By Dale Waters

Discussions on the qualifications for elders and deacons rarely address whether they should be married or have children. While scripture’s qualifications for both offices include being the husband of one wife and leading children well, these stipulations seem almost utterly ignored in modern discussions. Instead, the current focus is almost entirely on whether women can rightly become elders, with the occasional sidebar on deaconesses. When the subject of husband of one wife does come up, the emphasis invariably goes to the maleness of the subject rather than his marriedness. Similarly, the qualification to lead children well is abstracted for use in discussions of male headship. The result of all this seems to leave many Christians with the idea that a man must be a man, but a wife and children can be hypothetical. On the contrary, scripture is equally clear on the issue of elders’ and deacons’ families as it is on their sex, and we cannot allow timebound disputes to color our hermeneutics.

Qualifications and Roles

Before addressing the question of whether church officers must be married with children, it is helpful to differentiate between their roles and their qualifications. The roles of elders and deacons are comprised of what they are to do. Scripture has a number of passages with commands for elders in particular,[1] putting forth various duties that they must fulfill. These duties may vary in their application over time and certainly require wisdom, but they must be carried out nonetheless.

In contrast, qualifications define and describe the sort of man that is to carry out the duties of a given role. While we may be tempted to look at an individual role and reason ourselves how to best fill it, God had already told us what kind of person He wants in those roles. We must be wary of adding to or subtracting from God’s qualifications, as though we know better than He what is required to care for His Son’s body. God wants a certain kind of person to an elder or deacon, so we must obediently embrace His wisdom.

One other point before getting to the relevant texts is the matter of nomenclature. Scripture speaks of elders, overseers, and pastors/shepherds as leaders among the church. Passages such as 1 Peter 5:1-4 show that these terms are interchangeable, with elders as the ones who shepherd and oversee the flock of God. Thus, a passage on overseers can be applied to elders, and vice versa, because the two terms refer to the same office.

The Relevant Texts

The qualifications for elder are laid out in two primary texts: 1 Timothy 3:1-15 and Titus 1:5-9. While elders are mentioned elsewhere in scripture and many of the enumerated trades are discussed throughout the New Testament and interpreted in light of Christ, the qualifications for elder are only listed in these two passages. Similarly, the qualifications for deacon are only discussed in 1 Timothy 3 as well. Nevertheless, these sections are sufficiently comprehensive and clear on what God expects from the officers of His church.

1 Timothy 3:1-15 (LSB) – It is a trustworthy saying: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a good work. An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but considerate, peaceable, free from the love of money; leading his own household well, having his children in submission with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to lead his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?), and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation of the devil. And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not indulging in much wine, not fond of dishonest gain, but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And these men must also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons if they are beyond reproach. Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things. Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, leading their children and their own households well. For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a high standing and great boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.

I am writing these things to you, hoping to come to you soon, but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.

Titus 1:5-9 (LSB)–For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, namely, if any man is beyond reproach, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, who are not accused of dissipation, or rebellious. For the overseer must be beyond reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of dishonest gain, but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, righteous, holy, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to reprove those who contradict.

The similar context and content of these passages and their respective epistles provides a helpful background to study. Timothy and Titus were men sent by Paul to aid and appoint elders in churches (1 Timothy 1:3-5, 5:19-22; Titus 1:5). His letters to them involve similar encouragements and similar content beyond elder qualifications. Both letters contain warnings against Jewish challenges to the faith (1:3-11, Titus 1:10-16), deal with male and female roles (1 Timothy 2, 3, 5; Titus 2:2-8), and exhort believers to righteous lives in light of Christ (1 Timothy 4:7-10, Titus 2). These epistles are written to similar men on similar missions for similar purposes, hence the immense overlap in content.

These parallels apply to both sets of qualifications for church officers as well. While Titus doesn’t deal with deacons, the qualifications for elder are equivalent between the two letters. In both, elders are to be of sound character and reputation, holding fast to the faith and free of vices. They must be self-controlled, and caring, as well as able to teach. In Paul’s letter to Timothy, the ability to teach is the only clear requirement for elders that is not also for deacons. Among the qualifications for both is the requirement to be a husband of one wife, or more literally, a man of one woman.

Wives of One Husband and Husbands of one Wife

This requirement to be a man of one woman is typically viewed as a prohibition against polygamy. While it certainly does seem to rule out being a man of many women, that doesn’t appear to be the main thrust of the phrase. A similar phrase, woman of one man, is used in reference to widows later in 1 Timothy 5, where verses 3-16 discuss what qualifies a widow to be cared for by the church.

In verses nine and ten, a woman of one man (or wife of one husband) is described as having a reputation for good works, with other considerations being if she has brought up children, shown hospitality, and shown a general devotion to righteousness and faithful service to God. Here, being a wife of one husband is clearly a description of past actions and character; a widow is no longer married due to the death of her husband. However, just as important, a widow was married at some point and was observed in that state—a widow is not a spinster or bachelorette.

