Summary
A personal narrative unfolds as the speaker reflects on their father's decision to resign from his pastoral role after 15 years, driven by a vow made by the parents. Faced with limited financial resources and no opportunities in French-speaking churches, the father relocates to Hull, Quebec, where he takes a job as a federal translator while continuing to support the local French-speaking church.
The speaker recalls a conversation with their father about the importance of providing for one's family, referencing 1 Timothy 5:8, which emphasizes the responsibility of a man to support his own household. The father explains that while the church should assist those in genuine need, individuals capable of self-support must strive to do so to avoid becoming a burden and to maintain their faith. This discussion deepens the speaker's respect for their father's commitment and faithfulness during a challenging transition.
Show Notes
Although I did not know it, while I was in my last year of high school my parents made a quiet vow before the Lord. For reasons too complicated to go into here, they decided that unless certain things happened, at the end of the year Dad would resign from the pastoral charge he had maintained for fifteen years.
I finished school, left home, and went off to university. Within a month or so I received a letter from my parents: Dad had resigned as pastor of that church.
My parents had very little money. There was no other French-speaking church that was open to him. At this juncture Dad felt too old to start another church in another locale. He refused to consider pastorates in English Canada: both his call and his heart were tied up with Quebec. So I found out what my parents had decided: they were moving to Hull, on the French side of the river across from Ottawa, the nation’s capital, where Dad would support his family as a federal translator, and give as much time as he could to the French-speaking church in Hull.
I did not get “home” until Christmas. Somewhere along the line I probed my father to try to understand his reasoning. Granted his conviction that he should stay in a French-speaking part of Canada, the question soon arose as to how he would support his family. “For Scripture says,” Dad explained, “that if a man does not support his own family, he is worse than an infidel”: he was using the King James Version form of words of 1 Timothy 5:8: “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”
Obviously this text has some exceptions. If a man is too ill to work, for example, he is exempt—and judging by the tone of the entire chapter, the church itself should pick up whatever support is necessary, if the family cannot manage. But what strikes the reader about many of the instructions in this chapter is the way the church’s provision for the social needs of her people is prescribed with extraordinary sensitivity to the dangers. At the risk of oversimplification, the pattern Paul lays out can be summarized like this: those in genuine need are looked after by the church, but those with the capacity to find their way and support themselves must do so—both so as not to be a burden on the church, and for their own good—or be charged with abandoning the faith. Laziness is not next to godliness.
I cannot think of many times when I had greater respect for Dad’s obedient faith.
More from Read The Bible
It is worth comparing the anointing of David (1 Sam. 16) with the anointing of Jehu (2 Kings 9)—or, more precisely, it is worth comparing not only the two anointings, but what follows from the two anointings.
When I was still a very young man, I became pastor of a smallish church in Canada. The people were very kind toward me, and were far more patient of my faults and errors than I deserved.
In the New Testament, there are two explicit church offices. On the one hand, there are pastors (the word comes from the Latin expression for “shepherds”), who are also called elders or overseers (the word rendered “bishops” in older translations). On the other hand, there are deacons. It was not until the second century that bishops became a kind of third rank of ecclesiastical authority, supervising several pastors/elders under them.
Current agendas mean that when 1 Timothy 2 is referred to in contemporary discussions, usually the focus is on 1 Timothy 2:11–15. So we shall reflect on 1 Timothy 2:1–7.
Some years ago I received a letter from someone who told me that he had read one of my books and was upset that I had often referred to the Lord Jesus Christ as “Jesus.” He quoted several passages about confessing Jesus as Lord (e.g., Rom. 10:9), and how such confession is the mark of having the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3). I wrote back, explaining that when I refer to the Lord Jesus Christ as Jesus, I am not thereby denying his lordship. Rather, I am not at that point affirming it. Further, the book he had read dealt with one of the synoptic Gospels. In the Gospels, the Lord Jesus is most commonly referred to simply as “Jesus.” So since I was commenting on one of the Gospels, I tended to refer to Jesus in the same way that Scripture does. When expounding some passage from, say, Paul, I tend to use, predominantly, the forms for addressing or referring to Jesus that the apostle uses.