Does God Want Deaconesses in the Church?

January 21, 2026/Le Ann Trees/Editor's Picks, Faith

Photo Credit: Thai Noipho / iStock.com

Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

When it comes to any matter related to the Christian life—which is, in fact, every matter—our first priority is to ask what God desires for his people. This is true not only in our personal lives but also in matters of God’s revealed order for his church.

In some conservative churches, there is renewed debate over whether women may serve in the church under the title “deaconess.” While various progressive denominations have ordained women as elders and deacons for decades, some conservative churches have more recently adopted the practice of “commissioning” deaconesses in a non-ordained capacity.

A growing narrative suggests that Scripture permits women to hold the title deaconess and that withholding this designation prevents some women from fully exercising their God-given gifts—thus signaling a lack of appreciation and respect for their contributions to the church.

Before going any further, it is important to acknowledge that some women genuinely feel unseen or undervalued in their churches—not because they lack titles, but because they lack meaningful relational connection, intentional pastoral care, clear pathways for service, and affirming reminders of their God-given dignity within the church’s biblical structure. Naming this helps us recognize the Christ-centered longing many women have to fully participate in the life of the church—a longing that may at times be mistaken for a self-centered pursuit of recognition or position.

I appreciate that many women who advocate for female deacons or deaconesses are motivated by a sincere desire to uphold women’s dignity and bless the church. Likewise, many women who have served—or currently serve—in such roles do so with a heartfelt desire to honor Christ and care for his people. Yet good intentions, however commendable, must always be tested and governed by God’s Word. What, then, does the Bible teach about whether women should hold the title of deaconess?

What does the Bible tell us about deacons in the first-century church?

We first encounter the office of deacon in Acts 6:1–6, where “seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom” were selected to meet the practical needs of the church so that the apostles could devote themselves “to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (vv. 3–4). These seven men were “set before the apostles, and they prayed and laid their hands on them” (v. 6).

According to 1 Timothy 3:1–13, God has appointed the offices of elder and deacon for his church (see also Acts 14:23; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; and 2 Tim. 1:6). In this passage, Paul lays out specific qualifications for both offices:

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer [elder], he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil. (1 Tim. 3:1-7)

Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus. (1 Tim. 3:8-13)

From these qualifications, we can conclude that elders and deacons are to be godly men who oversee their households well. While many progressive denominations have concluded that 1 Timothy 3:1–13 does not exclude women from either office, even within conservative church denominations questions persist about whether Paul intended to restrict the office of deacon to men alone.

Appeals to the presence of deaconesses in church history are often used to support women serving as deacons or deaconesses today. For the sake of brevity, we will consider just a few key aspects of how the historical church understood women serving in a diaconal capacity.

What can we learn about deaconesses from church history?

Historically, the existence of deaconesses varied in numerous ways and often arose from specific practical needs—most notably assisting with the preparation of women for baptism, which in the early church involved complete nudity. The mere existence of deaconesses in certain times and places, though, does not mean the practice carried universal or enduring ecclesiastical approval. Historical practice does not equal orthodoxy. Indeed, it is difficult to arrive at a fixed definition of what church leaders throughout the centuries meant by the title deaconess. For a comprehensive and careful examination of this subject, see Aimé Georges Martimort, Deaconesses: An Historical Study, which documents both the diversity of deaconess practices and the positions of governing ecclesiastical bodies regarding whether deaconesses were understood to hold an office equivalent to that of deacons.

While some historians attempt to assert that deaconesses existed throughout the ancient church, Martimort observes that in the Western church—Rome, North Africa, and Spain—early sources describing church life and ministry make no mention of deaconesses.[1] When women do appear in these records, they are identified as widows or consecrated virgins devoted to prayer or charitable care, rather than as holders of a distinct role. This silence stands in contrast to evidence from the eastern Roman Empire, where deaconesses are attested in the early third century (pp. 196–98). Yet, the deaconesses of the East were not viewed positively in the West, for

in Rome as well as in Gaul, from the end of the fourth century on, the fact of the existence of deaconesses in the East was neither unknown nor passed over in silence; deaconesses were mentioned expressly in order to be excluded.[2]

Martimort also notes that during ordination ceremonies in the East, deacons and priests knelt (deacons on one knee and priests on both knees), whereas deaconesses remained standing and bowed their heads. Within the symbolic language of the Byzantine rite, this difference in posture suggests that the ordination of deaconesses was understood differently from that of deacons or priests.[3]

References to deaconesses in other historical writings and doctrinal statements are likewise sometimes cited in support of women holding the office of deacon or the title of deaconess. Still, context matters. The Council of Chalcedon, Canon 15 (A.D. 451) regulates the practice of laying hands on qualified deaconesses without grounding the existence of deaconesses in Scripture. In his Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin denotes “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,” affirming women’s organized service in works of mercy while maintaining the restriction of ecclesiastical office to men.[4] As the Westminster Confession of Faith reminds us,

All synods or councils since the apostles’ times, whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred; therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practice, but to be used as a help in both. (WCF 31.4)

While studying the history of deaconesses in the church provides helpful perspective on how Christians have approached diaconal ministry over the centuries, such references do not establish biblical warrant. Only Scripture—not historical precedent, theologians, councils, synods, creeds, or confessions—is the final authority in all matters pertaining to God’s order for the church.

