# Women deacons as church officers



## Jeri Tanner

it struck me the other day that women ordained to the office of deacon are then “church officers.” How can a church officer, even though female, not be someone invested with authority?

I’d like to know how strongly members of the board who are opposed to the ordination of women as deacons feel about this. Would it be a matter requiring separation if your church ordained a woman to the office of deacon?


----------



## Jake

Deacons are servants of the church, and not in authority like elders are. In fact, deacon means servant. Just like ordinary members, they are subject to the elders, but they are also appointed to specific tasks in the church. I think if we understand rightly the distinction between designated servants in the church and those who are in authority in the church, there is less confusion.

I'm not sure the ARP and RPCNA approach deaconesses the right way, but I also think we shouldn't be afraid of calling a woman a deacon in the way that Paul or Calvin does.

Calvin is not afraid of calling a woman as a deacon as one in a public office, because of the roles he ascribes to the deacons (from Institutes VI:IV:4):



> For there was no public office which women could discharge save that of devoting themselves to the service of the poor. If we admit this (and it certainly ought to be admitted), there will be two classes of deacons, the one serving the Church by administering the affairs of the poor; the other, by taking care of the poor themselves. For although the term διακονία has a more extensive meaning, Scripture specially gives the name of deacons to those whom the Church appoints to dispense alms, and take care of the poor, constituting them as it were stewards of the public treasury of the poor.



I see more room for concern when deacons are treated as those who rule. In the church I grew up in, there were higher standards for the deacons than the "ministers" of the church, because it was the deacons who actually ruled. However, in proper Presbyterian church government, I don't think this should be a problem.

To answer your other question: "Would it be a matter requiring separation if your church ordained a woman to the office of deacon?" – I would be concerned if it were done in an underhanded way in a denomination or church which did not allow for deaconesses, such as is happening in some corners of the PCA.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## earl40

I know some "reformed" churches install lady deacons by having the congregation and elders pray over them, but the elders insist they are not having them ordained, even though they are installed much like official deacons, and function practically as male deacons. Is this enough to separate? It could be a straw that broke a camels back, or a straw that leads to the broken back. I doubt this would not be the only serious problem (yes serious in my opinion) for churches that practice such.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Scott Bushey

The officers of the church are just that-officers. The office of deacon is not a lesser office, but another office with different scopes of practice. Does the deacon submit to the elder? Yes. Does the elder, submit to the deacon when it comes to their specialty and scope of their practice? Yes. Both are submitting according to their office practice.

In regard to the office of deacon and woman; The PCA seems to be redefing things a bit when it comes to woman, though it is not actively law in the PCA yet, it seems as if it is inevitable; Ordination vs installation. If they allow woman to serve, it will be via 'installation' and not actual ordination like the men. This distinction is problematic and eventually may rear it's ugly head.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Jake said:


> In fact, deacon means servant.
> 
> Calvin is not afraid of calling a woman as a deacon as one in a public office...


Jake, Christ is also referred to by the same Greek word as do the apostles (at least Paul) refer to themselves.

I’m not sure Calvin’s references to women serving as deacons had to do with ordination and installation in the church; rather, they were recognized by the church, perhaps, as being of great usefulness?

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Scott Bushey said:


> The officers of the church are just that-officers.


This is what I’m trying to get at; what does this imply? When did the idea arise in Presbyterian circles that ordination to office doesn’t imply authority?



Scott Bushey said:


> ...via 'installation' and not actual ordination like the men. This distinction is problematic and eventually may rear it's ugly head.


I can see that.


----------



## jwithnell

Deacons operate with a delegated authority, as seen in Acts 6. My husband represents the church when he visits a rough section of town to go to the apartment of a wheel-chair bound man. Same thing when he counsels a member who can"t pay his bills. Last month when he was duty deacon, there were a few tasks I did when he couldn't be there on time, but I made none of the decisions about what/where/when and was never before the congregation during worship. (That would just be weird!)

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner

For Scott and Earl- would actual ordination of a woman to the office be tolerable to you in your church? Or denomination?


----------



## JimmyH

I personally would have a hard time staying with a church that ordained, or installed, a women as a deacon. OTOH, in speaking with an SBC pastor some years ago he told me that the reason women seem to be taking a larger role in church affairs is that fewer men are stepping up to the plate. Somebody has to get the work done.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Scott Bushey

Jeri Tanner said:


> For Scott and Earl- would actual ordination of a woman to the office be tolerable to you in your church? Or denomination?



I’m against it, Ordination or installation.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## earl40

Jeri Tanner said:


> For Scott and Earl- would actual ordination of a woman to the office be tolerable to you in your church? Or denomination?



Ordination yes. (edit......in that ordination would be intolerable for me if they ordained a lady and I was a member) The "instillation" of lady deacons was one of the last straws (among many) that broke the camel back for me, and is why I am transferring out of the PCA.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## jwithnell

I would not avoid a church because it has women deacons, but it would trigger a much closer look at how that congregation views the infallibility and authority of scripture. Acts 6, Titus and Timothy are pretty clear. 

And I don't buy the idea that women have to fill in the gaps. If a church has no deacons, their duties involving any authority devolves to the elders, and if there aren't enough elders, the presbytery steps in.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Scott Bushey said:


> I’m against it, Ordination or installation.


So I take it you couldn’t in good conscience remain in a situation where this happened?


----------



## Jeri Tanner

jwithnell said:


> I would not avoid a church because it has women deacons


Jean, you probably would avoid a church with women elders? But if Scott’s view of church office is accurate, wouldn’t women deacons be just as bad?

And Jean you said, “I don't buy the idea that women have to fill in the gaps. If a church has no deacons, their duties involving any authority devolves to the elders, and if there aren't enough elders, the presbytery steps in.” Great point, thanks.


----------



## Cedarbay

Are women required to have the same training as males for the Diaconate? Is this considered an office one is called to?


----------



## jwithnell

Jeri Tanner said:


> Jean, you probably would avoid a church with women elders? But if Scott’s view of church office is accurate, wouldn’t women deacons be just as bad?
> 
> And Jean you said, “I don't buy the idea that women have to fill in the gaps. If a church has no deacons, their duties involving any authority devolves to the elders, and if there aren't enough elders, the presbytery steps in.” Great point, thanks.


I'm not fond of slippery slope arguments, but it sure seems that when the office of elder is infringed upon, a church is long gone. The scriptures become a reminiscent tradition at best, like a saying on a Hallmark card.

The passage of authority is discussed in the books of church order with some differences between denominations, though the principle is generally the same.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Just to flesh out the issue further for me, some denominations have a different view of what ‘office’ means. So those holding to one view of office would see women being ordained (and perhaps also installed) to office as unbiblical, while those holding to another view of office wouldn’t. It’s the second view of church office I can’t wrap my head around- I can’t find the biblical argument for how this view was ever arrived at in Presbyterianism.


----------



## timfost

If a) women are not to teach in church and b) a deacon is required to be able to teach, then the office necessarily bears authority.


----------



## Gforce9

timfost said:


> If a) women are not to teach in church and b) a deacon is required to be able to teach, then the office necessarily bears authority.



I hadn't thought of this, Tim.....thanks.


----------



## iainduguid

timfost said:


> If a) women are not to teach in church and b) a deacon is required to be able to teach, then the office necessarily bears authority.


But of course, unlike elders, deacons are not required to be "apt to teach"...

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Scott Bushey

Jeri Tanner said:


> So I take it you couldn’t in good conscience remain in a situation where this happened?



There are no other churches here in S. Fl. I will approach this inconsistency in mercy towards my brothers and submit it to prayer, just like I am doing over the need for Psalm singing and wine in the supper.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Scott Bushey

jwithnell said:


> elder is infringed upon, a church is long gone.



How is the idea of women being 'installed' to the deaconate (not ordained), an infringement on the office of elder?


----------



## Scott Bushey

timfost said:


> If a) women are not to teach in church and b) a deacon is required to be able to teach, then the office necessarily bears authority.



Consider the distinction the PCA is placing on the idea. It would leave room for your issue. A women installed (that is not ordained), is not a (D)eacon, but a (d)eacon. The way I see this, is a infrastructure for the actual office holders.

*I do not agree with this definition, mind you; I am only saying what I believe the PCA is thinking.


----------



## jwithnell

A previous reply had specifically asked me about elders.


----------



## Scott Bushey

jwithnell said:


> A previous reply had specifically asked me about elders.



How does this move, the installation of a woman, infringe on the elder, given my understanding (as I stated above)?


