Latest / Reformed Thinking / The Glass House: Domestic Authority as the Prerequisite for Ecclesial Office

Transcript

The Glass House: Domestic Authority as the Prerequisite for Ecclesial Office · Reformed Thinking

• 0:00
  Welcome to reformed thinking. So glad you could join us today.
• 0:03
  We're well, we're walking into a house, but it's not just any
• 0:06
  house. It's it's a glass house We're
• 0:09
  going to be cracking open the source material on.
• 0:12
  I mean honestly, one of the most sensitive, painful.
• 0:15
  And yeah, terrifying qualifications for church
• 0:17
  eldership. Exactly the requirement
• 0:20
  regarding a man's children. It's a topic that I think keeps
• 0:25
  a lot of good men awake at night.
• 0:27
  Yeah, we're looking at the specific biblical mandates in
• 0:29
  First Timothy 3 and Titus. One, this is really where the
• 0:33
  Apostle Paul takes a man's public ministry and, you could
• 0:38
  say, handcuffs it to his private paternity.
• 0:40
  And that, that creates this massive tension in the church.
• 0:42
  I see it all the time. On one side, you have this just
• 0:45
  rampant pragmatism. You see a guy, he's a gifted
• 0:47
  speaker. He can hold a crowd, you know,
• 0:49
  in the palm of his hand. He's a visionary, a CEO type.
• 0:52
  And the church looks at him and thinks, OK, so his teenage son
• 0:55
  is a bit wild. Maybe his home life is a little
• 0:58
  chaotic. Who cares?
• 0:58
  Look at how he preaches. We're tempted to just ignore the
• 1:01
  domestic sphere because the public performance is so good.
• 1:04
  That's the pragmatic ditch, a very deep one.
• 1:07
  But we can't forget the ditch on the other side of the road,
• 1:09
  right? And that is the crushing
• 1:11
  perfectionism that creates a culture where if a pastors kid,
• 1:15
  you know, makes a mistake or struggles with sin or gets a bad
• 1:19
  grade, some people in the congregation are ready to fire
• 1:22
  the dad. Yeah, it's this 0 tolerance
• 1:24
  policy that basically says unless your family looks like
• 1:27
  the covel of a 1950s hymnal, you cannot serve God.
• 1:31
  Right. So we're stuck.
• 1:32
  We're stuck between who cares and you must be perfect.
• 1:36
  And that is, I mean, that's just a miserable place for any leader
• 1:40
  to be. To help us sort this out, we've
• 1:42
  got 2 pretty heavy hitting theological essays in our stack
• 1:46
  today. One is called Proving Ground for
• 1:48
  the Pastoral Office and the other is simply titled The Glass
• 1:51
  House. And our approach for this whole
• 1:53
  deep dive, as always, is from a Reformed perspective.
• 1:57
  We're adhering to the Westminster Confession, viewing
• 1:59
  the church not as a business but as the household of God.
• 2:02
  So our mission is to figure out, is the home just a private
• 2:06
  compartment, like a man's hobby, something separate?
• 2:09
  Or is it, as one of these writers puts it, the divine
• 2:11
  proving ground? And to get really specific, we
• 2:16
  have to solve a translation Riddle.
• 2:18
  It all comes down to this. Does an elder need perfect
• 2:21
  children? Does he need believing children
• 2:26
  as in regenerate born again Christians or does he just need
• 2:31
  manage children? Because the difference between
• 2:34
  those 3 words, I mean it changes everything about who gets to
• 2:36
  lead a church. I want to start with the logic
• 2:38
  of this. Before we even dive into the
• 2:40
  Greek words or the, you know, the scary translation debates,
• 2:43
  Paul sets up a very specific logical argument in First
• 2:46
  Timothy 3. It's an if in proposition, and
• 2:49
  honestly, reading through these sources, this just struck me as
• 2:51
  some of the most practical management advice in the entire
• 2:53
  Bible. Even if you aren't a.
• 2:54
  Pastor Oh, it's incredibly practical.
• 2:56
  First Timothy 3 verses four and five.
• 2:58
  Paul says an overseer must manage his own household well,
• 3:01
  with all dignity, keeping his children submissive.
• 3:04
  And then he drops this parenthetical checkmate.
• 3:07
  Is this brilliant? He says.
• 3:09
  For if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how
• 3:12
  will he care for God's church? It sounds like a rhetorical
• 3:16
  question, but he's actually building a bridge.
• 3:19
  A bridge between 2 worlds. It's what logicians call.
• 3:23
  It's an argument from analogy. Paul is establishing what the
• 3:27
  church is. The church isn't a business, it
• 3:30
  isn't a social club. It's the household of God, it's
• 3:34
  a family structure, and the elder is a steward of that large
• 3:38
  family. So the logic is just, it's
• 3:40
  inescapable. It is.
