Romans 16:1: One of these things may or may not be like the others
When Paul wrote his letters to churches, he couldn’t just drop them in the mail box. He had to send them with trusted messengers. According to Christian tradition, Phoebe was the messenger who carried Paul’s letter to the Romans. So, as part of the letter, Paul introduces her, and this is what he says:
“I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae, so that you may welcome her in the Lord, as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and of myself as well. ”
So, what do we know about Phoebe? First, we know that she was really great. Second, we know that she was a deacon.
What does this mean?
Deacon is really just the Greek word, diakonos, written like an English word—in other words, it’s not much of a translation.
In Koine Greek, the word is not as specific as deacon is for us today. It might equally be used for a government official, a person in charge of food distribution, a household servant, or a missionary church leader. In English, it is usually translated with words like servant, helper, minister, and, yes, deacon. Historically, it has sometimes been translated deaconess when it refers to a woman, but the Greek doesn’t have a corresponding feminine form.
Which of these words should be used to refer to Phoebe? We know that she was trustworthy, that she did something for the church in Cenchreae, and that she was really helpful. Which word best expresses that?
Consistency is key.
Being the odd one out can be awesome! But not if it’s because you’re the one being excluded. And especially not if you’re to one being used to also exclude others.
If you really think that the best way to translate diakonos is with a less formal word like “servant” or “helper”, then I expect you to always translate diakonos that way. If, on the other hand, you make an exception for Phoebe that you don’t make for anyone else, then I have to ask: What makes you so sure that Phoebe is different?
So, to test the translation of Romans 16:1, I looked for an example of the exact same word being used somewhere else. It would be helpful if I could find an example where the word is used in a similar context, and written by the same writer.
Ta-da! I now present Philippians 1, verse 1:
“Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:”
The word here is diakonois, which is the plural form of diakonos. It’s the same word. Scholars overwhelmingly agree that Philippians and Romans were both written by Paul, so it’s the same writer. And, the usage is strikingly similar: It’s a reference to some kind of (unspecified) role in some church, used in the context of an introduction.
It seems reasonable to expect that the exact same word, written by the exact same writer, in very nearly the exact same context1, should be translated in very nearly the exact same way.
So, for this iteration of The Chart, I’m not just looking at the translation of one word or phrase in one verse. I’m looking at the way the word is translated in two different verses, and I’m comparing them. The comparison is the main point.
| Translation/Language: | Date: | Romans 16: | Philippians 1: | Bias: |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original Greek text | diakonos | diakonois | ||
| Popular translations: | ||||
| King James Version (KJV) | 1611 | servant | deacons | Male |
| American Standard Version (ASV) | 1901 | servant | deacons | Male |
| The Living Bible (TLB) | 1971 | your sister in the Lord, has worked hard in the church | deacons | Male |
| New King James Version (NKJV) | 1982 | servant | deacons | Male |
| New International Version – 1984* | 1984 | servant | deacons | Male |
| New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) | 1989 | deacon | deacons | Inclusive |
| Good News Translation (GNT/GNB/TEV) | 1992 | serves | helpers | Ambiguous |
| Contemporary English Version (CEV) | 1995 | leader | deacons | Male |
| New Living Translation (NLT) | 1996 | deacon | deacons | Inclusive |
| New International Version (NIV) | 2011 | deacon | deacons | Inclusive |
| Common English Bible (CEB) | 2011 | servant | servants | Ambiguous |
| English Standard Version (ESV) | 2016 | servant | deacons | Male |
| Christian Standard Bible (CSB) | 2017 | servant | deacons | Male |
| The Message (MSG) | 2018 | a key representative | ministers | Male |
| New American Standard Bible (NASB) | 2020 | servant | deacons | Male |
| NRSV Updated Edition (NRSVUE) | 2021 | deacon/*minister | deacons/*helpers | Inclusive |
| Specialty translations: | ||||
| God’s Word (GW) | 1995 | deacon | deacons | Inclusive |
| New Century Version (NCV) | 2005 | helper | deacons | Male |
| The Inclusive Bible (TIB) | 2009 | deacon | deacons | Inclusive |
| Expanded Bible (EXB) | 2011 | helper/servant/minister/deacon | deacons/servants/ministers | Male |
| Names of God (NOG) | 2011 | deacon | deacons | Inclusive |
| New Testament for Everyone (NTE) | 2011 | deacon | ministers | Inclusive |
| The Passion Translation (TPT) | 2017 | minister/servant/deaconess | servant-leaders | Ambiguous |
| New English Translation (NET) | 2017 | servant | deacons | Male |
| First Nations Version (FNV) | 2021 | sacred servant | those who have the sacred task of helping others | Ambiguous |
In order to make the comparison, I’m mentally grouping translations along a continuum that roughly goes like this:
On one end is more specific words that today are more often associated with (professional) leaders: minister, deacon, or other words that tend to indicate a more formal (leadership) role.