Is 1 Timothy 3:11 referring to the wives of deacons or women in general?

Next, we will consider several biblical passages commonly cited in support of the claim that women may hold the office of deacon in the church. One such passage is 1 Timothy 3:11, which reads,

Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things.

Some theologians and laypeople argue that 1 Timothy 3:11 refers to women serving as deacons rather than to the wives of deacons (for two examples, see here and here). One reason offered for this view is the absence of a possessive pronoun with the word γυναῖκας (gynaikas) in verse 11. As Martimort notes, “If the author had really intended to specify the wives of deacons, why did he not write τάς γυναίκας αυτών, instead of just γυναΐκας?”[5]

When a biblical text presents interpretive difficulty because a term may carry more than one meaning, sound hermeneutical practice requires that clearer passages guide the interpretation of less clear ones. With that in mind, it is helpful to examine other places where Paul omits a possessive pronoun as the possessive sense is clear from context:

Ephesians 5:25

Greek: “οἱ ἄνδρες, ἀγαπᾶτε τὰς γυναῖκας (wives)”(no possessive pronoun)
ESV: “Husbands, love your wives”

Here, the possessive relationship is supplied entirely by context. No pronoun is required in Greek for the relationship to be understood.

1 Timothy 3:4

Greek: “τέκνα (children) ἔχοντα ἐν ὑποταγῇ μετὰ πάσης σεμνότητος”(no possessive pronoun)
ESV: “keeping his children submissive with all dignity”

Again, the possessive “his” is inferred from the subject under discussion—the overseer.

1 Timothy 3:11

Greek: “Γυναῖκας (wives) ὡσαύτως σεμνάς, μὴ διαβόλους, νηφαλίους, πιστὰς ἐν πᾶσιν”(no possessive pronoun)
ESV: “Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things.”

As in Ephesians 5:25 and 1 Timothy 3:4, the possessive relationship in 1 Timothy 3:11 is implied by context rather than expressed grammatically. Since Paul at times omits possessive pronouns when the relational context clearly establishes possession, the absence of a possessive pronoun in verse 11 provides no decisive grammatical basis for interpreting γυναῖκας as referring to women holding the office of deacon.

Moreover, reading γυναῖκας as “women” in general rather than as the wives of deacons is contextually unlikely. Paul addresses men in verses 1–10, briefly mentions γυναῖκας in verse 11, and then immediately resumes addressing men in verse 12 (“Let deacons each be the husband of one wife”). A sudden shift to female officeholders—followed by an immediate return to male qualifications—would be abrupt and inconsistent with Paul’s orderly argument.

Calvin confirms this understanding in his commentary on 1 Timothy 3:11, writing, “Likewise the wives 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.”[6]

Since Paul considered marital status sufficiently important to address explicitly for men holding church office, it would be reasonable to expect him to address the marital status of women as well if 1 Timothy 3:11 were referring to women under consideration for the diaconate. The absence of any such discussion weighs against that interpretation. This is especially significant in light of appeals to 1 Timothy 5 in support of female deacons. There Paul speaks with notable precision about widows, specifying age, marital history, and conduct for those eligible to receive church support. If Paul was willing to be so explicit in chapter 5, the silence of chapter 3 regarding women’s marital status strongly suggests that women were not in view as candidates for the diaconate.

Theologian Edmund P. Clowney offers a further argument in support of interpreting 1 Timothy 3:11 as referring to women in general. He contends that the verse does not refer to the wives of deacons because there is no comparable description of the wives of overseers in the preceding verses.[7] Yet, for the sake of consistency, this reasoning would also need to be applied to other differences between Paul’s qualifications for overseers and deacons.

For example, overseers are instructed to be “not violent but gentle,” while no such qualification appears in the list for deacons. Conversely, deacons are required to “hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience,” a qualification not explicitly stated for overseers. These differences do not imply distinct moral standards. Rather, Paul’s broader point is that anyone holding ordained office in the church must be a godly man in every respect.

For these reasons, interpreting γυναῖκας in 1 Timothy 3:11 as referring to the wives of deacons—rather than to women holding the office itself—best fits the immediate context, the structure of the passage as a whole, and the clearer teaching of Scripture elsewhere.

What did Paul mean by “servant” in his commendation of Pheobe in Romans 16:1-2?

