Deaconess As Biblical Faithfulness

nleshelman · #1 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:33 PM

Last evening at my house a group of us had a great discussion of 'wives' as 'women' in I Timothy 3. We talked about women deacons and our thoughts on them.

So what do you think?

AV1611 · #2 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:38 PM

Women deacons show a denomination's feminist agenda and will lead to women elders. That is how it played out in the C of E.

Backwoods Presbyterian · #3 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:39 PM

This is going to sound odd but I see deaconesses as faithful to Scripture but not necessary for Women's ministry. The leader of a women's ministry need not be a deaconess. I do believe it is necessary in some areas to have women deaconess's (what we in the ARP call "caretaker deacons") who can perform actions that men, by prudence, cannot.

As far as the "feminist" call, one need look no further than the RPCNA for proof that it is not always the case, though I grant likely.

Davidius · #4 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:43 PM

I voted "other" because I don't know.

***fredtgreco*** · #5 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:49 PM

No one has ever been able, nor will they be, to explain how someone can be set apart to lead in an area of ministry (mercy and service) without having authority (contra to 1 Tim 2:12). If someone can do that ministry without authority, they don't need ordination.

It is a no brainer.

Presbyterian Deacon · #6 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:50 PM

I voted:

"Women deacons show a denomination's feminist agenda and will lead to women elders"

While this may not always be the case, church history is full of examples of "denominational slides" where this has been the result. So it seems to be the rule and not the exception....

Hippo · #7 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:51 PM

I see deaconesses as biblical and as such whether it is a slippery slope or not is irrelevant.

Feminism is wrong, but then again so are attempts to deprive women on there God given privilidges in case it may intrude on positions undertaken by men.

***Contra_Mundum*** · #8 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 03:54 PM

#3
I think it can be #2, but not necessarily. Being unbiblical, it ought to be rejected.

There is a hankering after a specific kind of recognition in ministry that drives this desire. The desire exists, ergo the Bible must be read in such a way that will open the way to fulfill that desire.

Presbyterian Deacon · #9 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Contra_Mundum

#3
I think it can be #2, but not necessarily. Being unbiblical, it ought to be rejected.

Feminism is unbiblical.

Deaconesses are unbiblical.

Either way, it is unbiblical!!

**KMK** · #10 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 04:32 PM

Is 'unbiblical' the right word? The Bible never really addresses the issue at all. It seems to assume that 'official' deacons shall be men. I am not in support of deaconesses but am uncomfortable with the word 'unbiblical'. Perhaps I need to get over it.

k.seymore · #11 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

No one has ever been able, nor will they be, to explain how someone can be set apart to lead in an area of ministry (mercy and service) without having authority (contra to 1 Tim 2:12). If someone can do that ministry without authority, they don't need ordination.

It is a no brainer.

I don't know the answer to the thread's question myself, but I have to admit what you say isn't a "no-brainer" to me. I never assumed deacons had authority over anyone. For instance, angels have the position of serving humans but they don't have authority over us. I'm probably just confused because I have never really thought it through before. Also people in the past had servants but the default isn't usually to think that the servants hold a position of authority over those they serve. Of course, Jesus said leaders should be like servants, but that wouldn't prove all servants are leaders.

***fredtgreco*** · #12 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k.seymore

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

No one has ever been able, nor will they be, to explain how someone can be set apart to lead in an area of ministry (mercy and service) without having authority (contra to 1 Tim 2:12). If someone can do that ministry without authority, they don't need ordination.

It is a no brainer.

I don't know the answer to the thread's question myself, but I have to admit what you say isn't a "no-brainer" to me. I never assumed deacons had authority over anyone. For instance, angels have the position of serving humans but they don't have authority over us. I'm probably just confused because I have never really thought it through before. Also people in the past had servants but the default isn't usually to think that the servants hold a position of authority over those they serve. Of course, Jesus said leaders should be like servants, but that wouldn't prove all servants are leaders.