• 3:41
  If you can't manage the small thing, your own family, how in
• 3:45
  the world are you going to manage the big thing, God's
• 3:47
  family? He's saying that if a man lacks
• 3:49
  the competency to steward the smaller sphere, his own
• 3:52
  biological family, he intrinsically, by definition,
• 3:56
  lacks the competency to care for the larger sphere.
• 3:59
  The 1 to 1 correlation for Paul. I was reading that section, the
• 4:02
  first source, and they use this phrase that I wrote down
• 4:04
  Laboratory of credibility. I thought that was just
• 4:06
  brilliant. That's good.
• 4:07
  It's the idea that your living room is the lab where your
• 4:10
  theories get tested before you're allowed to try them out
• 4:13
  on the general public. That is exactly right.
• 4:15
  I mean, think about it. It's easy to be a Calvinist in a
• 4:18
  library. It is so easy to have great
• 4:20
  theology when you're writing a paper or talking with your
• 4:23
  friends. But the home?
• 4:25
  The home is where your theology meets raw reality.
• 4:29
  It is much, much harder to be patient and kind and
• 4:32
  authoritative when a toddler is screaming because you cut his
• 4:35
  toast into triangles instead of squares.
• 4:38
  Or when a teenager is rolling their eyes so hard you can
• 4:41
  practically hear it from the other room.
• 4:42
  Precisely. And if a man abdicates
• 4:44
  discipline in his own home, if he's passive, or he just
• 4:48
  tolerates chaos and lets sin run rampant under his own roof, Paul
• 4:53
  is saying we can predict exactly what he will do in the church.
• 4:56
  It's not a mystery. When false teachers arrive or
• 4:59
  when messy sin arises in the congregation, that man will
• 5:02
  likely abdicate there too. He's already proven he doesn't
• 5:05
  have the stomach for it. Now you use the word manage.
• 5:08
  The text uses the Greek word prostomi.
• 5:11
  I did some digging into this because manage in English it
• 5:14
  sounds a little, I don't know, corporate.
• 5:17
  It sounds like middle management.
• 5:19
  Shuffling papers. Yeah, shuffling papers were
• 5:21
  organizing the shore chart, but the source material suggests
• 5:24
  this word is way, way heavier than that.
• 5:27
  It is so much heavier. Kostami literally means to stand
• 5:31
  before. It implies presiding.
• 5:34
  It implies exercising responsible leadership.
• 5:37
  It is authority. So it's not just influence.
• 5:39
  No, not at all. This is critical because in our
• 5:42
  modern culture we have this idea of parenting that is all about
• 5:46
  influence or, you know, friendship.
• 5:47
  People say, well, I can't tell my kids what to do.
• 5:49
  I can only influence. Them right the buddy dad on my
• 5:51
  son's best friend. Paul completely destroys the
• 5:54
  buddy dad model right here. He uses a word that implies
• 5:56
  governance. Now, it isn't tyranny.
• 5:58
  He has that qualifier with all dignity, but it is definitely
• 6:02
  rule. He is the head of the House, he
• 6:05
  is the governor. If he cannot govern the three or
• 6:07
  four people he lives with, he cannot govern the three or 400
• 6:10
  people in the sanctuary. It's that simple.
• 6:12
  And this connects to why one of the essays is titled The Glass
• 6:14
  House. The elder's life is, by
• 6:17
  definition, visible. If there's a scandal in the
• 6:20
  leader's home, it doesn't just stay in the living room, it
• 6:23
  bleeds out. It brings reproach upon the
• 6:26
  gospel. Later in First Timothy 3, Paul
• 6:29
  talks about having a good reputation with outsiders, with
• 6:32
  the non Christians in the community.
• 6:34
  If a man is preaching self-control in the power of the
• 6:37
  Spirit on Sunday morning, but his neighbors hear screaming
• 6:40
  matches or see the police showing up at his house on
• 6:42
  Friday night, the cognitive dissonance just destroys his
• 6:45
  witness. Of course the community looks at
• 6:47
  that and says this man's gospel doesn't even work for the people
• 6:51
  living in his own house. Why should I listen to a thing
• 6:53
  he says? That's the glass house reality.
• 6:56
  The walls are transparent whether we like it or not.
• 6:58
  So OK, we've established the logic.
• 7:01
  The private home is the prerequisite test for public
• 7:04
  office. But now we have to get into the
• 7:06
  weeds. This is where the fight starts.
• 7:08
  We have to talk about Titus 1.6. This is the crux, This is the
• 7:11
  center of the entire debate. Paul writes to Titus that in
• 7:14
  elders children must be and here's the Greek phrase tecna
• 7:17
  econ pista. Now I have 3 Bibles on my desk.
• 7:21
  One says faithful children, another one says believing
• 7:24
  children, and the third one says trustworthy children.
• 7:28
  Those are three very, very different standards.
• 7:31
  They are massive distinctions. I mean they're worlds apart.
• 7:33
  If it means believing children, we are saying that children must
• 7:36
  be regenerate born again Christians.
