I timothy 3 commentary

I TIMOTHY 3 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Qualifications for Overseers and Deacons
1 Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires
to be an overseer desires a noble task.
BAR ES, "This is a trite saying - Greek, “Faithful is the word” - the very phrase
which is used in 1Ti_1:15; see the notes on that verse. The idea here is, that it was worthy
of credence; it was not to be doubted.
If a man desire - Implying that there would be those who would wish to be put into
the ministry. The Lord, undoubtedly, by his Spirit, often excites an earnest and
irrepressible desire to preach the gospel - a desire so strong, that he in whom it exists
can be satisfied in no other calling. In such a case, it should be regarded as one evidence
of a call to this work. The apostle, however, by the statements which follow, intimates
that wherever this desire exists, it is of the utmost importance to have just views of the
nature of the office, and that there should be other qualifications for the ministry than a
mere desire to preach the gospel. He proceeds, therefore, to state those qualifications,
and no one who “desires” the office of the ministry should conclude that he is called to it,
unless these qualifications substantially are found in him. The word rendered “desire”
here (ᆆρέγω oregō), denotes properly, “to reach” or “stretch out” - and hence to reach
after anything, to long after, to try to obtain; Heb_11:16.
The office of a bishop - The Greek here is a single word - ᅚπισκοπᇿς episkopēs. The
word ᅚπισκοπή episkopē - “Episcope” - whence the word “Episcopal” is derived - occurs
but four times in the New Testament. It is translated “visitation” in Luk_19:44, and in
1Pe_2:12; “bishoprick,” Acts . Act_1:20; and in this place “office of a bishop.” The verb
from which it is derived (ᅚπισκοπέω episkopeō), occurs but twice, In Heb_12:15, it is
rendered “looking diligently,” and in 1Pe_5:2, “taking the oversight.” The noun rendered
bishop occurs in Act_20:28; Phi_1:1; 1Ti_3:2; Tit_1:7; 1Pe_2:25. The verb means,
properly, to look upon, behold; to inspect, to look after, see to, take care of; and the noun
denotes the office of overseeing, inspecting, or looking to. It is used to denote the care of
the sick, Xeno. Oec. 15, 9; compare “Passow;” and is of so general a character that it may
denote any office of overseeing, or attending to. There is nothing in the word itself which
would limit it to any class or grade of the ministry, and it is, in fact, applied to nearly all
the officers of the church in the New Testament, and, indeed, to Christians who did not

sustain “any” office. Thus it is applied:
(a) To believers in general, directing them to “look diligently, lest anyone should fail of
the grace of God,” Heb_12:15;
(b) To the elders of the church at Ephesus, “over the which the Holy Ghost hath made
you overseers,” Act_20:28;
(c) To the elders or presbyters of the church in 1Pe_5:2, “Feed the flock of God, taking
the oversight thereof;
(d) To the officers of the church in Philippi, mentioned in connection with deacons as
the only officers of the church there, “to the saints at Philippi, with the bishops
and deacons,” Phi_1:1;
(e) To Judas, the apostate. Act_1:20; and,
(f) To the great Head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ, 1Pe_2:25, “the Shepherd
and Bishop of your souls.”
From this use of the term it follows:
(1) That the word is never used to designate the “uniqueness” of the apostolic office, or
so as to have any special applicability to the apostles. Indeed, the term “bishop” is
“never” applied to any of them in the New Testament; nor is the word in any of its
forms ever used with reference to them, except in the single case of “Judas,” Act_
1:20.
(2) It is never employed in the New Testament to designate an order of men superior
to presbyters, regarded as having any other functions than presbyters, or being in
any sense “successors” to the apostles. It is so used now by the advocates of
prelacy; but this is a use wholly unknown to the New Testament. It is so
undeniable that the name is never given in the New Testament to those who are
now called “bishops,” that even Episcopalians concede it. Thus, Dr. Onderdonk
(Tract on Episcopacy, p. 12) says, “All that we read in the New Testament
concerning ‘bishops’ is to be regarded as pertaining to the ‘middle grade;’ that is,
to those who are now regarded as ‘priests.’” This is not strictly correct, as is clear
from the remarks above respecting what is called the “middle grade;” but it is
strictly correct, so far as it affirms that it is “never” applied to prelates.
(3) It is used in the New Testament to denote ministers of the gospel who had the care
or oversight of the churches, without any regard to grade or rank.
(4) It has now, as used by Episcopalians, a sense which is wholly unauthorized by the
New Testament, and which, indeed, is entirely at variance with the usage there. To
apply the term to a pretended superior order of clergy, as designating their special
office, is wholly to depart from the use of the word as it occurs in the Bible.
(5) As it is never used in the Scriptures with reference to “prelates,” it “should” be used
with reference to the pastors, or other officers of the church; and to be a “pastor,”
or “overseer” of the flock of Christ, should be regarded as being a scriptural
bishop.
He desireth a good work - An honorable office; an office which it is right for a man
to desire. There are some stations in life which ought never to be desired; it is proper for
anyone to desire the office of a bishop who has the proper qualifications; compare notes
on Rom_11:13.
CLARKE, "This is a true saying - Πιστος ᆇ λογος· This is a true doctrine. These

words are joined to the last verse of the preceding chapter by several of the Greek
fathers, and by them referred to the doctrine there stated.
The office of a bishop - Επισκοπης· The episcopacy, overseership or
superintendency. The word ορεγεται, which we translate desire, signifies earnest, eager,
passionate desire; and επιθυµει, which we translate desire, also signifies earnestly to
desire or covet. It is strange that the episcopacy, in those times, should have been an
object of intense desire to any man; when it was a place of danger, awl exposure to
severe labor, want, persecution, and death, without any secular emolument whatsoever.
On this ground I am led to think that the Spirit of God designed these words more for
the ages that were to come, than for those which were then; and in reference to after ages
the whole of what follows is chiefly to be understood.
A good work - A work it then was; heavy, incessant, and painful. There were no
unpreaching prelates in those days, and should be none now. Episcopacy in the Church
of God is of Divine appointment, and should be maintained and respected. Under God,
there should be supreme governors in the Church as well as in the state. The state has its
monarch, the Church has its bishop; one should govern according to the laws of the
land, the other according to the word of God.
What a constitutional king should be, the principles of the constitution declare; what a
bishop should be, the following verses particularly show.
GILL, "This is a true saying,.... Some think this clause belongs to the last verse of the
preceding chapter; and then the sense is, this is a doctrine that is true, and to be
believed, that there is salvation through the birth of a Son, or through the incarnate Son
of God, for men and women that believe in him, and continue in the faith of him, and
love to him, joined with works of righteousness and holiness. And so the same phrase
seems to belong to what goes before in 1Ti_4:8. Though it regards what follows in 1Ti_
1:15 and so it seems that it should be considered here; and is used to excite attention,
and suggests that what was about to be said was of moment and importance, and what
was without controversy, and unquestionably true. The apostle, having denied to women
the work and office of teaching, proceeds to observe, that though this belonged to men,
yet not to every man; and therefore he gives the qualifications of such; which might
serve as a direction to churches, in the choice of them; as well as be a means of stirring
up persons in such an office, to a proper regard to themselves and their work:
if a man desire the office of a bishop; which is the same with that of a pastor or
elder; and so here the Syriac version renders it, "if a man desires presbytery, or
eldership"; and it lies in preaching the word, administering the ordinances of the Gospel,
and taking care of the discipline of the church, and in the visiting, inspection, and
oversight of it; as the word επισκοπη, "episcopacy", here used, signifies; and this work
and office may be lawfully and laudably desired, with a view to the glory of God, and the
good of immortal souls. Nor should any undertake it, but such who find in themselves an
hearty desire, and inclination to it, on such principles, and a real delight and pleasure in
it; and such an one
he desireth a good work: the office of a bishop, elder, or pastor of a church, "is a
work", and a very laborious one; wherefore such are called labourers in the word and
doctrine: it is not a mere title of honour, and a place of profit, but it is a business of

labour and care; yet a good one, a famous and excellent one; it being an employment in
things of the greatest excellency in themselves, and of the greatest usefulness for the
good of men, and the honour of God; as the doctrines, ordinances, and discipline of the
Gospel; and so must be excellently, honestly, pleasantly, and profitably a good work.
HE RY, 1-7, "The two epistles to Timothy, and that to Titus, contain a scripture-
plan of church-government, or a direction to ministers. Timothy, we suppose, was an
evangelist who was left at Ephesus, to take care of those whom the Holy Ghost had made
bishops there, that is, the presbyters, as appears by Act_20:28, where the care of the
church was committed to the presbyters, and they were called bishops. It seems they
were very loth to part with Paul, especially because he told them they should see his face
no more (Act_20:38); for their church was but newly planted, they were afraid of
undertaking the care of it, and therefore Paul left Timothy with them to set them in
order. And here we have the character of a gospel minister, whose office it is, as a
bishop, to preside in a particular congregation of Christians: If a man desires the office
of a bishop, he desires a good work, 1Ti_3:1. Observe,
I. The ministry is a work. However the office of a bishop may be now thought a good
preferment, then it was thought a good work. 1. The office of a scripture-bishop is an
office of divine appointment, and not of human invention. The ministry is not a creature
of the state, and it is a pity that the minister should be at any time the tool of the state.
The office of the ministry was in the church before the magistrate countenanced
Christianity, for this office is one of the great gifts Christ has bestowed on the church,
Eph_4:8-11. 2. This office of a Christian bishop is a work, which requires diligence and
application: the apostle represents it under the notion and character of a work; not of
great honour and advantage, for ministers should always look more to their work than to
the honour and advantage of their office. 3. It is a good work, a work of the greatest
importance, and designed for the greatest good: the ministry is conversant about no
lower concerns than the life and happiness of immortal souls; it is a good work, because
designed to illustrate the divine perfections in bringing many sons to glory; the ministry
is appointed to open men's eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the
power of Satan unto God, etc., Act_26:18. 4. There ought to be an earnest desire of the
office in those who would be put into it; if a man desire, he should earnestly desire it for
the prospect he has of bringing greater glory to God, and of doing the greatest good to
the souls of men by this means. This is the question proposed to those who offer
themselves to the ministry of the church of England: “Do you think you are moved by the
Holy Ghost to take upon you this office?”
II. In order to the discharge of this office, the doing of this work, the workman must be
qualified. 1. A minister must be blameless, he must not lie under any scandal; he must
give as little occasion for blame as can be, because this would be a prejudice to his
ministry and would reflect reproach upon his office. 2. He must be the husband of one
wife; not having given a bill of divorce to one, and then taken another, or not having
many wives at once, as at that time was too common both among Jews and Gentiles,
especially among the Gentiles. 3. He must be vigilant and watchful against Satan, that
subtle enemy; he must watch over himself, and the souls of those who are committed to
his charge, of whom having taken the oversight, he must improve all opportunities of
doing them good. A minister ought to be vigilant, because our adversary the devil goes
about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour, 1Pe_5:8. 4. He must be sober,
temperate, moderate in all his actions, and in the use of all creature-comforts. Sobriety
and watchfulness are often in scripture put together, because they mutually befriend one
another: Be sober, be vigilant. 5. He must be of good behaviour, composed and solid,

and not light, vain, and frothy. 6. He must be given to hospitality, open-handed to
strangers, and ready to entertain them according to his ability, as one who does not set
his heart upon the wealth of the world and who is a true lover of his brethren. 7. Apt to
teach. Therefore this is a preaching bishop whom Paul describes, one who is both able
and willing to communicate to others the knowledge which God has given him, one who
is fit to teach and ready to take all opportunities of giving instructions, who is himself
well instructed in the things of the kingdom of heaven, and is communicative of what he
knows to others. 8. No drunkard: Not given to wine. The priests were not to drink wine
when they went in to minister (Lev_10:8, Lev_10:9), lest they should drink and pervert
the law. 9. No striker; one who is not quarrelsome, nor apt to use violence to any, but
does every thing with mildness, love, and gentleness. The servant of the Lord must not
strive, but be gentle towards all, etc., 2Ti_2:24. 10. One who is not greedy of filthy lucre,
who does not make his ministry to truckle to any secular design or interest, who uses no
mean, base, sordid ways of getting money, who is dead to the wealth of this world, lives
above it, and makes it appear he is so. 11. He must be patient, and not a brawler, of a
mild disposition. Christ, the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls, is so. Not apt to be
angry or quarrelsome; as not a striker with his hands, so not a brawler with his tongue;
for how shall men teach others to govern their tongues who do not make conscience of
keeping them under good government themselves? 12. Not covetous. Covetousness is
bad in any, but it is worst in a minister, whose calling leads him to converse so much
with another world. 13. He must be one who keeps his family in good order: That rules
well his own house, that he may set a good example to other masters of families to do so
too, and that he may thereby give a proof of his ability to take care of the church of God:
For, if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church
of God. Observe, The families of ministers ought to be examples of good to all others
families. Ministers must have their children in subjection; then it is the duty of
ministers' children to submit to the instructions that are given them. - With all gravity.
The best way to keep inferiors in subjection, is to be grave with them. Not having his
children in subjection with all austerity, but with all gravity. 14. He must not be a novice,
not one newly brought to the Christian religion, or not one who is but meanly instructed
in it, who knows no more of religion than the surface of it, for such a one is apt to be
lifted up with pride: the more ignorant men are the more proud they are: Lest, being
lifted up with pride, he fall into the condemnation of the devil. The devils fell through
pride, which is a good reason why we should take heed of pride, because it is a sin that
turned angels into devils. 15. He must be of good reputation among his neighbours, and
under no reproach from former conversation; for the devil will make use of that to
ensnare others, and work in them an aversion to the doctrine of Christ preached by
those who have not had a good report.
III. Upon the whole, having briefly gone through the qualifications of a gospel-bishop,
we may infer, 1. What great reason we have to cry out, as Paul does, Who is sufficient for
these things? 2Co_2:16. Hic labor, hoc opus - This is a work indeed. What piety, what
prudence, what zeal, what courage, what faithfulness, what watchfulness over ourselves,
our lusts, appetites, and passions, and over those under our charge; I say, what holy
watchfulness is necessary in this work! 2. Have not the best qualified and the most
faithful and conscientious ministers just reason to complain against themselves, that so
much is requisite by way of qualification, and so much work is necessary to be done?
And, alas! how far short do the best come of what they should be and what they should
do! 3. Yet let those bless God, and be thankful, whom the Lord has enabled, and counted
faithful, putting them into the ministry: if God is pleased to make any in some degree
able and faithful, let him have the praise and glory of it. 4. For the encouragement of all
faithful ministers, we have Christ's gracious word of promise, Lo, I am with you always,

even unto the end of the world, Mat_28:20. And, if he be with us, he will fit us for our
work in some measure, will carry us through the difficulties of it with comfort, graciously
pardon our imperfections, and reward our faithfulness with a crown of glory that fadeth
not away, 1Pe_5:4.
JAMISO , "1Ti_3:1-16. Rules as to Bishops (Overseers) and Deacons. The church,
and the Gospel mystery now revealed to it, are the end of all such rules.
Translate as Greek, “Faithful is the saying.” A needful preface to what follows: for the
office of a bishop or overseer in Paul’s day, attended as it was with hardship and often
persecution, would not seem to the world generally a desirable and “good work.”
desire — literally, “stretch one’s self forward to grasp”; “aim at”: a distinct Greek verb
from that for “desireth.” What one does voluntarily is more esteemed than what he does
when asked (1Co_16:15). This is utterly distinct from ambitious desires after office in the
Church. (Jam_3:1).
bishop — overseer: as yet identical with “presbyter” (Act_20:17, Act_20:28; Tit_1:5-
7).
good work — literally, “honorable work.” Not the honor associated with it, but the
work, is the prominent thought (Act_15:38; Phi_2:30; compare 2Ti_4:5). He who aims
at the office must remember the high qualifications needed for the due discharge of its
functions.
RWP, "Faithful is the saying (pistos ho logos). Here the phrase points to the
preceding words (not like 1Ti_1:15) and should close the preceding paragraph.
If a man seeketh (ei tis oregetai). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Present
middle indicative of oregō, old verb to reach out after something, governing the genitive.
In N.T. only here, 1Ti_6:10; Heb_11:16.
The office of a bishop (episkopēs). Genitive case after oregetai. Late and rare word
outside of lxx and N.T. (in a Lycaonian inscription). From episkopeō and means “over-
seership” as in Act_1:20.
CALVI , "1It is a true saying Chrysostom thinks, that this is the conclusion of the
preceding doctrine. But I do not approve of the opinion; for Paul commonly makes
use of this form of expression as a prelude to what he is about to introduce, Besides,
in the former discourse there was no need of so strong an affirmation; but what he
is now about to say, is somewhat more weighty. Let these words, therefore, be
received as a preface intended to point out the importance of the subject; for Paul
now begins a new discourse about ordaining pastors, and appointing the
government of the Church.
If any one desireth the office of a bishop (46) Having forbidden women to teach, he
now takes occasion to speak of the office of a bishop. First, that it may be more
clearly seen that it was not without reason that he refused to allow women to
undertake so arduous a work; secondly, that it might not be thought that, by

excluding women only, he admitted all men indiscriminately; and, thirdly, because it
was highly proper that Timothy and others should be reminded what conscientious
watchfulness ought to be used in the election of bishops. Thus the context, in my
opinion, is as if Paul had said, that so far are women from being fit for undertaking
so excellent an office, that not even men ought to be admitted into it without
distinction.
He desireth an excellent work The Apostle affirms that this is no inconsiderable
work, such as any man might venture to undertake. When he says that it is καλός I
have no doubt that he alludes to the ancient Greek proverb, often quoted by Plato ,
δύσκολα τὰ καλά which means that “ things which are excellent, are also arduous
and difficult;” and thus he unites difficulty with excellence, or rather he argues
thus, that it does not belong to every person to discharge the office of a bishop,
because it is a thing of great value.
I think that Paul’ meaning is now sufficiently clear; though none of the
commentators, so far as I perceive, have understood it. The general meaning is, that
a selection ought to be made in admitting bishops, because it is a laborious and
difficult charge; and that they who aim at it should carefully consider with
themselves, whether or not they were able to bear so heavy a burden. Ignorance is
always rash; and a mature knowledge of things makes a man modest. How comes it
that they who have neither ability nor wisdom often aspire so confidently to hold the
reins of government, but because they rush forward with their eyes shut? On this
subject Quintilian remarked, that the ignorant speak boldly, while the greatest
orators tremble.
For the purpose of restraining such rashness in desiring the office of a bishop, Paul
states, first, that this is not an indolent rank, but a work; and next, that it is not any
kind of work, but excellent, and therefore toilsome and full of difficulty, as it
actually is. It is no light matter to be a representative of the Son of God, in
discharging an office of such magnitude, the object of which is to erect and extend
the kingdom of God, to procure the salvation of souls which the Lord himself hath
purchased with his own blood, and to govern the Church, which is God’ inheritance.
But it is not my intention at present to make a sermon, and Paul will again glance at
this subject in the next chapter.
Here a question arises: “ it lawful, in any way, to desire the office of a bishop?” On
the one hand, it appears to be highly improper for any one to anticipate, by his wish,
the calling of God, and yet Paul, while he censures a rash desire, seems to permit it
to be desired with prudence and modesty. I reply, if ambition is condemned in other
matters, much more severely ought it to be condemned in “ office of a bishop.” But
Paul speaks of a godly desire, by which holy men wish to employ that knowledge of
doctrine which they possess for the edification of the Church. For, if it were
altogether unlawful to desire the office of a teacher, why should they who spend all
their youth in reading the Holy Scriptures prepare themselves by learning? What
are the theological schools but nurseries of pastors?

Accordingly, they who have been thus instructed not only may lawfully devote
themselves and their labors to God by a voluntary offering, but even ought to do so,
and that too, before they have been admitted unto the office; provided that,
nevertheless, they do not thrust themselves forward, and do not, even by their own
wish, make themselves bishops, but are only ready to discharge the office, if their
labors shall be required. And if it turn out that, according to the lawful order; they
are not called, let them know that such was the will of God, and let them not take it
in that others have been preferred to them. But they who, without any selfish
motive, shall have no other wish than to serve God and the Church, will be affected
in this manner; and, at the same time, will have such modesty that they will not be at
all envious, if others be preferred to them as being more worthy.
If any one object, that the government of the Church is a matter of so great
difficulty, that it ought rather to strike terror into the minds of persons of sound
judgment than to excite them to desire it. I reply, that the desire of great men does
not rest on confidence of their own industry or virtue, but on the assistance of
“ from whom is our sufficiency,”
as Paul says elsewhere. (2Co_3:5.) At the same time, it is necessary to observe what
it is that Paul calls “ office of a bishop;” and so much the more, because the ancients
were led away, by the custom of their times, from the true meaning; for, while Paul
includes generally all pastors, they understand a bishop to be one who was elected
out of each college to preside over his brethren. Let us remember, therefore, that
this word is of the same import as if he had called them ministers, or pastors, or
presbyters. (47)
(46) “Ou, Si aucun a affection d’ evesque.” — “ If any one hath a desire to be a
bishop.”
(47) “ us know that the Holy Spirit, speaking of those who are ordained ministers of
the word of God, and who are elected to govern the Church, calls them Pastors. And
why? Because God wishes us to be a flock of sheep, to be guided by him, hearing his
voice, following his guidance, and living peaceably. Since, therefore the Church is
compared to a flock, they who have the charge of guiding the Church by the word of
God are called Pastors. And next, the word Pastor means Elder not by age, but by of
office: as, at all times, they who govern have been called Elders, even among
heathen nations. ow the Holy Spirit has retained this metaphor, giving the name
Elder to those who are chosen to proclaim the word of God. He likewise calls them
Bishops, that is persons who watch over the flock to show that it is not a rank
unaccompanied by active exertion, when a man is called to that office, and that he
must not make an idol of it, but must know that he is sent to obtain the salvation of
souls, and must be employed, and watch, and labor, for that purpose. We see then
the reason of these words; and since the Holy Spirit hath given them to us, we must
retain them, provided that they be applied to a good and holy use.” — Fr. Ser.

BURKITT, "Observe here, 1. Our apostle acquaints Timothy with the dignity,
honour, and excellency of the sacred function: He that desireth the office of a
bishop, that is, to rule and teach in the church of God, he desireth a good work, that
is, honourable employment.
As if our apostle had said, "Know, O Timothy, that as to the office of a bishop,
whoever desireth it, doth desire a very great and excellent work; it is not a bare
name, title, dignity, a place of honour and command; but a work, a work of vast
importance, labour, and difficulty: take heed therefore whom thou dost admit, and
of those that are also admitted into the sacred function, to consider the great weight
of that important service, to enterprize it with extraordinary dread and caution,
looking upon their office not with aspiring but tremendous thoughts:--for who is
sufficient for these things?
ISBET, "‘The office of a bishop.’
1Ti_3:1
There are, and have been from the earliest times, three Orders in the ministry. St.
Paul in this chapter describes the qualifications for the office first of a bishop, and
then of the general body of the clergy, for the reference in 1Ti_3:8 must be taken in
its wider aspect and applied to priests as well as to deacons. A few thoughts on the
episcopal office as we understand it to-day.
I. The antiquity of the episcopal office.—It is apostolic, and in the Church of
England we trace our succession right back to apostolic times.
II. The making of a modern bishop.—The greatest care is taken. The Prime
Minister (representing the laity) nominates a qualified clergyman to the Crown; the
Crown nominates that clergyman to the Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral
(representing the clergy) for election; if he is elected, the election has to be
‘confirmed’ in a public court at which objectors may appear. In recent years there
has been much dispute as to what are valid grounds of objection, and attempts have
been made—but most wisely overruled—to object to bishops-elect on ritual
grounds. It is not necessary to discuss what might be grounds of objection; these
must be left to the proper authority to decide. But the point to bear in mind is the
care with which the Church guards the office of a bishop, as shown in the successive
steps from the time of nomination to consecration.
III. Consecration to the episcopal office.—When the election of a bishop-elect is
confirmed, but not till then, the archbishop proceeds to the consecration. Very
solemn is the service; the act of consecration is performed by the laying-on of hands,
the bishop-elect kneeling before the archbishop, and the archbishop and the bishops
assisting—sometimes a dozen in number—all laying their hands upon the head of

the bishop-elect as the archbishop recites the solemn words, ‘Receive the Holy Ghost
for the Office and Work of a Bishop in the Church of God,’ etc. What that work is is
shown in the questions put to the bishop-elect before the act of consecration. [Refer
to Consecration Service, and explain in detail the questions put in the examination
by the archbishop.]
PULPIT, "Faithful is the saying for this is a true saying, A.V.; seeketh for desire,
A.V. Faithful is the saying (see above, 1Ti_1:15, note). This manifestly refers to what
follows, not, as Chrysostom and others, and margin of the R.V., to the saying which
precedes, in 1Ti_2:15. Seeketh ( ὀρέγεται ); literally, stretches out his hands after. It
is peculiar in the ew Testament to the pastoral Epistles and the Epistle to the
Hebrews, though common in classical Greek (see 1Ti_6:10; Heb_11:16). The noun
ὔρεξις , appetite, desire (which is found several times in the LXX.), is used once by
St. Paul (Rom_1:27). The office of a bishop; meaning here, as everywhere else in
Scripture, that of a presbyter, or priest. Ἐπισκοπή , in the sense of "the episcopate,"
occurs only here and Act_1:20, where it is rendered "bishopric" in the A.V., and
"overseer-ship" in the margin of the R.V., being the translation in the LXX. of Psa_
108:1-13. (109., A.V.) of the Hebrew åÉúãÈ÷ËóÀ , "his office." Elsewhere (Luk_
19:44; 1Pe_2:12; 1Pe_5:6) it means "visitation." But ἐπίσκοπος , "bishop" (Psa_
108:2)—except in 1Pe_2:25, where it is applied to Christ—always means the
overseer of the particular flock,—the presbyter (Act_20:28; Php_1:1; Tit_1:7); and
ἐπισκοπεῖν the functions of such ἐπίσκοπος (1Pe_5:2 compared with 1). It was not
till the sub-apostolic age that the name of ἐπίσκοπος was confined to the chief
overseer who had "priests and deacons" under him, as Timothy and Titus had.
Possibly this application of the word arose from the visits of the apostles, and
afterwards of men sent by the apostles, as Timothy and Titus, Tychicus and
Artemas, were, to visit the Churches, being occasional and temporary only, as those
of Visitors. For such occasional visitation is implied in the verb ἐπισκέπτεσθαι
(Mat_25:36, Mat_25:43; Luk_1:68, Luk_1:78; Act_7:23; Act_15:36; Jas_1:27).
Afterwards, when the wants of the Churches required permanent oversight, the
name ἐπίσκοπος —vescovo (It.), eueque (Fr.), bischof (Get.), bisceop (A.S.),
aipiskaupus (Moeso-Goth.), etc.—became universal for the chief overseer of the
Church. A good work ( καλοῦ ἔργου , not ἀγαθοῦ , as verse 10). Καλού means
"honourable," "becoming," "beneficial," and the like.
BI 1-7, "The office of a bishop.
The office of a bishop a good work
If a man desire the office of a bishop from right principles, he desireth.
not a secular dignity--not a good benefice--not a post of honour or profit--not an
easy idle life--but he desireth a work; a good work indeed it is: but still it is a work.

I. It may properly be called a work, if we consider the duties of the office, which
require the utmost assiduity, and some of which are peculiarly painful and
laborious.
II. It is a good work, whether you consider, for whom, with whom, or for what you
work. The ministers of the gospel work for God, who is carrying on the grand
scheme of salvation in our world. His immediate service is the peculiar business of
their lives. Ministers also work for Jesus Christ. It was He that originally gave them
their commission; it was He that assigned them their work; it is He that is interested
in their success. Again, the ministers of the gospel work for the souls of men. To do
good to mankind is the great purpose of their office. Let us next consider with whom
the ministers of the gospel work; and we shall see how good their employment is.
“They are workers together with God.” (2Co_6:1). They are also co-workers with
Jesus Christ, promoting the same cause for which He became man; for which He
lived the life of a servant, and died the death of a malefactor and a slave. They may
also be called fellow-workers with the Holy Spirit, whose great office it is to sanctify
depraved creatures, and prepare them for the refined happiness of heaven. They
also act in concert with angels; for what are these glorious creatures but
“ministering spirits sent forth to minister to them that shall be heirs of salvation”?
(Heb_1:14). An angel once condescended to call a minister of the gospel his fellow-
servant (Rev_19:10). Ministers also are engaged in that work in which the apostles
went before them. The office of a bishop will farther appear a good work, if it be
considered for what it is that ministers work. They do not indeed work for a reward
upon the footing of personal merit; but they hope for it on the plan of the gospel,
through Jesus Christ. In this view, like Moses, they have “a respect to the
recompense of reward” (Heb_11:26). And thus it appears, their laborious and
painful work is good--good in itself, good for the world, and good for themselves. (S.
Davies, M. A.)
The ideal minister
The apostle who most boldly maintained the brotherhood of believers clearly
recognized the necessity for order and office in Christian communities.
I. The moral characteristics of the ideal pastor are strongly insisted upon. Strangely
enough, nothing is said about his piety, his love to God, his communion with Him,
his delight in Him, his devotion to Him; but this is naturally presupposed as the
basis of the rest. It is not alluded to here, partly because Timothy did not require to

be reminded that personal religion is the first essential in all spiritual work, and
partly because he was less able to judge of inward piety in others than of the
qualities mentioned here.
1. Self-rule is one of the principal of these, and it is to display itself in all directions.
The bishop is to be sober, exercising habitual self-restraint, not only in respect of
intoxicating drinks, but also in respect of indulgence in pleasures of all kinds, setting
an example of dominion over the carnal and sensuous. But temper is to be as much
under control as other passions, for the Christian teacher must be no “brawler,” no
striker, “but patient.”
2. Again, sound judgment is a qualification much needed by every pastor and
teacher. This is no doubt one reason of Paul’s for urging on Timothy, as he does in
the sixth verse, that a pastor in the Church should not be a “novice,” i.e., a recent
convert. If the young life of a plant be exposed to the glare of the sunshine, death
will supervene. And in the life of every creature--insect, and bird, and beast, and
most of all in the life of man--the period of development must precede the period of
manifestation.
3. Another characteristic of the ideal minister should be open-heartedness and open-
handedness. The phrase “given to hospitality” in Authorized Version, or more
correctly “a lover of strangers,” denotes what was relatively more important then
than now.
II. The relations of the minister to those around him, his right relation with God
being pre-supposed.
1. He is to be the husband of one wife.
2. Then allusion is made to the pastor’s own house as distinguished from God’s
house. So it is urged that any leader in the Church should rule well his own house,
having his children in subjection with all gravity. On which Dr. Reynolds has
beautifully said, “The child-life of the pastor’s home should suggest the sacred ness
of a temple and the order of a palace.” And is not this true for us all? Is it not in the
home that we are the most tested, and is it not there we can best glorify God?
3. The relation the pastor should hold towards the world. Much stress is laid in this
passage on being “blameless,” and having “a good report of them that are
without”--those, namely, who are outside the kingdom of Christ. We cannot afford,
as Christ’s representatives, to defy the world’s opinion about us so far as moral
reputation is concerned. The world is a poor judge of doctrine, of motive, and of
religious hopes and thoughts; but it is a keen and on the whole an accurate judge of
character; and when the members and leaders of the Church are recognized by the
world as honest, sincere, trusty, pure men and women, Christ will win the day
against His foes. (A. Rowland, LL. B.)

