One thing that must be rather confusing
for those reading the New Testament for the first time is the way the
various letters are titled. Romans through II Thessalonians are named
after the churches being addressed, but these are followed by I
Timothy-Philemon in which the addressees are individuals instead.
Then there is Hebrews, which appears to be directed toward a whole
ethnic group rather than an individual or specific church body. And
things really get really confusing when we encounter James through
Jude since now the books are named for their respective authors
rather than the individual or group being addressed.
Moving closer to the letter of most
interest in this post, from the summary above it would seem logical
to include Titus in the category of the Pastoral Letters along with
I-II Timothy since all three are concerned with giving valuable
advice to specific church leaders on how to teach and administer the
churches to which they are called to superintend. The short book of
Philemon is excluded from this category since it is a more personal
one-on-one private communication dealing with one specific subject,
the fate of a runaway slave.
We happen to know quite a bit
concerning Timothy and his activities, not only from the two epistles
with his name attached but also due to his ubiquitous appearance in
no less than nine additional NT epistles as well as the book of Acts.
By contrast, outside of the Letter to Titus itself, he only appears
in II Corinthians, Galatians and II Timothy. Putting together a
chronology regarding the movements of Paul and his companions on the
mission field. Lea and
Griffin suggest the following timeline:
A.D. 61-63 Paul's
first imprisonment. Writing of Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians,
and Philemon.
A.D. 63-65/66
Paul freed for additional mission work. Writing of 1 Timothy and
Titus.
A.D. 65/66 Paul
arrested again, followed by writing of 2 Timothy and eventually his
death.
The Early Life of Titus
Both liberals and
conservatives generally agree with the following order of the early
events associated with Titus:
“Although
he is never mentioned in Acts, Paul's letters provide information
about Titus. According to Gal 2.3 he was a Gentile who accompanied
Paul to the conference with the Jerusalem apostles, where Titus
served as a kind of litmus test for the acceptability of
uncircumcised Gentile converts. Titus played a crucial role in the
pastoral ministry to Corinth, first as a key administrator of the
collection for the church in Jerusalem (2 Cor 8.6,16-17,23; 12:18),
and later as Paul's diplomatic envoy who successfully brokered a
reconciliation between the apostle and the Corinthian church, which
had harbored doubts about Paul's legitimacy [i.e. as an apostle] and
financial reliability (2 Cor 2:13; 7.6-7, 13-16).” (M.M. Mitchell)
The Book of
Acts
Thus, the only
question remaining regarding Titus in these early years was why he
was never mentioned by Luke in the Book of Acts. Guthrie says, “For
the possibility that he was Luke's brother (which might explain the
absence of his name from Acts), see W. M. Ramsay.” To clarify the
reasoning behind that statement, keep in mind the following pattern
of humility evinced by many NT authors:
Luke's own
presence in the events of Acts is only marked by the occasional use
of the first-person plural “we,” and he omits any mention of his
(possible) brother Titus.
John in his
Gospel account never mentions his own name (utilizing instead the
pseudonym “beloved one”) and omits the name of his brother and
fellow apostle James the Great.
Most commentators
suspect that the anonymous young man who flees at Jesus' arrest in
Mark's Gospel is an unflattering self-portrait of Mark himself.
In the opening
verses of the epistles of James and Jude, neither author dares claim
that he is the step-brother or half-brother of Jesus. Instead they
only call themselves servants of Jesus Christ.
Even Paul, who
often comes across as rather dictatorial, says that the only thing he
has to boast about is his weakness. And in II Corinthians, he writes
his famous “fool's speech.”
Quinn actually
proposes two additional reasons for the absence of Titus' name in
Acts. He supposes that “the disturbance in the text of Acts 18:7
[where some manuscripts read 'Titius Justus' and others 'Titus
Justus'] may indicate that the copyists (if not the author) wanted to
distinguish [Emperor] Titus Justus from a person with a similar
name.” Alternatively, he proposes that the “silence of Acts
concerning his previous career may be due to the painful
controversies with which he was associated, controversies that Acts
muted or omitted altogether. On the hypothesis that the PE [i.e.
Pastoral Epistles] are to be read as a conclusion to Acts, the figure
of Titus was accordingly saved for the concluding roll.”
Galatians 2:3
We first encounter Titus in this verse in which Paul calls Titus a
Greek. According to Ridderbos, this designation “need not imply
that he was a Greek by nationality, but only that he came from a
non-Jewish, pagan sphere of life which, in those days, found in the
Greek language its general means of communication (cf. Mark 7:26).”
But besides that rather unimportant detail, the rest of the verse in
its immediate context is unfortunately fraught with controversy since
Paul's sentences remain unfinished and there are alternatives, albeit
unlikely ones, to the common understanding that Paul and his
companions stood their ground before a group of Jerusalem leaders and
refused to yield to their request that Titus be circumcised. As
Mikolaski notes, “The sentence structure [of Gal. 2:3-5] is
notoriously difficult to unravel.”
