SBC Explainer

Several friends & former students have asked me to explain what happened at the SBC meeting this week. Here's a humble attempt & some commentary 🙏 When Southern Baptists are at their best, they are a diverse coalition of independent churches united around Jesus's Great Commission. They are urban & rural, traditional & contemporary, Calvinists & Arminian, high church & low church, politically involved & uninvolved - all cooperating to send missionaries & start new churches. It's beautiful. This week, the SBC made the controversial decision to disfellowship any church that has a woman with the title pastor. Lots of backstory. It's not final; this constitutional change must be ratified again next summer, and a lot can happen in the meantime. But here are three big concerns. 1. Affirming every word of the SBC doctrine statement, the Baptist Faith & Message, has never been a prerequisite for participating in SBC life. The BF&M is a set of generally agreed upon doctrines; it provides accountability for SBC seminaries and mission agencies. But churches don't have to affirm it in totality. In fact, the BF&M says as much in the Preamble. We are "confessional," not "creedal." However, the creedal argument is now being advanced with people saying, "Any church in violation of the BF&M can't be SBC." By the same logic, the SBC would have to disfellowship other churches that don't affirm every line in the Baptist Faith & Message. This includes churches that, for instance, practice open communion, believe in dispensationalism, are governed by elders, or believe in freewill Arminianism. That's easily a majority of SBC churches! This would be a massive precedent. 2. It's also not a two-sided debate: egalitarian-vs-complementarian. First, there are many who believe we can disagree but still work together. Making things more complicated, there's a whole spectrum of nuanced positions on these issues. There are SBC churches that are conservative & complementarian, who believe that their elders/overseers must be qualified men. But also believe that the title "pastor" isn't equivalent to elder/overseer. They say "pastor" is simply one who shepherds. (Interestingly, "pastor" is used only once in the Bible in Ephesians 4.) These churches have women serving as women's pastors, children's pastors, etc. Even these churches are now being told, "You can't do missions with the SBC any longer." Some of my friends say, "No it's just about women as senior pastors - not about other staff roles." But that's not what the SBC voted on. Even very like-minded churches will be disfellowshipped over their terminology, not their theology. 3. The timing, tone, and messaging has made many called-to-ministry women feel invalidated. Instead of keeping the focus on needed sexual abuse reforms in the SBC, the focus shifted to restrictions on women, not protecting women. Furthermore, a small but vocal minority asserted, "Any woman who teaches a man is in open rebellion against Biblical authority and against God." That messaging is unfortunate, even if it doesn't reflect the majority. Personally, I believe there are spirit-filled people with good motives & a strong view of Biblical authority who arrive at different conclusions. On a personal note, I've co-labored alongside dozens of highly capable women who I admire and have learned from. My ministry has trained hundreds of young women as Bible study leaders, evangelists, and disciple-makers. And I pray I've always pushed them to do more than they believed they were able, not less. In conclusion, I prefer the approach of St. Augustine: "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity." I hope the SBC will too!