Paul writes in Titus 1:6, “An elder must be blameless, faithful to his wife, a man whose children believeand are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.”
Many Reformed theologians have interpreted this passage to be a parallel with 1 Timothy 3:5 and, as such, argue that Titus should be interpreted as focusing only on obedience. My fellow Calvinists often argue that because the Spirit is wholly responsible for regeneration that a prospective elder/teacher/pastor (the terms were synonymous in the early church) can only be judged on his managerial ability as the head of the household. After all, scholars like George Knight and others have argued that the Greek points to a child still under the authority of the father, who in the ancient near east. had near total control (or was supposed to) over his family.
I’m not so sure.
I think the focus has been on the potential elder/pastor/teacher rather than his or her offspring. Many have interpreted this passage in the context of not wanting to deny a position to a person who seems like a good person.
We as Christians are to reflect Jesus Christ. In fact, our ultimate reward is to be “like him” (1 John 3:2). The figure we are to become is one who relentlessly pursues the lost (Luke 15:11-32; Romans 5:8; etc.) Shouldn’t Christian leaders do the same within their own family?
I have one child. He is an eight-year old boy. I pray every day that God will save him. If He doesn’t clearly do so by the time he leaves my home then I cannot imagine any other course of action then to move wherever he is and pursue who with the love of God. If that means camping out outside of his dorm or apartment then so be it. For those of us who are Christians, has God done any less for us?
The focus on eldership or ministry as a right to the person seeking the position misses the point. We worship a Lord who gave up His rights and left His throne to live and die for us.
In Matthew 18:12-14 and Luke 15:3-7, Jesus teaches that God is the one who leaves the flock to seek the one who is lost. Shouldn’t a father and a mother do the same?
I think Paul may have advised potential Christian leaders to have Christian children or be willing to leave the flock of the church (where one wields power and respect) to humiliate him or herself to seek the one lost sheep from his or her own household because our Lord suffered such isolated humiliation for us. What better way is there to reflect Christ to the world?
So good. If a minister, elder, etc. is to leave his position to pursue his own family, how much more effective is his ministry? He is truly living and following in the footsteps of Jesus. I have nothing but respect for the person who denies himself and pride to become humble and meek and follow the true teachings of Christ. GOOD POST!
Thanks, Megkat!
A little off topic, but i was wondering what your opinion was on single elders? Should unmarried men be able to hold such a office?
Phil, the Apostle Paul was one!
Was he an actual church “elder”? Or was he a missionary? Is there a difference.
Elder/pastor in the early church were synonymous and it all comes down to who should speak authoritatively in the church.
Doesn’t Rev have a single elder, Justin?
Touche, Megan!
I’m a little frustrated, I was starting on my 4th or 5th paragraph when my phone went crazy and lost it. I’ve been thinking about this post a lot. I have several questions.
When I have more time I’ll post them.
but for now, have a blessed day!
A powerful call. But does that mean that the person should step down from eldership if his/her believing children opening rebel from God?
My wife once mentioned that her father shouldn’t be an elder for that reason. And yet, there’s something inside of me that doesn’t quite agree with that. Now, whether that’s the word of God or just my own dislike of exclusion I’m not sure.
That should be “openly rebel from God” instead of opening. lol
Alex, I do think they should resign and I think Titus 1 does set that standard. I think the focus on the pastor/elder and his office is the wrong focus. I think the focus should be on reflecting Jesus Christ to the world by leaving behind the sheep in the fold to pursue the one that is lost just as God has done for us. I think we tend to think too much of ourselves in that “we” can’t leave because, at the very least, it would inconvenience those we go to church when God can handle it all just fine. I think our first ministry is always to the children God gives us. They may spend their lives in rebellion but I don’t think it would be a waste of time to give up every spare moment to pursue them in prayerful hope that God will save them.
A very good point.
Luke 9:59-61
King James Version (KJV)
59And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
60Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.
61And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.
62And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.
How does these scriptures apply to this topic?
I think in order to harmonze Scripture than play one over another, it would be this: (1) Jesus was exaggerating to make a point not unlike the comment about a plank in the eye; (2) anyone could have buried the man’s father but only a dad can be a dad to a child; (3) If the man has not been a good father, he shouldn’t be a leader in the church.
