Titus 1:6 Kommentar

In this chapter we have, I. The preface or introduction to the epistle, showing from and to whom it was written, with the apostle's salutation and prayer for Titus, wishing all blessings to him (Tit 1:1-4). II. Entrance into the matter, by signifying the end of Titus's being left at Crete (v. 5). III. And how the same should be pursued in reference both to good and bad ministers (v. 6 to the end).

The apostle here gives Titus directions about ordination, showing whom he should ordain, and whom not. I. Of those whom he should ordain. He points out their qualifications and virtues; such as respect their life and manners, and such as relate to their doctrine: the former in the sixth, seventh, and eighth verses, and the latter in the ninth. 1. Their qualifications respecting their life and manners are, (1.) More general: If any be blameless; not absolutely without fault, so none are, for there is none that liveth and sinneth not; nor altogether unblamed, this is rare and difficult. Christ himself and his apostles were blamed, though not worthy of it. In Christ thee was certainly nothing blamable; and his apostles were not such as their enemies charged them to be. But the meaning is, He must be one who lies not under an ill character; but rather must have good report, even from those that are without; not grossly or scandalously guilty, so as would bring reproach upon the holy function; he must not be such a one. (2.) More particularly. [1.] There is his relative character. In his own person, he must be of conjugal chastity: The husband of one wife. The church of Rome says the husband of no wife, but from the beginning it was not so; marriage is an ordinance from which no profession nor calling is a bar. Co1 9:5, Have I not power, says Paul, to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles? Forbidding to marry is one of the erroneous doctrines of the antichristian church, Ti1 4:3. Not that ministers must be married; this is not meant; but the husband of one wife may be either not having divorced his wife and married another (as was too common among those of the circumcision, even for slight causes), or the husband of one wife, that is, at one and the same time, no bigamist; not that he might not be married to more than one wife successively, but, being married, he must have but one wife at once, not two or more, according to the too common sinful practice of those times, by a perverse imitation of the patriarchs, from which evil custom our Lord taught a reformation. Polygamy is scandalous in any, as also having a harlot or concubine with his lawful wife; such sin, or any wanton libidinous demeanour, must be very remote from such as would enter into so sacred a function. And, as to his children, having faithful children, obedient and good, brought up in the true Christian faith, and living according to it, at least as far as the endeavours of the parents can avail. It is for the honour of ministers that their children be faithful and pious, and such as become their religion. Not accused of riot, nor unruly, not justly so accused, as having given ground and occasion for it, for otherwise the most innocent may be falsely so charged; they must look to it therefore that there be no colour for such censure. Children so faithful, and obedient, and temperate, will be a good sign of faithfulness and diligence in the parent who has so educated and instructed them; and, from his faithfulness in the less, there may be encouragement to commit to him the greater, the rule and government of the church of God. The ground of this qualification is shown from the nature of his office (Tit 1:7): For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God. Those before termed presbyters, or elders, are in this verse styled bishops; and such they were, having no ordinary fixed and standing officers above them. Titus's business here, it is plain, was but occasional, and his stay short, as was before noted. Having ordained elders, and settled in their due form, he went and left all (for aught that appears in scripture) in the hands of those elders whom the apostle here calls bishops and stewards of God. We read not in the sacred writings of any successor he had in Crete; but to those elders or bishops was committed the full charge of feeding, ruling, and watching over their flock; they wanted not any powers necessary for carrying on religion and the ministry of it among them, and committing it down to succeeding ages. Now, being such bishops and overseers of the flock, who were to be examples to them, and God's stewards to take care of the affairs of his house, to provide for and dispense to them things needful, there is great reason that their character should be clear and good, that they should be blameless. How else could it be but that religion must suffer, their work be hindered, and souls prejudiced and endangered, whom they were set to save? These are the relative qualifications with the ground of them. [2.] The more absolute ones are expressed, First, Negatively, showing what an elder or bishop must not be: Not self-willed. The prohibition is of large extent, excluding self-opinion, or overweening conceit of parts and abilities, and abounding in one's own sense, - self-love, and self-seeking, making self the centre of all, - also self-confidence and trust, and self-pleasing, little regarding or setting by others, - being proud, stubborn, froward, inflexible, set on one's own will and way, or churlish as Nabal: such is the sense expositors have affixed to the term. A great honour it is to a minister not to be thus affected, to be ready to ask and to take advice, to be ready to defer as much as reasonably may be to the mind and will of others, becoming all things to all men, that they may gain some. Not soon angry, mē orgilon, not one of a hasty angry temper, soon and easily provoked and inflamed. How unfit are those to govern a church who cannot govern themselves, or their own turbulent and unruly passions! The minister must be meek and gentle, and patient towards all men. Not given to wine; thee is no greater reproach on a minister than to be a wine-bibber, one who loves it, and gives himself undue liberty this way who continues at the wine or strong drink till it inflames him. Seasonable and moderate use of this, as of the other good creatures of God, is not unlawful. Use a little wine for thy stomach's sake, and thine often infirmities, said Paul to Timothy, Ti1 5:23. But excess therein is shameful in all, especially in a minister. Wine takes away the heart, turns the man into a brute: here most proper is that exhortation of the apostle (Eph 5:18), Be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit. Here is no exceeding, but in the former too easily there may: take heed therefore of going too near the brink. No striker, in any quarrelsome or contentious manner, not injuriously nor out of revenge, with cruelty or unnecessary roughness. Not given to filthy lucre; not greedy of it (as Ti1 3:3), whereby is not meant refusing a just return for their labours, in order to their necessary support and comfort; but not making gain their first or chief end, not entering into the ministry nor managing it with base worldly views. Nothing is more unbecoming a minister, who is to direct his own and others' eyes to another world, than to be too intent upon this. It is called filthy lucre, from its defiling the soul that inordinately affects or greedily looks after it, as if it were any otherwise desirable than for the good and lawful uses of it. Thus