I did speak quickly on this. But here is the point. It is not the service itself that is the issue. All Christians are called to mercy ministry. All Christians are called to service. But Acts 6 presumes that someone is directing that effort. The person who directs is called a deacon. If the deacon did not have authority over those involved in the mercy ministry, we would have to suppose that no one but deacons could perform mercy ministry. Otherwise, why even have deacons?

JBaldwin · #13 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 05:11 PM

Women are not given the office of deacon in the Scripture. However, there is evidence that women served in a role very similar to that of the male deacons in the church. While I believe women do not have the authoritative role in the church, I do think it is a grave error to assume that because women have no authority in that area that they are somehow incapable of serving in the church or that they shouldn't be serving in the church.

Too often leaders who are very correct in saying that women have no leadership role in the church make the mistake of cutting women out of ministry all together. IMHO that is as sinful as a woman serving as a pastor.

***fredtgreco*** · #14 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBaldwin

Women are not given the office of deacon in the Scripture. However, there is evidence that women served in a role very similar to that of the male deacons in the church. While I believe women do not have the authoritative role in the church, I do think it is a grave error to assume that because women have no authority in that area that they are somehow incapable of serving in the church or that they shouldn't be serving in the church.

Too often leaders who are very correct in saying that women have no leadership role in the church make the mistake of cutting women out of ministry all together. IMHO that is as sinful as a woman serving as a pastor.

I definitely hear you on that. Women should be in ministry - especially mercy ministry. All Christians should. Just not everyone should be ordained.

Brad · #15 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 05:19 PM

Female deacons are not permitted by scripture, whether the desire for them is a sign of feminism or not is immaterial to me. Benjamite priests were also not permitted by scripture, would their desire to have them been called "benjamitism", or just the effects of the fallen nature and its proclivity for rebellion?

k.seymore · #16 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

I did speak quickly on this. But here is the point. It is not the service itself that is the issue. All Christians are called to mercy ministry. All Christians are called to service. But Acts 6 presumes that someone is directing that effort. The person who directs is called a deacon. If the deacon did not have authority over those involved in the mercy ministry, we would have to suppose that no one but deacons could perform mercy ministry. Otherwise, why even have deacons?

Well the way I had read Acts 6 previously was that it saying says that since the needy Greeks were getting the short end of the stick, all the disciples, both Jew and Greek were to gather together. The people were given the authority by the apostles to choose who would be their servants and serve them faithfully and fairly, since the apostles judged it to not be right that they themselves should wait tables at the expense of preaching the word and prayer. It sounded to me like the people tell the deacons who it is that needs something, and the deacons obey them. But... It does speak about management in the requirements of deacons elsewhere in scripture, so I think I can see what you were referring to. As far as the question you asked ("Otherwise, why even have deacons?") the way I would first read that is literally: Why have servants? or Why have table waiters? My first reaction is that the name implies lack of authority, not the fact of authority. They were originally to serve those who needed food. But I think I can now see how the other places where they are mentioned their duties encompass more than this. Thanks for your reply. Like I said, I just hadn't really thought about it much.

**Herald** · #17 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 06:00 PM

I answered "other." Female deacons are unbiblical, period. See Fred's post for my reasons.

AVT · #18 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 06:31 PM

The short answer is that the ordained, elected, authoritative office of Deacon per I Timothy 3 is for men only.

Ecclesiastical authoritative office, in accordance with Scripture and the priority in Creation, is for men only. It is contrary to Scripture for women to exercise ecclesiastical authority over men or to be ordained for such authority.

It is the responsibility and authority of Deacons to oversee mercy ministry in the church in such a way as to involve women and men in mercy (diaconal) ministry. Those so involved are not ordained, elected and do not exercise authority.

In accordance with Scripture, it is necessary that women and men be involved in diaconal ministry. The office of "Deacon" is not confused with "diaconal" (mercy, servant) ministry. For example a paralegal does "legal" work but is not to be confused with an attorney. Even though the paralegal is necessary, knowledgeable, and capable she or he is not licensed, professional standards accountable, or Bar pass certified as is the attorney and is not "set apart" to "pass the bar" and practice law in court.

