Restoring the Disqualified
August 14th, 2008
(By John MacArthur)
Should a pastor who has committed adultery be restored to the ministry?
Some believe that God’s forgiveness should nullify all sin’s consequences. This issue inevitably arises when a Christian leader who has fallen into immorality professes repentance and then wants to return to a position of leadership in the church. Predictably, the fallen leader will plead his case by pointing out that God has forgiven him for his sin, so past sins should not be a factor in considering him for church leadership.
Yet, the basic biblical requirement for all elders and deacons in the church is that they must be “above reproach” (1 Tim. 3:2, 10; Titus 1:6-7). The expression speaks of the leader’s public reputation. “Above reproach” means there is nothing of which he can be accused. It does not speak of sinlessness, or no one could qualify. But a man who is “above reproach” is someone whose life is not marred by any obvious sinful defect or scandal that hinders him from standing before the flock as an example of consistent godliness.
Some sins, particularly scandalous sexual sins, carry a reproach that cannot be blotted out even though the offense itself is forgiven (Prov. 6:32-33). Forgiveness restores the person to a right relationship with God, but the stigma and scandal of the sin sometimes remains. In such cases a man may be forgiven and yet disqualified from spiritual leadership, because his life has not been a model of godly virtue.
(Today’s article was adapted from The Freedom and Power of Forgiveness, 66-67.)
But how long-reaching would this go? Do we allow those who have murdered Christians to plant churches? Only if they did so before they were Christian? Do we allow a man to pastor if his adultery was when he was not saved? If it was while he was immature? 10 years ago?
I agree generally with this post, there needs to be accountability for sins and pastors sometimes (despite negative media coverage) get the easiest ride for their sins. The pastor who commits adultery should be removed from his position and his return should not be quick or easy. But to say he should never be allowed to pastor again? That is probably going too far.
I couldn’t agree more with the comments above.
But the next question is, What other sins are disqualifying? Is a pastor who is unable to “rule his own house well” (1 Timothy 3:4) also disqualify him from pastoring? How about a pastor’s son(s) who is/are immoral? Do the examples of Eli’s sons (1 Samuel 2:22) and Samuel’s sons (1 Samuel 8:3) bear on this question? God specifically removed Eli from the priesthood because of his son’s wickedness (1 Samuel 3:12, 13), and the wickedness of Samuel’s sons gave another excuse to the children of Israel to demand a king (1 Samuel 8:5).
My Pastor says that a lawyer who has committed adultery, can confess, repent, reconcile and go back and be a good lawyer. A lumberjack, who cheats on his wife, can confess, repent, reconcile, and go back and be a good lumberjack. A pastor who commits adultery, can confess, repent and reconcile, but he should not go back and be a pastor. He can become a lawyer or a lumberjack.
Thank you for this post. It is timely and appropriate given the current situation in many churches. I would appreciate further clarification on something that was written. You said, concerning the reason for disqualification, “the stigma and scandal of the sin sometimes remains.” What do you do if there is no apparent stigma or scandal?
Take divorce, for instance. Divorce has become so common in our culture that there does not appear to be a stigma or scandal. In fact, some churches would cry “legalism” if a pastor were dismissed or not hired because of a divorce. How do we chart a course of biblical fidelity when the Bible doesn’t explicitly say that these men are disqualified for leadership?
Denial is not exclusive to the trespasser; when malignant, it can permeate groups. The Emperor’s New Clothes comes to mind.
The non-recognition of the “stigma and scandal” is a sad symptom of a life without Almighty God.
It’s about pride. It’s about repentance. And it’s often about consequences.
To Chris- I’m curious to understand why someone would want to come back to ministry. If it obviously creates conflict, why not become a lawyer/lumberjack as Michael suggested?
The question is not whether he would be a good speaker or a good leader, it is whether he is above reproach or not. Or as Paul said [above and the Apostle
], whether he rules his house well or not. If not, then the person should recognize this and not even seek the position of overseer/pastor/elder. For someone to seek it, they may be dealing with something else – power hungry, pride, desperate need to be the center of attention, etc.