of the negative part of the bishop's character. But, Secondly, Positively: he must be (Tit 1:8) a lover of hospitality, as an evidence that he is not given to filthy lucre, but is willing to use what he has to the best purposes, not laying up for himself, so as to hinder charitable laying out for the good of others; receiving and entertaining strangers (as the word imports), a great and necessary office of love, especially in those times of affliction and distress, when Christians were made to fly and wander for safety from persecution and enemies, or in travelling to and fro where there were not such public houses for reception as in our days, nor, it may be, had many poor saints sufficiency of their own for such uses - then to receive and entertain them was good and pleasing to God. And such a spirit and practice, according to ability and occasion, are very becoming such as should be examples of good works. A lover of good men, or of good things; ministers should be exemplary in both; this will evince their open piety, and likeness to God and their Master Jesus Christ: Do good to all, but especially to those of the household of faith, those who are the excellent of the earth, in whom should be all our delight. Sober, or prudent, as the word signifies; a needful grace in a minister both for his ministerial and personal carriage and management. He should be a wise steward, and one who is not rash, or foolish, or heady; but who can govern well his passions and affections. Just in things belonging to civil life, and moral righteousness, and equity in dealings, giving to all their due. Holy, in what concerns religion; one who reverences and worships God, and is of a spiritual and heavenly conversation. Temperate; it comes from a word that signifies strength, and denotes one who has power over his appetite and affections, or, in things lawful, can, for good ends, restrain and hold them in. Nothing is more becoming a minister than such things as these, sobriety, temperance, justice, and holiness - sober in respect of himself, just and righteous towards all men, and holy towards God. And thus of the qualifications respecting the minister's life and manners, relative and absolute, negative and positive, what he must not, and what he must, be and do. 2. As to doctrine, (1.) Here is his duty: Holding fast the faithful word, as he has been taught, keeping close to the doctrine of Christ, the word of his grace, adhering thereto according to the instructions he has received - holding it fast in his own belief and profession, and in teaching others. Observe, [1.] The word of God, revealed in the scripture, is a true and infallible word; the word of him that is the amen, the true and faithful witness, and whose Spirit guided the penmen of it. Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. [2.] Ministers must hold fast, and hold forth, the faithful word in their teaching and life. I have kept the faith, was Paul's comfort (Ti2 4:7), and not shunned to declare the whole counsel of God; there was his faithfulness, Act 20:27. (2.) Here is the end: That he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort, and to convince the gainsayers, to persuade and draw others to the true faith, and to convince the contrary-minded. How should he do this if he himself were uncertain or unsteady, not holding fast that faithful word and sound doctrine which should be the matter of this teaching, and the means and ground of convincing those that oppose the truth? We see here summarily the great work of the ministry - to exhort those who are willing to know and do their duty, and to convince those that contradict, both which are to be done by sound doctrine, that is, in a rational instructive way, by scripture-arguments and testimonies, which are the infallible words of truth, what all may and should rest and be satisfied in and determined by. And thus of the qualifications of the elders whom Titus was to ordain. II. The apostle's directory shows whom he should reject or avoid - men of another character, the mention of whom is brought in as a reason of the care he had recommended about the qualifications of ministers, why they should be such, and only such, as he had described. The reasons he takes both from bad teachers and hearers among them, Tit 1:10, to the end. 1. From bad teachers. (1.) Those false teachers are described. They were unruly, headstrong and ambitious of power, refractory and untractable (as some render it), and such as would not bear nor submit themselves to the discipline and necessary order in the church, impatient of good government and of sound doctrine. And vain talkers and deceivers, conceiting themselves to be wise, but really foolish, and thence great talkers, falling into errors and mistakes, and fond of them, and studious and industrious to draw others into the same. Many such there were, especially those of the circumcision, converts as they pretended, at least, from the Jews, who yet were for mingling Judaism and Christianity together, and so making a corrupt medley. These were the false teachers. (2.) Here is the apostle's direction how to deal with them (Tit 1:11): Their mouths must be stopped; not by outward force (Titus had no such power, nor was this the gospel method), but by confutation and conviction, showing them their error, not giving place to them even for an hour. In case of obstinacy indeed, breaking the peace of the church, and corrupting other churches, censures are to have place, the last means for recovering the faulty and preventing the hurt of many. Observe, Faithful ministers must oppose seducers in good time, that, their folly being made manifest, they may proceed no further. (3.) The reasons are given for this. [1.] From the pernicious effects of their errors: They subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not (namely, the necessity of circumcision, and of keeping the law of Moses, etc.), so subverting the gospel and the souls of men; not some few only, but whole families. It was unjustly charged on the apostles that they turned the world upside down; but justly on these false teachers that they drew many from the true faith to their ruin: the mouths of such should be stopped, especially considering, [2.] Their base end in what they do: For filthy lucre's sake, serving a worldly interest under pretence of religion. Love of money is the root of all evil. Most fit it is that such should be resisted, confuted, and put to shame, by sound doctrine, and reasons from the scriptures. Thus of the grounds respecting the bad teachers. II. In reference to their people or hearers, who are described from ancient testimony given of them. 1. Here is the witness (Tit 1:12): One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, that is, one of the Cretans, not of the Jews, Epimenides a Greek poet, likely to know and unlikely to slander them. A prophet of their own; so their poets were accounted, writers of divine oracles; these often witnessed against the vices of the people: Aratus, Epimenides, and others among the Greeks; Horace, Juvenal, and Persius, among the Latins: much smartness did they use against divers vices. 2. Here is the matter of his testimony: Krētes aei pseustaî kaka thēriâ gasteres argai - The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. Even to a proverb, they were infamous for falsehood and lying; kretizein, to play the Cretan, or to lie, is the same; and they were compared to evil beasts for their sly hurtfulness and savage nature, and called slow bellies for their laziness and sensuality, more inclined to eat than to work and live by some honest employment. Observe, Such scandalous vices as were the reproach of heathens should be far from Christians: falsehood and lying, invidious craft and cruelty, all beastly and sensual practices, with idleness and sloth, are sins condemned by the light of nature. For these were the Cretans taxed by their own poets. 