Document 1 (Vision, Purpose, Commission & Mission), Chapter 6, lists the biblical qualifications for elders and deacons in full. This part unpacks each qualification as the eldership will actually need to assess it. For each: what the qualification means in plain language, how to assess it honestly, common errors of application, and how to handle harder cases. Before the qualifications themselves, one foundational question must be addressed: who is eligible for the office of elder, and who for the office of deacon.
3.1 The Question of Gender in the Eldership and Diaconate
Before any of the specific qualifications can be unpacked, one foundational question must be addressed plainly: who is eligible for the office of elder, and who for the office of deacon? This document takes the position that the office of elder is restricted to qualified men, and that the office of deacon is open to both qualified men and qualified women. The position is held not on cultural grounds but on the plain reading of the New Testament texts that define the offices, on the order of creation and the Fall in Genesis 1-3, and on the practical work the elder is actually called to do. The position is named directly here because everything that follows in this Part — and indeed in the rest of the document — builds on it.
What the New Testament texts say
The qualifications for the elder in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9 are written about a man, in masculine grammar throughout:
1 Timothy 3:1-7
“Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.”
Every pronoun and possessive is masculine — "his wife," "his children," "his own family," "he must," "his trustworthy message." Titus 1:6-9 follows the same pattern: "An elder must be blameless, faithful to his wife, a man whose children believe..." The masculine singular runs through both passages without break, and not as accident of translation; the underlying Greek is consistently masculine throughout.
By contrast, when Paul moves from elders to deacons in 1 Timothy 3:8, the qualifications continue in masculine grammar through verse 10, then at verse 11 introduce a parallel set of qualifications for women:
1 Timothy 3:11
“In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.”
Most thoughtful readers of the New Testament treat verse 11 as the qualifications for women deacons, parallel to verses 8-10. Romans 16:1 then names a specific woman — Phoebe, "a deacon of the church in Cenchreae" — confirming the same. The text itself draws the distinction the document follows. The elder is described in male grammar throughout; the deacon is described in male grammar followed by an explicit parallel section for women, and a woman is named in Romans 16:1 as holding the office.
What Paul says directly — 1 Timothy 2:11-15
Paul addresses the question of women and the teaching/authority role in the gathered church directly:
1 Timothy 2:11-14
“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.”
Paul does not ground his instruction in cultural circumstance. He grounds it in the order of creation — Adam was formed first, then Eve — and in the pattern of the Fall — the woman was deceived. These are creation-order arguments, and creation-order arguments do not change with culture. They are theological constants. Whatever else is being addressed in 1 Timothy 2, Paul ties the instruction to Genesis 1-3, which makes it permanent rather than situational.
Two clarifications are essential here. First, the teaching-and-authority restriction in this passage is set in the public, gathered-church context. It does not forbid women from teaching at all — Priscilla teaches the eloquent Apollos "the way of God more accurately" in Acts 18:24-26; Titus 2:3-5 commands older women to teach younger women; mothers throughout scripture teach their children (Proverbs 1:8). What it restricts is the formal teaching-and-authority role over the gathered body of men, which in the New Testament is the elder's role.
Second, the restriction is about office and role, not about value, dignity, capacity, or gifting. The same New Testament that gives this instruction also names women who taught, prophesied, exhorted, planted churches alongside their husbands, supported Jesus from their means, and stood at the cross when most of the male disciples had fled. Document 7 (The Christian Household) Section 2.6 treats this in detail under "The Voice of the Wife." The restriction is specifically on the formal office of elder, with its specific authority over the gathered body and the households within it.
The creation order foundation — Genesis 1-3
The argument rests on the same creation order that Document 1 Chapter 1 and Document 7 Part One develop in full. Man and woman are equal image-bearers of God (Genesis 1:27). The order of creation places the man first as the one to whom God gave the original command (Genesis 2:16-17), and the woman as the strong helper made for him (Genesis 2:18, ezer — see Document 7 Section 1.1 for the depth of this word). The Fall in Genesis 3 reverses the pattern — the woman listens to the wrong voice, the man fails to lead — and the redemptive work of Christ restores it.
Paul grounds his instruction in 1 Timothy 2 specifically in this Genesis pattern. He does not appeal to first-century cultural norms; he appeals to creation itself. The Genesis pattern is creational, not cultural; it precedes the Fall, was distorted by the Fall, and is restored in Christ. To set aside Genesis 1-3 as the basis for the structure of the church is to set aside scripture's own theological foundation.