• 7:38
  Which is a huge claim. A huge claim if it means
• 7:41
  faithful or trustworthy. We are saying they must be
• 7:43
  obedient, dutiful and not wild. That's a different standard
• 7:47
  altogether. So let's breakdown the arguments
• 7:49
  in the sources viewpoint. A is the believing argument.
• 7:53
  This is the hard line. One of our essays leans heavily
• 7:56
  into this. They argue that an elder's kids
• 7:58
  must be saved. What's the textual basis for
• 8:01
  that? Where do they get it from?
• 8:02
  Well, it rests largely on Paul's usage of the word pistos in the
• 8:06
  past role of pistols. So one and two, Timothy and
• 8:08
  Titus. The argument is basically
• 8:10
  statistical. In those letters, when Paul uses
• 8:13
  pistols, he is almost always referring to believers, members
• 8:17
  of the household of faith. So the proponents of this view
• 8:21
  say, look, Paul is consistent. If he means believer everywhere
• 8:24
  else in these letters, he likely means believer here in Titus
• 8:28
  1.6. And there's a logic to that too.
• 8:30
  It connects back to that lesser to greater argument we were just
• 8:33
  talking about. If an elder is called to
• 8:34
  shepherd's souls to Christ in the Church to oversee their
• 8:37
  regeneration and their spiritual growth, shouldn't he have a
• 8:40
  track record of leading souls to Christ in his own home?
• 8:43
  Right. The question they ask is a good
• 8:44
  one. If he cannot evangelize his own
• 8:47
  children who sit at his dinner table every single night, who he
• 8:50
  has the most access to, can he effectively evangelize the
• 8:55
  community? It's a compelling point, you
• 8:57
  can't deny that. But hold on, I have to push back
• 9:00
  here. And honestly, the sources do
• 9:01
  too. We're reformed.
• 9:02
  We adhere to the Westminster Confession.
• 9:04
  We believe in monarchism, that salvation is God's work alone.
• 9:09
  We believe God is the one who takes out the heart of stone and
• 9:11
  gives the heart of flesh. So if we require an elder to
• 9:15
  have believing children, aren't we asking him to do something
• 9:18
  that only the Holy Spirit can do?
• 9:20
  Aren't we making him responsible for God's sovereign election?
• 9:23
  That is the standard objection, and it's a very strong one.
• 9:26
  You hear it all the time. Fathers can't save anyone.
• 9:28
  I can't save my kids, you can't save yours.
• 9:31
  It's true. However, the essay supporting
• 9:33
  the Believing view answers this by pointing to the means of
• 9:36
  grace. Explain that connection.
• 9:39
  How does the concept of means of grace bridge that gap between
• 9:42
  God's sovereignty and a dad's responsibility?
• 9:45
  Yes, God is sovereign, but God uses means.
• 9:49
  He uses second causes. He uses the preaching of the
• 9:51
  Word. He uses prayer.
• 9:53
  He uses the sacraments. He uses discipline.
• 9:55
  The argument is that a faithful Father who teaches the Word, who
• 9:59
  disciplines consistently, and who models the gospel, that
• 10:03
  Father is the very instrument God typically uses to save
• 10:07
  children. So he's the tool in God's hand.
• 10:10
  He's the tool, so while the Father doesn't cause
• 10:12
  regeneration efficiently, he doesn't have that power.
• 10:16
  A home that is marked by total unbelief and rejection of God
• 10:20
  might be empirical evidence that those means of grace were
• 10:22
  neglected, or worse, they were contradicted by hypocrisy.
• 10:26
  It's like a farmer. Exactly like a farmer.
• 10:28
  He cannot make the sea grow. Only God can do that.
• 10:31
  But if his field is completely barren, you might be right to
• 10:34
  ask if he ever actually planted a seed or water the ground.
• 10:36
  OK, that makes sense. It's a strong argument.
• 10:37
  But let's look at viewpoint B. This is the view that pista
• 10:40
  simply means faithful or obedient.
• 10:43
  I found the climatical argument for this one really interesting
• 10:46
  because it relies on the context right there in the verse itself.
• 10:50
  Yes, this view looks at the immediate neighborhood of the
• 10:52
  word, doesn't just look at the whole book.
• 10:55
  In Titus 1.6, the phrase tecna ecun pista isn't standing alone
• 11:00
  on an island. It is immediately followed by a
• 11:02
  negative clause that defines it. It says not accused of
• 11:06
  debauchery or insubordination. Precisely.
• 11:09
  It's like Paul is giving us a definitional fence.
• 11:11
  He says I need them to be pista. And then he immediately explains
• 11:14
  what he means by that which means not wild and not
• 11:17
  rebellious. Yeah, that seems really clear.
• 11:19
  He seems to be defining the positive by negating the
• 11:21
  negative. The children should be faithful,
• 11:24
  which means they are not these two terrible things.