3. Here is the verification of this by the apostle himself: Tit 1:13. This witness is true, The apostle saw too much ground for that character. The temper of some nations is more inclined to some vices than others. The Cretans were too generally such as here described, slothful and ill-natured, false and perfidious, as the apostle himself vouches. And thence, 4. He instructs Titus how to deal with them: Wherefore rebuke them sharply. When Paul wrote to Timothy he bade him instruct with meekness; but now, when he writes to Titus, he bids him rebuke them sharply. The reason of the difference may be taken from the different temper of Timothy and Titus; the former might have more keenness in his disposition, and be apt to be warm in reproving, whom therefore he bids to rebuke with meekness; and the latter might be one of more mildness, therefore he quickens him, and bids him rebuke sharply. Or rather it was from the difference of the case and people: Timothy had a more polite people to deal with, and therefore he must rebuke them with meekness; and Titus had to do with those who were more rough and uncultivated, and therefore he must rebuke them sharply; their corruptions were many and gross, and committed without shame or modesty, and therefore should be dealt with accordingly. There must in reproving be a distinguishing between sins and sins; some are more gross and heinous in their nature, or in the manner of their commission, with openness and boldness, to the greater dishonour of God and danger and hurt to men: and between sinners and sinners; some are of a more tender and tractable temper, apter to be wrought on by gentleness, and to be sunk and discouraged by too much roughness and severity; others are more hardy and stubborn, and need more cutting language to beget in them remorse and shame. Wisdom therefore is requisite to temper and manage reproofs aright, as may be most likely to do good. Jde 1:22, Jde 1:23, Of some have compassion, making a difference; and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire. The Cretans' sins and corruptions were many, great, and habitual; therefore they must be rebuked sharply. But that such direction might not be misconstrued, 5. Here is the end of it noted: That they may be sound in the faith (Tit 1:14), not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth; that is, that they may be and show themselves truly and effectually changed from such evil tempers and manners as those Cretans in their natural state lived in, and may not adhere to nor regard (as some who were converted might be too ready to do) the Jewish traditions and the superstitions of the Pharisees, which would be apt to make them disrelish the gospel, and the sound and wholesome truths of it. Observe, (1.) The sharpest reproofs must aim at the good of the reproved: they must not be of malice, nor hatred, nor ill-will, but of love; not to gratify pride, passion, nor any evil affection in the reprover, but to reclaim and reform the erroneous and the guilty. (2.) Soundness in the faith is most desirable and necessary. This is the soul's health and vigour, pleasing to God, comfortable to the Christian, and what makes ready to be cheerful and constant in duty. (3.) A special means to soundness in the faith is to turn away the ear from fables and the fancies of men (Ti1 1:4): Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, that minister questions rather than godly edifying, which is in faith. So Ti1 4:7, Refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather to godliness. Fancies and devices of men in the worship of God are contrary to truth and piety. Jewish ceremonies and rites, that were at first divine appointments, the substance having come and their season and use being over, are now but unwarranted commands of men, which not only stand not with, but turn fRom. the truth, the pure gospel truth and spiritual worship, set up by Christ instead of that bodily service under the law. (4.) A fearful judgment it is to be turned away from the truth, to leave Christ for Moses, the spiritual worship of the gospel for the carnal ordinances of the law, or the true divine institutions and precepts for human inventions and appointments. Who hath bewitched you (said Paul to the Galatians, Gal 3:1, Gal 3:3) that you should not obey the truth? Having begun in the Spirit, are you made perfect by the flesh? Thus having shown the end of sharply reproving the corrupt and vicious Cretans, that they might be sound in the faith, and not heed Jewish fables and commands of men, 6. He gives the reasons of this, from the liberty we have by the gospel from legal observances, and the evil and mischief of a Jewish spirit under the Christian dispensation in the last two verses. To good Christians that are sound in the faith and thereby purified all things are pure. Meats and drinks, and such things as were forbidden under the law (the observances of which some still maintain), in these there is now no such distinction, all are pure (lawful and free in their use), but to those that are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; things lawful and good they abuse and turn to sin; they suck poison out of that from which others draw sweetness; their mind and conscience, those leading faculties, being defiled, a taint is communicated to all they do. The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Pro 15:8. And Pro 21:4, The ploughing of the wicked is sin, not in itself, but as done by him; the carnality of the mind and heart mars all the labour of the hand. Objection. But are not these judaizers (as you call them) men who profess religion, and speak well of God, and Christ, and righteousness of life, and should they be so severely taxed? Answer, They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate, Tit 1:16. There are many who in word and tongue profess to know God, and yet in their lives and conversations deny and reject him; their practice is a contradiction to their profession. They come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them: with their mouth they show much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness, Eze 33:31. Being abominable, and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate. The apostle, instructing Titus to rebuke sharply, does himself rebuke sharply; he gives them very hard words, yet doubtless no harder than their case warranted and their need required. Being abominable - bdeluktoi, deserving that God and good men should turn away their eyes from them as nauseous and offensive. And disobedient - apeitheis, unpersuadable and unbelieving. They might do divers things; but it was not the obedience of faith, nor what was commanded, or short of the command. To every good work reprobate, without skill or judgment to do any thing aright. See the miserable condition of hypocrites, such as have a form of godliness, but without the power; yet let us not be so ready to fix this charge on others as careful that it agree not to ourselves, that there be not in us an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God; but that we be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ unto the glory and praise of God, Phi 1:10, Phi 1:11.