----------



## jwithnell

I don't agree with your distinction. While we all submit to one another in love, the authority of a deacon is devolved from the elders, per BOCO and as exemplified in Acts 6. (The apostles appointed deacons to take care of one of their tasks, caring for widows.) And PCA churches already install deacons, using the same language as ordination. Or at least one that I've seen.


----------



## Scott Bushey

The above is true; however, there is a recent move where they are now using language that I have noted. Hence, the infrastructure that they are now endorsing, would not have any affect on the distinctions of the offices, per se, as the office holders MUST be ordained and these woman would not hold an official office as they are not ordained.


----------



## Dachaser

Jeri Tanner said:


> it struck me the other day that women ordained and installed to the office of deacon are then “church officers.” How can a church officer, even though female, not be someone invested with authority?
> 
> I’d like to know how strongly members of the board who are opposed to the ordination of women as deacons feel about this. Would it be a matter requiring separation if your church ordained a woman to the office of deacon?


Was there not a deaconess mentioned by Paul though as being set up in one of his local churches?
As long as they were not involved in the spiritual authority leadership of the church, nor in pulpit teaching, there would seem to be no scripture objections.


----------



## timfost

Scott Bushey said:


> Consider the distinction the PCA is placing on the idea. It would leave room for your issue. A women installed (that is not ordained), is not a (D)eacon, but a (d)eacon. The way I see this, is a infrastructure for the actual office holders.
> 
> *I do not agree with this definition, mind you; I am only saying what I believe the PCA is thinking.



By the same logic, couldn't we install women (e)lders then?


----------



## Scott Bushey

timfost said:


> By the same logic, couldn't we install women (e)lders then?



Tim,
I would assume; do we see any indication or ambiguity in the word in relation to the office of elder (as we see in the office of deacon)?


----------



## Dachaser

jwithnell said:


> I don't agree with your distinction. While we all submit to one another in love, the authority of a deacon is devolved from the elders, per BOCO and as exemplified in Acts 6. (The apostles appointed deacons to take care of one of their tasks, caring for widows.) And PCA churches already install deacons, using the same language as ordination. Or at least one that I've seen.


What is the role of the Deacon in a Presbyterian church then? In Baptists churches, we tend to see them as handling the financial and physical requirements of the church building and maintenance, but not involved in spiritual direction and leadership.


----------



## Jeri Tanner

I changed the wording in my OP from “women ordained and installed to the office of deacon” to “women ordained to the office of deacon,” because I didn’t have mere installation or commissioning in mind (although that’s very troubling on its own).I have in mind those few conservative Presbyterian denominations that do currently ordain women to the office. In one of them at least, part of the reasoning is that they view ‘office’ differently than do those who are opposed to women ordination. They hold that office does not automatically mean authority, and that ordination to an office does not mean authority.

Where, historically, does this position come from?


----------



## Scott Bushey

I believe, based on 1 Tim directed to men and the obvious challenges in the NT epistles where woman are seemingly carrying the nomenclature.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Dachaser said:


> Was there not a deaconess mentioned by Paul though as being set up in one of his local churches?
> As long as they were not involved in the spiritual authority leadership of the church, nor in pulpit teaching, there would seem to be no scripture objections.


David, context determines how the Greek word is to be understood. It’s variously translated ministers, servants, and deacons. The word is applied to all kinds of church members in Scripture, but only in 1 Timothy is a description of the qualifications for office of deacon given (and one qualification is “husband of one wife”).


----------



## Dachaser

Jeri Tanner said:


> David, context determines how the Greek word is to be understood. It’s variously translated ministers, servants, and deacons. The word is applied to all kinds of church members in Scripture, but only in 1 Timothy is a description of the qualifications for office of deacon given (and one qualification is “husband of one wife”).


Wasn't Phoebe though called one? And where would that violate the scriptures to have a female deacon, if she was not involved in assuming roles that only the clergy and Elders can do in the local church?


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Dachaser said:


> Wasn't Phoebe though called one? And where would that violate the scriptures to have a female deacon, if she was not involved in assuming roles that only the clergy and Elders can do in the local church?


David, it’s the view that women may hold office as a deacon that’s the problem (with installation and commissioning of women to only the title and duties of deacon also being problematic).


----------



## Jake

Jeri Tanner said:


> In one of them at least, part of the reasoning is that they view ‘office’ differently than do those who are opposed to women ordination. They hold that office does not automatically mean authority, and that ordination to an office does not mean authority.



I guess this comes down to semantics: what does "office" mean? I think of "office" in a more general sense of a specially designated role that is publicly known. I think the classic Webster definitions 1 and 2 fit with this, without necessarily being about authority: http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/office

Because of what I understand to be the purpose of deacons in the New Testament, I do not think Paul saying "For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree" (I Tim 3:13) thus means that deacons have an authoritative role in the church because the word "office" is used. Furthermore, as far as I can tell, the underlying Greek doesn't even use a word for "office" here as far as I can tell, and it's one of the few places the English word shows up in the Bible.

Really where it gets confusing then is with the Westminster Standards' use of the word, such as in Chapter 30. The beginning of the chapter entrusts the governing authority of the church to officers. I've always understood that to be referring to the elders of the church, but when officers is defined in the
Form of Presbyterial Church-Government, it includes "pastors, teachers, and other church-governors, and deacons" as the officers of the church. If the several references to "officer" in chapter 30 of the Confession includes deacons, I would have to disagree with the Standards here, as I do not believe they have this authority and I believe the office of deacon is distinct from elder.


----------



## Edward

jwithnell said:


> the authority of a deacon is devolved from the elders



No, while the deacons are subordinate to the elders, in the PCA they have authority directly from the BCO. 



jwithnell said:


> And PCA churches already install deacons, using the same language as ordination.



No, the PCA ordains deacons. It is an office held for life. (or until removed for cause, or ordination as an elder). 

I've rotated on and off the active diaconate several time, but even when I'm not 'active' attending the monthly meetings and voting as a deacon, I'm still called upon to serve as a deacon.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## jwithnell

I intended to specify women deacons.


----------



## OPC'n

I would have to find a new church.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Jake said:


> Furthermore, as far as I can tell, the underlying Greek doesn't even use a word for "office" here as far as I can tell, and it's one of the few places the English word shows up in the Bible.


Jake, it seems like surely the qualifications for both elder and deacon, given together as they are in 1 Timothy 3 with the “likewise” at verse 8, speak of two unique positions in the leadership of the church (with “office” the English word chosen to describe the positions, for whatever reason. There is such a close connection between the two offices, they do seem on a par with each other.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Scott Bushey

Jeri Tanner said:


> Jake, it seems like surely the qualifications for both elder and deacon, given together as they are in 1 Timothy 3 with the “likewise” at verse 8, speak of two unique positions in the leadership of the church (with “office” the English word chosen to describe the positions, for whatever reason. There is such a close connection between the two offices, they do seem on a par with each other.



Jeri, Agreed. The offices are parallel with differing specialties.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner

In reading a bit about the issues today, it’s notable that the interest in ordaining women as deacons in U.S. Presbyterianism grew in the times of the women’s suffrage movement. In an article by B.B. Warfield, which I believe has been referenced before on the PB, he speaks of the importance of ‘woman’s work’ in the church and how to make way for that by ordaining them to office (but no mention of Titus 2)...


----------



## Jake

Jeri Tanner said:


> Jake, it seems like surely the qualifications for both elder and deacon, given together as they are in 1 Timothy 3 with the “likewise” at verse 8, speak of two unique positions in the leadership of the church (with “office” the English word chosen to describe the positions, for whatever reason. There is such a close connection between the two offices, they do seem on a par with each other.



Yes, I agree that elder and deacon are two unique positions in the church with a close connection, but I think the office of elder includes the responsibilities of the deacons (such as in Acts 6 – when the responsibilities were too great, others were delegated particular tasks), but I don't think the opposite is true.

I guess I'm wondering now in this conversation: am I misunderstanding the Reformed view of deacons? I thought I agreed with what I read in Calvin and the Presbyterian Form of Church Government on the issue. The latter says:

"The Scripture doth hold out deacons as distinct officers in the church.

Whose office is perpetual. To whose office it belongs not to preach the word, or administer the sacraments, but to take special care in distributing to the necessities of the poor."

And Calvin, "Scripture specially gives the name of deacons to those whom the Church appoints to dispense alms, and take care of the poor, constituting them as it were stewards of the public treasury of the poor" and "The care of the poor was committed to deacons."

However, it seems some are saying there is leadership or authority attached to deacons. While I admit there is a certain amount of leadership attached to understanding how to care for the poor for example, I don't think that makes them leaders in the same way elders are.


