Titus 1:6–7

"If anyone is blameless (or unaccused)." How can he correct others if he is open to blame himself? "Husband of one wife." If married, he must have only one wife. Many people outside Israel had several at the same time, and Jews divorced a wife easily when they preferred another. "Having children faithful, not accused of excess (or loose living), or unruly." Having several wives would bar a man, whatever his fitness in other ways; disreputable children would bar him too.

The overseer had to be blameless, "the husband of one wife." In that day a man could have several wives at once, so the rule for anyone holding office in the Church of God was to have only one wife. It clearly does not mean that a man whose wife had died would be unfit for office if he married again.

He must be the husband of one wife. This requirement had special force for those coming out of a pagan background where a man could have several wives. A converted man with more than one wife was not to be rejected, but he was not fit for oversight.

The office of elder and overseer, we see here, is the same. The term elder was the title of respect; the term overseer described the work… The qualifications listed here are much the same as those given in the instructions to Timothy. But here, where dealing with people who contradict the truth is the prominent thought, Paul reminds Titus that the children of such a man should be believers (v. 6).

If a man is to help keep order, he must be a proper example of order in his own life and in his family life. His children were to show that they were subject to order.

Anyone who would keep order in the house of God must first show that he can keep order in his own house. He must be blameless in his family life — the husband of one wife, with no charge of wild living or defiance against his household.

Perhaps this neglect happened before he was converted. Perhaps, after his conversion, he took up the evil idea of leaving the children to themselves, on the faithless excuse that God would convert them sometime if He saw fit… For such an office it was not so much a question of gifts as of moral weight. A man might be a prophet, a teacher, an evangelist — a disorderly wife or children would not cancel his gifts. But he should not be an elder unless he brought up his children with godliness and seriousness.

The qualities required in an elder are much the same as in Timothy, above all the family qualities; for the elder is to be a father in the local assembly.

As to elders, an apostle chooses them (Acts 14:23), or leaves a representative for a time to appoint them (Titus 1:5-9)… The church is never invited to select them… Paul left Titus in Crete specifically to set in order what he had left undone, and to appoint elders in every city, as the apostle had appointed Titus and no one else.

"Elder" expresses the dignity of the person, drawn from the respect due to age. The elder need not be an aged man, but a man of experience. So people used the title even where there was no great age, wherever a man suited the position. "Bishop," or overseer, expresses instead the nature of the office: to take moral account of the saints and to maintain godly order. Oversight, in short, was the constant duty, privately and publicly.

The expression "steward of God" is a remarkable one. Even in this world, a sensible man of property will not employ a steward unless he has an irreproachable character. The charge is one of great responsibility and honour.

He must be "not self-willed," or headstrong. It is the grossest mistake to think that self-will implies courage, though it may lead to rashness or even recklessness. Nothing gives such quiet firmness as knowing you are doing the will of God. Then a man can be lowly and patient, but uncompromising… Self-will haughtily disregards both God and man. How shameful in an overseer!

Again, he must be "not soon angry," not irascible. Scarcely anything weakens authority more than a tendency to explosions of anger. The weight of a rebuke, however just it may be, is easily lost when a man is overcome with angry heat. Calmness gives weight and force to a needed rebuke. The next negation is perhaps figurative. Literally it means not staying long over wine, or being disorderly through it. So it generally comes to mean "not a brawler." Being addicted to wine is certainly ruled out. But even a Christian free from that suspicion is unfit to be God's steward if he is easily heated, noisy and quarrelsome.

Men in authority are quite apt to fall into another fault, but it is unworthy of an overseer. He must not seek gain by base means. He must stand firm against greed for dishonest money. The man called to rule before God among the saints must guard against this debasing evil at least as much as against the sins of violence. If he were faulty here, with what face could he rebuke those sins, as it is his duty to do?

Self-will is the strong intention of having one's own way, a most destructive element in the assembly of God. An elder is not to indulge in wine, nor to be a striker — that is, striking back against what he considers injustice. Nor is he to have the sort of character that seeks earthly gain by questionable means. Notice in all of these the necessity of controlling himself: his desires, his temper, his appetite, his resentment against wrongs, his selfishness. In other words, if he is to keep the assembly in order for God, he must certainly know how to control himself.

Evangelists and teachers have their place. But we should also value those who work in a simpler, less obvious way. Day by day they devote themselves to strengthen the links of affection and to check the sources of disorder that keep springing up in Christian assemblies. These are the people whom competent authority once appointed as elders, or overseers… And if we see men of such ways and gifts working now, we should respect and acknowledge them. They have the qualities and do the work of elders, though circumstances make their formal appointment no longer possible.