This chapter contains the inscription of the epistle, the apostle's salutation and preface to it; an account of the qualifications of an eider, or pastor of a church; a description of these teachers; and a charge to Titus to rebuke the Cretians for their errors and immoralities. The inscription and salutation are in Tit 1:1, in which the writer of the epistle is described by his name and office; by the faith and hope he had; and by the ministration of the Gospel, committed to him by the order of Christ: and the person to whom it is written is mentioned by name; and is described by the spiritual relation he stood in to the apostle, and to whom he wishes grace, mercy, and peace: the preface to the epistle is in Tit 1:5 which gives the reason of the apostle's leaving Titus in Crete, which was to set things in order there, and to ordain elders in all the churches; which leads him to point at the necessary qualifications of them for his direction; some of which respect their moral life and conversation, and others their doctrine, and are in Tit 1:6 and on occasion of the latter, and which is a reason why the elders should be sound in the faith, and hold it fast, the apostle takes notice of the false teachers that were in Crete, whom he describes by their noisy, vain, and deceitful talk; by their being pernicious and hurtful to whole families; and by their covetousness and sensuality, which is confirmed by a testimony out of one of the Cretian poets, Tit 1:10 wherefore he charges Titus sharply to rebuke either these false teachers, or those they had corrupted, that they regard sound doctrine, and not Jewish fables, and the commandments of erroneous men, Tit 1:13 and instances in things forbidden in the law of Moses as unclean, which were not now to be attended to by those who were pure in heart, and sound in faith, to whom all things were pure and lawful; and as for others that were impure, whose minds and consciences were defiled, and were unbelieving, nothing was pure to them, Tit 1:15 and who are further described as professors in words of the true knowledge of God, and yet practically were deniers of him; and as abominable in their nature and actions, disobedient to law and Gospel, and unfit for any good work whatever, Tit 1:16.

