Christianity. In the diocese of Norwich we have long and severely felt this defect in our ecclesiastical establishment. Nothing is further from my intention than to impute blame to our late venerable diocesan; but, considering his great age and infirmities, and the extent of his diocese, consisting, till very lately, of nearly as many benefices as there are in the whole kingdom of Ireland, can any one imagine that his episcopal duties could be so efficiently performed as they would have been had he enjoyed the help of a suffragan residing in his bishopric, and well acquainted with its clergy and its business? The subject has occupied the attention of many friends to the church in this neighbourhood. They once hoped that the return of our East Indian bishops to their native country might in some degree supply the deficiency; and they were prepared, had opportunity been offered, to submit the question to the consideration of our governors in church and state. But, alas! the dreadful waste of life and energies in these pious martyrs cuts off all hope of assistance from that quarter.

My own attention has again been drawn to the subject by perusing

a letter to Sir Robert Peel, very lately published by the Dean of Norwich, recommending certain improvements in our cathedrals, calcu lated to render them more subservient to the efficiency of our national church. Among other judicious observations, the writer adverts to one of the original and principal objects contemplated in the appointment of deans and chapters; i. e., to their being "selected by the bishop as counsel and assistants to him." If the ecclesiastical com missioners should deem the recommendations of the Dean of Norwich entitled to serious consideration, (and in my humble opinion they claim their best attention,) I hope they will not fail to deduce from one of his main propositions a corollary which naturally flows from it, and which it is the purpose of this letter respectfully to recommend. If a diocese wants a suffragan bishop, who so proper to fill that importaut office as the second dignitary in it; especially when by proposed arrangements his services can be obtained without money and without price? To preserve, however, unity in the church, it might still be left to the bishop to decide at what period, how far, and in what particulars, he would avail himself of these services. But it is obvious, that occasions would frequently arise in which they might be employed to the relief and comfort of the bishop himself, and with great benefit to his diocese. CLERICUS NORFOLCIENSIS.

Nov. 25th, 1837.

OBSERVANCE OF THE EMBER SEASONS.

SIR, After reading the Ecclesiastical Intelligence contained in the British Magazine for the present month, I am induced to make a few observations upon that neglect of ecclesiastical order which of late years has been gradually creeping into the church in regard to the solemn work of appointing men to the ministry.

Thus it appears, that in the months of September and October, there were four ordinations holden by four of our venerable prelates; namely, one on Sunday, September 24th; two on Sunday, October 8th, and one on Sunday, October 15th. It also appears, that the Lord Bishop of Ely will hold an ordination on the 3rd of December, and that the Archbishop of York and Bishop of Hereford will hold ordinations on the 17th of the same month.

Now, from the thirty-first canon, it appears, that there are four solemn times appointed for the making of ministers; and from the general preface to the form and manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating of bishops, priests, and deacons, according to the order of the church of England, it appears, that only on some urgent occasion may a bishop admit any man to the ministry except at the times appointed in the canon.

Such, then, is the canonical law; and as I have hitherto believed that it has been generally obeyed, I have, according to the rubric, invariably read one of those beautiful prayers which are appointed for the ember weeks in behalf of those that are to be admitted into holy orders; but I now beg leave to ask, how can I with propriety comply VOL. XIII.-Jan. 1838.

H