Let’s now consider the word the apostle Paul uses for “servant” in his commendation of Phoebe in Romans:

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant (διάκονον) of the church at Cenchreae, that you may welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints, and help her in whatever she may need from you, for she has been a patron of many and of myself as well. (Rom. 16:1-2)

The Greek noun διάκονος is a general term for service, whose specific sense is determined by context. In the original biblical texts, the Greek noun διάκονος appears with different endings that indicate its case, number, and grammatical gender—that is, how the word functions within a sentence. Despite these variations, all 30 occurrences refer to the same Greek word διάκονος and must therefore be interpreted according to context rather than grammatical form alone.

Below is a complete list of occurrences of διάκονος in Scripture, with the corresponding ESV and NASB translations alongside the Greek text (Nestle–Aland 28th edition). For clarity, the occurrences are grouped into contextual categories based on how διάκονος functions in each passage.

Category 1: General service (non-office, non-authoritative) — διάκονος used in a broad sense of service or assistance, without ecclesiastical office markers

Matthew 20:26

ESV: “…whoever would be great among you must be your servant…”
NASB: “…whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant…”
Greek: ἔσται ὑμῶν διάκονος

Matthew 22:13

ESV: “…the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot…’”
NASB: “…the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot…’”
Greek: τότε ὁ βασιλεὺς εἶπεν τοῖς διακόνοις

Matthew 23:11

ESV: “The greatest among you shall be your servant.”
NASB: “But the greatest among you shall be your servant.”
Greek: ὁ δὲ μείζων ὑμῶν ἔσται διάκονος

Mark 9:35

ESV: “…he must be last of all and servant of all.”
NASB: “…he shall be last of all and servant of all.”
Greek: καὶ πάντων διάκονος

Mark 10:43

ESV: “…whoever would be great among you must be your servant.”
NASB: “…whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant.”
Greek: ἔσται ὑμῶν διάκονος

John 2:5

ESV: “His mother said to the servants, ‘Do whatever he tells you.’”
NASB: “His mother said to the servants, ‘Whatever He says to you, do it.’”
Greek: λέγει ἡ μήτηρ αὐτοῦ τοῖς διακόνοις

John 2:9

ESV: “…though the servants who had drawn the water knew…”
NASB: “…though the servants who had drawn the water knew…”
Greek: οἱ διάκονοι οἱ ἠντληκότες τὸ ὕδωρ

John 12:26

ESV: “…where I am, there will my servant be also.”
NASB: “…where I am, there My servant will be also.”
Greek: ἐκεῖ καὶ ὁ διάκονος ὁ ἐμὸς ἔσται

Romans 13:4 (first occurrence)

ESV: “…for he is God’s servant for your good…”
NASB: “…for it is a minister of God to you for good…”
Greek: θεοῦ γὰρ διάκονος ἐστίν

Romans 13:4 (second occurrence)

ESV: “…for he is the servant of God, an avenger…”
NASB: “…for it is a minister of God, an avenger…”
Greek: θεοῦ γὰρ διάκονος ἐστίν

Romans 15:8

ESV: “For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised…”
NASB: “For I say that Christ has become a servant to the circumcision…”
Greek: Χριστὸν διάκονον γεγενῆσθαι

Romans 16:1

ESV: “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church…”
NASB: “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church…”
Greek: Φοίβην … οὖσαν διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας

1 Corinthians 3:5

ESV: “What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed…”
NASB: “What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed…”
Greek: τί οὖν ἐστιν Ἀπολλῶς; τί δέ ἐστιν Παῦλος; διάκονοι

2 Corinthians 6:4

ESV: “…as servants of God we commend ourselves…”
NASB: “…commending ourselves as servants of God…”
Greek: ὡς θεοῦ διάκονοι

2 Corinthians 11:15 (first occurrence)

ESV: “…if his servants also disguise themselves…”
NASB: “…if his servants also disguise themselves…”
Greek: οἱ διάκονοι αὐτοῦ

2 Corinthians 11:15 (second occurrence)

ESV: “…as servants of righteousness.”
NASB: “…as servants of righteousness.”
Greek: διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης

Galatians 2:17

ESV: “…is Christ then a servant of sin?”
NASB: “…is Christ then a minister of sin?”
Greek: ἄρα Χριστὸς ἁμαρτίας διάκονος;

Category 2: Gospel ministry (commissioned service, still not an ecclesiastical office) — διάκονος describing gospel labor or apostolic ministry, without technical office indicators

(Note: although English translations often render διάκονος here as minister, these passages lack the contextual markers Scripture elsewhere uses to identify ecclesiastical office.)