• 11:26
  Exactly, and the argument here is that the Church cannot
• 11:29
  infallibly see into the human heart to know if a child is
• 11:32
  truly regenerate. That's hidden with God.
• 11:34
  I can't see your soul. But the Church can see behavior.
• 11:38
  We can measure submission. We can measure order.
• 11:41
  So faithful here means they are faithful to the household order.
• 11:44
  They're not rebels. That feels like a much more
• 11:46
  workable, tangible standard for a church search committee.
• 11:50
  You know you can check if a kid is in legal trouble or screaming
• 11:54
  at his parents in the grocery store.
• 11:55
  You can't necessarily check the secret state of his soul.
• 11:58
  And that's where the synthesis comes in, because whether you
• 12:01
  translate it as believing or faithful, both our sources agree
• 12:04
  on the minimum standard, which is defined by those negative
• 12:08
  qualifiers. We really need to unpack those
• 12:10
  two Greek words, a Satya and Andy Pataktos.
• 12:14
  They're so descriptive. Let's dig in a Satya.
• 12:18
  It sounds like some kind of disease.
• 12:20
  It's a spiritual disease. It's often translated as
• 12:23
  debauchery or dissipation, but the root literally implies
• 12:27
  unfavourableness or wastefulness.
• 12:29
  This is the exact word used in the parable of the Prodigal son
• 12:33
  to describe his reckless living. So we're not talking about a kid
• 12:36
  who forgets to take out the trash, no.
• 12:38
  Or gets a speeding ticket once. Not at all.
• 12:40
  We are talking about a pattern, a lifestyle of sensory
• 12:43
  indulgence, drunkenness, wild partying, sexual immorality,
• 12:48
  burning through money with no thought for tomorrow.
• 12:51
  It is a life that squanders resources and just ignores all
• 12:53
  boundaries. It is public shameful behavior.
• 12:57
  And the second word, any patactos that sounds military?
• 13:01
  It is a military term. It means insubordination.
• 13:04
  It means refusing to line up under rank.
• 13:06
  This is the child who fundamentally rejects the
• 13:08
  authority structure of the home. It isn't just a kid who
• 13:11
  disagrees with dad. It's a kid who stands up and
• 13:13
  says you have no right to rule me.
• 13:15
  It is defiant, open refusal to be governed.
• 13:18
  So if we synthesize this, whether the child is a
• 13:20
  professing Christian or not, the absolute bottom line
• 13:23
  disqualifier is a home that's characterized by tolerated
• 13:27
  lawlessness. That is the phrase to remember,
• 13:29
  tolerated lawlessness. If a man's home is known for
• 13:32
  public scandal, if his children are running wild and he's doing
• 13:35
  nothing effective to stop it, he's disqualified.
• 13:37
  He cannot be an elder. Period.
• 13:39
  I want to pivot now to the why. Why does God care so much about
• 13:43
  this specific thing? We've talked about the pragmatic
• 13:46
  argument, the leadership test, the lab of credibility, but
• 13:50
  there has to be a deeper theological foundation here.
• 13:53
  What our sources brings up the concept of federal headship, and
• 13:56
  I feel like we tossed that term around a lot in reform circles.
• 13:59
  But let's ground it. Why does federal headship make a
• 14:02
  dad responsible for his kids sin?
• 14:04
  This is deep water for sure. Federal headship is the idea
• 14:08
  that a representative, a head, stands for the whole group.
• 14:12
  Adam was a federal head. When he sinned, we all fell.
• 14:15
  Right, we didn't bite the fruit. He did, but we fell with him.
• 14:18
  Exactly. Christ is the second Adam.
• 14:20
  When He obeyed perfectly, we who are in Him were made righteous.
• 14:24
  So the elder is like a mini federal head.
• 14:26
  In his home. In his home, yes, he is a sub
• 14:28
  Regent. He functions as prophet, priest
• 14:31
  and king in his own little domain.
• 14:32
  He's supposed to image Christ to his family.
• 14:35
  So think about Adam in the garden.
• 14:36
  What was his primary failure? He failed to guard the garden he
• 14:40
  left the serpent in, and then he stood by passively while his
• 14:42
  wife engaged with a lie. Passivity was the original sin
• 14:45
  in a way. It was so if an elder acts like
• 14:48
  the first Adam, standing by passively while sin and chaos
• 14:51
  destroy his home to shrug in his shoulders, he is not fit to
• 14:56
  represent the second Adam, Christ in the church.
• 15:00
  He's following the wrong pattern.
• 15:01
  There is a terrifying example of this in the Old Testament.
• 15:04
  I want us to spend some time here because the story of Eli
• 15:07
  is, well, it's haunting for any parent.
• 15:10
  It is one of the scariest narratives in all scripture for
• 15:14
  a father, without a doubt. So Eli is the high priest of
• 15:17
  Israel. He has the position, he has the
• 15:20
  theology, he operates the Tabernacle.
