Thread: Deaconess As Biblical Faithfulness

Originally Posted by Stephen

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

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).

Originally Posted by Stephen

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.

Stephen,

I don't disagree at all.

Originally Posted by Hippo

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.

Rather than a "stepping-stone" it should be recognized that ALL the offices are found in Christ, and from him are disposed to the apostles. What ordinary gifts remained to the church were then disposed to her ministers, and the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit remanded to the Spirit again.

Such was the recognition of the church during the apostolic days. The duties of "the deacon" were part of the duties of the eldership (and when there are no deacons in a church, they again are put back into the elders' laps; they don't disappear). When those duties became too much for the elders, Acts 6:2, they wisely devolved those particular duties to a sub-office, ala Moses in the wilderness, see Ex. 18:17.

So, the issue does return to the matter of office, and who and what is proper for an office holder. If women are not proper office holders by a divine ordinance--and Christ did not ordain any women, nor did the church see fit to ordain women to help the *widows* in Acts 6--I do not see how anyone can sensibly argue against the plain reading of Paul's description of the office.

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by Stephen

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

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).



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.

Stephen,

I don't disagree at all.

You and I are on the Overtures Committee so it should prove to be interesting.

Fredtgreco, your analysis seems sound, except I see the Bible speaking to the office of deacon requiring responsiblity, not accepting authority. The crux of the deacon is service, not leadership. Their activities are governed by Elders (or should). That being said, I am no feminist, but I think I might echo Backwoods Presbyterian's sentiments only as it relates to deacons/esses.

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.

The office of Deacon was established for this very purpose. If we accept this arguement for women deacons then we could turn around and justify women pastors because of a possible "set-up" for "hanky panky". I am afraid that your arguement has no legs.

(Acts 6:1-7)

1 Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a complaint against the Hebrews by the Hellenists,[a] because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution. 2 Then the twelve summoned the multitude of the disciples and said, “It is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. 3 Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business; 4 but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word.”
5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, 6 whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them.
7 Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.

(Acts 6:1-7)

[/QUOTE]

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.[/QUOTE]

Keep in mind our denomination is not really allowing congregations to take another position.

What led to one of the Overtures (#9) for a study committee was a review of Presbytery Records (at our General Assembly level) citing the practice as contrary to our Book of Church Order. Also, complaints were filed in the presbytery to enforce the Book of Church Order on these points.

It might be more accurate to say a few Presbytery majorities are either confused and need guidance or do not have the will to enforce our Constitution. Most are enforcing it. Even some that have not had the majority will to do so are legitimately crying out for help from their peers- a great benefit of being in a "connectional" system. Let's be charitable to our bretheren on this point.

Also, it is my understanding historically that when the RPCES churches joined with us more than twenty years ago, a substantial minority of them had ordained women deacons. The agreement was explicit that they must stop ordaining women... and they in good faith all did.

There was a less formalized understanding that deaconesses (a unordained office) could exist for a while during transition (sort of a grandfather clause) but that that would eventually go away. Most never did. The agreement was perhaps not explicit enough. Keep in mind most of these churches did have male leadership at the authority head of the Diaconate even if they were blending job functions or confusing ordination with commissioning.

A (very) few more recent churches seem to have gotten in with all sorts of non-Reformed, non-Presbyterian practices- functioning almost completely outside the trajectory of our denomination. I'm not sure how that has happened or how this has been allowed to continue, but we must deal with it now to preserve the peace and purtity of our denomination.

Originally Posted by interalia

Fredtgreco, your analysis seems sound, except I see the Bible speaking to the office of deacon requiring responsiblity, not accepting authority. The crux of the deacon is service, not leadership. Their activities are governed by Elders (or should). That being said, I am no feminist, but I think I might echo Backwoods Presbyterian's sentiments only as it relates to deacons/esses.

In my estimation the office of Deacon is not simply to directly serve, but rather to run mercy ministries and such in the church. Since they run the ministries they do carry authority, though as you mention they are responsible to the Session. The authority of the Deacons does not go to the extent of the Elder, but it certainly exists in the ministries that they oversee.