There is a nonauthoritative "office" of servant widow for women per I Timothy 5. It requires a widow, aged 60, a reputation for serving well, etc. This office is not ordained, or authoritative. It may, be supported (paid) by the church, and vows may be taken for it. It might be termed "deaconess" (my opinion would add if great care is taken to differentiate it from the authoritative office of Deacon.

It is not clear to me whether Scripture permits the office of "servant widow" is to be elected, I need to study that further.

R Harris · #19 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVT

The short answer is that the ordained, elected, authoritative office of Deacon per I Timothy 3 is for men only.

Ecclesiastical authoritative office, in accordance with Scripture and the priority in Creation, is for men only. It is contrary to Scripture for women to exercise ecclesiastical authority over men or to be ordained for such authority.

It is the responsibility and authority of Deacons to oversee mercy ministry in the church in such a way as to involve women and men in mercy (diaconal) ministry. Those so involved are not ordained, elected and do not exercise authority.

In accordance with Scripture, it is necessary that women and men be involved in diaconal ministry. The office of "Deacon" is not confused with "diaconal" (mercy, servant) ministry. For example a paralegal does "legal" work but is not to be confused with an attorney. Even though the paralegal is necessary, knowledgeable, and capable she or he is not licensed, professional standards accountable, or Bar pass certified as is the attorney and is not "set apart" to "pass the bar" and practice law in court.

There is a nonauthoritative "office" of servant widow for women per I Timothy 5. It requires a widow, aged 60, a reputation for serving well, etc. This office is not ordained, or authoritative. It may, be supported (paid) by the church, and vows may be taken for it. It might be termed "deaconess" (my opinion would add if great care is taken to differentiate it from the authoritative office of Deacon.

It is not clear to me whether Scripture permits the office of "servant widow" is to be elected, I need to study that further.

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.

Kevin · #20 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 06:54 PM

The "correct" reply is "women deacons are biblical, and sometimes expedient. However cultural conditions may require the avoidence of this office for a brief time."

***fredtgreco*** · #21 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Harris

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVT

The short answer is that the ordained, elected, authoritative office of Deacon per I Timothy 3 is for men only.

Ecclesiastical authoritative office, in accordance with Scripture and the priority in Creation, is for men only. It is contrary to Scripture for women to exercise ecclesiastical authority over men or to be ordained for such authority.

It is the responsibility and authority of Deacons to oversee mercy ministry in the church in such a way as to involve women and men in mercy (diaconal) ministry. Those so involved are not ordained, elected and do not exercise authority.

In accordance with Scripture, it is necessary that women and men be involved in diaconal ministry. The office of "Deacon" is not confused with "diaconal" (mercy, servant) ministry. For example a paralegal does "legal" work but is not to be confused with an attorney. Even though the paralegal is necessary, knowledgeable, and capable she or he is not licensed, professional standards accountable, or Bar pass certified as is the attorney and is not "set apart" to "pass the bar" and practice law in court.

There is a nonauthoritative "office" of servant widow for women per I Timothy 5. It requires a widow, aged 60, a reputation for serving well, etc. This office is not ordained, or authoritative. It may, be supported (paid) by the church, and vows may be taken for it. It might be termed "deaconess" (my opinion would add if great care is taken to differentiate it from the authoritative office of Deacon.

It is not clear to me whether Scripture permits the office of "servant widow" is to be elected, I need to study that further.

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

The "correct" reply is "women deacons are biblical, and sometimes expedient. However cultural conditions may require the avoidence of this office for a brief time."

Women deacons are not biblical, and it is in itself a reason not to align with a denomination that compromises on that issue.

***fredtgreco*** · #22 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Harris

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.

She is a servant, like those in Matthew 20:26; Matthew 22:13; Matthew 23:11; John 12:26; Romans 13:4 (where the magistrate is called a "diakonos"). Was our Lord a deacon? Because just a few verses earlier (Romans 15:8) Paul writes:

le,gw ga.r Cristo.n dia,konon gegenh/sqai peritomh/j u`pe.r avlhqei,aj qeou/( eivj to. bebaiw/sai ta.j evpaggeli,aj tw/n pate,rwn(

namely, that Christ became a "deacon" (or more rightly, servant). Why would Paul change his use of the word in such close proximity, in such a way that also requires exegetical gymnastics around 1 Timothy 3:12 (how does a woman become the husband of one wife?) ?