• 15:22
  But then you have his sons, Hofni and Phineas.
• 15:24
  Paint the picture of what these guys were doing, because it
• 15:26
  wasn't just that they were bad kids.
• 15:28
  No, it was atrocious. First Samuel 2 describes them as
• 15:32
  worthless men because they didn't know the Lord, but
• 15:34
  practically they were engaging in a city of the highest order.
• 15:38
  When people brought meat for the sacrifice, these guys would
• 15:41
  bully the worshippers and steal the raw meat for themselves
• 15:44
  before the fat was burned on the altar.
• 15:46
  They were literally stealing from God.
• 15:47
  And it gets worse than that. It does.
• 15:50
  The text says they were lying with the women who served at the
• 15:53
  entrance to the tent of meeting. So you have sacrilegious theft
• 15:56
  and gross sexual immorality happening right in the center of
• 15:59
  Israel's worship, all perpetrated by the priest's own
• 16:02
  sons. And where is Eli in all of this?
• 16:04
  What's his response? And that's the tragedy.
• 16:07
  Eli's old. He's heavy, and he's passive.
• 16:10
  He hears about it. The text makes it clear.
• 16:12
  It says he heard all that his sons were doing.
• 16:14
  And he does confront them. Technically, he says, why do you
• 16:17
  do such things? No, my sons.
• 16:18
  It's no good report that I hear. That sounds like a rebuke.
• 16:21
  On the surface, it sounds like he's doing his job.
• 16:24
  Why wasn't it enough? Because words were not enough
• 16:27
  for the level of the crime. These men were priests.
• 16:30
  Eli was the high priest. He had the authority to remove
• 16:32
  them from office. He had the authority to stop the
• 16:35
  blasphemy in its tracks, but he just gave them a verbal slap on
• 16:39
  the wrist and then let them continue.
• 16:41
  He did nothing. And God's judgement on Eli is
• 16:43
  just chilling. It is God sends a prophet who
• 16:46
  says, I will judge his house forever for the iniquity that he
• 16:50
  knew because his sons were blaspheming God and he did not
• 16:53
  restrain them. He did not restrain them.
• 16:56
  That's the phrase, isn't it? That's the phrase that keeps me
• 16:58
  up at night. It bridges that gap we were
• 17:00
  talking about between sovereignty and responsibility.
• 17:02
  God didn't judge Eli because he failed to regenerate his son's
• 17:06
  hearts. He can't do that.
• 17:08
  God judged him because he failed to restrain their hands.
• 17:11
  He allowed the blasphemy to continue under his jurisdiction,
• 17:15
  the text says. He honored his sons more than he
• 17:18
  honored God. That is the Eli principle.
• 17:20
  It's not demanding the Father create a new heart, but it is
• 17:24
  demanding He maintains order. If you allow open wickedness to
• 17:28
  go on in your jurisdiction, you are complicit.
• 17:30
  Exactly. He's the governor of the House.
• 17:32
  He cannot force the citizens to love the laws, but he must
• 17:35
  ensure the laws are up upheld and that chaos does not reign.
• 17:39
  His failure was a failure of governance.
• 17:42
  Now this brings up a very practical question that I know
• 17:44
  listeners are asking right now. We've covered the theology, but
• 17:47
  life is messy. Who is included in this?
• 17:50
  The text says an elder must be a man having children.
• 17:53
  Does this apply to my 30 year old son who lives in another
• 17:56
  state and has his own family? This is the critical question of
• 17:59
  scope, and we have to look at the grammar again.
• 18:02
  The words Paul uses, prosthomy managing and Echu having, are
• 18:07
  present tense verbs. They imply active current
• 18:10
  oversight. So the primary scope of this
• 18:13
  command is for children who are still under the roof, those who
• 18:17
  are still under the father's direct authority, his finances
• 18:19
  and his day-to-day care. So generally speaking, if the
• 18:22
  child is an independent adult out of the house, living on
• 18:25
  their own, paying their own bills, they are out of the
• 18:28
  immediate jurisdiction of this specific command.
• 18:31
  Generally, yes, the elder is not managing a 30 year old
• 18:35
  independent adult. I mean, you don't set a curfew
• 18:37
  for a man who has a mortgage. However, and this is a critical
• 18:40
  point that both our sources make, adult children are not
• 18:43
  irrelevant. They still function as what you
• 18:45
  might call secondary. Evidence.
• 18:46
  OK, what does that look like? Break that down for me.
• 18:48
  Well, think of two different scenarios.
• 18:50
  Scenario A. Let's call it the prodigal.
• 18:54
  The father was faithful when the son was at home.
• 18:56
  He taught the word. He disciplined fairly.
• 18:59
  He loved his son. The child turned 18, left home
• 19:02
  and rebelled. He went to the far country.
• 19:04
  Now that brings grief, deep grief, to the father.
• 19:08
  But it doesn't necessarily prove the father is a bad manager.
