this regard to the moral estimation in which the person to be chosen
is held by the church, that we can explain the succeeding qualifica-
tion, the husband of one luife. Not as if this in itself were one of
the principal marks of morality, or as if the contrary were the mark
of an immoral disposition for how many must there have been to
whom this criterion could not at all be applied but here again it is
the above consideration leads the apostle to lay on this qualification
so great stress, that he will have those who do not possess it unhes-
itatingly excluded from the office of a presbyter. With respect to
the sense of the words husband of one wife, we do not deem it nec-
essary to shew, that it is not here required that a presbyter should
be married. Against this the fuas is decisive, which cannot be here
put for the indefinite article, comp. Winer's G-r., 18, 9, note, p.
107, altogether apart from the view which the apostle elsewhere ex-
presses (comp. 1 Cor. vii. 1, 7, 8, 37, 40). Still less can it be meant
to express that a married man is not to be excluded for those
TITUS T. 6-8. 569
qualifications are here enumerated which one must have in order to
be fit for becoming a presbyter. It is also quite evident that the
words are not to be understood as referring to conjugal fidelity. On
the other hand, the view is certainly grammatically correct, which
explains the expression of having more than one wife at the same
time. Those who take this view appeal to Rom. vii. 1, seq. ; 1 Cor.
vii. 8, 9, 39, in which the apostle permits a second marriage, and
with which the present passage would not agree if it were understood
to refer to second marriage ; and further, to the fact that polygamy
strictly so called really prevailed at that time among the Jews, and
that this practice might easily pass over to the Gentile-Christians
in Crete, through the pernicious influence of the Jews, very many
of whom, it is well known, were living there. (Jos. Antt. XVII. 1,
2 ; Just. M. dial. c. Tryph. 134, ed. Col.) So Calvin, Beza, Hein-
richs, Schleiermacher. Notwithstanding, however, that the apostle
permits second marriage in general though he at the same time
gives the preference to the unmarried state it does not follow that
the present passage cannot be intended to forbid second marriage
in a presbyter. Although the Christian as such may be under no
obligation to abstain from second marriage, this may yet with the
utmost propriety be required as a qualification in him who, as pres-
byter, is to preside over a church, from a regard to his reputation in
the church, and even also from regard to the heathen (that the word
may not be blasphemed). And that the having been married only
once, in opposition to second marriage, was considered as a mark of
higher moral strictness and firmness, appears from Luke ii. 36, 37, and
from all the ancient ecclesiastical writers, as Heydenreich has proved
with reference to Athenag. Leg. pro Christ., p. 37 ; Theoph. ad
Autol. III., p. 127, ed. Col. ; Minuc. Felix Octav. Tertull. ad ux.
1, 7 ; exhort, cast. c. 7 ; de monag. c. 12 ; Orig. c. Celsum III., p.