Preference for the ministry
A remarkable avowal of the late Senator John A. Logan is reported by a clergyman
in a letter to us. He says that in talking with the senator not long before his death,
Logan said: “I have often thought that I would like to be in the ministry.” I replied:
“To have done that, general, you must have surrendered many ambitions.” “That,”
was his noble reply--“that would be nothing. The end will soon come, and these
things will then be seen to be worthless.” I was convinced of his transparent honesty
when he uttered these words, and am of opinion that he simply spoke as he believed
and felt. (Philadelphia Press.)
The dignity of the Christian ministry
Moreover, if we weigh all things in the balances of justice, we shall see that there is
no king, whatever may be the pomp that surrounds him, who as a king is not in
dignity below, I will not say a bishop only, but even a simple village pastor, regarded
as a pastor. We have only, in order to realize the fact, to cast our eyes on the
functions of the pastor and of the king respectively. What do the labours of princes
regard? Is it not that evil-doers may be kept down by the vigilance of the law, and
that the good may not be disturbed? That is to say, so to act that the persons and
property of the citizens of the state shall be in safety? But how much more excellent
is the aim of the minister of the gospel, who desires to establish in each individual
soul the serenest tranquility by quieting and subduing the lusts of the world! The
king’s labours are intended to secure that the state shall live at peace with its
neighbours; the priest’s aim is that every one may be at peace with God, that each
may possess peace within, and that no one may have it in his heart to injure another.
The prince designs to protect the house, lands, and cattle of particular persons from
the violence of depredators. But what does the priest design? To defend the
property of the souls entrusted to him, their faith, their charity, their temperance,
their purity against the assaults of the devil; property which confers happiness on
those who possess it, and the loss of which plunges them into the direst misfortune...
In one word, all that comes under the management of the prince is earthly and
transient; but that which occupies the pastor is divine, celestial, eternal. And,
therefore, as much difference as there is between the heaven and the earth, between
the body and the soul, between temporal goods and eternal possessions, so much
difference is there between the functions committed to the king and the trust
devolved on the priest. (Erasmus.)
A well-governed family

When there is to be a real order and law in the house, it will come of no hard and
boisterous or fretful and termagant way of command. Gentleness will speak the
word of firmness, and firmness will be clothed in the airs of true gentleness. How
many do we see who fairly rave in authority, and keep the tempest up from morning
till night, who never stop to see whether anything they forbid or command is in fact
observed! Indeed, they really forget what they have commanded. Their mandates
follow so thickly as to crowd one another, and even to successively thrust one
another out of remembrance. The result is, that by this cannonading of pop-guns,
the successive pellets of command ment are in turn all blown away. If anything is fit
to be forbidden or commanded, it is fit to be watched and held in faithful account.
On this it is that the real emphasis of authority depends, not on the windstress of the
utterance. Let there be only such and so many things commanded as can be
faithfully attended to; these in a gentle and film voice, as if their title to obedience
lay in their own merit; and then let the child be held to a perfectly inevitable and
faithful account; and by that time it will be seen that order and law have a stress of
their own, and a power to rule in their own divine right. The beauty of a well-
governed family will be seen in this manner to be a kind of silent, natural-looking
power, as if it were a matter only of growth, and could never have been otherwise.
(Horace Bushnell.)
Luther and his children
Luther used to teach his children to read the Bible in the following way. First, to
read through one book carefully, then to study chapter by chapter, and then verse
by verse, and lastly word by word, for, he said, “It is like a person shaking a fruit
tree. First shaking the tree and gathering up the fruit which falls to the ground, and
then shaking each branch and afterwards each twig of the branch, and last of all
looking carefully under each leaf to see that no fruit remains. In this way, and in no
other, shall we also find the hidden treasures that are in the Bible.” (J. Stewart.)
A minister above the love of money
A little while ago, in Calcutta, a native, a Christian merchant, was deeply interested
in a community of “outcasts,” and he made an offer of £60 a-year to any native
Christian who would go and live among these people, and teach them the Word of
Life. The offer had no sooner been made than a candidate for the office appeared.
Who was he? As humble and devoted and consistent a Christian as you ever met. He
was a professor in a missionary college, M.A. and LL.B. of the Calcutta University,
and drawing a salary of £200 a year. Such was the candidate for this office of £60 a
year! (Christian Herald.)

A liberal bishop
Bishop Baring’s generosity and munificence were unbounded. One instance may be
given out of many. He was spending the Sunday with a vicar blessed with very
moderate means and a large family. His lordship noticed the pale faces of the
children, and said to their mother, “You must take these little ones to the seaside,
and their father, too, must have a complete rest. I will provide his duty for six
weeks.” The good lady wondered where she was to find the wherewithal to carry out
this excel lent scheme. As the bishop, however, shook hands with her on leaving he
put a £50 note into her hand in the kindest way, and solved the difficulty. It is not,
however, every one who has such hereditary wealth as the late Bishop of Durham.
(Christian Herald.)
Ministers not contentious
(Revised Version):--How a soft answer can turn away wrath, as well as
dissatisfaction, is illustrated in the following anecdote of the late President Wayland.
Deacon Moses Pond went to Dr. Wayland once with the complaint that the
preaching did not edify him. “I’m sorry,” said the pastor; “I know they are poor
sermons. I wish I could make them better. Come, let us pray that I may be able to do
so.” The deacon, telling the story, used to say, “Dr. Wayland prayed and I prayed;
he cried and I cried. But I have thought a hundred times that it was strange that he
did not turn me out of the house. I tell you there never was a better man nor a
greater preacher than Dr. Wayland.” (W. Baxendale.)
Apt to teach.--
The pulpit a light and Tower
These three words are but one in the Greek. Ignorance is the inheritance of our fall
in Eden. The grand work of the ministry of Christ is to illuminate the darkened
mind. There is a fire that does not give light, and a cold phosphorescent flame that
yields no heat. Our teaching, while it dispels the darkness of sin, must shed its
beams to warm the frozen virtues into life.
1. To meet the claims of a good teacher one must he willing to learn. The apostles,
dropping their nets and other worldly craft, went to a school of the prophets, such
as never before or since existed on earth. Its sole instructor was the Great Teacher,
the Creator of all things. They learned wisdom without a book from the source of all
knowledge.
2. If we would be apt to teach, we must have a lesson to impart.

3. To be apt to teach, one must be master of the lesson he would impart.
4. To be apt to teach, a sacred enthusiasm is indispensable.
5. To be apt to teach under the wings of the Eternal Spirit, Holy Dove, we must
gather strength and success by prayer.
6. Apt to teach, finally, has the element of faith. (W. H. Van Doren.)
Take care of the Church of God.
Pastoral care
Observe the sacred charge committed to God’s appointed bishops, or shepherds, or
pastors. I should, first of all, insist that Christ’s pastors, who take care of the
Church committed to their charge are to take care of their food--that they shall have
nothing to eat but what is pure and wholesome. That in the care which God’s
servants have to take of the Church committed to their charge, they have to nourish
three descriptions of character, or three classes of the family specified in Scripture--
as babes, young men, and fathers. This care taken of the Church must be with all
tenderness, but with all firmness, and under the consciousness of responsibility. It
must be with all tenderness. We must be gentle, as the apostle says, “even as a nurse
cherisheth her children; and because we were desirous of your welfare, we were
ready to impart unto you our own souls, because ye were dear to our souls.” But we
are not only to use tenderness--“in meekness instructing those that oppose
themselves”--towards the lambs, the weak lings, the little ones; but we must use all
firmness. Moreover, if we would fake care of the Church of God, it must be by
keeping our hearts and thoughts fixed on our responsibility. (J. Irons.)
ot a novice.--
Vanity in preachers
I. Young preachers are especially subject to such vanity. It is the novice that is liable
to be “lifted up with pride.”
1. The young are naturally disposed to over-rate their abilities.
2. They are peculiarly susceptible to adulation. The more unenlightened and
unreflective men are, the more they are given to flattery.

II. The devil’s destiny must follow such vanity. “Fall into the condemnation of the
devil.” (The Homilist.)
Ministerial pride rebuked
An aged Scotch divine had occasionally to avail himself of the assistance of
probationers. One day, a young man, very vain of his accomplishments as a
preacher, officiated, and on descending from the desk, was met by the old gentleman
with extended hands, and expecting high praise, he said, “ o compliments, I pray.”
“ a, na, ha, my young friend,” said the parson, “nowadays I’m glad o’ onybody.”
Rowland Hill on ministerial work:-- o man ever had stronger views than Mr.
Rowland Hill of the true nature of the ministerial work, and of the necessity of a
humble dependence on the Lord’s assistance for a blessing in it. One of his remarks
was, “If favoured at any time with what is called a good opportunity, I am too apt to
find myself saying, ‘Well done!,’ when I should lie in the dust, and give God all the
glory.” Another was, “Lord, make me distrustful of myself, that I may confide in
Thee alone; self dependence is the Pharisee’s high road to destruction.” He was
accustomed strongly to urge on all who entered the sacred office the necessity of
maintaining Christian and heavenly tempers among their people. “Some folks,” he
would say, “appear as if they had been bathed in crab verjuice in their infancy,
which penetrated through their skins, and has made them sour-blooded ever since;
but this will not do for a messenger of the gospel; as he bears a message, so he must
manifest a spirit of love.” He used to like Dr. Ryland’s advice to his young
academicians--“Mind, no sermon is of any value, or likely to be useful, which has
not the three R’s in it,--Ruin by the Fall, Redemption by Christ, Regeneration by the
Holy Spirit.” Of himself he remarked, “My aim in every sermon is a stout and lusty
call to sinners, to quicken the saints, and to be made a universal blessing to all.” It
was a favourite saying with him, “The nearer we live to God, the better we are
enabled to serve Him. Oh how I hate my own noise, when I have nothing to make a
noise about! Heavenly wisdom creates heavenly utterance.” In a letter to Mr. Jones,
he observes, “There is something in preaching the gospel, with the Holy Ghost sent
down from heaven, I long to get at. At times I think I feel somewhat like it, and then
I bawl almost as bad as the Welshman. If we deal with Divine realities, we ought to
feel them such, and the people will in general feel with us, and acknowledge the
power that does wonders on the earth; while dry, formal, discussional preaching
leaves the hearers just where it found them. Still, they who are thus favoured had
need to be favoured with a deal of humility. We are too apt to be proud of that
which is not our own. Oh humility, humility, humility!” It is no wonder, with such
impressions as to the nature of his work, and the state of his mind, that Mr.
Rowland Hill’s preaching was so honoured and blessed of God. “Lord, help!” was
his constant and earnest prayer, and it was heard. (Scottish Christian Herald.)

Humility in ministers
The Rev. George Gilfillan, who died in 1877, was not only an author of some
distinction, but a wit. A congregation to whom he had been preaching presented
him, when a probationer, with a suit of clothes; and after he had put them on, the
old ones were tied up in a bundle. “Where shall I send them?” said the tailor. “I will
take them myself,” said Mr. Gilfillan; “I have carried them too long upon my back
to be ashamed of carrying them under my arm.” There was no false pride about
him. He gave due honour to old friends. (Christian Herald.)
Ministerial pride rebuked
The American religious journal, the Independent, relates the following story of
rebuked vanity, which was told recently in a gathering of ministers, by the Rev. Dr.
Gould, of Worcester. “A certain Rev. Samuel Smith had been discoursing very
learnedly and loftily, and was now walking home with his brother, eagerly waiting
for some word of commendation. ot finding it forthcoming, he dropped a slender
oblique hint, to see what could be drawn out. He was somewhat startled and
shocked by the outburst: “I tell you, Sam, what it is. Instead of preaching “Jesus
Christ and Him crucified,” you seem to have been preaching Samuel Smith and him
dignified.” How necessary it is for preachers of the gospel to hide themselves in the
shadow of Christ’s Cross, and to forget themselves in the majesty of the message
which they deliver.
I. A minister of good report:--About thirty years ago the present Bishop of
Minnesota went to Chicago, and built a church near the business centre of the city.
In those days there were no street cars, and it happened that the reverend
gentleman took up his residence in West Chicago, convenient to an omnibus line. It
frequently occurred that the omnibus would be crowded, and many obliged to take
“deck passage.” The writer was riding on the seat with the driver one Saturday
night, when the conversation turned upon Sunday labour and the consistency of
professed Christians, the driver thinking it rather hard that he should be obliged to
labour on Sunday, while others should take their rest. It appeared from his
conversation that his faith in Christianity was rather weak; but turning to me he
said, with considerable emphasis, “There is one clergyman whom I respect and
believe to be a consistent Christian.” Being a little curious to know who the
clergyman was, and upon what evidence he had based his opinion, I asked him for
an explanation. “Well,” said he, “there is the Rev. Mr. Whipple, who built that
church down town; he has a free pass over this line, but walks down and back on
Sundays rather than compromise his Christianity; that proves to me that he is a
consistent Christian.” It sometimes occurs that a clergyman’s most eloquent sermon
is being preached when he least expects it; and any private Christian may preach

the same kind of sermon. (Christian Age.)
The causes and remedies of pride
You can hardly fail to perceive that this reasoning of St. Paul’s proceeds on the
supposition that they who know but little are most in danger of pride. It is just
because man is a novice that he is likely to be lifted up. Is it not a confessed and
well-known fact that the arrogant and conceited person is ordinarily the superficial
and the ignorant? You will hardly ever find the man of real power and great
acquirement other than a simple and unaffected man. It would scarcely ever lead
you to a false estimate of persons, were you to take it as a rule, that where there is
the manifestation of conceit, there is shallowness of intellect. And why is this, but
because he who knows most is most conscious how little he knows? Can he be vain
of his mental power who, having applied it to the investigation of truth, has
discovered little more than that truth would exhaust power a thousand-fold greater?
Can he be proud of his scientific progress who, having laboured long and hard,
finds himself only a beginner, so vast are the spreadings which lie dimly beyond?
Oh! it is not, and it never will be, the man of experience who shows himself haughty
and conceited. We have thus taken the case generally of a novice in knowledge, as it
helps to place under a clearer point of view the gist of St. Paul’s argument--namely,
that ignorance is the great parent of pride. But we will now confine ourselves to
such particular branches of life as must have been referred to by the apostle, when
he penned the direction for the exclusion of a novice; and forasmuch as it is the
novice in Christian doctrine of which he speaks, we shall perhaps thoroughly
compass his argument if we give our attention to knowledge of ourselves, in the two
grand respects of our state by nature and our state by grace. Of all knowledge there
is confessedly none which is either more valuable in itself, or more difficult of
attainment, than self-knowledge; none more valuable, for a man has an
immeasurably greater interest or deeper stake in himself than in the whole
surrounding universe; none more difficult of attainment, for we have it on the
authority of the Bible itself, that none but a Divine Being can search the human
heart. And if we were not able to show of all knowledge whatsoever that it is a
corrective of pride, or at least reads such lessons to each, as to his incompetence and
insignificance, as leaves him inexcusable if he be not humble, we should have no
difficulty in doing this in regard to self-knowledge. Let it be, if you will, that the
study of stars in their courses might tend to give a man high thoughts of himself;
for, indeed, till you look closely into the matter, there is something ennobling--
something that seems to excuse, if not to form, a lofty estimate of power--when, with
daring tread, the astronomer pursues the heavenly bodies into untravelled regions,
tracking their wanderings and counting their revolutions; but in regard, at all
events, of self-knowledge, there can be no difficulty in showing to any one who will
hearken that pride can subsist only where this knowledge is deficient. If we consider
man in his natural condition, how could any one be proud who thoroughly knew
that condition? Self-knowledge--knowledge of the body--as appointed to all the
disorders of the grave, would be the most effectual corrective to the self-

complacency, of which beauty is the food. Who, again, could be proud of rank,
puffed up because of some petty elevation above his fellow-men, who was deeply
aware of his own position as an accountable creature? Who, once more, could be
proud of his intellectual strength, of his wit, his wisdom, his elocution, who knew the
height from which he had fallen--and saw in himself but the fragments--we had
almost said the rubbish--of what God designed and created him to be? Indeed, you
have here in the general the grand corrective to pride. Men have but to know
themselves as fallen and depraved creatures, and we might almost venture to say
that they could not be proud. But we have spoken of self-knowledge as though it
were knowledge of man in regard only of his natural condition. We must, however,
consider him as a redeemed being, and not merely as a fallen; for possibly, though
knowledge of him in his ruined state be the corrective of pride, it may not be the
same with knowledge of him in his restored state. Yes, a slight knowledge of the
gospel, so far from generating humility, may even tend to the fostering pride. There
is such an opposition between man ruined and man redeemed, if in the one state he
may be exhibited as loathsome and worthless, in the other he may be thought of
some such importance as ransomed by Christ whilst angels were left to perish, that
it is hard to avoid on first hearing of the gospel, feeling that, after all, our
degradation must have been exaggerated and our insignificance overdrawn. Thus
the novice is once more in danger of being lifted up with pride. As the novice in that
knowledge which has to do with man fallen, so the novice in that knowledge which
has to do with man redeemed, is liable, through his knowing but little, to the
thinking more highly of himself than he ought. And will not the danger diminish as
the gospel is more thoroughly studied and understood? Yes, indeed; for what were it
but the worst libel on the system of Christianity to suppose it not adapted to the
producing humility? And if to this argument for humility, which is interwoven with
the whole texture of the gospel, you add the constant denunciations of that gospel
against pride--its solemn demands of lowliness of mind as essential to all who would
inherit the kingdom of God--you will readily see that the further a man goes in
acquaintance with the gospel, the more motives will he have to the abasing himself
before God. Redemption as a scheme of wonders into which the very angels desire to
look, may kindle in him a dream of his importance; but redemption as emanating
from free grace, will convict him of his nothingness; and redemption as requiring
from him the mind which was also in Christ, will cover him with confusion. And
thus we reach the same conclusion, when we examine self-knowledge in regard to
our condition as redeemed, as we reach when we examine it in regard of our
condition as fallen. It is the novice who is in most danger of pride; it is his being a
novice which exposes him to danger. (H. Melvill, B. D.)
EXPOSITORS BIBLE 1-10, "ORIGI OF THE CHRISTIA MI ISTRY;
VARIOUS CERTAI TIES A D PROBABILITIES DISTI GUISHED. - 1Ti_3:1-
10
THIS passage is one of the most important in the ew Testament respecting the

Christian ministry; and in the Pastoral Epistles it does not stand alone. Of the two
classes of ministers mentioned here, one is again touched upon in the Epistle to
Titus, {Tit_1:5-9} and the qualifications for this office, which is evidently the
superior of the two, are stated in terms not very different from those which are used
in the passage before us. Therefore a series of expositions upon the Pastoral Epistles
would be culpably incomplete which did not attempt to arrive at some conclusions
respecting the question of the primitive Christian ministry; a question which at the
present time is being investigated with immense industry and interest, and with
some clear and substantial results. The time is probably far distant when the last
word will have been said upon the subject; for it is one on which considerable
difference of opinion is not only possible but reasonable: and those persons would
seem to be least worthy of consideration, who are most confident that they are in
possession of the whole truth on the subject. One of the first requisites in the
examination of questions of fact is a power of accurately distinguishing what is
certain from what is not certain: and the person who is confident that he has
attained to certainty, when the evidence in his possession does not at all warrant
certainty, is not a trustworthy guide.
It would be impossible in a discussion of moderate length to touch upon all the
points which have been raised in connection with this problem; but some service will
have been rendered if a few of the more important features of the question are
pointed out and classified under the two heads just indicated, as certain or not
certain. In any scientific enquiry, whether historical or experimental, this
classification is a useful one, and very often leads to the enlargement of the class of
certainties. When the group of certainties has been properly investigated, and when
the various items have been placed in their proper relations to one another and to
the whole of which they are only constituent parts, the result is likely to be a
transfer of other items from the domain of what is only probable or possible to the
domain of what is certain.
At the outset it is necessary to place a word of caution as to what is meant, in a
question of this kind, by certainty. There are no limits to skepticism, as the history
of speculative philosophy has abundantly shown. It is possible to question one’s own
existence, and still more possible to question the irresistible evidence of one’s senses
or the irresistible conclusions of one’s reason. A fortiori it is possible to throw doubt
upon any historical fact. We can, if we like, classify the assassinations of Julius
Caesar and of Cicero, and the genuineness of the Aeneid and of the Epistles to the
Corinthians, among things that are not certain. They cannot be demonstrated like a
proposition in Euclid or an experiment in chemistry or physics. But a skeptical
criticism of this kind makes history impossible; for it demands as a condition of
certainty a kind of evidence, and an amount of evidence, which from the nature of
the case is unattainable. Juries are directed by the courts to treat evidence as
adequate, which they would he willing to recognize as such in matters of very

serious moment to themselves. There is a certain amount of evidence which to a
person of trained and well-balanced mind makes a thing "practically certain": i.e.,
with this amount of evidence before him he would confidently act on the assumption
that the thing was true.
In the question before us there are four or five things which may with great reason
be treated as practically certain.
1. The solution of the question as to the origin of the Christian ministry has no
practical bearing upon the lives of Christians. For us the problem is one of historical
interest without moral import. As students of Church History we are bound to
investigate the origins of the ministry which has been one of the chief factors in that
history: but our loyalty as members of the Church will not be affected by the result
of our investigations. Our duty towards the constitution consisting of bishops,
priests, and deacons, which existed unchallenged from the close of the second
century to the close of the Middle Ages, and which has existed down to the present
day in all the three great branches of the Catholic Church, Roman, Oriental, and
Anglican, is no way affected by the question whether the constitution of the Church
during the century which separates the writings of St. John from the writings of his
disciple’s disciple, Irenaeus, was as a rule Episcopal, collegiate, or Presbyterian. For
a churchman who accepts the Episcopal form of government as essential to the well-
being of a Church, the enormous prescription which that form has acquired during
at least seventeen centuries, is such ample justification, that he can afford to be
serene as to the outcome of enquiries respecting the constitution of the
2. various infant Churches from A.D. 85 to A.D. 185. It makes no practical
difference either to add, or not to add, to an authority which is already ample. To
prove that the Episcopal form of government was founded by the Apostles may have
been a matter of great practical importance in the middle of the second century.
But, before that century had closed, the practical question, if there ever was one,
had settled itself. God’s providence ordained that the universal form of Church
government should be the Episcopal form and should continue to be such; and for
us it adds little to its authority to know that the way in which it became universal
was through the instrumentality and influence of Apostles. On the other hand, to
prove that episcopacy was established independently of Apostolic influence would
detract very little from its accumulated authority.
A second point, which may be regarded as certain with regard to this question, is,
that for the period which joins the age of Irenaeus to the age of St. John, we have

not sufficient evidence to arrive at anything like proof. The evidence has received
important additions during the present century, and still more important additions
are by no means impossible; but at present our materials are still inadequate. And
the evidence is insufficient in two ways. First, although surprisingly large as
compared with what might have been reasonably expected, yet in itself, the
literature of this period is fragmentary and scanty. Secondly, the dates of some of
the most important witnesses cannot as yet be accurately determined. In many cases
to be able to fix the date of a document within twenty or thirty years is quite
sufficient: but this is a case in which the difference of twenty years is a really serious
difference; and there is fully that amount of uncertainty as to the date of some of the
writings which are our principal sources of information; e.g., the "Doctrine of the
Twelve Apostles," the Epistles of Ignatius, the "Shepherd of Hermas," and the
"Clementines." Here also our position may improve. Further research may enable
us to date some of these documents accurately. But, for the present, uncertainty
about precise dates and general scantiness of evidence compel us to admit that with
regard to many of the points connected with this question nothing that can fairly be
called proof is possible respecting the interval which separates the last quarter of
the first century from the last quarter of the second.
This feature of the problem is sometimes represented by the useful metaphor that
the history of the Church just at this period "passes through a tunnel" or "runs
underground." We are in the light of day during most of the time covered by the
ew Testament; and we are again in the light of day directly we reach the time
covered by the abundant writings of Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian,
and others. But during the intervening period we are, not indeed in total darkness,
but in a passage the obscurity of which is only slightly relieved by an occasional
lamp or light-hole. Leaving this tantalizing interval, about which the one thing that
is certain is that many certainties are not likely to be found in it, we pass on to look
for our two next certainties in the periods which precede and follow it.
3. In the period covered by the ew Testament it is certain that the Church had
officers who discharged spiritual functions which were not discharged by ordinary
Christians; in other words a distinction was made from the first between clergy and
laity. Of this fact the Pastoral Epistles contain abundant evidence; and further
evidence is scattered up and down the ew Testament, from the earliest document
in the volume to the last. In the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, which is certainly
the earliest Christian writing that has come down to us, we find St. Paul beseeching
the Church of the Thessalonians "to know them that labor among you, and are over
you in the Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them exceeding highly in love for
their work’s sake" (1Th_5:12-13). The three functions here enumerated are
evidently functions to be exercised by a few with regard to the many: they are not
duties which every one is to discharge towards every one. In the Third Epistle of St.
John, which is certainly one of the latest, and perhaps the very latest, of the writings

contained in the ew Testament, the incident about Diotrephes seems to show that
not only ecclesiastical government, but ecclesiastical government by a single official,
was already in existence in the Church in which Diotrephes "loved to have the
preeminence" (3Jn_1:9-10). In between these two we have the exhortation in the
Epistle to the Hebrews: "Obey them that have the rule over you and submit to
them: for they watch in behalf of your souls, as they that shall give account". {Heb_
13:17} And directly we go outside the ew Testament and look at the Epistle of the
Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth, commonly called the First Epistle of
Clement, we find the same distinction between clergy and laity observed. In this
letter, which almost certainly was written during the lifetime of St. John, we read
that the Apostles, "preaching everywhere in country and town, appointed their
firstfruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto
them that should believe. And this they did in no new fashion; for indeed it had been
written concerning bishops and deacons from very ancient times; for thus saith the
Scripture in a certain place, I will appoint their bishops in righteousness, and their
deacons in faith"-the last words being an inaccurate quotation of the LXX of Isa_
60:17.
And a little further on Clement writes: "Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus
Christ that there would be strife over the name of the bishop’s office. For this cause,
therefore, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid
persons, and afterwards they provided a continuance, that if these should fall
asleep, other approved men should succeed to their ministration. Those therefore
who were appointed by them, or afterward by other men of repute with the consent
of the whole Church, and have ministered unblamably to the flock of Christ in
lowliness of mind, peacefully and with all modesty, and for long time have borne a
good report with all-these men we consider to be unjustly thrust out from their
ministration. For it will be no light sin for us, if we thrust out those who have
offered the gifts of the bishop’s office unblamably and holily. Blessed are those
presbyters who have gone before, seeing that their departure was fruitful and ripe,
for they have no fear lest any one should remove them from their appointed place.
For we see that ye have displaced certain persons, though they were living
honorably, from the ministration which they had kept blamelessly" (42., 44.).
Three things come out very clearly from this passage, confirming what has been
found in the ew Testament.
(1) There is a clear distinction made between clergy and laity.

