Deacons and Kids

The Bible says:
Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus. (ESV) 1 Timothy 3:8-13

Paul gives these instructions concerning deacons to Timothy. These qualities, or qualifications, follow similar ones given for elders (vv. 1-7).

The question addressed in this note concerns the item related to children. Does the Scripture require of a deacon that he have children?

We understand that if a deacon has children, they should be managed well. Does this contingency that a deacon manage his children well imply necessarily that he have children to manage?

The following reasons show conclusively that it is not necessary for a brother to have children in order to serve as a deacon.

1. The Scripture leaves no question, by explicit statement, that the deacon must be the husband of one wife. Thus, if we receive v. 11 as reference to the deacon's wife, then we hear the apostle Paul actually giving two necessary marriage conditions for a deacon: (a) that he must have one wife and (b) that the wife herself must exhibit certain godly characteristics.

If Scripture were to follow the same pattern for children as it does for his wife, then we might expect to read something like this: (a) A deacon must have children. (b) His children must be well managed. This keeps the matter unambiguous and clear as to what is required. However, the Scripture does not do this: it does not say explicitly that he must have children.

2. Is there a necessary inference that a deacon have children?

No. The text does not require it. If we were to allow the absence of children for the moment, we see that no violence or change comes to the meaning of the Scripture. The meaning of Scripture holds, namely, that such children as there are must be managed well.

What is necessary to the passage is that children, if there be any, are managed well. That this is the correct reading of the passage becomes clear in the next thought.

3. The Scripture also says that a deacon must manage his household well (v. 12). The household is not his wife nor is it his children. Both wife and children have each been addressed explicitly moments before. He must manage "children and household" well. The conjunction and indicates something in addition to children in this case. So, it is not his immediate family. Consequently, we must ask who or what constitutes the household?

The household includes other persons who would somehow be closely associated with the deacon's family. These would be servants, maids, or other people attached who serve in various capacities.

For example, Cornelius, a Gentile centurion in the Roman army, had a number of people associated with his house. These would be in addition to immediate family. In Acts 10:7 we learn that Cornelius sent two servants and one devout soldier to invite Peter to preach the message of salvation. These three messengers were among those who attended Cornelius; this implies a number of other people also closely associated with him - namely, his household.

The circumcision party later accuses Peter of eating with Gentiles. Peter defends his actions and tells them the Holy Spirit instructed him to teach Cornelius, because Cornelius himself had received instructions to hear the message by which he and all his household would be saved. Acts 11:14. We noted already that Cornelius' household included servants as well as soldiers. Furthermore, he had invited relatives and friends to join the meeting with Peter. Acts 10:24.

Now, does it follow that if a deacon is to manage his household well, that it is necessarily required of him to have such a household? That is, is it required that he have servants, maids, or other people somehow associated with him that constitute the household?

Or is the requirement, rather, that such household that there is must be managed well?

Without question we have never made having a household a requirement for a deacon. But more to the point, clearly, a deacon is simply not required to have a household. But if he does, it is required that he manage them well.

For exactly the same reason, a deacon is not required to have children. But if he does, they must be managed well.

We conclude, consequently, that it is not required of a brother to have children before he may serve as a deacon. But it is required, if he has children, that he manage them well.

"Authority" for Benevolence

By what authority does Jesus' congregation do benevolent works?

The Bible says:
And let's not get tired of doing good, for in due time we will reap, if we don't give up. So then, as we have the time, let's do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of belief. Gal. 6:9-10

The congregation serves God in helping people in their varied needs. A financial amount is budgeted yearly for anticipated, recurring events, such as serving nutritious meals at the local soup kitchen. There are also special contributions throughout the year to help out in urgent, unanticipated aftermaths of natural disasters or of other difficulties.

But someone might ask, "Isn't this exhortation to do good addressed to individual believers, and not to the whole church? Should benevolent works be funded out of the church's treasury?"

First. The passage above is a plural, "Let us ... we do not give up ... As we have opportunity ..." The Scripture addresses us as a collective. It is reasonable that such support come from the church treasury.

