The Office of Deacon – Acts 6:1-7

I expect that I will alienate everyone here tonight.

Half of you will be angry, and the other half full of sympathy for the offended brethren.

But then, hopefully, I’ll pull you all back in before we finish,

And before the rotten vegetables start to fly in my direction.

As we saw on Wednesday, the establishment of the office of Deacon grew out of necessity.

Whether real or perceived, some members of the church felt that there was mis-management of the church “Meals on wheels” program.

It was thought that the widows of the Grecians were not getting as much assistance as the widows of the native Hebrews.

If there had been a soup kitchen to which everyone came, then there wouldn’t have been a problem.

But obviously, many elderly folk can’t get out, so people have to bring assistance to them.

We aren’t told exactly what this assistance entailed,

But it might have been meals, rent money, or wood and oil to heat their homes and cook their meals.

Or it might have been other kinds of services such as medical attention.

Whatever it was, there were apparently people falling through the cracks, and not getting the help they needed.

And then someone perceived that they were primarily Grecian – probably foreign-born – sisters.

In order to stifle a potential mutiny, the Apostles suggested that the church elect a group of impartial, spirit-filled brethren to supervise the daily ministration of the church funds.

We have a very simple and obvious outline for you this evening:

The origin of the office of deacon; their ordination, their qualifications and their duties.

First, the ORIGIN of the office.

Once again I point out an Old Testament parallel to this New Testament situation.

By Exodus 18, the people of Israel had escaped Egyptian bondage through the grace of God.

They had come into the desert and had camped at the foot of Mount Horeb – Sinai.

And Moses’ father-in-law, the priest of Midian, came to visit his daughter and her family.

Moses affectionately and respectfully met Jethro as he approached the camp,

And he brought him home and gave him the guest room there in his tent.

I’m sure that they had a nice evening together, with a great meal and lots of reminiscing.

But then the next morning Moses was up early and off to work, judging the people of the nation.

Please turn to Exodus 18:14 and let’s read down to verse 27.

“Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: Be thou for the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God:

And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do.

Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.”

Moses liked Jethro’s idea and the Lord approved of the plan, so there were selected hundreds of judges and leaders, under Moses, to assist in the leadership of the nation.

Apparently, for the first few weeks or months of the church, the Apostles oversaw the distribution of the funds that were being given to the church.

They either did the work themselves or they had appointed one or two of their colleagues to take care of it.

But even if there were some appointees to do the leg-work, it appears that the twelve had their thumbs on the pulse of the project.

And they were probably the people to whom came the reports of people in need.

They kept the master-list of recipients, adding and deleting names as necessary.

And they probably had to do some investigation to verify the people and the need.

Also, it was to the Apostles that people came when they had complaints about problems.

As a result they were finding less and less time for prayer and for teaching and preaching.

They were sitting in the gate of the camp from morning until night, so to speak, overseeing this semi-important job.

Not only were they getting exhausted and frustrated, but so were many of the church members.

As Jethro said, “Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone.”

There isn’t a description of the visit of the Holy Spirit, to tell the Apostles about this new office.

There wasn’t the visit of Jethro, or Agabus, or anyone else.

But that doesn’t mean that this wasn’t of the Lord.

It might be argued that the decision to elect deacons was a reversion to the flesh.

But in addition to the fact that the Lord didn’t reprove them for their decision,

The Apostle Paul was led of the Holy Spirit to do some teaching about the qualifications of the deacon.

I have no doubt but that the Holy Spirit ordained the ordination of these deacons.

And speaking of their ORDINATION . . .

“And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch: Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.”

None of us can say with authority exactly how this election took place.

I think that nominations were made and after they prayed over them some were approved by the Apostles.

There may have been a hundred or more nominees,

But then on Super Tuesday, the list was whittled down to a more manageable number.

And then the church was encourage to vote or “choose.”

The Greek word “chose” is “eklegomai” ( ek-leg’-om-ahee )

Which is related to “eklektos” ( ek-lek-tos’ ) from which we get the word “elect.”

There is no doubt in my mind that the church had some sort of election in order to choose these final seven men.

In other words, they were not Apostolic appointees; they were chosen from among the church, by the church.

Of these seven men, we know very, very little.

Some of these names appear in “Foxes Book of Martyrs,”

Stating that most of them eventually became pastors who died for the cause of Christ.

These things may or may not be true.

Some of them have names that are distinctly Grecian, so we see that segment of the membership was well-covered.

And one man wasn’t even born an Hebrew.

Since the list was probably approved by the Holy Spirit through the Apostles, there wasn’t any problem in proceeding with their ordination once the church made their choice.

Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.”

The words “ordination” and “ordain” are not to be found in Acts 6, but that is what we witness here.

To ordain, is akin to sanctifying, but on a less spiritual level.

To ordain is to “set apart” or to “put in place.”

When the Apostles prayed for these seven men, and laid their hands on them, they were telling the church that they recognized their choice and they were placing them in the newly created office of deacon.

