Even among those who limit the office of elder to men, there is disagreement as to whether women may hold the office of deacon. This is in part because Paul mentions “women” in the middle of his requirements for deacons in 1 Timothy 3:8-11:
Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not double-tongued, or addicted to much wine or fond of sordid gain, 9 but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 These men must also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons if they are beyond reproach. 11 Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things. 12 Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households. 13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.
Whoever these women are in v. 11, there are only four things required of them. They are to be: (1) “dignified,” just like the deacons in v. 8; (2) not “malicious gossips” or slanderers; (3) “temperate,” meaning “self-controlled”—also said of elders in v. 2; (4) and “faithful in all things.” These four requirements are generic, but they also set a high bar. Not every Christian woman would qualify. However, every Christian man and woman should seek to be such things—dignified, not slanderous, temperate, and faithful.
Who Are the “Women”? (1 Timothy 3:11)
Verse 11 is sandwiched in between instructions for male deacons. We know this because v. 12 speaks of “husbands,” using the same phrase used earlier for elders—“the husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:2). So v. 8 uses masculine nouns for deacons, and then v. 12 refers to men. So why is v. 11 about “women” in the middle of this passage?
One option is to understand v. 11 to refer to female deacons—that is, women holding the office of deacon (sometimes called a deaconess). Some Reformed churches ordain female deacons, even those that do not ordain elders. For example, the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (ARP) allows churches to ordain women deacons, though not all their churches do so.
This has been a source of controversy in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). The Book of Church Order (BCO), part of the PCA Constitution, limits the office of deacon to men, though it allows the Session to appoint male and female “assistants” to the deacons. So regardless of what one thinks about female deacons, the PCA constitution does not allow them.
And yet, many PCA churches still call women “deacons” and have them serve with their male deacons. Some PCA churches on their websites list men and women together under “deacons,” with no distinction. Following the practice of Tim Keller and Redeemer New York, some of these churches “commission” these female deacons—even though the BCO has no such provision. Keller even said he stopped laying hands on the male deacons when they ordained them. This violates the BCO, which says you “shall” lay hands on deacons when ordaining them (BCO 21-7). And apparently, some churches even stopped ordaining male deacons at all because they know they cannot ordain female deacons. This brings equality, but it means their men and women are equally unordained (contra BCO 5-9, 8-6). In other words, they have no actual deacons.
The Case for Female Deacons—Stated and Refuted
So this is a big issue, and a very practical one. Let me first make the case for female deacons. And then I will show why I think it is incorrect. Advocates of female deacons go to two places—1 Timothy 3:11 and Romans 16:1. Let me briefly begin with Romans 16:1. There it says, “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea.” The Greek word translated “servant” is diakonos (διάκονος), which can refer to a deacon but is also used more broadly for those doing service or ministry.
The argument for Phoebe holding the office of deacon is that she is associated with a particular church, that of Cenchrea. However, two men associated with particular churches are called deacons—Epaphras in Colossians 1:7 and Timothy in 1 Timothy 4:6—and no one thinks they were deacons. The fact is, diakonos is not a technical word for deacon. And the only place we can be sure it is used for office is when it is treated as such, which is in places like 1 Timothy 3 and Philippians 1:1. We should not rest much on an ambiguous verse. Moreover, if Phoebe held an official position, it is possible she was of the separate servant-widow class in 1 Timothy 5. However, the most likely explanation is that Phoebe was simply a “servant” of the church and not an ordained “deaconess.”
As for 1 Timothy 3:11, proponents of female deacons typically argue four things:
The reference to “women” in the middle of the requirements for male deacons “suggests one larger category, the office of deacon, with qualifications for male and female officeholders” (Köstenberger, 1–2 Timothy & Titus, p. 131).
The adverb “likewise” in v. 11—which is also used for male deacons in v. 8—indicates “an office similar to that of male deacon” (Köstenberger, p. 133).
Paul only spoke of “women” because there was no word for “deaconess” in his day.
As to why there’s the absence of requirements for the woman’s family life (children and marital fidelity, cf. 5:9), they say this “suggests that these women needn’t be married” and that “these women were free from childrearing and homemaking responsibilities (1 Tim. 2:15; 5:14)” (Köstenberger, p. 133, n. 207).
