According to 2001 statistics gathered by The Barna Group, 33% of all who profess to be born again individuals and who have been married have gone through a divorce, which is statistically identical to the 34% incidence among non-born again adults. During the period during which they were single, one out of every three adults (33%) has lived with someone of the opposite gender, other than family members or relatives. One-quarter (25%) of those who profess to be born again Christians have co-habited.

These statistics reflect how the church of today faces the same problems and struggles that Titus faced in his leadership of the church in Crete. The doctrine of the church hasn’t made a notable difference on the lifestyles of church members as compared to the lifestyles of pagans. These statistics highlight the need of the church to have men of godly reputation leading, setting an example for all to follow as to what it looks like to be morally pure and faithful leaders of the home.

The book of Titus was written as a guide, showing Titus what Paul expected him to do to straighten out the problems in Crete as he helped organize the church there. The situation was that while there was a lot of religious display, religion made little difference as to how people lived their lives. There was little to be seen in terms of practical demonstrations of godliness. The world was impacting believers more than God’s people were impacting their world.

The major problem was the presence of false teachers. These men were promoting corrupt lifestyles by their false instruction. Legalism encouraged people to have the attitude that they could do it themselves—that they could earn their own way to God. Ritualism encouraged people just to go through the motions. It encouraged religion that was without power because it was without Christ. Paganism gave folks the impression that they could do whatever they wanted and that it didn’t matter if religion didn’t affect one’s lifestyle.

Paul left Titus in Crete to help the Christians living there to develop the conviction that sound doctrine should be accompanied by a sound lifestyle. He was concerned that they understand that the Christian faith ought to affect the way Christians live. The believers in Crete needed to know the truth of God and then demonstrate the truth of their doctrine by a godly lifestyle.

Paul left Titus to straighten out what was crooked in Crete. How was Titus to minister to a group of people who had become crooked themselves as the result of the false teaching they received? The solution was to appoint elders. Not just any elders would do. Titus needed to appoint elders who demonstrated by their lifestyle and character what a Christian should be like.

Why was the selection of godly leaders the top priority of Paul for preparing Titus for his ministry in Crete? When leaders model what godly living looks like, people are motivated to live godly lives themselves. When Christians live godly lives following the example of their godly leaders, it strengthens the church’s ministry of the gospel message—Our transformed lives demonstrate that our faith is valid and our message credible. On the other hand, the credibility of our message is hurt when it does not affect our daily lives. The credibility of our message is even more dramatically damaged when it does not affect how those in church leadership live their lives.

Because elders set the example for the rest of God’s people to model their lives after, there are higher expectations as to what they must be in terms of their character and conduct to qualify for their leadership position. While Paul gives a list of requirements in Titus 1:6-9 of what an elder must be, this list also defines what all people in the church should aspire to be. We are all expected to imitate the lives of godly leaders, acknowledging and taking responsibility for the fact that there is somebody out there for whom each and every one of us is setting a pattern—a younger adult or child, a son or daughter, a co-worker, a neighbor, a friend.

The believers living in Crete needed church leaders who had a good reputation in every area of life. Leaders with blameless character and conduct. Leaders with a good reputation in their home and family life. Leaders with a good reputation with respect to their personal character. Leaders with good reputations with respect to their use of God’s Word.

The quality of being above reproach is mentioned by Paul as the first of both lists of character qualifications required of elders in the church (Titus 1:6; 1 Timothy 3:2). Heading both lists, "blamelessness" stands as the all-embracing, overarching qualification. In other words, the elder must be above reproach in each of the character qualities Paul cites. Paul’s emphasis on the importance of this character trait is especially apparent in Titus chapter one where He writes of the need to be blameless not once, but twice (See Titus 1:7).

A person who is above reproach gives those who observe his life no basis for criticism. His life is without an obvious stain that people can point at. There is no basis in his life for someone who opposes the truth to accuse him and thereby reject the message he proclaims. Those who try to find a cause for accusing him will be frustrated because they won’t find anything in his life to attack. There is no habit or characteristic that if people were to find out about it, would harm the reputation of God’s work.

