Preached on Sunday, February 14, 2010
from
Titus 1:7-8
Theme: This passage describes the character qualities that must be true of an overseer of God’s household.
(Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture references are taken from The Holy Bible, New King James Version; copyright 1982, Thomas Nelson, Inc.)
Over the past few weeks, we’ve been studying the beginning section of the letter that the apostle Paul wrote to his ministry assistant Titus; and specifically, the qualities that he laid out for those men that Titus was to appoint to the role of leadership over the churches.
Paul wrote, “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you—” (Titus 1:5). And, as we saw last week, he began by laying out the ‘family’ qualifications of an elder in verse six; “. . . if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination” (v. 6). As we pointed out last time, the importance of the pastor’s family qualifications is shown in the fact that Paul specified them first.
Next Sunday—if the Lord so permits—I’m hoping that we’ll study the ‘doctrinal’ qualifications of an elder that Paul lays out in verse nine; that he is found to be “holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict” (v. 9). The need to be true to that last qualification—and to appoint leaders who are truly committed to preach and defend God’s revealed word authoritatively in our culture—is so critical, that I believe it deserves a whole Sunday morning’s attention from us.
But today, I ask that we give our attention to the qualifications mentioned in verses seven and eight; and to what I believe we could call the ‘character’ qualifications that must be true of the pastoral leaders of God’s church. He writes,
For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled . . . (Titus 1:7-8).
* * * * * * * * * *
I’ll never forget the first time I really poured through this passage. It was back in 1984. My wife and I had just moved to Portland to begin to pursue my ministry training. In one of my early pastoral ministry classes, we were instructed to look through this passage—and the similar one in 1 Timothy 3:1-7—and examine ourselves against it. The men in the class were urged to search their lives before God, and ask if they truly measured up to the qualifications that were found in God’s word concerning elders.
It was a tough experience to go through back then. And after the twenty-six years or so after that personal examination, I can say that it’s still tough to do. I wonder if that’s one of the values of these words being forever recorded for us in the Scriptures. Rereading them causes me examine myself against them again and again. I may have been weak in an area back then that—by God’s grace, I’ve grown to be stronger in today. And there may be an area in which I was strong in back then that—through neglect—I’ve allowed myself to grow weak in today. It forces me into constant review and revision; because I want not only to prove to have been biblically qualified to serve as your pastor, but I want—with God’s help—to stay qualified all my life.
I remember how, when we all came back to the class room after that initial self-examination, the professor asked us this question: “Having looked over this list of qualifications carefully—if you were part of a pulpit committee that was searching for a new pastor, and you had to choose—which of these qualifications do you think your church could afford to overlook?” In our immaturity, we were stupid enough to put forth our suggestion of which one’s were “optional”. But today, after having been in a pastoral role for most of my adult life, I can say that there isn’t a single one of these qualifications that is “optional”—that every one of them is essential to be found in the pastoral leadership of a church.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Look with me at how Paul introduced this list at the beginning of verse seven. Note how he emphasizes “blamelessness”. He said, “For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God . . .” He has referred to that general qualification “blameless” once before (or, as it’s translated in some versions, “above reproach”). He used it when he introduced the ‘family’ qualifications of an elder in verse six; “if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination.” And now—once again—he uses that word “blameless” or “above reproach” in verse seven with reference the man’s being “a steward of God”.
The word “steward” refers to someone who served as a household manager. In ancient times, a wealthy man would entrust the management and care of his household to one of his trusted servants; and it would be that servant’s responsibility to see to the care of all the wealthy man’s home, and his goods, and—in some cases—even to the care and training of his children. A very ready example of this from the Bible is found in the story of Joseph. When his master Potiphar “saw that the LORD was with him and that the LORD made all he did to prosper in his hand”; he “made him overseer of his house, and all that he had he put under his authority” (Genesis 39:3-4).
And so, when a man is entrusted with that much responsibility, it’s obvious that he must be “trustworthy”. In order to be entrusted with the privilege of being the “steward” of the household of another, he must be “blameless” or “above reproach”. As the apostle Paul has written, “Moreover it is required in stewards that one be found faithful” (1 Corinthians 4:2). And so, as someone being entrusted with the care of the household of God, an elder must be “blameless”. Perhaps this is why Paul “bookends” the ‘family’ qualifications of an elder with the general qualification of “blamelessness”; “for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?” (1 Timothy 3:5).