(2) This distinction is not a temporary arrangement, but is the basis of a permanent
organization.
(3) A person who has been duly promoted to the ranks of the clergy as a presbyter
or bishop (the two titles being here synonymous, as in the Epistle to Titus) holds that
position for life. Unless he is guilty of some serious offence, to depose him is no light
sin.
one of these passages, either in the ew Testament or in Clement, tells us very
clearly the precise nature of the functions which the clergy, as distinct from the
laity, were to discharge; yet they indicate that these functions were of a spiritual
rather than of a secular character, that they concerned men’s souls rather than their
bodies, and that they were connected with religious service ( ëåéôïõñãéá ). But the
one thing which is quite clear is this, -that the Church had, and was always intended
to have, a body of officers distinct from the congregations to which they ministered
and over which they ruled.
4. For our fourth certainty we resort to the time when the history of the Church
returns once more to the full light of day, in the last quarter of the second century.
Then we find two things quite clearly established, which have continued in
Christendom from that day to this. We find a regularly organized clergy, not only
distinctly marked off from the laity, but distinctly marked off among themselves by
well-defined gradations of rank. And, secondly, we find that each local Church is
constitutionally governed by one chief officer, whose powers are large and seldom
resisted, and who universally receives the title of bishop. To these two points we may
add a third. There is no trace of any belief, or even suspicion, that the constitution of
these local Churches had ever been anything else. On the contrary, the evidence
(and it is considerable) points to the conclusion that Christians in the latter part of
the second century-say A.D. 180 to 200-were fully persuaded that the Episcopal
form of government had prevailed in the different Churches from the Apostles’ time
to their own. Just as in the case of the Gospels, "Irenaeus and his contemporaries"
not only do not know of either more or less than the four which have come down to
us, but cannot conceive of there ever being either more or less, than these four: so in
the case of Church Government, they not only represent episcopacy as everywhere
prevalent in their time, but they have no idea that at any previous time any other
form of government prevailed. And although Irenaeus, like St. Paul and Clement of
Rome, sometimes speaks of bishops under the title of presbyter, yet it is quite clear
that there were at that time presbyters who were not bishops and who did not
possess Episcopal authority. Irenaeus himself was such a presbyter, until the
martyrdom of Pothinus in the persecution of A.D. 177 created a vacancy in the see
of Lyons, which Irenaeus was then called upon to fill; he held the see for upwards of

twenty years, from about A.D. 180 to 202. From Irenaeus and from his
contemporary Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, we learn not only the fact that
episcopacy prevailed everywhere, but, in not a few cases, the name of the existing
bishop; and in some cases the names of their predecessors are given up to the time of
the Apostles. Thus, in the case of the Church of Rome, Linus the first bishop is
connected with the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul, and, in the case of
Athens, Dionysius the Areopagite is said to have been appointed first bishop of that
Church by the Apostle Paul. This may or may not be correct: but at least it shows
that in the time of Irenaeus and Dionysius of Corinth episcopacy was not only
recognized as the universal form of Church government, but was also believed to
have prevailed in the principal Churches from the very earliest times.
5. If we narrow our field and look, not at the whole Church, but at the Churches of
Asia Minor and Syria, we may obtain yet another certainty from the obscure period
which lies between the age of the Apostles and that of Dionysius and Irenaeus. The
investigations of Lightfoot, Zahn, and Harnack have placed the genuineness of the
short Greek form of the Epistles of Ignatius beyond reasonable dispute. Their exact
date cannot as yet be determined. The evidence is strong that Ignatius was martyred
in the reign of Trajan: and, if that is accepted, the letters cannot be later than A.D.
117. But even if this evidence be rejected as not conclusive, and the letters be dated
ten or twelve years later, their testimony will still be of the utmost importance. They
prove that long before A.D. 150 episcopacy was the recognized form of government
throughout the Churches of Asia Minor and Syria; and, as Ignatius speaks of "the
bishops that are settled in the farthest parts of the earth ( êáôá ôáñáôá ïñéóèåíôåò )"
they prove that, according to his belief, episcopacy was the recognized form
everywhere. {Eph_3:1-21} This evidence is not a little strengthened by the fact that,
as all sound critics on both sides are now agreed, the Epistles of Ignatius were
evidently not written in order to magnify the Episcopal office, or to preach up the
Episcopal system. The writer’s main object is to deprecate schism and all that might
tend to schism. And in his opinion the best way to avoid schism is to keep closely
united to the bishop. Thus, the magnifying of the Episcopal office comes about
incidentally; because Ignatius takes for granted that everywhere there is a bishop in
each Church, who is the duly appointed ruler of it, loyalty to whom will be a
security against all schismatical tendencies.
These four or five points being regarded as established to an extent which may
reasonably be called certainty, there remain certain other points about which
certainty is not yet possible, some of which admit of a probable solution, while for
others there is so little evidence that we have to fall back upon mere conjecture.
Among these would be the distinctions of office, or gradations of rank, among the
clergy in the first century or century and a half after the Ascension, the precise
functions assigned to each office, and the manner of appointment. With regard to
these questions three positions may be assumed with a considerable amount of

probability.
1. There was a distinction made between itinerant or missionary clergy and
stationary or localized clergy. Among the former we find apostles (who are a much
larger body than the Twelve), prophets, and evangelists. Among the latter we have
two orders, spoken of as bishops and deacons, as here and in the Epistle to the
Philippians (1) as well as in the Doctrine of the
2. Twelve Apostles, presbyter or elder being sometimes used as synonymous with
bishop. This distinction between an itinerant and a stationary ministry appears in
the First Epistle to the Corinthians, {1Co_12:28} in the Epistle to the Ephesians,
{Eph_4:11} and perhaps also in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistles of St.
John. In the "Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles" it is clearly marked.
There seems to have been a further distinction between those who did, and those
who did not, possess supernatural prophetical gifts. The title of prophet was
commonly, but perhaps not exclusively, given to those who possessed this gift: and
the "Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles" shows a great respect for prophets. But the
distinction naturally died out when these supernatural gifts ceased to be manifested.
During the process of extinction serious difficulty arose as to the test of a genuine
prophet. Some fanatical persons believed themselves to be prophets, and some
dishonest persons pretended to be prophets when they were not such. The office
appears to have been extinct when Ignatius wrote: by prophets he always means the
prophets of the Old Testament. Montanism was probably a forlorn attempt to revive
this much desired office after the Church as a whole had decided against it. Further
discussion of the gift of prophecy in the ew Testament will be found in a previous
chapter (6).
1. The clergy were not elected by the congregation as its delegates or
representatives, deputed to perform functions which originally could be discharged
by any Christian. They were appointed by the Apostles and their successors or
substitutes. Where the congregation selected or recommended candidates, as in the
case of the Seven Deacons, {Act_6:4-6} they did not themselves lay hands on them.
The typical act of laying on of hands was always performed by those who were
already ministers, whether apostles, prophets, or elders. Whatever else was still
open to the laity, this act of ordaining was not. And there is good reason for
believing that the celebration of the Eucharist also was from the first reserved to the
clergy, and that all ministers, excepting prophets, were expected to use a prescribed
form of words in celebrating it.

But, although much still remains untouched, this discussion must draw to a close. In
the ideal Church there is no Lord’s Day or holy seasons, for all days are the Lord’s,
and all seasons are holy; there are no places especially dedicated to God’s worship,
for the whole universe is His temple; there are no persons especially ordained to be
His ministers, for all His people are priests and prophets. But in the Church as it
exists in a sinful world, the attempt to make all times and all places holy ends in the
desecration of all alike; and the theory that all Christians are priests becomes
indistinguishable from the theory that none is such. In this matter let us not try to
be wiser than God, Whose will may be discerned in His providential guiding of His
Church throughout so many centuries. The attempt to reproduce Paradise or to
anticipate heaven in a state of society which does not possess the conditions of
Paradise or heaven, can end in nothing but disastrous confusion.
In conclusion the following weighty words are gratefully quoted. They come with
special force from one who does not himself belong to an Episcopalian Church.
"By our reception or denial of priesthood in the Church, our entire view of what the
Church is must be affected and molded. We shall either accept the idea of a visible
and organized body, within which Christ rules by means of a ministry, sacraments,
and ordinances to which He has attached a blessing, the fullness of which we have
no right to look for except through the channels He has ordained (and it ought to be
needless to say that this is the Presbyterian idea), or we shall rest satisfied with the
thought of the Church as consisting of multitudes of individual souls known to God
alone, as invisible, unorganized, with ordinances blessed because of the memories
which they awaken, but to which no promise of present grace is tied, with, in short,
no thought of a Body of Christ in the world, but only of a spiritual and heavenly
principle ruling in the hearts and regulating the lives of men. Conceptions of the
Church so widely different from each other cannot fail to affect in the most vital
manner the Church’s life, and relation to those around her. Yet both conceptions
are the logical and necessary result of the acceptance or denial of the idea of a
divinely appointed and still living priesthood among men."
2 ow the overseer is to be above reproach,

faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled,
respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
BAR ES, "A bishop - A minister of religion, according to the foregoing remarks,
who has the charge or oversight of any Christian church. The reference here is doubtless
to one who had the government of the church entrusted to him 1Ti_3:4-5, and who was
also a preacher of the gospel.
Must be blameless - This is a different word (ᅊνεπίληµπτον anepilēmpton) from that
rendered “blameless” in Luk_1:6; Phi_2:15; Phi_3:6 (ᅎµεµπτος amemptos); compare
however, Luk_1:6 note; Phi_3:6 note. The word here used does not mean that, as a
necessary qualification for office, a bishop should be “perfect;” but that he should be a
man against whom no charge of immorality, or of holding false doctrine, is alleged. His
conduct should be irreprehensible or irreproachable. Undoubtedly it means that if “any”
charge could be brought against him implying moral obliquity, he is not fit for the office.
He should be a man of irreproachable character for truth, honesty, chastity, and general
uprightness.
The husband of one wife - This need not be understood as requiring that a bishop
“should be” a married man, as Vigilantius, a presbyter in the church at Barcelona in the
fourth century, supposed, however desirable in general it may be that a minister of the
gospel should be married. But, while this interpretation is manifestly to be excluded as
false, there has been much difference of opinion on the question whether the passage
means that a minister should not have more than one wife at the same time, or whether
it prohibits the marriage of a second wife after the death of the first. On this question,
the notes of Bloomfield, Doddridge, and Macknight, may be consulted. That the former
is the correct opinion, seems to me to be evident from the following considerations:
(1) It is the most obvious meaning of the language, and it would doubtless be thus
understood by those to whom it was addressed. At a time when polygamy was not
uncommon, to say that a man should “have but one wife” would be naturally understood
as prohibiting polygamy.
(2) The marriage of a second wife, after the death of the first, is nowhere spoken of in
the Scriptures as wrong. The marriage of a widow to a second husband is expressely
declared to be proper 1Co_7:39; and it is not unfair to infer from that permission that it
is equally lawful and proper for man to marry the second time. But if it is lawful for any
man it is right for a minister of the gospel. No reason can he assigned against such
marriages in his case, which would not be equally valid in any other. Marriage is as
honorable for a minister of the gospel as for any other man (compare notes on Heb_
13:4); and, as Doddridge has well remarked, “Circumstances may be so adjusted that
there may be as much reason for a second marriage as for the first, and as little
inconvenience of any kind may attend it.”
(3) There was a special propriety in the prohibition, if understood as prohibiting
polygamy. It is known that it was extensively practiced, and was not regarded as

unlawful. Yet one design of the gospel was to restore the marriage relation to its
primitive condition; and though it might not have seemed absolutely necessary to
require of every man who came into the church to divorce his wives, if he had more than
one, yet, in order to fix a brand on this irregular practice, it might have been deemed
desirable to require of the ministers of the gospel that they should have but one wife.
Thus the practice of polygamy would gradually come to be regarded as dishonorable and
improper, and the example and influence of the ministry would tend to introduce correct
views in regard to the nature of this relation. One thing is clear from this passage, that
the views of the Papists in regard to the celibacy of the clergy are directly at variance
with the Bible. The declaration of Paul in Heb_13:4, is, that “marriage is honorable in
all;” and here it is implied that it was proper that a minister should be married. If it were
not, why did not Paul prohibit it altogether? Instead of saying that it was improper that a
bishop should have more than one wife, why did he not say that it was improper that he
should be married at all? Would not a Romanist say so now?
Vigilant - This word (νηφάλεος nēphaleos) occurs only here and in 1Ti_3:11; Tit_2:2.
It means, properly, “sober, temperate, abstinent,” especially in respect to wine; then
“sober-minded, watchful, circumspect. Robinson.” A minister should have a watchful
care over his own conduct. He should be on his gaurd against sin in any form.
Sober - σώφρονα sōphrona Properly, a man of “a sound mind;” one who follows sound
reason, and who is not under the control of passion. The idea is, that he should have his
desires and passions well regulated. Perhaps the word “prudent” would come nearer to
the meaning of the apostle than any single word which we have.
Of good behaviour - Margin, “modest.” Coverdale renders it, “mannerly.” The most
correct rendering, according to the modern use of language, would be, that he should be
“a gentleman.” He should not be slovenly in his appearance, or rough and boorish in his
manners. He should not do violence to the usages of refined conversation, nor be unfit to
appear respectable in the most refined circles of society. Inattention to personal
neatness, and to the rules which regulate refined contact, is indicative neither of talent,
learning, nor religion; and though they are occasionally - not often - connected with
talent, learning, and religion, yet they are never the fruit of either, and are always a
disgrace to those who exhibit such incivility and boorishness, for such men “ought” to
know better. A minister of the gospel should be a finished gentleman in his manners,
and there is no excuse for him if he is not. His religion, if he has any, is adapted to make
him such. He has usually received such an education as ought to make him such, and in
all cases “ought” to have had such a training. He is admitted into the best society, and
has an opportunity of becoming familiar with the laws of refined conversation. He
should be an example and a pattern in all that goes to promote the welfare of mankind,
and there are few things so easily acquired that are suited to do this, as refinement and
gentility of manners. No man can do good, on the whole, or in the “long run,” by
disregarding the rules of refined contact; and, other things being equal, the refined,
courteous, polite gentleman in the ministry, will always do more good than he who
neglects the rules of goodbreeding.
Given to hospitality - This is often enjoined on all Christians as a duty of religion.
For the reasons of this, and the nature of the duty, see the Rom_12:13 note; Heb_13:2
note. It was a special duty of the ministers of religion, as they were to be examples of
every Christian virtue.
Apt to teach - Greek, “Didactic;” that is, capable of instructing, or qualified for the
office of a teacher of religion. As the principal business of a preacher of the gospel is to
“teach,” or to communicate to his fellow-men the knowledge of the truth, the necessity of

this qualification is obvious. No one should be allowed to enter the ministry who is not
qualified to impart “instruction” to others on the doctrines and duties of religion; and no
one should feel that he ought to continue in the ministry, who has not industry, and self-
denial, and the love of study enough to lead him constantly to endeavor to “increase” in
knowledge, that he may be qualified to teach others. A man who would “teach” a people,
must himself keep in advance of them on the subjects on which he would instruct them.
CLARKE, "A bishop then must be blameless - Our term bishop comes from the
Anglo-Saxon, which is a mere corruption of the Greek επισκοπος, and the Latin
episcopus; the former being compounded of επι, over, and σκεπτοµαι, to look or inspect,
signifies one who has the inspection or oversight of a place, persons, or business; what
we commonly term a superintendent. The New Testament writers have borrowed the
term from the Septuagint, it being the word by which they translate the ‫פקיד‬ pakid of the
Hebrew text, which signifies a visiter, one that personally inspects the people or business
over which he presides. It is given by St. Paul to the elders at Ephesus, who had the
oversight of Christ’s flock, Act_20:28; and to such like persons in other places, Phi_1:1;
1Ti_3:2, the place in question; and Tit_1:7.
Let us consider the qualifications of a Christian bishop, and then we shall soon
discover who is fit for the office.
First - is Christian bishop must be blameless; ανεπιληπτον, a person against whom no
evil can be proved; one who is everywhere invulnerable; for the word is a
metaphor, taken from the case of an expert and skillful pugilist, who so defends
every part of his body that it is impossible for his antagonist to give one hit. So this
Christian bishop is one that has so conducted himself, as to put it out of the reach
of any person to prove that he is either unsound in a single article of the Christian
faith, or deficient in the fulfillment of any duty incumbent on a Christian. He must
be irreprehensible; for how can he reprove that in others which they can reprove in
him?
Second - must be the husband of one wife. He should be a married man, but he
should be no polygamist; and have only one wife, i.e. one at a time. It does not
mean that, if he has been married, and his wife die, he should never marry
another. Some have most foolishly spiritualized this, and say, that by one wife the
Church is intended! This silly quibbling needs no refutation. The apostle’s
meaning appears to be this: that he should not be a man who has divorced his wife
and married another; nor one that has two wives at a time. It does not appear to
have been any part of the apostle’s design to prohibit second marriages, of which
some have made such a serious business. But it is natural for some men to tithe
mint and cummin in religion, while they neglect the weightier matters of the law.
Third - must be vigilant; νηφαλεον, from νη, not and πιω, to drink. Watchful; for as
one who drinks is apt to sleep, so he who abstains from it is more likely to keep
awake, and attend to his work and charge. A bishop has to watch over the Church,
and watch for it; and this will require all his care and circumspection. Instead of
νηφαλεον, many MSS. read νηφαλιον· this may be the better orthography, but
makes no alteration in the sense.
Fourth - must be sober; σωφρονα, prudent or, according to the etymology of the

word, from σως, sound, and φρην, mind, a man of a sound mind; having a good
understanding, and the complete government of all his passions. A bishop should
be a man of learning, of an extensive and well cultivated mind, dispassionate,
prudent, and sedate.
Fifth - must be of good behavior; κοσµιον, orderly, decent, grave, and correct in the
whole of his appearance, carriage, and conduct. The preceding term, σωφρονα,
refers to the mind; this latter, κοσµιον, to the external manners. A clownish, rude,
or boorish man should never have the rule of the Church of God; the sour, the
sullen, and the boisterous should never be invested with a dignity which they
would most infallibly disgrace.
Sixth - must be given to hospitality; φιλοξενον, literally, a lover of strangers; one who
is ready to receive into his house and relieve every necessitous stranger.
Hospitality, in those primitive times, was a great and necessary virtue; then there
were few inns, or places of public entertainment; to those who were noted for
benevolence the necessitous stranger had recourse. A Christian bishop, professing
love to God and all mankind, preaching a religion, one half of the morality of
which was included in, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, would naturally be
sought to by those who were in distress and destitute of friends. To enable them to
entertain such, the Church over which they presided must have furnished them
with the means. Such a bishop as St. Paul, who was often obliged to labor with his
hands for his own support, could have little to give away. But there is a
considerable difference between an apostolical bishop and an ecclesiastical bishop:
the one was generally itinerant, the other comparatively local; the former had
neither house nor home, the latter had both; the apostolical bishop had charge of
the Church of Christ universally, the ecclesiastical bishop of the Churches in a
particular district. Such should be addicted to hospitality, or works of charity;
especially in these modern times, in which, besides the spiritualities, they possess
the temporalities, of the Church.
Seventh - should be apt to teach; διδακτικον, one capable of teaching; not only wise
himself, but ready to communicate his wisdom to others. One whose delight is, to
instruct the ignorant and those who are out of the way. He must be a preacher; an
able, zealous, fervent, and assiduous preacher.
He is no bishop who has health and strength, and yet seldom or never preaches; i.e. if
he can preach - if he have the necessary gifts for the office.
In former times bishops wrote much and preached much; and their labors were
greatly owned of God. No Church since the apostle’s days has been more honored in this
way than the British Church. And although bishops are here, as elsewhere, appointed by
the state, yet we cannot help adoring the good providence of God, that, taken as a body,
they have been an honor to their function; and that, since the reformation of religion in
these lands, the bishops have in general been men of great learning and probity, and the
ablest advocates of the Christian system, both as to its authenticity, and the purity and
excellence of its doctrines and morality.
Chaucer’s character of the Clerke of Oxenford is a good paraphrase on St. Paul’s
character of a primitive bishop: -
Of studie tookin he moste cure and hede,

Nought oo word spak he more than there was nede,
And that was selde in forme and and reverence,
And short, and quick, and full of high sentence;
Sowning in moral vertue was speche,
And gladly wolde he lerne, and gladly teache.
GILL, "A bishop then must be blameless,.... Or "an elder", as the Syriac version
renders it; not that it can be expected that such an one should be entirely free from sin,
or be blameless in the sight of God; but that he should be one, who is so before men, and
has not been guilty of any notorious and flagitious crime; and particularly, is not
chargeable with the vices hereafter mentioned or hinted at. So the priests under the law
were to be without blemish, even in their bodies, Lev_21:17 to which the apostle may
here allude.
The husband of one wife; which is not to be understood in a mystical and allegorical
sense of his being the pastor of one church, since the apostle afterwards speaks of his
house and children, that are to be ruled and kept in good order by him, in distinction
from the church of God; but in a literal sense of his conjugal estate; though this rule does
not make it necessary that he should have a wife; or that he should not marry, or not
have married a second wife, after the death of the first; only if he marries or is married,
that he should have but one wife at a time; so that this rule excludes all such persons
from being elders, or pastors, or overseers of churches, that were "polygamists"; who
had more wives than one at a time, or had divorced their wives, and not for adultery, and
had married others. Now polygamy and divorces had very much obtained among the
Jews; nor could the believing Jews be easily and at once brought off of them. And though
they were not lawful nor to be allowed of in any; yet they were especially unbecoming
and scandalous in officers of churches. So the high priest among the Jews, even when
polygamy was in use, might not marry, or have two wives, at once; if he did, he could not
minister in his office until he divorced one of them (u). For it is written, Lev_21:13, "he
shall take a wife", ‫שתים‬ ‫ולא‬ ‫,אחת‬ "one, and not two" (w). And the same that is said of the
high priest, is said of all other priests; see Eze_44:22, likewise the Egyptian priests
might not marry more wives than one, though others might have as many as they
pleased (x): and so the Flamines among the Romans (y). An elder or pastor must also be
one that is
vigilant; or wakeful and watchful, who is diligent in his business, and attends to his
care and charge; is watchful over himself, his words, and actions; and watches for the
souls of men, to do them all the good he can; and is sober in body, is temperate, and uses
moderation in eating and drinking; and in mind, is modest, humble, and prudent; and so
the Vulgate Latin Version renders the word "prudent": and the Ethiopic version, "a wise
man", one of a sound judgment, a good understanding, and prudent conduct; is not wise
above what is written, but thinks soberly of himself, as he ought. The Syriac and Arabic
versions render it, "chaste", as free from intemperance, so from uncleanness: and
of good behaviour: neat and decent in his apparel; modest in his whole deportment
and conduct, and affable and courteous to all; beautiful in his life and conversation,
being adorned with every thing that is graceful and comely:
given to hospitality: to the love of strangers, and to the entertainment of them; and

especially the saints and fellow ministers, who are exiled, or are travelling for the sake of
spreading the Gospel, or upon some lawful and laudable account. These he is to assist by
his advice and counsel, and with the necessaries of life, according to his abilities.
Abraham and Lot are noted instances of this virtue.
Apt to teach; who has a considerable store of knowledge; is capable of interpreting the
Scripture to the edification of others; is able to explain, lay open, and illustrate the truths
of the Gospel, and defend them, and refute error; and who is not only able, but ready and
willing, to communicate to others what he knows; and who likewise has utterance of
speech, the gift of elocution and can convey his ideas of things in plain and easy
language, in apt and acceptable words; for otherwise it signifies not what a man knows,
unless he has a faculty of communicating it to others, to their understanding and
advantage.
JAMISO , "The existence of Church organization and presbyters at Ephesus is
presupposed (1Ti_5:17, 1Ti_5:19). The institution of Church widows (1Ti_5:3-25)
accords with this. The directions here to Timothy, the president or apostolic delegate,
are as to filling up vacancies among the bishops and deacons, or adding to their
number. New churches in the neighborhood also would require presbyters and deacons.
Episcopacy was adopted in apostolic times as the most expedient form of government,
being most nearly in accordance with Jewish institutions, and so offering the less
obstruction through Jewish prejudices to the progress of Christianity. The synagogue
was governed by presbyters, “elders” (Act_4:8; Act_24:1), called also bishops or
overseers. Three among them presided as “rulers of the synagogue,” answering to
“bishops” in the modern sense [Lightfoot, Hebrew and Talmudic Exercitations], and
one among them took the lead. Ambrose (in The Duties of the Clergy [2.13], as also
Bingham [Ecclesiastical Antiquities, 2.11]) says, “They who are now called bishops were
originally called apostles. But those who ruled the Church after the death of the apostles
had not the testimony of miracles, and were in many respects inferior. Therefore they
thought it not decent to assume to themselves the name of apostles; but dividing the
names, they left to presbyters the name of the presbytery, and they themselves were
called bishops.” “Presbyter” refers to the rank; “bishop,” to the office or function.
Timothy (though not having the name) exercised the power at Ephesus then, which
bishops in the modern sense more recently exercised.
blameless — “unexceptionable”; giving no just handle for blame.
husband of one wife — confuting the celibacy of Rome’s priesthood. Though the
Jews practiced polygamy, yet as he is writing as to a Gentile Church, and as polygamy
was never allowed among even laymen in the Church, the ancient interpretation that the
prohibition here is against polygamy in a candidate bishop is not correct. It must,
therefore, mean that, though laymen might lawfully marry again, candidates for the
episcopate or presbytery were better to have been married only once. As in 1Ti_5:9,
“wife of one man,” implies a woman married but once; so “husband of one wife” here
must mean the same. The feeling which prevailed among the Gentiles, as well as the
Jews (compare as to Anna, Luk_2:36, Luk_2:37), against a second marriage would, on
the ground of expediency and conciliation in matters indifferent and not involving
compromise of principle, account for Paul’s prohibition here in the case of one in so
prominent a sphere as a bishop or a deacon. Hence the stress that is laid in the context
on the repute in which the candidate for orders is held among those over whom he is to
preside (Tit_1:16). The Council of Laodicea and the apostolic canons discountenanced

second marriages, especially in the case of candidates for ordination. Of course second
marriage being lawful, the undesirableness of it holds good only under special
circumstances. It is implied here also, that he who has a wife and virtuous family, is to be
preferred to a bachelor; for he who is himself bound to discharge the domestic duties
mentioned here, is likely to be more attractive to those who have similar ties, for he
teaches them not only by precept, but also by example (1Ti_3:4, 1Ti_3:5). The Jews
teach, a priest should be neither unmarried nor childless, lest he be unmerciful [Bengel].
So in the synagogue, “no one shall offer up prayer in public, unless he be married” [in
Colbo, ch. 65; Vitringa, Synagogue and Temple].
vigilant — literally, “sober”; ever on the watch, as sober men alone can be; keenly
alive, so as to foresee what ought to be done (1Th_5:6-8).
sober — sober-minded.
of good behaviour — Greek, “orderly.” “Sober” refers to the inward mind;
“orderly,” to the outward behavior, tone, look, gait, dress. The new man bears
somewhat of a sacred festival character, incompatible with all confusion, disorder,
excess, violence, laxity, assumption, harshness, and meanness (Phi_4:8) [Bengel].
apt to teach — (2Ti_2:24).
RWP, "The bishop (ton episkopon). The overseer. Old word, in lxx, and
inscriptions and papyri. Deissmann (Bible Studies, pp. 230f.) has shown it is applied to
communal officials in Rhodes. See note on Act_20:28 for its use for the elders
(presbyters) in Act_20:17. So also in Tit_1:5, Tit_1:7. See note on Phi_1:1. The word
does not in the N.T. have the monarchical sense found in Ignatius of a bishop over
elders.
Without reproach (anepilēmpton). Accusative case of general reference with dei
and einai. Old and common verbal (a privative and epilambanō, not to be taken hold of),
irreproachable. In N.T. only here, 1Ti_5:7; 1Ti_6:14.
Of one wife (mias gunaikos). One at a time, clearly.
Temperate (nēphalion). Old adjective. In N.T. only here, 1Ti_3:11; Tit_2:2. But see
nēphō, to be sober in 1Th_5:6, 1Th_5:8.
Soberminded (sōphrona). Another old adjective (from saos or sōs, sound, phrēn,
mind) in N.T. only here, Tit_1:8; Tit_2:2, Tit_2:5.
Orderly (kosmion). See note on 1Ti_2:9. Seemly, decent conduct.
Given to hospitality (philoxenon). Old word (see philoxenia in Rom_12:13), from
philos and xenos, in N.T. only here, Tit_1:8; 1Pe_4:9.
Apt to teach (didaktikon). Late form for old didaskalikos, one qualified to teach. In
Philo and N.T. only (1Ti_3:2; 2Ti_2:24).
CALVI , "2A bishop, therefore, must be blameless The particle therefore confirms
the exposition which I have given; for, on account of the dignity of the office, he
concludes that it is requisite that he be a man endowed with rare gifts, and not any

person taken out of the crowd. (48) If the expression used had been “ good work,” as
the ordinary translation has it, or “ honorable work,” (honestam ,) as Erasmus has
translated it, the inference would not have been suitable.
He wishes a bishop to be blameless, (49) instead of which, in the Epistle to Titus, He
has used (Tit_1:7) the word ἀνέγκλητον meaning by both words, that he must not be
marked by any infamy that would lessen his authority. There will be no one found
among men that is free from every vice; but it is one thing to be blemished with
ordinary vices, which do not hurt the reputation, because they are found in men of
the highest excellence, and another thing to have a disgraceful name, or to be
stained with any baseness. In order, therefore, that a bishop may not be without
authority, he enjoins that there shall be made a selection of one who has a good and
honorable reputation, and not chargeable with any remarkable vice. Besides, he
does not merely lay down a rule for Timothy what sort of person he must select, but
likewise reminds every one of those who aspire to that rank, to institute a careful
examination of himself and of his life.
The husband of one wife. It is a childish fancy to interpret this as meaning “ pastor
of a single church.” Another other exposition has been more generally received, that
the person set apart to that office must be one who has not been more than once
married, that one wife being since dead, so that now he is not a married man. But
both in this passage and in Tit_1:6, the words of the apostle are, “ is,” and not “
hath been;” and in this very Epistle, where he treats of widows, (1Ti_3:10,) he
expressly makes use of the participle of the past tense. Besides, in this way he would
contradict himself; because elsewhere he declares that he has no wish to lay a snare
on the consciences.
The only true exposition, therefore, is that of Chrysostom, that in a bishop he
expressly condemns polygamy, (50) which at that time the Jews almost reckoned to
be lawful. This corruption was borrowed by them partly from sinful imitation of the
Fathers, (for they who read that Abraham, Jacob, David, and others of the same
class, were married to more wives than one at the same time, thought that it was
lawful for them also to do the same) and partly from neighboring nations; for the
inhabitants of the East never observed that conscientiousness and fidelity in
marriage which was proper. However that might be, polygamy was exceedingly
prevalent among them; (51) and therefore with great propriety does Paul enjoin that
a bishop should be free from this stain.
And yet I do not disapprove of the opinion of those who think that the Holy Spirit
intended to guard against the diabolical superstition which afterwards arose; as if
he had said, “ far is it from being right and proper that celibacy should be enforced
on bishops, that marriage is a state highly becoming in all believers.” In this way, he
would not demand it as a thing necessary for them, but would only praise it as not
inconsistent with the dignity of the office. Yet the view which I have already given is
more simple and more solid, that Paul forbids polygamy in all who hold the office of
a bishop, because it is a mark of an unchaste man, and of one who does not observe
conjugal fidelity.