If any be blameless,.... In his outward life and conversation, not chargeable with any notorious crime; See Gill on Ti1 3:2, the husband of one wife; See Gill on Ti1 3:2, having faithful children; legitimate ones, born in lawful wedlock, in the same sense as such are called godly and holy, in Mal 2:15 Co1 7:14 for by faithful children cannot be meant converted ones, or true believers in Christ; for it is not in the power of men to make their children such; and their not being so can never be an objection to their being elders, if otherwise qualified; at most the phrase can only intend, that they should be brought up in the faith, in the principles, doctrines, and ways of Christianity, or in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Not accused of riot; or chargeable with sins of uncleanness and intemperance, with rioting and drunkenness, chambering and wantonness; or with such crimes as Eli's sons were guilty of, from which they were not restrained by their father, and therefore the priesthood was removed from the family: "or unruly" not subject, but disobedient to their parents; See Gill on Ti1 3:4. See Gill on Ti1 3:5.

Appoint, therefore, for yourselves, bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men meek, and not lovers of money, and truthful and proved; for they also render to you the service of prophets and teachers. Despise them not therefore, for they are your honoured ones, together with the prophets and teachers.

Should we not rather recognize, from among the store of primitive scriptural precedents, those that correspond with the gospel order of things respecting discipline? By this means we convey to the new community the typical requirements of antiquity. In the old law I find the pruning knife applied to the license of repeated marriage.… Among us the prescript is more fully and more carefully laid down, that they who are chosen into the sacerdotal order must be men of one marriage. This rule is so rigidly observed that I remember some removed from their office for bigamy.

How detrimental to faith, how obstructive to holiness, second marriages are, the discipline of the Church and the prescription of the apostle declare, when he suffers not men twice married to preside (over a Church ), when he would not grant a widow admittance into the order unless she had been "the wife of one man; " for it behoves God's altar to be set forth pure.

Come, now, you who think that an exceptional law of monogamy is made with reference to bishops, abandon withal your remaining disciplinary titles, which, together with monogamy, are ascribed to bishops. Refuse to be "irreprehensible, sober, of good morals, orderly, hospitable, easy to be taught; "nay, indeed, (be) "given to wine, prompt with the hand to strike, combative, money-loving, not ruling your house, nor caring for your children's discipline,"-no, nor "courting good renown even from strangers.

I have set down these things which I have been told are to be avoided, but the Apostle is the Master of virtues, and he teaches that gainsayers are to be convicted with patience, who lays down that one should be the husband of a single wife, not in order to exclude him from the right of marriage (for this is beyond the force of the precept), but that by conjugal chastity he may preserve the grace of his baptismal washing; nor again that he may be induced by the Apostle's authority to beget children in the priesthood; for the speaks of having children, not of begetting them, or marrying again. And I have thought it well not to pass by this point, because many contend that having one wife is said of the time after Baptism; so that the fault whereby any obstacle would ensue would be washed away in baptism. And indeed all faults and sins are washed away; so that if anyone have polluted his body with very many whom he has bound to himself by no law of marriage, all the sins are forgiven him, but if any one have contracted a second marriage it is not done away; for sin not law is loosed by the laver, and as to baptism there is no sin but law. That then which has to do with law is not remitted as though it were sin, but is retained. And the Apostle has established a law, saying: "If any man be without reproach the husband of one wife." So then he who is without blame the husband of one wife comes within the rule for undertaking the priestly office; he, however, who has married again has no guilt of pollution, but is disqualified for the priestly prerogative.

Ver. 6. "If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, hating faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly." Why does he bring forward such an one? To stop the mouths of those heretics, who condemned marriage, showing that it is not an unholy thing in itself, but so far honorable, that a married man might ascend the holy throne; and at the same reproving the wanton, and not permitting their admission into this high office who contracted a second marriage. For he who retains no kind regard for her who is departed, how shall he be a good president? and what accusation would he not incur? For you all know, that though it is not forbidden by the laws to enter into a second marriage, yet it is a thing liable to many ill constructions. Wishing therefore a ruler to give no handle for reproach to those under his rule, he on this account says, "If any be blameless," that is, if his life be free from reproach, if he has given occasion to no one to assail his character. Hear what Christ says, "If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!" (Matt. vi. 23.) "Hating faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly." We should observe what care he bestows upon children. For he who cannot be the instructor of his own children, how should he be the Teacher of others? If he cannot keep in order those whom he has had with him from the beginning, whom he has brought up, and without? For if the incompetency of the father had not been great, he would not have allowed those to become bad whom from the first he had under his power. For it is not possible, indeed it is not, that one should turn out ill who is brought up with much care, and has received great attention. Sins are not so prevalent by nature, as to overcome so much previous care. But if, occupied in the pursuit of wealth, he has made his children a secondary concern, and not bestowed much care upon them, even so he is unworthy. For if when nature prompted, he was so void of affection or so senseless, that he thought more of his wealth than of his children, how should he be raised to the Episcopal throne, and so great rule? For if he was unable to restrain them it is a great proof of his weakness; and if he was unconcerned, his want of affection is much to be blamed. He then that neglects his own children, how shall he take care of other men's? And he has not only said, "not riotous," but not even "accused of riot." There must not be an ill report, or such an opinion of them.