And note what he calls the man, whom he insists must be “blameless”, before he lists his ‘character’ qualifications. He calls him, not just an “elder”, but a “bishop”—or, as it’s better translated, an “overseer”. The specific function of the elder with respect to the church is as an “overseer”—one who is entrusted with the responsibility of watching over the church’s spiritual care, protecting its people, and defending it from false doctrine.
Think of what the Bible tells us about the high responsibility of an “overseer”. Paul spoke to a group of elders once and told them, “Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:28). The writer of Hebrews urged his readers, “Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you” (Hebrews 13:17). Peter wrote to his fellow elders, “Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers . . .” (1 Peter 5:2). It’s no small thing to be made an overseer over God’s church! Such a man is to “shepherd the flock of God”! He is entrusted with the care of the church of the redeemed which Jesus Christ purchased with His own blood! He must lead the people of God in such a way as to be pleasing to the Lord, because he must, one day, give an account!
It is absolutely essential that such a man be qualified—not just in terms of his family, not just in terms of his doctrine, but in terms of his character as well! The world may say of many of its leaders, “Character doesn’t matter.” But with respect to the leadership of God’s household, character is essential! I hope you’ll keep me and the leaders of this church in your prayers—that we’ll continually review ourselves, and renew ourselves before God, with respect to these essential ‘character’ qualifications.
* * * * * * * * * *
Now; for the record, I’ve found this to be a very easy passage to outline. It’s not an easy one to obey, of course; but it’s at least easy to outline! Verse seven gives us five qualities that are ‘negatively’ stated with respect to an overseer in the church; and verse eight gives us six qualities that are ‘positively’ stated with respect to him.
I believe there is divine wisdom behind Paul’s choice to state the ‘character’ of an overseer in terms, both, of what he should be and what he shouldn’t be. That often gives us the fullest understanding of a thing—not only through what it is, but also through what it isn’t.
So; let’s look, first, at . . .
1. THE ‘NEGATIVE’ QUALITIES (v. 7).
First, Paul says that an elder must not be “self-willed”. This word in the original language is a word formed by putting of two words together: the Greek word “hēdonai“, which means “pleasure” (from which we get the word “hedonism”); and “autos“, which means “self”. Thus, a “self-willed” or “self-pleasing” man is a man who has to have things his way—a “My-way-or-the-highway” kind of man. The New International Version therefore translates that word “overbearing”; and the English Standard Version translates it “arrogant”.
A “self-willed” man is often the kind of man that people often seek in politics or in the business world. It’s the kind of man who knows what he wants, knows how he wants it done, and is willing to do whatever he has to do—to whoever he has to do it—in order to get it. They very often prove themselves to be “arrogant” and “overbearing”. But that’s not the kind of man God appoints as an overseer of His household! An elder is not there to seek his own pleasure or to assert his own will—but to serve at the pleasure and will of the Lord. Many such “self-willed” men have, sadly, sought to be pastors primarily in order to exercise power over others; and they have destroyed their churches—and have wounded many souls in the process—as they sought to ‘ramrod’ their own agendas into God’s house.
Second, Paul says that he must not be “quick tempered”; and perhaps this second negative qualification is an outflow of the first. It’s not that a man should never get angry; because even our Lord displayed righteous anger at times. Rather, it’s that he isn’t someone who is ‘prone’ to anger, or that has a hair-trigger temper. He must not be a man who blows his stack easily; or that is someone whose buttons people know how to push.
One of the things that Paul wrote to Timothy that a pastor must not do is “quarrel”. I’ve been around pastors who love to “quarrel”, and who get rather excited about fights over certain issues. I’ve watched their faces get red and their spittle start to fly over relatively unimportant things. They end up turning people away from the faith. Paul wrote to “avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of God must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will” (2 Timothy 2:23-26).
A third negative quality that Paul mentions is that a pastor must not be “given to wine”. This, again, is a word that’s produced by putting to words together—the preposition for “by” or “beside”; and the word for “wine”. This is describing a man who is around wine enough to become associated with it—to be, as the New American Standard translates it—”addicted to wine”.