Additionally, being remarried does not seem to disqualify a woman from being considered a wife of one husband, as Paul commands younger widows to get married rather than be cared for by the church. There is no indication that being widowed multiple times disqualified a woman from aid, or that Paul is giving young widows an ultimatum between surviving on their own until age sixty, or getting married at the risk of never being able to qualify for aid if the second spouse dies too. In context, wife of one husband refers to how the widow acted when married, specifically as a wife of proven faithfulness to the end. This served as one of the qualifications to be considered a widow indeed, a widow the church would take responsibility for.

In light of this parallel language for widows, the phrase husband of one wife seems to speak primarily to character. This meshes well with the other character-centric qualifications and helps ensure that the elder’s life is considered at home as well as amongst believers and in the world. However, much like the widow indeed, there is a necessary condition for being a husband of one wife: marrying a wife.

Just as a polygamous husband could not reasonably be called a one-woman man, neither can a bachelor be a man of one woman. Inasmuch as the requirement is ultimately about character, this insight can only be gained by actually seeing a man in a marital relationship with a woman. While performance in other areas of life can and should be taken as an indicator, there is ultimately no way to know what kind of husband a man will be until he is one. A similar argument is made more explicitly in the discussion of children.

Managing Children

The qualification for an elder to lead his household well, having his children in submission with all dignity,[2] is one of three qualifications that provide a justification in 1 Timothy 3. In this case, it is that if a man doesn’t know how to lead his own household,[3] he will not be able to care for the people of God. This is significant because the Holy Spirit through Paul has specifically told us how fatherhood relates to eldership: a bad husband and father makes a bad elder. From this, we know that how a husband handles his household reflects on how he will handle God’s church.

This makes sense because shortly after in 1 Timothy 3:15, the church itself is described as a household, so of course managing a small household would be relevant to managing a larger one. This command and the provided wisdom behind it make it clear that an elder must be a faithful husband and father. The church is not likened to a business, friend group, or any other social organization; a single man cannot be properly vetted because he hasn’t been seen in the relevant circumstances. Just as a man can’t be declared able to teach if he has never had the opportunity to teach, he cannot be declared a man of one woman, nor “the kind of guy who would be,” if he has never been married to a woman. God has told us that an elder must be a husband of one wife who leads his household well, He has told us why this is the case, and He saw fit to tell us twice, so we don’t have any exegetical ambiguity or wiggle room to say otherwise.

Deacons likewise…

Deacons are also required to be husbands of one wife, leading their children and households well. Their requirements are described as being similar to elders, with words such as “likewise” and “also” connecting the qualifications to those of the elder while clearly maintaining them as a separate office. Just as elders must be married with children to have a chance at being faithful in those roles, deacons cannot be husbands of one wife who lead their children and households well if they don’t have wives or children. We cannot possibly know if they meet this qualification until we see them in action.

There is a question of who the women in 1 Timothy 3:11 are, though the answer doesn’t affect whether deacons must be married with children. Since women must be dignified like deacons who must be dignified like elders, women are clearly not deacons or elders.[4] While it is possible that “women” refers to general women in the church, the terms “man” and “woman” surrounding this instance refer specifically to husband and wife, respectively. Therefore, these women are likely wives, specifically, the kinds of wives that deacons are required to have as per verse 12.

If these women are deacons’ wives, that raises the question of why deacons would have this requirement and not elders. The answer to that question is somewhat ambiguous, and this must be acknowledged without ignoring what has been made clear. It is possible that these comments on wives refer to all church officers’ wives and are another way of expressing good household management. It is also possible that deacons’ wives might be more involved in their work, so they would need to be held to a higher standard. Speculation aside, this particular issue amounts to very little in practice. What is clear and certain is that deacons and elders must have wives, as well as children, and manage them well.

Narrative Support

The Biblical narrative’s portrayal of elders is also in harmony with the requirement that they be married. Peter is shown to be an elder (1 Peter 5:1) and he was married (Matthew 8;14-15, Mark 1:29-31, Luke 4:38-49, 1 Corinthians 9:5). James was also married (1 Corinthians 9:5) and tradition holds him to have been an elder, though the Biblical data is less clear.[5] While the New Testament doesn’t discuss the marital status of any other elders, the fact stands that there are no examples of unmarried elders and the explicit qualifications to become an elder require being a husband of one wife. This is not an argument from silence, but rather noting that there is no tension between narrative and command.

Scriptural Clarity

Summarily, the Bible’s qualifications for elders and deacons seem perfectly clear, including the requirement to be faithful husbands and fathers. They must be husbands of one wife, or men of one woman, and one isn’t none. They must have children and lead them well. Not only is there nothing in the context to qualify or limit these requirements, but the reasoning behind them is provided, and it clearly articulates a link between overseeing a family and overseeing a congregation. This connection removes any remote possibility of the requirements being merely abstract, conditional, or hypothetical. The same hermeneutics that show that elders and deacons must be men, Christians, sober, and whatever else scripture says, also require that they be faithful husbands and fathers. There is no clear consistent hermeneutic that can make all but one requirement mandatory.