“A bishop then must be blameless.” The same thing that he says to Titus, “if any be blameless.” All the virtues are comprehended in this one word; thus he seems to require an impossible perfection. For if every sin, every idle word, is deserving of blame, who is there in this world that is sinless and blameless? Still he who is chosen to be shepherd of the church must be one compared with whom other men are rightly regarded as but a flock of sheep.

“One that rules well his own house.” That is, not by increasing riches, not by providing regal banquets, not by having a pile of finely wrought plates, not by slowly steaming pheasants so that the heat may reach the bones without melting the flesh upon them. No, he does this rather by first requiring of his own household the conduct which he has to inculcate in others.

"If anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of reckless living, or disobedient." Therefore he must be blameless, which I believe is also referred to in Timothy as irreprehensible (1 Tim. III): not that during the time he is ordained he has no crime, and has washed away past stains with a new life, but from the time he is reborn in Christ, he is not tormented by any consciousness of sin. For how can the leader of the Church remove evil from those who are in similar transgression? Or with what freedom can he rebuke the sinner, when the sinner answers silently that he himself has committed the same thing he is rebuking? Therefore, whoever desires a bishopric, desires good work. He says work, not privilege, not glory. But he must also have a good testimony from those outside, so that he does not fall into shame, and into the trap of the devil. And what he says, the husband of one wife, must be understood thus: so that we do not think that every monogamist is better than a widower; but so that he can exhort to monogamy and continence, who offers his example in teaching. For suppose a young man lost his wife and was overcome by the necessity of the flesh, and took a second wife, whom he also immediately lost and then lived continently; another, however, married until old age, and, as most believe, never gave up the work of the flesh: which of the two do you think is better, more chaste, more continent? Certainly he who was unfortunate even in a second marriage and afterwards conducted himself modestly and piously, is preferable to him who has been separated neither by the embrace of his wife nor by advanced age. Therefore, whoever is chosen as a quasi-monogamist should not applaud himself because he is better than every man who is twice married, since the greater happiness rather than his will has been chosen. Some people think this about this place: it was the custom of the Jews either to have two or more wives: which we read in the Old Law of Abraham and Jacob: and now they want it to be a precept, that he who is to be elected bishop should not have two wives at the same time. Even those who have been with the Gentiles, and after losing one wife, have taken another after the baptism of Christ, think more superstitiously than truly, that they should not be read in the priesthood: for certainly, if this is to be observed. those who, before taking one regenerated wife, indulged in wandering through prostitutes, should be more strongly barred from the episcopate: and it is much more detestable to fornicate with several than to find one who is twice married; because in the former, there is a kind of unhappiness in marriage, while in the latter there is a tendency to voluptuousness towards sin. Montanus and those who follow the Novatian schism, took the name of cleanliness to themselves: and they think that second marriages should be prohibited from the communion of the Church: whereas the Apostle, imposing this on bishops and presbyters, relaxed it in other respects. Not that he encourages second marriages; but that he indulges the necessity of the flesh. And Tertullian wrote a heretical book about Monogamy, which no one who has read the Apostle will be ignorant of opposing. And indeed, it is in our power to have a bishop or a presbyter without blame, and to have one wife. But that which follows, to have faithful children, not accused of lewdness, and not subject, is beyond our power. For to be sure, if parents have well instructed their children and always taught them the precepts of the Lord from a young age, if later they give themselves to lewdness, and putting aside the reins of vice, will the fault then rebound to the parents, and the sins of the father will stain the holiness of the son? If anyone has well instructed his children, I believe that includes Isaac, who is to be held as having well instructed his son Esau. But Esau, a fornicator and profane, sold his firstborn for one meal (Gen. 25:29-34). Samuel too, who was such that he called upon the Lord, and the Lord answered him, and in the time of harvest obtained the rain of the winter season, had sons who turned aside after bribes, and became such wicked judges that the people, not bearing it, demanded a king for themselves like the other nations (1 Samuel 8:4-5). Therefore, if the election of the priests were to take place, and Isaac on account of Esau and Samuel on account of his sons were deemed unworthy of the priesthood. And since the sins of parents are not attributed to their children, will the faults of the children prejudge the parents? (Ezekiel 18:2) First of all, it must be said that the name of the priesthood is so sacred that even external things are considered for us, not because we are not bishops because of our faults: but because we are barred from this position because of the incontinence of our sons. For with what freedom can we correct other people's children and teach what is right: when immediately he who has been corrected can say to us: First teach your sons? Or with what confidence do 1 Cor.ect a stranger who commits fornication when my own conscience responds to me: Therefore disinherit the fornicating son: reject your sons serving vices? But when a wicked son comes together with you under the same roof, do you dare to remove the speck from someone else's eye, not seeing the beam in your own eye (Matthew VII and Luke VI)? Therefore, the righteous is not polluted by the vices of his children: but freedom is reserved by the Apostle for the prince of the Church: so that he may become such that he may not be afraid to rebuke outsiders because of the vices of his children. Then also it must be inferred against those who are swollen with pride about the episcopate and think that they have achieved not the dispensation of Christ, but authority: because they are not immediately better than all those who have not been ordained bishops: and from the fact that they have been elected they themselves think that they are more confirmed: but understand that some are removed from the priesthood because their children's vices have hindered them. But if the sins of the children prohibit the righteous from the episcopate: how much more should each one consider himself and know that the powerful suffer torment powerfully (Wisdom VI), so he will withdraw from this not as much honor as burden: and he will not seek to take the place of others who are more worthy! Finally, it must be said that in the Scriptures by sons are meant reasonings, that is, thoughts; but by daughters, deeds, that is, works, and now he who will become a bishop must be commanded to have both thoughts and works in his power, and he truly believes in Christ, and is not stained by any creeping vice.