141. The same view of second marriage is found in the ancient
heathen writers, as De Wette observes, and Heydenreich in p. 169
of his commentary ; comp. also Mack on the passage, and Bott-
ger, V., p. 78, seq. With regard to the other reason adduced in
support of the view that this passage refers to polygamy, it is
no valid objection, that if polygamy were meant, the prohibition
would then be applicable to all Christians ; for the p? opytAov, an-
other of the presbyter's qualifications, is equally applicable to all
Christians. But are we to believe that the apostle thought it neces-
sary to mention this among the first things to Titus, that no one
living in polygamy should be appointed as a presbyter ? We know
of no single case of the kind among the Christians. Quite decisive,
however, against this interpretation, and in favour of that which
takes the words to be directed against deuterogamy, as Heydenreich,
Mack, Matthies, and others have already observed, is the passage
570 TITUS 1. 6-8.
1 Tim. v. 9, where the expression i-vbg dvdpbg ywrj cannot possibly
be understood as the opposite of having more than one husband at
the same time. In both places it is ecclesiastical distinction that
is spoken of, and in both places the having been but once married
is specified as a condition of this. 1 Tim. iii. 2, 12 is thus to be
understood in the same sense as this passage. This circumstance
belongs to the ty/rpa-em, ver. 8, and it is required, not of all, but of
those who are to have the oversight of churches, as a proof of moral
strictness ; and the reason of its being required lies in the moral es-
timate in which second marriage was held, to which we have already
referred above. To this also correspond the views and practice of
ecclesiastical antiquity, to which Tertullian has borne testimony, de
monag. c. 12, who, as a Montanist, was addicted to the view that
second marriage was inadmissible in the case of all without distinc-
tion, and brings as an objection against the Catholic view, " that
they say the apostle has permitted second marriage, so that he has
bound under the yoke of monogamy those only who hold office in
the church." Comp. Heydenreich, p. 166, seq. " Such as were
living in second or third marriage were not admitted to the pastoral
office," p. 168, seq.
If the qualification expressed in the word blameless, and the
others laid down in vers. 5-8, are objected to as too general and
self-evident, we have, on the contrary, in that which we have just
been considering, one of a very special nature. But this very
circumstance has been laid hold of as a mark of the spurious-
ness of the epistle. The requirement is too positive, observes
De Wette ; and Baur, appealing to passages in writings of the
second century, partly those adduced above, and partly others of
a similar import, finds in this circumstance a new confirmation
of his view respecting the origin of the Pastoral Epistles about
this period. For all will concede to him against Schleiermacher,
that there is no ground for understanding the expression in ques-
tion in first Timothy differently from here. Dr. Baur refers us to
the circumstances of that period, in which such a number and va-
riety of notions on the subject of marriage were put in circulation
by Gnostics and Montanists on the one hand, and their opponents
on the other. It was therefore natural, he says, that the writers of
these epistles should not overlook this so important question of the
tune, but in accordance with their mediating aim, should express a
conciliatory opinion also on this question, to the effect, namely, that
second marriage is not to be forbidden in the case of Christiana gen-
erally, but in the case of the office-bearers, to whom this prohibition
was first of all applied, and, for the furtherance of the ecclesiastical
system which these epistl"s aimed at confirming, could not but be
ever more and more strictly applied. (P. 112-120 die, s. q. Pastor-
TITUS I. 6-8. 571
albriefe.) Here again is confirmed, what we found it necessary to
state in the General Introduction in opposition to Baur's whole rea-
soning, namely, that in treating the positive evidence for the origin
of these epistles in the second century, the negative argument, that
they do not correspond to the period to which they claim to belong, is
neglected. Is it then inconceivable, that the apostle who prescribes
second marriage for those who cannot contain, because it is better
to marry than to burn, 1 Cor. vii. 9, should require of presbyters
such a degree of continence as is implied in their not living in second
marriage ? Did the Christian view which prevailed in the second
century on the subject of second marriage, and which in the Shep-
herd of Hernias, in Athenagoras, in Tertullian, and others (comp.
Baur, p. 117), goes the length of an entire prohibition of deutero-
gamy in every .case without exception, stand in no connexion with
the first -century, and specially with the apostolic era ? Do not
the catholic writers of the second century, according to the pas-
sage cited above from Tertullian, appeal expressly to the apos-
tle ? See further the General Introduction. Comp. also on this
subject, Bottger V., p. 76, seq. Chrysostom, places this matter
in its proper point of view : " Although second marriage may
not be prohibited by the law, still it is a thing open to many ob-
jections."