Some are called to leave everything but every Christian Father is called to be…well…a Christian father. If he hasn’t been, he has no business being a Christian leader–leadership should begin in the home.
Great post Matt. This relates in a way also with your previous posts on the importance in the clarity of the gospel. There are many pastors preaching in churches each Sunday that don’t understand the gospel themselves. But how could a pastor ever admit that to anyone? So, he continues preaching about getting along with people, and loving your neighbor and such. This lack of clarity is going to be reflected in the lives of their children as well. If churches took this passage seriously it would really help them as a church, because it would pull those pastors out that don’t understand the gospel and force them to learn what God really did on our behalf and how to communicate that clearly to their families and those around them. How amazing would it be for these guys to be given the opportunity to humbly step down, seek after their own lost sheep, and then come back one day with a clear understanding of God’s purpose for us?
With this I have a question for you. After hearing your own personal testimony, how do you think you would have responded if your own father had stepped down from the ministry and moved to California in an effort to see you saved? Do you think it would’ve pushed you further away, or resulted in you coming to Christ earlier rather than later? Keep preaching the truth brother, we’re praying for you guys.
Shawn, it so good to hear from you, brother. I read the blog and pray for you and Jen regularly. It is a privilege and honor to know and support you. In answer to your question, yes, I think it would have made a huge difference. I saw the church then as a sad place where people who coudldn’t deal with their own mortality came to buy into a fairy tale and the church staff as a place where egos were fed. I think that if my father had left it all to pursue me and my brothers that I would have to re-think all of it. Blessings to you, my friend.
[...] [...]
Ok, so a few questions. Please bear in mind that I have the upmost respect for you and none of this is meant as anything less than that. As you know I come from adifferent background than a lot of what rev teaches, so I’m still in the processes of figuring out what I believe.
In saying that, my heart grieves to say that three of the closest people in my life, both of my siblings, and my oldest friend, do not believe and are not living lifestyles reflecting Christ. I have ingrained the idea of moving to where they are for the purpose of sharing the gospel with them until they believe. Now I know I’m no minister/ elder, and they aren’t my children, but why does this verse only pertain to their children? I still have a very heavy burden that they do not believe.
That ingrained was supposed to be entertained.
One of the reasons why I feel like it would not be a good idea to move to where they are is if I know all three of them and did that for that purpose, it would only push them further away from me. It already has with two of them. They would probably want no part of me. which brings me to my next question, is there a point where you need to keep in mind that you could end up pushing them further away from Christ instead of bringing them closer to God?
The conclusion that I got from the entertaining of the idea to move to where they were was that God uses many people in ministering to and bringing one to be a child of his. To think that I could be the only one to do so would definitely be something of pride for me. I mean, it’s definitely not going to be me who brings them to Christ, but Christ himself. So I pray for those three daily.I pray that God would bring others into their life to minister to them and that he would use me in whatever way possible. So is it any less prideful for a minister to not rely on God to use others?
I know I have stated before that I’m not a minister and these three are not my kids, and my parents aren’t ministers, but didn’t God create us all? What makes ministers kids any different from my brother and sister?
Maybe I’m completely off base. That’s why I’m coming to you with my questions. But I do hope to get some answers. For when it comes to my 3, I don’t want to get it wrong.
Grace and peace.
Abby, wisdom is always necessary but I do think it is different for a parent and that they naturally reflect God to them in a way that no one else can. I think this is the reason that one part of the Trinity chose to be related to as “father.” Does that make sense?
That does make some sense. I know that in my case it was my parents’ example that first lead me to Christ. It’s harder for me to see that with my parents though. I’d have to say if my parents (who are believers) moved to where my brother and sister are I think they would push them away. In fact, they already have. Maybe it’s something I can’t see, I know that God hardens hearts, so maybe at this point, that’s what he is doing through them… it’s all so confusing. That’s one of the reasons why I’m having so much difficulty grasping this concept, because I just don’t see this working with my parents and my siblings.
I guess I still have two questions though. If you were not a minister, would you still move to wherever Jackson ends up if he doesn’t end up believing?