Illustration: I remember one of my favorite childhood toys was a set of Velcro balls that we would throw at a felt target trying to score the most amount of points possible. When we hit the target, the Velcro balls stuck. When we would miss the target, they would hit the wall and fall to the ground. Why? Because the make up of the wood wall had nothing in it that allowed Velcro balls to stick. As leaders, there should be nothing in our make up—in our character or conduct—to which accusations will stick when they are made against us.

Examples: Two Biblical examples of men who were above reproach are Daniel and Timothy. Consider the conclusion those who wanted to accuse Daniel came to—"They could find no corruption in him, because he was trustworthy and neither corrupt nor negligent….We will never find any basis for charges against this man" (Daniel 6:4-5). Consider also how those who knew Timothy talked about him—"The brothers at Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him" (Acts 16:1-2).

Above reproach doesn’t mean sinless.

If sinless perfection were the requirement for being an elder in the church, no one would make it. We all fail to measure up to God’s standard. If we say that we are sinless, we have just committed the sin of lying. 1 John 1:8 makes clear, "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us."

The key thought to keep in mind here is, "What is the man’s reputation or consistent pattern?" A person who sins in a particular area is not automatically disqualified because he committed a sin. For example, if an elder loses his temper in a particular instance, it does not necessarily mean that he needs to be dismissed as an elder. If, when he realizes his sin, he confesses it to the Lord and immediately takes steps to see that the problem is corrected, he has demonstrated his blameless character.

If however, an elder demonstrates a consistent pattern of being quick-tempered or is unwilling to deal with sin when confronted, then that person should no longer be an elder. A problem like this that an elder is unable or unwilling to correct should lead him to resign his position of leadership.

While an act of inconsistent conduct does not necessarily disqualify a man from being an elder, there are some actions such as physically pummeling someone in a fit of angry rage, or getting drunk, or having an adulteress affair with another woman in which case a single act demonstrates a problem of character that would disqualify a man from being an elder.

Such actions would serve as a basis for accusations being brought up against this man in the future, making him unqualified to serve as an elder.

An elder must be blameless. The church must not ignore or deny the requirements of God’s word that relate to what kind of men we select to be our leaders. As a pastor friend of mine says on a regular basis, "Be careful to guard the gate. Make sure only men with a reputation of godly character get in." As it relates to the overarching requirement of blamelessness:

There are several views as to what Paul means by "the husband of but one wife." The Bible is clear that polygamy is wrong, but Paul’s point here is not to address the problem of polygamy. Neither is Paul requiring that someone who serves as an elder must be a married man as some have suggested. Nor do I believe that he is saying that an elder who has been widowed cannot remarry if he desires to remain eligible as an elder. Nowhere in Scriptures is remarriage after the death of the wife depicted as forbidden or morally questionable. The view that a widowed elder cannot remarry is not in harmony with the tenor of Scriptures teaching on the subject of marriage, leading me to conclude that Paul is not bringing up the issue here either.

The concern Paul communicated to Titus and the requirement God gives to elders is that they have the reputation of being "one woman men."

"The husband of but one wife" can be properly translated two different ways. It can be translated, "a one woman man" or "a one wife husband." I prefer the first translation—"a one woman man"— as it puts the emphasis on a man’s character and reputation, which I believe is Paul’s point in the list of requirements he gives for elders.

The word order Paul used is this verse puts an emphasis on the word "One." An elder must be devoted to the one woman God has given to him as his wife. An elder must be a man who consistently demonstrates that he is absolutely committed to moral purity and sexual faithfulness to his spouse. He must have his affection and interest focused solely on his wife.