----------



## Scott Bushey

Jake said:


> I don't think that makes them leaders in the same way elders are.



in my opinion, their leadership is in the fact alone that they are officers in the church, with different occupations than the elders.A good example would be to consider that elders should not come out of their lanes and into the lanes of the deacon when it comes to the job description of their employment.


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Jake said:


> Yes, I agree that elder and deacon are two unique positions in the church with a close connection, but I think the office of elder includes the responsibilities of the deacons (such as in Acts 6 – when the responsibilities were too great, others were delegated particular tasks), but I don't think the opposite is true.
> 
> I guess I'm wondering now in this conversation: am I misunderstanding the Reformed view of deacons? I thought I agreed with what I read in Calvin and the Presbyterian Form of Church Government on the issue. The latter says:
> 
> "The Scripture doth hold out deacons as distinct officers in the church.
> 
> Whose office is perpetual. To whose office it belongs not to preach the word, or administer the sacraments, but to take special care in distributing to the necessities of the poor."
> 
> And Calvin, "Scripture specially gives the name of deacons to those whom the Church appoints to dispense alms, and take care of the poor, constituting them as it were stewards of the public treasury of the poor" and "The care of the poor was committed to deacons."
> 
> However, it seems some are saying there is leadership or authority attached to deacons. While I admit there is a certain amount of leadership attached to understanding how to care for the poor for example, I don't think that makes them leaders in the same way elders are.


This goes back to what you said in post #37- the Standards do clearly say that deacons form a part of the governing authority of the church. I would be very hesitant to disagree with them here, though I may not fully understand the issues yet. This apparently remained the view of the faithful Presbyterian churches for nearly 200 years.


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Scott Bushey said:


> in my opinion, their leadership is in the fact alone that they are officers in the church, with different occupations than the elders.


Yes, it comes down to that view of ‘office.’

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Scott Bushey

Here is a free read on Google Books where Benjamin Merkle considers the office of deacon 'a lesser office', to which I would disagree.

https://books.google.com/books?id=_...con is not a lesser office than elder&f=false


----------



## Edward

Jake said:


> However, it seems some are saying there is leadership or authority attached to deacons.



"It is their duty also to develop the grace of liberality in the members of the church" PCA BCO 9.2 

Seems to me to be a bit difficult to carry out that duty unless one had some authority and showed some leadership. Indeed, all of 9.2 points to a need to show some initiative.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## RBachman

Very interesting discussion. To circle back on the original question (I think)- I would leave a church that ordains officially or unofficially officers, leaders, etc. Who are Biblically unqualified. This includes women and men. Women by gender but also men who are divorced, haven’t cared for their family well, have a bad report outside of the church etc. We focus on women because that the latest front for Satan and his followers in the visible church. But as the now former Elder white, who celebrated murder, demonstrates, there are plenty of men who have no business being pastors, officers or members in God’s visible church. So I would like us to exercise greater care with all church leaders regardless of the particular definitions to keep satan’s followers out. The greater threat is not that a woman might be ordained a deacon, it is that there are ordained men pushing for this against the scripture.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## JimmyH

I'm under the impression that there is indeed a difference in authority between a ruling elder and a deacon, at least in the OPC, with the ruling elder having authority to use Scripture to exhort and correct. The deacon to use Scripture to edify and support/comfort. I used bold text to highlight the distinction between the pastor and the ruling elder, which sort of seem lumped together by that title up until the bolded text. 

From the OPC Book Of Church Order 2015 ;
In the case of a ruling elder :
The office of ruling elder is based upon the kingship of our Lord Jesus Christ, who provided for his church officers who should rule in his name. Paul and Barnabas “appointed . . . elders in every church”; and Paul commanded that those who “rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and in teaching.” In this passage the Scriptures distinguish between elders who labor particularly in the Word and in doctrine—usually called ministers or pastors—*and elders who join with the minister in the government and discipline of the church—generally called ruling elders*. It is the duty and privilege of ruling elders, in the name and by the authority of our ascended king, to rule over particular churches, and, as servants of our great shepherd, to care for his flock. Holy Scripture enjoins them: “Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of God, which he purchased with his own blood.” As a consequence, ruling elders must be zealous in maintaining the purity of the ministration of the Word and sacraments. They must conscientiously exercise discipline and uphold the good order and peace of the church. With love and humility they should promote faithfulness on the part of both elders and deacons in the discharge of their duties. Moreover, they should have particular regard to the doctrine and conduct of the minister of the Word, in order that the church may be edified, and may manifest itself as the pillar and ground of the truth.
In the case of a deacon :
The office of deacon is based upon the solicitude and love of Christ for his own people. So tender is our Lord’s interest in their temporal needs that he considers what is done unto one of the least of his brethren as done unto him. For he will say to those who have ministered to his little ones: “I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me.” In the beginning the apostles themselves ministered to the poor, but subsequently, in order that they might be able to devote themselves wholly to prayer and the ministry of the Word, they committed that responsibility to others, having directed the people to choose men of good report, full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom. Since the days of the apostles the church has recognized the care of the poor as a distinct ministry of the church committed to deacons. The duties of deacons consist of encouraging members of the church to provide for those who are in want, seeking to prevent poverty, making discreet and cheerful distribution to the needy, praying with the distressed and reminding them of the consolations of Holy Scripture.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## timfost

Before deacons, it was the elder that took on all responsibilities. The elder was put over all matters of _both body and soul. _Since it was determined that the elder's time was better spent in the Word and prayer, the task of caring for body and soul was delegated to two separate offices (as I understand it). 

Are matters of the soul under authority but not matters of the body? It seems that saying one office is a matter of authority and the other is not does not account for a) the fact that matters of body and soul were first both under the authority of elder and b) the fact that both body and soul need to be _governed_.

It was men who were to be chosen in Acts 6:3 and it is men addressed in Timothy and Titus precisely because these offices carried authority.

Does elder (presbyteros) ever apply to a woman?

"Do not rebuke an older man [presbyteros] but exhort him as a father, younger men as brothers, *older women [presbyteros] *as mothers younger women as sisters, with all purity." (1 Tim. 5:1-2)

Although the context clearly speaks of age, the word _presbyteros _is used. Women certainly are to minister. Older women should be respected. To interpret an office from passages like these is, in my opinion, bad exegesis.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Jeri Tanner

timfost said:


> Before deacons, it was the elder that took on all responsibilities. The elder was put over all matters of _both body and soul. _Since it was determined that the elder's time was better spent in the Word and prayer, the task of caring for body and soul was delegated to two separate offices (as I understand it).
> 
> Are matters of the soul under authority but not matters of the body? It seems that saying one office is a matter of authority and the other is not does not account for a) the fact that matters of body and soul were first both under the authority of elder and b) the fact that both body and soul need to be _governed_.
> 
> It was men who were to be chosen in Acts 6:3 and it is men addressed in Timothy and Titus precisely because these offices carried authority.


This seems like a great point, Tim. We tend to think a great deal of the authority needed for those who teach, but too little of the reasons for authority needed for those who govern in practical matters concerning physical needs. But in the Bible, God sure places great importance on our physical lives and on the church caring for them; what a lovely thing you’ve pointed out. “Both body and soul need to be governed.”

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser

Scott Bushey said:


> Jeri, Agreed. The offices are parallel with differing specialties.


Deacons seemed to be though involved with church functions such as business issues for today, not in the teaching and spiritual leadership roles of the pastors and Elders.


----------



## Dachaser

timfost said:


> Before deacons, it was the elder that took on all responsibilities. The elder was put over all matters of _both body and soul. _Since it was determined that the elder's time was better spent in the Word and prayer, the task of caring for body and soul was delegated to two separate offices (as I understand it).
> 
> Are matters of the soul under authority but not matters of the body? It seems that saying one office is a matter of authority and the other is not does not account for a) the fact that matters of body and soul were first both under the authority of elder and b) the fact that both body and soul need to be _governed_.
> 
> It was men who were to be chosen in Acts 6:3 and it is men addressed in Timothy and Titus precisely because these offices carried authority.
> 
> Does elder (presbyteros) ever apply to a woman?
> 
> "Do not rebuke an older man [presbyteros] but exhort him as a father, younger men as brothers, *older women [presbyteros] *as mothers younger women as sisters, with all purity." (1 Tim. 5:1-2)
> 
> Although the context clearly speaks of age, the word _presbyteros _is used. Women certainly are to minister. Older women should be respected. To interpret an office from passages like these is, in my opinion, bad exegesis.


The Bible does not anywhere under the NC support that women are allowed to function as either a pastor or an Elder, but since deacon seems to not be in the same type of office as those 2 are, why would women be excluded from being a deaconess?