But there it might be objected, that what is sinful in all ought not to have been
condemned or forbidden in bishops alone. The answer is easy. When it is expressly
prohibited to bishops, it does not therefore follow that it is freely allowed to others.
Beyond all doubt, Paul condemned universally what was contrary to an unrepealed
law of God; for it is a settled enactment,
“ shall be one flesh.” (Gen_2:24.)
But he might, to some extent, bear with that in others which, in a bishop, would
have been excessively vile, and therefore not to be endured.
or is this a law laid down for the future, that no bishop, who already has one wife,
shall marry a second or a third, while the first wife is still living; but Paul excludes
from the office of a bishop any one who shall be guilty of such an enormity.
Accordingly, what had been once done, and could not be corrected, he reluctantly
endures, but only in the common people. For what was the remedy for those who,
under Judaism, had fallen into the snare of polygamy? Should they have divorced
their second and third wives? Such a divorce would not have been free from doing
wrong. Since, therefore, the deed was done, and could not be undone, he left it
untouched, but with this exception, that no bishop should be blemished by such a
stain.
Sober, temperate, modest The word which we have translated sober, Erasmus has
translated (vigilantem) watchful. As the Greek word νηφάλεος (52) admits of either
signification, the readers may make their own choice. I have preferred to translate
σώφρονα temperate, instead of sober, because σωφροσύνη has a more extensive
meaning than sobriety. Modest means one who conducts himself with decency and
propriety.
Hospitable (53) The“” here spoken of, is toward strangers, and this was very
common among the ancients; for it would have been reckoned disgraceful for
respectable persons, and especially for those who were well known, to lodge in
taverns. In the present day, the state of matters is different; but this virtue is and
always will be highly necessary in a bishop, for many reasons. Besides, during the
cruel persecution of the godly, many persons must have been constrained frequently
to change their habitation; and therefore it was necessary that the houses of bishops
should be a retreat for the exiles. In those times hard necessity compelled the
churches to afford mutual aid, so that they gave lodgings to one another. ow, if the
bishops had not pointed out the path to others in this department of duty, the
greater part, following their example, would have neglected the exercise of
humanity, and thus the poor fugitives would have been greatly discouraged. (54)
Able to teach In the epistle to Titus, doctrine is expressly mentioned; here he only
speaks briefly about skill in communicating instruction. It is not enough to have
profound learning, if it be not accompanied by talent for teaching. There are many
who, either because their utterance is defective, or because they have not good

mental abilities, or because they do not employ that familiar language which is
adapted to the common people, keep within their own minds the knowledge which
they possess. Such persons, as the phrase is, ought to Sing to themselves and to the
muses. (55) They who have the charge of governing the people, ought to be qualified
for teaching. And here he does not demand volubility of tongue, for we see many
persons whose fluent talk is not fitted for edification; but he rather commends
wisdom in applying the word of God judiciously to the advantage of the people.
It is worth while to consider how the Papists hold that the injunctions which the
apostle gives do not at all belong to them. I shall not enter into a minute explanation
of all the details; but on this one point what sort of diligence do they observe? And,
indeed, that gift would be superfluous; for they banish from themselves the ministry
of teaching as low and groveling, although this belonged especially to a bishop. But
everybody knows how far it is from observing Paul’ rule, to assume the title of
bishop, and boast proudly of enacting a character without speaking, provided only
that they make their appearance in a theatrical dress. As if a horned mitre, a ring
richly set in jewels, or a silver cross, and other trifles, accompanied by idle display,
constituted the spiritual government of a church, which can no more be separated
from doctrine than any one of us can be separated from his own soul.
(48) “Et non pas le premier qui se pourroit presenter.” — “ not the first that might
offer himself.”
(49) ᾿Ανεπίληπτον — “ is properly an antagonistic term, signifying, ‘ who gives his
adversary no hold upon him;’ but it is often (as here) applied metaphorically to one
who gives others no cause justly to accuse him. So Thucydides, v. 17, τοῖς ἐχθροῖς
ἀνεπίληπτον εἶναι. “ (says a celebrated writer) is the perfect purity of our religion,
such the innocence and virtue which it exacts, that he must be a very good man
indeed who lives up to it.” And when we consider the still greater requirements in a
teacher of religion, (who is to be an example to others,) and reflect on the injury
done to religion through the side of false professors, how much reason will there
appear that such a one should be, as the apostle says, blameless.” — Broomfield.
(50) “Qu’ condamne en l’ d’ deux femmes ensemble vivantes.” — “ he condemns in
a bishop the having two wives living at the same time.”
(51) “La polygamie estoit une chose toute commune entre les Juifs.” — “ was a thing
quite common among the Jews.”
(52) “ Νηφάλιον, ‘ or circumspect.’ In which sense the word occurs in the later
writers; as, for instance, Phavorinus. The force of the word is well expressed by the
Pesch. Syr., ‘mente sit vigilanti ’ Instead of νηφάλιον, (the reading of many of the
best MSS. and all the early editions,) νηφάλεον was introduced by Beza, but without
any sufficient reason; and the former has been rightly restored by Wetstein,
Griesbach, Matthaei, Tittnhann, and Vater. Here, then, we have a quality suggested

by the very term ἐπίσχοπος, which imports vigilant superintendence.” —
Bloomfield.
(53) “Recueillant volontiers les estrangers;” — “ entertaining strangers.”
(54) “ every one know that the virtues which are here required in all ministers of the
word of God, are in order to give an example to the flock. It is highly proper for
every one to know that, when it is said that ministers should be wise, temperate, and
of good moral behavior, it is in order that others may be conformed to their
example; for it is not for three or four only, but for all in general, that these things
are said. This is the way in which the example of men must be profitable to us, so far
as they shall conduct themselves properly, according to the will of God. And if they
depart from that will ever so little, we must not yield to them such authority as to
follow them on that account; but we must attend to what Paul says, that we ought to
follow men so far as they are entirely conformed to the pure word of God, and are
imitators of Jesus Christ, to lead us in the right way.” — Fr. Ser.
(55) “Il faut que tels s’ a autre chose.” — “ persons ought to be employed in
something else.”
BURKITT, "Here we have St. Paul's positive character of a bishop, and what he
ought to be, who is admitted into that high and honourable office in the church of
God: he ought to be
blameless, a person free from scandal, without any just ground of blame: the life of
a bishop should shine so bright, that others may not only behold it, but admire it,
and guide their lives by the example of it.
The husband of one wife; that is, one at a time; not guilty of the sin of having many
wives, or of putting away the wife by divorce, as the Jews frequently did for
frivolous causes.
Here note, 1. The apostle's command (that the bishop be the husband of one wife)
doth not oblige him to marry, but it establishes the lawfulness of his marriage, if he
sees sufficient reason for it.
or, 2. Does the apostle here forbid successive marriages, as if when a bishop has
married one wife, or more, he might not lawfully marry again; for this he elsewhere
allows, 1Co_7:8.
From this it may not be in a man's power to abstain: many lose their first, and
sometimes their second wives, so soon, that were not after-marriages lawful, all the
ends of marriage must be frustrate to them; yet may we suppose by these words,
and many others, that St. Paul proposes a greater degree of chastity to church
governors than to other persons.

Vigilant, very diligent and watchful in the performance of his whole duty, not long
absent from his flock, nor negligent when he is among them:
sober, governing his passions and appetites, reducing those rebellious powers under
the dominion of reason and religion:
of good behaviour, in his words, in habit and garb, in his deeds and actions, neither
proud and supercilious, nor morose and sour, but affable and easy, kind and
courteous, of a composed temper and grave behaviour:
given to hospitality, not to sensuality; it is not the keeping of a free table, and open
house for all comers, which St. Paul points at; but charity in entertaining strangers,
poor Christians that left their country by persecuton, or such as traveled upon their
lawful affairs from place to place; the free relieving of such as are necessitous and
exposed to want and hardship, is the hospitality pointed at by our apostle:
apt to teach, that is, both knowing and willing, able to teach, and forward to it,
having both skill and will, ability and dexterity, for that part of his duty; one that is
neither ignorant of his duty, nor negligent in the performance of it.
PULPIT, "The for a, A.V.; therefore for then, A.V.; without reproach for blameless,
A.V.; temperate for vigilant, A.V.; sober-minded for sober, A.V.; orderly for of good
behavior, A.V. The bishop (see note on 1Ti_3:1); "a bishop" is better English.
Without reproach ( ἀνεπίληπτος ); only here and 1Ti_5:7 and 1Ti_6:14 in the ew
Testament; not found anywhere in the LXX, but used by Thucydides, Euripides,
and others, in the sense of "not open to attack," "blameless." The metaphor is said
(though denied by others)to be from wrestling or boxing, when a man leaves no part
of his body exposed to the attack of his adversary. The husband of one wife (comp.
Tit_1:6). Three senses are possible. The passage may be understood
(1) as requiring a bishop, (or presbyter) to have a wife, and so some took it even in
Chrysostom's time (though he does not so understand it), and so the Russian
Church understands it;
(2) as prohibiting his having more than one with at a time;
(3) as prohibiting second marriages for priests and bishops. Bishop Wordsworth,
Bishop Ellicott, and Dean Alford, among English commentators, all agree in
thinking that (3) is the apostle's meaning. In spite of such consensus, it appears in
the highest degree improbable that St. Paul should have laid down such a condition
for the priesthood. There is nothing in his writings when treating expressly of
second marriages (Rom_7:2, Rom_7:3; 1Co_7:8, 1Co_7:39) to suggest the notion of
there being anything disreputable in a second marriage, and it would obviously cast
a great slur upon second marriages if it were laid down as a principle that no one
who had married twice was fit to be an ἐπίσκοπος . But if we consider the general
laxity in regard to marriage, and the facility of divorce, which prevailed among

Jews and Romans at this time, it must have been a common thing for a man to have
more than one woman living who had been his wife. And this, as a distinct breach of
the primeval law (Gen_2:24), would properly be a bar to any one being called to the
"office of a bishop." The same case is supposed in 1Co_7:10-13. But it is utterly
unsupported by any single passage in Scripture that a second marriage should
disqualify a man for the sacred ministry. As regards the opinion of the early
Church, it was not at all uniform, and amongst those who held that this passage
absolutely prohibits second marriages in the case of an episcopus, it was merely a
part of the asceticism of the day. As a matter of course, such writers as Origen and
Tertullian held it. The very early opinion that Joseph, the husband of Mary, had
children by a former wife, which finds place in the Protevangelium of James (9.), is
hardly consistent with the theory of the disreputableness of second marriages. In
like manner, the phrase in 1Ti_5:9, ἐνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή , is best explained in
accordance with the apostle's doctrine about the lawfulness of a woman's second
marriage, as meaning that she was the husband of one man only, as long as her
husband lived. (For the chief patristic opinions on the subject, see Bishop
Wordsworth's note, and Bingham's 'Christian Antiquities,' bk. 4. 1Ti_5:1-25.)
Temperate ( νηφάλιον ); peculiar to the pastoral Epistles (see 1Ti_5:11 and Tit_2:2),
but found in classical Greek. The verb νήφειν means "to be sober" (1Th_5:6; 2Ti_
4:5; 1Pe_1:13; 1Pe_4:7; 1Pe_5:8). It denotes that temperate use of meat and drink
which keeps the mind watchful and on the alert, and then the state of mind itself so
produced. The opposite state of mind is described in Luk_21:34. Sober-minded (
σώφρονα ); in the ew Testament only here and in Tit_1:8; Tit_2:2, Tit_2:5. But
σωφρονέω is found in the Gospels and Epistles; σωφρονίζω σωφρονισµός
σωφρόνως , in the pastoral Epistles; and σωφροσύνη in 1Ti_2:15 (where see note).
Orderly ( κόσµιον ; see 1Ti_2:9, note). Given to hospitality ( φιλόξενον ; as Tit_1:8
and 1Pe_4:9). The substantive φιλοξενία is found in Rom_12:13; Heb_13:2. Apt to
teach ( διδακτικόν ); only here and 2Ti_2:24, and Philo, 'De Proem. et Virt.,' 4
(Huther). The classical word is διδασκαλικός , though chiefly applied to things. In
the above-quoted passage in 1Pe_4:1-19. the gifts of speaking and ministering are, as
here, placed alongside that of hospitality.
EXPOSITORS BIBLE, "THE APOSTLE’S RULE RESPECTI G SECO D
MARRIAGES; ITS MEA I G A D PRESE T OBLIGATIO . - 1Ti_3:2
THE Apostle here states, as one of the first qualifications to be looked for in a
person who is to be ordained a bishop, that he must be "the husband of one wife."
The precise meaning of this phrase will probably never cease to be discussed. But,
although it must be admitted that the phrase is capable of bearing several meanings,
yet it cannot be fairly contended that the meaning is seriously doubtful. The balance
of probability is so largely in favor of one of the meanings, that the remainder may
be reasonably set aside as having no valid ground for being supported in
competition with it.

Three passages in which the phrase occurs have to be considered together, and these
have to be compared with a fourth.
(1) There is the passage before us about a bishop,
(2) another in ver. 12 (1Ti_3:12) about deacons, and
(3) another in Tit_1:6 about elders or presbyters, whom St. Paul afterwards
mentions under the title of bishop.
In these three passages we have it plainly set forth that Timothy and Titus are to
regard it as a necessary qualification in a bishop or elder or presbyter, and also in a
deacon, that he should be a "man of one woman" or "husband of one wife" ( ìéáò
ãõíáéêïñ ). In the fourth passage {1Ti_3:2} he gives as a necessary qualification of
one who is to be placed on the roll of Church widows, that she must be a "woman of
one man" or "wife of one husband" ( åíï ). This fourth passage is of much
importance in determining the meaning of the converse expression in the other three
passages.
There are four main interpretations of the expression in question.
1. That which the phrase at once suggests to a modern mind, -that the person to be
ordained bishop or deacon must have only one wife and not more; that he must not
be a polygamist. According to this interpretation, therefore, we are to understand
the Apostle to mean, that a Jew or barbarian with more wives than one might be
admitted to baptism and become a member of the congregation, but ought not to be
admitted to the ministry. This explanation, which at first sight looks simple and
plausible, will not bear inspection. It is quite true that polygamy in St. Paul’s day
still existed among the Jews. Justin Martyr, in the "Dialogue with Trypho," says to
the Jews, "It is better for you to follow God than your senseless and blind teachers,
who even to this day allow you each to have four and five wives" (134). But
polygamy in the Roman Empire must have been rare. It was forbidden by Roman
law, which did not allow a man to have more than one lawful wife at a time, and

treated every simultaneous second marriage, not only as null and void, but
infamous. Where it was practiced it must have been practiced secretly. It is probable
that, when St. Paul wrote to Timothy and Titus, not a single polygamist had been
converted to the Christian faith. Polygamists were exceedingly rare inside the
Empire, and the Church had not yet spread beyond it. Indeed, our utter ignorance
as to the way in which the primitive Church dealt with polygamists who wished to
become Christians amounts to something like proof that such cases were extremely
uncommon. How improbable, therefore, that St. Paul should think it worth while to
charge both Timothy and Titus that converted polygamists must not be admitted to
the office of bishop, when there is no likelihood that a one of them knew of a single
instance of a polygamist who had become a Christian! On these grounds alone this
interpretation of the phrase might be safely rejected.
But these grounds do not stand alone. There is the convincing evidence of the
converse phrase, "wife of one husband." If men with more than one wife were very
rare in the Roman Empire, what are we to think of women with more than one
husband? Even among the barbarians outside the Empire, such a thing as a
plurality of husbands was regarded as monstrous. It is incredible that St. Paul could
have had any such case in his mind, when he mentioned the qualification "wife of
one husband." Moreover, as the question before him was one relating to widows,
this "wife of one husband" must be a person who at the time had no husband. The
phrase, therefore, can only mean a woman who after the death of her husband has
not married again. Consequently the converse expression, "husband of one wife,"
cannot have any reference to polygamy.
2. Far more worthy of consideration is the view that what is aimed at in both cases is
not polygamy, but divorce. Divorce, as we know from abundant evidence, was very
frequent both among the Jews and the Romans in the first century of the Christian
era. Among the former it provoked the special condemnation of Christ; and one of
the many influences which Christianity had upon Roman law was to diminish the
facilities for divorce. According to Jewish practice the husband could obtain a
divorce for very trivial reasons; and in the time of St. Paul Jewish women sometimes
took the initiative. According to Roman practice either husband or wife could
obtain a divorce very easily. Abundant instances are on record, and that in the case
of people of high character, such as Cicero. After the divorce either of the parties
could marry again; and often enough both of them did so; therefore in the Roman
Empire in St. Paul’s day there must have been plenty of persons of both sexes who
had been divorced once or twice and had married again. There is nothing
improbable in the supposition that quite a sufficient number of such persons had
been converted to Christianity to make it worth while to legislate respecting them.
They might be admitted to baptism; but they must not be admitted to an official
position in the Church. A regulation of this kind might be all the more necessary,
because in a wealthy capital like Ephesus it would probably be among the upper

and more influential classes that divorces would be most frequent; and from
precisely these classes, when any of them had become Christians, officials would be
likely to be chosen. This explanation, therefore, of the phrases "husband of one
wife" and "wife of one husband" cannot be condemned, like the first, as utterly
incredible. It has a fair amount of probability: but it remains to be seen whether
another explanation (which really includes this one) has not a far greater amount.
3. We may pass over without much discussion the view that the phrases are a vague
way of indicating misconduct of any kind in reference to marriage. o doubt such
misconduct was rife among the heathen, and the Christian Church by no means
escaped the taint, as the scandals in the Church of Corinth and the frequent
warnings of the Apostles against sins of this kind show. But when St. Paul has to
speak of such things he is not afraid to do so in language that cannot be
misunderstood. We have seen this already in the first chapter of this Epistle; and the
fifth chapters of 1 Corinthians, Galatians, and Ephesians supply other examples.
We may safely say that if St. Paul had meant to indicate persons who had entered
into illicit unions before or after marriage, he would have used much less ambiguous
language than the phrases under discussion.
4. There remains the view, which from the first has been the dominant one, that
these passages all refer to second marriage after the first marriage has been
dissolved by death. A widower who has married a second wife ought not to be
admitted to the ministry; a widow who has married a second husband ought not to
be placed on the roll of Church widows. This interpretation is reasonable in itself, is
in harmony with the context and with what St. Paul says elsewhere about marriage,
and is confirmed by the views taken of second marriages in the case of clergy by the
early Church.
(a) The belief that St. Paul was opposed to the ordination of persons who had
contracted a second marriage is reasonable in itself. A second marriage, although
perfectly lawful and in some cases advisable, was so far a sign of weakness; and a
double family would in many cases be a serious hindrance to work. The Church
could not afford to enlist any but its strongest men among its officers; and its
officers must not be hampered more than other men with domestic cares. Moreover,
the heathen certainly felt a special respect for the univira, the woman who did not
enter into a second marriage; and there is some reason for believing that second
marriages were sometimes thought unfitting in the case of men, e.g., in the case of
certain priests. Be that as it may, we may safely conclude that, both by Christians
and heathen, persons who had abstained from marrying again would so far be more
respected than those who had not abstained.

(b) This interpretation is in harmony with the context. In the passage before us the
qualification which immediately precedes the expression, "husband of one wife," is
"without reproach"; in the Epistle to Titus it is "blameless." In each case the
meaning seems to be that there must be nothing in the past or present life of the
candidate, which could afterwards with any show of reason be urged against him as
inconsistent with his office. He must be above and not below the average of men;
and therefore he must not have been twice married.
(c) This agrees with what St. Paul says elsewhere about marriage. His statements are
clear and consistent, and it is a mistake to suppose that there is any want of
harmony between what is said in this Epistle and what is said to the Corinthian
Church on this subject. The Apostle strongly upholds the lawfulness of marriage for
all. {1Co_7:28; 1Co_7:36; 1Ti_4:3} For those who are equal to it, whether single or
widowed, he considers that their remaining as they are is the more blessed
condition. {1Co_7:1; 1Co_7:7-8; 1Co_7:32; 1Co_7:34; 1Co_7:40; 1Ti_5:7} But so
few persons are equal to this that it is prudent for those who desire to marry to do
so, and for those who desire to marry again to do so. {1Co_7:2; 1Co_7:9; 1Co_7:39;
1Ti_5:14} These being his convictions is it not reasonable to suppose that in selecting
ministers for the Church he would look for them in the class which had given proof
of moral strength by remaining unmarried or by not marrying a second time? In an
age of such boundless licentiousness continency won admiration and respect; and a
person who had given clear evidence of such self-control would have his moral
influence thereby increased. Few things impress barbarous and semi-barbarous
people more than to see a man having full control over passions to which they
themselves are slaves. In the terrific odds which the infant Church had to encounter,
this was a point well worth turning to advantage.
And here we may note St. Paul’s wisdom in giving no preference to those who had
not married at all over those who had married only once. Had he done so, he would
have played into the hands of those heretics who disparaged wedlock. And perhaps
he had seen something of the evils which abounded among the celibate priests of
heathenism. It is quite obvious that, although he in no way discourages celibacy
among the clergy, yet he assumes that among them, as among the laity, marriage
will be the rule and abstaining the exception; so much so, that he does not think of
giving any special directions for the guidance of a celibate bishop or a celibate
deacon.
5. Lastly, this interpretation of the phrases in question is strongly confirmed by the
views of leading Christians on the subject in the first few centuries, and by the

decrees of councils; these being largely influenced by St. Paul’s language, and
therefore being a guide as to what his words were then supposed to mean.
Hermas, Clement of Alexandria, of course Tertullian, and among later Fathers,
Chrysostom, Epiphanius, and Cyril, all write in disparagement of second marriages,
not as sin, but as weakness. To marry again is to fall short of the high perfection set
before us in the Gospel constitution. Athenagoras goes so far as to call a second
marriage "respectable adultery," and to say that one who thus severs himself from
his dead wife is an "adulterer in disguise." Respecting the clergy, Origen says
plainly, " either a bishop, nor a presbyter, nor a deacon, nor a widow, can be twice
married." The canons of councils are not less plain, either as to the discouragement
of second marriages among the laity, or their incompatibility with what was then
required of the clergy. The synods of Ancyra (Song of Solomon 19), of eocaesarea
(Son_3:1-11; Son_7:1-13), and of Laodicea (Son_1:1-17) subjected lay persons who
married more than once to a penalty. This penalty seems to have varied in different
Churches; but in some cases it involved excommunication for a time. The Council of
icaea, on the other hand, makes it a condition that members of the Puritan sect of
Cathari are not to be received into the Church unless they promise in writing to
communicate with those who have married a second time (Son_8:1-14). The
"Apostolic Constitutions" (6:17) and the so-called "Apostolic Canons" (17)
absolutely forbid the promotion of one who has married twice, to be a bishop,
presbyter, or deacon; and the "Apostolic Constitutions" forbid the marriage of one
who is already in Holy Orders. He may marry once before he is ordained: but if he
is single at his ordination he must remain so all his life. Of course, if his wife dies he
is not to marry again. Even singers, readers, and door-keepers, although they may
marry after they have been admitted to office, yet are in no case to marry a second
time or to marry a widow. And the widow of a cleric was not allowed to marry a
second time.
All these rigorous views and enactments leave little doubt as to how the early
Church understood St. Paul’s language: viz, that one who had exhibited the
weakness of marrying a second time was not to be admitted to the ministry. From
this they drew the inference that one who was already in orders must not be allowed
to marry a second time. And from this they drew the further inference that entering
into a marriage contract at all was inadmissible for one who was already a bishop,
presbyter, or deacon. Marriage was not a bar to ordination, but ordination was a
bar to marriage. Married men might become clergy, but the higher orders of clergy
might not become married.
A little thought will show that neither of these inferences follows from St. Paul’s
rule; and we have good reason for doubting whether he would have sanctioned

either of them. The Apostle rules that those who have shown want of moral strength
in taking a second wife are not to be ordained deacons or presbyters. But he
nowhere says or hints that, if they find in themselves a want of moral strength of
this kind after their ordination, they are to be made to bear a burden to which they
are unequal. On the contrary, the general principle, which he so clearly lays down,
decides the case: "If they have not continency, let them marry: for it is better to
marry than to burn." And if this holds good of clergy who have lost their first wives,
it holds good at least as strongly of those who were unmarried at the time of their
ordination. Those Churches, therefore, which, like our own, allow the clergy to
marry, and even to marry a second time, after ordination, may rightly claim to have
the Apostle on their side.
But there are Churches, and among them the Church of England, which disregard
the Apostle’s directions, in admitting those who have been more than once married
to the deaconate, and even to the episcopate. What defense is to be made of an
apparent laxity, which seems to amount to lawlessness? The answer is that there is
nothing to show that St. Paul is giving rules which are to bind the Church for all
time. It is quite possible that his directions are given "by reason of the present
distress." We do not consider ourselves bound by the regulation, which has far
higher authority than that of a single Apostle, respecting the eating of blood and of
things strangled. The first council, at which most of the Apostles were present,
forbade the eating of these things. It also forbade the eating of things offered to
idols. St. Paul himself led the way in showing that this restriction is not always
binding: and the whole Church has come to disregard the other. Why? Because in
none of these case is the act sinful in itself. While the Jewish converts were likely to
be scandalized by seeing their fellow-Christians eating blood, it was expedient to
forbid it; and while heathen converts were likely to think lightly of idolatry, if they
saw their fellow-Christians eating what had been offered in sacrifice to an idol, it
was expedient to forbid it. When these dangers ceased, the reason for the enactment
ceased; and the enactment was rightly disregarded. The same principle applies to
the ordination of persons who have been twice married. owadays a man is not
considered less strong than his fellows, because he has married a second time. To
refuse to ordain such a person would be to lose a minister at a time when the need of
additional ministers is great; and this loss would be without compensation.
And we have evidence that in the primitive Church the Apostle’s rule about
bigamists was not considered absolute. In one of his Montanist treatises Tertullian
taunts the Catholics in having even among their bishops men who had married
twice, and who did not blush when the Pastoral Epistles were read; and Hippolytus,
in his fierce attack on Callistus, Bishop of Rome, states that under him men who had
been twice and thrice married were ordained bishops, priests, and deacons. And we
know that a distinction was made in the Greek Church between those who had
married twice as Christians, and those who had concluded the second marriage

before baptism. The latter were not excluded from ordination. And some went so far
as to say that if the first marriage took place before baptism, and the second
afterwards, the man was to be considered as having been married only once. This
freedom in interpreting the Apostle’s rule not unnaturally led to its being, in some
branches of the Church, disregarded. St. Paul says, "Do not ordain a man who has
married more than once." If you may say, "This man, who has married more than
once, shall be accounted as having married only once; you may equally well say, The
Apostle’s rule was only a temporary one, and we have the right to judge of its
suitableness to our times and to particular circumstances." We may feel confidence
that in such a matter it was not St. Paul’s wish to deprive Churches throughout all
time of their liberty of judgment, and the Church of England is thus justified.
3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle,
not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
BAR ES, "Not given to wine - Margin, “Not ready to quarrel and offer wrong, as
one in wine.” The Greek word (πάροινος paroinos) occurs in the New Testament only
here and in Tit_1:7. It means, properly, “by wine;” i. e., spoken of what takes place “by”
or “over” wine, as revelry, drinking songs, etc. Then it denotes, as it does here, one who
sits “by” wine; that is, who is in the habit of drinking it. It cannot be inferred, from the
use of the word here, that wine was absolutely and entirely prohibited; for the word does
not properly express that idea. It means that one who is in the habit of drinking wine, or
who is accustomed to sit with those who indulge in it, should not be admitted to the
ministry. The way in which the apostle mentions the subject here would lead us fairly to
suppose that he did not mean to commend its use in any sense; that he regarded its use
as dangerous, and that he would wish the ministers of religion to avoid it altogether. In
regard to its use at all, except at the communion or as a medicine, it may be remarked,
that a minister will do no injury to himself or others by letting it entirely alone; he may
do injury by indulging in it. No man is under any “obligation” of courtesy or Christian
duty to use it; thousands of ministers of the gospel have brought ruin on themselves, and
disgrace on the ministry, by its use; compare Mat_11:9 note, and 1Ti_5:23 note.
No striker - He must be a peaceable, not a quarrelsome man. This is connected with
the caution about the use of wine, probably, because that is commonly found to produce
a spirit of contention and strife.
Not greedy of filthy lucre - Not contentious or avaricious. Greek, Not desirous of

base gain. The desire of this is condemned everywhere in the New Testament; but it is
especially the duty of a minister of the gospel to be free from it. He has a right to a
support (see the notes on 1 Cor. 9); but there is nothing that more certainly paralyzes the
usefulness of a minister of the gospel than the love of money. There is an instinctive
feeling in the human bosom that such a man ought to be actuated by a nobler and a
purer principle. As avarice, moreover, is the great sin of the world - the sin that sways
more hearts, and does more to hinder the progress of the gospel, than all others
combined - it is important in the highest degree that the minister of religion should be
an example of what men “should” be, and that he, by his whole life, should set his face
against that which is the main obstruction to the progress of that gospel which he is
appointed to preach.
But patient - Modest, mild, gentle. See the word (Greek) in Phi_4:5; Tit_3:2; Jam_
3:17, and 1Pe_2:18, where it is rendered “gentle.” The word means that the minister of
the gospel should be a man of mild and kind demeanor, such as his Master was.
Not a brawler - compare 2Ti_2:24. That is, he should not be a man given to
contention, or apt to take up a quarrel. The Greek is, literally, “Not disposed to fight.”
Not covetous - Greek, “Not a lover of silver;” that is, of money. A man should not be
put into the ministry who is characteristically a lover of money. Such a one, no matter
what his talents may be, has no proper qualification for the office, and will do more
harm than good.
CLARKE, "An eighth article in his character is, he must not be given to wine; µη
παροινον. This word not only signifies one who is inordinately attached to wine, a
winebibber or tippler, but also one who is imperious, abusive, insolent, whether through
wine or otherwise. Kypke contends for this latter acceptation here. See his proofs and
examples.
Ninth - He must be no striker; µη πληκτην, not quarrelsome; not ready to strike a
person who may displease him; no persecutor of those who may differ from him;
not prone, as one wittily said,
“To prove his doctrine orthodox
By apostolic blows and knocks.”
It is said of Bishop Bonner, of infamous memory, that, when examining the poor
Protestants whom he termed heretics, when worsted by them in argument he was used
to smite them with his fists, and sometimes scourge and whip them. But though he was a
most ignorant and consummate savage, yet from such a scripture as this he might have
seen the necessity of surrendering his mitre.
Tenth - He must not be greedy of filthy lucre; µη αισχροκερδη, not desirous of base
gain; not using base and unjustifiable methods to raise and increase his revenues;
not trading or trafficking; for what would be honorable in a secular character,
would be base and dishonorable in a bishop. Though such a trait should never
appear in the character of a Christian prelate, yet there is much reason to suspect
that the words above are not authentic; they are omitted by ADFG, many others,
the Syriac, all the Arabic, Coptic, (and Sahidic), Ethiopic, Armenian, later Syriac,
(but it appears in the margin), the Vulgate and Itala, and by most of the Greek

fathers. Griesbach has left it out of the text, in which it does not appear that it ever
had a legitimate place. The word covetous, which we have below, expresses all the
meaning of this; and it is not likely that the apostle would insert in the same
sentence two words of the same meaning, because they were different in sound. It
appears to have been borrowed from 1Ti_3:8.
Eleventh - He must be patient; επιεικη, meek, gentle; the opposite to πληκτην, a
quarrelsome person, which it immediately follows when the spurious word
αισχροκερδη is removed. Where meekness and patience do not reign, gravity
cannot exist, and the love of God cannot dwell.
Twelfth - He must not be a brawler; αµαχον, not contentious or litigious, but quiet
and peaceable.
Thirteenth - He must not be covetous; αφιλαργυρον, not a lover of money; not
desiring the office for the sake of its emoluments. He who loves money will stick at
nothing in order to get it. Fair and foul methods are to him alike, provided they
may be equally productive. For the sake of reputation he may wish to get all
honourably; but if that cannot be, he will not scruple to adopt other methods. A
brother heathen gives him this counsel: “Get money if thou canst by fair means; if
not, get it by hook and by crook.”
GILL, "Not given to wine,.... One that does not sit at it, or is continually drinking it,
and is intemperate in the use of it; otherwise it is lawful for persons in such an office to
drink wine, and sometimes absolutely necessary; see 1Ti_5:23 it signifies one that is not
given to much wine, as in 1Ti_3:8 is not addicted to it, or a follower of it; the Syriac
version renders it, "who does not transgress over wine", or go beyond due bounds in the
use of it, who is not immoderate in it; the Arabic version renders it, "not insolent
through wine", as one that is heated with it is fierce and furious, and wrangling and
quarrelsome, and often very mischievous and injurious; and this sense is followed by
some.
No striker; either with his hands, so the Syriac version, "whose hand is not swift to
strike"; not one who is nimble and ready at it, who no sooner is abused or injured, but he
lifts up his hands and strikes; is but a word and a blow: or with his tongue; so the Arabic
version, "not wounding with his tongue"; being too sharp and severe in the admonitions
and reproofs of weak brethren, or fallen believers; and especially, he ought not to use
scurrilous, reproachful, and contumelious language to any; see Jer_18:18.
Not greedy of filthy lucre; not covetous of getting money, of amassing wealth and
riches together; or desirous of popular applause and glory from men. This clause is not
in the Alexandrian copy, nor in five of Beza's manuscripts and other copies, nor is it in
the Vulgate Latin version, nor in any of the Oriental versions; it seems to be transcribed
from Tit_1:7. And indeed it is unnecessary here; since the same is expressed by the word
"covetous", at the end of the verse, and makes that a tautology; and moreover, by leaving
out this clause, the opposition appears more manifest, between "no striker" and what
follows,
but patient; one who patiently bears all reproaches and injuries, puts up with affronts,
and gives up what is his right and due, rather than contend, quarrel, and strike; who is

patient towards all men, and does not bear hard on those that have offended, but is
moderate and mild, and gentle in his censures, reproofs, and admonitions:
not a brawler; not a quarrelsome litigious person, given to fighting, either with the fist
or sword, or any other weapon:
not covetous; or a lover of money in an immoderate way, greedy of worldly substance
and riches, and insatiable in his desires after them; niggardly, sordid, and illiberal;
acting a mercenary part; seeking his own things, and not the things of Christ; his gain
from his quarter, and not the good of souls; and withholding from himself, from his
family, and the poor, what ought to be enjoyed by them. Whereas, on the other hand, he
ought to be generous and liberal, hospitable and charitable, and ready to communicate
on all occasions, according to his abilities.
JAMISO , "Not given to wine — The Greek includes besides this, not indulging in
the brawling, violent conduct towards others, which proceeds from being given to wine.
The opposite of “patient” or (Greek) “forbearing,” reasonable to others (see on Phi_4:5).
no striker — with either hand or tongue: not as some teachers pretending a holy zeal
(2Co_11:20), answering to “not a brawler” or fighter (compare 1Ki_22:24; Neh_13:25;
Isa_58:4; Act_23:2; 2Ti_2:24, 2Ti_2:25).
not covetous — Greek, “not a lover of money,” whether he have much or little (Tit_
1:7).
RWP, "No brawler (mē paroinon). Later word for the earlier paroinios, one who sits
long at (beside, para) his wine. In N.T. only here and Tit_1:3.
No striker (mē plēktēn). Late word from plēssō, to strike. In N.T. only here and Tit_
1:3.
Gentle (epieikē). See note on Phi_4:5 for this interesting word.
Not contentious (amachon). Old word (from a privative and machē), not a fighter.
In N.T. only here and Tit_3:2.
No lover of money (aphilarguron). Late word (a privative and compound
philarguros) in inscriptions and papyri (Nageli; also Deissmann, Light, etc., pp. 85f.). In
N.T. only here and Heb_13:5.
CALVI , "3 ot addicted to wine. By the word πάροινον (56) which is here used, the
Greeks denote not merely drunkenness, but any intemperance in guzzling wine.
And, indeed, to drink wine excessively is not only very unbecoming in a pastor, but
commonly draws along with it many things still worse; such as quarrels, foolish
attitudes, unchaste conduct, and other things which it is not necessary to describe.
But the contrast which is added shortly afterwards, shews that Paul goes farther
than this.