Originally Posted by interalia

Fredtgreco, your analysis seems sound, except I see the Bible speaking to the office of deacon requiring responsiblity, not accepting authority. The crux of the deacon is service, not leadership. Their activities are governed by Elders (or should). That being said, I am no feminist, but I think I might echo Backwoods Presbyterian's sentiments only as it relates to deacons/esses.

This is my own position on the matter. A deacon or deaconess is under authority and is not permitted to lead or exercise authority, but the problem in the PCA is that we have congregations that have deaconesses (10th Pres. in Philadelphia, Redeemer in NY City, several congregations in N. California Presbytery, and a host of others) and the PCA has never addressed it. Some like 10th in Philadelphia had deaconesses before they were joined and received by the PCA. Should the PCA bring discipline against these congregations, allow them to be ordained without authority, comission them (which some PCA churches have already done) or function as a body of women under deacons? That will be for the General Assembly of the PCA to decide next month.

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.[/QUOTE]

Keep in mind our denomination is not really allowing congregations to take another position.

What led to one of the Overtures (#9) for a study committee was a review of Presbytery Records (at our General Assembly level) citing the practice as contrary to our Book of Church Order. Also, complaints were filed in the presbytery to enforce the Book of Church Order on these points.

It might be more accurate to say a few Presbytery majorities are either confused and need guidance or do not have the will to enforce our Constitution. Most are enforcing it. Even some that have not had the majority will to do so are legitimately crying out for help from their peers- a great benefit of being in a "connectional" system. Let's be charitable to our bretheren on this point.

Also, it is my understanding historically that when the RPCES churches joined with us more than twenty years ago, a substantial minority of them had ordained women deacons. The agreement was explicit that they must stop ordaining women... and they in good faith all did.

There was a less formalized understanding that deaconesses (a unordained office) could exist for a while during transition (sort of a grandfather clause) but that that would eventually go away. Most never did. The agreement was perhaps not explicit enough. Keep in mind most of these churches did have male leadership at the authority head of the Diaconate even if they were blending job functions or confusing ordination with commissioning.

A (very) few more recent churches seem to have gotten in with all sorts of non-Reformed, non-Presbyterian practices- functioning almost completely outside the trajectory of our denomination. I'm not sure how that has happened or how this has been allowed to continue, but we must deal with it now to preserve the peace and purtity of our denomination.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps the PCA is not allowing others to take a different position in theory but it is in practice. The PCA has not made a ruling against those who are allowing for this function, so this is confusing and somewhat contradictory. If a presbytery allows a deaconess to assist with the ordination of elders this is a clear violation of PCA standards. If a congregation is ordaining deaconesses this is a violation of our standards. Keep in mind that the Book of Church order is always being ammended or revised, so it is conceivable that the language of men only could be changed. I am not sure that is why Overture 9 was submitted to the Overtures committee.

Although I have not been "ordained" as a deaconess, I have been married to a deacon. Truth be told, most of the work assigned to deacons gets done by the women of the church. They arrange the schedule and cook the meals for people that are sick or have babies. They arrange child care for moms that find themselves single parents while there husbands travel on business. They often sit with the sick.

Again, I have not been "ordained" as a deaconess. However, was I in charge of these ministries? yes. Did I tell people what to do? Yes. Most of them were other women though because it was women's work. (Don't tell Gloria Steinem I said that).

QUOTE=Vonnie Dee;409882]Although I have not been "ordained" as a deaconess, I have been married to a deacon. Truth be told, most of the work assigned to deacons gets done by the women of the church. They arrange the schedule and cook the meals for people that are sick or have babies. They arrange child care for moms that find themselves single parents while there husbands travel on business. They often sit with the sick.

Again, I have not been "ordained" as a deaconess. However, was I in charge of these ministries? yes. Did I tell people what to do? Yes. Most of them were other women though because it was women's work. (Don't tell Gloria Steinem I said that).[/QUOTE]


Good points and thanks for your service!