Many, when they hear the requirement, "An elder must be the husband of but one wife" immediately jump to the marriage issue. The first thing they think about is whether a person has only one spouse. While the phrase "one woman man" has implications in regards to what an elder’s marital status must be, focusing on this issue does not put the emphasis where Paul does—on the issue of having a reputation for being absolutely committed to sexual purity and faithfulness

It is quite possible, and all too common, for a man to be married to only one woman and yet not be a "one woman man", because he has sexual desires for someone other than his wife and has a reputation for engaging in impure, improper behavior with other women. A man might be married to only one woman, and yet possess a reputation for having a rubber neck when an attractive woman passes by or tennis eyes that jump up and down when a beautiful woman is coming his way. Even though a man has only one wife, if he has a reputation for giving lustful looks at women and makes them feel uncomfortable, he does not qualify as an elder.

An elder must be faithful to the woman who is his wife and demonstrate sexual purity both inwardly and outwardly. He must be faithful and pure in both thought and action.

Outwardly, he will not make eyes at other woman, flirt with other woman, make advances at other woman, be physically involved with other woman or be emotionally involved with other woman through chat rooms, secret phone calls, or e-mails. He should be the kind of man who has a reputation for treating younger women as he would his sisters.

Inwardly, he will be a man who guards his thoughts, trusting God to help him be pure in this area as well. He must not be a man who harbors sexual, lustful desires for women other than his wife. Jesus made it clear that "…Anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." A "one woman man" is not a lustful husband who commits moral adultery by entertaining and harboring sexual desire for woman other than his wife through the things he views on T.V., magazines, videos, or pornographic sights in cyberspace. If a man has a reputation for going after sexually explicit material so as to feed a lustful heart, he is not qualified to serve as an elder.

While Paul’s major point is on the matter of character in requiring elders be "one woman men," I believe it is also necessary that the church require that elders not be divorced and remarried. It is inconsistent to apply the title "one woman man" to a man who has been married to more than one woman. The phrase "one woman man" in my opinion, clearly disqualifies men who have had more than one wife from the opportunity of serving as an elder (with the exception of widowers who have remarried). There must be no record of divorce or other marital infidelity in any candidate for elder.

It is easy to understand the relationship between a testimony or reputation that is blameless and a permanent biblical marriage, without divorce. On the other hand, the divorced person is always at risk of being accused of some offense based on his previous marriage. His life being open to such accusations and charges is what in my mind disqualifies him from being an elder.

Let’s be crystal clear as to what Paul is not saying in this verse. He is not saying that divorced and remarried men are inferior to "one woman men" or that "one woman men" are better. He is not minimizing the fact that the blood of Christ cleanses all sin and that divorced and remarried believers are completely forgiven by the wonderful grace of God. He is not saying that divorced men are unable to fulfill other ministry roles within the church such as teaching Sunday School, leading a flock, leading a discipleship group or serving as a trustee. At Pleasant View, godly men who have divorce in their backgrounds are able to serve in all of the ministries I have just mentioned.

What if a man was divorced prior to getting saved and is now very faithful to the Christian woman he has married? As a Christian, he has been a one woman kind of man. Does he qualify? In my opinion, no, he does not qualify. Why? First, he is not a "one woman man." Yes, he is presently demonstrating a commitment to one woman and is a one woman man it that sense, which is wonderful and important, but there have been at least two women in his life. It seems logical to conclude that the issue is different if a man was divorced before he was saved, but this thinking is just that—our logic—it is not what Paul said.

The bigger issue here that I would personally focus on is the fact that this man is not above reproach. A divorced man has an ex wife and possibly some kids out there who have basis to come and bring accusations against him. If this man is presently in fellowship with God and leading a godly life, he should be used in the ministry of the church and enthusiastically embraced and loved as a part of the fellowship, but he is not above reproach and therefore does not qualify to serve in the position of elder.

Those who hold the office of elder must be men who consistently model the character and conduct that members of the body can look to and emulate. They must be blameless men lest the church be subjected to attacks that negatively affect the body’s reputation and ministry of the gospel. Elders must be "one woman men" both in character and in marriage.

What practical steps should a man take to have and maintain blamelessness as it relates to his sexual purity and faithfulness to his spouse?