AVT · #23 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 07:52 PM

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Scripture doesn't give us much information about Phoebe. There is no mention of her husband and she is described as a "servant." She is commended for her faithfulness. It is quite possible she was of the "servant widow" type of I Timothy 5 and what is said comports with that (widow, faithful service).

If she was "merely a helper," that was important to God speaking through the Apostle Paul and she is commended for it. If she was of the servant-widow office there were specific qualifications, but again this is not the office of Deacon. There are other places where men and women are commended for faithful service...

What is unclear in Scripture is best resolved in favor of what is clear, which is that the office of Deacon is for men only, it has authority and that is rightly exercised over women and men.

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.[/QUOTE]

I believe there are many wonderful Christians in this denomination and that they get a lot right.

My understanding is that the issue of ordaining women to authority over men is is causing a lot of "undercurrent concern." It is also my understanding that most congregations in ARP do not ordain women deacons, many are opposed to it. In my opinion, the unresolved stance (let each congregation decide) will only build confusion and division and needs to be resolved for the peace and purity of the denomination... that's only an outsider's opinion.

Truly, I want you to find the option that would best help you as a congregation to Honor and Glorify God. There certainly are many very good ARP churches and God may be leading you to join and submit there, imperfections notwithstanding.

Kevin · #24 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 08:10 PM

Brother Fred, it is never a compromise to follow Gods word.

***fredtgreco*** · #25 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Brother Fred, it is never a compromise to follow Gods word.

Exactly. How I wish the American church would include 1 Timothy 2:12 in their Bibles. Maybe then there would be less effeminate hand-wringing, and more gospel defending.

Presbyterian Deacon · #26 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Brother Fred, it is never a compromise to follow Gods word.

Exactly. How I wish the American church would include 1 Timothy 2:12 in their Bibles. Maybe then there would be less effeminate hand-wringing, and more gospel defending.

That verse comes right after 1 Timothy 2:11 in my Bible, but I suppose many modern egalitarians don't like to read that either!

Kevin · #27 (**permalink**) 05-19-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Brother Fred, it is never a compromise to follow Gods word.

Exactly. How I wish the American church would include 1 Timothy 2:12 in their Bibles. Maybe then there would be less effeminate hand-wringing, and more gospel defending.

I am not a member of the American Church...

However it does seem to me that Saint Pauls warning to Timothy is that women should not "rule", not that they should not "serve".

Stephen · #28 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by k.seymore

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

No one has ever been able, nor will they be, to explain how someone can be set apart to lead in an area of ministry (mercy and service) without having authority (contra to 1 Tim 2:12). If someone can do that ministry without authority, they don't need ordination.

It is a no brainer.

I don't know the answer to the thread's question myself, but I have to admit what you say isn't a "no-brainer" to me. I never assumed deacons had authority over anyone. For instance, angels have the position of serving humans but they don't have authority over us. I'm probably just confused because I have never really thought it through before. Also people in the past had servants but the default isn't usually to think that the servants hold a position of authority over those they serve. Of course, Jesus said leaders should be like servants, but that wouldn't prove all servants are leaders.

I did speak quickly on this. But here is the point. It is not the service itself that is the issue. All Christians are called to mercy ministry. All Christians are called to service. But Acts 6 presumes that someone is directing that effort. The person who directs is called a deacon. If the deacon did not have authority over those involved in the mercy ministry, we would have to suppose that no one but deacons could perform mercy ministry. Otherwise, why even have deacons?

Fred, I understand your point about deacons having authority. The Scriptures restrict the office of sheperding and authoritative teaching (preaching) to men only. Yes, a person who serves has authority, but what kind of authority? Suppose for the sake of argument that the Scriptures do allow women to serve as deacons, their authority would not be the same as that given to elders. Paul certainly commands women to teach women in Titus 2 and we do have the example of women assisting Paul or Jesus in their ministry, but they are prohibited from exercising the kind of authority that is given to elders.

