“We’re not an issue-driven convention; we’re a mission-driven convention,” Julio Guarneri, president of the Baptist General Convention of Texas, told attendees at the end of the second business session of the 2023 BGCT annual meeting in McAllen.

Guarneri received a rousing response. His description of the BGCT as mission-driven was one of the most well-received statements made during the annual meeting, because it is a statement of identity that resonates with Texas Baptists.

I see in the floor discussion of motions about women in ministry evidence of Texas Baptists’ shared desire to take their mission seriously. And what is their mission? To communicate the good news of Jesus Christ to all people, beginning in Texas and reaching around the world. Women are integral to that mission.

Discussing women in ministry

As reported by Ken Camp, both motions were ruled out of order and revised. Tuesday morning, during floor discussion on the first motion—made by Meredith Stone—an amendment was offered and passed. The main motion subsequently was passed as amended. Ellis Orozco—who made the second motion—withdrew his motion after Stone’s amended motion passed.

Stone’s revised motion read: “I move that the Baptist General Convention of Texas Executive Board be instructed to have staff create programs, resources, and initiatives to assist churches in affirming, appointing, and employing women in ministerial and pastoral roles.”

After a handful of messengers spoke for and against Stone’s motion and time was called, a motion was passed to extend the time for discussion by 10 minutes, because the discussion of women in ministry is important for the BGCT.

Dustin Slaton, pastor of First Baptist Church in Round Rock, then brought an amendment to Stone’s motion: “I move that we request the BGCT Executive Board to resource BGCT staff to continue developing more strategies, resources, and advocacy initiatives to assist churches in affirming, appointing, and employing women in ministry and leadership roles.”

In explaining the amendment’s intent, he said many Texas Baptist churches love, empower and equip women while still holding to a complementarian position—the belief that certain leadership roles, such as pastor, are limited to men.

His amendment offered a middle way between completely rejecting both motions and approving a motion critics saw as infringing upon autonomy of the local church.

Support for the amended motion was strong, but it was not universal. An interesting coalition emerged, albeit small in appearance, to vote against it—those who thought the amendment did not affirm women strongly enough and those who oppose women in pastoral roles of any kind.

Both of these groups—the one for the original main motion and those strongly opposed to that motion in any form—were left in agreement over the amended motion. Neither wanted it.

What did all groups in the room hold in common? They all take seriously Jesus’ command to go and make disciples of all people, teaching them to obey everything Jesus commanded. They agree Texas Baptists’ mission is to communicate the good news of Jesus Christ to all people, beginning in Texas and reaching around the world.

Where Texas Baptists want to focus

The majority of messengers in attendance affirmed the amended motion. The amendment expressed their desire that the BGCT not divide over the issue of women in ministry.

Like Guarneri, messengers to the 2023 annual meeting want to focus on mission, not issues—while understanding issues are important because they involve people. They want to take the issues seriously, and they don’t want the issues to supersede the mission.

For many who voted for Slaton’s amendment, they see the mission as so big and so important that it shouldn’t be scuttled over disagreement about whether women can be called to and serve in pastoral roles. The truth is, many Texas Baptists don’t believe women can.

For many Texas Baptists, the urgency and sheer scale of the work involved in communicating the gospel of Jesus Christ is too great to wrestle over whether we have enough agreement about women in ministry to be able to work together.

Guarneri also received a strong affirmative response to his declaration that “doctrinal uniformity” shouldn’t distract from “missional fidelity.”

This doesn’t mean doctrine doesn’t matter. Doctrine matters immensely. But our devotion to doctrine shouldn’t outstrip our humility, and our passion for it shouldn’t exceed our passion for our mission.

But how often do we burn hotter when our doctrinal positions feel threatened than we do for communicating the good news of Jesus Christ?

As I see it, messengers to the 2023 BGCT annual meeting, by adopting the amended motion on women in ministry, sent the message women are integral to Texas Baptists’ mission.

Additionally, messengers communicated that churches who affirm women in ministry and churches who do not both have a place where together they can communicate the good news of Jesus Christ for all people, beginning in Texas and reaching around the world.

