Church Leadership: The Biblical Role of Deacons & A Case for Deaconesses

Ethnic divisions. 

Jealousies. 

Overlooked constituencies. 

The potential for explosive division. 

The church I am describing is not a 21st-century one, but the often-idealized first church in Jerusalem. The scene I just laid out is described in Acts 6. 

The problem is not unfamiliar to us; the solution is quite surprising. 

Deacons. 

In our last post, we explored the need and function of elders in the life of the church. In this post, we will consider the office of deacon. 

Although deacons are often treated as the board of directors for the local church, in reality, their role in Scripture is simultaneously less powerful and far more important. In Scripture, deacons are the need-meeting unity-bringers in the life of the church. 

The office of deacon was designed not for governance, but for service—practical, hands-on ministry that supports the elders and preserves the unity of the church. Understanding this distinction is crucial, not only for honoring biblical patterns of church leadership, but also for ensuring that both men and women are equipped and recognized in service roles according to Scripture. This article examines the biblical role of deacons, their historical function, and their ongoing significance in the life of the church.  

A Serving Role

The office of deacon is described most fully in two texts, Acts 6:1-7 and 1 Timothy 3:8-13. It is presented as a vital role alongside the ministry of the word. In Acts 6, it operated alongside the apostles, while in 1 Timothy 3, it is set beside the overseers (or pastors/elders). 

"Deacon" is simply a transliteration of the Greek term that means "minister," “assistant,” or “servant.” While every Christian is a servant, a deacon is a recognized or appointed "servant” with a particular area of service in the life of the church.

Deacons are a distinct office from elders, according to Philippians 1:1 and I Timothy 3. The primary distinction is that elders are tasked with oversight and teaching, while deacons are tasked with practical service and hands-on ministry. 

Elders are required to be "able to teach" and are called to "take the oversight" of the church, have no such requirement. This is not to say that deacons should not teach; it is to say that they are not required to be “apt to teach” as are the elders.

Moving to a plurality of elders will mean restoring the New Testament role of deacons. Under the New Testament’s eldership model, deacons will be free to focus on practical service rather than leadership and oversight. They would be focused on meeting the often-neglected physical needs of the body under the direction of the elders.

Acts 6:1-7 shows the first deacons being appointed to ensure the equitable administration of mercy ministry to the widows of the Jerusalem church, freeing the apostles to focus on praying, leading the church, and preaching the Word. They were not merely discharging an unwanted task; they were preserving the unity of the church at a critical juncture in redemptive history. Without the first deacons, the Jerusalem church could readily have split into warring ethno-linguistic factions.

The apostles call the church "seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business." "We" means that the apostles are the ones delegating the ministry to them. "Appoint over" (coupled with the laying on of hands) conveys a measure of appropriate authority. "This business" speaks of carrying out the church's care of widows. Notice, they don't say, "all the business affairs of the church" nor do they say, "whom we may appoint over business and to keep the elders in check." 

It is clear that the first deacons had authority to carry out the ministries assigned to them by the church; there is no indication that the apostles envisioned deacons as an authoritative decision-making body to rule over the church, or as counter-balance to the elders. 

The deacons serve in crucial and tangible ways. The Bible regards practical mercy ministry with such high regard that those who engage in it are called to a high standard of character and trustworthiness. Many areas of practical service involve the handling of funds, and they likewise require an ability to avoid favoritism, and therefore they demand godly character. 

An Appointed Role

While all Christians are “servants” in a broad sense, deacons are “appointed servants,” affirmed and recognized by the church to meet specific needs that arise. 

In growing and active churches, organization and coordination are crucial. The distribution of food in Acts 6, for example, was a multi-faceted and demanding job that required skill and character. Appointed and recognized individuals were necessary. Disorganization can amplify disunity. Likewise, skilled administration can guard against disunity and chaos.  

In the same way, churches today need trustworthy and appointed people to administer the church’s finances, care for widows, disburse benevolence funds, serve the Lord’s Supper, maintain church facilities, coordinate volunteer rosters, run a church’s media ministry, organize children’s ministries, and coordinate church hospitality and security. This list only scratches the surface of possibilities. 

Any area of ministry that necessitates multiple individuals and is seen as an official ministry of the church could potentially include deacon administration. Having a recognized individual, a “deacon,” over each of these areas ensures that matters are carried out “decently and in order” under godly guidance.

Deacons could be appointed to fill any number of practical needs: deacon of music (worship leader), deacon of media, deacon of building and grounds, deacon of security, deacon of finance (treasurer), and so on. By giving these individuals the title of “deacon,” the church affirms the dignity of these often-neglected areas of service and upholds Biblical standards of character.