----------



## Dachaser

JimmyH said:


> I'm under the impression that there is indeed a difference in authority between a ruling elder and a deacon, at least in the OPC, with the ruling elder having authority to use Scripture to exhort and correct. The deacon to use Scripture to edify and support/comfort. I used bold text to highlight the distinction between the pastor and the ruling elder, which sort of seem lumped together by that title up until the bolded text.
> 
> From the OPC Book Of Church Order 2015 ;
> In the case of a ruling elder :
> The office of ruling elder is based upon the kingship of our Lord Jesus Christ, who provided for his church officers who should rule in his name. Paul and Barnabas “appointed . . . elders in every church”; and Paul commanded that those who “rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and in teaching.” In this passage the Scriptures distinguish between elders who labor particularly in the Word and in doctrine—usually called ministers or pastors—*and elders who join with the minister in the government and discipline of the church—generally called ruling elders*. It is the duty and privilege of ruling elders, in the name and by the authority of our ascended king, to rule over particular churches, and, as servants of our great shepherd, to care for his flock. Holy Scripture enjoins them: “Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of God, which he purchased with his own blood.” As a consequence, ruling elders must be zealous in maintaining the purity of the ministration of the Word and sacraments. They must conscientiously exercise discipline and uphold the good order and peace of the church. With love and humility they should promote faithfulness on the part of both elders and deacons in the discharge of their duties. Moreover, they should have particular regard to the doctrine and conduct of the minister of the Word, in order that the church may be edified, and may manifest itself as the pillar and ground of the truth.
> In the case of a deacon :
> The office of deacon is based upon the solicitude and love of Christ for his own people. So tender is our Lord’s interest in their temporal needs that he considers what is done unto one of the least of his brethren as done unto him. For he will say to those who have ministered to his little ones: “I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me.” In the beginning the apostles themselves ministered to the poor, but subsequently, in order that they might be able to devote themselves wholly to prayer and the ministry of the Word, they committed that responsibility to others, having directed the people to choose men of good report, full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom. Since the days of the apostles the church has recognized the care of the poor as a distinct ministry of the church committed to deacons. The duties of deacons consist of encouraging members of the church to provide for those who are in want, seeking to prevent poverty, making discreet and cheerful distribution to the needy, praying with the distressed and reminding them of the consolations of Holy Scripture.


Beyond even what is stated there for us, what do the scriptures say that be against a woman being appointed as a deaconess in a church? Not to be a pastor or Elder, as scriptures prohibit those roles, but what just that role?


----------



## Dachaser

Jeri Tanner said:


> Yes, it comes down to that view of ‘office.’


What does the scriptures themselves state to us the role of the deacon is though? My understanding would be that it prohibits women from either office of pastor/Elder, but since deacon seems to be of a lower position, what would prohibit a godly woman from performing that function?


----------



## Afterthought

Rutherford says concerning the order of widows,

"Againe, that this Widow had some charge or service in the Church, (I meane not any Ministeriall office, for she was not ordained as the Deacon, Acts 6. with imposition of hands) I prove from the Text"

He says the order of widows had a "charge" or "service" in the church and distinguishes this from a "Ministeriall office." The office includes "ordination," which belongs to the Deacon. While further analysis may be necessary, it would seem then that Rutherford viewed church office as invested with authority, in contrast to the service or charge provided by the order of widows.

So far as the duties of Deacons go, Jus Divnium refers Calvin's "two classes" to belong to one office, states that Deacons are an ordinance of Christ (which would seem to imply they have authority from Christ to do their duty), that they distinct from all other church officers, that their duties are summed up in helping and showing mercy. They then refer to Rutherford's Due Right (linked to above) for further argumentation to those who scruple the distinct office of Deacon.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Dachaser

Afterthought said:


> Rutherford says concerning the order of widows,
> 
> "Againe, that this Widow had some charge or service in the Church, (I meane not any Ministeriall office, for she was not ordained as the Deacon, Acts 6. with imposition of hands) I prove from the Text"
> 
> He says the order of widows had a "charge" or "service" in the church and distinguishes this from a "Ministeriall office." The office includes "ordination," which belongs to the Deacon. While further analysis may be necessary, it would seem then that Rutherford viewed church office as invested with authority, in contrast to the service or charge provided by the order of widows.
> 
> So far as the duties of Deacons go, Jus Divnium refers Calvin's "two classes" to belong to one office, states that Deacons are an ordinance of Christ (which would seem to imply they have authority from Christ to do their duty), that they distinct from all other church officers, that their duties are summed up in helping and showing mercy. They then refer to Rutherford's Due Right (linked to above) for further argumentation to those who scruple the distinct office of Deacon.


So the role of the deacon would not be linked to spiritual leadership/authority, correct?


----------



## Gforce9

Dachaser said:


> Beyond even what is stated there for us, what do the scriptures say that be against a woman being appointed as a deaconess in a church? Not to be a pastor or Elder, as scriptures prohibit those roles, but what just that role?



This discussion, in my opinion, is exhibit A in what kind of confusion, disunity, conflict,...happens when a term is hijacked and reapplied. Women are not to be office bearers. Call them Sunday School Coordinators, Financial Consultants, Meal Facillitators or whatever else but deacon(ess). I understand why liberals hijack terms; they wish to sound orthodox. I do not understand why non-liberals hijack and redefine terms because it only causes trouble and we are not to be troublemakers. Simply use another term and this discussion disappears into the ether where it cant cause any trouble......

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Scott Bushey

Dachaser said:


> Deacons seemed to be though involved with church functions such as business issues for today, not in the teaching and spiritual leadership roles of the pastors and Elders.



You cited the post which clearly says:

"The offices are parallel with differing specialties"

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Afterthought

Dachaser said:


> So the role of the deacon would not be linked to spiritual leadership/authority, correct?


I hesitate to say "yes" because the deacon is a church office given by Christ for the care of his people. Rutherford denies that the deacon is not a spiritual office, although it deals with the care of temporal things. The deacon being in charge of the temporal goods of the church and their distribution means they are acting with leadership and authority.

However, I think I know what you are trying to ask. To clarify before I answer, in a Presbyterian church, our church officers who govern the church are elders and pastors (pastors are also elders, but we often refer to elders that are not ordained to preach as just "elders"). As individuals, the elders and pastors are responsible by their office to take care of the general spiritual oversight of the congregation, including teaching, rebuking, exhorting, and ministering to their spiritual needs. They are the "spiritual leadership/authority" in the church. They meet together in a court--the church Session--and in that court Session they make decisions about the spiritual government of the church, e.g., questions put forward by members, handling cases of discipline, determining how the worship should be governed and so forth. They rule and govern the church. This is something that deacons do not do: deacons rule and govern the church funds and temporal things, not the church. They do not meet with the Session so as to make decisions concerning the government of the church with a vote. The deacons instead meet in their own court to determine how to handle the temporal needs of the church.

Is handling the temporal needs an act of "spiritual leadership?" In the sense that they are exercising spiritual gifts (e.g., showing mercy) in an official capacity and are the ones in charge of such things, yes, they are exercising spiritual leadership and authority. In doing such things, they also set an example for the rest of the congregation to follow; is that not a spiritual leadership/authority? As church officers, they are also representatives of Christ, hence the need for character and holding the mysteries of the faith in good conscience.

Elders and pastors rule and govern the church. The deacons rule and govern the church funds and temporal things. Different functions, but both require leadership and authority. And in some sense, the deacons exercise a spiritual leadership and authority, although they do not govern the souls of the congregation or handle the government of the church.

However, if the above is confusing, then I guess I'll just say "yes:" they do not exercise a "spiritual leadership/authority."


----------



## Afterthought

Rutherford writes in his Peacable and Temperate Plea concerning the order of widows,

"Q. 9. How is it that you have taken away widowes, which was an office established by the Apostles? Rom. 12. 8. For some say they should be gone, because they were tem∣porary, and the heate of the Easterne Countries which cau∣sed sicknesse, required them, but they are not needfull now. So saith Cartwright. Others make them perpetuall, as Fen∣ner,* some make them to be women, as Cartwright, some men,* as Travors, some neither men nor women onely, as Beza and Junius.*

Answ.* The perpetuall use of that office we thinke continueth, that is, that there be some to shew mercy on the poore, which are captives, exiled, strangers, dis∣eased, distracted, and that there be Hospitals for that effect, and Chirurgians, Physicians, aged men and wo∣men, but that widowes were officers in the Church, as Elders and Deacons are, we thinke no; but that that service may be performed by men or women, as the Church shall thinke good. Cartwright thinketh no other then what I say. Fenner thinketh well that the sicke should alwayes be cared for, neither by men only, nor by women onely, as Beza and Junius thinke, but by both as need requireth."