2 Corinthians 3:6

ESV: “…who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant…”
NASB: “…who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant…”
Greek: ἱκάνωσεν ἡμᾶς διακόνους καινῆς διαθήκης

2 Corinthians 11:23

ESV: “Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one…”
NASB: “Are they servants of Christ?—I more so…”
Greek: διάκονοι Χριστοῦ εἰσιν;

Ephesians 3:7

ESV: “Of this gospel I was made a minister…”
NASB: “of which I was made a minister…”
Greek: οὗ ἐγενόμην διάκονος

Ephesians 6:21

ESV: “…Tychicus… a faithful minister…”
NASB: “…Tychicus, the beloved brother and faithful minister…”
Greek: Τυχικὸς … πιστὸς διάκονος

Colossians 1:7

ESV: “…Epaphras our beloved fellow servant…”
NASB: “…Epaphras, our beloved fellow bond-servant…”
Greek: Ἐπαφρᾶ … πιστοῦ διακόνου

Colossians 1:23

ESV: “…of which I, Paul, became a minister.”
NASB: “…of which I, Paul, was made a minister.”
Greek: οὗ ἐγενόμην ἐγὼ Παῦλος διάκονος

Colossians 1:25

ESV: “…of which I became a minister…”
NASB: “…of which I was made a minister…”
Greek: ἧς ἐγενόμην ἐγὼ διάκονος

Colossians 4:7

ESV: “…a beloved brother and faithful minister…”
NASB: “…a beloved brother and faithful servant…”
Greek: πιστὸς διάκονος

1 Thessalonians 3:2

ESV: “…Timothy… a minister of God…”
NASB: “…Timothy, our brother and God’s fellow worker…”
In this verse the NASB follows a textual variant reading συνεργὸν (“fellow worker”) rather than διάκονον (“servant/minister”).
Greek: Τιμόθεον … διάκονον τοῦ θεοῦ

1 Timothy 4:6

ESV: “If you put these things before the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, being trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine that you have followed.”
NASB: “In pointing out these things to the brothers and sisters, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the good doctrine which you have been following.”
Greek: καλὸς ἔσῃ διάκονος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ

Category 3: Established ecclesiastical office (Deacon) — διάκονος used in a technical sense, clearly identified as church office

Philippians 1:1

ESV: “…with the overseers and deacons…”
NASB: “…with the overseers and deacons…”
Greek: σὺν ἐπισκόποις καὶ διακόνοις

1 Timothy 3:8

ESV: “Deacons likewise must be dignified…”
NASB: “Deacons likewise must be men of dignity…”
Greek: διακόνους ὡσαύτως

1 Timothy 3:12

ESV: “Let deacons each be the husband of one wife…”
NASB: “Deacons must be husbands of only one wife…”
Greek: διάκονοι ἔστωσαν

While the ESV and NASB differ at points in how they translate the Greek noun διάκονος, both translations reserve the term deacon for passages where the context clearly identifies an established ecclesiastical office (Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3). As the passages above demonstrate, διάκονος itself is not a technical term for church office but a general word whose meaning is determined by context.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG) identifies two primary senses of διάκονος: (1) “one who serves as an intermediary—agent, courier, or assistant,” and (2) “one who carries out a task at the direction of a superior, assistant.” [8] It is important to note that BDAG’s categories are lexical, describing the range of meanings a word may bear, not whether a given occurrence refers to ecclesiastical office. BDAG places διάκονος in Romans 16:1 under both categories, while classifying its occurrences in Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8 and 3:12 under the second category. Accordingly, BDAG treats διάκονος as a general term for service, with its specific sense determined by context rather than by the word itself.

What about arguments claiming that Paul calls Phoebe a deacon in an official capacity in Romans 16:1?

Before moving on from Romans 16:1–2, I want to address another aspect of Clowney’s argument in support of Phoebe’s being a deacon of the church in Cenchreae. Clowney appeals to Anglican theologian C. E. B. Cranfield’s exegesis of the present participle of εἰμί (“to be”) in verse 1 to advance his case:

C. E. B. Cranfield concludes that the form Paul uses in Romans 16:1 speaks of ‘deacon’ in the official sense. [29] The present participle of the verb ‘to be’ is regularly used to identify an office (Jn. 11:49; Acts 18:12; 24:10). The addition of the name of the church in Cenchrea fits this identification: ‘Phoebe our sister, being also deacon of the church in Cenchrea… If diakonos were being used in the general sense of ‘servant’ we might have expected ‘servant of Christ.’[9]

Here is the fuller context of Cranfield’s commentary regarding Phoebe:

οὖσαν [καὶ] διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ἐν Κεγχρεαῖς. Phoebe is not only a fellow Christian; she is also διάκονος of the church in Cenchreae, the eastern port of Corinth. It is perhaps just conceivable that the word διάκονος should be understood here as a quite general reference to her service of the congregation; but it is very much more natural, particularly in view of the way in which Paul formulates his thought (οὖσαν … διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας), to understand it as referring to a definite office. We regard it as virtually certain that Phoebe is being described as “a” (or possibly “the”) deacon of the church in question, and that this occurrence of διάκονος is to be classified with its occurrences in Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8, 12.[10]

