John,

Actually, you did a good job summarizing Hendriksen's position. 1) He rejects any notion of a third office of Deaconess, nor is the text 2) referring to Deacons' wives, nor 3) to women in general.

On the whole, methinks Hendriksen has the proper understanding of the text. On these points, my view is as follows:

1) Paul deals with with how women are to conduct themselves in the Church in 1Tim 2:9-13. There is no mention of an office of Deaconess anywhere. Men were entrusted with the administration of the Church. Yes, Phebe is often brought up as supporting the office of Deaconess, but the word diaconon (diaconia) isn't restricted to Deacon but also means "service" or "one who does service" in general. Phebe was a woman who served the Church in some capacity as did many other women, but not as an ordained office bearer.

2) I differ slightly with Hendriksen on this point as I think the construction of the grammar would allow the wives of Deacons to be included. They in all probability assisted their husbands in their work and thus Paul's comments as to how they were to conduct themselves is appropriate. I do agree, however, that v. 11 should be taken as referring to Deacons' wives but not exclusively nor even primarily. It seems to me that given the context of vv. 1-13, where the subject is in regard to the administration of the Church, and given the grammatical structure of the Greek, specific women are being addressed; all women who are given to ministry within the Church.

3) As mentioned in #2, the context must rule out the view that all women in general are to be understood. Paul has already dealt with all women in the previous chapter, 2:9-15. Paul then shifts gears, so to speak, and in chapter 3 begins a new topic concerning the Church and those who are appointed to do works of ministry, either through an ordained office; Elder and Deacon, or women who assist in various and important tasks in addition to those under the authority of the office bearers. Lenski makes a good case on this particular aspect exegetically. And Patrick Fairbairn, who also is in basic agreement with what I wrote above, Hendriksen and Lenski, has some very good insights as well.