A further desideratum in a presbyter, not with respect to his
own person, but with respect to those belonging to him, is speci-
fied in the words having faithful children. That KIOTO, is not to
be taken in the merely external sense of belonging to the Chris-
tian church, is evident in itself, and is shewn by the following
words, not accused, etc. Hiarog, as at Eph. i. 1 ; Col. i. 2. We
find the same requisition in 1 Tim. iii. 4, where it is confirmed
in the following verse : for if a man know not how to rule his own
house, how shall he take care of the church of God. These are
simple things ; but the wisdom which they display consists just
in this, that the significance of these simple things is rightly appre-
ciated. The expression not accused, shews again the apostle's point
of view. Chrysostom observes: "the apostle does not merely say
that they are not to be licentious, but that they are not even to be
accused of this not to have an ill report." 'Acrama, licentiousness ;
in like manner, Eph. v. 18 ; 1 Pet. iv. 4 ; Luke xv. 13. Comp. on
the first passage Harless's inquiry into the signification of the word,
'AvvTrora/cTOf, insubordinate ; 1 Tim. iii. 4, positively, KV vnorayy :
Heb. ii. 9. The objection founded on this requisite, namely, that
it presupposes the previous existence of Christianity in Crete for
some length of time, can, after what has already been said, present
no difficulty. M/y here, as in the following characteristics, because
the idea of an efficient bishop is expressed, Winer, 55, 2, p. 423.
572 TITUS I. 6-8.
In ver. 6 the apostle reminds Titus of the direction already given
to him, and urges it anew. Then follows in ver. 7, the reason of
his requiring that a presbyter should have the qualification already
expressed in the word blameless, which may be said to comprehend
in itself every other : del yap, etc., says the apostle. The emphasis
rests on the word tfet ; the apostle points at the necessity implied
in the relation conformably to which this requisite is laid down.
This relation is however indicated in the expression tmanorroc; ; the
presbyter, in so far as he is overseer, shepherd of the flock, must be
open to no objection, if he is to guide the flock. Thus the change
of the designation from rrpeoftvTepog to In'tono-noc; is explained ; conap.
above, ver. 5. The apostle still brings into prominence the idea im-
plied in Zmanonog, in the words that follow : as the steward of God.
Qeov emphatically placed before ; as God's steward. He is God's
steward, inasmuch as the house of God, i. e., the church, is entrust-
ed to his management. It is wrong to take this as equivalent to
1 Cor. iv. 1, steward of the mysteries of God; for w? in its refer-
ence to t7r7K07ro can only express the idea already implied in
the word tnioKonog, that he is steward of the house, which, accord-
ing to 1 Tim. iii. 5, is the church of the living God. Comp. on
this use of okoc, 1 Pet. iv. 17 ; Heb. iii. 2, 5, 6, x. 21 ; and the
Hebrew r^rr ma, Numb. xii. 7 ; Hos. viii. 1, as also the metaphor
frequently used by the apostle, temple of God, 1 Cor. iii. 16, vi. 19 ;
2 Cor. vi. 16 ; Eph. ii. 21 ; and okodo/u?/, 1 Cor. iii. 9 ; 2 Cor. v. 1 ;
Eph. ii. 21. The import of the general term blameless, is then un-
folded in the following specific qualities, in which there is an umnis-
takeable reference to the vices that were prevalent in Crete ; comp.
ver. 12, and Winer, E.W.B., on Crete. He is not to be avdddrjg, pro-
perly qui sibi ipse placet ; occurring also in 2 Pet. ii. 10, ;md in the
Sept. where it is used for t*, Gen. xlix. 7, ITP (proud, arrogant),
Prov. xxi. 24 (comp. Wahl). It denotes a self-loving, imperious,
violent disposition. 'Opyt'Aof found only here, iracundus. M?) ndpoi-
vov here, and 1 Tim. iii. 3, vinolentus. In 1 Tim. iii. 8, this is expressed
by not given to much wine. The word includes at the same time the
signification, " impudent, insolent." No striker, in the same con-
nexion, 1 Tim. iii. 3, which shews plainly the intended connexion
with the preceding. Not given to filthy lucre, also at 1 Tim. iii. 8.