While Cranfield places considerable weight on the formulation οὖσαν … διάκονον τῆς ἐκκλησίας (“being … a servant of the church”), treating the construction as suggestive of office and drawing a strong conclusion (“virtually certain”), Clowney presses the point further by treating the present participle of εἰμί (“to be”) as though it regularly identifies office, rather than merely accompanying it where office is already clear. In the proof texts Clowney cites to support this claim—John 11:49 (“Caiaphas, who was high priest that year”), Acts 18:12 (“Gallio was proconsul of Achaia”), and Acts 24:10 (“many years you [Felix, the governor of Judea] have been a judge over this nation”)—the office in view is already clear from the historical and narrative context. In each case, the participial construction of εἰμί does not establish the office but simply describes a role that is already known to the reader. The grammar, therefore, accompanies an existing identification rather than creating it.

Both Cranfield and Clowney err in treating the verb “to be” (εἰμί) as a technical construction, a claim the evidence cannot sustain given the wide and ordinary use of εἰμί in Greek. In light of the weight they place on this common verb to support Phoebe’s holding diaconal office, it is difficult not to wonder whether the same exegetical pressure would be applied if Paul were commending a man rather than a woman at the beginning of Romans 16.

It’s also worth noting that when Cranfield wrote his commentary on Romans (vol. 1 [Rom. 1–8] published in 1975, and vol. 2 [Rom. 9–16] in 1979), deaconesses were already well established in Anglican life, and women were beginning to be ordained as deacons in the Episcopal Church. The ordination of women as deacons was later permitted in England in 1985. This Anglican context provides helpful background for understanding Cranfield’s openness to an official reading of διάκονος in Romans 16:1.

We can still appreciate Phoebe’s good works without unnecessarily ascribing the office of deacon to her. In his commentary on Romans 16, Calvin praises Phoebe’s distinguished service to the church and describes her as a trusted assistant, yet he does not treat Paul’s commendation as conferring ecclesiastical office: “She had always been a helper to all the godly; and since she was an assistant of the Cenchrean church, he [Paul] bids that on that account she should be received in the Lord.”[11]

This distinction is made explicit by theologian John Murray, who addresses the tendency to read Romans 16:1 as referring to the ecclesiastical office of deacon:

It is common to give to Phoebe the title of “deaconess” and regard her as having performed an office in the church corresponding to that which belonged to men who exercised the office of deacon (cf. Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:8-13). Though the word for “servant” is the same as is used for deacon in the instances cited, yet the word is also used to denote the person performing any type of ministry. If Phoebe ministered to the saints, as is evident from verse 2, then she would be a servant of the church and there is neither need nor warrant to suppose that she occupied or exercised what amounted to an ecclesiastical office comparable to that of the diaconate. The services performed were similar to those devolving upon deacons. Their ministry is one of mercy to the poor, the sick, and the desolate. This is an area in which women likewise exercise their functions and graces. But there is no more warrant to posit an office than in the case of the widows who, prior to their becoming the charge of the church, must have borne the features mentioned in 1 Timothy 5:9, 10.[12]

Taken together, Calvin and Murray affirm that Phoebe’s faithful service can be fully recognized and honored without conflating commendable Christian ministry into ecclesiastical office—a distinction Scripture itself carefully maintains.

What can we know with certainty about Phoebe and her service to the church?

According to Aimé Georges Martimort, the setting of Cenchreae as a port city helps clarify the nature of the service Paul attributes to Phoebe in Romans 16:2,

Even more than that, it is possible to argue that what follows in the text provides the best clue to the nature of the service rendered by Phoebe. St. Paul specifies that for him, as for many others, she has been a helper, or protectress (ιιροαιάας).[10] This term suggests activities pertaining to the established and accepted practices, recognized by all, of providing hospitality and assistance. This interpretation is especially plausible when we remember that Cenchreae was the port of Corinth facing east; it was there that the Christian brethren from Syria or Asia Minor would normally have debarked in Greece.[11][13]

Paul’s commendation of Phoebe in Romans 16:1–2 is therefore richly informative. He expresses full confidence in the sincerity of her faith and her union with Christ, urging the Roman believers to “welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints.” He also demonstrates deep respect for her character by asking them to “help her in whatever she may need,” confident that she would make godly use of their support. Phoebe likely also carried Paul’s letter to the Romans. Finally, Paul notes that she had “been a patron of many,” including Paul himself, indicating her generosity and active support of the church. Taken together, these remarks show that Phoebe was unequivocally a beloved fellow saint in the church of Cenchreae—one who trusted in Christ alone for salvation and was marked by faithfulness, trustworthiness, and devotion to good works in both deed and generosity.

We must exercise caution when applying the terms “deacon” or “deaconess” to the noun διάκονος.