And a response to Scott as far as a divorced person- it’s definitely case by case, but the question still stands, is he above reproach? 99 out of 100 that question would be answered no as far as someone who is divorced. We cannot try to please someone or make them feel good by allowing them to hold these positions while at the same time sacrificing what this simple, straight forward passage says. It’s not legalism unless you do not believe the entire Bible is the Word of God.
A youth pastor I knew committed fornication as a single man. He repented and was restored to fellowship. I lost touch with him, but many years later I saw him at a wedding. He was happily married, a father and had a job in Law Enforcement. He was also an elder in another church. Can a man who has been disqualified from full time ministry but has been restored to fellowship, become elder qualified at some point in the future? I have always been taught the standard for pastoral ministry and a lay elder are the same.
Thank you for this post. I am one who has disqualified himself by committing adultery as a pastor. After a period of reconciliation, I contemplated a return at the urging of some others. I realized that personally the damage done to my own conscience and to my family would not allow me to return.
It has now been 11 years since my fall. I have learned that in my current occupation (hotel manager) that I can be salt and light to my staff as well as to my guests. I am even more confident that I could not serve as a pastor like I did before my fall. I know of some who have taken a different path. I am not confident that they have followed the appropriate path.
We live in a “forgive and forget” culture. While forgiven, it is really not ever forgotten. God “remembers” our sin no more, but that doesn’t mean that God forgets. He is the omniscient God. He remembers them not by not attributing them to my account.
I write this hoping to give a perspective from the other side.
This brings to mind the repentance of David in Psalm 51. David’s prayer was for forgiveness and restoration. I think Paul’s question above is pertinent, adultery is one of the disqualifiers for eldership but there are others as well. Should a man who is in this sin step aside for a period of repentance? Certainly! Should he never again serve God? Peter denied Christ three times and yet was forgiven and continued on in ministry. It is nothing to be taken lightly, but I challenge anyone to find me a pastor who has never sinned.
To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet went to him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba. Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin! For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment. Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being, and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart. Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones that you have broken rejoice. Hide your face from my sins, and blot out all my iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from your presence, and take not your Holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the joy of your salvation, and uphold me with a willing spirit. Then I will teach transgressors your ways, and sinners will return to you. Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, O God of my salvation, and my tongue will sing aloud of your righteousness. O Lord, open my lips, and my mouth will declare your praise. For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; you will not be pleased with a burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise. Do good to Zion in your good pleasure; build up the walls of Jerusalem; then will you delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings; then bulls will be offered on your altar.
(Psalms 51:1-19)
I just had this discussion with a pastor friend of mine.
I agree with the article and want to point out the opposite of what brother Chris Roberts has said.
What is “above reproach?” Can a pastor commit any kind of heinous sin and than just come back? Can you murder and than come back and be a pastor? Seriously, in the medical field, it takes far less than that to have your license permanently barred. If you kill a patient on the table or do anything sexual to them you career as a doctor is over. No doubt you can get forgiveness from everyone in the situation, but for sure you will not get your medical license back.
If the secular world has standards like this for their work, doesn’t it only make sense that the clergy before God can have “license” revoking standards? And in God’s eyes, sexual immorality is just one of those career ending deals (though forgiveness would come). Let me just emphasize again, what is a more holy position – Medicine or the Clergy? If we can understand doctors not being reinstated, why is it so hard for us to understand that pastors and elders cannot?
Some of the questions in Chris’ post above are still not addressed. Many of the comments here are addressing restoration of a fallen pastor and not sins of the past of someone who was not in leadership at the time of their sin. I agree that it is difficult to restore a fallen leader but in this type of discussion we always tends to discuss a fallen leader verses the below example.
In some cases, it may be that the sin was committed prior to being a Christian or as a very immature Christian really early in their faith when they were without solid discipleship and biblical teaching. This example of sin, which occurs prior to even being close to being leadership qualified, then leads to the person committing to a local church where then amazing growth occurs over a period of time and then has qualified character for leadership due to the Spirit’s work in his life over time and testing.