However, I think these arguments make some unwarranted assumptions. Let me respond to each. The first argument was that “women” mentioned in v. 11 in the middle of requirements for male deacons means they fall under this broader category of deacons. However, this concludes too much. All this tells us is these “women” had some relation to the male deacons. It likely indicates they served with the deacons in some capacity. And thus they could have been assistants to the deacons or the wives of the deacons.
As for the second argument that the adverb “likewise” in v. 11 indicates a separate office just as that for male deacons in v. 8—this has several problems. First, Paul goes right back to men in v. 12, so “likewise” is not a clear marker for a separate office. We should not assume “likewise” functions so strongly. All it indicates is that there was some role here for the women. In fact, if you look at v. 8 and v. 11, there is a connection. I will give literal translations to make this connection clear—“Deacons likewise dignified” (v. 8); “Women likewise dignified” (v. 11). “Likewise” in v. 11 simply means the wives of deacons are to be “dignified” (σεμνάς) like their husbands must be “dignified” (σεμνούς) (v. 8) (Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, WBC, p. 203). Deacons should be dignified and respectable like elders, and these women in v. 11 should also be dignified. That is all “likewise” means.
The third argument for female deacons is that Paul only referenced “women” in v. 11 because there was no word for “deaconess” in his day. However, while it is true there was no word for “deaconess” at the time, Paul could have invented a word or even used additional words to explain his point. For example, he could have used the feminine definite article in Greek (“the”) in front of the word “deacon.” But he did no such thing. He simply says women, or “wives.”
As for the fourth argument that Paul leaves out more detailed requirements for women’s familial life because these women might not be married, this assumes too much. For even if some of these women serving with the deacons were not married, some surely would be. And if so, why would not Paul say they should be faithful wives? He used that phrase “wife of one husband” in 5:9 for widows to be enrolled in the church. Further, while there is a gift of continence (1 Corinthians 7), Paul encourages single women to marry and manage the home—“Therefore, I want younger widows to get married, bear children, keep house” (1 Timothy 5:14; cf. Titus 2:3-5). If Paul wanted women to not marry but instead be celibate deacons, we would expect more instruction here. In fact, we do have instructions in 1 Timothy 5 for older widows—who are single—and that is made clear. Thus, Paul only gives four requirements for these women in v. 11. If this referred to a separate office for female deacons, we would expect women to have similar requirements—like those for widows in chapter 5.
Deacons Exercise Authority
So that is my response to the arguments for female deacons in 1 Timothy 3:11. But let me also add one broader reason why these are not female deacons. This is because deacons do exercise at least some authority. Some deny this, but the deacons are required to be “good managers” of their homes, as v. 12 says. Like elders, this is an indicator of ability to care for the church (vv. 4-5). Now, Paul does not restate the question for deacons, but this is probably just because it would be repetitive. He already made his point about why home management matters. So when Paul says deacons must manage the home well, it is implied that this is because it is a good indicator of whether a deacon will care for the church. Yet such a standard is not given for the “women” in v. 11.
Further, Paul’s letter to the church in Philippi is addressed to the elders and deacons (Philippians 1:1), suggesting both offices have authority in the church. And the deacons appointed in Acts 6 were all men—even though they were serving women (widows). Women were likely helping them, but there were no women appointed as deacons. Most Reformed theologians have considered Acts 6:1-6 to be the origin of the diaconate, and all seven were men.
In practice, deacons have authority. They vote on things. They make decisions. While under the leadership of elders, deacons still exercise authority and hold what we call “office.” Women are prohibited from holding such authority in the church in 2:12—“I do not permit a women to teach or exercise authority over a man.”
A Better Explanation for the “Women” in 1 Timothy 3:11
So what we have is a somewhat ambiguous reference to “women” or “wives” in v. 11 with minimal requirements, in the middle of longer requirements for male deacons. This is not a strong case for women being in the same class as the male deacons who have longer requirements. Instead of v. 11 speaking of female deacons, the alternative explanation is that Paul has lesser requirements for women because they do not actually hold office. It makes little sense that there would be a lower standard for female deacons compared to male deacons—or for that matter, a lower standard for female deacons compared to enrolled widows, who were supposed to be the “wife of one husband” (1 Timothy 5:9).
So who then are these women? There are three options: (1) women who assist the deacons, (2) the wives of the deacons, (3) the wives of deacons and wives of elders (Calvin’s position).