For a side-by-side illustration of the need for consistency when determining whether διάκονος refers to the office of deacon in Romans 16:1, let’s compare Paul’s use of the word “servant” with respect to Phoebe and Epaphras:

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant (διάκονον) of the church at Cenchreae, that you may welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints, and help her in whatever she may need from you, for she has been a patron of many and of myself as well. (Rom. 16:1-2)

Just as you learned it from Epaphras, our beloved fellow servant (συνδούλου; “fellow [συν] bond-servant [δούλου]”). He is a faithful minister (διάκονος) of Christ on your behalf. (Col. 1:7)

Feature	Phoebe (Rom. 16:1)	Epaphras (Col. 1:7)
Greek term used	διάκονον	διάκονος
Inflected form denotes	Accusative singular, in apposition to Φοίβην as the direct object of “I commend”	Nominative singular, describing Epaphras as the subject of the clause
Lemma (dictionary form)	διάκονος	διάκονος
Gender denoted by noun [14]	Common-gender (gender supplied by context, not morphology)	Common-gender (gender supplied by context, not morphology)
Context	Commendation of Phoebe to the Roman church	Description of Epaphras’ role in gospel ministry
Additional descriptors	“our sister”; προστάτις (“benefactor/patron”)	“faithful”; ἀγαπητὸς σύνδουλος (“beloved fellow servant”)
Office explicitly stated?	No	No
Paired with overseers or qualifications listed?	No	No
Nature of service described	Support, aid, and trusted service connected with a local church	Teaching and gospel labor on behalf of the church

As the chart above highlights, Paul uses the same Greek word διάκονος to describe both Phoebe and Epaphras, even though their service differs in form and context. In neither passage does Paul explicitly identify the term as an ecclesiastical office or associate it with ordination, formal qualifications, or overseers. Instead, the nature of each person’s service is clarified by context, showing that διάκονος by itself does not establish church office or authority.

We can be certain that a specialized ecclesiastical meaning (“deacon”) arises for the word διάκονος only when the surrounding passage clearly signals an established church role, such as the pairing of deacons with overseers or the listing of qualifications (see Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:8–13). In the absence of such markers, it is prudent to understand διάκονος as denoting service rather than office, even when used of individuals who are highly commended or prominent within the church (e.g., Rom. 16:1–2).

If the office of deacon is authoritative in nature, it is off limits to women.

The historical emergence of deaconesses appears to reflect a convergence of practical concerns—such as caring for widows, addressing pastoral needs among women, and honoring women’s service in the church—along with, in some periods, an increasing emphasis on rites and ceremonies. While these impulses are often well intentioned, all such practices must ultimately be evaluated and governed by the authority of Scripture.

At the heart of the issue is a single word: authority.

The New Testament distinguishes elders and deacons from other forms of service not primarily by ceremonial actions—such as the laying on of hands—but by the exercise of authorized responsibility within the ordered life of the church.

Paul grounds this order in God’s own character. Writing to the Corinthians, he affirms that “God is not a God of confusion but of peace” (1 Cor. 14:33) and instructs women to “keep silent in the churches for they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission as the Law also says” (1 Cor. 14:34). The Rev. Zach Keele summarizes the intent of Paul’s instructions here in 1 Corinthians:

In short, it is not permitted for a woman to participate in the official teaching and preaching of God’s word in corporate worship. Thus, Paul’s order for women to be silent doesn’t refer to congregational singing. It does not include the corporate voice of all the saints to respond to God; women can sing, confess their faith, and join together in corporate prayers. Secondly, Paul grounds his command by saying, “as the Law also says.” The truth of the Old Testament supports Paul’s regulation. Yet, Paul does not refer here to any one specific Old Testament text; rather, this “Law says” reflects a general principle or truth found through the Old Testament. And what is this? Well, it refers to the fact that women were forbidden from the priesthood. Women could not be God’s anointed king. And with the exception of a few prophetesses, all the main prophets of Israel were men. All the special offices of the Old Testament were limited to men. Thus, Paul says the New Testament church is consistent with this Old Testament reality.

In 1 Timothy 2:11–14, Paul grounds his instruction in creation and the fall, explaining why women are not permitted to teach or to exercise authority over a man in the assembled church:

Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor (emphasis added).

Because Paul’s restrictions address authoritative teaching and governance in the life of the church, they also bear on roles that involve delegated authority within the church’s ecclesiastical structure.

Furthermore, arguments that flatten biblical distinctions between men and women by appealing to Galatians 3:28 (“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”) would, if consistently applied, undermine large portions of Scripture that address authority and submission—not only in the church but also in marriage and civil life. Any interpretation that requires setting aside or nullifying clear biblical teaching cannot be sustained.

Authoritative service in the church involves acts carried out in the name of the church, the exercise of delegated responsibility, accountability for outcomes, and the expectation of recognition and submission. Because deacons are set apart as authorized stewards of the church’s ministry of mercy and administration—a responsibility that distinguishes their service from informal or voluntary assistance—it is difficult to maintain that the office of deacon lacks authoritative character.