• 19:10
  Now the son is outside his sphere of management.
• 19:13
  OK, that makes sense. The dad isn't responsible for
• 19:15
  the choices of another independent adult.
• 19:17
  But now look at scenario B. Let's call it the Hoffney and
• 19:20
  Phineas scenario. In the modern day, you have an
• 19:23
  adult child living in open scandalous sin, may be addicted
• 19:26
  to drugs or living a criminal lifestyle, but the father is
• 19:29
  still funding them, or the father is constantly making
• 19:32
  excuses for them to the church. Or the adult child's behavior
• 19:35
  reveals a long standing pattern that for 18 years the father was
• 19:39
  absent or negligent. So if he's currently enabling
• 19:42
  the sin of the adult child, he's still failing the test.
• 19:45
  Precisely if he is currently shielding his adult son from the
• 19:49
  consequences of his actions, paying his bail, paying his rent
• 19:53
  so he can continue living in sin, he is demonstrating that he
• 19:57
  values his family's comfort over God's law.
• 20:00
  That is an active, present tense disqualifier.
• 20:04
  He is still managing poorly. Let's talk about another hard
• 20:07
  case, blended families. This is a reality in so many of
• 20:11
  our churches today. You have a guy who comes to
• 20:13
  faith later in life. He has a past.
• 20:15
  Maybe he's divorced now, he's remarried and he has
• 20:17
  stepchildren. Or maybe he has kids from a
• 20:20
  previous marriage who live with their mom most of the time and
• 20:22
  he only sees them every other weekend.
• 20:24
  How does he manage children who aren't fully under his roof?
• 20:27
  This is where we need tremendous pastoral realism and wisdom.
• 20:31
  A father is responsible for the authority he actually possesses.
• 20:34
  He cannot be held responsible for what happens at the other
• 20:36
  parents house. If the ex-wife runs a chaotic,
• 20:39
  godless home, he can't control that.
• 20:41
  So you don't disqualify him for the chaos that happens in the
• 20:44
  other house. No, you can't.
• 20:45
  You ask what happens when they're in his house during his
• 20:50
  visitation time? Is he a steady, loving, firm
• 20:53
  presence? Is he doing his best to shepherd
• 20:55
  the influence he has? We shouldn't penalize a man for
• 20:58
  the complexity of a broken world or a past life, but we also
• 21:01
  can't just lower the standard of what a godly home looks like.
• 21:04
  The question is, is he a faithful steward of the time and
• 21:08
  the authority that he does have? What about the other end of the
• 21:10
  age spectrum? Toddlers.
• 21:12
  I mean, you can't really assess if a three-year old is accused
• 21:15
  of debauchery. A three-year old is by nature
• 21:18
  basically tiny sociopath. Right they are.
• 21:21
  You don't look for deep theological articulation in a
• 21:24
  toddler. You look for submission with all
• 21:25
  dignity. The tests three young children
• 21:27
  is can the father secure their attention?
• 21:30
  Is the home generally chaotic or generally ordered?
• 21:32
  Does he discipline with patients or with anger?
• 21:35
  That distinction is so key because I've seen dads who have
• 21:38
  controlled kids, but they do it through terror.
• 21:40
  They're just bullies. And that is not with all
• 21:42
  dignity. That is tyranny.
• 21:44
  If the kids are quiet because they are terrified of their
• 21:47
  father, that man is disqualified.
• 21:49
  He is a bully, not a shepherd. But on the other hand, if the
• 21:52
  kids are wild, hitting their mothers, screaming in the store,
• 21:55
  and the dad is just passively staring at his phone, that man
• 21:58
  is disqualified too. We are looking for a father who
• 22:01
  is engaged, who corrects behavior, and who maintains a
• 22:05
  general sense of peace and order in his domain.
• 22:08
  This whole discussion, it really forces us to confront some of
• 22:11
  the idols we have in the church. We touched on pragmatism
• 22:14
  earlier, the CEO pastor. But why is that idol so hard to
• 22:17
  kill? Why do we keep falling for the
• 22:19
  guy with the great resume but the messy life?
• 22:22
  Because we want results. It's that simple.
• 22:25
  We are addicted to what we perceive as success.
• 22:28
  We want the church to grow. We want the budget to be met.
• 22:30
  We want the sermons to be exciting and dynamic.
• 22:32
  We worship the gift, and when we worship the gift, we're always
• 22:36
  willing to overlook the character of the man.
• 22:38
  It becomes a transaction. You give us a big church and
• 22:41
  we'll agree to ignore your screaming kids.
• 22:43
  Exactly. And the danger is that we're
• 22:44
  building the church on a foundation of sand.
• 22:47
  If a man cannot manage his house, Paul says, he cannot care
• 22:50
  for the church. It isn't.
• 22:52
  He might struggle a bit. It is an ontological inability.