Concerning Deacons and ruling, Rutherford writes (Due Right p. 149),

"Object. 3. By those who rule well, are understood Deacons, who take care of the poore.
Answ. Didoclavius observeth, that Deacons are never called Rulers, but distinguished from them, Rom. 12. 8. Secondly, the well ruling here taketh up the halfe of the Pastors Office, and all that belongeth thereunto, except labouring in the word and doctrine; as to receive accusations against an Elder, to judge and governe with the Pastor, to visit the sicke, to exhort and rebuse in a judiciall way; *but to serve Tables, and to take care of the poore onely, is the least and most inferiour part of well-govern∣ing of Gods house, and is but a care for their bodies*: VVhereas to rule well, is an Ecclesiasticall Magistracy, to goe in and out before Gods people, to watch for their soules, as those which must give an accompt, Hebr. 13. 17. 1 Thess. 5. 12. *The Deacon careth for the body onely*, and the Deacon, that Bilson and others would have with him, is neither in this place, nor in all Gods Word, as we shall heare."


I post some exercepts from the Free Church Practice concerning Deacons, which shows an example of how this office necessarily acts with authority.

"The New Testament warrants a distinction between the office of Elder on the one hand, and Deacon on the other. Whereas Elders are charged with the general and spiritual oversight of congregations, and in the case of those we designate "ministers", labour in word and doctrine, the Deacons’ specific function relates to the temporal concerns of the Church. Though it is allowed that deacons may discharge their functions without having elders present at their meetings there are two considerations which underlie the accepted practice of minister and elders being in membership of the Deacons’ Court.

These are:
(1) The securing of maximum consultation between elders and deacons for
the better total management of the congregation.

(2) Many congregations cannot supply from their own membership a sufficient number of Deacons to function separately from the eldership. Act VII, 1846, therefore states "that it be competent for elders to be employed as deacons when a sufficient number of deacons cannot be had".

Though a degree of spiritual maturity is requisite for either office, the difference in function between elder and deacon implies that a man having the gifts needed for the diaconate may not thereby qualify to be an elder. Nor does fitness for the eldership require previous experience as a deacon.

The meeting of deacons is referred to as the Deacons’ Court but this does not imply that this court is part of the legislative structure of the Church. In the Presbyterian system that structure comprises Kirk Sessions, Presbyteries, Synods, and General Assembly. The Deacons’ Court is essentially a Board of Management and administration having the bounds of its authority prescribed by Church law. So long therefore as the Deacons’ Court acts within its mandate its decisions are regarded as final, and no dissent and complaint is competent. A simple dissent is, however, competent."

"2. The functions of the Deacons’ Court may be more particularly outlined as
follows:

2.1 No Power of Discipline: Being essentially a board of management the Deacons’ Court does not exercise disciplinary functions even over its own members, this being within the competence of the Kirk Session by whose authority members are admitted, suspended, or deposed and to whom resignations should be addressed. It is the duty of the Kirk Session to inform the Deacons’ Court of any changes in its membership and the extracts of minutes giving this information must be engrossed in the minutes of the Deacons’ Court and its Roll revised accordingly.

2.2 Congregational Property: Though responsible for the management, repair and maintenance of all congregational properties and charged to raise funds for these purposes, the Deacons’ Court are not entitled to grant the use of buildings for any purpose, without the consent of the Minister. Nor can it withhold the use of buildings for meetings of a strictly religious, ecclesiastical or charitable nature sanctioned by the minister. It is, however, within their competence to make such charge for these uses as will defray costs falling on the congregation. The minister’s sanction notwithstanding, the Deacons’ Court’s approval must be given before buildings can be used for any purpose which is not of a strictly religious, ecclesiastical or charitable nature.

2.3 Church Officer and Fee to Precentor: If it is deemed necessary or desirable to employ a Beadle or Church Officer for the week to week management, cleaning and good upkeep of properties, it is the duty of the Deacons’ Court to do this and to determine terms of employment and payment. If a fee is paid to the precentor, this is fixed by the Deacons’ Court but the court does not appoint the precentor, this being a function of the minister after due consultation with the Kirk Session."

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## timfost

Dachaser said:


> The Bible does not anywhere under the NC support that women are allowed to function as either a pastor or an Elder, but since deacon seems to not be in the same type of office as those 2 are, why would women be excluded from being a deaconess?



David,

If you disagree with my point, please let me know _why _so that we can have a conversation. Otherwise, we're just sharing opinions. This won't help us understand objective truth.

Thanks in advance!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser

Afterthought said:


> I hesitate to say "yes" because the deacon is a church office given by Christ for the care of his people. Rutherford denies that the deacon is not a spiritual office, although it deals with the care of temporal things. The deacon being in charge of the temporal goods of the church and their distribution means they are acting with leadership and authority.
> 
> However, I think I know what you are trying to ask. To clarify before I answer, in a Presbyterian church, our church officers who govern the church are elders and pastors (pastors are also elders, but we often refer to elders that are not ordained to preach as just "elders"). As individuals, the elders and pastors are responsible by their office to take care of the general spiritual oversight of the congregation, including teaching, rebuking, exhorting, and ministering to their spiritual needs. They are the "spiritual leadership/authority" in the church. They meet together in a court--the church Session--and in that court Session they make decisions about the spiritual government of the church, e.g., questions put forward by members, handling cases of discipline, determining how the worship should be governed and so forth. They rule and govern the church. This is something that deacons do not do: deacons rule and govern the church funds and temporal things, not the church. They do not meet with the Session so as to make decisions concerning the government of the church with a vote. The deacons instead meet in their own court to determine how to handle the temporal needs of the church.
> 
> Is handling the temporal needs an act of "spiritual leadership?" In the sense that they are exercising spiritual gifts (e.g., showing mercy) in an official capacity and are the ones in charge of such things, yes, they are exercising spiritual leadership and authority. In doing such things, they also set an example for the rest of the congregation to follow; is that not a spiritual leadership/authority? As church officers, they are also representatives of Christ, hence the need for character and holding the mysteries of the faith in good conscience.
> 
> Elders and pastors rule and govern the church. The deacons rule and govern the church funds and temporal things. Different functions, but both require leadership and authority. And in some sense, the deacons exercise a spiritual leadership and authority, although they do not govern the souls of the congregation or handle the government of the church.
> 
> However, if the above is confusing, then I guess I'll just say "yes:" they do not exercise a "spiritual leadership/authority."


The confusion to me is that the Baptists also do see the clear distinction between Pastors/Elders and Deacons, as we would view the pastors/Elders as function in about the same basis and why as you outlined here, while the deacons are those charged with just the practical needs for the church. Those areas include love/trust funds, maintenance, handling the office concerns for bill payments, payroll accounting. for examples.
In my church, there are Senior Pastor, who is also Elder, pastor, and Youth pastor. There are Elders, and those such as maintenance directors/office managers falll loosely under Deacons.
Only the pastors and Elders though handle the teaching, ordinances, and discipline within the church.
Seems to boil down to just how we see the deacon functioning, in what role within the local church.


----------



## Dachaser

Scott Bushey said:


> You cited the post which clearly says:
> 
> "The offices are parallel with differing specialties"


Except that I am not familiar with Deacons handling the same responsibilities as Pastors/Elders do.


----------



## Dachaser

timfost said:


> David,
> 
> If you disagree with my point, please let me know _why _so that we can have a conversation. Otherwise, we're just sharing opinions. This won't help us understand objective truth.
> 
> Thanks in advance!


I was not in disagreement your post, was just seeking to clarify if you would see that deacons are not charged in the scriptures to do the same as Elders, and so a female deacon would not fall under the prohibition as a Pastor/Elder.


----------



## timfost

Dachaser said:


> I was not in disagreement your post, was just seeking to clarify if you would see that deacons are not charged in the scriptures to do the same as Elders and
> so a female deacon would not fall under the prohibition as a Pastor/Elder.



Of course deacons and elders have different roles. My argument was that both roles are _governing_ roles. If a woman is given a governing role, she necessarily has authority over men in church. Paul expressly forbids this.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Dachaser

timfost said:


> Of course deacons and elders have different roles. My argument was that both roles are _governing_ roles. If a woman is given a governing role, she necessarily has authority over men in church. Paul expressly forbids this.


Would doing those items that a Deacon does in my church though qualify as being under a governing role?


----------



## Scott Bushey

Dachaser said:


> Except that I am not familiar with Deacons handling the same responsibilities as Pastors/Elders do.



