Deaconess As Biblical Faithfulness

[Virginia Marine]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Mushroom]

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

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

 

[jaybird0827]

Option "c" or "3".

 

[Hippo]

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

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

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

 

[Zenas]

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

 

[fredtgreco]

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

Stephen,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Leslie]

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

 

[fredtgreco]

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

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

 

[Stephen]

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

Stephen,

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

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

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

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

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

 

[larryjf]

I voted not-biblical, but not necessarily feminism.

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

 

[fredtgreco]

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

Stephen,

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

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

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

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

Stephen,

I don't disagree at all.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

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

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

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

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

 

[Stephen]

Stephen,

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



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

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

Stephen,

I don't disagree at all.

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

 

[interalia]

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

 

[DavidinKnoxville]

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

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

(Acts 6:1-7)

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

(Acts 6:1-7)

 

[AVT]

[/QUOTE]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[larryjf]

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

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

 

[Stephen]

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

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

 

[Stephen]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Vonnie Dee]

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

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

 

[AVT]

thoughts on authority of diaconal ministry v office authority

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

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


Good points and thanks for your service!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[jwithnell]

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

 

[interalia]

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

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

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

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