Editorial: It’s time to examine denominational connections

Who does your church connect with, and why?

If your church hasn’t had this conversation in a while, you should. Regardless of anything else, it can be a healthy conversation to have and a matter of good stewardship.

I used the word “connect,” but the technical term for Baptists is “cooperate.”

For churches cooperating with the Southern Baptist Convention—in Texas and elsewhere—the 2024 SBC annual meeting gives additional reason to have the conversation.

The point was made crystal clear at least twice during the convention that the SBC and its entities expect cooperating churches to adhere to the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. If your church has not adopted the 2000 statement or does not have “a faith and practice that closely identifies” with it, there are a couple of things you need to know.

No women pastors

First, you need to know you will be expected not to employ a woman as a pastor of any kind—even though the proposed amendment to write that into the SBC constitution failed.

Churches have been voted out of the convention during the last two consecutive SBC annual meetings precisely because they employ a woman as a pastor of any kind. Each of the votes passed by a wide margin.

Discussion during this year’s meeting related to the proposed amendment and the vote to remove First Baptist Church of Alexandria, Va., made abundantly clear that Southern Baptists absolutely mean what the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message says: “the office of pastor/elder/overseer is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.”

In other words, to have a faith and practice that closely identifies with the SBC’s adopted statement of faith means your church will not have a woman pastor—senior, associate, executive, worship, youth, children’s, senior adult, recreation, media and technology, women’s. Not any.

Though some wanted it made clear women leaders are valued and that their church does employ women as ministers.

So, if your church cooperates with the SBC and you employ a woman as a pastor of any kind, you will need to change her title to minister, find other employment for her or expect to be deemed “not in friendly cooperation” with the SBC during some upcoming SBC annual meeting.

NOTE: After publishing this editorial, some pointed out First Baptist Alexandria was not disfellowshipped because they employ a woman as a pastor for children and women, but because the church espouses egalitarianism rather than complementarianism. While technically true, it also is true Saddleback Church was disfellowshipped for employing a woman as teaching pastor, and the Law Amendment was less than 5 percent shy of passage.

2000 Baptist Faith and Message

Second, you need to know your church will be expected to adopt and hold to the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message if you want to enjoy full cooperation with the SBC.

Kevin Ezell, president of the North American Mission Board, made that clear when answering a Texas Baptist pastor’s question following the NAMB report June 12.

NAMB has accepted money gladly from First Baptist Church of Round Rock for decades without ever asking what statement of faith the church adopted, the church’s pastor Dustin Slaton said. He asked if his church’s investment can be reciprocated.

He and his church want to partner with NAMB and the BGCT to plant complementarian, “genuinely Southern Baptist churches in Texas.” Since First Baptist Round Rock and the BGCT hold to the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message and not the 2000 version, this won’t happen, as we reported in May.

After repeating what a NAMB spokesperson communicated to the Baptist Standard the end of May, Ezell told Slaton, “I would love for you to consider, for your state convention to adopt the Baptist Faith and Message 2000.”

So, if your church wants to cooperate with the SBC and has not adopted the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message, you will need to adopt the 2000 statement of faith and partner with a state convention that has done the same to receive money from NAMB to plant a church in your state.

If your church is not going to adopt the 2000 statement and neither is your state convention, then you need to know the SBC’s cooperation with your church will be limited—at least, via NAMB. You are free, however, to hold to a different Baptist statement of faith, such as the 1963 version, and you are free to keep sending money to the SBC and its entities.

Making decisions

The SBC has made it clear who it will cooperate with and why. Is your church as clear? It should be.

Maybe your church has a century-old relationship with the SBC, like First Baptist Church of Alexandria, Va., who was voted out June 11.

If your church hasn’t examined its relationship with its ministry partners in a while, it may be on autopilot. It’s good stewardship to examine the relationship. You need to know what the relationship expectations are and whether you will or want to meet them.

Perhaps your church adheres to the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message and nothing has changed about your faith and practice in, well, decades. Your church may have principled reasons—such as autonomy of the local church—or theological reasons for not adopting the 2000 statement, or it may have none.

You need to know what your church’s faith statement is and why it’s that statement and not another one. Knowing where your church stands helps evaluate your ministry connections. You may determine nothing needs to change. Or it may be time to find new connections.

If your church believes women can be pastors, or it doesn’t; if your church holds to the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message, or it doesn’t; the Baptist General Convention of Texas (Texas Baptists), GC2 and Ascent are just three possible connections to know about.

Some will say this is divisive. But it isn’t divisive to know who you are and why and to connect with those who will enable God to work in and through you best. Those seeking God’s glory ought to want the best connections possible.

Eric Black is the executive director, publisher and editor of the Baptist Standard. He can be reached at eric.black@baptiststandard.com. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.