Brother David,
The post said that they have 'differing specialties'

""The offices are parallel with differing specialties""

Hence, they do not have 'the same responsibilities'.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## JimmyH

Had a maintenance workday at my church today. Myself, another deacon, and a trustee. The trustee is a young man of 25 or so, but grew up in this church from a toddler and is very knowledgeable regarding doctrine and practice. I told him about this thread and how I had the impression that an elder is an office of greater authority and importance than that of a deacon.
He said that _all_ of the congregation, including the pastor, elders, deacons are one body. None is more important than the other and they have been given particular gifts and responsibilities based on those God given gifts. He opined that when you start viewing one office/individual as more important than another you are getting dangerously close to Romanist theology.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## NaphtaliPress

I'm not sure it would get used, but we need am Emily Litella 'nevermind' smilie.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## timfost

Dachaser said:


> Would doing those items that a Deacon does in my church though qualify as being under a governing role?



I addressed this in post #52. Do you disagree with my argument? We know that physical needs affect our spiritual state (James 2:16). It seems to me that if we argue that spiritual matters need authority but physical do not, then a) we separate soul from body, b) we make the work of an elder superior to the work of a deacon and c) we disregard the reason deacons need to have basically the same qualifications as elders in the first place.

Consider 1 Tim. 3:12:

"Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well."

Why does it matter if deacons rule their own house well if their position is not one of authority?

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Jeri Tanner

timfost said:


> Consider 1 Tim. 3:12:
> 
> "Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well."
> 
> Why does it matter if deacons rule their own house well if their position is not one of authority?


Another very helpful point, thanks.


----------



## earl40

JimmyH said:


> Had a maintenance workday at my church today. Myself, another deacon, and a trustee. The trustee is a young man of 25 or so, but grew up in this church from a toddler and is very knowledgeable regarding doctrine and practice. I told him about this thread and how I had the impression that an elder is an office of greater authority and importance than that of a deacon.
> He said that _all_ of the congregation, including the pastor, elders, deacons are one body. None is more important than the other and they have been given particular gifts and responsibilities based on those God given gifts. He opined that when you start viewing one office/individual as more important than another you are getting dangerously close to Romanist theology.



Of course having more authority does not mean one is more important to Christ. The simple matter of fact in that there are gradations of authority, and this is not a road to Rome.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Dachaser said:


> What does the scriptures themselves state to us the role of the deacon is though?


Well, the Scriptures state the role of deacon is to be filled by "men full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom" (Acts 6:3); being "the husband of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well" (1 Timothy 3:12); and these men are as well to be "grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience" (1 Timothy 3:8,9). 

Phoebe being called a servant, which is another English word often used to translate _diakonos, _in no way makes her a deacon that meets the requirements of Acts 6 and 1Timothy 3, and there's nothing in the passage about her that suggests that. She was obviously a revered, trusted, and appreciated servant of the church, as were many others who held no office.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Edward

Dachaser said:


> why would women be excluded from being a deaconess?





Dachaser said:


> what do the scriptures say that be against a woman being appointed as a deaconess in a church?



I suppose one should be willing to entertain the idea, so long as the woman is a husband of one wife.

Reactions: Like 2 | Funny 3


----------



## JimmyH

Edward said:


> I suppose one should be willing to entertain the idea, so long as the woman is a husband of one wife.


Nowadays there are some who would say that could be a reality ! (but I'm not one of them)


----------



## Southern Presbyterian

JimmyH said:


> Nowadays there are some who would say that could be a reality ! (but I'm not one of them)



I was about to make the same point. GMTA

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## SolaScriptura

Most words have multiple uses or reference points. It has been pointed out that the word "apostle" means "sent one" and as such the Bible uses it (generically) to refer to, well, anyone sent by another. But it is also used to refer to those who hold a specific office. Likewise, the word "elder" (can) mean simply an old man, but it also happens to be the title given to a specific office. Deacon means "servant" and can therefore be applied to anyone who serves. Of course, it, like both elder and apostle, is also used to designate a specific office. It takes maturity to recognize how the words are being used in a given context.

But, regards to the ordination of women as deacons... given all that the NT says about the role and place of women in the church, I'll accept that Paul nonetheless approves of women being ordained to church office as soon as proponents of deaconesses grant that Paul is likewise suggesting that we should recognize civil rulers as church officers because the word "deacon" is applied to them in Rom 13:4.

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## malvaradosr

I am opposed to the ordination of women to the office of deacon. At the same time and with equal vigor, I believe that the church needs to highlight the many ways that our women can use their spiritual gifts in the appropriate context.

I believe that we can see authority exercised in the church as a session meets to discuss the spiritual needs and government of the church. Decisions will be made that will affect the entire congregation by the elders who were installed into this capacity.

In the same way we meet as a diaconal board to discuss the welfare of the flock and of those on the outside. Decisions are made that will affect the direction of church resources by the deacons who were installed into this capacity.

What I have thus described is not congregational polity, decisions are made in behalf of the congregation by others. This I believe is the essence of what authority is. And here is where 1 Timothy 2:12 comes into play.

If it is objected that Phoebe is referred to as a deaconess (diakonon) in Romans, my reply is first that we should praise the Lord for women like Phoebe. And Lydia, and Mary, and Kathryn (our wonderful church administrative assistant). There are many ways that our women can exercise their heart of a servant (diakonon). However is it is a wise principle that the explicit declarations in Scripture must provide the light to those whose meaning is in dispute.

To answer the second part of your question, I could not conscientiously continue to attend a church who would ordain women deacons.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Dachaser

JimmyH said:


> Had a maintenance workday at my church today. Myself, another deacon, and a trustee. The trustee is a young man of 25 or so, but grew up in this church from a toddler and is very knowledgeable regarding doctrine and practice. I told him about this thread and how I had the impression that an elder is an office of greater authority and importance than that of a deacon.
> He said that _all_ of the congregation, including the pastor, elders, deacons are one body. None is more important than the other and they have been given particular gifts and responsibilities based on those God given gifts. He opined that when you start viewing one office/individual as more important than another you are getting dangerously close to Romanist theology.


The scriptures themselves though do seem to indicate that God sees the offices of the Pastor and Elders as being higher in the sense that they have been charged to overseer the flock, to maintain correct teaching of doctrines and the church discipline.
Your friend would be correct that we are all equal in a saved sense by God, and all of us have gifts and callings that while different, are all used by God in and for the Body, but there still seems to be that distinction for the pastor/Elder in the local church.


----------



## Dachaser

timfost said:


> I addressed this in post #52. Do you disagree with my argument? We know that physical needs affect our spiritual state (James 2:16). It seems to me that if we argue that spiritual matters need authority but physical do not, then a) we separate soul from body, b) we make the work of an elder superior to the work of a deacon and c) we disregard the reason deacons need to have basically the same qualifications as elders in the first place.
> 
> Consider 1 Tim. 3:12:
> 
> "Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well."
> 
> Why does it matter if deacons rule their own house well if their position is not one of authority?


I understand your position, but the offices of the pastor and Elder seem to have spiritual authority beyond/above that of the Deacon, as they have the ultimate roles of overseers of the local flock of Christ.


----------



## Dachaser

Jeri Tanner said:


> Well, the Scriptures state the role of deacon is to be filled by "men full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom" (Acts 6:3); being "the husband of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well" (1 Timothy 3:12); and these men are as well to be "grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience" (1 Timothy 3:8,9).
> 
> Phoebe being called a servant, which is another English word often used to translate _diakonos, _in no way makes her a deacon that meets the requirements of Acts 6 and 1Timothy 3, and there's nothing in the passage about her that suggests that. She was obviously a revered, trusted, and appreciated servant of the church, as were many others who held no office.


Good point you made here, as that title is only mentioned for a women one time in the NT, as the deaconess.


----------



## beloved7

I'm not exactly sure what a Deacon is. Pastors and Elders have to be male to be biblical, but I'm not sure what you mean by Deacon/ church officer. Women can lead a particular ministry within the church, be a trustee etc


----------



## timfost

Dachaser said:


> I understand your position, but the offices of the pastor and Elder seem to have spiritual authority beyond/above that of the Deacon, as they have the ultimate roles of overseers of the local flock of Christ.



David,

I think you're making my point. Elders watch over the souls (Heb. 13:17). This is "spiritual" as you call it. Deacons watch over our bodies, if you will. Does the body affect the spiritual? Does the spiritual affect the body? Your dichotomy, I believe, separates body and _spirit _without seeing the connection. Why would Paul spend so much energy talking about our bodies being the temple of God? Again, the body needs to be governed.


----------



## Dachaser

timfost said:


> David,
> 
> I think you're making my point. Elders watch over the souls (Heb. 13:17). This is "spiritual" as you call it. Deacons watch over our bodies, if you will. Does the body affect the spiritual? Does the spiritual affect the body? Your dichotomy, I believe, separates body and _spirit _without seeing the connection. Why would Paul spend so much energy talking about our bodies being the temple of God? Again, the body needs to be governed.