Is there a point where you need to let go and trust God to use the people to plant seeds that he wants to use?
I do know that God is all powerful and can use anything and anyone he wants to, so I’m not doubting that God can do this, I just am trying to look at my family’s current situation.
Like I said, I’m grasping for anything that can help reach my brother and sister and to be used by God in their lives.
I’ve thought about this quite often, This is what I struggle with in the context of the idea of the elect. So seriously what if my child is not elect? I pray for them often, but have seen this play out in my own family with my brother. He had the exact same teaching and upbringing as I. And of course Reags is three so if the road of sanctification could start any time now that would be great…LOL
When children of believing parents depart the faith I have never seen that relationship benefit from being relentlessly pursued on the matter.
I am one of four sons, none of whom are “practicing” Catholics like our parents. I can’t imagine the pain that relentless pursuit of our return to the church would cause but it would probably make grandparenting difficult.
Perhaps a dose of “I might be wrong” is called for? Certainly as a father I know my child is often my teacher too.
Doesn’t pursuing our grown children in a physical and verbal way put us in God’s seat? Doesn’t that state that we have predetermined the course of action without knowing what incredible actions, changes God will be effecting in their lives? What if the spark and support comes from others? Prayer, prayer and prayer for My child to win the battle, find spiritual healing through and to God will help us discern what actions God wants from us….prayers for he or she to be surrounded with his Almighty presence, not the physical presence of hovering, perhaps fearful parents?
This blog post is a challenging one for me…you’ve given me a lot to think about..I just found your blog today and so appreciate your honesty, openness and scripture talks!
s
I find this a bit ironic coming from a Calvinist who believes a person’s salvation is entirely in the hands, or more precisely, the pre-determined will of God. If whether a person is going to be saved or not has already been determined by God then there is absolutely NOTHING a father can do to get his children saved. If God has determined that a child is not and never will be saved, then (if Calvinism is true) God has determined that father can not be a pastor.
Kirby, I, and most Calvinsts do NOT believe that. As a former hard core arminian, I once believed that about Calvinists too. Then I read Calvin (and Spurgeon and BB Warfield, John Frame and Wayne Grudem, etc.) and found that to be untrue.
So you don’t ascribe to TULIP?
TULIP is a rather poor summary of Reformed thought. If I were you, I would actually read The Institutes as well as Bavink and Warfield.
Do you believe a person is too depraved to be able to make a decision for himself regarding his salvation?
Kirby, I believe the Bible sets it out as a paradox. Now, unfortunately, I have a job and don’t have time to do this back and forth. If you are looking to pick a fight, please do it elsewhere. Again, read Reformed works before you jump to conclusions. I worked in the Christian church and was licensed in the Methodist church before I read Calvin, Spurgeon, Warfield, etc. It made sense to me biblically and logically. I recommend you do the same before you jump on other people’s blogs and start to throw punches. Blessings,
Matt, your interpretation opens a Pandora’s Box of problems. For one thing, at what point in time–what age–would an elder’s child have to be evaluated to determine whether they are saved? What is the criteria for determining salvation? What if the child professed belief but engaged in attitudes/conduct that didn’t seem consistent with the profession? Who determines whether this child is actually saved?
Jeff, with all due respect, do you think Paul hadn’t put any thought into these variables? A child is always a child of a parent. The fruits of the spirit witness to salvation. The individual church where the elder serves should determine these questions but more important, and the point of the post was, that an elder who believes his child is not saved should commit himself to humility and love until the child sees the love of God. Is this not what our heavenly father has done for us? Why should we consider ourselves above our master? I think you are elevating form over substance. Blessings,
“If that means camping out outside of his dorm or apartment then so be it.”
Your obsessive desire to impose your beliefs on your own children to the point of stalking them is seriously disturbing. I submit to you that such heavy handed tactics will have achieve the opposite of what you intend. You will only succeed in confirming to your son your odious zealotry. If you cannot respect everyones right to hold beliefs different than your own (just as you expect others to respect your right to believe), then a restraining order is called for. There are laws in place to protect citizens against fanatics like you.