While each deacon could have a special area of service like those described above, all deacons would be involved with the core tasks of caring for widows and engaging in practical, hands-on ministry. As is clear in the Acts 6 text, deacons exist to ensure that no segment of the church is neglected or overlooked. In modern contexts, deacons could ensure that seniors, for example, are adequately cared for, or that single moms have needed support. The needs of the body will determine the function of the deacons. 

This focus on practical service does not diminish the importance of deacons. Their selection in Acts 6:1-7 involved the entire church. Their inclusion in I Timothy 3 shows that they are one of two offices ordained by God for the local church. In fact, Jesus himself describes himself as a "deacon," elevating humble service to great dignity.  

Deacons should meet the requirements laid out in both texts, be affirmed by the church, and be ordained into office. Just because the office is not one of authority does not mean it is one devoid of dignity.

An Important Role

Deacons have an active and vital role to play in the life of the church. Three basic activities and relationships mark their ministry.

1. Deacons Relieve the Elders. 

Deacons serve the church by relieving the elders and ensuring that the needs of the church are met (Acts 6:1-7). The church delegates ministry to them and ordains them, setting them apart for a vital ministry. The church directly benefits from their hands-on service as the elders can focus on their main calling—the Word.

While any number of ministries could be delegated to the deacons, their role is specific and their ministry focused. In Acts 6, they are given responsibility in “this business,” not “all the business affairs” of the church. The term translated “business” is the Greek word for “need” or “duty.”

The phrase does not warrant the common notion that deacons manage all the business affairs of the church apart from the elders.

2. Deacons Serve the Church. 

The ministry to the widows mentioned in Acts 6 was no minor ministry. Care for widows and orphans is a key marker of true holiness throughout Scripture (see James 1:27-28). Seeing that it was done well was essential to having a healthy church.

Historically, deacons have been “mercy ministers,” visiting widows, disbursing funds to those in need, and looking out for the vulnerable in the community.

Though the term “tables” in Acts 6:2 probably refers to food tables, not money tables (context is key), helping administer the finances of the church is an appropriate function of deacons.

While deacons are appointed over various ministries (Acts 6:3) and must lead their homes well (I Timothy 3:12), no verses speak of deacons “ruling,” “overseeing,” or “having authority” over the church outside of their delegated authority. Giving deacons the same role as elders essentially erases any distinction from the two, and burdens deacons with the role of leading, a strange reversal of Acts 6’s entire point.

3. Deacons Unify the Congregation. 

While their authority was delegated and their ministry focused, their purpose was significant. Protecting the unity of the church is one of the greatest priorities in numerous New Testament texts (I Corinthians 1-4; the entire book of Ephesians; Romans 12-14). The entire point of having deacons was to make sure that unity was protected in the administration of care to the widows so that the church would not divide on linguistic lines.

While the focus of their ministry is practical, the point of their ministry is significant—protecting the unity of the church. Deacons do this by hearing concerns, and directing elders to anyone needing special care or visitation. They ensure that the church’s ministries are done equitably.

An Open Role: Men and Women 

If deacons are “appointed servants” and not formal leaders, could women be appointed to serve in diaconal roles? My argument is that, in most churches, we already have them, and more importantly, so does the Bible. 

In most churches, women already serve in recognized and appointed service roles. Women are already recognized as overseeing nursery, leading children’s ministries, stewarding the media ministry, and coordinating church social functions. These are all “service” roles that are “appointed/recognized” by the church that enable the elders to focus on teaching and preaching the Word. Often, they are deaconesses in everything but title. 

The question that must be asked is whether the New Testament envisions such a title/role. The evidence is limited, but seems to support seeing the position of "deaconess" in Scripture. 

1 Timothy 3:8-13

In I Timothy 3:8-13, Paul seems to describe both male and female deacons. The term rendered “the wives” in 3:11 in the KJV is simply the Greek term “women.” Whether the term is rendered "wives" or "women" must be determined by contextual and grammatical features.  

It would be unusual for Paul to have specific requirements for the wives of deacons, but not the wives of overseers (in 3:1-7). Thus, it is better to understand Paul as laying out the requirements for female appointed servants in the church, rather than laying out requirements for the wives of deacons. 

Understood this way, in addition to meeting the general requirements for appointed servants in 3:8-10, the women must meet the requirements of 3:11 (they must not be gossips) while the men must meet the additional proviso of 3:12 (lead their homes well). 

Structurally, then, 3:8-10 give the general requirements for all appointed servants, while verses 11-12 give specific requirements to women (3:11) and men (3:12). Verse 13 then summarizes with encouragement to both.

At issue is the rendering of the term translated “wives” in 3:11. The Greek term (gynaikos) can legitimately be translated either way, "wives" or "women." Wycliffe translated it "women," while Tyndale and KJV went with "wives." Demonstrating the staying power of Tyndale’s work, the ESV renders it "wives," while the NASB renders it "women."

