A Fallen Pastor and His Restoration

A Tragic Reality in the Church – A Fallen Pastor:

            The Church of Jesus Christ is not perfect. While the invisible Church is perfect and flawless, awaiting its arrival in the New Heaven and the New Earth, the visible church on earth is marked by many weaknesses and imperfections. For example, Christians often hear heartbreaking and tragic incidents that have taken place within churches. Among the various tragic news that emerges from churches, perhaps the most heartbreaking is the fall of a pastor from his position.

There are many reasons pastors fall from their prestigious and honorable calling. In fact, it is easy to find reports of pastors resigning due to moral failure because the secular world and media often show great interest in such stories. Some pastors resign because they have embezzled church funds for personal gain. Others step away because they have abused members of their congregations. Still, others resign due to being caught in acts of sexual immorality.

When people learn of a pastor's fall from grace, there is often unanimous agreement that he must step away from ministry. Whether through indefinite suspension or defrocking (the formal removal of a minister from office), most agree that a fallen minister should not continue their duties.

However, not everyone agrees on whether a minister can ever be restored to office after falling from grace. Some argue that a minister who has fallen due to misconduct or sin cannot be restored. Others believe certain sins permanently disqualify a man from ministry, while others might allow for restoration after sufficient time and evidence of repentance. Still, others argue that all sins, except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Mark 3:28–30), can be forgiven through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore, they contend that genuine repentance, which leads to life (2 Cor. 7:10), may allow for restoration.

This raises an important question: Can a fallen minister ever be restored to office? Are there certain sins that permanently disqualify a man from ministry? Or, can a fallen minister return to office after sufficiently proving genuine repentance and restoration, regardless of the sin? In this article, I invite you to think carefully with me as we seek to answer this important question.

The Biblical Example for Restoration:

            One of the most astonishing aspects of the Bible is that it does not shy away from recording the mistakes and weaknesses of the heroes of the faith. In our younger years, we often hear stories of men called by God to serve Him and are encouraged to see them as examples of faith to emulate.

However, the Bible also records the terrible mistakes these heroes of faith committed. For example, Abraham twice sold out his wife to preserve his life in foreign lands (Gen. 12:10–20; 20:1–18). Moses, in anger, disobeyed the Word of the Lord by striking the rock at Meribah instead of speaking to it, resulting in his being forbidden from entering the Promised Land (Num. 20:7–12). David committed adultery with Bathsheba and orchestrated Uriah’s murder to cover his sin (2 Sam. 11). The Bible does not hide the fact that many men of faith also fell into various sins in their lives.

In the New Testament, we see similar accounts of men of faith falling into sin, including the Apostles. Perhaps the most well-known example is Peter’s denial of Jesus Christ on the night of His arrest (Matt. 26:69–75).

Peter’s denial of Jesus serves as clear evidence of how a man called to ordained ministry can fall terribly from his calling and purpose. Peter was among the twelve disciples Jesus appointed as Apostles (Luke 6:13). He traveled with Jesus and carried out apostolic duties under Jesus’ supervision, such as preaching and performing miracles (Matt. 10:1–15; Mark 6:7–13; Luke 9:1–6). Peter even displayed a strong sense of allegiance to Jesus, declaring, “Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away” (Matt. 26:33). Yet, Peter denied Jesus three times when questioned about his relationship with Him.

Despite this grievous failure, Peter’s account also serves as a powerful example of how Christ can restore a fallen officer (Apostle). After His resurrection, Jesus met His disciples in Galilee and directly addressed Peter, asking three repeated questions that affirmed Peter’s love for Him and his calling (John 21:15–17). Jared C. Wilson explains the significance of this moment:

Why did Jesus repeat the question three times? There is no significance in the linguistic difference in the “loves” (agape, phileo), as that appears to be a literary penchant of John’s, but rather Jesus is echoing and thereby covering Peter’s threefold denial. The gist? You cannot out-sin the grace of God. As far as your sin may go, the gospel goes further still…Some proponents of permanent disqualification miss the gravity of what is taking place in this beautiful moment. The interjection between each question and answer of “Feed/tend my lambs” would seem to indicate that Peter is not simply being restored to “good graces” with Jesus but also to the ministerial office. He is certainly not dismissed from his apostleship and of course goes on to preach and write authoritatively. This is after he has publicly denied knowing Jesus.[1]

It is important to remember that Peter’s restoration was preceded by deep repentance and agony over his sin. After his third denial, for example, the Scripture testifies that Peter wept bitterly (Matt. 26:75). John 21:15–17 further reveals Peter’s ongoing grief and awareness of his offense, as he was “grieved” when Jesus asked the third time, “Do you love me?”