Joe, as a prodigal myself, I couldn’t disagree more AND it was an exaggeration to make a point. Thanks for stopping by and please switch to decaf.
[...] for my children. There’s nothing more important to me than the salvation of their souls. I read a blog post about how my children are intricate to my ministry, not because of my standing, but because of my [...]
I just came across your post and thought I’d react:
It seems that your conclusion that ‘a (real) christian father will ‘camp out’ near the child who ‘departed form the ways of God’ collides with many biblical passages.
Just a few examples: the parable of the prodigal son: what is Jesus teaching us here, what is His point? Isn’t it to teach us Who His Father is, what REAL love looks like? Why doesn’t Jesus have the father ‘camp out where His lost son is’ in this parable? Instead He has him waiting for the son to come back! To mention another principle of dealing with the sin of disobedience and unbelief: repeatedly we are told to warn, exort, etc but that there does come a time to stop this….”and have nothing further to do with such a person” In the light of all this: does ‘relentlessly persuing the lost’ really mean ‘following your lost son and camping out his house’ ? Sometimes we are told to ‘back off’ “so that the wayward may be shamed” …isn’t this a part of ‘tough love’? How do you ‘marry this up’ with your categorical “chase after him and camp out his house” (till he repents?) Regards, Rolf
Rolf, 1) The prodigal is an example of God NOT an elder. Otherwise, the Apostle Paul’s writings would not have been inspired and misunderstood Scripture. 2) If a man’s 1st ministry priority is his own home, which is the scholarly consensus re: Paul’s commands, then going after his wayward child would be to re-embark on his first ministry and to do so as the divine does. Blessings,
Again, I disagree. Read Tim Keller’s “The Prodigal God.”. In the ANE culture, it was shameful for a father to go after a wayward son but it is not so anymore. Moreover, the older brother should have gone after the prodigal to save the father the shame but refused. But Jesus is our older brother who pursues us as He should. We are not above our master.
Thanks Matt,
Wouldn’t you say that the passage gives us ‘prerequisites’ for elders and that the point is: ” make sure that the men can LEAD : if they can’t lead their own family then don’t put them “in charge” of the congregation as elders…that’s ‘all’, that’s the point wouldn’t you say?
Then I want to ask: if a man has 5 kids and one of them , at age 30, turns away from God (is ‘not a christian’ ..a ‘prerequisite’….ACCORDING TO SOME TRANSLATIONS…–this is important!) …does this mean that the father is not a good leader, not fit to be an elder (which was the point here?)
I came across an interesting article which goes into this ‘problem’ in detail, here is the link: http://www.yoyomaster.com/ministry.file/BelievingChildren.pdf
Regards,
Rolf
1) on the latter, you are mixing the church as a whole and the leader of the home. That’s a categorical mistake. 2) I don’t see it as a prereq (the Greek doesn’t support that), I see it as a qualification. We place too much emphasis on the office and not the role. The role is to serve God not hold an office. If your first ministry is your family, that is where you need to focus. Also, the early church was not a congregation to be lead for they were too small. They were a group to be cared for and lovingly taught the Word of God. An elder in Scripture is a pastor, not a corporate board member. And even if they were, in a parable, Jesus compares God to the shepherd who leaves the 99 to find the one stray. We, especially pastors, should be no different.
PS: I was wondering if you could interact wit the following Matt: As I said : in dealing with ‘the wayward’ the bible teaches that we, as church, should be following ‘steps’ ..steps-of-love, ‘steps’ that are taken with this goal in mind: to win the sinner for Christ : The person should be approached and admonished , warned, etc and the final step should be: “have nothing further to do with this person’. God, through Paul, even gives us the reason for this last step, tells us what the rationale behind it is: to shame the person so that he will repent from his unGodly ways. Point here is: NO MORE CONTACT as a loving ‘method’ (‘tough’ love….but love nonetheless)
What I hear you say is that this loving discipline-step , suggested by God himself, should NOT be taken when it concerns your own children…why not? how do come to this conclusion?
