their duty was to perform such offices for their sex, particularly in baptism, as the usages of the church required, and which could not with propriety be administered by the public ministers of the church. They were also particularly necessary in the East, where that sex is carefully excluded from intercourse with the other. : 5. Their duties were, (a) To take the care of the poor and the sick this in the apostolic age was their principal office-a service so commendable that, in imitation of it, even Julian the Apostate required the same. Under this head may also be classed the duty of ministering to martyrs, and confessors in prison. (b) To instruct catechumens, and to assist at their baptism. They instructed female candidates in the symbols, and other things preparatory to their baptism. Their attendance at the baptism of candidates of their own sex was requisite to assist in divesting them of their raiment, to administer the unction, and to make arrangements for the administration of the ordinance with all the decency becoming a rite so sacred.† (c) To exercise a general oversight over the female members of the church. This oversight they continued, not only in all the exercises of religious worship, of the sacrament, and of penance, but in private life, imparting needful admonition, and making due reports of them to the presbyters and bishop.s 6. This office ceased in the church at an early period, but the precise time cannot be determined. It was abrogated in France, by the Council of Orange, A. D. 441, and appears to have gradually ceased from the Western church. The Council of Laodicea, A. D. 360, c. 11, is supposed to have abrogated this office in the Eastern church. Such is Böhmer's interpretation of it, though he admits that the office continued in the church at Constantinople until the twelfth century. Various considerations probably led to the abrogating of this * Καὶ ότι μεν διακονισσῶν τάγμα (ordo) ἐστὶν εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, αλλ' οὐχὶ εἰς ιερατεύειν, ούδε τι επιχωρεῖν ἐπιτρεπείν, ἕνεκεν δε σεμνότητος του γυναικείου γένους, ἢ δι ̓ ὥραν λουτρου ἢ ἐπισκέψεως παθους ἢ πόνου καὶ οτε γυμνωθείη σώμα γυναίου, μια μὴ ὑπὸ ἀνδρῶν ἱερουργούντων θεαθείη, ἀλλ ̓ ὑπὸ τῆς διακονίσσης.-EPIPHAN. Haer. 79. †The custom of the times was to baptize by immersion, and in a state of nudity. The duties of the deaconesses are duly set forth by the first Council of Carthage, A. D. 399. Viduæ vel sanctimoniales, quæ ad ministerium baptizandarum mulierum eliguntur, tam instructæ sint ad officium, ut possint apto et sano sermone docere imperitas et rusticas mulieres tempore, quo baptizandæ sunt, qualiter baptizatori respondeant, et qualiter accepto baptismate vivant. office, such as the following:-The services of these women became less important after the cessation of the agape of the primitive church; the care of the sick and the poor, which had devolved upon the church, was in the time of Constantine assumed by the state; after the general introduction of infant baptism in consequence of the prevalence of the Christian religion,* their attendance at this ordinance became of less importance; and finally, they, in their turn, became troublesome aspirants after the prerogatives of office; just as the abbesses and prioresses of later times assumed all the offices of the bishop, preaching, administering the communion, absolving, excommunicating, and ordaining at pleasure; abuses which it required all the authority of councils, and of the pope himself, to rectify; in a word, the order was abolished because it was no longer necessary. Cessante causa, cessat effectus. There were fanatical sects even in the ancient church, such as the Montanists and Collyridians, who authorized and encouraged women to speak, dispute, and teach in public. But the sentiment of the church has uniformly been opposed to such indecencies. What impudence, says Tertullian, in these heretical women to teach, to dispute, to exorcise, and even to baptize! Let no woman speak in public, nor teach, nor baptize, nor administer the sacrament, nor arrogate to herself any office of the ministry belonging to the other sex.10 Let not a woman, however learned or holy, presume to teach men in public assembly-is the injunction of the Council of Carthage, iv. 99. Let all the female sex, says Chrysostom, forbear from assuming the responsibility of the sacred office and the prerogatives of men." The Apostolic Constitutions declare it to be a heathenish custom ;12 and Epiphanius has a particular dissertation in which he shows at large, that no woman, from the foundation of the world, was ever ordained to offer sacrifice or perform any solemn service of the church. § 10. OF ARCHDEACONS. THE policy of the bishop, in attaching to himself the interests of the deacons in opposition to the presbyters, was peculiarly manifested in respect to the archdeacon, who was the firm adherent of *Baptisms were at first necessarily administered chiefly to adults, who were received into the church as converts from paganism. But this circumstance is no argument against the ordinance of infant baptism. the bishop and the bitter opponent of the archpresbyters. The office, indeed, owed its chief importance, if not its origin, to the rivalry between bishops and presbyters for dignity and power, and was designed to counteract the influence, particularly of the archpresbyters. Contrary to the general usage of antiquity, qualifications for office had more influence in his election than seniority of age and ordination. Athanasius of Alexandria, while yet a young man, was invested with the office of archdeacon.1 Jerome also gives us to understand that the deacons chose from among themselves indiscriminately the most suitable candidate for the office, or, with greater probability, the archdeacon was first chosen by the deacons, as at Alexandria, in the fourth century, and at a later period was at the disposal of the bishop, as in France, in the fourth century. According to the same author, there was one archdeacon for each church. But while the office was in certain churches elective, in others it was filled by appointment of the bishop. Indeed, he might very naturally be expected to guard with peculiar jealousy the appointment of this officer who, according to the antiquated phraseology of the day, was to be his own right hand, his mouth, his ear, his eye. Accordingly, when the rule of seniority prevailed, the bishop retained the right of overruling it at pleasure, leaving to the candidate elect his rank and title, but substituting in his place another better qualified to transact the business of the office." The leading historical facts relating to this office, are briefly as follows: 1. The office occurs as early as the fourth or fifth century, but without any distinct title; such were Athanasius of Alexandria, Cæcilian of Carthage, and the famous Leo the Great of Rome. 2. The arrogance and ambition of the archdeacons became, as early as the fifth century, the subject of bitter complaint.