Logically and rationally with so much history supporting female deacons or deaconesses, it is difficult to understand such conflict.  The office of deacon does not biblically lead to the office of elder.  Their gifts and callings are different.  One governs and the other serves.  Remember, originally, they served tables. 

The current battle over women as deacons or deaconesses is disturbing—disturbing, as there are so many evidences for women participating in the works of mercy (responding to “Thoughts on the ARP Special Committee on Women Deacons Study”)

First, perhaps a thought is worth noting.  We hear and believe as some claim that the feminization of the church has/is taking place.  I would also offer that there is a history of the masculinization of the church.  Let’s be reminded that in the Church, we are “. . . neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”  Throughout history, this has been forgotten.

I am not a member of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (ARP) but rather a member of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC).  But I am also a student of the Word with a degree in Biblical Education, which means I’ve academically studied Bible, theology, church history, Greek, and hermeneutics.  This background plus more than 60 years of Bible study leads me to my conclusion.  Now to some personal thoughts.

I agree with the ARP form of Government wherein is stated, “The office of deacon is not one of authority and does not require the obedience of church members.”  The author responds, While an argument might be made that the New Testament church had female deacons, there is no evidence to suggest that some congregations had deaconesses and others explicitly denied them.”  Actually, the New Testament doesn’t compare any congregations.  So that point appears moot.   The author continues as to teaching reaffirming women being ordained to the office of deacon stating, “. . . I don’t believe any of us believe is the one taught in Scripture.”  Actually, Scripture, it appears, does give evidence in 1 Timothy 3: “In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.” (1 Timothy 3: 11) This follows the qualifications of the male deacons.  The word διακονοι covers both men and women.  Some versions translate women as “wives” of deacons.  However, as qualifications for elders precede deacons, their wives—who would be more important than deacon’s wives—are not mentioned.  Other translations of “women” allow for considering in context that these are the qualifications of female deacons.  To me, this is the more hermeneutically logical and rational understanding. Then there’s Phoebe who is titled in the Greek “deacon.”  But since the same word can be either translated deacon or servant, some versions translate “servant” for her as a woman.  One has to wonder if it’s an effort to avoid affirming her role as deacon/deaconess.

Next worth considering is that neither the fruit of the Spirit nor the gifts of the Spirit are separately listed by gender.  Therefore, the gift of mercy is not a gift given only to men—remember, “neither male nor female.”   There is a practice in many Reformed faith churches that also is not taught in Scripture.  It is customary in many churches for a man to be an usher, be promoted to deacon, and then promoted to elder.  That’s not biblical.  Where in Scripture is evidence that a deacon becomes an elder?  Those gifts and offices are separate.

We must go to church history to see what transpired in churches closest to the times of the Apostles.  For the first 400 years of the church, female deacons or deaconesses were prolific.  “Their ministry is mentioned by early Christian writers such as Clement of Alexandria and Origin. . . In a letter, Pliny the Younger attests to the role of the women deaconesses. . . (He actually tortured two) 4^th century Fathers of the Church, such as Epiphanius of Salamis, Basil of Caesarea, John Chrysostom, and Gregory of Nyssa accept the ministry of deaconesses as a fact.” (Wikipedia) There is much more out there in Church history.

In Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, he lauds deaconesses compared to nuns.  Perhaps he later differentiated between ordained and nonordained, but he recognized the ministry.

Logically and rationally with so much history supporting female deacons or deaconesses, it is difficult to understand such conflict.  The office of deacon does not biblically lead to the office of elder.  Their gifts and callings are different.  One governs and the other serves.  Remember, originally, they served tables.  When there are potluck or other meals in the church, who mostly serves tables?  Aren’t they the women?

This is written, and hopefully lovingly, in response to the conflict and cancellation of women as deaconesses or deacons in the ARP, but it stretches to many Presbyterian and Reformed Faith churches including my own.

The opinion I offer here today isn’t based on gender; it’s based on Scripture, ancient history, and Church history.  It’s so confusing—if not disappointing—to see such a strong push against the ministry (works of mercy) and service denied those gifted by the Holy Spirit for such a ministry.  Imagine the wealth of service a church lacks due to denying gifted women authority, recognition, and a God-given role in Christ’s body to practice and use the gifts the Holy Spirit has sovereignly given to both men and women to honor and glorify Jesus Christ and benefit His body, as well as many others.  I’m compelled to say, “Lord, have mercy. Christ, have mercy on us.”

Helen Louise Herndon is a member of Central Presbyterian Church (EPC) in St. Louis, Missouri. She is freelance writer and served as a missionary to the Arab/Muslim world in France and North Africa.