Back in the Old Testament, after the tabernacle had been raised and dedicated in the wilderness and the glory of the Lord appeared to the people, something dreadful happened. The two sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, each took their censer and put fire in it and offered “strange” fire to the Lord—something that the Lord did not command. Fire went out from the Lord and devoured them; and they died before the Lord! What a shocking thing it was! What an upsetting thing it must have been to poor Aaron! And after their smoking bodies were dragged away from the sacred place of the Lord, we’re told that the Lord spoke to Aaron and said, “Do not drink wine or intoxicating drink, you, nor your sons with you, when you go into the tabernacle of meeting, lest you die. It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations, that you may distinguish between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean, and that you may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD has spoken to them by the hand of Moses” (Leviticus 10:9-11). And if this was true in the Old Covenant era, how much more so in the New!
There is no vocation that requires a clearer head than that of the man who is providing oversight to the church that Jesus has purchased with His own precious blood! He must not only be an example—because the Bible warns that those who have a life-style of drunkenness will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:10); but he also must have an unimpaired mind in order to handle matters of eternal importance to the heirs of that kingdom! A man who is a pastor must not be a man that is addicted to alcohol—or by extension, any kind of mind-impairing substance!
A fourth ‘negative’ quality is that he must not be “violent”. The New American Standard translates it “pugnacious”; but the old King James is more to the point when it calls him a “striker”. This is describing someone prone to allow his emotions to get out of hand; and to make his point by giving a shove, or twisting an arm, or by throwing a punch. Maybe that was how he was raised. Maybe he got hurt a lot; and has learned to get by in life by hurting others. Such a person needs to be confronted and helped. But such a man must never be a pastor.
There are some pastors like this who have learned that it doesn’t pay to get physical; but they’ve nevertheless learned how to be “violent” in their words. They use abusive speech toward people. They call people names. I’ve actually heard some elders suggest violence toward others with whom they disagreed; and even if it was only in jest, it still represented what was in their hearts. They often vent themselves through their sermons; and perhaps you’ve already experienced how those sermons sound! No man who is prone to be violent—either in act or in attitude—ought to be a pastor.
And finally, a fifth ‘negative’ quality is that he must not be “greedy for money”. If a man who is greedy for money gets into the position of oversight over God’s household, he’s going to be willing to compromise the gospel in order to protect his income, or to speak untruth in order to win the favor of people who can be an advantage him in some way, or even to dip his hands in the till when no one is looking. This kind of greed was one of the problems, in fact, that was going on in Crete. Paul, in verse 11, says that certain false teachers must be stopped, “who subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain.”
I appreciate what the apostle Peter said in 1 Peter 5:2; that elders should shepherd the flock of God, “not for dishonest gain, but eagerly”. Now; the Bible teaches, of course, that a pastor should be financially supported by his church. Paul writes, “Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.” And it’s clear that “honor” means pay, because he goes on to say, “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer is worthy of his wages’ (1 Timothy 5:17-18). But if a man is truly called to pastor a church, he ought to be willing to do so at in obedience to the Lord’s call on his life—”eagerly”, whether he got paid for it or not. And if he proves himself to be a man willing to God’s people without pay, he should serve—and should be paid! But no man should be called as a pastor who is motivated by what he can get out of it. He’ll never get enough!
* * * * * * * * * *
Now; those are the “negative” qualities. A pastor must be a man who is ” not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money”; because those qualities are blameworthy, and “a bishop must be blameless”. Those things bring reproach on a man; and an overseer must be “above reproach”.
And if you look closely, you’ll see that the “negative” qualities in verse seven are separated from the “positive” qualities in verse eight by the word “but”. These “positive” qualities may not stand in point-for-point contrast to the “negative” ones, but they certainly stand out in general contrast to the “blameworthy” kind of man. In verse seven, Paul is saying what a pastor should not be; but in verse eight, he’s saying—by contrast—what a pastor should be instead.
So next, let’s consider . . .
2. THE ‘POSITIVE’ QUALITIES (v. 8).
First, he says that an overseer ought to be “hospitable”. The word in the original language means “a lover of strangers”. He is a man who has the ‘welcome mat’ out—even to folks he’s just getting to know.
I certainly believe this means that a pastor ought to be the kind of man who has people over to his home. If he is blessed with a wonderful wife, as I am, he and she ought to have people over for dinner. If they can, they ought to have a spare room for guests. But I believe it also means that he has an attitude of heart that simply loves people. He needs to be the kind of man that takes unbelievers out for coffee—and always pays for it. He needs to be the first man to greet the newcomers at church. I’ve been surprised by how much that means to people—when the pastor greets them and knows them by name. I believe that a church with a hospitable pastor soon becomes known as a welcoming church family—and such a church reaches lost people, and grows.
