He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
I’m especially thinking of that last bit: being able to rebuke those who contradict sound doctrine.
How many heresies have been spread, not by clever heretics, but by incompetent defenders of orthodoxy? I mean by people who have been so bad in their refutations of error that they make the orthodox position look stupid–and thus actually make heterodoxy look attractive to people who would otherwise have been more careful and not succumbed?
When a pastor makes confident statements about a teaching or idea which anyone at all familiar with the idea knows to be entirely false and backwards, he has made his own position seem anti-intellectual and the other position more respectable. Human nature being what it is, when someone presents a false portrayal of a new doctrine, those who have been genuinely interested in the doctrine will be inclined to think that the “defender” of orthodoxy really can’t deal with the truth and is creating a strawman because he has no real arguments. Heresy thus looks more reasonable due to an unreasonable, from-the-hip, ill-researched response. The heresy is actually being spread not by the heresiarchs but by the orthodox teachers and preachers because they are not living up to the criteria which Paul sets forth for pastors in Titus 1.9.
While all pastors should meet this criterion, it is especially important to seminary professors. They will have students who like to read and study. These students, as future pastors, need to do so in order themselves to become qualified shepherds. But this necessary skill can also make them extra vulnerable. To be an immunity system for the Church, they themselves get exposed to more diseases. Teaching pastors in seminaries, doctors of the Church, are quite important to be an extra line of defense. But what if they, instead of doing careful research, simply spout off the top of their head and make many errors of fact in the process? Their laudable zeal could, and indeed certainly would, end up promoting the very error they wished to defeat.
In fact, we can go further: A division between sheep and goats would take place that is not according to God’s revealed will. A professor’s more intelligent and thoughtful students would be the most likely to find the error more attractive due to the professor’s zeal rendering him unable to effectively rebuke the contradiction of sound doctrine. Those prone to simply accept whatever the professor says, and regurgitate it on his tests, would be more likely accept his verdict without question. Those whose gifts and characteristics did not make them well-suited to be sheep would be more likely to dig in their heals. The heresy would appear more tenable because of the professor’s inability to deal with it. In the meantime, those who accepted the professor’s verdict would be accepting his false portrayal as well. They would thus only be equipped to reduplicate the same zeal-induced mistake in their congregations causing a similar divide.
How this process would affect presbyteries and whold denominations, if left unchecked, would be nightmarish. It is really important that those ordained as pastors be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. If this criteria is not applied by pastors to themselves, and to their decisions as to who to ordain into the office of minister of the Gospel, there will be Hell to pay.
Furthermore, the environment might eventually get to the point where orthodox pastors and orthodox teaching is falsely accused. God grant us the will and ability to follow Titus 1.9. There is much at stake.
But more importantly, this really has very little to do with intellectual abilities. It actually depends much more on love. Will you listen before you speak? Will you guard a heretics reputation as dearly as you do your own? Or will you pass off second-hand anecdotes about his character or other faults in order to undermine his credibility? Will you read what he says and refute it as Paul instructs Timothy, or will you refute a straw man?
Love means rigor in analysis. Without charity the courts of the Church will be a sounding gong or a claning cymbal. If you want to see justice done and orthodoxy maintained you will uphold charity.
If anyone hasn’t yet, please take a look at Presbyterians and Presbyterians Together.