Who May Serve As a Deacon? A Short Study of Romans 16:1-2

The content of this paper is from Dr. Robert B. Strimple’s minority report submitted to the OPC in 1988 on The Report of the Committee on Women in Church Office; Dr. Strimple’s article published in the June-July issue of New Horizons magazine titled, Phoebe Was A Deacon: Other Women Should Be, Too; the current 1980 Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America; the paper titled Communication #01-3 in the minutes of the RPCNA Synod for 2001 on pages 262-277 of the pdf; and the Report of the Committee to Respond to Communication #01-3 in the minutes of the RPCNA Synod for 2002 on pages 116-123.

    The current Testimony of the RPCNA 25.8 teaches:

The permanent officers to be set apart by ordination are elders and deacons. The office of elder is restricted in Scripture to men. Women as well as men may hold the office of deacon. Ordination is a solemn setting apart to a specific office by the laying on of the hands of a court of the Church and is not to be repeated. Installation is the official constitution of a relationship between one who is ordained and the congregation.
1 Tim. 2:12; 3:2; Titus 1:6.

    Phoebe is called a diakonos of the church at Cenchrea. However, what does diakonos mean? There are two Greek terms used throughout the New Testament to describe “service”. The first term, (diakonia) is “the most comprehensive term for the ministry of the New Testament church”. The second-which Paul uses in Romans 16:1-term (diakonos) is “the general term for all those who carry out that ministry.” Therefore, these two Greek words have an overall broad meaning of serving. The first is used when speaking of the whole church, and the second is used when describing the tasks of an individual serving within the church. However, neither term, on its own, means a particular ministry or office within the church. We do, however, see in Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8, 12, 13 Paul using these two words as an official title within the church. Romans 12:7 may also point to the first term moving to an official position within the church where Paul might be saying “office of service”. The question in the text is whether the term diakonos used by Paul about Phoebe is used to talk about Phoebe holding a church office or if Paul is saying Phoebe is a women who serves in the church at Cenchrea in an informal role?
    To determine the answer to this question we need to examine the context of these two verses. One approach to these two verses is to say that there is nothing in the context to rule out a general use of the Greek word diakonos; the way to understand what Paul is saying about Phoebe’s relationship to the church at Cenchrea is based on the way we understand the office of deacon in the other New Testament texts and then we can understand what Paul was saying about Phoebe. This view says that the interpretation of diakonos is not clear in the immediate context and the translation of either “servant” or “deacon” is left up to one's view of if a woman ought to be able to be deacon or ought not to be able to be deacon. The other approach to this passage contends that Paul does say enough in verses 1 and 2 to be able to decide if Phoebe is an office holder of the church or someone who informally serves the church in Cenchrea and is now in Rome.
    The second view considers four exegetical arguments in the context as being decisive in determining how we ought to understand Paul’s meaning towards Phoebe and then Paul’s other instructions to other churches and church officers about how we are to understand who may be considered for the office of the diaconate. We need to quickly consider these four points to help us understand what Paul is saying about the larger office of the diaconate. It maybe helpful to clearly state that each one these four arguments make a different point about different parts of verses 1 and 2 of Romans 16. I will try to state the immediate part being considered, state the argument, and then state a short summary of the argument to plainly reveal the point of the argument.

1. "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is also a deacon of the church which is at Cenchrea..." The formula that Paul employs in this passage suggests that the reference is to Phoebe’s holding the office of deacon. Paul speaks of Phoebe, literally, as “being a deacon.” Such a formula is consistently the way in which a person identifies the particular office someone holds at a particular time. Examples of this usage in the N.T. are found in John 11:49 (“Caiaphas, who was high priest that year”), Acts 18:12 (“Gallio was proconsul of Achaia”), and Acts 24:10 (“... for many years you (Felix) being a judge to this nation ..."). This argument is establishing that the Paul is writing about Phoebe as a church officer is the normal way that the Bible addresses other people who hold either a church office or a office in the state.
2. "I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is also a deacon of the church which is at Cenchrea..." In the critically accepted Greek manuscripts of the Book of Romans, Paul uses a Greek term meaning “also”. Verse 1, based on these manuscripts would read, “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is also a deacon of the church which is at Cenchrea; that you receive her in the Lord …” In this fuller translation of the text the emphasis seems to be not only that Phoebe is a Christian sister but also a deacon in the church of Cenchrea. In this second argument, Paul is not writing about an additional quality of Phoebe, but giving additional information about Phoebe by using the word "also." The word "also" is an addition to Paul's commendation. Paul is not explaining why he is personally commending Phoebe, but is adding a church's commendation to his own.
3. The possessive phrase (“... of the church which is at Cenchrea …”) does not simply inform us of the place from which Phoebe came, but underscores again her official status. Modern examples of this are common as we speak of Barack Obama, president of the United States of America, or Dave Long, pastor of the RP church in Lafayette. This point is arguing that since Paul is noting which church Phoebe is from that Phoebe had an official relationship with the church of Cenchrea. This point by itself does not mean that Phoebe was office holder, but does mean that Phoebe had an official relationship with the church of Cenchrea. Paul has already established at the beginning of verse Phoebe's standing with Christ, but now is explaining Phoebe's status within the church.
4. At the end of verse 2, Paul adds that “she herself has also been a helper of many.” If the reference to Phoebe as a “deacon” in verse 1 only describes Phoebe’s acts of service, the words in verse 2 would be a superfluous repetition. However, if Paul were saying that Phoebe holds a church office, Paul is stating that Phoebe held a church office and is describing how she has performed in that office.

