The Qualifications of Elders and Overseers
In the article “Are the Qualifications for Elders and Overseers Negotiable?” Benjamin Merkle asserts that Paul’s lists of qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 are non-negotiable and relevant in a contemporary context.[1] Merkle provides several arguments to support his view. First, regarding whether the Apostle Paul used a preformed virtue list, Merkle reasonably suggests that, regardless of whether a list was available or not, Paul felt free to adapt the list to his listeners.[2]
Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 46, Pastoral Epistles
Second, regarding how much of Paul’s lists reflect the recipients’ historical situation, Merkle also correctly disagrees with William Mounce, who appears to argue that Paul’s primary initiative was to respond to false teachers.[3] In other words, Paul’s lists appear to directly apply to overseeing a church. However, the more challenging issue is whether the lists of qualifications in 1 Timothy and Titus should be universally applied.
Merkle argues that Paul’s lists have a universal application. First, Merkle contends that all moral qualifications are non-negotiable due to the nature of the overseer’s position.[4] Second, Merkle also believes that the duty of teaching, although not an issue of morality, is also non-negotiable because it is necessary to oversee the local church.[5] Third, Merkle then addresses the three remaining qualifications that potentially lie outside of moral exhortations and teaching: (1) having one wife, (2) managing one’s children, and (3) being a seasoned believer.[6]
Regarding one wife, Merkle assumes the meaning is that if a man marries, then he must be faithful; thus, it is non-negotiable because it is a moral issue.[7] Merkle applies similar logic to managing children.[8] Finally, concerning new converts, Merkle suggests the qualification is “somewhat negotiable or, at least, relative to the particular context” because “it is too simplistic to put all of the qualifications in the same category.”[9]
I find Merkle’s arguments less than convincing. However, I do agree with his final assertion that sometimes the situation is complex because, from my perspective, black-and-white rules of morality are risky and sometimes downright immoral. Let me explain. First, although it would be difficult to ever imagine a time when overindulging in alcohol or being a lover of money would be acceptable, other moral qualifications such as hospitality, gentleness, and having a good reputation with outsiders could be considered abhorrent depending on the context. For example, 1 Corinthians 5 illustrates a situation where hospitality would have been unacceptable; Matthew 16:22-23 provides an example where gentleness from Jesus would have been inappropriate, and Jesus certainly did not have a good reputation with certain outsiders. Second, by holding tightly to the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law, certain risks also arise. For example, it is possible that a man is married to only one woman but has been married seven times to different women. Would this disqualify the man, or would it depend on the situation and the context? Furthermore, what if a man was not given to drunkenness but was addicted to marijuana? In other words, the qualifications depend on the context in both directions: At times, the qualifications need exceptions while, at other times, the qualifications need to be expanded.
Third, regarding one of the final three qualifications Merkle addresses, the author concludes that parents must lead children to be respectful because it ultimately points to a morality issue.[10] In general, the qualification is certainly important to uphold, but it is likely akin to a proverbial maxim rather than a non-negotiable. What about a situation where a man has five children, and all five are respectful except one? Could it be that the problem is with the child rather than the parent? The story of the prodigal son comes to mind. Additionally, would Yahweh be disqualified under such guidelines as the nation of Israel and Solomon, in particular, are referred to as God’s sons, but clearly these children were, at times, quite disrespectful. Without question, the analogy is less than perfect. However, the point is that sometimes children stray, even for a short period of time, with no fault assigned to the parents. Finally, what is considered “respectable” in one culture is not the same as what is respectable in another culture. Twenty years ago, a tattoo or playing euchre may have disqualified an individual from overseeing a local church, but today neither may be considered disrespectable in certain congregations. In my view, it is too simplistic to state that all the qualifications for elders and overseers in 1 Timothy and Titus are never negotiable.
_________________________________
[1] Benjamin L Merkle, “Are the Qualifications for Elders or Overseers Negotiable?,” Bibliotheca Sacra 171, no. 682 (2014): 188.
[2] Ibid., 176.
[3] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000), 153.
[4] Merkle, “Are the Qualifications for Elders or Overseers Negotiable?,” 181.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid., 182.
[7] Ibid., 183.
[8] Ibid., 183–84.
[9] Ibid., 186.
[10] Ibid., 184.
Bibliography
- Merkle, Benjamin L. “Are the Qualifications for Elders or Overseers Negotiable?” Bibliotheca Sacra 171, no. 682 (2014): 172–88.
- Mounce, William D. Pastoral Epistles. Vol. 46. Word Biblical Commentary. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000.