Isn’t the requirement for elder/pastor a current qualification (must be above reproach)? Perhaps the man has not always been a top notch example in his entire past but is now over a time period of growth and testing.
A man who just comes to Christ may not run his home well but through growth and discipleship as a Christian becomes a solid manager of his home. A man who struggled with sexual sin in his past prior to Christ may struggle with some of it eary in his walk/faith when his flesh is still so strong but through solid discipleship, growth, and the Spirits power shuns it all and becomes a man that is an example for all to follow over time.
How do you address this situation?
To argue against the restoration of a pastor solely on the basis of the word “above reproach” is a very flimsy argument. I remember Don Carson saying that all of the requirements found in the New Testament for pastors are also listed somewhere else for all believers (with the possible exception of “able to teach” which is a translation issue). For instance, Colossians 1:22 says that Jesus reconciled us to God in order to make us “above reproach.” This obviously refers to all believers. The common statement one hears is that “pastors (elders) are held to a HIGHER STANDARD. I think, rather, that pastors are to model the HIGH STANDARD to which all of us are called. And part of that is the ability to confess, repent, reform, be reconciled, and restored.
At what point can a man receive full reconciliation? At what point are a mans sins forgivable for ministry? Is it the sins committed before coming to Christ only? Or are they sins committed before entering “ministry” as recognized by a church body? As a divorced man, can I become a pastor, since I divorced my wife after she had two children that were not mine? What about adulterous men?
By disallowing men who have fallen in life after coming to Christ, are we in essence saying that a man convicted of murder, child molestation, or a man who’s wife left him are eligible only if it occurred before he became a Christian.Saul was responsible for the death and imprisonment of great numbers of believers before he came to Christ, and yet, after a reasonable period, he was recognized as being fir for ministry. Certainly a mans sins can disqualify him, but isn’t there room for complete restoration and reconciliation?
How far do we carry the rule of disqualification? Would you allow them to be a deacon? Collect the offering? How about the public reading of the Scripture or prayer? Could they still give their testimony? Or would that be preaching? Would they even be allowed to sing in the choir or give a solo? Or have they become “untouchables”?What then becomes the definition of ministry? and what is considered reconciliation?
If a man who committed sexual sin and perhaps had multiple sexual encounters before coming to Christ can be a pastor because he was never legally married, in a way suggests that a man who by biblical standards was married multiple times or who committed adultery just as many times, would somehow be more qualified. We would then perhaps need to encourage Christians to just live together if they thought they might want to be pastors someday.
As John MacArthur Jr. notes in his NEW TESTAMENT COMMENTARY ON FIRST TIMOTHY page 104-105;
“Paul is not referring to a leader’s marital status…rather the issue is his moral, sexual behavior. Many men married only once are not one-woman men. Many with one wife are unfaithful to that wife. While remaining married to one woman is commendable, it is not an indication or guarantee of moral purity. Some may wonder why Paul begins his list with this quality. He does so because it is in this area, above all others, where leaders seem most prone to fall. The failure to be a one-woman man has put more men out of the ministry than any other sin. It is thus a matter of grave concern.
…Others maintain that Paul here forbids remarriage after the death of a spouse. As already noted, however, this standard, like all the rest refers to moral character, not marital status. Further, the Scriptures permit and honor second marriages under the proper circumstances….Still others hold that this qualification excludes divorced men, from spiritual leadership. That again, ignores the fact that Paul is not referring to marital status. Nor does the Bible forbid all remarriage after a divorce. In Matthew 5;31-32 and Matthew 19:9, our Lord permitted remarriage when a divorce was caused by adultery. Paul gave a second occasion when remarriage is permitted, when the unbelieving spouse initiates the divorce. (1 Cor. 7:15). While God hates all divorce (Mal. 2;16) He is gracious to the innocent party in those two situations. Since remarriage in itself is not a sin, it is not necessarily a blight on a man’s character.”
D.A. Carson makes reference to this in his book, “The Cross and the Christian Ministry,” where he says:
“The most remarkable feature of this list is that is unremarkable.”
