If any be without crime, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly.

“Should we not rather recognize, from among the store of primitive scriptural precedents, those that correspond with the gospel order of things respecting discipline? By this means we convey to the new community the typical requirements of antiquity. In the old law I find the pruning knife applied to the license of repeated marriage.… Among us the prescript is more fully and more carefully laid down, that they who are chosen into the sacerdotal order must be men of one marriage. This rule is so rigidly observed that I remember some removed from their office for bigamy.”

“We have already said that a bishop, a presbyter and a deacon, when they are constituted, must be married but once, whether their wives are alive or whether they are dead. It is not lawful for them, if they are unmarried when they are ordained, to be married afterwards; or if they are married at that time, to marry a second time, but to be content with that wife which they had when they came to ordination. We have already said, that a bishop, a presbyter, and a deacon, when they are constituted, must be but once married, whether their wives be alive or whether they be dead; and that it is not lawful for them, if they are unmarried when they are ordained, to be married afterwards; or if they be then married, to marry a second time, but to be content with that wife. which they had when they came to ordination.”

“I have set down these things which I have been told are to be avoided, but the Apostle is the Master of virtues, and he teaches that gainsayers are to be convicted with patience, who lays down that one should be the husband of a single wife, not in order to exclude him from the right of marriage (for this is beyond the force of the precept), but that by conjugal chastity he may preserve the grace of his baptismal washing; nor again that he may be induced by the Apostle's authority to beget children in the priesthood; for the speaks of having children, not of begetting them, or marrying again. And I have thought it well not to pass by this point, because many contend that having one wife is said of the time after Baptism; so that the fault whereby any obstacle would ensue would be washed away in baptism. And indeed all faults and sins are washed away; so that if anyone have polluted his body with very many whom he has bound to himself by no law of marriage, all the sins are forgiven him, but if any one have contracted a second marriage it is not done away; for sin not law is loosed by the laver, and as to baptism there is no sin but law. That then which has to do with law is not remitted as though it were sin, but is retained. And the Apostle has established a law, saying: "If any man be without reproach the husband of one wife." So then he who is without blame the husband of one wife comes within the rule for undertaking the priestly office; he, however, who has married again has no guilt of pollution, but is disqualified for the priestly prerogative.”

“Ver. 6. "If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, hating faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly." Why does he bring forward such an one? To stop the mouths of those heretics, who condemned marriage, showing that it is not an unholy thing in itself, but so far honorable, that a married man might ascend the holy throne; and at the same reproving the wanton, and not permitting their admission into this high office who contracted a second marriage. For he who retains no kind regard for her who is departed, how shall he be a good president? and what accusation would he not incur? For you all know, that though it is not forbidden by the laws to enter into a second marriage, yet it is a thing liable to many ill constructions. Wishing therefore a ruler to give no handle for reproach to those under his rule, he on this account says, "If any be blameless," that is, if his life be free from reproach, if he has given occasion to no one to assail his character. Hear what Christ says, "If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!" (Matt. vi. 23.) "Hating faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly." We should observe what care he bestows upon children. For he who cannot be the instructor of his own children, how should he be the Teacher of others? If he cannot keep in order those whom he has had with him from the beginning, whom he has brought up, and without? For if the incompetency of the father had not been great, he would not have allowed those to become bad whom from the first he had under his power. For it is not possible, indeed it is not, that one should turn out ill who is brought up with much care, and has received great attention. Sins are not so prevalent by nature, as to overcome so much previous care. But if, occupied in the pursuit of wealth, he has made his children a secondary concern, and not bestowed much care upon them, even so he is unworthy. For if when nature prompted, he was so void of affection or so senseless, that he thought more of his wealth than of his children, how should he be raised to the Episcopal throne, and so great rule? For if he was unable to restrain them it is a great proof of his weakness; and if he was unconcerned, his want of affection is much to be blamed. He then that neglects his own children, how shall he take care of other men's? And he has not only said, "not riotous," but not even "accused of riot." There must not be an ill report, or such an opinion of them.”

“The first freedom, then, is to be without crimes. And so when the apostle Paul chose either priests or deacons to be ordained, and when anyone is to be ordained to take charge of a church, he does not say, If anyone is without sin. For if he were to say this, every person would be rejected, no one would be ordained. But he says, "if anyone is without crime," such as homicide, adultery and uncleanness of fornication, theft, fraud, sacrilege, and other things of this sort.”