Stephen · #29 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Harris

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVT

The short answer is that the ordained, elected, authoritative office of Deacon per I Timothy 3 is for men only.

Ecclesiastical authoritative office, in accordance with Scripture and the priority in Creation, is for men only. It is contrary to Scripture for women to exercise ecclesiastical authority over men or to be ordained for such authority.

It is the responsibility and authority of Deacons to oversee mercy ministry in the church in such a way as to involve women and men in mercy (diaconal) ministry. Those so involved are not ordained, elected and do not exercise authority.

In accordance with Scripture, it is necessary that women and men be involved in diaconal ministry. The office of "Deacon" is not confused with "diaconal" (mercy, servant) ministry. For example a paralegal does "legal" work but is not to be confused with an attorney. Even though the paralegal is necessary, knowledgeable, and capable she or he is not licensed, professional standards accountable, or Bar pass certified as is the attorney and is not "set apart" to "pass the bar" and practice law in court.

There is a nonauthoritative "office" of servant widow for women per I Timothy 5. It requires a widow, aged 60, a reputation for serving well, etc. This office is not ordained, or authoritative. It may, be supported (paid) by the church, and vows may be taken for it. It might be termed "deaconess" (my opinion would add if great care is taken to differentiate it from the authoritative office of Deacon.

It is not clear to me whether Scripture permits the office of "servant widow" is to be elected, I need to study that further.

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.

Randy, that is the question. Romans 16:1 calls her a servant and one who assisted in apostolic ministry. Paul uses the diakonon for the word "servant". The current debate on this issue is not whether women should assist in ministry or serve, but if they should be recognized and commissioned in some way as an office.

Stephen · #30 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Harris

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVT

The short answer is that the ordained, elected, authoritative office of Deacon per I Timothy 3 is for men only.

Ecclesiastical authoritative office, in accordance with Scripture and the priority in Creation, is for men only. It is contrary to Scripture for women to exercise ecclesiastical authority over men or to be ordained for such authority.

It is the responsibility and authority of Deacons to oversee mercy ministry in the church in such a way as to involve women and men in mercy (diaconal) ministry. Those so involved are not ordained, elected and do not exercise authority.

In accordance with Scripture, it is necessary that women and men be involved in diaconal ministry. The office of "Deacon" is not confused with "diaconal" (mercy, servant) ministry. For example a paralegal does "legal" work but is not to be confused with an attorney. Even though the paralegal is necessary, knowledgeable, and capable she or he is not licensed, professional standards accountable, or Bar pass certified as is the attorney and is not "set apart" to "pass the bar" and practice law in court.

There is a nonauthoritative "office" of servant widow for women per I Timothy 5. It requires a widow, aged 60, a reputation for serving well, etc. This office is not ordained, or authoritative. It may, be supported (paid) by the church, and vows may be taken for it. It might be termed "deaconess" (my opinion would add if great care is taken to differentiate it from the authoritative office of Deacon.

It is not clear to me whether Scripture permits the office of "servant widow" is to be elected, I need to study that further.

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

The "correct" reply is "women deacons are biblical, and sometimes expedient. However cultural conditions may require the avoidence of this office for a brief time."

Women deacons are not biblical, and it is in itself a reason not to align with a denomination that compromises on that issue.

I am not being contrary on this Fred, but you and I are teaching elders in a denomination that has allowed congregations to elect deaconesses. So in your words you are algined with a denomination that compromises on that issue.

Virginia Marine · #31 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Harris

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVT

The short answer is that the ordained, elected, authoritative office of Deacon per I Timothy 3 is for men only.

Ecclesiastical authoritative office, in accordance with Scripture and the priority in Creation, is for men only. It is contrary to Scripture for women to exercise ecclesiastical authority over men or to be ordained for such authority.

It is the responsibility and authority of Deacons to oversee mercy ministry in the church in such a way as to involve women and men in mercy (diaconal) ministry. Those so involved are not ordained, elected and do not exercise authority.