Which is correct?

First, everywhere else Paul uses the term in the plural in I Timothy, it is translated "women," not "wives" (five times in 2:9-14). In the singular, it refers to a “wife,” as in 3:2, 12; 5:9. As it is plural here, it is probable that Paul intended this to mean “women.” 

Second, it lacks any pronoun or article in the Greek text (as the KJV indicates this with italics). That suggests the generic "women" over the specific "wives."

To illustrate the difference, Matthew 5:28 uses the term without the article “the,” and it is translated “woman." Matthew 5:31, however, has the article, and it is rendered “wife.” It is obvious from the context in Matthew 5 that this rendering makes the most sense. 

It would be expected for a writer to use the singular or an article/pronoun to specify whether the more generic “woman” or more specific “wife” is being employed. Thus, it seems better to render the term with the more general “women” rather than the more specific “wives.”

Romans 16

In Romans 16, Phoebe is called a "diakonos of the church," likely appointed to deliver Paul’s letter to the church in Rome. While some contend he is using the term generically to say she “served” in a non-official capacity, the use of the term in direct connection with a specific church refers to a recognized position within the church—not merely her servant-like character.

In the early church, female deacons assisted women in preparing for baptism, directed ministry to widows (many of whom were quite young in the ancient world), and served in areas of practical ministry where a woman’s involvement was appropriate. Such ministry would help protect the all-male eldership from potentially compromising situations in ministering to women within the body.

Complementarian Concerns

Many conservative evangelicals understandably balk at the suggestion that women may serve as deacons. Is this not a compromise with the culture, and a step toward placing women in unbiblical places of leadership within the church? If women are permitted to serve as deacons, why not elders?

It is an important question. The answer turns on how the office of “deacon” is understood. If “deacon” is a loose synonym for “elder” and if deacons function as an authoritative decision-making body in the church, then opposition to female deacons is warranted.

God has called men to lead His church. That is clear in texts like I Timothy 2:15ff. If, however, deacons are restored to their biblical function, that is, serving as "appointed servants" to meet marked-out physical needs within the church, then there is no theological reason why a woman could not be an "appointed servant" (nursery director, hospitality coordinator, media director etc.). 

Making such an allowance actually guards the uniqueness and maleness of the office of elder while also providing recognized areas of ministry for godly women within the church under the biblical regulations applicable to diaconate ministry.

If God, in His wisdom, ordained two offices, elder and deacon, does it not stand to reason that every recognized position in the church should fit into one of these two buckets? In our age’s pragmatism, churches multiply titles and positions without consideration to the Bible’s standards.

It is this fast and loose proliferation of titles and positions that has allowed churches to smuggle in women to pastoral, elder-like positions.

If, instead, churches held to the Bible’s standard regarding male-only elders, and also accepted the Bible’s suggestion that all other recognized positions be deacon-qualified roles, then every role can be filtered through a biblical grid. If it is granted that women may serve in deaconing positions but not eldering positions, much confusion can be eliminated.

For example:

“Youth Pastor/Director” is an elder-like role. It involves preaching and teaching to mixed audiences and involves spiritual authority. It should normally be filled by an elder-qualified man (even if the individual is not yet an ordained elder).

“Director of Nursery” is a service-type role. It involves practical ministry that enables the elders to focus on the Word, and it involves hands-on ministry. It may be filled by a deacon-qualified woman.

Few, if any, would take issue with a church officially recognizing a woman having the position of stewardship over church hospitality, childcare, finances, organizing meals for new moms, coordinating outreaches into the community, leading small group discussions, engaging in ministry to women and children, and so on.

Why not place these appointed service positions under the Bible’s regulations, standards, and titles? If calling Phoebe's role “deacon” who delivered Romans to Rome was good enough for Paul, is it good enough for 21st century Christians?

To be clear, the Bible does not require deaconesses, any more than it requires deacons. Paul ordained elders almost immediately (Acts 14:21-23), but no word is mentioned of immediate ordination of deacons. The appointment of deacons seemed to be determined by the needs of the church. 

Titus, written to a less-established church on Crete, includes no mention of deacons, only elders. I Timothy, written to the well-established Ephesus does include mention of deacons, overseers, and if the interpretation above is accepted, deaconesses.

Conclusion: 

Deacons play a vital and God-ordained role in the life of the church. Their ministry, focused on practical service, relieves elders so that the Word can be faithfully preached and taught. By attending to tangible needs, protecting the vulnerable, and fostering unity, deacons are indispensable in maintaining the health of the body. Scripture also provides a framework for recognizing women in appointed service roles, ensuring that all believers can contribute according to their gifts while preserving the biblical distinction between elders and deacons. Restoring the New Testament understanding of deacons allows the church to function more faithfully, efficiently, and lovingly—honoring God and serving His people.