• We must develop good communication with our wives, communicating our sexual needs and helping our wives understand how we are wired. We need to communicate to our wives how important and helpful it is when as a couple, we mutually obey the instruction of 1 Corinthians 7:1-5.
• We must not deliberately expose ourselves to temptation. If we know the places and situations in which we know we will be tempted, we should avoid those situations and places.
• We should be especially careful to trust the Lord to help us remain pure when we are hungry, hurting, angry, feeling lonely, and tired, for during these times we can be most vulnerable.
• We should avoid unnecessary idleness.
• Most importantly, we should have communion with our Lord, drawing from Him the strength we need to be pure and depending on His Spirit to produce His fruit.

Some might think it unfair to judge a man’s character and suitability for the position of elder based on the behavior of his children. Why should the way a man’s kids behave have the potential of disqualifying him for leadership?

The fact is, a man’s kids are very closely related to him. He has a relationship in which he has both the opportunity and responsibility to model and teach what godly living looks like. If a man is unable to keep control of his kids or influence them toward faithfulness in how they live, how can such a man effectively lead the church? An elder cannot be a man who has children accused of rebellious or wild living or else the message he proclaims will be discredited and his leadership will not be respected, causing harm to the church body. A man must have a track record at leading well at home before he can present himself as a leader among God’s people.

I believe that it is appropriate to use this passage to point out to children of elders how important their example is. Children of church leaders should desire to be faithful so as not to discredit their parent’s leadership and ministry in the church.

However, it is important to realize that while this passage addresses what an elder’s kids must be like, the emphasis is on what a man’s leadership needs to be in the home so as to produce kids with a positive testimony.

This passage is not intended to serve as a club in the hands of the elder by which he harangues and threatens his kids to shapen up lest they ruin his ministry. When an elder uses this passage to demand his kids look good so that he will look good, he has missed the point. The point is that an elder is responsible to manage his household well so as to lead his kids to have a good testimony in the community.

This is not to say that his kids must be perfect just as the elder himself is not expected to be perfect. All Christian families will have problems and imperfections that will show up. The difference that must be present in an elder’s kids is that they not have a reputation for their problems, but for their good testimony. An elder’s kids must share a good reputation along with their father.

The Greek word for "believer" in Titus 1:6 is used in two different ways in the New Testament. It is used to refer to a person who believes in or trusts in someone or something. It is also used to refer to someone or something that is believable, worthy of trust or faithful. Titus 1:9 uses this same word in the to describe God’s Word. God’s word is worthy of our trust. I believe Paul uses this word the same way in Titus 1:6. The children of our church’s leadership should be trustworthy.

While we certainly hope and pray that the children of our leaders would believe in Christ, trusting him as their personal Savior, Paul’s concern for leadership in Titus 1:6 is how a man’s kids are viewed by the community. They should be sons and daughters who have a reputation for a lifestyle that inspires confidence and trust. They should be the kind of kids about whom people say, "You can count on his kids. They will not let you down by their behavior. They will do what is right. They will be faithful and obedient to their parents." An elder’s kids must be trustworthy.

In contrast to trustworthy children are those who are wild and disobedient. Paul uses strong words here. The word translated "wild" could also be translated "reckless abandonment." Paul used this same word in Ephesians 5:18 to describe the behavior typical of a drunken person. The word translated "disobedient" is used of the person who is unruly, insubordinate, or rebellious. This person refuses to recognize and submit to authority.

If a man’s kids are deserving of the accusation of living a life characterized as wild and disobedient, that man does not qualify to serve as an elder.

An elder’s home should be an example that shows what God wants the home to look like. Although his home will never be perfect, it should provide an example worthy of imitating. Before a man is presented as the leader among God’s people, he must be a godly leader and example at home. His wife should exude confidence that her man is devoted and faithful solely to her. His kids should share a good reputation with him.

What obstacles does God need to remove from our lives to make us blameless as it relates to our leadership of the home?

How should we apply these requirements to the selection of elders in the coming year? Why is it so critical that we do so?

Can people who observe our church and its leaders readily see that our doctrine determines how we live our lives in relationship to our families?