“He proceeds to the narration; and, as has been said, he intends to fortify the Church against heretics. And first he admonishes Titus that he should instruct others to resist heretics; second he teaches how he himself should resist them, at *but you speak*, ch. II. Again, first he admonishes that he should appoint bishops, who might resist heretics; second he shows the necessity of this commission, at *for there are many*. Again, first he sets forth the commission made to Titus concerning the appointing of a bishop; second he shows what sort the bishops ought to be, at *if any man is without crime*; third he makes clear what he said, at *for it behooves*. Since therefore the apostle had a universal commission over the Church of the gentiles, and could not by himself alone carry out all things, he therefore says *for this cause I left you at Crete*, namely on the island of Crete, that in the apostle's place he might discharge the pastoral office for the Cretan Church. Prov. 18:19: *a brother who is helped by a brother is like a strong city.* But as to what he says *that you might correct what is lacking*, it seems that he ought to have said, *that you might supply*. I respond. It must be said that the Gloss supplies it thus: that you might correct all things that are amiss, and add what is lacking in good things. 1 Thess. 3:10: *that we may supply what is lacking to your faith.* Or it must be said that there is a certain sin of omission, and a certain sin of transgression, and each needs correction. In holy and perfect men, as Titus was, transgressions did not abound; and therefore he does not say, that you correct transgressions, but *what is lacking*, that is, omissions. And *that you appoint presbyters*, that is, bishops, whence below he says *it behooves a bishop*, etc. And he uses the name of bishops and of presbyters indifferently. Whence a heretic took occasion, who coveted the episcopate, and because he could not obtain it, divided himself from the others, and taught many false things. Among which he said that bishops differ in nothing from priests, which is against Dionysius in the book *On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy*. The apostle therefore uses the same name for both by identity of the thing, because presbyter means elder. Again, because it belongs to superiors to appoint a bishop, although the canons elect him. And he says *that you appoint*, not in villages, but *through the cities*; for just as in the commonwealth kings are only in the cities, so in spiritual governance are bishops. 1 Pet. 2:9: *a royal priesthood.* Again, they ought to be elders. Eccle. 10:16: *woe to you, O land, whose king is a boy.* And understand elders not only in age, but also in character. Num. 11:16: *gather to me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be elders of the people and masters*, etc. Again, according to the form of the Church; whence he says *as I have ordered you*. Prov. 13: *my son, let not these things slip from your eyes.* Then when he says *if any man is without crime*, he describes them in three ways, namely as to themselves, as to the part of the wife, and as to the part of the children. Concerning the first it is said *without crime*. If anyone shall be such. 1 John 1:8: *if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.* It must be said that crime is one thing, sin another. Sin is said of whatever, whether great, or small, or hidden. But crime is great and notorious. Ps. 14:1: *Lord, who shall dwell in your tabernacle*, etc.; and afterward he adds: *he who walks without blemish*, etc. Not that one who sins mortally after Baptism cannot be chosen; but that the one to be chosen should not be notorious. As to the second he says *the husband of one wife*. Which the Orientals explain thus, that is, that he should not have two wives at once, as is the custom of some. But according to this it would not have been necessary for the apostle to say this; because according to the Roman laws, by which the apostle was writing, even before the faith, it was not lawful to have several wives at once. Again, 1 Tim. 5:9 speaks of a widow, who was the wife of one husband, and yet it was never lawful for one woman to have several husbands at once. And in this way he wishes this also concerning the widow, namely that she should have had only one husband. But Jerome says that it behooves that he should have had only one wife after Baptism, and that it does not matter if before Baptism he had had others. But Augustine and Ambrose say that through Baptism all crimes are blotted out; but that through Baptism, marriage is not blotted out; therefore according to these it must be said, and more correctly, that he must have had only one and not several, whether he had had her before or after. According to some, the reason for this is, that it would be a sign of incontinence if he had had several. But this is not true; because it would be no objection if he had had several harlots, who are more incontinent. But there is another reason, higher in signification, namely because he himself is a dispenser of the sacraments, and therefore there ought to be no defect of the sacraments in him; but the sacrament of matrimony signifies the conjunction of Christ and the Church; therefore that the sign may correspond to the thing signified, just as Christ is one, and the Church one, so also here; which indeed would fail, if the bishop had had several wives. In the old law, the patriarchs signified this conjunction, not as already conjoined to Christ, but as to be conjoined, and since the Church was to be gathered in the future from many, therefore then not one, but several were had. And therefore the multitude of their wives signified this. But as to the third, namely on the part of the children, he adds, saying *having faithful children, not under accusation of luxury*, etc. For a bishop is appointed, that he may oversee; and he who is appointed to something ought to be practiced in it, otherwise he would not be prudently instituted. But he is presumed to be well practiced, if he has ruled others well. But a bishop is appointed for three things. First, that he may teach the faith. Matt., last chapter: *teach all nations*, etc. And therefore he says *faithful*. Second, it is required that he instruct the people unto the virtues. Ecclus. 7:25: *have you children? Instruct them.* But the sins of wantonness draw one away from virtue more. Ecclus.: *the wanton and imprudent will not keep the time.* And therefore he says *not under accusation of luxury*. 1 Kings 3:13: Eli is condemned, because he did not correct his sons in this matter. Third, it behooves that he correct the obstinate. Whence he says *or not subject*, that is, not obedient. Ecclus. 30:8: *an untamed horse turns out stubborn, and a son left to himself turns out headstrong.* Then when he says *for it behooves*, he expounds what he said, and first what he said, *without crime*; second, without what things he ought to be, at *not proud*. But the reason for the first is, that he ought to dispense divine things. Ecclus. 10:2: *as the judge of the people is, so also are his ministers.* Ps. 100:6: *he who walked in the blameless way, this one*, etc. Then when he says *not proud*, he shows from what things he ought to be free: and first he shows from what crimes; second, by what virtues he should shine, at *hospitable*. But of sins, some are carnal, some spiritual. Of the first he makes no mention, because they ought to be wholly clean of them. Eph. 5:3: *but fornication and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as becomes saints.* But only concerning the spiritual, which are five, of which two have no place in prelates, namely envy, which is the sin of little ones. Job 5:2: *envy kills the little one*; but a prelate is at the summit. Likewise not sloth either, because all things turn out for him according to his wish; but pride, because he is at the summit, and anger and cupidity by occasion of temporal things, of which he is the dispenser. As to the first he says *not proud*. Ps. 100:5: *with a proud eye and an insatiable heart, with this one I did not eat.* Ecclus. 32:1: *have they made you a ruler? Do not be lifted up*, etc. As to the second, first he excludes anger, when he says *not irascible*. Second, the kindling of anger, which is wine, saying *not given to wine*. Prov. 23:29: *whose eyes are bloodshot? Is it not to those who linger over wine*, etc. Third, the sequel of anger, which is striking. Therefore he says *not a striker*, that is, not cruel. Is. 50:6: *I gave my body to those who struck it, and my cheeks to those who plucked them*, etc. Or, *not a striker*, that is, not one who strikes the consciences of others by depraved conduct. 1 Cor. 8:10: *and striking their weak conscience.* As to the third he says *not desirous of base gain*. 1 Tim. 3:8: *not pursuing base gain.* Wis. 15:12: *but they reckoned our life to be a game, and the conduct of life composed for gain, and that one must acquire from whatever source, even from evil.* Then he sets forth the good things which he ought to have: and first, those which pertain to the conduct of life; second, those which pertain to the truth of doctrine, at *embracing*. And all these are evident.”