No doubt men and women were, are, and need to be involved in "diaconal" ministry. Phebe in Romans 16 is commended for her involvement in "diaconal" ministry as a servant as are many other men and women in various places in Scripture.

John Calvin believed that I Timothy 3 involved qualifications for the wives of both Elders and Deacons- that is they had to be known for hospitalitity (e.g. diaconal ministry). That was because, he reasoned, the wife's character reflected back on the office of the husband.

In like matter, it would be reasonable biblically for the wife of a church officer to be involved in mercy ministry, even in an exemplary way.
Lots of menial tasks, done heartily for the glory of God. God is faithful to reward that.

This is not the same thing as the ordained, authoritative, elected office of Deacon which I understand is charged with the responsibility and oversight of mercy ("diaconal") ministry, among other funtions. It seems to me the Deacons are responsible to oversee, direct and dispose of mercy ministry to make sure it gets done in the church. That will involve many tasks, including the Board of Deacons involving men and women in the body of Christ extending mercy.

We might say the Elders have oversight authority, Deacons have administrative authority (over mercy ministry), and men and women who assist the Deacons have various amounts of task authority. It works like this in the business world, authority is at different levels, the board of directors is ultimately responsible, the executive officers administrate in accordance with the will of the board, and many managers and employees at lower level have task authority, but it is not the same (and is not accountable in the same way) and is not chosen in the same way as the board of directors or the chief executive officers.

An employee may have a responsibility to file three copies of each incoming order. The employee may have some authority. But if the order is never delivered, the customer will sue the company, ultimately the board of directors, maybe the chief administive officers to recover. They will not sue the employee, even though the employee did all the work in relation to the order.

It's even deeper than that because Scripture is explicit in male leadership for the offices of Elder and Deacon and sometimes, mentions the two offices together (Philippians 1:1), showing they are both authoritative. Not the same amounts of authority or exactly the same kind, but similarl.

What may come out of all this discussion is a greater valuation of the office of Deacon, of ordination of church officers, and of men and women's involvement in mercy (diaconal) ministry. And we do have a beautiful structure in the Church to do that and it is very important we do it for God's Honor and Glory.

I understand deaconess as a role rather than as an office. It comes in two forms, a woman who is unusually gifted in the ability to extend mercy and the wife of a deacon who really needs to have some gifts in this area too. In either case, they need to be working under the authority of the deacons and elders. Having such women in the congregation is especially helpful when needing to assist women (how many of you men really want to help with childbirth issues?) and young children.

Originally Posted by larryjf

Originally Posted by interalia

Fredtgreco, your analysis seems sound, except I see the Bible speaking to the office of deacon requiring responsiblity, not accepting authority. The crux of the deacon is service, not leadership. Their activities are governed by Elders (or should). That being said, I am no feminist, but I think I might echo Backwoods Presbyterian's sentiments only as it relates to deacons/esses.

In my estimation the office of Deacon is not simply to directly serve, but rather to run mercy ministries and such in the church. Since they run the ministries they do carry authority, though as you mention they are responsible to the Session. The authority of the Deacons does not go to the extent of the Elder, but it certainly exists in the ministries that they oversee.

Yes, but the "run the mercy ministries of the church" (i.e., administer/lead) is an extra-Biblical inference. Not to say it is a bad inferences (I think it is sound), but the emphasis Biblically is service. I do not want to be guilty of adding anything extra to the Word. I think we need to recognize and reassess this distinction, or we otherwise delimit the nature of the office of Elder and the role of deacon. I believe too many churches see the diaconate as a lesser "office" to that of the Elder, or even a stepping stone of sorts. Because of that, the maleness of the diaconate is underscored so men have another avenue to "lead" where they may not be qualified as Elders. But the Bible does not teach that...I think we need to be careful.

For the record, I am not advocating the female diaconate, but I am arguing that we should understand the lines Scipture makes and recognize the fact that we ought not base decisions/disctinctions "based on the Bible" that are really only our fallible inferences of what the Biblesays. That is inverted logic and can be dangerous.