In accordance with Scripture, it is necessary that women and men be involved in diaconal ministry. The office of "Deacon" is not confused with "diaconal" (mercy, servant) ministry. For example a paralegal does "legal" work but is not to be confused with an attorney. Even though the paralegal is necessary, knowledgeable, and capable she or he is not licensed, professional standards accountable, or Bar pass certified as is the attorney and is not "set apart" to "pass the bar" and practice law in court.

There is a nonauthoritative "office" of servant widow for women per I Timothy 5. It requires a widow, aged 60, a reputation for serving well, etc. This office is not ordained, or authoritative. It may, be supported (paid) by the church, and vows may be taken for it. It might be termed "deaconess" (my opinion would add if great care is taken to differentiate it from the authoritative office of Deacon.

It is not clear to me whether Scripture permits the office of "servant widow" is to be elected, I need to study that further.

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.

Randy, that is the question. Romans 16:1 calls her a servant and one who assisted in apostolic ministry. Paul uses the diakonon for the word "servant". The current debate on this issue is not whether women should assist in ministry or serve, but if they should be recognized and commissioned in some way as an office.

Just to add to the discussion, because this subject came up when I was server as a Youth leader in a Church I was erving at overseas... The fact that Phoebe is described as a "helper of many" denotes that she was probably a wealthy person. Many believe she is the one who carried Paul's epistle to the church at Rome. The word "servant" (Gk. "diákonon") is the same word used of any brother or sister in Christ who does a work of service and ministers to others in any way. You can't simply interpret her as one in the office of deacon in the strictest sense. If you applied this logic, then any Christian who ministers to anyone else is a deacon and the whole church is nothing more than a church of deacons. (Note, the same word is also used of Christ.) Phoebe was probably nothing more than a wealthy member of the church in Cenchrea who had the means to minister and serve others in an extended capacity.

Brad · #32 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 12:39 PM

These discussions are silly. Scripture is not unclear on this matter. I personally am ashamed that my own denomination goes off a-handwringing everytime a feminist or some other sort of rebel raises their hackles. If you can't read the scriptures with enough intellect to see that when folks want to be ordained to offices to which they are not qualified it is rebellion rather than a valid issue to rehash for the millionth time, then please go join the PCUSA or some similar joke of a denom, and leave mine alone.

I really can't believe anybody who is qualified to be a teaching elder would even need to consider the question for more than 30 seconds before rejecting it. Such men should be ashamed of themselves for allowing the bleating of recognition hungry she-bears to distract them from the real work of the Gospel. There are vastly more important things to be busy with than assuaging the egos of glory hounds.

jaybird0827 · #33 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 02:40 PM

Option "c" or "3".

Hippo · #34 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

These discussions are silly. Scripture is not unclear on this matter.

I think that scripture is not particlarly unclear on this issue, it is as easy to accuse all who oppose women deacons of mysogeny as it is to accuse all those who support women deacons of feminism.

My own view is that a conflation of the role of deacon and elder is often linked to the opposition of women elders. The office of deacon should not be seen as a stepping stone to being an elder.

Zenas · #35 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 02:49 PM

Deaconesses are unbiblical but not a sign of feminism. My denomination allows women to be deacons, but I disagree with the practice.

***fredtgreco*** · #36 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Fred, I understand your point about deacons having authority. The Scriptures restrict the office of sheperding and authoritative teaching (preaching) to men only. Yes, a person who serves has authority, but what kind of authority? Suppose for the sake of argument that the Scriptures do allow women to serve as deacons, their authority would not be the same as that given to elders. Paul certainly commands women to teach women in Titus 2 and we do have the example of women assisting Paul or Jesus in their ministry, but they are prohibited from exercising the kind of authority that is given to elders.

Stephen,

The question is not just what kind of authority (although that is important), but it is also over whom one has authority. Unless a church prohibits all men from being involved in the work of mercy and service (i.e. diaconal work) any women deacons would have authority over men in the area of mercy service. That is contrary to the clear statement in 1 Timothy 2:12 (which is among the clearest of all statements in the Bible regarding gender).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Harris

I understand I Tim 3. But what exactly is Phebe in Romans 16:1? Was she merely a "helper," or did she have diaconal authority in the church?