The word for “women” here can be translated as “women” or “wives.” It is the same word translated “wife” in v. 2 and v. 12. If v. 11 refers to female assistants, this would make sense. For there are situations where it is not appropriate for men to help women physically, and thus women assistants are needed (whereas they are not needed for elders who focus on ruling).
However, I think a stronger case can be made that these are the “wives” of the deacons. Now, some argue this Greek word in v. 11 cannot refer to “wives” because it lacks the definite article (i.e., “the”). In response, we should note that “children” in v. 12 also lacks the definite article in Greek. And it clearly refers to the children of the deacons (i.e., “their” children). It is not saying deacons should manage other people’s children well!
Additionally, v. 12 also references the wives of the deacons, saying deacons must be the “husbands of one wife” (γυναικὸς). Let me quote vv. 11-12 together, using “wives,” to show how this flows—“Wives must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things. Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.” Thus, vv. 11-12 join together regarding the deacon’s family. The entire implication is that the “women” (Γυναῖκας) of v. 11 are in fact the “wives” of deacons. And this makes good sense—Paul gives some requirements for wives of deacons and then goes right into related family requirements for deacons in v. 12. Deacons’ wives must be decent Christians. And deacons must be faithful to those wives and manage their households well—children and implicitly wives.
Now Calvin held that the reference to “wives” in v. 11 applies to wives of deacons and also back earlier to wives of elders. This would explain why v. 11 seems somewhat isolated. This would also explain why Paul does not say “their wives” in v. 11, as he does not want to limit it to deacons’ wives. Paul just says “wives” to refer to the wives of all officers. Unfaithful, gossiping, intemperate wives would be a problem for the church—whether wives of deacons or of elders.
So Calvin may be correct when he says of v. 11: “He means the wives both of deacons and of bishops, for they must be aids to their husbands in their office; which cannot be, unless their behavior excel that of others.” But if v. 11 only refers to the wives of deacons, this would be explained by the fact that deacons’ wives are more likely to assist them in their work. Deacons serve, and women can do that. But elders rule, and women cannot do that.
Now I should note that some who advocate deaconesses appeal to the practice of John Calvin (ironically, considering his prior comment). So let me briefly explain the practice in Calvin’s Geneva. Calvin held to “two kinds of deacons,” one of which was devoted to “the care of the poor and sick” (1 Timothy 5) and one of which was an administrator (1 Timothy 3). Calvin included the widows of 1 Timothy 5:9–10 in the care category, but his view excluded women from serving as the kind of deacon that “administer[s] the affairs of the poor” (Calvin, Institutes, 2:1061 [4.3.9]). Few today follow Calvin when he includes the widows of 1 Timothy 5 as servant-deacons (not administrative-deacons). But if one wants to do so, this requires widow-deaconesses to be over sixty years of age (1 Timothy 5:9, 11-16).
Women Should Still Serve
I think it is important that we get this issue right. There is lots of pressure from the culture to be egalitarian in our practice. And while Scripture is quite clear that women may not preach or be elders, the ambiguities of biblical language regarding deacons has opened the door to the argument that women may be deacons. So let me turn now to application and the bigger picture.
One point of application is this—women may not hold church office, but they should still serve in the church. If they are able, the wives of deacons should serve with their husbands, when appropriate, and especially if there are women in need of care. Women who are not wives of deacons should also serve. There are always opportunities to help those in the church, whether it is organizing meals for the sick, the elderly, and women who just had a baby. There are cases where it is not appropriate for men to physically help women, and that is especially where women should help.
It follows from this that deacons should be in contact with non-deacons in the church to administrate the service of others. So if you are a deacon, you should be leading efforts to serve others, inside and outside the church. Invite non-deacons to serve alongside you. And if you are not a deacon—male or female—talk to your deacons about service opportunities.
Why should we serve others? Because our Lord Jesus Christ served us. He gave His life as a ransom for us—paying the penalty for our sins, that we may know God. As He says in Mark 10:43-45, “But it is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant; and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
Paul’s words for deacons in v. 13 may also be broadly applied to all Christians who serve others—as those who “serve well…obtain for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.” Our service—whether as a deacon or as a non-officer in the church—pleases God. And thus it brings honor—a high standing. But it also brings great confidence in faith. As we serve, we are acting out our faith. Our trust in Christ leads to good deeds. And this actually feeds faith. So if your faith is weak and you do not do much service, then go serve. Good deeds bring confidence and boldness.