    The conclusion is that if Philippians 1:1 is the first reference in the N.T. to the particular office of deacon (for reasons that will be demonstrated in the next two paragraphs), then Phoebe is the first and only officer of the office named in the N.T. I believe the four exegetical points to be a compelling reason for our church to continue the practice of allowing women to hold the office of deacon if they meet the other qualifications given in 1 Timothy 3:8-13. However, we should broaden out our argument to consider a few other passages of Scripture. I do believe that Romans 16:1-2 is most clear text on this issue, but let’s consider Acts 6, which is commonly believed to be the beginning of the office of Deacon in the church, and 1 Timothy 3:8-13, particularly verse 12.
    Dr. Strimple believes that the office of the deacon was established outside of the events reported in the book of Acts. The seven men chosen in Acts 6 were appointed to an unique office in the same sense as the Apostolate was unique. The office of the seven led into the permanent office of the diaconate; in the same way the office of the twelve apostles led into the permanent office of elder. The ministries of Steven (6:8-7:60) and Philip (8:5-40; 21:8) went well beyond the ministry of the diaconate. For instance, in Acts 6:8 Philip is said to be performing signs and wonders among the people; Steven, likewise, in verses 9-10 is filled with the Spirit and disputing with the Jews as an apologist of the Christian faith.
    With regards to 1 Timothy 3:12, the RPCNA adopted response in 2002 argued that Paul's meaning in the phrase “ husband of one wife” expresses the idea of a person already managing what God has given them and choosing to use the analogy of a family to express the qualification. The qualification can be stated as the following question,“Is this person managing their current responsibilities in a Godly way?” The report argues that Paul is not limiting the identity of the office holder to either a man or a woman in either verses 11 or 12, but Paul is using an analogy to address qualifications needed to serve as a deacon in general. The RP Testimony already employs a very similar understanding of the qualifications of an office holder in 24.17 when it states that marriage is not necessary for officers in the Church to be eligible for an office and cities 1 Cor. 7:7 as the Scripture reference for this position.
    In conclusion, the current practice within the RPCNA is currently biblical; whereas, the majority practice within the Reformed church of North America is not biblical. By not allowing qualified women to serve in the diaconate our brothers and sisters are actually representing a loss of biblical authority. This might be a reaction to late 19th and 20th century concerns about gender roles, which is a perfectly valid concern in and of itself. Furthermore, the majority of modern English translations and interpretations of Paul’s writing in these first two verses of Romans 16 is an example of inductive exegesis; that is, reading an idea into Paul’s letter instead of letting Paul in Romans 16 inform us about Phoebe.
    This debate is healthy to have within a church committed to having a biblically correct Confession. We have needed to, on other issues, enlarge or subtract statements from our Testimony because we have recognized that either previous saints have not spoken clearly enough on a matter that the Bible teaches or have taught beyond what the Bible teaches and then have made appropriate changes. If women being deacons is not the teaching of God’s Word then changes must be made. However, I believe that women may serve the church as deacons because of Romans 16:1-2 and the nature of the diaconate as explained elsewhere in Paul’s letters. The problem is that the RPCNA has not, as a church, really presented a positive case for women to be deacons. The lack of clear teaching has resulted in mass confusion on not only the role of women in our church, but also a larger confusion on the role of the diaconate in the church. We have abandoned this part of our testimony because of neglect. Therefore, it is appropriate, and a duty, that ministers ask the denomination to explicitly abandon it through both a study committee and a vote on the what the Scriptures teach about women and the diaconate. Nevertheless, the practice is still clearly taught and now must be clearly addressed beginning with the Synod meeting of 2015. I welcome this debate and hope and pray that the RPCNA will still recognize Paul’s clear teaching in Romans 16:1-2 as encouraging women to serve the church in the office of deacon.