The same quality is enjoined upon bishops at 1 Pet. v. 2 ; where ala-
po/cepd(2if stands in opposition to -rrpodvp.^ ; to be understood not of
disreputable trafficking apart from the oifice, but of base eagerness
after gain in the office, as we learn from ver. 11 ; 1 Tim. vi. 5 ; 1 Tim.
iii. 3 ; and 1 Pet. v. 2. Comp. De Wette. That disposition and
manner of conduct are meant, which make of the living of the gospel
an affair of gain. An injunction especially necessary for Cretans.
In ver. 8 the opposite qualities are specified. They are, how-
TITUS I. 6-8. 573
ever, only the same qualities viewed positively. A lover of hospi-
tality, the opposite of given to filthy lucre, so at 1 Tim. iii. 2 ;
1 Pet. iv. 9. Hospitality is likewise enjoined upon all Christians in
Eom. xii. 13 ; Heb. xiii. 2, compared with 3 John 5 ; a virtue for
the injunction of which there were special reasons in the circum-
stances of the time. $ikdya6os only here, loving what is good and
those who are good, comp. Passow ; not specifically benevolent, but
as opposed generally to the corrupt tendencies before mentioned.
/Sober, just, holy, temperate thus the apostle continues to designate
the substantial elements of personal character positively, in opposi-
tion to the negative characteristics before specified. The word
<ro)0ptov as also GMfypoavvr], oufypovug, ow&poveu, autypovifaj ocMfrpovta-
juof has been found fault with by the critics. 2w0pwv certainly oc-
curs only in the Pastoral Epistles, three times in this epistle, and in
1 Tim. iii. 2, in the same connexion as in this passage. 2w0pdvwf,
<TGj0pov/w, afixfrpovianog, occur, each once in these epistles, comp.
Tit. ii. 12, ii. 4 ; 2 Tim. i. 7 ; on the other hand, we find ow^povew
and ouQpoovvr] besides Tit. ii. 6, 1 Tim. ii. 9, 15, in many other pas-
sages, as the former in Mark v. 15 ; Luke viii. 35 ; Rom. xii. 3 ;
2 Cor. v. 13 ; 1 Pet. iv. 7 the latter in Acts xxvi. 25. $p?p used
by Paul only in 1 Cor. xiv. 20, where it occurs twice ; besides
a0pwv, d(f)poovvi], in several passages, and d'0pwv in a moral sense,
comp. Eph. v. 17, and Harless on the passage. It is evident even
from this collation of passages, how little reason there is for finding
anything perplexing in the use of the word in these epistles. And
when we consider further, that as the critics themselves admit,
greater stress is laid on the moral features of Christianity in these
than in the other epistles, inasmuch as the circumstances of the
church required it, the reason of this expression being more fre-
quently used becomes self-evident. In the second epistle to Timothy,
where the circumstances are different, we find only oufypov ia\i(x; in
one passage. Bottger V., p. 5, correctly observes, that " the expres-
sion <rc50pwv is in strict connexion with the metaphor then before
the apostle's mind, of soundness and unsoundness in religious know-
ledge and religious conduct. For aw^pwv = a&$ 0pe<m>, denotes
sanitas mentis and this, both intellectually in opposition to fiaivea-
6ai, comp. au^poavvr}, Acts xxvi. 25, and in opposition to desires and
passions as a malady affecting man's moral nature. Here, it is op-
posed to the passionateness expressed in opytAo^, and the following
term, as such, while fyiXdyaQoq is opposed in general to the objects
there specified, towards which the propensity is directed ; it there-
fore means " discreet, sober." Just, holy, both ideas are also else-
where connected by the apostle, comp. Eph. iv. 24 ; 1 Thess. ii. 10.
On the signification of ooiog, neither " pious," nor " devoted to God,"
but pure, holy, as a personal quality, see Harless on Eph. iv. 24.
574 TITUS I. 9-16.
also thus designates not the special virtue of justice toward
others, a sense in itself not suited to the context, but in general
moral probity, as afterwards at ii. 12 ; Eph. iv. 24 ; 1 Thess. ii. 10.
The expressions lover of what is good, etc., are not intended to
designate special and particular virtues, but to set forth in its vari-
ous aspects that fundamental state of mind and heart which is right.