ot a striker, not wickedly desirous of gain (57) As he contrasts with “ striker” one
who is not quarrelsome, and with him who is covetous of dishonest gain (
ἀφιλάργυρον) one who is not covetous, so with τῷ παροίνῳ him who is addicted to
wine, he contrasts one who is gentle or kind. The true interpretation is that which is
given by Chrysostom, that men of a drunken and fierce disposition ought to be
excluded from the office of a bishop. As to the opinion given by Chrysostom, that “
striker” means one who wounds with the tongue, (that is, who is guilty of slander or
of outrageous reproaches,) I do not admit it. or am I moved by his argument, that
it will be no great matter, if the bishop do not strike with the hand; for I think that
here he reproves generally that fierceness which is often found in the military
profession, and which is utterly unbecoming in the servants of Christ. It is well
known to what ridicule they expose themselves, who are more ready to strike a blow
with the fist, and — we might even say — to draw the sword, than to settle the
disputes of others by their own sedate behavior. Strikers is therefore the term which
he applies to those who deal much in threatenings, and are of a warlike
temperament.
All covetous persons are wickedly desirous of gain; for, wherever covetousness is,
there will also be that baseness of which the apostle speaks. “ who wishes to become
rich wishes also to become rich soon.” (58) The consequence is, that all covetous
persons, even though this is not openly manifest, apply their minds to dishonest and
unlawful gains. Accordingly, he contrasts with this vice the contempt of money; as
there is no other remedy by which it can be corrected. He who will not patiently and
mildly endure poverty will never escape the disease of mean and sordid
covetousness.
Mild and not quarrelsome He contrasts with “ striker” the man who is “
quarrelsome.” Mild — which, we have said, is contrasted with being “ to wine” — is
the term applied to him who knows how to bear injuries with a gentle and moderate
disposition, who forgives much, who passes by insults, who neither makes himself be
dreaded through harsh severity, nor exacts with full rigor. ot quarrelsome, one
who avoids disputes and quarrels; for, as he elsewhere writes,
“ servant of the Lord must not be quarrelsome.”
(2Ti_2:24.)
(56) “ expositors, ancient and modern, take this to be equivalent to ὑβριστὴν or
αὐθάδη; which is, indeed, much countenanced by three vices in this clause, standing
opposed to the three virtues in the next. But considering that we have at 1Ti_3:8 the
expression µή οἴνῳ προσέχοντας used of the deacons, here at least the physical sense
must be included; and, according to every principle of correct exegesis, it must stand
first. In the word πάροινος, the παρὰ means beyond, denoting excess. So the
expression in Hab_2:5, ‘ transgresseth by wine.” — Bloomfield.

(57) “ e convoiteux de gain deshonneste.” — “ covetous of dishonourable gain.”
(58) “Dives fieri qui vult, Et cito vult fieri.” — Juvenal.
BURKITT, "
The negative characater of a bishop now follows, showing what he must not be.
ot given to wine; that is, to much wine, no inordinate lover either of wine or strong
drink, no wine-bibber, no sitter at wine in his own house, much less at taverns and
public houses:
no striker, either with hands or tongue, no quarreller, that cannot keep his hand
from hurting, no word-striker, no striker with the tongue, and passion, and anger; a
word, we say, wounds deeper than a sword; the ministers of God may wound the
consciences of men with the sword of the Spirit, but they must not wound the
reputations of men with their own wrathful spirits; we must use our tongues rather
to heal than wound, or if at any time to wound, it must be in order to healing:
not guilty of filthy lucre; no inordinate lover of money, which makes a man base and
sordid, both in getting, keeping, and spending:
but patient, meek, and forbearing, not rigidly exacting his due, not acting summo
jure, but rather parting with somewhat which in strictness may be his right for
peace-sake;
not a brawler, or contentious person, often engaged in law-suits, but of a mild and
peaceable disposition;
not covetous, or enslaved to the love of wealth; possess he may the good things of
this life, but not be possessed by them.
PULPIT, " o brawler for not given to wine, A.V.; the R.T. omits the clause µὴ
αἰσξρερδη ; gentle for patient, A.V.; contentious for a brawler, A.V.; no lover of
money, for not covetous, A.V. o brawler ( µὴ πάροινον ); only here and Tit_1:7;
but, as well as παροίνιος , common in classical Greek, in the sense of "quarrelsome
over wine." In Mat_11:19 and Luk_7:34 "wine-bibber" is οἰνοπότης . In 1Pe_4:3
the word for "excess of wine" is οἰνοφλυγία . o striker ( µὴ τλήκτην ); only here
and Tit_1:7. It is used, though rarely, in classical Greek for a "striker," "brawler."
There is but weak manuscript authority for the reading in the T.R., µὴ αἰσχροκερδῆ
, not given to filthy lucre, which is thought to have been derived from Tit_1:7 (q.v.).
The internal evidence, however, is in its favor, as something is wanted to correspond
to ἀφιλάργυρον , just as πάροινον and πλήκτην correspond to ἐπιεικῆ and at,
ἄµαχον respectively. Gentle ( ἐπιεικῆ ); as Tit_3:2. So also it is rendered in the A.V.
of Jas_3:17; 1Pe_2:18. It is very common in classical Greek, in the sense of "fair,"
"meet," "suitable," of things; and of "fair," "kind," "gentle," of persons. The
substantive ἐπιεικεία means "clemency," "gentleness," (Act_24:4; 2Co_10:1). ot
contentious ( ἄµαχον ); only here and Tit_3:3 in the ew Testament, and in Ecclus.

19:5 in the Complutensian edition. It is also used in this sense in AEschylus, 'Persse,'
955, though its more common meaning in classical Greek is "invincible." o lover of
money ( ἀφιλάργυρον ); only here and Hebrews xiii, 5. Ἁφιλαργυρία occurs in
Hippocrates. The positive φιλάργυρος , φιλαργυρία , occurs in 1Ti_6:10; 2Ti_3:2;
Luk_16:14. either the A.V. nor the R.V. quite preserves the form of the original
sentence, where the three negative qualities ( µὴ πάροινον µὴ πλήκτην µὴ
αἰσχροκερδῆ , T.R.) are followed by three positive qualities ( ἐπιοικῆ ἄµαχον
ἀφιλάργυρον —"gentle," "peaceful," and "indifferent about money").
4 He must manage his own family well and see
that his children obey him, and he must do so in a
manner worthy of full[a] respect.
BAR ES, "One that ruleth well his own house - This implies that a minister of
the gospel would be, and ought to be, a married man. It is everywhere in the New
Testament supposed that he would be a man who could be an example in all the
relations of life. The position which he occupies in the church has a strong resemblance
to the relation which a father sustains to his household; and a qualification to govern a
family well, would be an evidence of a qualification to preside properly in the church. It
is probable that, in the early Christian church, ministers were not unfrequently taken
from those of mature life, and who were, at the time, at the head of families; and, of
course, such would be men who had had an opportunity of showing that they had this
qualification for the office. Though, however, this cannot be insisted on now as a
“previous” qualification for the office, yet it is still true that, if he has a family, it is a
necessary qualification, and that a man in the ministry “should be” one who governs his
own house well. A want of this will always be a hindrance to extensive usefulness.
Having his children in subjection with all gravity - This does not mean that his
“children” should evince gravity, whatever may be true on that point; but it refers “to the
father.” He should be a grave or serious man in his family; a man free from levity of
character, and from frivolity and fickleness, in his conversation with his children. It does
not mean that he should be severe, stern, morose - which are traits that are often
mistaken for gravity, and which are as inconsistent with the proper spirit of a father as
frivolity of manner - but that he should be a serious and sober-minded man. He should
maintain proper “dignity” (σεµνότης semnotēs); he should maintain self-respect, and his

deportment should be such as to inspire others with respect for him.
CLARKE, "The fourteenth qualification of a Christian bishop is, that he ruleth well
his own house; του ιδιου οικου καλως προιʷσταµενον, one who properly presides over and
governs his own family. One who has the command, of his own house, not by sternness,
severity, and tyranny, but with all gravity; governing his household by rule, every one
knowing his own place, and each doing his own work, and each work having the proper
time assigned for its beginning and end. This is a maxim of common sense; no family
can be prosperous that is not under subjection, and no person can govern a family but
the head of it, the husband, who is, both by nature and the appointment of God, the head
or governor of his own house. See the note on Eph_5:22.
GILL, "One that ruleth well his own house,.... His family, wife, children, and
servants; and is not to be understood of his body, and of keeping of that under, and of
preserving it chaste and temperate, as appears from what follows:
having his children in subjection with all gravity; keeping a good decorum in his
family; obliging his children to observe his orders, and especially the rules of God's
word; and not as Eli, who did not use his authority, or lay his commands upon his sons,
nor restrain them from evil, or severely reprove them for their sins, but neglected them,
and was too mild and gentle with them;
1Sa 2:23 3:13 but like Abraham, who not only taught, but commanded his children and
his household, to keep the way of the Lord; Gen_18:19 and so should those act who are
in such an office as is here treated of; and should not only rule well in their families,
preside over them, go before them, and set an example to them, and keep their children
in obedience and subjection; but this should be "with all gravity": not only in the master
of the family, but in the children; who as their father is, or should be, should be brought
up in, and used to gravity in words and in dress; and in the whole of their deportment
and conversation. This may he observed against the Papists, who forbid marriage to the
ministers of the Gospel.
JAMISO , "ruleth — Greek, “presiding over.”
his own house — children and servants, as contrasted with “the church” (house) of
God (1Ti_3:5, 1Ti_3:15) which he may be called on to preside over.
having his children — rather as Greek, “having children (who are) in subjection”
(Tit_1:6).
gravity — propriety: reverent modesty on the part of the children [Alford]. The fact
that he has children who are in subjection to him in all gravity, is the recommendation
in his favor as one likely to rule well the Church.
CALVI , "4Who ruleth well his own house Hence it is evident, that Paul does not
demand that a bishop shall be unacquainted within human life, (59) but that he
shall be a good and praiseworthy master of a household; for, whatever may be the

admiration commonly entertained for celibacy and a philosophical life altogether
removed from ordinary custom, yet wise and thoughtful men are convinced by
experience, that they who are not ignorant of ordinary life, but are practiced in the
duties of human intercourse, are better trained and adapted for governing the
Church. And, therefore, we ought to observe the reason which is added, (1Ti_3:5,)
that he who does not know how to rule his family, Will not be qualified for
governing the Church. ow, this is the case with very many persons, and indeed
with almost all who have been drawn out of an idle and solitary life, (60) as out of
dens and caverns; for they are a sort of savages and destitute of humanity.
Who hath his children in subjection with, all reverence The apostle does not
recommend a clever man, and deeply skilled in domestic matters, but one who has
learned to govern a family by wholesome discipline. He speaks chiefly of children,
who may be expected to possess the natural disposition of their father; and therefore
it will be a great disgrace to a bishop, if he has children who lead a wicked and
scandalous life. As to wives, he will speak of them afterwards; but at present, as I
have said, he glances at the most important part of a house.
In the Epistle to Titus, (Tit_1:6,) he shows what is here meant by the word
reverence; for, after having said that the children of a bishop must not be unruly
and disobedient, he likewise adds,
“ liable to the reproach of profligacy or of intemperance.”
He therefore means, in a word, that their morals shall be regulated by all chastity,
modesty, and gravity.
(59) “Que I’ ne sache que c’ de vivre au Monde.” — “ the bishop shall not know
what it is to live in the world.”
(60) “C’ a dire, de la moinerie.” — “ is, from monkhood.”
BURKITT, "A bishop being a ruler in the church of God, Timothy is advised to
choose such a one to rule in the church that well and wisely governs his own family,
having his children in due subjection, and both he and they behaving themselves
with becoming gravity; and St. Paul subjoins a reason for this apostolical
injunction, arguing from the less to the greater, thus: "The church is a large family,
the bishop's house a less; the former requires a greater skill in governing of it than
the latter: if then a man cannot rule a less province, how shall he manage a greater?
If he cannot keep up his authority with decency and becoming gravity in his own
family, how shall such a one be thought fit to be entrusted with the care of the
church of God?"
Great are the obligations which lie upon the ministers of God, above all men, to
guide and govern their own families, to keep their children in due subjection, and
their servants in great order; because their family miscarriages reflect greatly upon

their authority and prudence, and the world will pronounce them unfit for rule in
the church of God, who cannot govern their own house. If a man know not how to
rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?
Learn hence, That he who knows now to rule his own house well, is in a good
posture of spirit for public rule; the same wisdom, justice, and holiness for kind, but
more extensive, acts in either sphere, and will regularly move in both.
PULPIT, "One that ruleth well his own house. The ἐπίσκοπος is one who has to
preside over and rule ( προίστασθαι ) the house of God (1Ti_5:17; Rom_12:8; 1Th_
5:12), as the high priest was called "ruler of the house of God" (1Ch_9:11; eh_
11:11). So in Justin Martyr the bishop is called ὁ προεστῶς τῶν ἀδελφῶν
('Apology,' 11) and simply ὁ προεστῶς , and similarly in Heb_13:7 the clergy are οἱ
ἡγούµενοι ὑµῶν , "they which have the rule over you." How needful, then, is it that
he should rule well his own house, and have his own children in subjection! The
testimony given in this passage to a married clergy is too clear to need any comment.
In subjection ( ἐν ὑποταγῇ ); as above, 1Ti_2:11, where see note. For the sense,
comp. Tit_1:6, which leads us to apply the words, with all gravity ( σεµνότητος ), the
contrary to "riot," ἀσωτία ), to the children. The children of the ἐπίσκοπος are to
exhibit that seriousness and sobriety of conduct which is in accordance with their
father's office, µετά , together with, as in 1Ti_1:14.
5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his
own family, how can he take care of God’s
church?)
BAR ES, "For if a man know not how to rule - This is a beautiful and striking
argument. A church resembles a family. It is, indeed, larger, and there is a greater variety
of dispositions in it than there is in a family. The authority of a minister of the gospel in
a church is also less absolute than that of a father. But still there is a striking
resemblance. The church is made up of an assemblage of brothers and sisters. They are
banded together for the same purposes, and have a common object to aim at. They have
common feelings and common needs. They have sympathy, like a family, with each other
in their distresses and afflictions. The government of the church also is designed to be

“paternal.” It should be felt that he who presides over it has the feelings of a father; that
he loves all the members of the great family; that he has no prejudices, no partialities, no
selfish aims to gratify.
Now, if a man cannot govern his own family well; if he is severe, partial, neglectful, or
tyrannical at home, how can he be expected to take charge of the more numerous
“household of faith” with proper views and feelings? If, with all the natural and strong
ties of affection which bind a father to his own children; if, when they are few
comparatively in number, and where his eye is constantly upon them, he is unable to
govern them aright, how can he be expected to preside in a proper manner over the
larger household where he will be bound with comparatively feebler ties, and where he
will be exposed more to the influence of passion, and where he will have a much less
constant opportunity of supervision? Confucius, as quoted by Doddridge, has a
sentiment strikingly resembling that before us: “It is impossible that he who knows not
how to govern and reform his own family, should rightly govern and reform a people.”
We may remark, also, in this verse, a delicate and beautiful use of words by the apostle
to prevent the possibility of misapprehension. While he institutes a comparison between
the government of a family and that of the church, he guards against the possibility of its
being supposed that he would countenance “arbitrary” authority in the church, even
such authority as a father must of necessity employ in his own family. Hence, he uses
different words. He speaks of the father as “ruling” over his own family, or “presiding
over it” - προστᇿναι prostēnai; he describes the minister of religion as “having a tender
care for the church” - ᅚπιµελᆱσεται epimelēsetai.
CLARKE, "For if a man know not - Method is a matter of great importance in all
the affairs of life. It is a true saying, He that does little with his head must do much with
his hands; and even then the business is not half done for want of method. Now, he who
has a proper method of doing business will show it in every affair of life, even the least.
He who has a disorderly family has no government of that family; he probably has none
because he has no method, no plan, of presiding. It was natural for the apostle to say, If a
man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God?
Look at a man’s domestic arrangements; if they be not good, he should not be trusted
with any branch of government, whether ecclesiastical or civil.
GILL, "For if a man know not how to rule his own house,.... Which is an affair
of less importance, and more easy to be done; not requiring so much resolution,
prudence, care, and thought:
how shall he take care of the church of God? preside over it, rule in it, provide for
it, and see that everything is in its proper place, and done according to the will of God.
The argument is from the lesser to the greater.
JAMISO , "For — Greek, “But.”
the church — rather, “a church” or congregation. How shall he who cannot perform
the lesser function, perform the greater and more difficult?

RWP, "If a man knoweth not (ei tis ouk oiden). Condition of first class, assumed
as true.
How to rule (prostēnai). Second aorist active infinitive of same verb proistēmi and
with oiden means “know how to rule,” not “know that he rules.”
How (pōs). Rhetorical question expecting negative answer.
Shall he take care of (epimelēsetai). Future middle of epimeleomai, old compound
(epi, direction of care towards) verb, in lxx, in N.T. only here and Luk_10:34.
The church of God (ekklēsias theou). Anarthrous as in 1Ti_3:15, elsewhere with
article (1Co_10:32; 1Co_15:9; 2Co_1:1; Gal_1:13). The local church described as
belonging to God. No one in N.T. but Paul (Act_20:28) so describes the church. This
verse is a parenthesis in the characteristics of the bishop.
CALVI , "5And if any one know not how to rule his own house (61) This
argument, drawn from the less to the greater, is in itself manifest, that he who is
unfit for governing a family will be altogether unable to govern a people. Besides
that it is evident that he is destitute of the virtues necessary for that purpose, what
authority will he have over the people, seeing that his own house makes him
contemptible?
(61) “ house of a believer ought to be like a little church. Heathens, who did not
know what a church is, said that a house is but an image and figure of any public
government. A poor man, living with his wife and children and servants, ought to be
in his house like a public governor; but Christians ought to go beyond this. Every
father of a family should know that God has appointed him to that place, that he
may know how to govern his wife and children and servants; so that God shall be
honored in the midst of them, and all shall do Him homage. Paul speaks of children;
and why? Because he who wishes to discharge his duty as pastor of a church must
be like a father to all believers. ow, let us suppose that a man cannot govern two or
three children which he has in the house. They are his own children, and yet he
cannot keep them in subjection; they are deaf to all that he says to them. How then
shall he be able to govern those who are at a distance, and who may be said to be
unknown to him, who even refuse to become wiser, and think that they have no need
of being instructed? How shall he be able to keep men in dread when his own wife is
not subject to him? Let us not, therefore, think it strange if it is required in all
pastors, that they be good fathers of a family, and know what it is to govern their
own children well. It is not enough to condemn the children, but we must condemn
the fathers, when they permit their children to be worse than others.” — Fr. Ser.

6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may
become conceited and fall under the same
judgment as the devil.
BAR ES, "Not a novice - Margin, “one newly come to the faith.” The Greek word,
which occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, means, properly, that which is “newly
planted.” Thus it would mean a plant that was not strong, or not fitted to bear the
severity of storms; that had not as yet struck its roots deep, and could not resist the
fierceness of a cold blast. Then the word comes to mean a new convert; one who has had
little opportunity to test his own faith, or to give evidence to others that he would be
faithful to the trust committed to him. The word does not refer so much to one who is
young “in years,” as one who is young “in faith.” Still, all the reasons which apply against
introducing a very recent convert into the ministry, will apply commonly with equal
force against introducing one young in years.
Lest being lifted up with pride - We are not to suppose that this is the only reason
against introducing a recent convert into the ministry, but it is a sufficient reason. He
would be likely to be elated by being entrusted at once with the highest office in the
church, and by the commendations and flattery which he might receive. No condition is
wholly proof against this; but he is much less likely to be injured who has had much
experience of the depravity of his own heart, and whose mind has been deeply imbued
with the spirit of the gospel.
He fall into the condemnation of the devil - That is, the same kind of
condemnation which the devil fell into; to wit, condemnation on account of pride. It is
here intimated that the cause of the apostasy of Satan was pride - a cause which is as
likely to have been the true one as any other. Who can tell but it may have been produced
by some new honor which was conferred on him in heaven, and that his virtue was not
found sufficient for the untried circumstances in which he was placed? Much of the
apostasy from eminent virtue in this world, arises from this cause; and possibly the case
of Satan may have been the most signal instance of this kind which has occurred in the
universe. The idea of Paul is, that a young convert should not suddenly be raised to an
exalted station in the church. Who can doubt the wisdom of this direction? The word
rendered “lifted up” (τυφωθᆯις tuphōtheis), is from a verb which means to smoke, to
fume, to surround with smoke; then to “inflate” - as a bladder is with air; and then to be
conceited or proud; that is, to be “like” a bladder filled, not with a solid substance, but
with air.

CLARKE, "Fifteenth - It is required that he be not a novice - Νεοφυτον· Not a
young plant, not recently ingrafted, that is, one not newly converted to the faith; (old
MS. Bible); one who has been of considerable standing in the Christian Church, if he
have the preceding qualifications, may be safely trusted with the government of that
Church. It is impossible that one who is not long and deeply experienced in the ways of
God can guide others in the way of life. Hence presbyters or elders were generally
appointed to have the oversight of the rest, and hence presbyter and bishop seem to have
been two names for the same office; yet all presbyters or elders certainly were not
bishops, because all presbyters had not the qualifications marked above. But the apostle
gives another reason: Lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the
devil. It is natural for man to think himself of more importance than his fellows when
they are intrusted to his government. The apostle’s term τυφωθεις, puffed up, inflated, is
a metaphor taken from a bladder when filled with air or wind. It is a substance, has a
certain size, is light, can be the sport of the wind, but has nothing in it but air. Such is
the classical coxcomb; a mere puffball, a disgrace to his function, and despised by every
intelligent man. Should we not say to those whom it may concern,
“From such apostles, O ye mitred heads,
Preserve the Church; and lay not careless hands
On skulls that cannot teach, and will not learn.”
From these words of the apostle we are led to infer that pride or self-conceit was the
cause of the devil’s downfall. In Ecclus. 10 there are some excellent sayings concerning
pride: “Pride is hurtful before God and man.” “Why is earth and ashes proud?” “The
beginning of pride is when one departeth from God.” “For pride is the beginning of sin;
and he that hath it shall pour out abomination.” “Pride was not made for Men.” See
verses 7, 9, 12, 13, and 18, of the above chapter.
GILL, "Not a novice,.... Or one newly planted, the Arabic version adds, "in the faith";
meaning not a young man, for so was Timothy himself; but a young professor and
church member; one that is lately come to the knowledge of the truth, and has just
embraced and professed it, and become a member of a church, a new plant there: so the
Hebrew word ‫,נטע‬ "a plant", is by the Septuagint in Job_14:9 rendered by this very word.
The reason why such a person should not be a bishop, elder, or pastor of a church, is,
lest being lifted up with pride; through the dignity of the office he is advanced to,
and the high opinion of men he stands in, and the great gifts qualifying him for such a
place, he is supposed to have: for pride on account of these is apt to creep in, and swell
and elate the minds of young professors especially; so that there is danger
that he fall into the condemnation of the devil; or "of the slanderer", as the word
is rendered in 1Ti_3:11 and the sense then is, lest he should be censured and condemned
by such who are given to calumny and detraction, and are glad of any opportunity to
reproach and vilify the ministers of the word: but it is better to understand it of Satan;
and then the meaning is, either lest such an one fall under the censure and
condemnation of the accuser of the brethren; or rather lest he fall into the same
condemnation and punishment the devil is fallen into, their crimes being alike. For it
seems from hence, that pride was the first sin of the devil, and the cause of his apostasy

from God; being elated with his own knowledge, strength, and dignity; and not being
able to bear it, that the human nature should be advanced above that of angels.
JAMISO , "not a novice — one just converted. This proves the Church of Ephesus
was established now for some time. The absence of this rule in the Epistle to Titus,
accords with the recent planting of the Church at Crete. Greek, “neophyte,” literally, “a
young plant”; luxuriantly verdant (Rom_6:5; Rom_11:17; 1Co_3:6). The young convert
has not yet been disciplined and matured by afflictions and temptations. Contrast Act_
21:16, “an old disciple.”
lifted up with pride — Greek, literally, “wrapt in smoke,” so that, inflated with self-
conceit and exaggerated ideas of his own importance, he cannot see himself or others in
the true light (1Ti_6:4; 2Ti_3:4).
condemnation of the devil — into the same condemnation as Satan fell into (1Ti_
3:7; 2Ti_2:26). Pride was the cause of Satan’s condemnation (Job_38:15; Isa_14:12-15;
Joh_12:31; Joh_16:11; 2Pe_2:4; Jud_1:6). It cannot mean condemnation or accusation
on the part of the devil. The devil may bring a reproach on men (1Ti_3:7), but he cannot
bring them into condemnation, for he does not judge, but is judged [Bengel].
RWP, "Not a novice (mē neophuton). Our “neophyte.” Vernacular word from
Aristophanes on, in lxx, and in papyri in the original sense of “newly-planted” (neos,
phuō). Only here in N.T.
Lest (hina mē). “That not.”
Being puffed up (tuphōtheis). First aorist passive participle of tuphoō, old word
(from tuphos, smoke, pride), to raise a smoke or mist (a smoke-screen of pride). In N.T.
only here; 1Ti_6:4; 2Ti_3:4.
He fall into (empesēi eis). Second aorist active subjunctive with hina mē, negative
purpose, of empiptō, old verb, to fall into. Note both en and eis as in Mat_12:11; Luk_
10:36.
The condemnation of the devil (krima tou diabolou). See note on Rom_3:8 for
krima. Best to take tou diabolou as objective genitive, though subjective in 1Ti_3:7, “the
condemnation passed on or received by the devil” (not just “the slanderer,” any
slanderer).
CALVI , "6 ot a novice There being many men of distinguished ability and
learning who at that time were brought to the faith, Paul forbids that such persons
shall be admitted to the office of a bishop, as soon as they have made profession of
Christianity. And he shews how great would be the danger; for it is evident that
they are commonly vain, and full of ostentation, and, in consequence of this,
haughtiness and ambition will drive them headlong. What Paul says we experience;
for “” have not only impetuous fervor and bold daring, but are also puffed up with
foolish confidence, as if they could fly beyond the clouds. Consequently, it is not
without reason that they are excluded from the honor of a bishopric, till, in process
of time their proud temper shall be subdued.