Pastor Doug makes an interesting point when he stated that, “pastors are to model the HIGH STANDARD to which all of us are called. And part of that is the ability to confess, repent, reform, be reconciled, and restored.”
While it should by no means be taken by pastors as a license to sin, I agree with Pastor Doug’s point, that pastors should be models of the standards that we are all called to as believers – and that involves repenting, reforming, being reconciled and restored, as Pastor Doug stated.
It is certainly possible that God can and may “disqualify” a pastor from service, and He is well within His rights to do so. However, apart from being uniterested in the repenting and reforming that Pastor Doug mentioned (which some pastors when in sin certainly are), there doesn’t seem to be much biblical basis for us, as humans, to deem a pastor forever “disqualified.”
Patrick
http://www.theologyofomaha.com
There are certainly ways in which sin, on-going and without repentance, should disqualify from eldership, and mean church discipline-including non-fellowship, much less non-restoration to leadership. This would be true if it was sexual immorality or any other blatant disobedience. However, this context assumes that either there has been heart-felt repentance, or other circumstances which should be used as a guide for how we see such a soul. Moreover, divorce, and its sister false allegation, is often the very method used in persecution of the believer. One cannot stop divorce if done against him/her. One cannot stop allegations. It has become much too easy a form of attack, in some cases, without any connection to a just cause, or the truth. The full story may or may not be capable of retelling, either accurately or convincingly. In our modern culture, the act of litigation is the norm, not the exception. The affliction is real and spiritual. Is it possible for God to be sovereign and in control of all things and not have brought about this type of affliction for the growth of the believer/leader? What about the cases of false accusation of sexual impurity? These often leave the result of a kind of “reproach” regardless of whether they are ever disproved or not. Will the hidden sins of elders be brought out, or is it only the public sins that matter to God? It is too easy to suggest a pat answer. Biblical marriage and legal marriage often overlap, regardless of the courthouse records. At what point does the one-fleshness of adultery/fornication become a marriage in front of God? This is often determined by cultural norms, and legal protocol. To what extent is it necessary to understand false accusations, persecution, heartache, and pain and be an effective elder, or to understand Christ who was the model of enduring false allegations-even called a devil? In our world, what is the more poignant nexus of all this than the dissolution of families, and its subsequent disgrace? Being isolated from this might reduce outside criticism, probably from those with a limited understanding of mercy given, needed, or received, but how is the isolation from these realities necessarily better for church leadership? Whom God receives, he chastens and scourges. Taken as a whole, the requirements for eldership, and restoration, must be used to discern good leaders, and this may not be those with the least traumatic pasts. I do not speak for those without the prerequisite repentant posture-which posture should be maintained each time a look of lust occurs (adultery in the heart), and daily rendered due to our innate sinfulness. Let him without sin cast the first stone. If we cannot determine by the Spirit’s leading who is, and is not a good leader, or who should and should not be restored from sins affect (theirs or another’s), then we should not be making the judgment in the first place. And what if we err? It will become evident soon enough. Is our reputation to the world one of mercy for sinners, or pious living? Which one glorifies God the most? Which scenario brings sinners into the church to hear preaching from elders? This whole topic of church leadership, its requirements, and the metaphysical ramifications of what is most often sited as a “position”, is missing something that I can’t quite figure out, but intuitively understand. There is something anti-gospel in it all. Consequences of sin notwithstanding, are we better than God to remember sins that he has forgotten? Do we, as born-again Christians live in our past, or do we press toward the mark? Someone is not being honest with themselves in this. What produces humility? Rather, how does God produce humility? Do I want an humble elder, or a squeaky clean white-washed tomb? Stigmatizing probably has the effect of undermining the Gospel message of being a “new creation”, far more than it serves its furtherance. What did it take for David to be man after the heart of God? Give me a pastor/elder who has experienced failure, pain, suffering, rejection, persecution, false allegations, shame, and the misery of sin’s effect in his life, and with the proper theology, he can truly minister. What does a man who has not experienced sin, or seen the sin of another close up, have that qualifies him to discern between good and evil? How can he understand Romans 9? Does not evil exist to show us what is right?