Why the practical work of an elder confirms it
The position is not held on textual grounds alone. The practical work the elder is actually called to do confirms it.
An elder's primary work is to shepherd the flock, teach sound doctrine, exercise discipline, and watch over souls (1 Peter 5:1-4; Acts 20:28; 1 Timothy 5:17; Hebrews 13:17). In a real local body, that means ongoing pastoral ministry to households — sitting with married couples in difficulty, instructing parents in how to raise their children in the Lord, calling husbands to lead their homes well, calling families to repentance, walking with men in honest conversation about their walk with Christ, exercising spiritual authority over the doctrine and life of the body. The elder's ministry necessarily intersects with the husband's role as the head of his own home.
For a woman to function in the elder's office would require her to give pastoral instruction and exercise spiritual authority over other women's husbands. That would place her in a position the New Testament does not authorise — instructing and exercising authority over a man not her husband, against the order Paul grounds in Genesis 2-3. It would also place her against the husband-as-head pattern that Document 7 unpacks in detail: she would be giving spiritual instruction to a man other than her own husband in the very area (the spiritual leadership of his home) that Genesis places under his calling. The structural conflict is not incidental; it is built into the elder's job description.
The position is not that women lack capacity to teach, lead, or shepherd. The faithful Saints across the centuries who have taught, led, prayed, prophesied, written, and shepherded are testimony to the opposite. The position is that the specific office of elder, with its specific calling to shepherd and teach the gathered body and the households within it, is restricted by scripture to qualified men — and the restriction makes practical sense in light of the role's actual work.
Why the diaconate is different and open to women
The role of the deacon is different in kind from the elder's, and this is why the office is open to both men and women.
Acts 6:1-7 establishes the diaconate as a delegated practical service so the apostles could devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word. The seven were appointed for the operational care of the body — specifically, in that case, the daily distribution of food to widows. Their work was service of practical needs in support of the apostolic ministry, not spiritual oversight of the body, not the teaching authority of the gathered church, not the shepherding of households as such. The diaconate exists to serve the practical needs of the saints who are themselves doing the work of the ministry.
The diaconate's work — care of the vulnerable, hospitality, administration, mercy ministry, the operational support of the church's life — does not require the exercise of formal teaching authority over the gathered body of men, and does not place a woman over another woman's husband in the spiritual leadership of his home. It is service of the body in a different sphere from the elder's. Phoebe, a deacon of Cenchreae, served the church in this way; Paul commends her as having been "a benefactor of many people, including me" (Romans 16:2). The office is biblical, the office is open to women, and the church does well to recognise and release faithful women into it.
What this position is not
This position is not patriarchy as a cultural system. It is not the silencing of women in the body. It is not a verdict on women's capacity or gifting. It is not an artefact of first-century culture that can be set aside in a different age. It is the structural framing of two specific offices in the New Testament, held in fidelity to the text and to the creation order Paul appeals to in defending it.
The misuses of complementarian language to silence, dominate, diminish, or harm women are misuses of it — and Document 7 Section 2.3 names those misuses as the failures of headship they are. The same New Testament that restricts the elder's office to qualified men also names women who taught the apostles (Priscilla), greets Junia as "outstanding among the apostles" (Romans 16:7), commends Phoebe as the deacon she was, honours Mary as the first witness of the resurrection, and gives Titus 2 to the older women as a teaching commission to the younger women. The strong-helper voice of the wife (Sarah, Abigail, Priscilla, the Proverbs 31 woman, Anna) is honoured in full, in Document 7 Section 2.6. The ministry of women throughout the body is honoured in full. What is restricted is the specific office of elder, with its specific authority over the gathered body and the households within it.
What this means for the identification process
Practically: when the eldership considers candidates for the office of elder, they consider qualified men. When they consider candidates for the office of deacon, they consider both qualified men and qualified women. The qualifications laid out in Section 3.2 below apply to the male elder candidate. The qualifications laid out in Section 3.3 apply to both male and female deacon candidates, with the additional 1 Timothy 3:11 framing for women specifically.
The wife of an elder also matters to the identification process — Section 3.2 treats the spousal interview in detail. The wife's role in her husband's eldership is supportive, prayerful, prophetic, and partnered; her voice is essential to his fruitful service (Document 7 Section 2.6). But her role is not the office itself. She is the strong help (ezer) the eldership calling needs; she is not the office-holder.