Lest he fall into the condemnation of the devil. The judgment or condemnation of
the devil may be interpreted in three ways; for some take ∆ιαβόλου (of the devil) to
mean Satan; and others, to mean slanderers. I give the preference to the former
view; because it rarely happens that “” means slander. But again, “ judgment of
Satan” may be taken either actively or passively. This latter sense is adopted by
Chrysostom, with whom I willingly agree There is an elegant contrast, which
heightens the enormity of the case, “ he who is placed over the Church of God fall,
by his pride, into the same condemnation with the devil.” Yet I do not reject the
active signification, namely, that he will give the devil occasion for accusing him.
But the opinion of Chrysostom is more correct. (62)
(62) “ words εἰς κρῖµα ἐµπέσὟ τοῦ ∆ιαβόλου are, by most expositors ancient and
modern, understood of falling into the same condemnation and punishment that the
devil fell into through pride, which is supported by the authority of the Pesch. Syr.
Several eminent expositors, from Luther and Erasmus downwards, take τοῦ
∆ιαβόλου to mean the “” or slanderous enemy of the gospel, the noun being, they
say, used generically of those who seek an occasion to calumniate the Christians;
but, as Calvin observes, ‘ rarely happens that “” means slander.’ Moreover, the
expression ∆ιάβολος would thus have to be taken of just condemnation.” —
Bloomfield.
BURKITT, "A novice signifies, a young plant; here, a young, raw, unexperienced
person; yet not so much young in years as in knowledge; for Timothy himself was
very young: not a novice in religion then, not one that is unexperienced in the
mysteries of the gospel, undertaking to teach others before he has learnt himself.
And the reason for this injunction is weighty; Lest being puffed up with pride, he
fall into the condemnation of the devil; implying, that young, raw, and
unexperienced persons, when put into public office, are in very great danger of
falling into the sin of pride, the devil's sin, and of exposing themselves to
condemnation, the devil's punishment because their knowledge is weaker, and their
passions stronger, and their graces feebler, and they want that experience which
should consolidate their judgments, and are therefore in great danger of self-
exalting; for none so proud and confident as the ignorant and injudicious.
ote here, That when St. Paul says, Lest he fall into the condemnation of the devil, it
is as if he had said, "Lest he be condemned for the same sin that the devil was
condemned for, which was pride;" not that the devil will condemn him for his pride,
for the more proud a man is, the more the devil approves him; nor is it the devil's
office to condemn, but to execute; he is the executioner, not the judge; he will not
condemn for sin, but he will eternally torment them whom God condemns.
PULPIT, "Puffed up for lifted up with pride, A.V. A novice ( νεόφυτον ); only here

in the ew Testament, but found repeatedly in the LXX. in its literal sense of "a
tree" or "plantation" newly planted (Psa_127:3 (Psa_128:3, A.V.); Psa_144:12; Isa_
5:7). Here the novice or neophyte is one recently converted and received into the
Church. As such he is not yet fit to be a ruler and a teacher of the brethren. The
reason follows. Lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
Τυφωθεις , puffed up, is peculiar in the ew Testament to the pastoral Epistles
(1Ti_6:4; 2Ti_3:4), from τυφός , smoke (comp. λίνον τυφόµενον , "smoking flax,"
Mat_12:10). The idea seems to be "lightness," "emptiness," and "elation." Some
add that of "obscuration" as by smoke; τυφόω , to wrap in smoke; τετύφωµαι , to
be wrapt in clouds of conceit and folly (Liddell and Scott). The condemnation of the
devil. A somewhat obscure phrase. It means either
(1) the same condemnation as that into which the devil fell through pride,—and so
Chrysostom, Olshausen, Bishop Ellicott, Wordsworth, Alford, etc., take it; or
(2) the condemnation or accusation of the devil. In the latter case κρῖµα would be
used in the same sense as κρίσις in Jud_1:9, and would mean the charge preferred
against him by "the accuser of the brethren" (comp. Job_1:9; Job_2:4, Job_2:5).
One of the senses of κρίνω is "to accuse"—like κατηγορεῖν (Liddell and Scott). And
this view agrees with ὀνειδισµὸν καὶ παγίδα τοῦ διαβόλου in Jud_1:7, which means,
not the trap into which the devil fell, but the trap laid by the devil. It remains
doubtful which is the true sense, but
(2) seems, on the whole, the most probable. The devil ( τοῦ διαβόλου ) can only mean
Satan (Mat_4:1; Mat_13:39, etc.), though possibly conceived of as speaking by the
mouth of traducers and vilifiers of the Church, as in Jud_1:7.
7 He must also have a good reputation with
outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and
into the devil’s trap.
BAR ES, "Moreover he must have a good report of them which are
without - Who are without the church; that is, of those who are not Christians. This
includes, of course, “all” classes of those who are not Christians - pagans, infidels, Jews,
moral people, and scoffers. The idea is, that he must have a fair reputation with them for
integrity of character. His life must be in their view upright. He must not be addicted to

anything which they regard as inconsistent with good morals. His deportment must be
such that they shall regard it as not inconsistent with his profession. He must be true
and just and honest in his dealings with his fellow-men, and so live that they cannot say
that he has wronged them. He must not give occasion for scandal or reproach in his
contact with the other sex, but must be regarded as a man of a pure life and of a holy
walk. The “reason” for this injunction is obvious.
It is his business to endeavor to do such people good, and to persuade them to become
Christians. “But no minister of the gospel can possibly do such people good, unless they
regard him as an upright and honest man.” No matter how he preaches or prays; no
matter how orthodox, learned, or apparently devout he may be, all his efforts will be in
vain unless they regard him as a man of incorruptible integrity. If they hate religion
themselves, they insist justly that since he has professed it he shall be governed by its
principles; or if they feel its importance, they will not be influenced to embrace it by a
man that they regard as hypocritical and impure. Go to a man whom you have
defrauded, or who regards you as having done or attempted wrong to any other one, and
talk to him about the necessity of religion, and he will instinctively say that he does not
“want” a religion which will not make its professor true, honest, and pure. It is
impossible, therefore, for a minister to over-estimate the importance of having a fair
character in the view of the world, and no man should be introduced into the ministry,
or sustained in it, who has not a fair reputation; compare Col_4:5 note; 1Th_4:12 note.
Lest he fall into reproach - That is, in such a way as to bring dishonor on the
ministerial character. His life will be such as to give people occasion to reproach the
cause of religion.
And the snare of the devil - The snare which the devil lays to entrap and ruin the
ministers of the gospel and all good people. The snare to which reference is here made, is
that of “blasting the character and influence of the minister of the gospel.” The idea is,
that Satan lays this snare so to entangle him as to secure this object, and the means
which he uses is the vigilance and suspicion of those who are out of the church. If there
is anything of this kind in the life of a minister which they can make use of, they will be
ready to do it. Hence, the necessity on his part of an upright and blameless life. Satan is
constantly aiming at this thing; the world is watching for it, and if the minister has any
“propensity” which is not in entire accordance with honesty, Satan will take advantage of
it and lead him into the snare.
CLARKE, "The sixteenth requisite is, that he should have a good report of
them which are without - That he should be one who had not been previously a
profligate, or scandalous in his life. Such a person, when converted, may be a worthy
private member of religious society; but I believe God rarely calls such to the work of the
ministry, and never to the episcopate. Them that are without are the Jews, Gentiles, and
the unconverted of all kinds. For the meaning of this term see the note on Col_4:5.
Lest he fall into reproach - For his former scandalous life.
And the snare of the devil - Snares and temptations, such as he fell in and fell by
before. This is called the snare of the devil; for, as he well knows the constitution of such
persons, and what is most likely to prevail, he infers that what was effectual before to
their transgressing may be so still; therefore on all suitable occasions he tempts them to
their old sins. Backsliders in general fall by those sins to which they were addicted
previously to their conversion. Former inveterate habits will revive in him who does not
continue to deny himself, and watch unto prayer.

The snare of the devil. - Some would translate παγιδα του διαβολου, the snare of the
accuser; and they give the same meaning to the word in 1Ti_3:6, because it is evident
that διαβολους has that meaning, 1Ti_3:11, and our translators render it slanderers. Now,
though διαβολος signifies an accuser, yet I do not see that it can, with any propriety, be
restrained to this meaning in the texts in question, and especially as the word is
emphatically applied to Satan himself; for he who, in Rev_12:10, is called the accuser of
the brethren, is, in Rev_12:9, called the great dragon, the old serpent, the Devil,
διαβολος, and Satan.
GILL, "Moreover, he must have a good report of them which are without,
That is, "without the church", as the Arabic version reads; for wicked men, though they
dislike the principles and profession of godly ministers, and despise their office, yet
cannot but speak well of their becoming life and conversation. And this part of their
character is necessary to invite persons to hear them, and to recommend their ministry
to them, as well as for the reasons that follow:
lest he fall into reproach; into the reproach of men; not only of the world, but of
professors of religion; who may be apt to upbraid him with his past sins; especially such
that may fall under his censures, admonitions, and reproofs, which hereby will become
in a great measure useless and ineffectual:
and the snare of the devil; lest Satan should take encouragement from hence to
tempt him to other and greater sins; or lest finding himself slighted and despised by the
people of God, because of his former sins, he should break out into anger and revenge
against them; or into despondency and despair in himself; or should be negligent of his
duty, and timorous of exhorting and reproving others, lest they should retort upon him,
and reproach him with his former crimes. The Jews have a regard to the wisdom,
prudence, gravity, and manners, of a man they appoint as a minister of a congregation.
Their rule is this (z):
"they do not appoint a messenger or minister of a congregation, but he who is the
greatest in the congregation for wisdom and works; and if he is an elderly man, it is the
better; and they take care that the messenger or minister of the congregation be a man
whose voice is pleasant, and he is used to read: but he whose beard is not full grown,
though he is a very considerable man, he may not be a minister of the congregation,
because of the honour of the congregation.''
JAMISO , "a good report — Greek, “testimony.” So Paul was influenced by the
good report given of Timothy to choose him as his companion (Act_16:2).
of them which are without — from the as yet unconverted Gentiles around (1Co_
5:12; Col_4:5; 1Th_4:12), that they may be the more readily won to the Gospel (1Pe_
2:12), and that the name of Christ may be glorified. Not even the former life of a bishop
should be open to reproach [Bengel].
reproach and the snare of the devil — reproach of men (1Ti_5:14) proving the
occasion of his falling into the snare of the devil (1Ti_6:9; Mat_22:15; 2Ti_2:26). The
reproach continually surrounding him for former sins might lead him into the snare of

becoming as bad as his reputation. Despair of recovering reputation might, in a weak
moment, lead some into recklessness of living (Jer_18:12). The reason why only moral
qualities of a general kind are specified is, he presupposes in candidates for a bishopric
the special gifts of the Spirit (1Ti_4:14) and true faith, which he desires to be evidenced
outwardly; also he requires qualifications in a bishop not so indispensable in others.
RWP, "From them that are without (apo tōn exōthen). “From the outside (of the
church) ones.” Paul’s care for the witness of outsiders is seen in 1Th_4:12; 1Co_10:32;
Col_4:5. There are, of course, two sides to this matter.
Reproach (oneidismon). Late word from oneidizō. See note on Rom_15:3.
The snare of the devil (pagida tou diabolou). Here subjective genitive, snare set by
the devil. Pagis, old word from pēgnumi, to make fast. So a snare for birds (Luk_21:35),
any sudden trap (Rom_11:9), of sin (1Ti_6:9), of the devil (1Ti_3:7; 2Ti_2:26). Ancients
used it of the snares of love. The devil sets special snares for preachers (conceit 1Ti_3:6,
money 1Ti_6:9, women, ambition).
CALVI , "7A good report from those who are without. This appears to be very
difficult, that a religious man should have, as witnesses of his integrity, infidels
themselves, who are furiously mad to tell lies against us. But the apostle means, that,
so far as relates to external behavior, even unbelievers themselves shall be
constrained to acknowledge him to be a good man; for, although they groundlessly
slander all the children of God, yet they cannot pronounce him to be a wicked man,
who leads a good and inoffensive life amongst them. Such is that acknowledgment of
uprightness which Paul here describes. The reason is added, —
Lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil; which I explain in this manner:
“ being subject to reproach, he begin to be hardened, and abandon himself the more
freely to all iniquity, which is to entangle himself in the snares of the devil.” For
what hope is left for him who sins without any shame?
BURKITT, " ote here, How needful it is for a minister to be of an untainted
reputation; a bishop must be of good report, saith St. Paul; it is necessary for his
own salvation that he be good, and for the salvation of others that he be accounted
so: great is their sin, then, who go about to blast a minister's reputation, because
something of reputation is absolutely necessary to render his ministry successful.
ote farther, He must have a good report of them that are without, that is, without
the church, unbelieving Jews or Gentiles, with whom he formerly conversed; lest
becoming contemptible, and so not able to perform his duty as he should, he give
occasion to the heathen to blaspheme Christianity, and to reproach him for his
former course of life.
PULPIT, "Good testimony from for a good report of, A.V.; that for which, A.V.
Good testimony ( µαρτυρίαν καλήν ; see 1Ti_5:10). So it is said of Timothy himself

that ἐµαρτυρεῖτο , "he was well reported of by the brethren" (Act_16:2). In
accordance with this rule, letters testimonial are required of all persons to be
ordained, to the importance of character in a clergyman. Them that are without (
τῶν ἔξωθεν ); used in Mat_23:1-39. 27; Luk_11:39; 1Pe_3:3; Rev_11:2, etc., of that;
which is outside or external literally, as the outside of the cup, the outer ornament of
the body, the outside of the sepulcher, the outer court of the temple. It is
synonymous with the more common form, ἔξω . (For the phrase, "they that are
without" ( οἱ ἔξω ), as applied to those who are not members of the Church, see
Mar_4:11; Joh_9:34, Joh_9:35; 1Co_5:12, 1Co_5:13; Col_4:5; 1Th_4:12.) The
opposite is ἔσω ἔσωθεν (1Co_5:12; Mat_23:25, etc.). So exoteric and esoteric, of
doctrines intended respectively for the outside world or the inner circle of disciples.
Reproach ( ὀνειδισµόν ); the reproaches anti revilings cast upon him by unbelievers
(Rom_15:3; Heb_10:33; Heb_11:26; Heb_13:13). The verb ὀνειδίζειν has the same
sense, and so in classical Greek. This reproach is further described as the snare of
the devil, because it is through these revilings that the devil seeks to impair the
power of his ministry and frighten him from the exercise of it. The genitive τοῦ
διαβόλου depends only upon πασίδα , not upon ὀνειδισµόν . The καὶ does not
indicate that there are two separate things into which he falls, but adds, as a
description of the ὀνειδισµός , that it is "a snare of the devil." The idea in 1Pe_5:8 is
analogous. There it is by afflictions that the devil seeks to devour the disciple who is
weak in faith. Those afflictions might well be described as παγίδα τοῦ διαβόλου ," a
snare of the devil," set for weak souls.
8 In the same way, deacons[b] are to be worthy of
respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and
not pursuing dishonest gain.
BAR ES, "Likewise must the deacons - On the meaning of the word “deacons,”
see the notes on Phi_1:1. On their appointment, see the notes, Act_6:1. The word here
evidently denotes those who had charge of the temporal affairs of the church, the poor,
etc. No qualifications are mentioned, implying that they were to be preachers of the
gospel. In most respects, except in regard to preaching, their qualifications were to be
the same as those of the “bishops.”
Be grave - Serious, sober-minded men. In Act_6:3, it is said that they should be men
“of honest report.” On the meaning of the word “grave,” see the notes on 1Ti_3:4. They
should be men who by their serious deportment will inspire respect.
Not double-tongued - The word here used δίλογος dilogos - does not occur

elsewhere in the New Testament. It means, properly, uttering the same thing twice (from
δίς dis and λέγω legō), and then deceitful, or speaking one thing and meaning another.
They should be men who can be relied on for the exact truth of what they say, and for the
exact fulfillment of their promises.
Not given to much wine - see 1Ti_3:3. The word “much” is added here to what is
said 1Ti_3:2 of the qualification of a bishop. It is not affirmed that it would be proper for
the deacon, anymore than the bishop, to indulge in the use of wine in small quantities,
but it “is” affirmed that a man who is much given to the use of wine ought not, on any
consideration, to be a deacon. It may be remarked here, that this qualification was
everywhere regarded as necessary for a minister of religion. Even the pagan priests, on
entering a temple, did not drink wine. “Bloomfield.” The use of wine, and of strong
drinks of all kinds, was absolutely prohibited to the Jewish ministers of every rank when
they were about to engage in the service of God; Lev_10:9. Why should it then be
anymore proper for a Christian minister to drink wine than for a Jewish or a pagan
priest? Shall a minister of the gospel be less holy than they? Shall he have a feebler sense
of the purity of his vocation? Shall he be less careful lest he expose himself to the
possibility of conducting the services of religion in an irreverent and silly manner? Shall
he venture to approach the altar of God under the influence of intoxicating drinks, when
a sense of propriety restrained the pagan priest, and a solemn statue of Yahweh
restrained the Jewish priest from doing it?
Not greedy of filthy lucre - notes, 1Ti_3:3. The special reason why this
qualification was important in the deacon was, that he would be entrusted with the
funds of the church, and might be tempted to appropriate them to his own use instead of
the charitable purposes for which they were designed; see this illustrated in the case of
Judas, Joh_12:6.
CLARKE, "Likewise must the deacons - The term deacon, διακονος, simply
signifies a regular or stated servant: from δια, through or emphatic, and κονεω, to
minister or serve. See it explained in the note on Mat_20:26. As nearly the same
qualifications were required in the deacons as in the bishops, the reader may consult
what is said on the preceding verses.
Grave - Of a sedate and dignified carriage and conduct.
Not double-tongued - Speaking one thing to one person, and another thing to
another, on the same subject. This is hypocrisy and deceit. This word might also be
translated liars.
Not given to much wine - Neither a drunkard, tippler, nor what is called a jovial
companion. All this would be inconsistent with gravity.
Not greedy of filthy lucre - See on 1Ti_3:3 (note).
GILL, "Likewise must the deacons be grave,.... The apostle proceeds to give the
qualifications, and so the rules for choosing another sort of officers in the church,
deacons; whose work and business is, not to preach the Gospel, and administer
ordinances; but to take care of the secular affairs of the church, and particularly to serve
tables; to provide the bread and wine for the Lord's table, to attend at it, and distribute
the elements from the minister to the people, to collect for it, defray the charges of it,

and divide what remains among the poor; and they are to take care of the minister's
table, that he is provided for in a comfortable way, and to stir up the members to their
duty in this respect; and to take care of the poor's table, and distribute what the church
collects for them, with simplicity and cheerfulness; and are to be helps to the pastor, in
observing the walk of members, in composing differences between them, in visiting the
sick and poor, and in preparing matters for church meetings. Their characters are, that
they be "grave"; in their speech, gesture, and dress; honest, and of good report among
men; and chaste in their words and actions; all which may be signified by the word here
used; and the latter may be rather hinted at, because of Nicholas, one of the first
deacons, who was charged with uncleanness:
not doubletongued; whose hearts and tongues do not agree together; and who, being
a sort of middle persons between the pastor and the members of the church, say one
thing to one, and another to the other; which to do is of bad consequence: or who speak
well to the poor when they apply to them, and promise them to do them all the service
they can, and when it comes to the upshot speak against them:
not given to much wine; which impairs the health, stupefies the mind, and so renders
unfit for any such office, as well as wastes the temporal estate; and may lead them to
embezzle and consume the church's stock:
not greedy of filthy lucre; for such would withhold from the poor that which is meet
for them, and make use of money in their hands, to their own advantage.
HE RY, 8-13, "We have here the character of deacons: these had the care of the
temporal concerns of the church, that is, the maintenance of the ministers and provision
for the poor: they served tables, while the ministers or bishops gave themselves only to
the ministry of the word and prayer, Act_6:2, Act_6:4. Of the institution of this office,
with that which gave occasion to it, you have an account in Act_6:1-7. Now it was
requisite that deacons should have a good character, because they were assistants to the
ministers, appeared and acted publicly, and had a great trust reposed in them. They
must be grave. Gravity becomes all Christians, but especially those who are in the office
in the church. Not doubled-tongued; that will say one thing to one and another thing to
another, according as their interests leads them: a double tongue comes from a double
heart; flatterers and slanderers are double-tongued. Not given to much wine; for this is
a great disparagement to any man, especially to a Christian, and one in office, unfits men
for business, opens the door to many temptations. Not greedy of filthy lucre; this would
especially be bad in the deacons, who were entrusted with the church's money, and, if
they were covetous and greedy of filthy lucre, would be tempted to embezzle it, and
convert that to their own use which was intended for the public service. Holding the
mystery of faith in a pure conscience, 1Ti_3:9. Note, The mystery of faith is best held in
a pure conscience. The practical love of truth is the most powerful preservative from
error and delusion. If we keep a pure conscience (take heed of every thing that
debauches conscience, and draws us away from God), this will preserve in our souls the
mystery of faith. Let these also first be proved, 1Ti_3:10. It is not fit that the public
trusts should be lodged in the hands of any, till they have been first proved, and found fit
for the business they are to be entrusted with; the soundness of their judgments, their
zeal for Christ, and the blamelessness of their conversation, must be proved. Their wives
likewise must have a good character (1Ti_3:11); they must be of a grave behaviour, not
slanderers, tale-bearers, carrying stories to make mischief and sow discord; they must be
sober and faithful in all things, not given to any excess, but trusty in all that is

committed to them. All who are related to ministers must double their care to walk as
becomes the gospel of Christ, lest, if they in any thing walk disorderly, the ministry be
blamed. As he said before of the bishops or ministers, so here of the deacons, they must
be the husband of one wife, such as had not put away their wives, upon dislike, and
married others; they must rule their children and their own houses well; the families of
deacons should be examples to other families. And the reason why the deacons must be
thus qualified is (1Ti_3:13) because, though the office of a deacon be of an inferior
degree, yet it is a step towards the higher degree; and those who had served tables well
the church might see cause afterwards to discharge from that service, and prefer to serve
in preaching the word and in prayer. Or it may be meant of the good reputation that a
man would gain by his fidelity in this office: they will purchase to themselves great
boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus. Observe, 1. In the primitive church there
were but two orders of ministers or officers, bishops and deacons, Phi_1:1. After-ages
have invented the rest. The office of the bishop, presbyter, pastor, or minister, was
confined to prayer and to the ministry of the word; and the office of the deacon was
confined to, or at least principally conversant about, serving tables. Clemens Romanus,
in his epistle to the Christian (cap. 42, 44), speaks very fully and plainly to this effect,
that the apostles, foreknowing, by our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would arise in the
Christian church a controversy about the name episcopacy, appointed the
forementioned orders, bishops and deacons. 2. The scripture-deacon's main
employment was to serve tables, and not to preach or baptize. It is true, indeed, that
Philip did preach and baptize in Samaria (Acts 8), but you read that he was an evangelist
(Act_21:8), and he might preach and baptize, and perform any other part of the
ministerial office, under that character; but still the design of the deacon's office was to
mind the temporal concerns of the church, such as the salaries of the ministers and
providing for the poor. 3. Several qualifications were very necessary, even for these
inferior officers: The deacons must be grave, etc. 4. Some trial should be made of
persons' qualifications before they are admitted into office in the church, or have any
trust committed to them: Let these also first be proved. 5. Integrity and uprightness in
an inferior office are the way to be preferred to a higher station in the church: They
purchase to themselves a good degree. 6. This will also give a man great boldness in the
faith, whereas a want of integrity and uprightness will make a man timorous, and ready
to tremble at his own shadow. The wicked fleeth when no man pursueth, but the
righteous are bold as a lion, Pro_28:1.
JAMISO , "The deacons were chosen by the voice of the people. Cyprian [Epistle,
2.5] says that good bishops never departed from the old custom of consulting the people.
The deacons answer to the chazzan of the synagogue: the attendant ministers, or
subordinate coadjutors of the presbyter (as Timothy himself was to Paul, 1Ti_4:6; Phm_
1:13; and John Mark, Act_13:5). Their duty was to read the Scriptures in the Church, to
instruct the catechumens in Christian truths, to assist the presbyters at the sacraments,
to receive oblations, and to preach and instruct. As the “chazzan” covered and uncovered
the ark in the synagogue, containing the law, so the deacon in the ancient Church put the
covering on the communion table. (See Chrysostom [19], Homily on Acts; Theophylact
on Luk_19:1-48; and Balsaman on Canon 22, Council of Laodicea). The appointing of
“the seven” in Act_6:1-7 is perhaps not meant to describe the first appointment of the
deacons of the Church. At least the chazzan previously suggested the similar order of
deacons.

double-tongued — literally, “of double speech”; saying one thing to this person, and
another to that person [Theodoret]. The extensive personal intercourse that deacons
would have with the members of the Church might prove a temptation to such a fault.
Others explain it, “Saying one thing, thinking another” (Pro_20:19; Gal_2:13). I prefer
the former.
not greedy of filthy lucre — All gain is filthy (literally, “base”) which is set before a
man as a by-end in his work for God [Alford] (1Pe_5:2). The deacon’s office of collecting
and distributing alms would render this a necessary qualification.
RWP, "Deacons (diakonous). Accusative case of general reference like the
preceding with dei einai understood. Technical sense of the word here as in Phi_1:1
which see (two classes of church officers, bishops or elders, deacons).
Grave (semnous). See note on Phi_4:8. Repeated in 1Ti_3:11; Tit_2:2.
Not double-tongued (mē dilogous). Rare word (dis, legō) saying same thing twice.
Xenophon has dilogeō and dilogia. In Pollux, but lxx has diglōssos (double-tongued, Latin
bilinguis). Only here in N.T. One placed between two persons and saying one thing to
one, another to the other. Like Bunyan’s Parson “Mark. Two-Tongues.”
Not given to much wine (mē oinōi pollōi prosechontas). “Not holding the mind (ton
noun understood as usual with prosechō, 1Ti_1:4) on much wine” (oinōi, dative case).
That attitude leads to over-indulgence.
Not greedy of filthy lucre (mē aischrokerdeis). Old word from aischros (Eph_5:12)
and kerdos (Phi_1:21). “Making small gains in mean ways” (Parry). Not genuine in 1Ti_
3:3. In N.T. only here and Tit_1:7 (of bishops).
CALVI , "8Likewise the deacons There is no reason why the diversity of
interpretations should lead us to entertain any doubt. It is certain that time Apostle
speaks of those who hold a public office in the Church; and this refutes the opinion
of those who think that domestic servants are here meant. As to the view given by
others, that it denotes presbyters who are inferior to the bishop, that is without
foundation; for it is manifest from other passages, that the term bishop belongs alike
to all presbyters. (63) All are constrained to acknowledge this; and more especially a
passage in the first chapter of the Epistle to Titus proves clearly that this is the
meaning. (Tit_1:7.) It remains to be stated that we understand “ deacons” to be
those who are mentioned by Luke, (Act_6:3,) and who had the charge of the poor.
But those who wish to have a more full account of the duties of deacons may consult
the Institutes. (64)
Grave, not double-tongued The first four virtues, with which he wishes them to be
endowed, are of themselves sufficiently well known. Yet it ought to be carefully
observed that he advises them not to be double-tongued; because it is a vice which it
is difficult to avoid in the discharge of that office, and yet ought, more than anything
else, to be kept at a distance from it.

(63) “Que le nom d’ estoit commun a tons prestres. et qu’ prestre et evesque il n’ a
nulle difference.” — “ the term bishop was common to all presbyters, and that there
is no difference between presbyter and bishop.”
(64) See Calvin’ Inst. of the Christian Religion, vol. 3.
BURKITT, " ote here, 1. That there are but two sorts of fixed church-officers
mentioned by St. Paul, bishops and deacons; as the church had its own bishop, so
likewise its own deacons: these were at first instituted for the service of the poor; the
alms of the church were brought to the altar, the deacons received them, and
distributed them among the aged and impotent from house to house; now because
they were thus employed, the apostle advised them to beware of those faults that are
frequently committed in common conversation, as light and vain discourse, saying
one thing to one person, and the contrary to another. Let the deacons be grave, not
guilty of levity, but serious and composed, men of a modest and becoming carriage;
not double-tongued, nor over-talkative persons, nor saying one thing to one person
and the contrary to another, according to the place or company they fell into; not
given to much wine, not the thing, but the excess, is forbidden; not greedy of filthy
lucre, seeking to get wealth by sordid ways and means.
PULPIT, "Deacons in like manner must for likewise must the deacons, A.V. Grave (
σεµνούς ); in Php_4:8 rendered "honest" in the A.V., and "honourable" in the R.V.,
and "venerable" in the margin. one of the words are satisfactory, but "honest" in
the sense of honnete, i.e. "respectable," "becoming the dignity of a man," comes
nearest to the meaning of σεµνός . Ἄνηρ σεµνός is a man who inspires respect by his
conduct and deportment. It occurs again in Php_4:11 and in Tit_2:2. Double-
tongued ( διλόγους ); only here in the ew Testament, or indeed anywhere. The verb
διλογεῖν and the noun διλογία are found in Xenophon and Diodorus Siculus, but in
a different sense—"to repeat," "repetition." Here δίλογος is used in the sense of
δίγλωσσος (Pro_11:13; Ecclus. 28:13), "a slanderer," "a false-tongued man," who,
as Theophylact (ap. Schleusner) well explains it, thinks one thing and says another,
and says different things to different people. The caution here given is of
incalculable importance to young curates. They must not allow themselves to be
either receptacles or vehicles of scandal and detraction. Their speech to rich and
poor alike must be perfectly sincere and ingenuous. ot given to much wine. The
effect of the best sermon may be undone, and more than undone, if the preacher
sinks into the pot-companion of his hearers. He at once ceases to be σεµνός , to
inspire respect (comp. Tit_2:3 where the additional idea, most true, of the slavery of
drunkards, is introduced). Greedy of filthy lucre ( αἰσχροκερδεῖς ); only here and in
Tit_2:3 (T.R.) and Tit_1:7. The adverb αἰσχροκερδῶς occurs in 1Pe_5:2, and is one
of many points of resemblance between the pastoral Epistles and 1 Peter. Balsam,
Gehazi, and Judas Iscariot are the three prominent examples of professed servants
of God being lovers of filthy lucre. Achan (Jos_7:21) is another (see 1Ti_6:10).
When lucre is the price for doing wrong, it is "filthy." When lucre is sought on

occasions where none is due, it is "filthy;" and when the desire of even just gains is
excessive, it ceases to be clean.
BI 8-13, "Likewise must the deacons be grave.
The ideal deacon
I. Deacons should be of noble character (1Ti_3:8).
1. They were to be grave--i.e., of serious deportment--not sharing in the follies and
gaieties of pleasure loving cities like Ephesus, but revered as men living in a higher
and purer atmosphere.
2. ot double-tongued, saying one thing to this man and another to that, and thus
giving rise to misunderstandings and differences. Gossip is sometimes as harmful as
slander.
3. ot given to much wine. Such temper ance should be a characteristic of any true
Christian, and is absolutely essential to one who would lead and represent the
Church.
4. ot greedy of filthy lucre, or “base gain.”
II. Deacons should re strong in the faith (1Ti_3:9). “Holding the mystery of the faith
in a pure conscience.”
III. Deacons should be trusted by the church (1Ti_3:10). “Let these also first be
proved,” for their qualifications ought to be evidenced and recognized, in order that
they may have the confidence of their brethren.
IV. Deacons may look for the recompense of reward (1Ti_3:13). The phrase
“purchase to themselves a good degree,” or, as in Revised version, “gain to
themselves a good standing,” includes the idea of obtaining high reputation amongst
the brethren; and that is not without its value. But it implies, also, advance in faith,
in courage, and in wisdom, as the result of active and faithful service. And this is the
preparation for, and the pledge of the honour which will be given in, the last great

day--honour which will vary among the saints according to the measure of their
capacity and fidelity. (A. Rowland, LL. B.)
Double tongued
During the civil war in America, three orthern officers were appointed on a
commission with three Southern officers, after the battle of Prairie Grove, to
negotiate an exchange of prisoners. While the commission was sitting, an aged
farmer strayed into the room, thinking it was the provost’s office. His eyes were
dim, but he quickly noticed the uniforms, and supposing himself in the presence of
the orthern staff, began protesting his loyalty to the Union. One of the officers
facetiously advised him to be cautious, and, pointing to the Southern officers, told
him to look at them. The old man put on his spectacles, and recognizing the
uniform, explained that his heart was with the South in the great struggle, and that
his only son was a soldier in the Southern army. Gazing around the room, he
recognized the orthern uniforms also, and was bewildered. At last he leaned both
hands on the table, and surveying the entire party, he said, “Well, gentlemen, this is
a little mixed; but you just go on and fight it out among yourselves. I can live under
any government.” (Christian Herald.)
An equivocal life to be avoided
Some time ago two travellers went to Africa. Coming to a lake, one sought to find
whither the current tended by throwing a float on its surface; and slowly, but
surely, it floated eastward. “The current is eastward,” said the traveller, satisfied
with his discovery. Some time afterwards another traveller stood by the same lake,
asking” himself the same question, “Whither does the current tend?” He, too, cast a
float upon the surface of the water, which at once floated westward. “The current is
towards the west,” he said; and, following out his discovery, he gained its out-let,
and so traced it to where it emptied itself into the Atlantic Ocean. Let us see to it
that our life is not uncertain, like this lake, at one time seeming to be going
heavenward, and at another seeming to be going with the world. But rather may we,
who bear the name of Jesus, let our lives run like a quiet and steady stream, and, as
we go, leave a bright record of our lives behind us. (Christian Herald.)
Holding the mystery of the faith.
Accepting mysteries of the faith

