A bishop then must be blameless,
Spurgeon said something along the lines that if you don't have a sermon, you can try the John Gill commentary method, which goes something like "Firstly, the verse does not mean this. Secondly, the text does not mean that. Thirdly, the verse certainly doesn't mean this other thing. In conclusion, the verse speaks of this."
My blog post may be a little like that today, not that I haven't anything to so, but it is sometimes easier to find out what it doesn't mean and deal with what is left. Certainly "blameslessness" cannot mean that a pastor is without sin. There is one one perfect Pastor, and His name is Jesus. The author of this passage also wrote Romans 7.
This cannot mean that a man cannot be a bishop if, in his life prior to salvation, he lived a life as, well, a sinner. It would be difficult to make this case, as the man who penned the letter was the chief of sinners.
Also, it can't mean that the pastor never gets blamed or accused. Being accused of wrong doing is pretty much part of the job description of being a pastor. If you have been a pastor for more than two Sunday's, you've been accused of something.
What then, does it mean? The pastor is to be above reproach in his life. He is not to live in unrepentant sin and he is not to live in a way that will bring reproach or shame to the gospel of Christ. When he does sin, he must be quick to make it right between man and God. Paul was in prison. Jesus was crucified. These are shameful things for wrong doers. Jesus was hated, arrested, accused, sentenced, and crucified, dying, despising the shame. However, the life of Jesus was one without reproach, blameless before God.
the husband of one wife,
There has been more broken fellowship over this one portion of scripture among Baptist in my lifetime than, perhaps any other verse of scripture. I'm not going to add to the fire that exists, but I will do my best not to wear tap shoes and dance around the issue and "out Fred the nimblest Astaire", so let's just begin by me saying that I believe divorced and remarried men can pastor, and I'm not convinced that this is what Paul had in mind when he penned the letter.
If you have two wives, you cannot be a pastor. You can only have one wife. Since neither Paul, nor Jesus were married when they pastored, I cannot say that you MUST be a husband of one wife. Since we have this verse and the example of Peter, we dare not say that you cannot be married. I like how the Geneva Study Bible notes say it "Therefore he that shuts out married men from the office of bishops, only because they are married, is antichrist."
There is no law against a widower marrying again. He would not have two wives, since his wife is dead, though she would be his 2nd wife. So we cannot say this verse means that you MUST be the husband of one wife for the entirety of your life. Robertson's Word Pictures (μιας γυναικος — mias gunaikos). One at a time, clearly.
But let's be real..the only reason that this verse is controversial is because of the divorce question. As you study this issue, you will find men who have held that this meant divorce in the early days after the close of the cannon. You will also find men from the same time asserting that this is about polygamy. The commentators too are split, though most of the trusted men I have read come down on the anti-polygamy side of the fence. Yes, I'm full aware of the ad verecundiam but it is more than a little foolish not to inquire the minds of those who have gone before me.
I honestly do not think that Paul had divorce in mind here. I believe had the intention been to condemn divorce and remarriage, he would have more explicitly than was done here. When I was a younger man, I thought that this verse refereed to polygamy and I was told that I was being crazy and that couldn't mean that and how unrelevant this verse would be. Fast forward to 2015, and we see that pro-polygamy forces have already pushed to promote the practice. In 25-50 years, churches in the USA will have men come to faith in Christ, who were united in polygamous marriages prior to salvation.
On a side note, I have known many godly, faithful, men who have been divorced and remarried. I do not and will not break fellowship with a church that differs from me on this. Churches call their own pastors to serve them. If the church feels that a man is not qualified to be a bishop based upon this passage and his marital life, then they are free to call or not call him. That is the point here. These are markers of a man's life. It deals with the man's overall character. There won't be a single man on earth that meets each one of these marks to perfection, and every pastor, will at times, fall short of the high standards laid out here. Every man and every church will give an account before the Saviour on how they have applied the standard.
No comments:
Post a Comment