Deacons could be offices within the local church, but do not see them as being on same par as the pastors/Elders.


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Dachaser said:


> Good point you made here, as that title is only mentioned for a women one time in the NT, as the deaconess.


There's no doubt that Phebe is distinguished and honored by Paul and Scripture. She's the only woman in Scripture specifically referred to as _diakonos_, so that is notable. But it's clear from the teaching passages that the title (role, office) of deacon is for qualified men.


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Dachaser said:


> Deacons could be offices within the local church, but do not see them as being on same par as the pastors/Elders.


Can you make an argument from the Scriptures as to why?


----------



## Dachaser

Jeri Tanner said:


> Can you make an argument from the Scriptures as to why?


The terminonoly might be different between Baptists and presbartarianon this issue of roles with thin the church, as we see the Bible allow for Pastors/Elders/Deacons, based upon Paul giving to us the requirements for Deacons, and that God had the Apostles separate unto themselves deacons to carry on the day to day operations of the church assembly.
I now would see Deacons as being a position in the local church that would be not on the same levels of the pastor/Elder, and that men only would qualify under that technical term.


----------



## Gforce9

Dachaser said:


> The terminonoly might be different between Baptists and presbartarianon this issue of roles with thin the church, as we see the Bible allow for Pastors/Elders/Deacons, based upon Paul giving to us the requirements for Deacons, and that God had the Apostles separate unto themselves deacons to carry on the day to day operations of the church assembly.
> I now would see Deacons as being a position in the local church that would be not on the same levels of the pastor/Elder, and that men only would qualify under that technical term.



I think the offices are more than "allowed"; the "are to be" seems to indicate duty to have them for a rightly ordered church. The Deacon is an office.


----------



## Dachaser

Gforce9 said:


> I think the offices are more than "allowed"; the "are to be" seems to indicate duty to have them for a rightly ordered church. The Deacon is an office.


An office that would more restricted by God as to what they are set up to do within the local Assembly. Elders and Pastors are required to be able to lead and teach, but Deacon seem to not need to fulfill that obligation.


----------



## Dachaser

beloved7 said:


> I'm not exactly sure what a Deacon is. Pastors and Elders have to be male to be biblical, but I'm not sure what you mean by Deacon/ church officer. Women can lead a particular ministry within the church, be a trustee etc


What is a trustee?


----------



## Gforce9

Dachaser said:


> An office that would more restricted by God as to what they are set up to do within the local Assembly. Elders and Pastors are required to be able to lead and teach, but Deacon seem to not need to fulfill that obligation.



Does not Timothy spell of qualifications for Deacons? Deacon is an office.


----------



## timfost

Dachaser said:


> ...but do not see [deacons] as being on same par as the pastors/Elders.



1. What do you mean "same par?" 

2. Do you believe the requirements for elder and deacon are fundamentally different?


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Dachaser said:


> An office that would more restricted by God as to what they are set up to do within the local Assembly. Elders and Pastors are required to be able to lead and teach, but Deacon seem to not need to fulfill that obligation.


Timfost’s and Scott Bushey’s posts talk about that. I’ve realized from this thread that qualified deacons are meant to be part of the governing body of a church. I don’t think that’s familiar to those of us coming from the typical Baptist background, but do a good Bible study on it and read some material that teaches on it, and I think you’ll see it.


----------



## Dachaser

Gforce9 said:


> Does not Timothy spell of qualifications for Deacons? Deacon is an office.


We all seem to be agreeing here that the Office of deacon is in the Bible given to us, but trying to see what exactly their role is within the local assembly.


----------



## Dachaser

timfost said:


> 1. What do you mean "same par?"
> 
> 2. Do you believe the requirements for elder and deacon are fundamentally different?


I would be seeing the Pastor/Elder as being of a higher role/responsibility, as God has given to them the spiritual oversight/overseer of the local church.
I also see the deacon being similar in qualifications to the Elders, except not required to be able to teach, nor holding spiritual leadership positions.


----------



## Dachaser

Jeri Tanner said:


> Timfost’s and Scott Bushey’s posts talk about that. I’ve realized from this thread that qualified deacons are meant to be part of the governing body of a church. I don’t think that’s familiar to those of us coming from the typical Baptist background, but do a good Bible study on it and read some material that teaches on it, and I think you’ll see it.


what areas then would Deacon be given authority over, as the pastors/Elders handle the primary spiritual leadership role within the local assembly.


----------



## BGF

To the OP, in and of itself the ordination or installment of women deacons would not cause me to leave my church. Combined with other errors or, as Earl put it, other straws on a camel's back, it could make me leave. I would, however, likely resign as a deacon.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser

In your church, what are your specific assigned tasks?


----------



## BGF

Dachaser said:


> In your church, what are your specific assigned tasks?


I assume you are asking me.

The broad duties of the deacon in my church are outlined in the PCA's Book of Church Order, chapter 9, section 2:

_It is the duty of the deacons to minister to those who are in need, to the sick, to the friendless, and to any who may be in distress. It is their duty also to develop the grace of liberality in the members of the church, to devise effective methods of collecting the gifts of the people, and to distribute these gifts among the objects to which they are contributed. They shall have the care of the property of the congregation, both real and personal, and shall keep in proper repair the church edifice and other buildings belonging to the congregation._

Our board of deacons divvy up the tasks into four broad areas; Worship operations, Facilities, Finances, and Mercy. I oversee the Mercy ministry. This includes receiving and assessing financial assistance requests from within and without the church, establishing and strengthening external ministry partners, assessing and facilitating benevolence programs, working with the elders to assess and meet the care needs of our congregants, and encouraging the active participation of our congregants in mercy and care ministry. As a member of the board, I also participate in discussions concerning the other three areas of responsibility and vote on motions that are put forward.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner

BGF said:


> To the OP, in and of itself the ordination or installment of women deacons would not cause me to leave my church. Combined with other errors or, as Earl put it, other straws on a camel's back, it could make me leave. I would, however, likely resign as a deacon.


Thanks, Brett. Have you considered the implications of governance in the deaconate deriving from the Form of Presbyterial Government, discussed somewhat in the thread? I ask because in reading and considering this along with the pertinent Scripture, I found myself informed in a way that changed my view of the office. (I already believed it was for men only.)


----------



## Jeri Tanner

Dachaser said:


> what areas then would Deacon be given authority over, as the pastors/Elders handle the primary spiritual leadership role within the local assembly.


I think the traditional roles of deacons are about what you’d think, and Brett gave a great overview of his duties that is informative and insightful. He definitely has a leadership role in his church.

Read over again what Scott and Timfost said about how the role of caring for the physical needs in the church is not inferior to the role of caring for the spiritual needs. It’s been pointed out that the deacons chosen (by the congregation) and appointed by the apostles in Acts 6 were to take over part of the apostles’ duties. Notice that they were to be men “full of the Holy Spirit.” That implies something about these men that fitted them for leadership. Then look at Stephen and Phillip and how their being filled with the Spirit fitted them for the great deeds ahead of them.

So the Bible elevates the role of deacons. I’m thinking we have diminished it in more modern times!

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1


----------



## SolaScriptura

BGF said:


> I assume you are asking me.
> 
> The broad duties of the deacon in my church are outlined in the PCA's Book of Church Order, chapter 9, section 2:
> 
> _It is the duty of the deacons to minister to those who are in need, to the sick, to the friendless, and to any who may be in distress. It is their duty also to develop the grace of liberality in the members of the church, to devise effective methods of collecting the gifts of the people, and to distribute these gifts among the objects to which they are contributed. They shall have the care of the property of the congregation, both real and personal, and shall keep in proper repair the church edifice and other buildings belonging to the congregation._
> 
> Our board of deacons divvy up the tasks into four broad areas; Worship operations, Facilities, Finances, and Mercy. I oversee the Mercy ministry. This includes receiving and assessing financial assistance requests from within and without the church, establishing and strengthening external ministry partners, assessing and facilitating benevolence programs, working with the elders to assess and meet the care needs of our congregants, and encouraging the active participation of our congregants in mercy and care ministry. As a member of the board, I also participate in discussions concerning the other three areas of responsibility and vote on motions that are put forward.



Brett - this is very helpful. I'm in the process of trying to help our Diaconate become more effective and focused. Would you please, either here or via PM, let me know the duties of the deacons assigned to supervise the other 3 broad areas (Worship operations, Facilities, and Finances)? Thanks!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Edward

SolaScriptura said:


> Brett - this is very helpful. I'm in the process of trying to help our Diaconate become more effective and focused.