Accordingly, in light of the clear teaching of 1 Corinthians 14:33–34 and 1 Timothy 2:11–14 regarding women’s roles in the gathered church, the office of deacon must be restricted to men.

Is it appropriate to give women the non-ordained, commissioned-only title of deaconess?

The question is not whether women served faithfully and sacrificially in the early church, for they certainly did. Historically, however, the term deaconess was not necessarily intended to denote a female version of the ordained diaconal office. As Martimort explains,

One of the results of our study has been to recognize that the word “deaconess” has been used very differently from one church to another and from one age to another. Perhaps this inevitably had to be the case because the pastoral problems that had to be resolved were so different.[15]

Martimort also cautions readers about the inherent difficulties involved in interpreting ancient practices:

The complexity of the facts about deaconesses and the proper context of these facts prove to be quite extraordinary. There exists a significant danger of distorting both the facts and the texts whenever one is dealing with them secondhand.[27] It is also very difficult to avoid falling into anachronisms when trying to resolve the problems of the present by reference to the solutions appropriate to a past that is long gone [such as times when female assistants were needed since “baptism required total nudity” (p. 44)]. For the fact is that the ancient institution of deaconesses, even in its own time, was encumbered with not a few ambiguities, as we have seen.[16]

In light of this historical diversity, it is reasonable to conclude that the term deaconess was generally used to designate women appointed to assist the church in various practical ways, such as preparing women for baptism and caring for those in need.

The confusion surrounding deaconesses in church history is compounded by modern usage. In contemporary English, the “-ess” suffix is typically understood to indicate the female version of the same role (actor/actress, waiter/waitress). As a result, the term deaconess is often assumed to refer to an ordained female deacon—someone who holds a position of leadership within the church’s ecclesiastical structure. Although some churches use the term deaconess to describe non-ordained female service, the title itself frequently leads to misunderstanding.

Moreover, while women have served as deaconesses at various times in church history, many other historical practices—such as clerical celibacy, the veneration of relics, and prayers for the dead—were later rejected because they conflicted with Scripture. The case of deaconesses is no different: historical precedent cannot establish doctrinal authority.

The title deaconess carries implications of leadership and authority that Scripture consistently associates with ecclesiastical office. If Scripture neither commands nor clearly establishes a practice for the church, prudence counsels restraint. This question is not about women’s competence, giftedness, or godliness, but about obedience to the pattern Christ has given his church. The regulative principle of worship guards the church from instituting practices that go beyond God’s revealed order. Because the term deaconess is, at best, confusing and, at worst, suggestive of an office Scripture does not authorize, it should not be used as a title in Christ’s church.

At the same time, the church does well to provide non-authoritative structures that enable women to assist in diaconal ministry. The Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) addresses this explicitly in its Book of Church Order:

9-7. It is often expedient that the Session of a church should select and appoint godly men and women of the congregation to assist the deacons in caring for the sick, the widows, the orphans, the prisoners, and others who may be in any distress or need. These assistants to the deacons are not officers of the church (BCO 7-2) and, as such, are not subjects for ordination (BCO 17).

For further discussion of why the titles “female deacon” or “deaconess” should be avoided, see Thomas Rickard, “A Brotherly Plea to Cease Using the Title ‘Deaconess,’” and Brad Isbell, “The PCA’s ‘Essgate.’”

Do women need titles to serve the church well?

Throughout Scripture, we encounter women who served God faithfully and were honored for their faith, service, and character. Yet none of these godly women held ecclesiastical office in either the old or new covenant eras. Their example reminds us that fruitful service in God’s kingdom has never depended on titles or formal office.

Consider the following women, listed in chronological order by biblical book:

Old Testament

Sarah — Gen. 12–23
Shiphrah and Puah — Exod. 1:15–21
Jochebed (mother of Moses) — Exod. 2:1–10; Num. 26:59
Miriam (prophetess, which is not an ecclesiastical office) — Exod. 2:1-10; 15:20–21; Mic. 6:4
Rahab — Josh. 2; 6:22–25; Heb. 11:31; James 2:25
Deborah (judge; prophetess) — Judg. 4–5
Jael — Judg. 4:17–22; 5:24–27
Ruth — Book of Ruth
Hannah — 1 Sam. 1–2
Abigail — 1 Sam. 25
Huldah (prophetess) — 2 Kings 22:14–20
Esther — Book of Esther
The Proverbs 31 woman — Prov. 31:10–31