The first freedom, then, is to be without crimes. And so when the apostle Paul chose either priests or deacons to be ordained, and when anyone is to be ordained to take charge of a church, he does not say, If anyone is without sin. For if he were to say this, every person would be rejected, no one would be ordained. But he says, “if anyone is without crime,” such as homicide, adultery and uncleanness of fornication, theft, fraud, sacrilege, and other things of this sort.

We have already said that a bishop, a presbyter and a deacon, when they are constituted, must be married but once, whether their wives are alive or whether they are dead. It is not lawful for them, if they are unmarried when they are ordained, to be married afterwards; or if they are married at that time, to marry a second time, but to be content with that wife which they had when they came to ordination.

We have already said, that a bishop, a presbyter, and a deacon, when they are constituted, must be but once married, whether their wives be alive or whether they be dead; and that it is not lawful for them, if they are unmarried when they are ordained, to be married afterwards; or if they be then married, to marry a second time, but to be content with that wife. which they had when they came to ordination.

Paul does not measure the virtue of fathers by the depravity of their children, nor did the misbehavior of his sons make Samuel unworthy of the priesthood; Paul wishes only to show the likely intentions of the father from what has been created in the sons.

If anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children who are not accused of overindulgence or insubordination. If anyone is blameless. Let his life be pure, it is said, and let no one have occasion to find fault with his life. the husband of one wife. Paul says that she alone should know the lawful one. He silences heretics who detest marriage, as if they could also take care of anything after marriage. But he forbids the second marriage, as being under condemnation. having faithful children. For he who has not disciplined his own children, how can he manage others?

If he leads a life free from reproach, if no one reproaches him for his way of life. For if the light, He says, is darkness, then the darkness how much more? To shut the mouths of heretics who condemned marriage, he accepts a married man into the episcopacy. For marriage is so honorable that with it one can even ascend to the sacred throne. But to restrain the incontinent, he says: "the husband of one wife." For he who preserved no affection for his deceased wife, how will he be a good leader in the Church? A bishop must be blameless. But a man twice married is not blameless, even though this is permitted by civil laws. Who has not raised his own children, how will he manage others? It is clear that if he had first raised his children well and with care, they would not have turned out disobedient. For sins are not such by their nature that they could be stronger than such diligence. The Apostle did not say simply: not profligate children, but even entirely free from reproach of profligacy and free from evil suspicion.

Then, when he says, if anyone is without crime, he describes them in three ways: first, in regard to themselves; second, in regard to their wives; third, in regard to their children. In regard to themselves he says, without crime. But is there such a person? For it is said: if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (1 John 1:8). I answer that a crime is one thing and a sin another. A sin is an evil which might be great or small, open or secret; but a crime is great and public: O Lord, who shall sojourn in your tent? Who shall dwell on your holy hill? (Ps 15:1) And the answer is given: he who walks blamelessly, and does what is right. This does not mean that a person who has sinned after baptism cannot be chosen, but that the chosen must not be disreputable. In regard to the second he says, the husband of one wife. The Orientals explain this by saying that he may not have two wives simultaneously, as was the custom some followed. But if this were so, the Apostle would have had no reason for writing this; whereas, according to the laws of the Romans to whom the Apostle was writing, it was not lawful to have more than one wife. Furthermore, in 1 Timothy he says, let a widow be enrolled, having been the wife of one husband (1 Tim 5:9), and yet it was never lawful for a woman to have more than one husband at once. And thus, he desired the same of widows, namely, that they have never had more than one husband. Jerome says that the requirement was that he have had only one wife after baptism; and it does not apply if he had others before baptism. Nevertheless, Augustine and Ambrose say that through baptism all crimes are washed away, but it does not wash away matrimony. Therefore, according to them it is more correct to say that he may not have had more than one wife either before or after baptism. According to others the reason behind this law was that it had been a sign of incontinence to have more than one. But this is not true, because it would not be held against him if he had concubines, who are more incontinent. But there is a deeper reason, namely, because he dispenses the sacraments, and no sacramental defect should be present in him; but the sacrament of matrimony signifies Christ's union with the Church. Therefore, if the sign is to correspond to the things signified, then as Christ is one and the Church is one, so also a bishop. But this signification would be lacking if the bishop had more than one wife. However, in the old law the Patriarchs signified this union, not as joined to Christ but because they would be joined in the future; and because the Church of the future was to be composed of Jews and gentiles, the Patriarchs took not one but several wives. Consequently, that multitude of wives signified this. In regard to the third, i.e., on the part of the children, he says, having faithful children, not open to the charge of being profligate or insubordinate. For a bishop is ordained to oversee; and one appointed to such a task ought to be skilled in it; otherwise, he will be unable to rule prudently. But it is presumed that he is well skilled, if he has ruled others well. Yet a bishop is expected to do three things besides rule: first, to teach the faith; make disciples of all nations (Matt 28:19); therefore he says, faithful. Second, to instruct the people in virtue: do you have children? Discipline them, and make them obedient from their youth (Sir 7:23). But sins of lust destroy virtue: a braggart and fool goes beyond the right moment (Sir 20:7); therefore he says, not open to the charge of being profligate. In 1 Samuel, Eli is punished for failing to correct his sons on this point (1 Sam 3:13). Third, it is required that he correct the unruly; hence he says, or insubordinate, i.e., not obedient: a horse that is untamed turns out to be stubborn, and a son unrestrained turns out to be willful (Sir 30:8).