In fact, one possible interpretation of the verse, according to
Bruce, was that Titus himself volunteered to have it done. This is
highly unlikely and Bruce's judgment is expressed in his words: “Had
Paul and his colleagues [including Titus] given way on this issue,
even temporarily, the 'truth' of integrity of the gospel would have
been compromised.” Thus, we could state that Titus was more than a
mere pawn or “Exhibit A” in those proceedings. He, as well as
Paul, had the fortitude and religious conviction to resist against
overwhelming peer pressure he knew was misplaced.
II Corinthians
Quinn states, “Titus had been Paul's liaison with the refractory
Corinthian converts, and Paul called him 'my brother' (2 Cor 2:13)
and 'my partner and fellow worker' (...2 Cor 8:23).” Beyond that,
Quinn feels that further references to Titus came from much later
sources and can't necessarily be trusted as historically accurate.
From indications in this letter, Guthrie deduces that Titus “appears
to have been a stronger personality than Timothy (cf. 1 Cor. xvi.10;
2 Cor. vii.15) and possessed ability as an administrator...and seems
to have possessed a particular affection and serious concern for the
Corinthians.” See II Corinthians 8:16-17.
“Giving to the needs of others...becomes a test of the genuineness
of one's faith (2 Cor 8:8,24; 9:13), with Titus providing an example
of just such a genuine faith and the love it produces (2 Cor
8:16-17).” (Hafemann)
Everts: “In 2 Corinthians 8:16-9:5, Paul goes on to explain why
Titus is returning to help with the collection. Titus is another
generous benefactor who can serve as a model for the Corinthians and
he has the best interests of the Corinthians at heart.”
“The
key roles in the congregation are to be taken up by proved
individuals and couples within their own ranks (I Tim 3:1-13; Tit
1:5-9), which Paul's associates [Titus and Timothy] could only help
identify through knowledge provided by the churches themselves.
Clearly, for all his close ties ties with his churches, Paul gave
them considerable freedom to develop their own life and to do so in
ways that were not identical to one another.” (Banks)
The Later Career of Titus
The divide in
chronological matters between different theological camps comes about
only when discussing the later events in the life of Titus, reflected
in hints given in the pastoral letters II Timothy and Titus. Those
discounting these books as fictional products of an later anonymous
author masquerading as Paul attempt to poke holes in the narratives
based on the fact that they have no confirmation elsewhere in the New
Testament. This reasoning has been rightly labeled as “a
hermeneutic of suspicion,” i.e. biblical accounts should be
considered unhistorical unless proven otherwise. It is sort of like a
twisted court of law in which a defendant must prove his innocence
rather than it being the duty of the prosecution to prove the party's
guilt.
But for those who
tend to trust the NT accounts as historical, the remaining references
to Titus in them fit well into the following proposed scenario:
After Paul was
released from his first captivity in Rome, he went to Crete on
another missionary journey. When Paul had established a fledgling
church body there, he departed (either to evangelize elsewhere or
when he was again taken prisoner and brought back to Rome to face
death) and commissioned Titus to take his place on that island to
fully establish the Christian churches (as described in the Letter to
Titus). Finally, after Titus had completed that important assignment,
he left for the region of Dalmatia (see reference in II Timothy 4:10)
to continue missionary activities there.
Thus, Titus
“appears as one of the earliest, as he was to be one of the latest,
of Paul's fellow-workers.” (Coad)
Letters to
Titus and II Timothy 1:2
Ellis:
“He [i.e. Paul] sent letter to trusted coworkers, Titus in Crete
and Timothy in Ephesus, which served both as instruments of personal
communication and encouragement and also as vade
mecums
[handbooks or guides kept at hand for later consultation] to
give apostolic authorization for their teaching.”
“For
the PE Titus and Timothy are paradigmatic persons who furnish the
pattern (Titus 2:7; 1 Tim 4:12) of what the continuing Pauline
apostolate is and does. They are models of Paul and models for
believers as they are designated to carry on the apostle's work,
carry out his commands, emulate his sufferings, teach his gospel and
practice it themselves, preside at the liturgy, receive material
support for their ministerial work, and choose other men who will in
their turn share their apostolic ministry (see Titus 1:5, etc.).”
(Quinn)
Quinn
continues with a comment on Titus 2:7b-8: “Titus is to be 'a
pattern,' typos,
of the attractive conduct that he urges on young Christian men. The
Greek suggests the concentrated force of this living example, falling
like a mallet (typas)
or punch upon the matrix of those whose lives it marks...The author
of the Letter to Titus chose typos,
however, for more than simply ethical reasons. He has placed Titus
among the younger men of the congregation, conceiving him to be
Paul's junior, perhaps by as much as twenty years...Titus is
emphatically Paul's 'true child' (1:4), and children are typoi
of their parents...Thus Titus is not only to leave a 'pattern' on his
peers but is also a living typos
stamped out of the life and teaching of the Pauline model.”
