WHO WAS TITUS?

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.