This issue is not one of damnable consequence, yet at the same time, we ignore the wisdom and commands of God at our own peril. Consequently, we should take care that we are letting the Spirit-breathed scriptures speak for themselves and not injecting a tradition, expedience, or other factors that distort the clear intent of the text. God wants elders and deacons to be men who lead their families well, so that is wise and good and we should be grateful that He has revealed this to us.

Answering Objections

            Objections from the Texts

                        Objection: The other qualifications seem to speak to character, not life status.

Response: Yes, and we apparently need a man to have achieved a certain life status to get proper insight into his character. This doesn’t just apply to marital and parental status, but also to the length of his conversion (1 Timothy 3:6).

Objection: What about the widowed, divorced, etc…?

Response: Good question! This is not explicitly addressed, so we need to see what else scripture says about these things. Widows are described as wives of one husband, so a widower probably still meets the standard, as he has been observed in the relevant scenarios. That said, it is likely worth re-evaluating on an emotional level, as loss of a beloved spouse is very difficult. Divorce is more ambiguous. A faithful husband abandoned by his wife would seem to have proven his character despite no longer being married. In this case or those of sexual immorality and death, the marriage truly would be over and remarriage could also occur (Matthew 19:9; 1 Corinthians 7:15, 39). Actions prior to conversion probably should be viewed differently as well, but that’s beyond the scope of this and is best left to individual elders and congregations.

Objection: What if the husband and/or his mandatory wife are infertile?

Response: Adoption is always a wonderful option, though becoming an elder shouldn’t be the sole or primary reason to adopt. Church office is just one of many ways to serve Jesus, so whatever barriers there are to children (biological, financial, preferential, etc.), there are far more opportunities to use whatever gifts the Holy Spirit has given you.

Objection: Isn’t it strange that this would be the only requirement that isn’t a sin issue?

Response: No, unless you think it’s sinful to be a new convert (1 Timothy 3:6).

            Objections from the Prooftexts

Objection: What about Paul and Jesus? They weren’t married! Are you saying they aren’t qualified to be elders?

Response: Paul and Jesus were not elders. Paul was an apostle, but that’s not an elder. Peter was an apostle and an elder, but he was married. Jesus is well above elders and apostles; it’s not a matter of qualification. Jesus and Paul are both men, but I’d hesitate to phrase that as them being unqualified to be mothers.[6]

Objection: Timothy was young and probably not married.

Response: We don’t know whether or not Timothy was married, so that’s an argument from silence at best. We also have no reason to believe he was an elder; Timothy is told to do the work of an evangelist (2 Timothy 4:5) and that is a separate church office/function (Ephesians 4:11).

Objection: What about the female deaconess Phoebe?

Response: Deacon is not a magic word; it just means helper or assistant and is transliterated inconsistently. Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and others are called deacons, and the word has nothing to do with the church office. Phoebe was a helper of Paul and the church, but the context does not imply she held church office and she clearly does not meet the explicit requirements for the office of deacon.[7]

Objection: Paul said not to get married, so wouldn’t that mean Paul basically said don’t be an elder or deacon?

Response: No. In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul is addressing a specific question from a very idiosyncratic church and it’s not entirely clear what scenario they are asking about. Additionally, his advice to stay single is made in light of a then-present distress. His more generalizable statements in this passage make it clear that not everyone is to be single like he is.

Objection: It stinks to be a gifted single woman in your small world.[8]

Response: Alas, there are no ways to use what God has given us if we are not elders or deacons. But who am I to argue with such clearly Biblical übersacerdotalism?

[1] Deacons’ role is presumably to assist the elders (deacon means helper or assistant and they are always mentioned with elders), but there are no lists of deacon duties or examples of deacons doing anything whatsoever in scripture.

[2] Titus 1 requires that the children be faithful. While some interpretations and translations have taken this to mean Christian, the passage explains faithful to refer to the children’s general behavior, i.e., not accused of dissipation or rebellious (v. 6). This is essentially a restatement of 1 Timothy 3:4 requiring children be led in submission with all dignity.

[3] Given the larger context of the letter, a household might also include other relatives, such as related widows, c.f. 1 Timothy 5:7-8, 16. However, the immediate context demands at least a wife and children.

[4] It would also be difficult for a one-woman man to be a woman; likely impossible.

[5] James is called a pillar in Galatians 2:9 and seems to be looked to as some sort of an authority figure in Jerusalem throughout the New Testament.

[6] One could also argue that Jesus is married, or at least betrothed, to the church.

[7] For a deeper dive into the historical and New Testament usage of deacon, see Paul’s Vision for the Deacons: Assisting the Elders with the Care of God’s Church by Alexander Strauch. He’s wrong about elders and deacons needing to be married with kids, but it’s still a great book! I appreciate the grace with which he deals with churches that have female deacons.

[8] This objection is courtesy of Reformed Reddit user u/OHdutchdad.