Comp. on Phil. iv. 8, 9. The explanation : "just towards men,
pious towards God," must therefore be rejected. 'Eypa-rf/ used only
here, and in this connexion referring not merely to the sexual, but
to the passions generally ; Chrysostorn : " one who has his passions
under command." It is he who has himself in his own power, con-
tinens ; the word in its reference particularly to the lusts and de-
sires, contains a more special idea than aufypw.
Vers. 9-16. The qualification of an imaKorro^ with respect to
doctrine, and confirmation of this by a reference to the state of
things in Crete. Ver. 9. The positive enumeration of the requisite
qualifications, leads the apostle beyond what the antithesis would
have required, inasmuch as he adds the qualities which a bishop
must have with respect to doctrine. Chrysostom : rd \iv yap <UAa
KOI KV roZf dpxo[ivoig evpot rig av 8 <5e ndXiora xapaKrrjpi&i rbv diddv-
KaXov rovro iari TO dvvavOat Karrixelv rbv Xojov. Holding fast the
faithful word, etc. 'AvTt'^<70az, similarly Matth. vi. 24 ; Luke xvi.
13, of adherence to a master ; by the apostle in 1 Thess. v. 14, in
the sense " taking care of." The radical signification in the geni-
tive construction is, " to hold fast by" = u to abide by." So
Herod. I. 134, avrK^eadai r7]<; dperrjc, comp. Passow. On the frequent
use of the word in the Scptuagint, see Wahl. Tov nard rfjv 6ida%riv
TTtarov Adyou does not express two co-ordinate properties of the Adyo? ;
but Kara rr\v dida^ijv more exactly determines the Adyor. Still the
Kara may be variously rendered. Calvin, = "for, to," as i. 1;
others in the general signification " with respect to," which cer-
tainly would yield the suitable sense : " sure with respect to instruc-
tion," i. ., the Adyof is described as a sure rule for those who teach.
But neither of these significations corresponds to the right explana-
tion of -toroc, which denotes the credibility of the word, according
to iii. 8 ; 1 Tim. i. 15, iii. 1, iv. 9 ; Rev. xxi. 5, xxii. 6 ; hence Calvin
has been led into the mistake of taking maro? utilis. We abide
therefore by the signification " according to, conformable to," so
that ard dida^v denotes the ground of the credibility, in so far as
the word rests on the apostolic teaching. This characteristic forms
an antithesis to the immediately f flowing fiaratokoyia, which does
not abide by the sound doctrine, teaching things which the// nmjht
not, ver. 11. 'O Aoyo^, without explanation, elsewhere also with the
apostle designates the Christian doctrine, Gal. vi. 6 ; Phil. i. 14 ;
Col. iv. 6 ; 1 Thess. i. 6. The design of this qualification is then
TITUS I. 9-16. 575
given, Iva, etc. He is to be able both to admonish with the sound
doctrine, and to refute gainsayers ; and only then is he qualified for
both of these ends, when he can insist, not on a mere subjective
opinion, but on a word delivered to him, and credible because thus
delivered to him. RapaaaXelv is one part of his function as a
teacher in connexion with the following in the sound doctrine. 'Ev
shews that -rrapatca^elv here signifies not " to comfort," but " to ad-
monish." 'H didaanaTda rj vytaivovaa is another expression which
critics have put into their index prohibitorum. kidaonaMa is often
used by the apostle, Kom. xii. 7, xv. 4 ; Eph. iv. 14 ; Col. ii. 22, to
signify both the teaching and the doctrine itself in which instruction
is given, as a comparison of the passages cited will shew. It has the
same twofold signification frequently in the Pastoral Epistles, 1 Tim.