3.2 The Elder Qualifications (1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9)
Above reproach / blameless
This is a summary qualification — not perfection, but a life that does not carry public stain that would compromise the gospel witness. To assess: ask whether anyone inside or outside the church has a credible accusation against the candidate that has not been faced and resolved. A pattern of unaddressed accusations, even if individually small, is disqualifying.
Faithful to his wife (or husband of one wife)
The phrase is "a one-woman man" in the Greek. The qualification is sexual and relational fidelity to his wife. The harder cases:
- Divorce before conversion: most thoughtful biblical scholars and traditions treat pre-conversion divorce as not disqualifying, on the principle that what is past in Christ is past.
- Divorce after conversion: a much harder case. Where the divorce was the result of the candidate's own unfaithfulness, this is generally treated as disqualifying. Where the divorce was the result of the other spouse's persistent unfaithfulness or abandonment, traditions differ, and the eldership should consult the body's theological framework and pray carefully.
- A widower who has remarried: not disqualifying. The "one-woman man" phrase concerns simultaneous, not sequential, faithfulness.
- A man currently single: traditions differ on whether this disqualifies. The text addresses what the qualification looks like for a married elder; it does not necessarily exclude the unmarried (Paul himself was unmarried). Where a body chooses to require marriage, this should be stated explicitly in its eldership policy.
Temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach
A cluster of character markers, observable over time:
- Temperate — not given to excess of any kind; the opposite of "drunkenness", but applied more broadly.
- Self-controlled — disciplined in speech, in temper, in appetites.
- Respectable — carries weight in the community; not dismissed as flighty, immature, or unreliable.
- Hospitable — welcomes others into home and life; not closed off.
- Able to teach — can explain the truth of scripture; not the same as charismatic preaching, but the capacity to instruct others rightly.
To assess: ask multiple long-term members of the body to describe their observation of the candidate in these areas. Look for consistency. A candidate who is gracious to those above them but harsh to those below them fails respectable. A candidate whose home is closed to others fails hospitable.
Not given to drunkenness
Plain reading. Not abstinence required, but not characterised by excess. In contexts where drunkenness has been a public issue, the candidate's relationship with alcohol should be discussed openly. The wider point: any addictive pattern — alcohol, prescription drugs, gambling, pornography, screen time — needs honest examination before eldership is considered.
Not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome
Patterns of conflict. A candidate with a history of physical violence is disqualified. A candidate with a pattern of verbal aggression, social-media combativeness, or driving conflict in groups is similarly outside the qualification. Honest gentleness includes the capacity to be firm — Paul was not afraid of plain speech — but the default posture is patient, kind, and slow to anger.
Not a lover of money
Hard to assess from the outside, easy to discern over time. The questions are: does the candidate take risks for the Kingdom that cost them financially? Are their lifestyle choices proportionate to their income or stretched to consume it? Are they generous in giving, not just for tax reasons? Are they free from the entanglements of debt or financial pressure that would compromise their freedom to follow the Spirit's direction? The candidate's spouse is often the best source of insight here.
Manages his own family well, sees that his children obey him
The most assessable, and the most often overlooked qualification. The principle: how a man shepherds his own household is the proving ground for how he will shepherd the church. The 1 Timothy 3:5 logic is plain — "If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?"
How to assess:
- Speak with the wife privately. Ask honestly: how does your husband lead the home? Is his leadership safe, sacrificial, and Christ-honouring? Are the children growing in faith and obedience? Does he pray with you and lead spiritually? Where are the gaps?
- Where children are old enough, observe the family's interaction at a meal or in church. Look for the children's default attitude toward the father — respect or distance.
- Where children have left the home, look for the pattern of relationship: are the now-adult children walking with the Lord and in faithful relationship with the parents? Patterns of estrangement are not automatically disqualifying (children make their own choices in adulthood), but require pastoral inquiry.
- The harder cases — a rebellious teenager, a child with mental-health struggles, a marriage in a difficult season — should be handled with care. A man whose family is in genuine crisis is generally not yet ready for eldership; what he needs is pastoral support, not elevation. This is not punitive; it is for the candidate's and his family's good.
