Introduction
Last week, we examined the first error regarding deacons: Deacons are not the governing body. We saw how some churches, particularly in Baptist contexts, place deacons in positions of authority over the congregation, despite Scripture reserving oversight and shepherding responsibilities for elders (1 Peter 5:1–4). We also explored the practical consequences of this mistake, including the creation of unscriptural roles and the weakening of the church when offices are misapplied.
Error #2: Deacons Are Not Junior Priests
This week, we turn to a second common error, often seen in high church traditions (e.g Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism). This area grants a teaching and preaching responsibility upon deacons. The error arises from the misunderstanding of the distinct calling of deacons. In some traditions, deacons are viewed as “apprentice priests” or “junior clergy.” For example, Roman Catholicism views ordained ministry through the lens of Holy Orders and these orders have three degrees to them. The degrees consist of: deacons, priests, and bishops.
What is important for the purposes of this post is that in both Roman Catholic and others like it, deacons are explicitly entrusted with teaching and preaching as part of their ordained office. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal states that “the Deacon, in virtue of sacred ordination, proclaims the Gospel [and] sometimes preaches the homily,” while the Directory for the Ministry and Life of Permanent Deacons speaks of the deacon’s ministry as including “the proclamation and preaching of the Word of God, as well as instruction and exhortation of the faithful.”
Similarly, the Episcopal Church’s Book of Common Prayer charges deacons “to proclaim the Gospel, to preach,” framing this responsibility not as an exception or emergency measure but as intrinsic to the office itself. In these traditions, therefore, the diaconate is not merely a ministry of service but a clerical order that shares—though in a subordinate degree—in the Church’s public ministry of the Word.
The Scriptural’s Teaching on the Matter
How does this way of envisioning and employing deacons square with the Scriptures? To do so, one must go back to the qualifications given by Paul. If we consider Paul’s words in I Timothy 3, we see that he primarily highlights character traits to be embodied in elders and deacons and they largely mirror each other. However nestled in the midst of them is one qualification connected to aptitude, namely teaching.
According to Paul, the teaching ministry is specifically connected to the roles and responsibilities of elders. This maps on well to Paul’s words in other places. For example, elders who labor in preaching and teaching are worthy of double honor (I Timothy 5:17) and he tells Titus that an elder must hold fast to the faithful word, why, well “so that he can give instruction in sound doctrine.” (Titus 1:9) Secondly, if we consider the men of Acts 6 as proto-deacons, this distinction that develops later is seen even there by asking the simple question of why were they needed or how did they extend the ministry? Simply put, they were established so that the ministry of the Word was not neglected because of the material needs of the body (Acts 6:2).
No doubt individuals who view deacons in the way expressed in the error of Deacons as junior priests, will come back with counter examples such as Stephen of Philip preaching, to which I would respond in two ways. First, Acts is primarily descriptive and as such, we need to be careful with making what is seen there prescriptive. Second, because Stephen or Philip was extraordinarily gifted in a certain way it does not follow that the ordinary calling of diaconate should be changed. More can be said here, but I want to move ahead to address how this error can hurt the church
Why This Matters
What are the consequences of this error? I would argue that it de-values the office, for in contexts that I am referencing throughout this post, the office is looked at as a stepping stone to something greater. And as such, it is not valued for what it is, a God-given and blessed office of mercy and extension of the ministry of the Word. This is not good.
Additionally, it hinders the church from identifying and installing deacons according to the qualifications established by the Scriptures and as such, creates a deficit in terms of this critical office of the church. Men, otherwise qualified for the diaconate, might be hesitant because of this unscriptural requirement.
Conclusion
Whether in low church or high church contexts, God’s offices are distinct and clear. Deacons serve faithfully and indispensably, but they are neither rulers or teachers. Upholding these biblical boundaries preserves the order, teaching, and care that Christ designed for His church.
If you missed Part I of this series, where we addressed the dangers of deacons overstepping into elder responsibilities, you can read it here. https://holycovenantchurch.com/errors-regarding-deacons-part-i/