i. 10, iv. 1, 6, 13, 16, v. IT, vi. 1, 3 ; 2 Tim. iii. 10, iv. 3 ; Tit. i. 9,
ii. 1, 7, 10 ; here as also at ii. 1 it means the doctrine. There is
therefore here as yet nothing unpauline. 'Tyiaivovoa, and vyi^g in
the sense in which it is here used, occur only in the Pastoral Epis-
tles, and in them very often, 1 Tim. i. 10, vi. 3 ; 2 Tim. i. 13, iv. 3;
especially in this epistle, i. 9, 13, ii. 1, 2, ii. 8 (^yfr), partly in con-
nexion with Adyof or Adyot, and partly with -TTLOTH;. The opposite
occurs in the metaphor : VOOELV rrepi fyTrjaeig, 1 Tim. vi. 4, where also
fyrrjoeig is opposed to Adyof and 6idaoK.aA.ia, as voaelv to vyiaivetv ; to
this belongs also ydyypaiva, 2 Tim. ii. 17. De Wette rightly refers
for an explanation to 1 Tim. iv. 6, the good doctrine, 1 Tim. vi. 3,
the doctrine according to godliness; especially however would we
refer in connexion with this passage, to the words in the opening of
the epistle, the truth which is according to godliness. Even from
the employment of this term more exactly to define the apostolic
office, as also from its frequent recurrence, we may infer that it is
not chosen by the apostle at random, and for which any other might
be substituted from his other epistles. And the critics are warranted
in characterizing it as unpauJine, only when they can point out a
corresponding one from the other epistles, which might replace that
here selected. So long as they are unable to do this, we must main-
tain that the apostle himself, even if he be not the writer, would
have had recourse in this case, to an expression not found elsewhere
in his writings. It is in an expression like this recurring thoughout
the Pastoral Epistles, that we see their peculiar phraseology closely
connecting itself with the state of things which the writer has in his
eye. See the General Introduction. Has the apostle in his eye a
state of things in the church, which consists in a knowledge directed
to useless subjects, to fables and commandments of men, ver. 14, iii.
9, which bear no fruit of moral improvement a state not indeed of
open warfare against the truth, but of such an undervaluing of what
is essential, as results in the loss of that power of godliness which
576 TITUS I. 9-16.
lies in the truth, and in a gradual falling away of individuals from the
faith what designation could be more suitable, than that which is
here selected, and which is drawn from the image of bodily health
and sickness ? Sound doctrine, i. e.. the truth which leads to godli-
ness, i. 1, or the doctrine which leads to godliness, 1 Tim. vi. 3, is
necessary in order that those infected with the spiritual malady of
vain speculation and moral apathy, may be restored, and brought
back to true soundness of faith. Moreover, De Wette errs in ex-
plaining sound doctrine of moral doctrine ; it is rather the Chris-
tian doctrine viewed as a doctrine which produces the fruits of
godliness, and is opposed to those questions which bear no such
fruit ; see 1 Tim. vi. 4. Thus the expression is fully vindicated, as
the adequate designation of a new state of things in the church of
the apostolic era. We learn also from the other epistles of Paul how
easily he could command new expressions when such were necessary.
Comp. also on this the General Introduction.
A bishop must be able to admonish with the sound doctrine, and
secondly to confute the gainsayers, inasmuch as he himself stands
on the sure ground of wholesome doctrine. For he has to deal with
a contentious and refractory people in Crete, as is added in ver. 10
by way of confirming the necessity of such qualifications ; for there
are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, chiefly they of the
circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped. Kai before awndraK-
roi is not found in A.C. and others. Tischeudorf has received it
again on the authority of D.E.F.G I.K., etc., and justly ; comp. De
Wette. There are many and unruly na-aioXoyot, and (ppevaTrdrai.
The former expression occurs again in an abstract form at 1 Tim.
i. 6 ; similar designations of the corruption which is assailed, such
as foolish questions, empty babblings, etc., occur often. It is not,
however, to be said with De Wette, that the heresy is characterized
as vain talking, for this overlooks what is specific in the expression ;
it is not a heresy that is spoken of, but merely a vain talking.