Not a recent convert
A "newcomer" in the Greek. The risk is pride and falling into the same judgement as the devil (1 Timothy 3:6). How recent is recent? Scripture doesn't prescribe a year-count, but the principle is that conversion needs time to settle into character. A pattern of three to five years' demonstrated faithfulness in the body is a reasonable working minimum for most contexts. Less for established believers transferring into a new body (where the discipleship history is documented). More for someone whose previous life included significant disorder that the Lord has been healing.
Good reputation with outsiders
The unbelieving community knows enough of the candidate to speak well of them. Not universally liked — Christ Himself was hated by many — but respected for integrity. Assess by asking trusted unbelievers (where there are such relationships): is this person known to be honest, reliable, kind, and fair? Where outside reputation is poor, the eldership investigates honestly. Sometimes the reputation is unfair; sometimes it reflects a real character issue still to be addressed.
Holds firmly to the trustworthy message (Titus 1:9)
Sound doctrine, held with conviction, and the capacity to teach it and refute error. To assess: ask the candidate to articulate the gospel plainly. Ask them how they would respond to a common doctrinal challenge they might face. Ask what they have been reading in scripture and what is forming them currently. A candidate who cannot articulate the gospel coherently is not yet ready to teach others.
3.3 The Deacon Qualifications (1 Timothy 3:8-13)
Worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, not pursuing dishonest gain
Substantially the same cluster as the elder qualifications, with particular emphasis on financial integrity ("not pursuing dishonest gain" — appearing twice in the deacon qualifications). Because deacons typically handle the body's practical resources, financial trustworthiness is especially weighted.
Keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience
A deacon need not be a teacher in the eldership sense, but must hold sound doctrine and live in keeping with it. The "clear conscience" phrase is important: a deacon whose private life is at variance with the public faith cannot serve with integrity.
First be tested
Distinctive to the deacon qualifications. Before formal appointment, the candidate should have a demonstrated track record of faithfulness in service. Part Four's identification process makes this concrete with a multi-month testing phase before final installation.
In the same way, the women (deaconesses) are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything
Verse 11. Most traditions read this as the qualifications for women deacons (deaconesses), confirming the existence of the office for women, as Phoebe in Romans 16:1 attests. Some traditions read it as the qualifications for deacons' wives. The exegetical question is real; the body should make its choice explicitly and document it in its eldership policy.
A deacon must be faithful to his wife and manage his children and his household well
Same family-management qualification as the elders. The household is the proving ground for the body, regardless of office.
3.4 Honest Cases the Frameworks Do Not Quite Address
A few specific cases that recur and need particular care:
The candidate everyone wants who is just under the qualification. A man widely loved in the body, clearly gifted, deeply faithful — but with a recent moral failure that has been confessed but not yet sufficiently distant in time, or a marriage in active repair, or a child whose path is currently uncertain. The temptation is to install him because of his evident gifting. The discipline is to wait. Waiting honours the qualification, the candidate, and the body. Installation can come later.
The faithful long-serving member who is not actually qualified. A faithful Saint who has been the backbone of the body for decades, who serves tirelessly, who everyone respects — but whose gifting is not in the eldership cluster and whose discernment in matters of doctrine and pastoral care has consistently been off the mark. The temptation is to install him for honour. The discipline is to honour him by name and by gift in some other way. Eldership is not a recognition of long service; it is a particular gifting and calling.
The candidate whose family is in real trouble. A man who is gifted, qualified in most areas, but whose marriage or children are currently in significant difficulty. The discipline is to support him pastorally, not to elevate him. The 1 Timothy 3:5 principle is plain — the household first, then the church. Lifting him out of the household into more responsibility is unlikely to help; restoring the household is what is needed.
The candidate from a divisive history. A faithful Saint who, for reasons of conscience, has left a previous body in conflict. The eldership should inquire honestly: was the conflict principled (doctrinal drift, unaddressed sin in the previous leadership) or characterological (a pattern of inability to live within difference)? The former is not disqualifying — sometimes the most courageous Saints are the ones who have left when they had to. The latter is. The way to tell: speak with the previous leadership directly, with the candidate's permission.
The candidate who carries trauma. Many Saints carry trauma from previous churches, family of origin, abuse, addiction now healed, or other histories. None of this is disqualifying by itself. What matters is whether the trauma has been faced (whether through counselling, pastoral care, prayer, time), whether the Saint is in healthy ongoing care for it where needed, and whether they can serve from a place of relative wholeness rather than from compulsion. Wounded healers can be the most powerful elders; unaddressed wounds carried into office tend to damage the body.