Second, Paul says that an overseer ought to be “a lover of what is good”. The Bible says, “Have regard for good things in the sight of all men” (Romans 12:17); and I believe that a pastor should be a man who has a clear sense of what those things are, truly loves them, and leads the rest of God’s people in ‘having regard’ for them; so that even the non-Christians around them feels that it benefits from their presence in the world.
Such men are the kind who think about matters of justice, and mercy, and care for the needy. It may also mean that he is a man who is a lover of “good people”—even if they may come from a different tradition of the faith than they do, or with whom they may disagree on fundamental issues. They are the kinds of men who show genuine appreciation for even a non-Christian who wants to do something kind for the church family.
Third, Paul says that they ought to be “sober-minded”; or, as some translations have it, “self-controlled”. It’s speaking of the kind of man who is ‘sober’ and ‘temperate’; but I don’t believe this means he is a humorless man who walks around always being serious. Rather, I believe it’s speaking of a man who has a clear head, who knows what’s going on, and is thinking rightly about things.
Perhaps a good way to think of it would be to contrast it with what James says in James 1:8 about “a double-minded man”; who, as he says, is “unstable in all his ways”. The double-minded man is easily distracted and drawn away from the right path. But the “sober-minded” man has his eyes pointed straight ahead and is thus “stable” in all situations. A pastor should not be a “double-minded” man; because such a man doesn’t lead the people of God with confidence. Instead, he should be a stable, ‘steady-as-she-goes’ man—a man who isn’t controlled by the circumstances; but who is, is rather, always under God’s control while in those circumstances.
Fourth, Paul speaks of how he ought to be “just”. The word that he uses is the same Greek word that is often translated “righteous”; and perhaps it should go without saying that he ought to be a righteous man; or, as the NIV has it, “upright”. But I tend to think he’s speaking of a man who is characterized by “justice” in his conduct toward others—that he isn’t a man who shows favoritism, but is equitable in his dealings with all people. He’s “just” in his interactions with others.
Fifth, Paul says he ought to be “holy”. And the word that Paul uses is different from the usual word for “holy”. The usual word is one that means “separated” or “set-apart” unto God’s use. But this word has more to do with the idea of being “devout” or genuinely “pious” in one’s conduct before God—someone who is walking in the right manner before God. I suggest that this has to do with how a man treats the things of God.
Many pastors try too hard to be entertainers. Some degenerate into using their pulpits as opportunities to become stand-up comics. And in the end, they defile the holy things of God. But by contrast, when a man is truly “holy” or “devout”, he treats the things of God according to their true worth. He reveres God’s house. He reveres God’s ordinances. He reveres God’s word. He reveres God’s gospel. He treat sin seriously—as an offense to a holy God. He mourn over the lost condition of the unbeliever as God Himself mourns over it. Such a pastor instructs people in the church through his own conduct; and inspires them to treat the sacred things of God according to their true worth.
And finally, Paul says that he ought to be “self-controlled”; or, as the New International Version has it, “disciplined”. He ought to be the kind of man who has mastery over himself. He’s habitually on time for things. He’s prepared when he gets there. He keeps himself well-groomed, appropriately dressed, and physically fit. He pays his bills when they’re due. He’s the kind of man who has the maturity to do the things that need to be done—even if he doesn’t feel like doing them.
* * * * * * * * * *
I read this list and I realize I have a long ways to go. I imagine you feel that way too—not only that I truly do have a long ways to go, but that you do too! These are, after all, qualities that are to be in the life of the elders of the church; so that the people of God may follow their example. These things are not only to be true of the overseers; but they are also to be true of every follower of Jesus in the church family.
And I suggest that the qualities we’ve just considered are a very good description of our Lord. Jesus walked on this earth as just such a man. He was blameless in His walk; “not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled”. He has placed His Holy Spirit in us, to live His life in and through us; and that should give us great hope.
So, let’s keep on praying for one another with encouragement and confidence. As your pastor, I’ll keep praying for you. And you keep on praying for me; and for the other leaders of the church family—and they’ll keep praying or you too. Let’s pray that, increasingly, Jesus Christ will live His life in and through us—making us the kind of “blameless” people in this world who will represent Him well—people who are not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, lovers of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled.
And as a result, may people be drawn to trust the wonderful Savior who our lives thus display.