New Testament

Mary, the mother of Jesus — Matt. 1–2; 12:46–50; Mark 3:31–35; Luke 1–2; John 2:1–12; 19:25–27; Acts 1:14
Mary, mother of James the younger and of Joses — Matt. 27:55-56; Mark 15:40–41, 47; 16:1
Salome — Mark 15:40–41; 16:1
Elizabeth — Luke 1
Anna (prophetess) — Luke 2:36–38
Mary of Bethany — Luke 10:38–42; John 11:1-44; 12:1–8
Martha of Bethany — Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44
Mary Magdalene — Luke 8:1–3; John 20:1-18
Joanna — Luke 8:3; 24:10
Susanna — Luke 8:3
Mary, mother of John Mark — Acts 12:12
Lydia — Acts 16:14–15, 40
Priscilla — Acts 18:1-18; Rom. 16:3; 1 Cor. 16:19; 2 Tim. 4:19
Philip’s four daughters (prophetesses) — Acts 21:8–9
Phoebe — Rom. 16:1–2
Mary of Rome — Rom. 16:6
Junia — Rom. 16:7
Tryphena and Tryphosa — Rom. 16:12
Persis — Rom. 16:12
Chloe — 1 Cor. 1:11
Euodia — Phil. 4:2–3
Syntyche — Phil. 4:2–3
Lois — 2 Tim. 1:5
Eunice — 2 Tim. 1:5; Acts 16:1
Apphia — Philemon 1:2

These godly women served and strengthened the church in courageous and faithful ways, and Scripture remembers them with profound honor. Not one required a formal title to serve the Lord or to receive the respect of God’s people. Indeed, throughout biblical history we find no female priests, no female anointed rulers of God’s people, no female apostles, no female elders, and no undisputed female deacons.

In my own experience, I cannot recall knowing even one godly Christian woman who—like our sister Phoebe of the church at Cenchreae—faithfully served her church and community and yet was not respected.

Jesus is our perfect example of how we are called to love and serve God and our neighbor.

Jesus did not seek the prestigious titles of his day—not Pharisee, not scribe, not ruler. He did not chase honor or insist on public recognition. The King of the universe came down from heaven and was born in the flesh to serve to the point of allowing himself to be stripped naked, beaten, and nailed to a cross in utter humiliation so that you and I could commune with God in perfect love for eternity.

Christian men and women alike must therefore guard against the temptation to pursue status, position, or recognition as the world does, and instead pursue humble, cross-shaped faithfulness. The good structure Christ has given his church exists so that those who do hold office may serve well while being held accountable in shepherding and caring for Christ’s flock. This structure was never meant to diminish anyone’s worth; it reflects Christ’s wise and loving ordering of his church.

Respect for God and for one another is good, right, and loving. Yet honoring God and others also requires upholding God’s revealed order for his church. Church leaders must therefore take care not to place women in ecclesiastical roles that Scripture does not expressly authorize.

Men and women do not need titles to serve Christ’s church faithfully.

Titles outside ecclesiastical office can serve a helpful organizational purpose. For example, if I want to learn more about opportunities for women to serve in my local church, a listing in the bulletin or on the church website for a women’s ministry coordinator helps direct questions and facilitate involvement. Such organizational structure can assist the church in connecting people, meeting needs, and encouraging the wise use of gifts, resources, and talents.

We must remain vigilant against interpreting Scripture in ways that conform to cultural expectations of honor while undermining God’s design for the church. Christians are never called to reshape Scripture to fit the culture, but to bear faithful witness by standing firmly on what God has revealed.

May we hold fast to a theology of the cross and walk in the footsteps of our Savior with humility and sacrificial love, serving one another gladly in the many ways God has appointed. Godliness is rooted in faithfulness, not in office, and God delights to honor those who walk in loving obedience—whether or not they bear a title.

Editor’s Note: AI-assisted drafting and editing were used in the preparation of this article. This article is an expansion of “Respect, Titles, and the Way of Christ” from Beautiful Christian Life’s November 2025 monthly newsletter, “Respect.”

Notes:

[1] Aimé Georges Martimort, Deaconesses: An Historical Study (Ignatius Press, 1986), 196-97.

[2] Martimort, Deaconesses, 199.

[3] Martimort, Deaconesses, 161-62.

[4] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, IV.3.9 (1559).

[5] Martimort, Deaconesses, 21.

[6] John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, trans. William Pringle (Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1856), on 1 Timothy 3, https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/1-timothy-3.html.

[7] Edmund P. Clowney, The Church (IVP, 1995), 232-33.

[8] Frederick William Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 230, s.v. “διάκονος.”

[9] Clowney, Church, 232.

[10] C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, vol. 2 (T&T Clark LTD, 1979), 781.

[11] John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, trans. John Owen (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, repr.; Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1849), on Romans 16:1–2, https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom38.xx.i.html.

[12] John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1959), 226.

[13] Martimort, Deaconesses, 19.

[14] Although διάκονος is morphologically masculine, it is a common-gender noun whose form does not encode sex; the gender of the referent is supplied by context and agreement rather than by the noun itself.

[15] Martimort, Deaconesses, 255.

[16] Martimort, Deaconesses, 263–64.