The interpretation timeline

Titus 1:6

How this passage has been read — the sources, oldest to newest.

From the early Church Fathers to now.

6 Patristic · 2 Reformed · 1 Methodist · 1 Catholic

Titus 1:6 · Douay-Rheims
“If any be without crime, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly.”
Patristic before A.D. 750
220
A.D.
Tertullian Patristic
c. A.D. 150–220
“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.”
Source
220
A.D.
Tertullian Patristic
c. A.D. 150–220
“How detrimental to faith, how obstructive to holiness, second marriages are, the discipline of the Church and the prescription of the apostle declare, when he suffers not men twice married to preside (over a Church ), when he would not grant a widow admittance into the order unless she had been "the wife of one man; " for it behoves God's altar to be set forth pure.”
Source
220
A.D.
Tertullian Patristic
c. A.D. 150–220
“Come, now, you who think that an exceptional law of monogamy is made with reference to bishops, abandon withal your remaining disciplinary titles, which, together with monogamy, are ascribed to bishops. Refuse to be "irreprehensible, sober, of good morals, orderly, hospitable, easy to be taught; "nay, indeed, (be) "given to wine, prompt with the hand to strike, combative, money-loving, not ruling your house, nor caring for your children's discipline,"-no, nor "courting good renown even from strangers.”
Source
177 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
397
A.D.
Ambrose of Milan Patristic
A.D. 339–397
“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.”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“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.”
Source
430
A.D.
Augustine of Hippo Patristic
A.D. 354–430
“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.”
Source
1,341 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
Post-Reformation c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“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.”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“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.”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“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.”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“(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).”
Source
Undated date unknown
c. A.D. 380
“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.”
Source
c. A.D. 380
“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.”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.