The apostle's statement of his character, his hope, and his function, Tit 1:1-3. His address to Titus, and the end for which he left him in Crete, Tit 1:4, Tit 1:5. The qualifications requisite in those who should be appointed elders and bishops in the Church of God, Tit 1:6-9. Of false teachers, Tit 1:10, Tit 1:11. The character of the Cretans, and how they were to be dealt with, Tit 1:12-14. Of the pure, the impure, and false professors of religion, Tit 1:15, Tit 1:16.

If any be blameless - See the notes on Ti1 3:2, etc. Having faithful children - Whose family is converted to God. It would have been absurd to employ a man to govern the Church whose children were not in subjection to himself; for it is an apostolic maxim, that he who cannot rule his own house, cannot rule the Church of God; Ti1 3:5.

ADDRESS: FOR WHAT END TITUS WAS LEFT IN CRETE. QUALIFICATIONS FOR ELDERS: GAINSAYERS IN CRETE NEEDING REPROOF. (Tit. 1:1-16) servant of God--not found elsewhere in the same connection. In Rom 1:1 it is "servant of Jesus Christ" (Gal 1:10; Phi 1:1; compare Act 16:17; Rev 1:1; Rev 15:3). In Rom 1:1, there follows, "called to be an apostle," which corresponds to the general designation of the office first, "servant of GOD," here, followed by the special description, "apostle of Jesus Christ." The full expression of his apostolic office answers, in both Epistles, to the design, and is a comprehensive index to the contents. The peculiar form here would never have proceeded from a forger. according to the faith--rather, "for," "with a view to subserve the faith"; this is the object of my apostleship (compare Tit 1:4, Tit 1:9; Rom 1:5). the elect--for whose sake we ought to endure all things (Ti2 2:10). This election has its ground, not in anything belonging to those thus distinguished, but in the purpose and will of God from everlasting (Ti2 1:9; Rom 8:30-33; compare Luk 18:7; Eph 1:4; Col 3:12). Act 13:48 shows that all faith on the part of the elect, rests on the divine foreordination: they do not become elect by their faith, but receive faith, and so become believers, because they are elect. and the acknowledging of the truth--"and (for promoting) the full knowledge of the truth," that is, the Christian truth (Eph 1:13). after godliness--that is, which belongs to piety: opposed to the knowledge which has not for its object the truth, but error, doctrinal and practical (Tit 1:11, Tit 1:16; Ti1 6:3); or even which has for its object mere earthly truth, not growth in the divine life. "Godliness," or "piety," is a term peculiar to the Pastoral Epistles: a fact explained by the apostle having in them to combat doctrine tending to "ungodliness" (Ti2 2:16; compare Tit 2:11-12).

(Compare Notes, see on Ti1 3:2-4.) The thing dwelt on here as the requisite in a bishop, is a good reputation among those over whom he is to be set. The immorality of the Cretan professors rendered this a necessary requisite in one who was to be a reprover: and their unsoundness in doctrine also made needful great steadfastness in the faith (Tit 1:9, Tit 1:13). having faithful children--that is, believing children. He who could not bring his children to faith, how shall he bring others? [BENGEL]. ALFORD explains, "established in the faith." not accused--not merely not riotous, but "not (even) accused of riot" ("profligacy" [ALFORD]; "dissolute life" [WAHL]). unruly--insubordinate; opposed to "in subjection" (Ti1 3:4).