Yet, the account of Peter’s denial and restoration testifies of the Gospel’s power to redeem and restore even those who fall from the highest positions in the Church to the lowest depths of sin. Jesus reaffirmed Peter’s purpose and calling, commanding him to “Feed my sheep.” In Peter’s story, we find a clear biblical example of how a fallen servant of God can be restored by Christ’s grace.

The Biblical Considerations for Restoration:

            But then, does Peter’s account prove that every pastor who has fallen from grace can be restored to office? Does it teach that every pastor who has shown genuine repentance can once again “feed the sheep of Christ”? Unfortunately, the answers to these questions are not as straightforward as we might like.

First, pastors today do not receive direct re-affirmations of their call to ministry from Jesus after falling from grace, as Peter did. We cannot simply assume that because Jesus re-affirmed Peter’s call to ministry, He would also re-affirm every pastor who falls into sin. After all, Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Jesus, was not restored but tragically ended his life. Peter’s account demonstrates that a fallen pastor can be restored, but it does not necessarily prove that every fallen pastor should be restored.

Therefore, it is prudent to examine all of Scripture to biblically assess the restoration of fallen pastors. While we no longer hear the voice of Jesus directly and explicitly re-affirming a fallen minister, we can study God’s Word to understand what kind of fallen minister might be restored, as Peter was. A key passage in this discussion is 1 Timothy 3:1–7, where the Apostle Paul outlines the qualifications for elders (pastors) of a local congregation:

"The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil."

Accordingly, the Apostle Paul makes two very important remarks regarding the office of elder (pastor). First, the Apostle Paul indicates that the office of elder (pastor) is an office of honor and prominence. It is clear from 1 Timothy 3:1-7 that the office of elder (pastor) is an office that distinguishes whoever is ordained from the “lay people” of one’s congregation. In fact, elsewhere in the Scripture, the teaching elders (pastors) are considered worthy of double honor (1 Tim. 5:17-18) and, at the same time, warns others from becoming teachers (pastors) because they will be judged with greater strictness (James 3:1).

            Second, as such, the Apostle Paul teaches that only men who are possessed with exemplary characters ought to be ordained as an elder (pastor) of a local congregation. For example, Paul prescribes in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 that an elder ought to be daily characterized by being above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money, good spiritual head, mature saint, and possess a good reputation with outsiders.

            However, in this list of qualifications, one particular requirement stands out: having a good reputation with outsiders. While other qualifications primarily concern a person’s expected character as a leader within the Christian community, Paul also includes a seemingly unusual qualification—one that is completely outside the man’s control: having a good reputation with outsiders. Considering that Christianity in its early years was often hated and despised by many “outsiders” (unbelievers), this qualification might seem almost impossible to fulfill. After all, it would be unlikely for all outsiders to have favorable opinions of a devout, elder-material Christian man.

When the Apostle Paul writes that an elder (pastor) must have a good reputation with outsiders, he is not suggesting that the church should refrain from ordaining any qualified man simply because of ill-intentioned defamation from outsiders. John Calvin provides helpful insight into this seemingly peculiar qualification0:

This appears to be very difficult, that a religious man should have, as witnesses of his integrity, infidels themselves, who are furiously mad to tell lies against us….

Calvin goes on to explain that Paul includes this qualification to prevent a minister from becoming a cause for God’s name to be blasphemed by unbelievers. Calvin elaborates further:

… But the apostle means, that, so far as relates to external behaviour, even unbelievers themselves shall be constrained to acknowledge him to be a good man; for, although they groundlessly slander all the children of God, yet they cannot pronounce him to be a wicked man, who leads a good and inoffensive life among them…[2]

Accordingly, in his sermon on 1 Timothy, the Apostle Paul further clarifies:

Paul’s message is not that unbelievers should think highly of those they know to be God’s servants and should freely praise their virtues, but that they should find nothing with which to reproach them. Of course we cannot prevent enemies of the truth from finding much to criticize in us, but we must be innocent of wrongdoing, so that the wicked cannot besmirch God’s church by claiming that those who lead and govern it are vile, disreputable rogues or men of evil life. That, in brief, is the meaning of Paul’s words.

What we are taught here is said in other parts of Scripture—that we must do our best to see that God’s name is not blasphemed and that the wicked do not have cause to scorn the gospel and the church’s good order. For if through our insolence we bring shame upon God, will such a thing be pardoned? They should be so ruled that we are mindful that others have their eye on us, and want only to revile the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and the faith that we profess.[3] [Emphasis added]

Calvin’s interpretation of 1 Timothy 3:7 is likely an accurate reflection of the Apostle Paul’s intention. Considering how Paul regarded a minister as the servant of Christ and the Church (1 Cor. 3:5–7), the steward of Christ and God (1 Cor. 4:1–2), the ambassador of Christ (2 Cor. 5:20), and God’s fellow worker (1 Cor. 3:9), it is clear that Paul viewed the minister as a public representative of Christ and His Church. It was therefore essential that a minister be well thought of by outsiders so that he would not fall into disgrace, and, as a public representative, bring dishonor to Christ, the Church, and the name of God.