“If any be blameless,.... In his outward life and conversation, not chargeable with any notorious crime; See Gill on Ti1 3:2, the husband of one wife; See Gill on Ti1 3:2, having faithful children; legitimate ones, born in lawful wedlock, in the same sense as such are called godly and holy, in Mal 2:15 Co1 7:14 for by faithful children cannot be meant converted ones, or true believers in Christ; for it is not in the power of men to make their children such; and their not being so can never be an objection to their being elders, if otherwise qualified; at most the phrase can only intend, that they should be brought up in the faith, in the principles, doctrines, and ways of Christianity, or in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Not accused of riot; or chargeable with sins of uncleanness and intemperance, with rioting and drunkenness, chambering and wantonness; or with such crimes as Eli's sons were guilty of, from which they were not restrained by their father, and therefore the priesthood was removed from the family: "or unruly" not subject, but disobedient to their parents; See Gill on Ti1 3:4. See Gill on Ti1 3:5.”

“If any be blameless - See the notes on Ti1 3:2, etc. Having faithful children - Whose family is converted to God. It would have been absurd to employ a man to govern the Church whose children were not in subjection to himself; for it is an apostolic maxim, that he who cannot rule his own house, cannot rule the Church of God; Ti1 3:5.”

“Without crime. See the like qualifications, 1 Timothy iii. (Witham) — These words if taken in their strictest meaning, do not seem to have all the force St. Paul meant them to have. For it is not sufficient that a bishop be free from great crimes; he ought, moreover to lead such a life as to draw others by his example to the practice of virtue. (Calmet) — If we consult all antiquity we shall find, that if in the early infancy of the Church some who had been once married were ordained to the ministry, we shall find that after their ordination they abstained from the use of marriage. See St. Epiphanius, lib. iii. cont. hær. and lib. ii. hæres. 59.”

“(Compare Notes, see on Ti1 3:2-4.) The thing dwelt on here as the requisite in a bishop, is a good reputation among those over whom he is to be set. The immorality of the Cretan professors rendered this a necessary requisite in one who was to be a reprover: and their unsoundness in doctrine also made needful great steadfastness in the faith (Tit 1:9, Tit 1:13). having faithful children--that is, believing children. He who could not bring his children to faith, how shall he bring others? [BENGEL]. ALFORD explains, "established in the faith." not accused--not merely not riotous, but "not (even) accused of riot" ("profligacy" [ALFORD]; "dissolute life" [WAHL]). unruly--insubordinate; opposed to "in subjection" (Ti1 3:4).”