Regards,
Rolf
I’m not disputing the fact that for me, as a father, my priority is: the children which God put in my care! What I AM questioning is your CATEGORICAL “should my child stray…I will need to leave my task, my wife, my other kids…and camp out his apartment (until he repents?)” : I agree that we, as fathers , should “relentlessly pursue our lost son” ..but does this “relentless pursuit” necessarily translate into “camping out” (till….when?) ? So my question is : why does the (loving) final step in the correction-steps not apply to my own son? What I’m really asking is I guess: isn’t this final step part of this ‘relentless pursuit’ ?
First of all, you are turning an example into an imperative. Second, you are stating that a minister supposedly committed to a God who relentlessy pursues us as the expense of his own son, should be held the same standard as the wayward child. Thank the Lord, God does not do that to us!
I’m obviously not making myself clear here: I’m not ‘stating’ anything, I’m asking you: is ‘having nothing further to do with a wayward child’ (last step of a set of steps, “designed” to bring back this wayward sinner….and btw: ..GOD suggested these steps!) not also part of the ‘relentless pursuit’? It looks like YOU are taking an example and turning it into an imperative: you seem to LIMIT (that’s the point here!) the “leave the 99 and pursue the 1 lost” to : ” go and camp out his dorm” . I know I’ve asked you a few times now but could you please interact specifically with what I’m asking here: is the last step in the ‘plan of action’, suggested by God Himself (through Paul) to bring back the sinner not also part of this relentless pursuit…and, if so, why not take this step when it concerns my own son?
With all due respect, you are not being clear at all. Please give me the Scriptures you are relying on and please read my post again VERY slowly because you obviously are turning an example into an imperative because you keep bringing it up as a MUST when the post clearly lists it as an example of the radical steps a father SHOULD be willing to take if necessary AND please distinguish between every Christian father’s duty and the duty of a church when dealing with an unrepentant member. Thanks.
Ok, I’m referring to the church-discipline ‘steps’ in , say Matt. 18 and Titus 3. The whole idea of church discipline is a plan of action with as goal: bringing back the wayward..wouldn’t you say? Including the last step (have no more to do with him) ? 2 Thess. 3 : “so that he will be put to shame”..: ‘tough love’ is suggested as part of a plan to bring him back wouldn’t you say ?
But you say: “then I cannot imagine ANY OTHER course of action then to move wherever he is”, which I understand to mean: the ONLY answer is: “move to wherever he is”…
My question is simply: IF the last step in the church discipline ‘process’ is a loving step ‘designed’ to bring him back (and it is) , then why should this step NOT be taken by me as a father , why does the logic of ‘so he will be ashamed when you take this step’ go out the window when it concerns my son?
1) I’m talking about what I WOULD DO. I can not imagine doing anything but going after my son as such. 2) Titus 3 is NOT necessarily speaking about church discipline but about dealing with Jewish opponents and the early sect that Paul calls the “Judaizers.” 3) Jesus is speaking of relationships within the church not the family. Again, you are making a categorial mistake. Moreover, he is dealing with people actively and unrepentantly sinning WITHIN the church. 4) Paul is also addressing those within the church in 2 Thess. 3. That is what I was saying earlier about distinguishing. Also, remember that in that time, a person expelled from a church had no where else to go. That’s not true today and hasn’t been since Constantine. I hope that is clear because, with all due respect, I have been repeating myself for a while now. Blessings.
Not to butt in, the passages referring to casting members out are referring to willful sin and those refusing to repent. A wayard child,or lost sheep, would be unsaved. Correct?
Correct.
Hi Matt,
I’ve been following this discussion between you and Rolf and I have a question: suppose my son / daughter IS a willfull sinner and leaves,are you saying that parents need to take a different approach to the rest of the congregation (disassociate with him/her?) , should my husband resign as elder and run after my son/daughter instead: it sounds like you are saying that this is what the bible teaches?
Kind Regards,
Liza
Liza, My post only addresses unbelieving children of pastors/elders not those whose are in the church but being divisive; that is the critical distinction that some of those on this thread have apparently failed to grasp. Blessings,
One has to be a complete imbecile to think intrusive tactics such as stalking and “camping out” would achieve anything other than an escalation of resistance and conflict. Try taking a course in basic human psychology.
Joe, try taking a course in civility. If this is how you speak at home, I would run from your house and your faith too!