I say “deacon” even though the word isn’t found here.

“Deacon” is found in our English Bible in only one place: I Timothy 3 (which we will get to in a minute).

But there is little doubt that even though they may not have been given this title right away, these men were the first deacons.

That word means, very simply “servant.”

And that is the Greek word translated “serve” in verse 2.

These seven men were set apart, or placed into the office of servant.

Now, here is an extra-credit question:

“Is an ordination to theoffice of deacon a life sentence?”

If a man is ordained as a deacon, does that mean he should always be a deacon?

Yes, he should always be a deacon, because he continues to serve.

But if he should stop serving then, he should not be considered a deacon any longer.

Amen?

Now think about their QUALIFICATIONS:

“Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.”

That sounds very much like what Jethro said to Moses: Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness.”

The ministry requires above all other things: honesty, spirituality and wisdom.

And when I speak of “ministry” I’m referring to any position of service in the Lord’s church:

That includes usher, treasurer, clerk, deacon, pastor and janitor.

Wisdom is something which comes with experience, so different servants have it to different degrees.

I have to admit that I have made some stupid, stupid mistakes in the ministry.

And I also hope that I have learned from those mistakes.

That doesn’t mean that I am especially wise, or that I won’t make a horrendous mistake tomorrow.

Sin on the other hand is another matter.

There is no Christian who is not incapable of sin.

And there is therefore no Christian who should be unforgiving.

But men in the ministry, whether Apostles, pastors, missionaries or deacons, must not be characterized by sin.

They should be filled with the Holy Spirit, not grieving the Spirit.

And they must be completely honest.

When they speak, their words must be absolutely trustworthy.

And in their day-to-day lives, they must be above reproach.

The Apostle Paul said essentially the same thing to Timothy.

Turn to I Timothy 3:8 – “Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.

Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.”

A quick comparison shows that the standards that the Bible lays down for the pastor are required for all of the servants of the Lord, including deacons.

Not just anyone should be pastor of a church, and not just anyone should be elected to be a deacon.

And now what about the DUTIES of the deacon?

The only scripture where we read of their responsibilities are right here in Acts.

They were appointed the task of administering relief to members of the church who needed it.

They were elected to help take away some of the more secular work-load of the Apostles.

It appears from this passage that the deacon had a two-edge responsibility:

He was to serve the needy in the congregation,

But he was in another sense the pastor’s helper.

Amen? (Careful, I’m setting you up.)

Some of the things that deacons were never ordained to do, include:

Making spiritual decisions on behalf of the pastor.

Neither was he to make major decisions on behalf of the church.

You’d even be hard-pressed to prove from the Bible that deacons are supposed to make financial decisions.

And certainly, deacons are not the people who determine who should pastor the Lord’s church.

These are some of the things done by deacons in a lot of Baptist churches today.

I have never had the privilege of pastoring a church which had deacons.

I’m not averse to such a situation.

But I’ve never pastored a church which was large enough and complicated enough to require deacons.

And secondly, I’ve never pastored a church which had men qualified to be deacons.

Did everyone hear that:, I’VE NEVER PASTORED A CHURCH WHICH HAD MEN WHOM I CONSIDERED TRULY QUALIFIED TO BE DEACONS.

Please hear me out before you start throwing song books at me.

Most churches have men who are honest, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, including this one.

And there are men in this church who meet the other qualifications as outlined by Paul:

Grave, not double-tongued, not drunkards, not greedy and holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

We have men that are not slanderers, sober, and basically faithful.

We have men who are good husbands and reasonable fathers.

But there is one additional qualification which I would like to see before I ordain a man a deacon:

It’s called “servanthood.”

I would like the man that I ordain as a deacon to virtually FORCE ME TO ORDAIN HIM.

I want him constantly begging me for things that he might do to bless and strengthen and serve the church.

I want him to make sure that I don’t have to cut the grass or paint a wall, or change light bulbs inside this church building.

I want him to take the initiative in caring for the temporal aspects of the Lord’s church – fixing fences, cleaning the yard, picking up trash.

I want him to beseech me for tracts that he might put out door to door.

I want to see him bringing people to the house of God.

I want to see him yearning to build and to teach a Bible class.

In other words, I want him to force me to ordain him a deacon, because he’s already deaconing.

As I said Wednesday, to be a deacon is not an honorary position.

It should not be given as a reward for a person’s generosity or even for his tireless service.

But if a man is a spirit-filled, humble, faithful servant, serving to the utmost of his ability, then he should be called “a deacon.”

Are there men qualified to be deacons in our church?

Yes, there are.

The question is, are there any men who are deaconing enough that they should be called “deacon?”

No, there are not.

If we want to have deacons in Calvary Baptist Church, I think that we have three choices:

We can fire the preacher and get one whose standards are easier to swallow.

We can keep that preacher and ignore his standards.

Or some of the men of the church can strive to become more deacon-like.