Elders and Deacons: Wives and Children

[Scott Hutchinson]

Hey do any of yall need this place ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgGZxh6k2Ug

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by Sept5SavedTeen

Ok, everybody, I have a question about elders. The Scriptures tell us:

Titus 1:5For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

6If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

7For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

8But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;

9Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.


1 Timothy 3:1This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

3Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

4One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

5(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

6Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

7Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

8Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;

9Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

10And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.

11Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

12Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

13For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.


Some background on my train of thought. About two or three summers ago I was in a fairly conservative Campellite (church of Christ) meetinghouse for a Sunday evening service, and I heard a great message about obedience. The preacher explained the COMPLETE obedience we were to have to the Bible, and how we were to be obedient to GOD's plan for HIS Church. He briefly mentioned the roles of the eldership and deakonite, and he meantioned how their assembly had multiple deacons and elders. And he briefly mentioned the qualifications, and mentioned how these men had to be married WITH multiple (two or more) children. I heard the preaching, thought about, but I was in an apostolic assembly (UPCI) that didn't practice plurality of elders or deacons, and the pastor of the UPC I was attending had a wife and two kids. Through the leading of the LORD, I was led to an independent assembly that was/is striving for an eldership and diakonite made up of many men, who meet the qualifications.
Now, I am thinking about the qualifications, and I was thinking, "Alex, you should work towards being a deacon, that seems like a good role for a young man like yourself to fill, you'd be a servant to the people of GOD, andyou could work in that role and work towards meeting the qualifications of being grave, not doubletounged, not greedy, having a pure conscience, blameless, ect.. ect... ok Alex, let's work towards that..." BUT WAIT!

I DON'T HAVE A WIFE OR TWO+ CHILDREN (which of course I'd need a wife first of course...)

Now, the question is this, is having a wife and 2+ children just as part of fufilling the qualifications as being grave, not drunken, not doubletounged, ect, ect...?

How can we say, "Ok, the Bible says, "Wife and children for elders and deacons, but, we'll make it work like this;

(From Titus 1:6)

6If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, not accused of riot or unruly.

OR

6If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having a faithful child not accused of riot or unruly.

OR

6If any be blameless, and is married or single, has children, no children or one child not accused of riot or unruly.

Can we do this? Can a man have hands laid on him for this role without a wife and multiple children? Are there not things that a man just can not know without a wife and multiple children?

What say all of ye?

-Bro. Alex

There are those who look at the office of bishop or deacon as official offices of an organization or corporation. Those who qualify and feel led my seek those offices. Often the organization or the church in question has it's own list that broadly mirrors the biblical standards you mentioned above.

However, in the first century the church wasn't an organization. The offices of bishop or deacon weren't official offices, they were callings. The vast majority of Christians met in homes for the first 250 to 300 years of Christianity. These were smaller, home based groups, where in they worshiped, prayed, and studied together. The church's function was much like a family (hence the terms "brother" and "sister"). The bishops, or elders, were men of calling who had knowledge of the Scriptures and who taught those who gathered in their homes. The deacons served as servants and ministers of the early church. These areas of leadership and service were best fit for men who knew how to govern a home. A man with a bride can more easily relate to how Christ desires his bride to be treated. A man with children who rules his house well can better manage the church of the living God with the strength and compassion of a father. Also being married prevented temptation and the snare of Satan through lust. Many young single men find themselves in ministry with young ladies looking up to them, respecting them, desiring them. It's often very hard for a married man to maintain proper perspective if a woman's advances are strong, God help the single young man.

It's my belief that the biblical standards for elders and deacons in the church are sound. If it indicates that an elder or deacon should be married with children, embrace it.

But at the same time...I'd be cautious not to be overly dogmatic...because Paul himself wasn't married. It may be however that Paul was an older man who had been married (obviously a requirement to hold office in the Sanhedrin) but was now a widower.

I'd say to any young unmarried man that approaching ministry or the offices of elder or deacon should be done with great caution.

[El Apostolico]

Paul said that it is preferable for ministers to not marry and to be dedicated to the church, yet I think this only applies to those who have a gift of chastity vs. those who don't...I think to be an Elder you do need to be married though unless you have the gift (da debil is cunnin')

[Scott Hutchinson]

Paul even said it better to marry than to burn,Paul was strong in the Holy Ghost cause when the heat-wave hits you it's hard to deal with.

[Antipas]

It's also important to note that Paul wrote....

1 Timothy 3:1-2
1This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

Titus 1:5-6
5For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:
6If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

Many think that Paul was issuing a condemnation of polygamy and/or divorce by stating that an elder or deacon be the husband of one wife. But Paul never condemned polygamy, for example many in Paul's "Hall of Faith" in Hebrews 11 were polygamists. Paul did emphasize the virtues of and encouraged monogamy. But there may be a reason for this that most don't consider. Paul stated that a man ministering as an elder or deacon was to be "blameless", meaning he had to be above reproach or charge to them that were within and without the church. The Roman Empire had outlawed polygamy before the time of Christ. If a Christian minister were to have more than one wife it would be a violation of Roman law and custom, bringing much reproach on the church in Roman society. Many rabbinical scholars agree that rabbinical authorities in Paul's day deferred to monogamy in accordance to Roman law. So the statements aren't so much a condemnation of polygamy but rather an effort to keep the church abiding by the law of the land.

Just felt I should throw that one out there.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

Anyways, Paul would not be an elder by the definition I am giving, but that is not a bad thing, Paul was an apostle. Men without wives or children are not barred from being apostles or evangelists, it's just that they can't be elders or deacons, what say the rest of ye?

With this talk of find a wife though, I would not mind prayers going up that I could become an elder or a deacon (and meet ALL of the qualifications that entails, )

-Bro. Alex

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Sept5SavedTeen

Anyways, Paul would not be an elder by the definition I am giving, but that is not a bad thing, Paul was an apostle. Men without wives or children are not barred from being apostles or evangelists, it's just that they can't be elders or deacons, what say the rest of ye?

With this talk of find a wife though, I would not mind prayers going up that I could become an elder or a deacon (and meet ALL of the qualifications that entails, )

-Bro. Alex

Here is a revelation for you, Paul the Apostle was an elder, Peter translated the same word and declared himself to be an Elder, as was John. Any leader in their governing vein was considered an elder.