This important qualification provides significant considerations regarding the restoration of a fallen minister: would restoring this minister dishonor the Church and cause the name of God to be blasphemed by unbelievers?

As Calvin rightly pointed out, unbelievers will often look for any reason to disgrace ministers of the Gospel. However, it is equally important to recognize the difference between criticism based on unfounded accusations and criticism based on legitimate grounds. There is a notable distinction between criticism arising from irrational hostility and criticism arising from credible, rational reasons. In other words, there is a fundamental difference between unfair accusations against a minister and fair criticism based on his conduct.

For example, there are certain immoralities and misconducts that may be considered treacherous by believers but are regarded as relatively insignificant by unbelievers. Peter’s threefold denial of Jesus provides a helpful case in this regard. While believers might view Peter’s denial as one of the most treacherous sins imaginable, unbelievers likely would not see it with the same gravity. To them, Peter’s denial might appear as little more than weak loyalty to his master—worthy of ridicule, perhaps, but not of deep condemnation. Thus, while believers may feel anger and disappointment toward Peter for his denial, unbelievers would likely mock Peter for his cowardice rather than view him as a sinner.

On the other hand, some immoralities and misconducts disgust both believers and unbelievers due to their absolute atrocity and public nature. Actions such as murder, pedophilia, bestiality, and sexual assault are universally recognized as abhorrent. If a minister falls into such publicly scandalous sin and later seeks restoration to his office, after a long period of genuine repentance, believers might accept his repentance. However, the abhorrible offense committed by the minister will give a legitimate cause for unbelievers to mock and blaspheme the Church and God. Therefore, one must carefully consider whether a fallen pastor who has committed such egregious sins can be restored to ministry when he no longer qualifies as "having a good reputation with outsiders" and risks bringing further dishonor to the name of God.

On the other hand, if a minister falls due to private and less serious misconduct, it may be possible for him to be restored to his office after sufficient evidence of genuine repentance and restoration has been observed. Especially if his life becomes marked by renewed grace from the Lord Jesus Christ, so much so that outsiders no longer suspect his past failures but instead speak well of him, one can be confident that Christ has restored him to his high calling and commanded him once again to feed His flock.

The Degree of Sin for the Restoration:

            Finding an answer to the fallen pastor and his restoration is difficult and complex. Scripture certainly teaches us that a man who has fallen from grace and his high calling could be restored to his office with sufficient evidence and time of genuine repentance. The account of Peter’s restoration undoubtedly proves this truth.

At the same time, Scripture also seems to teach us that there are certain cases where a man who has fallen from grace and his high calling cannot be restored to his office due to the weight and degree of the offense he has committed. The Westminster Divines helpfully elaborate on this in the Westminster Larger Catechism Q&A 150 and 151:

Q. 150. Are all transgressions of the law of God equally heinous in themselves, and in the sight of God?

A. All transgressions of the law of God are not equally heinous; but some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others.

Q. 151. What are those aggravations that make some sins more heinous than others?
A. Sins receive their aggravations,

1. From the persons offending: if they be of riper age, greater experience or grace, eminent for profession, gifts, place, office, guides to others, and whose example is likely to be followed by others.

2. From the parties offended: if immediately against God, his attributes, and worship; against Christ, and his grace; the Holy Spirit, his witness, and workings; against superiors, men of eminency, and such as we stand especially related and engaged unto; against any of the saints, particularly weak brethren, the souls of them or any other, and the common good of all or many.

3. From the nature and quality of the offence: if it be against the express letter of the law, break many commandments, contain in it many sins: if not only conceived in the heart, but break forth in words and actions, scandalize others, and admit of no reparation: if against means, mercies, judgments, light of nature, conviction of conscience, public or private admonition, censures of the church, civil punishments; and our prayers, purposes, promises, vows, covenants, and engagements to God or men: if done deliberately, wilfully, presumptuously, impudently, boastingly, maliciously, frequently, obstinately, with delight, continuance, or relapsing after repentance…

Accordingly, the answer to the restoration of a fallen minister appears to depend on the degree of the sin he has committed. If the sin leaves room for the minister to be above reproach and maintain a good reputation with outsiders, he would be well-qualified to be restored. However, if the sin leaves no room for the minister to be above reproach or maintain a good reputation due to its public and atrocious nature, he may not be restored to the office of minister. This ensures that the Church and the name of God are not brought to disgrace because of him.

Rev. Seob Kim is an ordained minister of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. Born in Korea, he grew up as a missionary kid in Cambodia. In November 2022, Rev. Seob and his family moved to Grove City, Pennsylvania, to serve Christ Presbyterian Church.