Disagree, friend. The article above fails to persuade: it does not fit the wider context of Scripture from Genesis forward, nor even its immediate context (I believe it's obvious that Paul has Genesis 3 at the forefront of his mind). It's not popular today, but the fact remains: Church office (elders and deacons) is for qualified men.
Discussion
1 Timothy chapter 3 is typically used to support women serving as deacons.
It is a debated point, true.
But a plain reading of the qualifications Paul gives to both Timothy and Titus, for both elders and deacons, include qualifications for _their wives also_. It takes some mental gymnastics (in my opinion) to ignore the necessary presuppositions underlying those texts (can a woman have a "wife"? On what ground can we overwrite 'his' with the de-gendered 'a person's' and 'wife' with the de-gendered 'spouse'? I don't think we can without succumbing to the charge of blatant eisegesis).
Beyond that, if further argument is even needed--and I don't think it should be--is the point that the office of deacon _carries authority_, and is therefore included in the prohibition.
Consider: Gregory Reynolds, "[Phoebe Was a Deaconess, But She Was Not Ordained](https://opc.org/os.html?article_id=868)"
Among the many helpful points Reynolds brings out, is this simple one: to 'ordain' _means_ 'to bestow with authority.'
Also consider: Daniel Schrock, "The Churchly Authority of the Office of Deacon":
- [Part 1 - Acts 6, Elders, and Deacons](https://gospelreformation.net/the-churchly-authority-of-the-office-of-deacon-2/)
- [Part 2 - The Representative Authority of Deacons](https://gospelreformation.net/the-churchly-authority-of-the-office-of-deacon-3/)
- [Part 3 - Deacons and Church Power](https://gospelreformation.net/the-churchly-authority-of-the-office-of-deacon/)
It’s my understanding that the Greek word for wives could also be translated to women in which case your plain reading hypothesis wouldn’t make much sense.
I’m not sure I’ve heard the argument that women shouldn’t hold offices of authority. Though, I am familiar with camps of people that don’t believe women should have teaching ability over men.
Those points aside, I think there’s a good argument to be made for the biblical elevation of female status comparatively. Genesis is the only creation story where women are also created in the image of God. The first people to declare the gospel were women.
I don’t really have a firm position on female leadership in the church, it’s something I’m still working through as a believer.
Paul is speaking about men (plural) who would be deacons, so he speaks of _their wives_ -- each wife of each man in question. He didn't mean each one's wives, as he had already limited the office to those 'with one wife."
Regarding 'authority' -- it's right there in [1 Tim 2:12](https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1ti/2/12/s_1121012): "I do not permit a woman to teach _or usurp authority_ over a man." And given the context immediately following, this is a _creational_ principle, not a _cultural_ one. The same creational principle appears in 1 Cor. 11.
No question that both Christ himself and Christianity elevated (thus restoring) the general status of women in society, especially in the context of that day.
Why would there be qualifications listed for the wives of deacons but not the wives of elders? It makes more sense to me that he was describing women than wives in that context.
I guess I’m being picky with the word authority being used. How does this apply in non-religious settings? Would you argue that women should not have authority over men in the workplace? There’s no “gotcha” coming, I’m just curious on how that application affects your world in other contexts.
There are qualifications for both right in the same letter. And he is speaking about _their_ wives--as in, the wife of each man under consideration for office.
That’s an interesting thought. I’m on the absolutely edge of my knowledge on the topic so I’m really out of rebuttal points.
I can explain why it is a bad idea on a pragmatic common sense type of way but I might have to write an article.
I am going to leave a quick thought penny.
Paul writes that if you have a problem with your brother you should take him aside and discuss your issue with him.
The word brother is important because I have no business stepping outside with another mans wife or daughter to argue and complain about why I am not happy with... whatever.
Do you see the logic.
Anyway...
Read this and weep. (jokey tone)
https://echdel.npub.pro/post/dismembered-spouse-barbara-streisand-and-a-kick-in-the-dick-1ai2py/