I can drink of the clear cold spring, and be refreshed, though I may not hope to
pierce the awful foundation of granite from whence it comes rushing up. I can take
of the grain of the tawny sheaves, or of the laden vine, though I cannot tell how the
unconscious root and fibres select, elect--never mistaking--out of a common soil that
which shall produce their specific fruit. I can rejoice in the shining sun, and fan my
cheek with the breathing wind, though I am ignorant as an infant of the great palace
of light, and “know not when the wind cometh, nor whither it goeth.” Even so; I
stoop my parched lips to the “living water,” and I rise revived; and I know not man
nor woman who ever sought to do so and was hindered. I am content with that. (A.
B. Grosart.)
The mystery of the faith
I. ow there is a prevailing error to which we are exposed in the present day, of not
sufficiently recognizing in revealed truth mysteries which lie beyond the reach of
human comprehension. By far the greater portion of the doctrines which compose
the scheme of Christianity are mysteries which pass man’s understanding. Such, for
example, is the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity. Here, however, let me observe that
although a mystery, it is a mystery of faith. It is not a revelation of which the
mystery affords any excuse for unbelief. It is a mystery, I confess, upon God’s part,
of incomprehensible wisdom, power, and love; but yet it is a mystery upon which we
may rely with the fullest assurance. It is the more important to observe this, because
there are many minds before which the mysteries of Divine truth present themselves
as an apology for unbelief. The facts of Christianity, and the doctrines which flow
out of them, are amply attested. There is a marvellous self-evidencing property in
the Gospel. Crowded though it be with mysteries, it is so constructed as to bespeak
its suitableness to the moral necessities of the fallen. We appeal, then, not only to the
evidence upon which the truth of the gospel rests, as contained in God’s Word, but
also to the results which have attended its proclamation, in corroboration of its
claim, mystery though it be, to implicit faith. It is this mystery which has conferred
upon mankind ten thousand blessings for time, the pledges and foretokens of yet
richer blessings in eternity.
II. But here the practical question arises, what is it to “hold the mystery of the faith
in a pure conscience”; or, in other words, to what course of action are we summoned
by the direction which the apostle here gives? ow, a pure conscience is “a
conscience void of offence towards God and towards man.” It is a conscience
enlightened by the Holy Ghost, and free from accusation, whether on the ground of
duty omitted or of precept infringed. To hold the mystery of the faith in a pure
conscience, is therefore to be so under the influence of revealed truth as to be
thereby impelled to practise all that God has enjoined, and to avoid whatsoever God

has forbidden. ow, for nothing is the Bible more remarkable than for the practical
nature of all its disclosures. There is not a doctrine of revealed truth which is not
both designed and adapted to influence the daily life and conversation; and never
can the truth be held in a pure conscience but where the creed which is professed is
exemplified in the conduct. Take, for example, any of the elementary truths of
revelation, and you may discern at once their practical character. There is the
revealed truth of the omnipresence of God, a truth which no man can hold the
mystery of the faith and yet deny. According to this doctrine, we believe that God is
everywhere and at all times present. ever can we escape from His observation--
never elude His watchful inspection. This is a part of the mystery of the faith. And
so with regard to every component part of the mystery of the faith. To hold it in a
pure conscience is to allow every Christian doctrine to have its legitimate influence
over the entire walk and conversation. This, then, it is to “hold the mystery of the
faith in a pure conscience.” It is to make every revealed doctrine a fresh motive for
striving after moral perfection. Alas! there may be a “holding the mystery of the
faith,” but not “in a pure conscience.” There may be familiarity with Christian
truth, orthodoxy of creed, clearness in the enunciation of the Gospel mysteries, zeal
in the maintenance of the truth, and skill in contending against error, where,
nevertheless, we look in vain for a correspondence between the profession of the lip
and the language of the daily life. The mystery of the faith is held; it is expounded,
professed, defended, and yet it is not held in a pure conscience. Its influence is
counteracted by a life not regulated by the principles confessed. (Bp. Bickersteth.)
9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the
faith with a clear conscience.
BAR ES, "Holding the mystery of the faith - On the word “mystery,” see notes
on 1Co_2:7. It means that which had been concealed, or hidden, but which was now
revealed. The word “faith” here, is synonymous with “the gospel;” and the sense is, that
he should hold firmly the great doctrines of the Christian religion which had been so
long concealed from people, but which were now revealed. The reason is obvious.
Though not a preacher, yet his influence and example would be great, and a man who
held material error ought not to be in office.
In a pure conscience - A mere orthodox faith was not all that was necessary, for it
was possible that a man might be professedly firm in the belief of the truths of
revelation, and yet be corrupt at heart.

CLARKE, "Holding the mystery of the faith - Instead of της πιστεως, the faith,
one MS. (the readings of which are found in the margin of a copy of Mill’s Greek text in
the Bodleian library, and which is marked 61 in Griesbach) reads αναστασεως, of the
resurrection. This reading, like many others in this MS., is found nowhere else; and is
worthy of little regard, but as expressing what appeared to the writer to be the apostle’s
meaning. One of the greatest mysteries of the faith was undoubtedly the resurrection of
the dead; and this was held in a pure conscience when the person so exercised himself as
to have a conscience void of offense towards God and towards men. See Act_24:16. What
has been since called Antinomianism, that is, making void the moral law, by a pretended
faith in the righteousness of Christ, is that which the apostle has here particularly in
view.
GILL, "Holding the mystery of the faith,.... The doctrine of the Gospel, called the
"faith", because it contains things to be believed; proposes Christ the object of faith; is
the means by which faith comes, and is unprofitable without it: it is called "the mystery",
because it is of divine revelation, and could have never been discovered by human
reason; and now it is revealed, the modus of many things contained in it remains a
mystery; several of the doctrines of it are mysterious ones, particularly the doctrine of
the Trinity; and which the ancient Jews call by this very name, (a) ‫דמהימנותא‬ ‫,רזא‬ "the
mystery of faith"; the incarnation of the Son of God, the union of the saints to Christ,
and their communion with him, and the resurrection of the dead, with others. Now this
mysterious doctrine of faith is to be held by deacons; they are to profess it, and to hold
fast the profession of it and that
in a pure conscience; with a conscience sprinkled by the blood of Christ; with a
conscience void of offence both towards God and man; with a suitable life and
conversation; a conversation becoming the Gospel of Christ, and by which it is adorned:
and this part of their character is necessary, that such may be able to instruct and
establish those who are weak in the faith, and oppose and refute the erroneous, and also
recommend the Gospel by their own example; otherwise should their principles or
practices be bad, their influence on others might be very pernicious and fatal.
JAMISO , "the mystery of the faith — holding the faith, which to the natural
man remains a mystery, but which has been revealed by the Spirit to them (Rom_16:25;
1Co_2:7-10), in a pure conscience (1Ti_1:5, 1Ti_1:19). (“Pure,” that is, in which nothing
base or foreign is intermixed [Tittmann]). Though deacons were not ordinarily called on
to preach (Stephen and Philip are not exceptions to this, since it was as evangelists,
rather than as deacons, they preached), yet as being office-bearers in the Church, and
having much intercourse with all the members, they especially needed to have this
characteristic, which every Christian ought to have.
RWP, "The mystery of the faith (to mustērion tēs pisteōs). “The inner secret of the
faith,” the revelation given in Christ. See for mustērion in Paul (2Th_2:7; 1Co_2:7; Rom_

16:25; Col_1:26; Eph_3:9).
In a pure conscience (en katharāi suneidēsei). See note on 1Ti_1:19. “The casket in
which the jewel is to be kept” (Lock).
CALVI , "9Holding the mystery of faith As if he had said, “ the pure doctrine of
religion, and that from the heart, with a sincere fear of God;” or, “ well instructed
in the faith, so as not to be ignorant of anything which it is necessary for Christians
to know.” He gives to the sum of Christian doctrine the honorable appellation of a
mystery; as indeed God, through the gospel, reveals to men on earth a wisdom
which angels in heaven behold with admiration, and, therefore, we need not wonder
if it exceed human capacity.
Let us therefore remember that it ought to be embraced with the deepest reverence;
and because we could never, by our own strength, ascend to such a height, let us
humbly entreat God to impart it to us by the Spirit of revelation. On the other hand,
when we see wicked men either ridicule those doctrines or have no relish for them,
let us acknowledge that it is owing to the grace of God that those things which have
been hidden from others are in our hearts, and before our eyes, as Moses says,
(Deu_30:11.)
Thus he wishes that deacons should be well instructed in “ mystery of faith;”
because, although they do not hold the office of teaching, yet it would be exceedingly
absurd to hold a public office in the Church, while they were ill informed in the
Christian faith, more especially since they must frequently be laid under the
necessity of administering advice and consolation, if they do not choose to neglect
their duties. It is added, in a pure conscience, which extends to the whole life, but
chiefly that they may know how to obey God.
BURKITT, "That is, they must be sound believers, and of an upright life,
maintaining truth of doctrine and soundness of faith, by sincerity of heart and
integrity of life.
ISBET, "FAITH A D CO SCIE CE
‘Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.’
1Ti_3:9
Having discoursed on the office of a bishop, St. Paul next proceeds to speak of the
qualifications of a clergyman—for the reference cannot be limited to the deacon—
and it is significant that he puts a conscientious faith high upon his list.
I. Faith and a pure conscience go hand in hand.—Both are necessary, and there is
no need to decide the limits of their respective domains. St. Paul had united them
together in his direct charge to Timothy himself. He now unites them again in

stating his qualifications for the first step in the ministry. A good conscience is the
natural element in which a sound faith exists. Therefore the man who deliberately
thrusts away from him the former renders himself incapable of holding the latter, or
at least places himself in great danger of making shipwreck of it. A true faith cannot
live in an impure heart, though it may be there dormant and inactive.
II. Purity of conscience is an important element in determining our belief upon such
doctrines as the Incarnation and the Atonement. The same may be said of any
conception of God which includes the idea of holiness as a part of His character. It is
true that all our ideas of holiness are relative and imperfect, as are the teachings of
conscience itself; but what idea of beauty, and excellence, and holiness can be
formed by one whose own heart and conscience are defiled, or how can such an one
form any conception of the holiness of Him Who is of purer eyes than to behold
iniquity?
PULPIT, "Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. Μυστήριον , a
mystery, is that which, having been long hidden, is at length disclosed, either to men
generally or to elect disciples. It is derived from µυέω , to initiate, of which the
passive µυέοµαι , to be instructed or initiated, is found in Php_4:12, and is common
in classical Greek, being itself derived from µύω , "to close the lips as in
pronouncing the syllable µῦ ," whence also taurus. The idea is of something secret,
which might not be spoken of. In the ew Testament we have "the mysteries of the
kingdom of heaven"; and St. Paul brings out the full force of the word when he
speaks (Rom_16:25) of "the mystery which was kept secret ( σεσιγηµένου ) since the
world began … but is now made known to all nations for the obedience of faith"
(see too Eph_3:3-6; Col_2:1-23 :26, etc.). "The faith" is equivalent to "the gospel,"
or "the kingdom of heaven," or the "godliness" of Php_4:16 (where see note); and
"the mystery of the faith" might be paraphrased by "the revealed truth of
Christianity". What is added, "in a pure conscience," teaches us that orthodoxy
without personal holiness is little worth. Holding "the truth in unrighteousness" is
severely condemned by St. Paul (Rom_1:18). He says of himself (Act_23:1), "I have
lived in all good conscience before God until this day" (comp. Act_24:16; 2Co_1:12;
1Ti_1:5, 1Ti_1:19, etc.). It is much to be observed how St. Paul, the great teacher of
the doctrine of g-race, lays constant stress upon the functions of the conscience, and
the necessity of having a pure conscience.
10 They must first be tested; and then if there is
nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

BAR ES, "And let these also first be proved - That is, tried or tested in regard
to the things which were the proper qualifications for the office. This does not mean that
they were to be employed as “preachers,” but that they were to undergo a proper trial in
regard to their fitness for the office which they were to fill. They were not to be put into it
without any opportunity of knowing what they were. It should be ascertained that they
were grave, serious, temperate, trustworthy men; men who were sound in the faith, and
who would not dishonor the office. It is not said here that there should be a “formal”
trial, as if they were candidates for this office; but the meaning is, that they should have
had an opportunity of making their character known, and should have gained such
respect for their piety, and their other qualifications, that there would be reason to
believe that they would perform the functions of the office well. Thus, in Act_6:3, when
deacons were first appointed, the church was directed to “look out seven men of honest
report,” who might be appointed to the office.
Then let them use the office of a deacon - Let them be appointed to this office,
and fulfil its duties.
Being found blameless - If nothing can be alleged against their character see the
notes on 1Ti_3:2.
CLARKE, "Let these - be proved - Let them not be young converts, or persons
lately brought to the knowledge of the truth. This is the same in spirit with what is
required of the bishops, 1Ti_3:6.
Let no man be put into an office in the Church till he has given full proof of his
sincerity and steadiness, by having been for a considerable time a consistent private
member of the Church.
Being found blameless - Ανεγκλητοι οντες· Being irreproachable; persons against
whom no evil can be proved. The same as in 1Ti_3:2, though a different word is used.
See the note on 1Ti_3:2.
GILL, "And let these also first be proved,.... Not that they should be tried in any
part of the deacon's office, to see how capable they are of performing it; but their
internal and external characters are to be looked into and examined, and if they appear,
to be right, then they are to be approved of, chosen and called unto, and invested with
the office:
then let them use the office of a deacon; let them be employed and minister in the
several parts and branches of that office:
being found blameless; not without sin, but free from any gross and enormous one;
not before God, but in the sight of men; See Gill on 1Ti_3:2.

JAMISO , "“And moreover,” etc. [Alford].
be proved — not by a period of probation, but by a searching inquiry, conducted by
Timothy, the ordaining president (1Ti_5:22), whether they be “blameless”; then when
found so, “let them act as deacons.”
blameless — Greek, “unexceptionable”; as the result of public investigation
unaccused [Tittmann].
RWP, "First be proved (dokimazesthōsan prōton). Present passive imperative third
plural of dokimazō, old and common verb, to test as metals, etc. (1Th_2:4, and often in
Paul). How the proposed deacons are to be “first” tested before approved Paul does not
say. See note on Phi_1:10 for the two senses (test, approve) of the word.
Let them serve as deacons (diakoneitōsan). Present active imperative of diakoneō
(same root as diakonos), common verb, to minister, here “to serve as deacons.” Cf.
diakonein in Act_6:2. See also 1Ti_3:13.
If they be blameless (anegklētoi ontes). “Being blameless” (conditional participle,
ontes). See note on 1Co_1:8; Col_1:22 for anegklētos.
CALVI , "10And let those be first tried He wishes that they who are chosen should
not be unknown, but that their integrity should be ascertained, like that of the
bishops. And hence it is evident, that they are called blameless who are not stained
by any marked vice. Besides, this trial is not for a single hour, but consists in long
experience. In a word, when deacons are to be ordained, the choice must not fall at
random, and without selection, on any that come to hand, but those men are to be
chosen who are approved by their past life in such a manner that, after what may be
called full inquiry, they are ascertained to be well qualified.
BURKITT, "Here Timothy is directed not to put any person suddenly into the office
of a deacon, but to first to prove them for some considerable time; and their
sufficiency being approved, let them be ordained, and use the office of a deacon.
PULPIT, "Serve as deacons for use the office of a deacon, A.V.; if they be for being
found, A.V. And let these also, etc. There is an ambiguity in the English here. It is
not" these also"—these in addition to others, i.e. the bishops before named—but
"these be also first proved." Their general character, as described in 1Ti_3:8, 1Ti_
3:9, must not be taken upon loose hearsay, but must be put to the test by
examination, by special testimony, by inquiry, and then, if they are ἀνέγκλητοι , not
accused, not open to just blame, blameless, let them be admitted to serve as deacons
(see 1Ti_3:13, note). The Church of England scrupulously acts up to these directions
by requiring written testimonials, by personal inquiries made by the bishop, by the
Si quis, by the appeal to the congregation in the Ordination Service, "Brethren, if

there be any of you who knoweth any impediment, or notable crime, in any of these
persons presented to be ordained deacons, for the which he ought not to be admitted
to that office, let him come forth in the name of God, and show what the crime or
impediment is;" as well as by the careful examination of the candidates. Blameless
(comp. Tit_1:6, Tit_1:7); ἀνέγκλητος , rendered in the Vulgate nullum crimen
habentes (which seems to explain the "notable crime" of the Ordination Service),
and in Col_1:22 "unreprovable" both in the A.V. and the R.V. The whole passage,
from Col_1:2 to Col_1:13, shows the supreme importance of a holy and blameless
conversation in the clergy.
11 In the same way, the women[c] are to be
worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but
temperate and trustworthy in everything.
BAR ES, "Even so must their wives be grave - Chrysostom, Theophylact,
Grotius, Bloomfield, and many others, suppose that by the word “wives,” here, (γυνᇰικας
gunaikas), the apostle means “deaconesses.” Clarke supposes that it refers to women in
general. The reason assigned for supposing that it does not refer to the wives of deacons,
as such, is, that nothing is said of the qualifications of the wives of bishops - a matter of
as much importance as that of the character of the wife of a deacon; and that it cannot be
supposed that the apostle would specify the one without some allusion to the other. But
that the common interpretation, which makes it refer to the wives of deacons, as such, is
to be adhered to, seems to me to be clear. Because:
(1) It is the obvious and natural interpretation.
(2) The word here used - “wives” - is never used of itself to denote deaconesses.
(3) If the apostle had meant deaconesses, it would have been easy to express it without
ambiguity; compare notes, Rom_16:1.
(4) What is here mentioned is important, whether the same thing is mentioned of
bishops or not.
(5) In the qualifications of bishops, the apostle had made a statement respecting his
family, which made any specification about the particular members of the family
unnecessary. He was to be one who presided in a proper manner over his own house, or
who had a well-regulated family; 1Ti_3:4-5. By a comparison of this passage, also, with
Tit_2:3-4, which bears a strong resemblance to this, it would seem that it was supposed

that the deacons would be taken from those who were advanced in life, and that their
wives would have some superintendence over the younger females of the church. It was,
therefore, especially important that they should be persons whose influence would be
known to be decidedly favorable to piety. No one can doubt that the character of a
woman may be such, that it is not desirable that her husband should be an officer in the
church. A bad woman ought not to be entrusted with any additional power or influence.
Grave - notes, 1Ti_3:4.
Not slanderers - compare Tit_2:3, “Not false accusers.” The Greek word is
διαβόλους diabolous - “devils.” It is used here in its original and proper sense, to denote a
“calumniator,” “slanderer,” or “accuser.” It occurs in the same sense in 2Ti_3:3, and Tit_
2:3. Elsewhere in the New Testament, it is uniformly rendered “devil” (compare notes,
Mat_4:1), and is given to Satan, the prince of the fallen angels Mat_9:34, by way of
eminence, as “the accuser;” compare Job_1:6-11 notes, and Rev_12:10 note. Here it
means that they should not be women who were in the habit of calumniating others, or
aspersing their character. Mingling as they would with the church, and having an
opportunity to claim acquaintance with many, it would be in their power, if they chose,
to do great injury to the character of others.
Sober - notes, 1Ti_3:2.
Faithful in all things - To their husbands, to their families, to the church, to the
Saviour.
CLARKE, "Even so must their wives be grave - I believe the apostle does not
mean here the wives either of the bishops or deacons in particular, but the Christian
women in general. The original is simply: Γυναικας ᆞσαυτως σεµνας· Let the women
likewise be grave. Whatever is spoken here becomes women in general; but if the apostle
had those termed deaconesses in his eye, which is quite possible, the words are
peculiarly suitable to them. That there was such an order in the apostolic and primitive
Church, and that they were appointed to their office by the imposition of hands, has
already been noticed on Rom_16:1 (note). Possibly, therefore, the apostle may have had
this order of deaconesses in view, to whom it was as necessary to give counsels and
cautions as to the deacons themselves; and to prescribe their qualifications, lest
improper persons should insinuate themselves into that office.
Not slanderers - Μη διαβολους· Literally, not devils. See on 1Ti_3:7 (note) This may
be properly enough translated slanderers, backbiters, tale-bearers, etc., for all these are
of their father, the devil, and his lusts they will do. Let all such, with the vast tribe of
calumniators and dealers in scandal, remember that the apostle ranks them all with
malicious, fallen spirits; a consideration which one would suppose might be sufficient to
deter them from their injurious and abominable conduct.
Sober - See on 1Ti_3:2 (note)
Faithful in all things - The deaconesses had much to do among the poor, and
especially among poor women, in dispensing the bounty of the Church. They were not
only faithfully to expend all they had got, and for the purpose for which they got it; but
they must do this with impartiality, showing no respect of persons, the degree of distress
being the only rule by which the distribution was to be regulated.

GILL, "Even so must their wives be grave,.... Some instead of "wives" read
"women", and understand them of deaconesses, such as were in the primitive churches;
whose business it was to visit the poor and sick sisters of the church, and take care of
things belonging to them; but it is better to interpret the words of the wives of the
deacons, who must be as their husbands, "grave" in speech, gesture, and dress, of an
honest report, a good behaviour, and chaste conversation; which will reflect honour and
credit to their husbands:
not slanderers; or accusers, and so act like devils, as the word is sometimes rendered;
for should they act such a part, and accuse either the poor, or any of the members of the
church wrongfully, or on any trifling occasion, as persons addicted to this vice are wont
to do, it would be of bad consequence: and they also should be
sober, temperate, not given to wine; excessive drinking is very scandalous in the female
sex; and is the rather mentioned here, because women in the eastern countries were too
frequently addicted to it:
faithful in all things; as in the marriage bed, so with whatsoever else they are
intrusted with in the family, and civil concerns of their husbands; and this is the rather
observed, because the wives of deacons may be sometimes intrusted with the church's
stock in their husband's absence, to impart to the poor.
JAMISO , "their wives — rather, “the women,” that is, the deaconesses. For there
is no reason that special rules should be laid down as to the wives of the deacons, and
not also as to the wives of the bishops or overseers. Moreover, if the wives of the deacons
were meant, there seems no reason for the omission of “their” (not in the Greek). Also
the Greek for “even so” (the same as for “likewise,” 1Ti_3:8, and “in like manner,” 1Ti_
2:9), denotes a transition to another class of persons. Further, there were doubtless
deaconesses at Ephesus, such as Phoebe was at Cenchrea (Rom_16:1, “servant,” Greek,
“deaconess”), yet no mention is made of them in this Epistle if not here; whereas,
supposing them to be meant here, the third chapter embraces in due proportion all the
persons in the service of the Church. Naturally after specifying the qualifications of the
deacon, Paul passes to those of the kindred office, the deaconess. “Grave” occurs in the
case of both. “Not slanderers” here, answers to “not double-tongued” in the deacons; so
“not false accusers” (Tit_2:3). “Sober” here answers to “not given to much wine,” in the
case of the deacons (1Ti_3:8). Thus it appears he requires the same qualifications in
female deacons as in deacons, only with such modifications as the difference of sex
suggested. Pliny, in his celebrated letter to Trajan, calls them “female ministers.”
faithful in all things — of life as well as faith. Trustworthy in respect to the alms
committed to them and their other functions, answering to “not greedy of filthy lucre,”
1Ti_3:8, in the case of the deacons.
RWP, "Women (gunaikas). Accusative with dei einai understood (hosautōs, likewise)
as in 1Ti_3:8. Apparently “women as deacons” (Rom_16:1 about Phoebe) and not
women in general or just “wives of deacons.” See Pliny (Ep. X. 97) ministrae.
Not slanderers (mē diabolous). Original meaning of diabolos (from diaballō, Luk_
16:1), the devil being the chief slanderer (Eph_6:11). “She-devils” in reality (Tit_2:3).
“While men are more prone to be dilogous, double-tongued, women are more prone than

men to be slanderers” (White).
Faithful in all things (pistas en pāsin). Perhaps as almoners (Ellicott) the
deaconesses had special temptations.
CALVI , "11.Likewise the wives He means the wives both of deacons and of
bishops, for they must be aids to their husbands in their office; which cannot be,
unless their behavior excel that of others.
BURKITT, "In the original it runs, Let the women, by which is meant either the
deacons' wives, or the deaconesses, who were appointed to take care of the poor
women, as the deacons were of the men; understand it of both; these qualifications
are very excellent and well becoming of both; they ought to be grave and sober, not
light and airy, no slanderers, not devils, says the original; the sense is, not railers,
nor false accusers, but diligent and faithful in all business, and trusty in all affairs.
It is not enough and sufficient that the ministers of the gospel themselves be of a
grave and sober conversation, but their wives also must and ought to take special
care that they demean themselves answerably to their place and station, and
suitably to the character which their husbands bear; so must their wives be grave.
PULPIT, "Women in like maturer must for even so must their wives, A.V.;
temperate for sober, A.V. Women. What is meant by these "women"? Certainly not
women in general, which would be quite out of harmony with the context. The
choice lies between
(1) the wives of the deacons, as in the A.V.;
(2) the wives of the episcopi and deacons;
(3) deaconesses.
This last, on the whole, is the most probable. The male deacons had just been
spoken of, and so the apostle goes on to speak of the female deacons (at διάκονοι ,
Rom_16:1). He conceives of the deacon's office as consisting of two branches—
(1) the deacons,
(2) the deaconesses;
and gives appropriate directions for each. It must he remembered that the office of
the early deacon was in a great measure secular, so that there is nothing strange in
that of the deaconess being coupled with it. The retrain in 1Ti_3:12 to the male
deacon is in favor of understanding "the women" of the deaconesses, as showing
that the subject of the diaconate was not done with. Chrysostom (who says, "He is
speaking of those who hold the rank of deaconesses") and all the ancient
commentators, and De Wette, Wiesinger, Wordsworth, Alford, and Ellicott among

the moderns, so understand it (see following notes). Grave ( σεµνὰς ; see 1Ti_3:8,
note). ot slanderers ( µὴ διαβόλους , corresponding to the µὴ διλόγους of 1Ti_3:8).
This use of διάβολος , which is the classical one, is peculiar in the ew Testament to
the pastoral Epistles (see 2Ti_3:3; Tit_2:3). Temperate ( νηφαλίους ; see 1Ti_3:2,
note). It corresponds here to the µὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας of 1Ti_3:8. Faithful in
all things ( πιστὰς ἐν πᾶδιν ). This seems to refer specially to their being the
almoners of the Church charities, and so favors the explanation of "women" as
meaning deaconesses. Πιστός means especially "trusty" (Mat_24:45; Mat_25:21;
Luk_12:42; Luk_16:10, etc.).
BI, "Even so must their wives be grave.
The pastor’s wife
A good example is the pastor’s first ministry, and Paul associates the wife in this
ministry, when he wishes the wives to be “grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all
things.” This has been felt to be so important that in certain churches, those of
Hungary, the minister has been made positively responsible for the conduct of his
wife. He is everywhere so morally, and the responsibility is a grave one, the ministry
may suffer considerably if it is not regarded. How much may the humours and vices
of the wife (slander, avarice, negligence, display, etc.), compromise the respectability
of the pastor? And conversely: Julian the apostate, observing that one cause of the
success of the gospel was the purity in the manners of its followers, and especially its
ministers, and wishing to enable paganism to compete with Christianity, ordered the
pagan priests to maintain their wives, children, and domestics in the same sanctity
of manners. (Vinet.)
Talebearing discouraged
Hannah More had a good way of managing tale-bearers. It is said that whenever she
was told anything derogatory of another, her invariable reply was, “Come, we will
go and ask if this is true.” The effect was sometimes ludicrously painful. The tale-
bearer was taken aback, stammered out a qualification, or begged that no notice
might be taken of the statement. But the good lady was inexorable; off she took the
scandalmonger to the scandalised, to make inquiry and compare accounts. It is not
very likely that anybody ever a second time ventured to repeat a gossipy story to
Hannah More. Milton being asked if he intended to teach his daughters languages,
replied, “ o, one tongue is enough for a woman!” (E. J. Hardy, M. A.)