• 22:56
  So when we hire the CEO pastor with the chaotic home, we are
• 22:59
  essentially hiring someone who is biblically incompetent, no
• 23:02
  matter how good his strategy is. We are hiring a surgeon who
• 23:06
  doesn't know how to wash his hands.
• 23:08
  That's a harsh truth, but I think we need to hear it.
• 23:10
  Another idol our sources identify as therapeutic
• 23:13
  victimhood. This feels very, very current.
• 23:15
  This is the tendency to blame everything on the environment,
• 23:19
  on culture, on anything but personal responsibility.
• 23:22
  This is the spirit of our age, isn't it?
• 23:23
  If a child is rebellious, we have 1000 reasons why it isn't
• 23:26
  his fault. Oh, it's the peer pressure, it's
• 23:28
  his difficult temperament. It's the culture, it's the
• 23:30
  school system. We are conditioned to view the
• 23:33
  child, and frankly everyone, as a victim.
• 23:35
  And to be fair, those influences are real.
• 23:37
  The culture is hostile. They are absolutely real, but
• 23:41
  the text places the locus of responsibility squarely on the
• 23:45
  father technic and having children.
• 23:48
  Fathers cannot abdicate their God-given duty by pointing at
• 23:51
  the culture. The Christian home is supposed
• 23:53
  to be a fortress against the culture, a counterculture.
• 23:56
  If the culture is winning in the elders own home, if the world is
• 24:00
  discipling his kids more than he is, how can he possibly help the
• 24:04
  church fight the culture? He has already lost the primary
• 24:07
  battle in his own living room. Then there is the other side of
• 24:10
  that coin, the idol of antinomian permissiveness or
• 24:13
  what you might call cheap grace. This is the dad who just wants
• 24:17
  to be his kids buddy. I see this a lot with guys who
• 24:20
  grew up in really legalistic homes.
• 24:22
  They swing the pendulum all the way to the other side.
• 24:24
  Yes, it's a reaction. They are so afraid of being
• 24:26
  strict or religious that they go the other way.
• 24:28
  They tolerate sin because they don't want to alienate their
• 24:32
  children. They have this twisted idea that
• 24:34
  grace means never having to say no.
• 24:36
  The line is always I just want them to know they are loved.
• 24:38
  But true grace is not the absence of law, it is the power
• 24:42
  to obey God. A Father who allows his child to
• 24:45
  live in a suchia in wild rebellion without any
• 24:49
  consequence is not loving that child.
• 24:52
  He is hating that child. Biblically speaking, Proverbs is
• 24:55
  crystal clear. He who spares the rod hates his
• 24:57
  son. To leave a child in their sin is
• 25:00
  an act of hatred, not an act of grace.
• 25:02
  And finally, we have to talk about the opposite error,
• 25:05
  perfectionism. We have to be really careful
• 25:06
  here because I think some good godly men disqualify themselves
• 25:11
  unnecessarily. They think above reproach means
• 25:13
  sinless. They think if their kid slams
• 25:16
  the door one time, they have to resign from the eldership.
• 25:18
  That is a tragedy when that happens.
• 25:20
  Above reproach means no credible legal charge can be brought
• 25:23
  against you. It is a legal term.
• 25:25
  It does not mean you never sinned or that your family is
• 25:27
  perfect. If we demand and perfection, we
• 25:29
  just create hypocrites. We create families who put on a
• 25:32
  perfect smile in the church lobby and then scream at each
• 25:34
  other in the car on the way home.
• 25:36
  We create the perfect family that is rotting from the inside
• 25:39
  out. So what's the standard then?
• 25:41
  If it's not perfection, what is it?
• 25:42
  The standard is a home where sin is dealt with, not a home where
• 25:46
  sin is absent. Is there a mechanism for
• 25:48
  repentance and forgiveness? Is the gospel actually active in
• 25:52
  that house? Let's get really practical.
• 25:54
  We have search committees listening, maybe current elders
• 25:57
  trying to vet new candidates. How do we actually evaluate
• 26:00
  this? We need a rubric of some kind
• 26:02
  because manage well can be subjective.
• 26:04
  The. First rule of the rubric has to
• 26:06
  be look for patterns, not snapshots.
• 26:09
  Don't judge a man by 1 bad Sunday morning when his kids
• 26:11
  were tired. We all have bad days.
• 26:14
  Look at the trajectory of his home over years.
• 26:16
  Is it generally ordered? Is there a general atmosphere of
• 26:19
  respect and love? And you have to distinguish
• 26:21
  between gossip and reputation. That seems huge, especially in
• 26:24
  the age of social media. Hugely important.