Ben, we have a somewhat more complex structure.

Nine major teams: Facilities, Finance, Stewardship, Care Clusters (geographically defined groups of members for mutual service and fellowship) , 24x7 prayer (available to meet prayer needs when needed, and assist the pastor on call with hospital visitation), Urban Mission, Good Sam (probably similar to Brett's Mercy Ministry) Equip Mercy Ministry (long term mentoring toward self-sufficiency) and Missionary Care.

Six Minor Teams: Frontline (greeting, parking lot duty), Disaster Response, Helping Hands (quarterly workdays for scheduled fixup projects for the elderly, disabled, and single moms), Diaconate Recruitment, Clements Hospital (basically usher and greet at a service held in the hospital chapel) Prayer.


----------



## Edward

Dachaser said:


> What is a trustee?



I didn't see where anyone else has answered, so I'll take a shot. Generally, they have control of the real estate in churches which are set up to hold property in a separate entity. It can be used to try to keep the property out of the hands of the denomination in the event of a departure (no opinion as to whether that might work) or to limit liability. I would think that most bodies would go with incorporation and insurance to manage risk these days. 

In some cases, the church might also set up a foundation with trustees to manage certain gifts outside of the normal treasury function. The officers of the foundation might be titled trustees.


----------



## BGF

Jeri Tanner said:


> Have you considered the implications of governance in the deaconate deriving from the Form of Presbyterial Government, discussed somewhat in the thread?


If I understand you correctly, I assume you are asking me what I think of the notion of deacons having authority. I believe they do, but it is a delegated authority. I'll try to explain my reasoning below.

First, I don't think the authority that deacons possess is derived from the Presbyterian form of government. Rather, It is taught from Scripture, if not explicitly, then by good and necessary consequence. In the Bible, authority is conferred by the laying on of hands. Assuming the common understanding that Acts 6 records the first ordination of deacons (or proto-deacons), it is interesting to note that the seven men chosen were commissioned for their task by the laying on of hands and prayer. Now, the laying on of hands was used to confer other things other than office (guilt to the offerings, healing to the sick, the Holy Spirit to those who had not yet received him, etc.), but context shows that none of these are occurring here. It is similar to the laying on of hands done by Moses to Joshua, recorded in Numbers 27:18-23; or perhaps Numbers 8:18 is an even more appropriate parallel, as the congregation laid hands on the Levites for their setting apart for the service of the temple. In 1 Timothy 4:14 The elders laid hands on Timothy. In Acts 13:3 Paul and Barnabas were set apart by the laying on of hands. In each of these instances the laying on of hands was used to set apart men for a purpose, and they are given power and authority to accomplish that purpose. In the PCA, men are ordained to office in accordance with this scriptural practice. BCO 17-2 states:

_Ordination is the authoritative admission of one duly called to an office in the Church of God, accompanied with prayer and the laying on of hands, to which it is proper to add the giving of the right hand of fellowship._

Second, the authority the deacons have is specifically in the task they have been set apart to. Again, the parallel with the Levites is instructive. We are called to serve. Our BCO states in 7-2

_The office of deacon is not one of rule, but rather of service both to the physical and spiritual needs of the people._

But wait, how can a deacon have authority if the office is one of service and not rule? This is why I say that the deacon has delegated authority. Just as the apostles their rightful authority to the seven men in Acts; just as Moses delegated authority to the elders of Israel; and just as Jesus delegates His authority to the Apostles, the deacons are delegated authority in their service. We are directly under the authority and supervision of our sessions, but in our service we can exercise Godly discernment to authoritatively carry out our duties.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## BGF

Edward said:


> Ben, we have a somewhat more complex structure.


Edward, your church has about 20 times the members that we have. The complexity is probably very appropriate and necessary to care for your congregation. If the Lord grows us, I would love to get a behind the scenes peek at your diaconal ministries. We are nearing our next stage of growth and are rethinking our approach. We'll probably keep the same categories for now, but we will focus on engaging members of the congregation to assist us in carrying out our duties.


----------



## BGF

SolaScriptura said:


> Brett - this is very helpful. I'm in the process of trying to help our Diaconate become more effective and focused. Would you please, either here or via PM, let me know the duties of the deacons assigned to supervise the other 3 broad areas (Worship operations, Facilities, and Finances)? Thanks!


Ben, I'll gladly share. I'm locking up at work and when I get home I'll sit down and type it out. Possibly in a separate thread.


----------



## Edward

BGF said:


> Edward, your church has about 20 times the members that we have. The complexity is probably very appropriate and necessary to care for your congregation.



The needs are probably similar, but the volume would be different and the structure streamlined. I provided the breakdown in case that there were holes that might be missed. (Although there are probably few churches that would need to man a preaching station at a hospital on a weekly basis).


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion

See also related new thread here:

https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/how-our-church-organizes-the-deacons.95400/


----------



## beloved7

Dachaser said:


> What is a trustee?


Oversee church assets, make sure we are in accordance to our by laws etc


----------



## Dachaser

beloved7 said:


> Oversee church assets, make sure we are in accordance to our by laws etc


So more of a financial oversight capacity?


----------



## beloved7

Dachaser said:


> So more of a financial oversight capacity?


Essentialy, yes. We have an actual accountant/ financial manager as well. The trustees oversee church assets in general, mainly the building and grounds. They are in charge of allocating different projects for trustee work days, keeping track of building conditions, contacting contractors for projects etc.


----------



## Andrew P.C.

BGF said:


> We are directly under the authority and supervision of our sessions, but in our service we can exercise Godly discernment to authoritatively carry out our duties.




It seems that you are saying your authority is given from the elders. Would you agree that a deacon’s authority comes from the office “which was committed to them by the Holy Ghost in the apostles”? (Owen, Works, 16.146)

"This office of deacons is an office of service, which gives not any authority or power in the rule of the church; but being an office, it gives authority with respect unto the special work …" _(Owen, Works_, 16.147).

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## jwithnell

I recall the mainline Presbyterians up north using trustee as a third office, usually on matters of property. In my younger years, I saw elder, deacon, and trustees listed on the bulletin. If I'm not mistaken, some states may require trustees and it is met with an annual meeting by session or by a few appointed to do so. (The requirement comes from property tax exemption.)

As to the differences in requirements, Timothy and Titus give descriptions that should be true of all believers. The officers need to have walked in this way and should be publicly recognized as having done so. The description differs in one way: wives of deacons are specifically required to have discernment -- I suspect because we are often aware of the times our husbands are called in to help.

You can have an OPC church without deacons, if none are qualified, but you cannot have one without elders, even if that means getting help from presbytery. Deacons are given by scripture, but their duties are delegated by session.


----------



## Jeri Tanner

jwithnell said:


> You can have an OPC church without deacons, if none are qualified, but you cannot have one without elders, even if that means getting help from presbytery. Deacons are given by scripture, but their duties are delegated by session.


There have been times in the church when deacons were considered more essential to a church properly set up. This is an article I read earlier in this thread that I found helpful; it’s from the dreaded Covenanter dot org website but they do have a lot of good historical information. 
http://www.covenanter.org/reformed/...rdinary-and-perpetual-in-the-christian-church


----------



## DTK

As a general rule, I'm disposed to think, there are things more serious in play at a church prior to the ordination of women, resulting in the latter.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Dachaser

DTK said:


> As a general rule, I'm disposed to think, there are things more serious in play at a church prior to the ordination of women, resulting in the latter.


When either a Presbyterian or a Baptist church starts to ordain women as pastors, then you seem to drift next into ordaining practicing gays/Lesbians, as the floodgate has been opened up in that assembly.


----------



## Gforce9

Dachaser said:


> When either a Presbyterian or a Baptist church starts to ordain women as pastors, then you seem to drift next into ordaining practicing gays/Lesbians, as the floodgate has been opened up in that assembly.



I think you misunderstood pastor King... his view is the "floodgates" were opened long before the ordination of women took place...


----------



## BGF

Andrew P.C. said:


> It seems that you are saying your authority is given from the elders. Would you agree that a deacon’s authority comes from the office “which was committed to them by the Holy Ghost in the apostles”? (Owen, Works, 16.146)
> 
> "This office of deacons is an office of service, which gives not any authority or power in the rule of the church; but being an office, it gives authority with respect unto the special work …" _(Owen, Works_, 16.147).


I'm saying that we are under the authority of the elders who have the duty of rule. I agree that the office is one of authority "_with respect unto the special work..._", and is given by the Holy Spirit.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## DTK

Gforce9 said:


> I think you misunderstood pastor King... his view is the "floodgates" were opened long before the ordination of women took place...


Indeed, that was my meaning - thank you.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