12 A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must
manage his children and his household well.
BAR ES, "Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife - notes, 1Ti_3:2.
Ruling their children and their own houses well - notes, 1Ti_3:4-5.
CLARKE, "Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife - This is the same
that is required of the bishops. See on 1Ti_3:2 (note) 1Ti_3:4 (note), and 1Ti_3:5 (note).
GILL, "Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife,.... See Gill on 1Ti_3:2.
ruling their children and their own houses well. These qualifications are the
same with those of the bishop or elder; See Gill on 1Ti_3:4.
JAMISO , "husbands of one wife — (See on 1Ti_3:2).
ruling their children — There is no article in the Greek, “ruling children”; implying
that he regarded the having children to rule as a qualification (1Ti_3:4; Tit_1:6).
their own houses — as distinguished from “the Church of God” (see on 1Ti_3:5). In
the case of the deacons, as in that of the bishops, he mentions the first condition of
receiving office, rather than the special qualifications for its discharge. The practical side
of Christianity is the one most dwelt on in the Pastoral Epistles, in opposition to the
heretical teachers; moreover, as the miraculous gifts began to be withdrawn, the safest
criterion of efficiency would be the previous moral character of the candidate, the
disposition and talent for the office being presupposed. So in Act_6:3, a similar criterion
was applied, “Look ye out among you seven men of honest report.” Less stress is laid on
personal dignity in the case of the deacon than in that of the bishop (compare Notes, see
on 1Ti_3:2, 1Ti_3:3).
CALVI , "Let the deacons be Since he mentioned wives, he lays down the same
injunction about deacons as he had formerly down about bishops; namely, that each
of them — satisfied within having but one wife — shall set an example of a chaste
and honorable father of a family, and shall keep his children and his whole house
under holy discipline. And this refutes the error of those who understand this

passage as referring to domestic servants. (65)
(65) “Des serviteurs domestiques, et non pas des diacres de l’.” — “ domestic
servants, and not to the deacons of the Church.”
BURKITT, "That is, "Let not any such be admitted deacon who has more wives
than one, or that hath injuriously put away one, and married to another; and let
them show by the good government of their own children and household, that they
are fit to govern the church of God."
ote here, That the higher officers of the church were usually chosen out of the
inferior; and accordingly, the qualifications for both offices, namely, that of bishops
and deacons, are for the greatest part the same, both in this epistle and in that to
Titus.
PULPIT, "Deacons for the deacons, A.V.; husbands for the husbands, A.V.
Husbands of one wife (see above, 1Ti_3:2, note). Ruling, etc. ( προιδτάµενοι );
literally, being at the head of, presiding over (see 1Ti_3:4, note). In Rom_12:8 and
1Th_5:12 it is applied to the spiritual ruler, the ἐπίσκοπος or πρεσβυτερος of the
Church. Elsewhere only in the pastoral Epistles (above, 1Th_5:4 and 1Th_5:5; 1Ti_
5:17; Tit_3:8, Tit_3:14). Their own houses (above, 1Th_5:5). "Their own" is in
contrast to" God's house."
BI, "Husband of one wife.
A negligent father
I was once the guest, says Mr. Moody, of a Christian man, whose children were
turning out badly. One night a conversation took place about them; and with tears
trickling down his cheek he said, “My four eldest sons turned out badly, and I am
afraid that the others are following their example.” I said: “Let us look into this
thing. Tell me about your family. How many nights do you go to church?” “On
Sunday night. I am an officer in the church, and I am there on Sunday night.”
“What about Monday?” “Oh, I am a deacon, and I am at the church on Monday
night.” “What about Tuesday night?” “I am connected with the city government,
and I have to attend committee-meetings of the council.” “Wednesday night is
prayer-meeting, and you go to church?” “Yes.” “That is how you are occupied four
nights. What do you do the other three?” “I belong to the Masons. I hold a high
office in the lodge, and have to be there.” “That accounts for five nights. Of course,
as you hold a high social position, you are often out at dinner-parties and
committees. You go out perhaps one night each week to dinners and committees.”
“It will average all that.” “Then,” I said, “there is one more night, that is, Saturday

night; what do you do then?” “Oh, I am superintendent of the Sabbath school, and I
lock myself in my room and prepare the lesson for my Bible-class on the following
day.” “You don’t let your children into your room then, do you?” “ o; certainly
not.” “Then your children have to get off early in the morning, and they are away
from family prayer?” “Yes; some get off early, and others rise late, and they are not
present at morning worship.” “And you have to get away as early, as possible to
your business” as soon as I get through worship I am off. What time do you take
dinner. At six o’clock.” “You see your children at six. But you are not always
prompt. I suppose half-past six, is it not?” “Yes, that is about the average.” “And
your meetings begin about half past seven; so that you have but little time with your
children. What have you done for them?” And at that very time he was trying to be
made mayor of the city. He dropped his head, and said that he had never thought of
it in that light before. There are many just like that. They are giving their time to
public affairs, to the utter neglect of their children and their homes.
Evils of polygamy
Titus, brother of Africaner, was the only individual on the station who had two
wives, and fearing the influence of example, I have occasionally made a delicate
reference to the subject and by degrees could make more direct remarks on the
point which was one of the barriers to his happiness; but he remained firm,
admitting, at the same time, that a man with two wives was not to be envied, and
added, “He is often in an uproar, and when they quarrel he does not know whose
part to take.” He said, he often resolved when there was a great disturbance, he
would pay one off. One morning I thought the anticipated day had come. He
approached my door leading an ex upon which one of his wives was seated. “What is
the matter?” I inquired. Giving me a shake of his hand, and laughing, he replied,
“Just the old thing over again. Mynheer must not laugh too much at me, for I am
now in for it.” The two wives had quarrelled at the outpost, and the one in a rage
had thrown a dry rotten stick at the other, which had entered the palm of her hand,
and had left a piece about an inch long, and the thickness of a finger. The hand had
swollen to nearly four times its usual size. “Why” I asked, “did you not bring her
sooner?” “She was afraid to see you, and would not come till I assured her that you
were a maak mensche”(a tame man). Having made an incision and extracted the
piece of wood, she was melted into tears with gratitude, while I earnestly exhorted
her to a better way of life. (Dr. Moffatt.)
Purchase to themselves a good degree.--
The good degree
The words refer, in the first place, to a faithful discharge of the duties attached to
the office of the deacon. They that have “used the office of a deacon well” are they
who have laboured in the diaconate with honour to themselves and glory to their
Master; for “well” is the same word used in the latter part of the verse, and

translated good--a good degree. It is the specific term for the beautiful in human
action, in contrast to the grudging discharge of mere obligation. It implies in the
labourer not only diligence and zeal, but also carefulness and purity of motive; and
the best use of every power and opportunity that God has entrusted to us--the frank,
loving, self-abandoning, self-forgetting discharge of a holy obligation. Such an idea
cannot be confined to any special office, and it is not, therefore, the particular work
done which is thrown into the front, but the grace shown in the mode of doing it--
the beautiful discharge of duty for God, in whatever sphere of the Church it may be,
and whatever the exact nature of the duty Which is done. But, further, the words
furnish a stimulating motive to this earnest discharge of duty, by setting before the
soul’s desire a certain advantage that is to be secured by it. Here we must carefully
put away the idea of buying--that is, of meriting in any way, as if we bargained with
God. It has been thought that the word “degree” refers to ecclesiastical position and
church office; but such a meaning would be an appeal to professional selfishness,
and would be utterly out of harmony both with the spirit of St. Paul, and with the
meaning of his language. We must look much deeper to find the mind of God. A
good degree is a degree full of honour, praise, and joy, and such as the soul may
covet with all the force of a renewed and sanctified affection. In what consists the
good degree, which results from the honourable discharge of duty?
I. It consists in a higher state of spiritual life, a stronger faith, a brighter hope, a
more entrancing and captivating love; in short, a larger possession of god, as if the
Deity within flung His own grace and glory over the soul in which He dwells. Grace
is but the soul’s health, the restoration of a sin-stricken creature into the full
enjoyment for which it was intended. A large measure of grace is, therefore, a high
measure of health--and is not health delightful? Is there pleasure in the aching head,
in the weary limb, in the scorching fever, or the racking pain, or the feebleness and
languor and strange incapacities of sickness and disease? But must not the same
thing be true of the soul? Doubts, fears, alarms, conflicts, strange searchings of
heart, dim gropings of spirit, and occasional agonies of conscience, and the gnawing
aching pain of a self-upbraiding memory, are all the symptoms of spiritual sickness.
That the honourable discharge of every duty promotes the health of the soul is clear
enough. The more constantly duty is done, the more constantly faith and hope and
love are present; and then they grow by exercise till they become the soul’s habit, its
very life, the breath of its being, a part of the living self in the all-pervading
presence and power of God. That this high measure of spiritual life is the good
degree of the text, is shown by the last words, “great boldness in the faith.” The
literal meaning of the word translated “boldness” is freedom, frankness, and
confidence of speech. It has two relations. One looks toward man when the soul, rich
in its own love for Christ, and actually overflowing with icy in the Holy Ghost,
pours out to others the fulness of its own affection--not with an effort, but freshly,
naturally, spontaneously, as the living spring within the soul itself, the power of the
Holy Spirit of God flows forth into utterance. Such a boldness of speech to others
about their souls implies a glow and warmth of emotion, a strength of experience,
and a power of love such as might fill the soul of an angel. Then there is another

meaning of the word. It is used elsewhere for boldness of access to God.
II. But a good degree includes a further idea, and that is a higher state in glory, a
place nearer God in the world to come, a more perfect knowledge of Him, and a
more entrancing enjoyment of Him for ever and ever. This, we must bear in mind,
springs from the other, and is but its completion. God is infinite. His gifts will be
boundless as Himself; His gifts of knowledge, of holiness, of strength, of joy and
rapture, will be infinite. There is in God no limit whatever. If for all eternity we
shall enjoy more and more of God, it will be because the power to enjoy grows by
enjoyment as the soul becomes larger and larger with the God who fills it. Grace
here increases the capacity for glory hereafter. The more grace, the more glory. (E.
Garbett, M. A.)
Faithfulness in an inferior position leads to a higher
Dr. Morrison wrote to his friends in England and asked them to send him out
another missionary. A young man from the country came and offered himself. He
came to the office of the Missionary Society and was introduced to the gentlemen of
the board and had a long talk with them. They then asked him to call again in an
hour or two, and they would give him an answer. In talking the matter over after he
was gone, they came to the conclusion that this young man would not do to go as the
colleague of Dr. Morrison. Finally, they said to Dr. Phillips, one of their members:
“Doctor, you see the young man and tell him that we do not think him fit to be a
missionary; but that if he would like to go out as servant to the missionary we will
send him.” The doctor did not like much to do this; but he did it. He told the young
man just what the board said. ow, many a young man would have been angry on
hearing this, and would have said: “ o, I shall do no such thing. If I can’t go out as
a missionary, I won’t go at all.” But this young man did not feel or act so. After
hearing what the doctor said, his answer was: “Well, sir, if the gentlemen don’t
think me fit to be a missionary I will go as a servant. I am willing to be a hewer of
wood, or a drawer of water, or do anything to help on the cause of my heavenly
Master.” He was sent out as a servant, but he soon got to be a missionary, and
turned out to be the Rev. Dr. Milne, one of the best and greatest missionaries that
ever went to any country. (R. ewton, D. D.)
13 Those who have served well gain an excellent

standing and great assurance in their faith in
Christ Jesus.
BAR ES, "For they that have used the office of a deacon well - Margin,
“ministered.” The Greek word is the same as deacon, meaning ministering, or serving in
this office. The sense would be well expressed by the phrase, “deaconizing well.” The
“word” implies nothing as to the exact nature of the office.
Purchase to themselves - Procure for themselves; see this word explained in the
notes on Act_20:28.
A good degree - The word here used (βαθµός bathmos) occurs nowhere else in the
New Testament. It means, properly, “a step,” as of a stair; and the fair meaning is that of
going up higher, or taking an additional step of dignity, honor, or standing. So far as the
“word” is concerned, it may mean either an advance in office, in dignity, in
respectability, or in influence. It cannot certainly be inferred that the apostle referred to
a higher grade of “office;” for all that the word essentially conveys is, that, by exercising
this office well, a deacon would secure additional respectability and influence in the
church. Still, it is possible that those who had performed the duties of this office well
were appointed to be preachers. They may have shown so much piety, prudence, good
sense, and ability to preside over the church, that it was judged proper that they should
be advanced to the office of bishops or pastors of the churches. Such a course would not
be unnatural. This is, however, far from teaching that the office of a deacon is a
subordinate office, “with a view” to an ascent to a higher grade.
And great boldness in the faith - The word here rendered “boldness” properly
refers to boldness “in speaking;” see it explained in the Act_4:13 note; 2Co_3:12 note;
Phi_1:20 note. But the word is commonly used to denote boldness of any kind -
openness, frankness, confidence, assurance; Joh_8:13, Joh_8:26; Mar_8:32; 2Co_7:4.
As it is here connected with “faith” - “boldness in the faith” - it means, evidently, not so
much public speaking, as a manly and independent exercise of faith in Christ. The sense
is, that by the faithful performance of the duties of the office of a deacon, and by the kind
of experience which a man would have in that office, he would establish a character of
firmness in the faith, which would show that he was a decided Christian. This passage,
therefore, cannot be fairly used to prove that the deacon was “a preacher,” or that he
belonged to a grade of ministerial office from which he was regularly to rise to that of a
presbyter.
CLARKE, "That have used the office of a deacon well - They who, having been
tried or proved, 1Ti_3:10, have shown by their steadiness, activity, and zeal, that they
might be raised to a higher office, are here said to have purchased to themselves a good
degree, βαθµον καλον· for, instead of having to administer to the bodies and bodily wants
of the poor, the faithful deacons were raised to minister in holy things; and, instead of

ministering the bread that perisheth, they were raised to the presbyterate or episcopate,
to minister the bread of life to immortal souls. And hence the apostle adds; And great
boldness in the faith; πολλην παρምησιαν, great liberty of speech; i.e. in teaching the
doctrines of Christianity, and in expounding the Scriptures, and preaching. It seems to
have been a practice dictated by common sense, that the most grave and steady of the
believers should be employed as deacons; the most experienced and zealous of the
deacons should be raised to the rank of elders; and the most able and pious of the elders
be consecrated bishops. As to a bishop of bishops, that age did not know such. The pope
of Rome was the first who took this title. The same office, but not with the same powers
nor abuse, is found in the patriarch of the Greek Church, and the archbishop of the
Protestant Church. As the deacon had many private members under his care, so the
presbyter or elder had several deacons under his care; the bishop, several presbyters;
and the archbishop, several bishops. But I speak now more of the modern than of the
ancient Church. The distinction in some of these offices is not so apparent in ancient
times; and some of the offices themselves are modern, or comparatively so. But deacon,
presbyter, and bishop, existed in the apostolic Church, and may therefore be considered
of Divine origin.
GILL, "For they that have used the office of a deacon well,.... With diligence
and faithfulness, with simplicity and cheerfulness; taking good care of the minister and
poor, and of the discipline of God's house:
purchase to themselves a good degree; not an higher office, as that of presbytery
or episcopacy, which is a sense calculated to serve a hierarchy; nor a degree in glory and
happiness hereafter; but rather an increase of gifts and grace; or a degree of respect and
honour in the church: or the sense is, they possess and enjoy, which is the meaning of
the word rendered "purchase", a very honourable office in the church; and which is so to
them, they using it well, and discharging it in an honourable manner; unless the apostle
should design what the Jews called ‫דמהימנותא‬ ‫,דרגא‬ "a degree of faith": (b) but that is
expressed in the next clause:
and great boldness in the faith, which is in Christ Jesus: either in the exercise of
the grace of faith at the throne of grace; or in asserting the doctrine of faith before men;
and in reproving either for error or immorality: all which may be boldly done by those
who use this office well.
JAMISO , "purchase to themselves a good degree — literally, “are acquiring
... a ... step.” Understood by many as “a higher step,” that is, promotion to the higher
office of presbyter. But ambition of rising seems hardly the motive to faithfulness which
the apostle would urge; besides, it would require the comparative, “a better degree.”
Then the past aorist participle, “they that used the office of deacon well,” implies that
the present verb, “are acquiring to themselves boldness,” is the result of the completed
action of using the diaconate well. Also, Paul would not probably hold out to every
deacon the prospect of promotion to the presbytery in reward of his service. The idea of
moving upwards in Church offices was as yet unknown (compare Rom_12:7, etc.; 1Co_
12:4-11). Moreover, there seems little connection between reference to a higher Church
rank and the words “great boldness.” Therefore, what those who have faithfully

discharged the diaconate acquire for themselves is “a good standing-place” [Alford] (a
well-grounded hope of salvation) against the day of judgment, 1Ti_6:19; 1Co_3:13, 1Co_
3:14 (the figurative meaning of “degree” or “step,” being the degree of worth which one
has obtained in the eye of God [Wiesinger]); and boldness (resting on that standing-
place”), as well for preaching and admonishing others now (Eph_6:19; a firm standing
forth for the truth against error), as also especially in relation to God their coming
Judge, before whom they may be boldly confident (Act_24:16; 1Jo_2:28; 1Jo_3:21; 1Jo_
4:17; Heb_4:16).
in the faith — rather as Greek, “in faith,” that is, boldness resting on their own faith.
which is in Christ Jesus — resting in Christ Jesus.
RWP, "Gain to themselves (heautois peripoiountai). Present middle indicative of
peripoieō, old verb, to make besides (peri, around, over), to lay by. Reflexive (indirect)
middle with reflexive pronoun (heautois) repeated as often happens in the Koiné. In N.T.
only here, Luk_17:33; Act_20:28 (Paul also, quoting Isa_43:21).
A good standing (bathmon kalon). Late word from bainō, in lxx for steps at a door (1
Samuel 5:5). In plural the steps of a stair. In the inscriptions it means a good foothold or
standing. The ecclesiastical writers (Theodoret) take it to be a higher grade or rank, but
it is doubtful if Paul means that here.
Much boldness (pollēn parrēsian). A Pauline phrase (2Co_3:12; 2Co_7:4; Phi_
1:20).
In the faith which is in Christ Jesus (en pistei tēi en Christōi Iēsou). Pauline
phrase again (Act_26:18; Gal_3:26; Col_1:4; Eph_1:15; 2Ti_1:13; 2Ti_3:15).
CALVI , "13For they who have served well Owing to a practice which came into
use one or two centuries after the death of the apostles, of choosing presbyters from
the order of deacons, this passage has been commonly interpreted as describing
elevation to a higher rank, as if the Apostle called to the honor of being presbyters
those who had faithfully discharged the office of a deacon. For my own part, though
I do not deny that the order of deacons might sometimes be the nursery out of which
presbyters were taken, yet I take Paul’ words as meaning, more simply, that they
who have discharged this ministry in a proper manner are worthy of no small
honor; because it is not a mean employment, but a highly honorable office. ow by
this expression he intimates how much it is for the advantage of the Church to have
this office discharged by choice men; because the holy discharge of it procures
esteem and reverence.
How absurd is it for Papists to maintain that, in making deacons, they do what Paul
enjoins! First, why do they make deacons but to carry the cup in a procession, and
to feed the eyes of the ignorant with I know not what ridiculous exhibitions?
Besides, they do not even observe this; for not a single deacon has been made,
during the last five hundred years, except that, after taking this step, he may
immediately rise to the priesthood. What impudence is it, to boast of elevating to a
higher rank those who have ministered well, when they confer their priesthood on

none but those who have never touched a single part of the former office!
And much liberty in the faith. With good reason does he add this; for there is
nothing that tends so much to produce liberty as a good conscience and a life free
from crime and reproach; as, on the contrary, timidity must be the lot of those who
have a bad conscience. And if they sometimes make a valiant boast of liberty, yet it
is not uniform and constant, nor has it any weight. For this reason he describes also
the kind of liberty. “ the faith,” says he, which is in Christ; that is, that they may
serve — Christ with greater boldness; as, on the other hand, they who have acted
basely in the discharge of their office may be said to have their mouth shut and their
hands tied, and are unfit for doing good; because no reliance — no authority is
given to them.
BURKITT, "
That is, "Although the deacons be as servants to the bishops, yet such as use that
office well, according to the foregoing rules, by so doing do purchase to themselves a
good degree above the vulgar, and also have farther hopes of being advanced in the
church to higher offices; and when they preach the word (as did Philip and Stephen)
they might do it with great boldness, and with expectation of success, living suitably
to the qualification of their function, and walking according to the rule of the gospel,
which they professed and taught."
PULPIT, "Served well as deacons for used the office of a deacon well, A.V.; gain to
themselves a good standing for purchase to themselves a good degree, A.V. Served…
as deacons ( διακονήσαντες ); as in 1Ti_3:10. In this technical sense only found in
these two passages; which well agrees with the late date of this Epistle, when the
technical sense of διάκονος was established. Gain to themselves a good standing. The
sense of the passage depends a good deal upon the exact meaning of βαθµός . In
1Sa_5:4, 1Sa_5:5, in the LXX., βαθµός is the rendering of ðúÌÈôÀíÄ (rendered
αἴθριον in Eze_9:3; Eze_10:4), a somewhat unusual word for a "threshold." In 2Ki_
20:9, 2Ki_20:10, 2Ki_20:11, it is the rendering of äìÈòÂíÇ , "a degree on the sun-
dial." This latter seems to suit better the verb περιποιοῦνται , they gain or acquire,
which suggests the idea of advancement. It does not follow that St. Paul had in his
mind their advancement from the "inferior office" to "the higher ministries in the
Church" (Ordination Service); he may merely have meant to say that the discharge
of the duties of a deacon in an efficient and exemplary manner raised a man to high
estimation in the Church, and so gave him confidence in confessing the faith of Jesus
Christ both by word and deed. Gain to themselves ( περιποιοῦνται ); acquire by
purchase or otherwise. Frequent in the LXX.; but only elsewhere in the ew
Testament in Act_20:28. Boldness ( παρρησίαν ); very common in the ew
Testament (comp. Act_4:13, Act_4:29, Act_4:31; Eph_6:19; Php_1:20, etc.), where it
is especially applied to boldness in preaching the gospel of Christ. This seems to
imply that St. Paul contemplated preaching as a part of the deacon's work. We
know that Philip the deacon and Stephen the deacon were both preachers.

Reasons for Paul’s Instructions
14 Although I hope to come to you soon, I am
writing you these instructions so that,
BAR ES, "These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee
shortly - That is, he hoped to come there to give instructions personally, or to finish,
himself, the work which he had commenced in Ephesus, and which had been interrupted
by his being driven so unexpectedly away. This verse proves that the apostle Paul did not
regard Timothy as the permanent diocesan bishop of Ephesus. Would any Episcopal
bishop write this to another bishop? If Timothy were the permanent prelate of Ephesus,
would Paul have intimated that he expected soon to come and take the work of
completing the arrangements there into his own hands? In regard to his expectation of
going soon to Ephesus, see the notes on 1Ti_1:3; compare the Introduction to the
Epistle.
CLARKE, "These things write I - That is: I write only these things; because I hope
to come unto thee shortly.
GILL, "These things write I unto thee,.... Concerning the offices of bishops and
deacons, their several qualifications, and the rules of judging of persons fit for such
service:
hoping to come unto thee shortly; at Ephesus. He could not tell whether he could
come or not, and therefore makes no promise, but hoped he should; and since it was
uncertain, he thought fit to write the above things for his instruction and use.
HE RY, 14-16, "He concludes the chapter with a particular direction to Timothy. He
hoped shortly to come to him, to give him further directions and assistance in his work,
and to see that Christianity was well planted, and took root well, at Ephesus; he
therefore wrote the more briefly to him. But he wrote lest he should tarry long, that
Timothy might know how to behave himself in the house of God, how to conduct himself
as became an evangelist, and the apostle's substitute. Observe,
I. Those who are employed in the house of God must see to it that they behave
themselves well, lest they bring reproach upon the house of God, and that worthy name
by which they are called. Ministers ought to behave themselves well, and to look not only

to their praying and preaching, but to their behaviour: their office binds them to their
good behaviour, for any behaviour will not do in this case. Timothy must know how to
behave himself, not only in the particular church where he was now appointed to reside
for some time, but being an evangelist, and the apostle's substitute, he must learn how to
behave himself in other churches, where he should in like manner be appointed to reside
for some time; and therefore it is not the church of Ephesus, but the catholic church,
which is here called the house of God, which is the church of the living God. Observe
here, 1. God is the living God; he is the fountain of life, he is life in himself, and he gives
life, breath, and all things to his creatures; in him we live, and move, and have our being,
Act_17:25, Act_17:28. 2. The church is the house of God, he dwells there; the Lord has
chosen Zion, to dwell there. “This is my rest, here will I dwell, for I have chosen it;” there
may we see God's power and glory, Psa_63:2.
II. It is the great support of the church that it is the church of the living God, the true
God in opposition to false gods, dumb and dead idols.
1. As the church of God, it is the pillar and ground of truth; that is, either, (1.) The
church itself is the pillar and ground of truth. Not that the authority of the scriptures
depends upon that of the church, as the papists pretend, for truth is the pillar and
ground of the church; but the church holds forth the scripture and the doctrine of Christ,
as the pillar to which a proclamation is affixed holds forth the proclamation. Even to the
principalities and powers in heavenly places is made known by the church the manifold
wisdom of God, Eph_3:10. (2.) Others understand it of Timothy. He, not he himself
only, but he as an evangelist, he and other faithful ministers, are the pillars and ground
of truth; it is their business to maintain, hold up, and publish, the truths of Christ in the
church. It is said of the apostles that they seemed to be pillars, Gal_2:9. [1.] Let us be
diligent and impartial in our own enquiries after truth; let us buy the truth at any rate,
and not think much of any pains to discover it. [2.] Let us be careful to keep and preserve
it. “Buy the truth, and sell it not (Pro_23:23), do not part with it on any consideration.”
[3.] Let us take care to publish it, and to transmit it safe and uncorrupted unto posterity.
[4.] When the church ceases to be the pillar and ground of truth, we may and ought to
forsake her; for our regard to truth should be greater than our regard to the church; we
are no longer obliged to continue in the church than she continues to be the pillar and
ground of truth.
2. But what is the truth which the churches and ministers are the pillars and grounds
of? He tells us (1Ti_3:16) that without controversy great is the mystery of godliness.
The learned Camero joins this with what goes before, and then it runs thus: “The pillar
and ground of the truth, and without controversy great is the mystery of godliness.” He
supposes this mystery to be the pillar, etc. Observe,
(1.) Christianity is a mystery, a mystery that could not have been found out by reason
or the light of nature, and which cannot be comprehended by reason, because it is above
reason, though not contrary thereto. It is a mystery, not of philosophy or speculation;
but of godliness, designed to promote godliness; and herein it exceeds all the mysteries
of the Gentiles. It is also a revealed mystery, not shut up and sealed; and it does not
cease to be a mystery because now in part revealed. But,
(2.) What is the mystery of godliness? It is Christ; and here are six things concerning
Christ, which make up the mystery of godliness. [1.] That he is God manifest in the flesh:
God was manifest in the flesh. This proves that he is God, the eternal Word, that was
made flesh and was manifest in the flesh. When God was to be manifested to man he was
pleased to manifest himself in the incarnation of his own Son: The Word was made
flesh, Joh_1:14. [2.] He is justified in the Spirit. Whereas he was reproached as a sinner,
and put to death as a malefactor, he was raised again by the Spirit, and so was justified

from all the calumnies with which he was loaded. He was made sin for us, and was
delivered for our offences; but, being raised again, he was justified in the Spirit; that is,
it was made to appear that his sacrifice was accepted, and so he rose again for our
justification, as he was delivered for our offences, Rom_4:25. He was put to death in the
flesh, but quickened by the Spirit, 1Pe_3:18. [3.] He was seen of angels. They
worshipped him (Heb_1:6); they attended his incarnation, his temptation, his agony, his
death, his resurrection, his ascension; this is much to his honour, and shows what a
mighty interest he had in the upper world, that angels ministered to him, for he is the
Lord of angels. [4.] He is preached unto the Gentiles. This is a great part of the mystery
of godliness, that Christ was offered to the Gentiles a Redeemer and Saviour; that
whereas, before, salvation was of the Jews, the partition-wall was now taken down, and
the Gentiles were taken in. I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, Act_13:47. [5.]
That he was believed on in the world, so that he was not preached in vain. Many of the
Gentiles welcomed the gospel which the Jews rejected. Who would have thought that the
world, which lay in wickedness, would believe in the Son of God, would take him to be
their Saviour who was himself crucified at Jerusalem? But, notwithstanding all the
prejudices they laboured under, he was believed on, etc. [6.] He was received up into
glory, in his ascension. This indeed was before he was believed on in the world; but it is
put last, because it was the crown of his exaltation, and because it is not only his
ascension that is meant, but his sitting at the right hand of God, where he ever lives,
making intercession, and has all power, both in heaven and earth, and because, in the
apostasy of which he treats in the following chapter, his remaining in heaven would be
denied by those who pretend to bring him down on their altars in the consecrated
wafers. Observe, First, He who was manifest in flesh was God, really and truly God, God
by nature, and not only so by office, for this makes it to be a mystery. Secondly, God was
manifest in flesh, real flesh. Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood,
he also himself likewise took part of the same, Heb_2:14. And, what is more amazing, he
was manifest in the flesh after all flesh had corrupted his way, though he himself was
holy from the womb. Thirdly, Godliness is a mystery in all its parts and branches, from
the beginning to the end, from Christ's incarnation to his ascension. Fourthly, It being a
great mystery, we should rather humbly adore it, and piously believe it, than curiously
pry into it, or be too positive in our explications of it and determinations about it, further
than the holy scriptures have revealed it to us.
JAMISO , "write I ... hoping — that is, “though I hope to come unto thee shortly”
(1Ti_4:13). As his hope was not very confident (1Ti_3:15), he provides for Timothy’s
lengthened superintendence by giving him the preceding rules to guide him. He now
proceeds to give more general instructions to him as an evangelist, having a “gift”
committed to him (1Ti_4:14).
shortly — Greek, “sooner,” namely, than is presupposed in the preceding directions
given to him. See my Introduction on this verse. This verse best suits the theory that this
First Epistle was not written after Paul’s visit and departure from Ephesus (Acts 19:1-
20:38) when he had resolved to winter at Corinth after passing the summer in
Macedonia (1Co_16:6), but after his first imprisonment at Rome (Act_28:17-31);
probably at Corinth, where he might have some thoughts of going on to Epirus before
returning to Ephesus [Birks].
RWP. "Shortly (en tachei). Old idiom (locative case of tachos, quickness, speed). See

note on Rom_16:20. A pseudonymous writer would hardly have put in this phrase.
Paul’s hopes were not to be realized, but he did not know that.
CALVI , "14These things I write to thee He holds out to Timothy the hope of his
coming, partly in order to encourage him, and partly in order to repress the
insolence of those who grew more haughty on account of his absence. And yet he
does not make any feigned promise to Timothy, or terrify others through false
presence; for he fully expected that he would come, as it is probable that he came, if
he wrote this epistle at the time when he passed through Phrygia, as is related by
Luke. (Act_18:23.) Let us look on this as a proof how great was his anxiety for the
churches, when he could not endure to delay for a short time a remedy for a present
evil. Yet immediately afterwards he adds, that he wrote this epistle for the purpose
of informing Timothy, if it should happen that he were delayed longer than he
thought.
BURKITT, "As if the apostle had said, "I do hope to come to thee very shortly; but
if I tarry long, or be prevented at last, as I am uncertain, I write these things to thee,
that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to converse in the house of God, in the
church of the living God, in which thou art a pillar and firm buttress of the truth."
Some, by the pillar here, will understand the church, as being the foundation on
which the truth is built, and giving it authority; but she is therefore the church of
Christ, because she holds the truth, and it is essential to her being to maintain and
teach all necessary truths; she holds it forth, and publishes it to the world,
sustaining it, and supporting it as a pillar doth the king's proclamation. The truth
receives not its authority from the church, but the church receives authority from
adhering to the truth.
Others, by the pillar, understand Timothy; and that St. Paul is here exhorting, that
according to his office Timothy should be a pillar and buttress of truth in the
church.
Hence, Gal_2:9 James, Cephas, and John are said to be pillars there, as is Timothy
here; a pillar in the church, signifies a man that is well rooted and grounded, and
strong in the faith; this he exhorts Timothy to be.
Observe here, 1. The church's surpassing dignity: she is called the house of God, in
which he dwells. God is present in all places, even in hell itself, by the immensity of
his being; but the church is his palace, the place of his peculiar residence.
Observe, 2. The ministers of the church's important duty, namely, as pillars to
support, maintain, and uphold, the divine truth against all those that seek to corrupt
and suppress the same. Be thou, O Timothy in the church of God as the pillar and
ground of truth.

I timothy 3 commentary

I timothy 3 commentary

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to I timothy 3 commentary

More from GLENN PEASE

Recently uploaded

I timothy 3 commentary