One the other end is less specific words that today are more often associated with subordinate roles: servant, helper, or other words that tend to downplay the role. (Note that in some traditions today2, deacons are officially a subordinate kind of clergy. But, that means subordinate to other clergy, which still makes deacons professional leaders.)
The second is words that today are more often associated with subordinate roles: servant, helper, or other word’s that tend to downplay the role’s importance. (Note that in many traditions today*, deacons are a subordinate kind of clergy. But, that means subordinate to other clergy, which still makes those deacons leaders.)
In theory this could go four different ways, but in practice, lol, of course there are only three, which I categorize as:
Everyone is a (professional) leader (Bias: Inclusive)
Men are (professional) leaders, not so much Phoebe (Bias: Male)
Everyone is a servant or helper (Bias: Ambiguous)
The inclusive choice: We’re all leaders here!
Technically, if you choose to use deacon in both verses, you can always argue you’re just going with the most literal translation.
But, today, people don’t hear deacon as the anglicized form of a Greek word. They hear it as a title. In some traditions, the title is used for slightly subordinate clergy—but still clergy. In other traditions, deacons might be the members of the governing board or council. These are all leadership roles. Deacons are leaders, in the same way that ministers are leaders.
If you think that only men can be leaders in the church, that makes Phoebe a problem, and see the next section for that.
If you think that all people can be leaders in the church, though, then there is no problem, and no reason not to translate consistently. Phoebe and her siblings in Philippi are all deacons/ministers. No big deal. No argument needed. It’s as easy as saying that une colombe is a dove.
If you are tired of all this nonsense, please enjoy this barely relevant music break before you move on:
The exclusive choice: Only men are leaders!
As far as I can tell, the logic is as follows:
Only men are leaders in the church.
Phoebe is not a man.
Therefore, the word being used to refer to Phoebe must mean something different when it’s applied to her.
We call this eisegesis when we’re being cute. It means “reading your biases into the text”.
(Note that The Chart acknowledges that being biased towards the inclusive choice is also a bias. Everyone has biases! The Bible itself includes biases! But some people pretend to free from bias. Never trust a translator who claims to be totally unbiased.)
The ambiguous choice: Everyone is a servant!
In theory, this sounds good, too. Jesus told us to serve one another. Therefore, leaders ought to serve, and also, we ought to treat servants with the exact same dignity and respect that we treat leaders.
We do not.
We like to talk about “servant leaders”, true, but servant in this case is an adjective modifying leaders. Servant leaders are still leaders, not servants.
So, if translators consistently use “servant” or “helper” language for diakonos, it might be because they are trying to accurately reflect the kind of leadership that Jesus taught. By using language of service and helping to refer to everyone, they might be trying to change the way we hear and use that language. We should not treat helpers and servants as lesser!
Or, translators who make this choice could be covering for the fact that they aren’t willing to use professional ministry terms to refer to a woman. (If they don’t use those terms for anyone, they don’t have to use them for Phoebe.)
That makes this choice ambiguous.
Ambiguity is not necessarily bad. Preserving the ambiguity of the original text is often very good translation. Strictly speaking, translations that consistently use deacon are equally ambiguous!
And, at the same time, Phoebe is one of the biblical women whose leadership roles in the early church have been distorted in order to downplay the roles that women can play in the church today—or acknowledged, in order to uplift the roles that women can play in the church today. Deacon Phoebe means so much to so many! So much harm is being done, right now, by people fighting to preserve male-only leadership in the church.
So, in this case, and speaking from my context, there is simply no room for ambiguity on this point: according to a plain reading of the text, the early church had female leaders, and Phoebe was one of them. A translation that leaves room for assuming otherwise is not as good as it could be.
Therefore, for purposes of The Chart, an “Ambiguous” rating gives you half a point, but I’m writing about this so that you can form your own judgment. For what it’s worth, of the translations that got this rating, I like what First Nations Version does the best, because referring to sacred service is such a powerful choice.
1If it is obvious to you that the context must be quite different if the person is question is named “Phoebe”, that is something you are reading into the text. You can’t blame Paul for that. That’s on you.
2 But totally not in the ELCA. Well, not theologically, at least not officially. Structurally, yes. We have some work to do.