I heard some advice from one pastor to another, as long as you do not have intercourse with a woman you will not lose your mantle. This is not the first time I have heard this, another pastor had said his personal life has nothing to do with his spiritual life. I have not found that in the bible, however it appears that many pastors, elders and deacons lead with that example.
I have to admit that this is a very foreign idea to me. In two ways:
1) Talking about a "mantle". I've only heard language like this in a very particular stream of Christian thinking, it is a borrowing of the language used in the Old Testament, when the Prophet Elijah's mantle was given to his pupil, Elisha, who took up the mantle and went on to be a prophet in his teacher's footsteps. The mantle here was literal, it was a literal cloak which Elijah wore, and Elisha taking it up was symbolic of his succeeding Elijah. As such "mantle" is being borrowed to describe a divine gift of ministry. In a church tradition that views being a pastor as being endowed with a divine gift, rather than as a vocation within the Church to which the Church makes one a pastor and to which the pastor is held accountable, that's the only way this language can have any significance. However, in most church traditions, even those which view the pastorate as having a special indelible grace connected to it (e.g. Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox), it is still a vocation which is subservient to the Church itself, and which is accountable to the Church. Which leads to the second thing:
2) Of course one's personal life affects one's spiritual life. This is a no-brainer. This is especially true for clergy, who have received their commission and vocation from the Church, to wield what they have been given with the due responsibility expected of them. Pastors are no less sinners than anyone else, so this isn't about holding pastors to an impossible standard; but it definitely means that when a pastor is unfaithful to his duties the Church has not only the right, but the responsibility to revoke what has been given. A shepherd that can't be trusted with a flock has no business being in charge of sheep. In the Lutheran tradition this is a very serious thing, we say that pastors have been given the vocation and responsibility to wield the Keys of the kingdom. This comes from the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18) and the Gospel of John (John 20:21-23)--the Keys were given to the Church, and thus it is from the Church that pastors receive their authority, and the privilege of wielding the authority of the Keys in service--as servants--of Christ and His Church. Pastors are under-shepherds, for the Church has one Shepherd, Christ; and thus all pastors are by their calling and vocation acting in Christ's stead to act as shepherds, as Christ says to St. Peter, "Feed
My lambs".
In the Pastoral Epistles (Titus, 1 & 2 Timothy) the Apostle St. Paul gives clear instructions to his protégé Timothy, and to his student Titus about how those who want to serve the Church are to be strictly vetted. All three of the historic ministerial offices are mentioned in these letters (bishop, presbyter, and deacon), and all contain the same sort of vetting instructions. So for example we get this in 1 Timothy 3:2-3
"A bishop must be above reproach, a one-woman-man, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not prone to arguments, not a money-lover"
There has been a lot of ink spilled as to what all or exactly is meant when Paul says μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα (mias gunaikos andra, literally "one wife/woman man/husband", but we can be certain that it certainly does mean "no funny business". But that's not just "don't have intercourse with [a/another] woman", the bar is higher than that here. Also, that's not the only criterion, notice everything else in just this small passage, "above reproach, ... sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not prone to arguments, not a money-lover"
And this kind of stuff was taken seriously in the ancient Church. When we look at a lot of the ancient Canons (rules) set down by the Church at various councils, a lot of them were specifically about how clergy were supposed to conduct themselves. For example, the Church established a rule that bishops shouldn't even live with a woman unless it's his wife, or mother or sister, or immediate relative. Even if the bishop wasn't doing anything bad, this rule was about ensuring that the bishop wouldn't even look like he was doing anything bad, or be accused of impropriety. This stuff got taken very seriously.
A pastor's personal life was important. Because, of course one's personal life affects one's spiritual life--what we do matters to God, that's true of everyone, not just pastors. But also a pastor's personal life has a direct correlation to their wielding of the Keys, of their call and vocation to shepherd, to be pastors. To borrow one of the words of my generation,
Duh.
In my opinion this seems a little hypocritical but, is there a thing of the closer to God the less sin affects you? Or is it a better understanding of sin in general and pastors and leaders have that, and the congregants don't yet, like when Paul talks about being fed milk verse meat? Or is it just we are all sinners, and we need to just forgive and reconcile?
We're all sinners, and so we all come to the Throne of Grace with contrition and repentance, confessing our sins.
But pastors have to be scrutinized. For the same reason that civil and military leaders, teachers and doctors have to be scrutinized. I mean, you should expect even the guy you take your car to for a tune-up is responsible enough to be a mechanic, right?
-CryptoLutheran
