Buried Talents: Elders, Wives of One Husband? Part 3

2. Are the qualifications described in 1 Timothy and Titus intended as laws or merely indicative of to whom God has given the gift of leadership?

Objectively viewed, it is hard to argue that the qualification lists in 1 Timothy and Titus are “laws.” As we have discussed in the context of Galatians, Paul has very principled reasons for not making himself into the next Moses. Moreover, there is internal evidence that these are not laws.

First, why are the lists in Titus and 1 Timothy different? Is God’s eternal law of who can be an elder different in Crete (the destination of Titus) than in Ephesus (the destination of 1 Timothy)? It would appear so. While the lists are similar, Titus and Timothy were working out of two different rulebooks, if rulebooks they are.

(Titus 1:6-9) An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. Since an overseer is entrusted with God’s work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain.

Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.

(1 Tim. 3:1-7) Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.

The following chart compares the two qualification lists:

As the table demonstrates, the two lists are very similar, but different. For example, we in the Churches of Christ have customarily held that an elder must have at least one (some say two) Christian children. That limitation is from Titus. But Paul told Timothy that it is enough if an elder has children who obey with proper respect, a very different thing indeed. A child may be obedient and yet be too young to be a Christian. And Paul told Timothy to ordain no recent converts, and yet Titus was given no such instruction.

Do these inconsistencies threaten the inspiration of the passages? Not at all, but they tell us much about their nature.

Second, the test for who could be a deacon in Acts 6 is simply “full of the Spirit and wisdom.” Why is this rule different from the rules laid out by Paul regarding deacons and elders? Indeed, Paul told the elders in Ephesus that the Holy Spirit had “made them overseers” (Acts 20:28). The most natural interpretation of this statement is that the elders were made overseers by the Spirit by being filled with the Spirit — that is, by receiving the gifts of the Spirit associated with being an elder, such as the gifts of administration and leadership.

Could it be that the rules are not different at all? Maybe what Paul is saying in the Pastorals is, “Timothy and Titus, these are the characteristics that you look for to determine who has wisdom and is filled with the Spirit.”

As numerous commentators have pointed out, the characteristics of an elder or deacon are characteristics that all Christians should have. The exceptions to this rule are the apparent requirements that elders and deacons be married and fertile (and have fertile wives).

But Paul and most (if not all) the apostles were single. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 7:

1 Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. … 7 I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that. … 32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife—34 and his interests are divided. … 35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.

If Paul believes that marriage is required for a man to be a deacon (so he can lock doors, keep the building maintained, handle the treasury) or an elder, then he certainly changed his tune from 1 Corinthians 7. But I have too much respect for inspiration to believe that Paul changed his mind or exaggerated his recommendation of celibacy. He was quite sincere when he wrote 1 Corinthians 7, and he never changed his mind.

There is no imaginable reason why a man must be married and have children in order to be a deacon. Paul would agree. He says that a man is a better servant of God if he is single! And he truly wishes that all men were single so they could better serve God!

Does Paul wish that there were no elders or deacons? And if an apostle is a better apostle for being single, how can we conclude that the man locking the building (or waiting on tables) must be held to some supposedly higher standard?

The only conclusion we can reach and still take Paul at his word is that the lists in 1 Timothy and Titus are not laws but indicative of the real test — whether someone is full of wisdom and the Spirit — at the time and place the letter was written.

In fact, Paul characterizes his own statements as “a trustworthy saying” (1 Tim. 3:1), hardly the language of a lawgiver. Any other interpretation causes Paul to contradict himself — and requires a man to be married and fertile in order to wait on tables!

Third, there are other verses that specify the qualifications of elders, and they speak in terms of gifts, not sex, marital status, or fertility.

(1 Cor. 12:28-30) And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues ? Do all interpret?

The Greek word translated “administration” literally means “(a) steering, pilotage; (b) metaphorically, governments or governings, said of those who act as guides in a local church.” Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words. This is certainly an apt description of the eldership. And yet Paul’s discussion is in terms of spiritual gifts. Paul points out—

(1 Cor. 12:18-21) But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the body be? But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, but one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” As it is, there are many parts, but one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!”

The gift of administration is from God, and it is a sin to tell anyone with the gift that the church does not (or cannot) use that gift.

(Eph. 4:7, 11-13) But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. … It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

We next see that being a pastor (elder) is a gift from God. The only qualification mentioned is whether a Christian has been so gifted.

(Rom. 12:6-8) We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.

“Govern” is defined in Strong’s Dictionary as “to stand before, i.e. (in rank) to preside, or (by impl.) to practise:—maintain, be over, rule.” It is the same verb used by Paul in 1 Timothy 3:4 and 12 with respect to elders and deacons “ruling” their households well. And yet, in Romans, the only requirement for leadership is having the gift to lead. Moreover, the language is a command. If one has the gift to lead, one must lead and lead diligently. The command applies to women as well as to men.

Realize that 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Romans were all written well before 1 Timothy or Titus. How were the Christians who received these letters to understand them? Surely, each Christian had to understand that he or she should humbly determine his or her gifts and then use those gifts in God’s service.

Paul did not tell the Corinthians, Ephesians, or Romans that his teaching only applied to men! It would have been the rarest of women in the First Century world who had the ability to lead. This is just not so today. If a woman has the gift, we are commanded to let her use the gift.