Female deacons were found 1st century. However, they served a very specific function. The female deaconess back then primarily dealt with female catechumens. They prepared them in matters of modesty and doctrine/teachings (and girl stuff and all that comes with it
). There are some early accounts of female deaconesses being tortured by Rome in order to learn more about the *atheist Christians.
(They considered Christians to be atheist because they didn't believe in the many gods of the Empire and also refused to recognize the Emperor himself as being *ahem* the son of god, as he was called. Also, when Emperors became Emperor his arrival was often referred to as, the good news. So people would say, have you heard the good news? And then they'd tell you about the new Emperor, the son of god. When those early Christians were out there spreading the Good News about The actual Son of God it was not without a great deal of political charge.)
But this is what kind of baffles me. We see a word in the bible like, deacon, pastor, etc. We juxtapose our modern sense of what a deacon is and their roles and obligations onto the verse. We justify our doing so because we see the word deacon is written in the bible. This ties into the whole ordination thing. Laying on of hands (another elementary teaching) often has to do with instituting persons into various offices. Elders and Overseers played a much different role than we have them playing today. If you follow the historical growth of the early Church (it's not an easy task because of the volume of different historians and their agendas) you can actually see why and how Overseers became "Bishops". Why deaconesses fell by the way-side (though founds new meaning in modern protestantism) and why Elders weren't just senior citizens that had attended church for a long time.
The strange thing about the reformation was that it never intended to break away from many of the traditions but it seems that modern protestantism has become disconnected, not only from her Christian roots, but from the early protestant traditions as well. Should this evolutionary mutation be seen as progress? Or has it torn down the flood-gates surrounding the sheep allowing hordes of wolves to come and go without notice? Catholics get a lot of flack for their doctrines and historical record but the fruit growing in protestant pastures doesn't seem any less "strange".
On Catechumens:
In
ecclesiology, a
catechumen (pronounced
/ˌkætəˈkjuːmən/; from
Latin catechumenus,
Greek κατηχουμενος, instructed) is one receiving instruction from a catechist in the principles of the
Christian religion with a view to
baptism.
Although Catechumens existed by the time of the Letter to the
Galatians (
Strong's G2727), which mentions them, the practice slowly developed, from the development of doctrine and the need to test converts against the dangers of falling away. The Bible records (Acts 19) that the Apostle Paul while visiting some people who were described as "disciples", established they had received the baptism of John for the repentance of sins but had not yet heard of or received the Holy Spirit. Further, from the second century it appears that baptisms were held only at certain times of year, indicating that periods of instruction were the rule rather than the exception.
Justin Martyr (100–165 A.D.), in his
First Apology, cites instruction as occurring prior to baptism: As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated.--- WIKI