* This arrogance, which first evinced itself by an assumption of authority * Audio quemdam in tantam erupisse vecordiam, ut diaconos presbyteris, id est episcopis anteferret; nam quum apostolus perspicue doceat, eosdem esse presbyteros, quos episcopos, quid patitur mensarum et viduarum minister, ut supra eos se tumidus efferat, ad quorum preces Christi corpus sanguisque conficitur,— ceterum etiam in ecclesia Romæ presbyteri sedent, et stant diaconi; licet paulatim increbrescentibus vitiis, inter presbyteros, absente episcopo, sedere diaconum viderim, et in domesticis conviviis benedictiones presbyteris dare. Discant, qui hoc faciunt, non se recte facere. Sciant, quare diaconi constituti sint. Legant Acta Apostolorum, recordentur conditionis suæ. HIERON. Ep. 146, Ad Evangel. over the presbyters, finally became troublesome to the bishops themselves, by whom it was at first encouraged. 3. They often had the address to become the successors of the bishop; they claimed to take precedence of the presbyters, and to be second in rank only to the bishop.3 4. Their power became greatly extended through the period reaching from the seventh to the ninth centuries, when they were not only authorized to remove deacons and subordinate officers, but the honours shared by them were in some instances eagerly sought by the presbyters themselves;5 even the jurisdiction of the bishop was disowned by them, with whom they became, in a measure, partners in office." 5. From the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries, the bishops were engaged in a fruitless endeavour to curtail the grasping ambition of the archdeacons, who still had the address to elude their efforts through the influence of synods, and by allying themselves more and more with the secular power. Finally, they not only became independent of the bishops, but subjected them, in a degree, to their own control. The establishment and the increase of their power was favoured at Rome, as the means of weakening the hands of the bishops and extending the influence of the Romish see. So that the very order of men that the bishops employed to assist them in gaining ascendency over the presbyters, was now employed by a more aspiring power against themselves. 6. In the thirteenth century, the archbishops succeeded in putting an effectual check upon the immoderate power of the archdeacons; a decree in council having been finally obtained which prohibited the archdeacon from employing any substitute whatever in the discharge of his office, or passing any judicial sentence for grave offences without the permission of the bishop. The archbishops also required of the bishops that they should employ, in the discharge of their duties, a new class of officers, who should be entirely distinct from the archdeacons. These were first appointed by Innocent IV., A. D. 1250, and were called vicarii, officiales, officials, vicars, and also vicar-generals, because they were intrusted with judicial authority and adjudicated in the name of the bishop. This measure had the desired effect to reduce the power of the archdeacon, which in consequence became an inconsiderable office. In the East it became extinct as early as the eighth century. The office itself may be compared both with that of bishop and deacon, for it partook in part of the nature of both. The principal complaint against the archdeacon arose from the abuse of his power in assuming as his right what was only delegated to him, as has been already related. His various offices are specified by Bingham in the following summary:-1, To attend the bishop at the altar; 2, to assist him in managing the church revenues; 3, in preaching; 4, in ordaining the inferior clergy; 5, he also had power to censure deacons, and the inferior clergy, but not presbyters. § 11. SUBDEACONS. THIS office is a creation of the third century, which Cyprian' is the first to mention. In the Eastern church, Athanasius, who lived a century later, first notices it, at which time it had become common in the churches. Though frequently associated with the inferior clergy, their office may be considered in connection with that of deacons. The specific duty of the subdeacons was to assist the deacons in their duties. The number of these was so limited that it was quite impracticable for them personally to discharge all the duties of their office. For this reason they were provided with the assistance of the subdeacons. Like the deacons, these were usually seven in number. To this number the church of Rome adhered with singular pertinacity. But in order that they might retain their sacred number seven, and still have the aid of a sufficient number of assistants, they created three several classes of these officers, consisting of seven each, and called palatini, stationarii, and regionarii.2 In the church at Constantinople there were at one time ninety, and, at another, seventy subdeacons. Authorities are not agreed respecting the consecration of the subdeacons. Some affirm that they were, and others that they were not, ordained by the imposition of hands.3 In the East they were uniformly regarded as of a subordinate rank, and classed with the readers. In the West they ranked the first in the lower order of the priesthood, and about the twelfth or thirteenth centuries they were transferred to the superior order. The reason for this promotion was that, on the elevation of the episcopate in the increasing power of the hierarchy, the three orders might still retain their original number and relative rank. The Eastern church adhered more closely to the original design for which they were appointed. Before their promotion in the Western church, their duties were the following:-To convey the bishop's letters or messages to foreign |