Towner,
a much more conservative commentator than Quinn, actually echoes much
of what Quinn says above: “From vv. 7b-8 the attention is focused
on Titus, who is set into this context as a model for the young
men...First, Paul considers the quality of Titus's observable
life...This concept is important within these letters (and esp. in
Titus) for detecting the observable dimension of the Christian life
that faith produces...Second, Paul considers the character of his
coworker's teaching in a way that will take in both content and
teacher.” In regard to this second quality, Towner notes that there
is a Greek term in the phrase 'irreproachable with respect to the
sound teachings' (Titus 2:8a) which only appears here in the New
Testament. Aphthoria
is defined as soundness or incorruption which Towner feels “seems
to denote innocence,” which may make a better reference to
disposition than to content. As Tanner concludes, “Clearly there is
a lot resting on the shoulders of Titus.” But Paul must feel that
he is fully capable of the task.
Several
commentators weigh in on the way Titus is introduced in this letter
by Paul. Knight notes that Titus 1:4 describes Titus as “my true
child according to a common faith, which is identical to the way
Timothy is addressed in 2 Tim 1:2 with the addition of 'common'
before 'faith.' ...Paul may use it in reference to Titus, not to
Timothy, because of the need to remind Titus, the churches on Crete,
and the false teachers 'of the circumcision' (1:10; cf. v. 14) that
Titus the uncircumcised Greek and Paul the Hebrew of Hebrews share
the same faith...Titus, no less than circumcised Timothy, is Paul's
spiritual son in this shared faith, and it is to him as such than
Paul writes the letter.”
“Historically,
the description tells us little about Titus. While it is possible
that Paul speaks in this way because Titus was a convert of his, the
attached qualifier, 'in our common faith,' really established the
spiritual basis for kinship (i.e., faith in Christ rather than blood
or legal adoption), with the probable implication of Titus's loyalty
and fidelity to Paul's gospel. Of course these are important
affirmations for Titus...Titus is obligated to serve Paul as a
faithful son would a father.”
Lea and Griffin:
“Our lack of information about Titus stands in contrast with the
reasonably full picture of Timothy...Paul's designation of Titus as a
'true son'...may suggest Titus was one of Paul's converts. The word
'son' is the same word used in connection with Timothy, but the
appending of the adjective 'true' seems to suggest that Titus may
have been a genuine Pauline convert...Paul seems to have used Titus as
an effective troubleshooter in delicate situations. His performance
under such pressure appears to have been superlative. Despite the
positive evidences of his usefulness in Christian service, Titus
remains a lesser-known character in the New Testament.”
Although we know
Paul was married, there is no mention in the New Testament of him
having any biological children. Thus, it is doubly important to
consider those very few disciples whom Paul chose to consider his
spiritual sons. Besides Titus, that quite select list includes only
two other co-workers of Paul: Timothy (see I Corinthians 17;
Philippians 2:22; I Timothy 1:2,18; and II Timothy 1:2;2:1) and
Onesimus (Philemon 10).
As to what seems
to be, according to some, missing in the Pastoral Letters, Lea and
Griffin explain: “Paul may have refrained from extensive discussion
of the heresy [of incipient Gnosticism] because he assumed that
Timothy and Titus did not need additional instruction answering the
vague speculations. They had proven themselves competent enough in
discussions to respond without additional help from Paul.”
Quinn, who
throughout his commentary on the Book of Titus expresses skepticism
regarding its historical nature, is somewhat at a loss as how to
treat Titus 3:12-15. He notes the appropriateness and apparent
authentic nature of these closing personal comments. The best he can
suggest, and it is little better than a shot in the dark, is the
following hypothetical chain of events: “An authentic, brief
dispatch from Paul in the mid-sixties of the first Christian century
would, according to this reconstruction, serve to frame a reworking
and reapplication of Pauline traditions twenty years later. If in
fact Luke was the redactor-author of the PE as well as a member of
Paul's entourage in the apostle's last years, one would need to look
no further for the one who had drafted and then preserved a copy of
such a memorandum, Pauline in content, Hellenistic in form. Luke's
intimate connection with the origin of the dispatch and letter of
recommendation would have warranted his later and different use of
it.”
As you can see,
some biblical skeptics are more willing to believe rather complicated
and unlikely scenarios filled with unproved hypotheses rather than
simply taking what is written there at face value.
Church
Traditions
And
for those who would like to know what happened to Titus after that
point in his life, the best we have are some later traditions
recorded in Eusebius' Ecclesiastical
History. These explain
that Titus ended up ultimately returning to Crete, where he became a
church bishop and remained until his old age.
Posts