• 26:27
  Paul uses the phrase not accused that applies a public charge,
• 26:31
  something verifiable. It does not mean some people are
• 26:33
  whispering. Is the home under credible
• 26:35
  accusation? Is the rebellion public and
• 26:38
  known in the community? Or is this just malicious gossip
• 26:41
  from a disgruntled person? Church must not be a court of
• 26:44
  rumor. One of the most helpful things I
• 26:46
  read in the sources was what they called the Parental
• 26:47
  Response test. It shifts the focus from the
• 26:50
  child's action, which can be unpredictable, to the father's
• 26:54
  reaction, which he can control. Yes, this is the key diagnostic
• 26:57
  tool. When the child sins, because
• 27:00
  they will, what does the father do?
• 27:03
  Does he confront it? Does he discipline consistently
• 27:06
  and in love? And here's a big one.
• 27:08
  Does he repent when he sins against them?
• 27:10
  Oh, that's good. Does the dad actually apologize
• 27:12
  to his kids? Does the dad have the humility
• 27:15
  to say I was angry, I was wrong, please forgive me.
• 27:19
  A messy home where sin is biblically confronted and where
• 27:22
  the gospel of repentance is active is a qualified home.
• 27:26
  A managed home where everyone is quiet but there is coldness and
• 27:29
  hidden sin is a dangerous home. And a chaotic home where the dad
• 27:32
  just ignores the sin is a disqualified home.
• 27:35
  We are looking for the presence of the gospel mechanism, sin,
• 27:38
  confession, repentance, restoration.
• 27:40
  And trajectory matters so much. It does.
• 27:43
  Is this household, with all its bumps and bruises, moving
• 27:46
  generally toward order under the word?
• 27:49
  Or is it moving away from it? Sometimes?
• 27:51
  For young father or a new believer, the wisest and most
• 27:54
  loving answer from the elder should be Not yet.
• 27:57
  Yeah, delay is not a punishment. It is protection for him and for
• 28:01
  the church. We can tell him.
• 28:02
  Brother, focus on your family for the next two years.
• 28:05
  Get this in order. Shepherd your wife, Shepherd
• 28:08
  your kids. Then we will talk about
• 28:10
  shepherding the church. That is an act of love.
• 28:14
  We're coming to the end of our deep dive here, and we've
• 28:16
  established that this qualification is really a divine
• 28:19
  firewall. It protects the church from
• 28:21
  hypocrisy. It protects the church from
• 28:23
  leaders who are good on stage but bad at home.
• 28:26
  It is the unforgeable credential.
• 28:28
  I love that phrase from one of the sources.
• 28:29
  You can fake a resume. You can fake a sermon.
• 28:31
  You can fake a smile. You cannot fake a godly marriage
• 28:34
  and faithful children for 20 years.
• 28:36
  The fruit speaks for itself. But I want to land on the gospel
• 28:39
  connection because this standard is heavy.
• 28:41
  I mean, it is really heavy. If any fathers they're
• 28:44
  listening, they are probably feeling a significant weight on
• 28:47
  their chest right now. I know I am.
• 28:49
  We all fall short of this. We have all had our Eli moments
• 28:52
  where we were too tired or too selfish to discipline.
• 28:55
  We do. And that is why we must end with
• 28:57
  Christ. This standard is designed to
• 29:00
  crush earthly fathers, to show us our inadequacy so that we
• 29:04
  will run to the Heavenly Father. Ultimately, there's only one
• 29:08
  elder who kept his Father's will perfectly, and that is Jesus.
• 29:13
  He is the only one who rules his house perfectly.
• 29:15
  And the good news of the gospel is imputed righteousness for the
• 29:19
  Father who feels he has failed, who looks at his home with
• 29:21
  regret. His standing before God is not
• 29:24
  based on his parenting record. It is based on Christ's perfect
• 29:27
  record, which is credited to his account.
• 29:30
  And that changes how we parent, doesn't it?
• 29:32
  It changes everything. It means we don't parent for our
• 29:35
  salvation, We parent from our salvation.
• 29:38
  It is from that place of grace, knowing we are totally forgiven
• 29:41
  in Christ, that we find the strength to go back home,
• 29:45
  apologize to our kids for our anger, and start shepherding
• 29:49
  again. We can be faithful because He
• 29:52
  was faithful for us. That is a beautiful distinction.
• 29:55
  It takes the pressure off performing and puts the focus
• 29:58
  back on faithfulness. And I would leave the listener
• 30:00
  with this final thought. In theology, we often talk about
• 30:04
  the third use of the law, the idea that God's law guides our
• 30:08
  gratitude and our living. This structural order of the
• 30:11
  home, this whole qualification, is an act of worship.
• 30:14
  It isn't just about following rules to get a position.
• 30:16
  So here's the question for you to Mull over as you go about
• 30:19
  your week. If the home is the seminary of
• 30:21
  the church. If it is the training ground,
• 30:24
  what is your home currently teaching your children and your
• 30:26
  neighbors about the gospel? Is it teaching them that grace
• 30:30
  is real and sin is dealt with, or is it teaching something
• 30:33
  else? That's the question.
• 30:34
  Thank you for going depth with us today.
• 30:35
  This has been reform thinking. Grace and peace to you.