Second. We support the preacher out of the church treasury using the authority of a preceding verse (v. 6), "Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor." The passage addresses the individual person being taught, that he should share goods with the teacher; yet, without difficulty we receive the instruction that we may give a salary out of the church treasury for the preacher.

Third. The so-called "church treasury" is itself never authorized in Scripture. It is an expediency invented out of mutual convenience for the congregation. As we have invented the church treasury, for our convenience, we use it for its intended purposes. In our case, the purposes are indicated through the yearly budgetary processes as the elders and the congregation choose. Additional special contributions usually have their own limited purposes.

But someone may also ask, "Where is the authority to assist unbelievers out of the church treasury?"

The Bible says:
"As we have opportunity, let's do good to everyone." There is no limit on the good Christians may do other than "as we have opportunity." The passage also says, "and especially to those who are of the household of faith." Clearly, there is a priority determined in the passage, namely, that believers should have care given "especially." Such priority does not imply rejection of others.

Jesus was sent, he says, only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Despite this, he served pagans as well. Mt. 15:21-28. We would not do less.

But someone may further ask, "Where is the authority for the church to work benevolence through agencies such as the soup kitchen or some other church's work or other benevolent organization?"

The Bible says:
And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Mt. 5:47-48.

(We note that Jesus speaks to "you" plural, not singular.)

First. Jesus calls his people to do more than what pagans do. To "greet" here, is not merely to say, "How do you do?" It is, rather, to do good toward those pagans. Even pagans take care of their own kind. Jesus' call for perfection in this Scripture is a call to do as God does, namely, to do good even for those of another kind.

Second. The congregation's benevolent funds are contributed and distributed toward specific human need, regardless of the agency that happens to assemble the people for distribution of goods.

Third. Benevolent funds from the church treasury go for direct services. As examples: Moneys for the soup kitchen go to buy food that will be distributed at the soup kitchen. Special collection moneys for the summer feeding project go to buy food to feed children. Moneys for kids' life vests going to school on waterways goes directly to the buying of life vests. And so on. None of the moneys we give goes to pay for administration or for agency salaries of benevolent organizations.

God's blessing makes rain and sunshine fall on good, bad, righteous, and unrighteous people alike. Mt. 5:45. God provides rain and sunshine for the atheist who receives God's gifts greedily, who denies all the while the Giver. It is unreasonable, consequently, to think that we must not join in humanitarian efforts with people of a different kind. Indeed, a few moments earlier, Jesus said to his follower: Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. Mt. 5:42.

But someone will ask, "Where is the authority to do something other than in the name of Jesus?"

The Bible says:
And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, to it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him. Col. 3:17.

All the benevolent work we purpose to do is in the name of Jesus.

But someone will ask, "Doesn't that passage mean that we are supposed to do benevolence by the specific authority (command, example, inference) of the Lord Jesus?"

No.

First. What the passage means relates immediately to its context: (a) that we are to let the peace of Christ rule in our hearts since we are parts of one another; (b) that we are to be thankful; (c) that we let the word of Christ dwell within us as we teach and admonish; (d) that we give thanks to God in all our communications with each other. Col. 3:15-17.

Second. An ambassador works in the name of the commissioning authority that sent the ambassador on its mission. The ambassador understands the mission and does everything in light of that mission. Unanticipated situations inevitably arise and the ambassador must act without explicit direction. Even so, the ambassador will act in a manner consistent with the mission. Indeed, despite the lack of direct instruction, all still would be done in the name of the commissioning authority.

No one has a problem with this. (There could be a question afterward whether the ambassador's given action was in fact consistent with the mission, but that's a different conversation.)

Third. Peter summarizes Jesus' life like this: He went around doing good. Acts 10:38. We do good stuff because we are followers of Christ, not just because we got a direct command or received a revelation that the specific good thing needs to be done. Jesus went around doing good, and that's good enough authority for us, too.

Finally. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and keep oneself unstained from the world. Jas. 1:27. May we do so and give thanks to God!