Our congregation is considering 4 denominations to possibly align with, with the ARP being one. However, the issue of women deacons is causing many on the session to veer away from the ARP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

The "correct" reply is "women deacons are biblical, and sometimes expedient. However cultural conditions may require the avoidence of this office for a brief time."

Women deacons are not biblical, and it is in itself a reason not to align with a denomination that compromises on that issue.

I am not being contrary on this Fred, but you and I are teaching elders in a denomination that has allowed congregations to elect deaconesses. So in your words you are algined with a denomination that compromises on that issue.

I realize that we have some congregations that choose to violate the spirit of our form of government and to flout the Lord's commands. I truly believe that they will have to answer to the Lord for that - not just the practice of having women in authority, but the rank deception that is used to flout the BCO. But that does not mean that we as a denomination compromise. Our BCO is clear. I an say with a clear conscience that it is not the case in my Presbytery. If it was, I would file a complaint.

Leslie · #37 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 03:03 PM

The scripture does not specifically forbid deaconesses. What is the alternative to having deaconesses? Male deacons do the work, right? At some point, this will lead to repeated helpful contacts between male deacons and emotionally vulnerable widows. It is a set-up for hanky-pank, suspicions or charges of the same, or emotional bondage for the widow(s). It seems to me that this is a camel compared to the gnat of having females in a minor, non-authoritative office.

***fredtgreco*** · #38 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leslie

The scripture does not specifically forbid deaconesses. What is the alternative to having deaconesses? Male deacons do the work, right? At some point, this will lead to repeated helpful contacts between male deacons and emotionally vulnerable widows. It is a set-up for hanky-pank, suspicions or charges of the same, or emotional bondage for the widow(s). It seems to me that this is a camel compared to the gnat of having females in a minor, non-authoritative office.

Who said that the work of service and mercy had to be performed exclusively by deacons? All of Christ's people are to do that work. The people are merely to be directed by and submit to the authority of those who lead in the work - deacons.

Stephen · #39 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Fred, I understand your point about deacons having authority. The Scriptures restrict the office of sheperding and authoritative teaching (preaching) to men only. Yes, a person who serves has authority, but what kind of authority? Suppose for the sake of argument that the Scriptures do allow women to serve as deacons, their authority would not be the same as that given to elders. Paul certainly commands women to teach women in Titus 2 and we do have the example of women assisting Paul or Jesus in their ministry, but they are prohibited from exercising the kind of authority that is given to elders.

Stephen,

The question is not just what kind of authority (although that is important), but it is also over whom one has authority. Unless a church prohibits all men from being involved in the work of mercy and service (i.e. diaconal work) any women deacons would have authority over men in the area of mercy service. That is contrary to the clear statement in 1 Timothy 2:12 (which is among the clearest of all statements in the Bible regarding gender).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Women deacons are not biblical, and it is in itself a reason not to align with a denomination that compromises on that issue.

I am not being contrary on this Fred, but you and I are teaching elders in a denomination that has allowed congregations to elect deaconesses. So in your words you are algined with a denomination that compromises on that issue.

I realize that we have some congregations that choose to violate the spirit of our form of government and to flout the Lord's commands. I truly believe that they will have to answer to the Lord for that - not just the practice of having women in authority, but the rank deception that is used to flout the BCO. But that does not mean that we as a denomination compromise. Our BCO is clear. I an say with a clear conscience that it is not the case in my Presbytery. If it was, I would file a complaint.

I find it odd that we have a denomination that takes one position and then allows congregations to take another position. This is the problem in the PCA. If we are a Reformed denomination that is subject to authority then we should deal with these matters and not allow deviation. The issue before the PCA regarding deaconesses has come to the assembly before, but the only decision that has been made is that deaconesses are a violation of our standard. We need to address how we deal with a number of congregations that have deaconesses. Some congregations had them from the time they entered the PCA, and yet to my knowlege no ruling has been made against it.

larryjf · #40 (**permalink**) 05-20-2008, 03:22 PM

I voted not-biblical, but not necessarily feminism.

I do have to say that i really don't like the idea of "unordained Deaconess"...it would be like having "unordained Elders"