As we seek to communicate that good news, we need to consider the full reach of it. When we seek to communicate Jesus’ good news to women under duress outside the church, will they be able to see that same Jesus in the way we care for the women inside the church?

Following the vote, Baptist Women in Ministry posted an update to their Facebook profile expressing their concerns with the motion as passed. Among those concerns is that the motion did not make “clear if women in pastoral roles who are targeted by the SBC will be supported by the BGCT.”

What that support ought to be and how the BGCT can demonstrate such support warrants healthy and diligent conversation leading to God-honoring action. Doing so reflects on our mission.

We have one mission, a shared mission—to communicate the good news of Jesus Christ to all people, beginning in Texas and reaching around the world. This is not a mission for some of us. It is a mission for all of us and needs all of us—men and women, boys and girls.

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 are those of the author.

This year’s Baptist General Convention of Texas annual meeting is a Family Gathering, a fairly recent modification of the annual meeting format that occurs every five years. This year’s Family Gathering takes place in McAllen July 16-18.

Since Family Gatherings are held during the summer—as opposed to the regular autumn schedule—the first thing people expect is heat and sun. KRGV 5 News in the Rio Grande Valley forecasted a balmy 102ºF for Sunday and 101ºF for Monday and Tuesday, plus the heat index. Heat and sun we will get.

We can expect some singing, some preaching, some meeting and some voting. We also can expect to walk up and down the rows of exhibits looking for freebies and Minnesota-Wisconsin apples and cheese. In this way, Family Gatherings are no different than other BGCT annual meetings.

We expect to see old friends—whether they really are old or we’ve just known them a long time. For many, this is the highlight of each BGCT annual meeting—“a family reunion,” we call it.

So far, I’ve answered a different question than the headline asks. The things listed above answer the question of what to expect during the 2023 BGCT annual meeting. But if this meeting—and any other like it—is to be worth its salt, the more important question is what to expect from it.

Will we come from the meeting more Christlike?

Important discussions will take place during the annual meeting. We may even vote on some of them. When those discussions and votes are over, the matters that gave rise to them will not be finished. They will continue after we return home.

When we return home, will we have been formed in any way during the annual meeting for engaging those issues in a more Christlike way? I realize that’s a lot to ask of such a compressed and busy time.

If we are not so formed, then for us the annual meeting really is just business, not a time and place where the Holy Spirit—who is never compressed and busy—holds sway. For followers of Christ, such meetings are never “just business.” They always are times of formation. We should expect to come away from the 2023 annual meeting looking and living more like Christ.

Being open now to the voice and leading of the Holy Spirit before, during and after the annual meeting—wherever the Holy Spirit calls us and leads us—is a necessary posture toward that end.

Will our families come from the meeting stronger?

The intent of Family Gatherings is to bring families together in at least two senses. In one sense, the intent is for families—spouses, parents, children—to attend the gathering together.

For those families able to attend together, will they return from the annual meeting better for it? Will their relationships be sweeter, their love deeper, their commitment stronger? We should expect from the Family Gathering that they will.

To increase the likelihood of this happening, families planning to attend together need to commit now to have shared experiences during the meeting. They should commit to find within the busyness and business of the meeting life-giving things that will deepen their joy in Christ in ways transferable to the daily grind after the meeting.

In a second sense of gathering family, the Family Gathering is intended to bring together the churches of the BGCT, African American Fellowship and Convención Bautista Hispana de Texas—whose annual meetings normally are separate from each other—and the international and intercultural churches affiliated with the BGCT.

It’s not enough that we will be in the same building at the same time. Will we share meals together, sit together, talk together? Will we listen to one another? Will we come together on equal footing to worship our one Lord and to discuss ministry matters with equal concern?

I realize all the above are seemingly easy-to-answer “yes” or “no” questions. But there’s a hook in every “yes” and “no,” and that hook is barbed. The kingdom of God is contained in every one of those questions, and it’s not going to let go of those who claim citizenship in it.

Will we return home from this Family Gathering more unified as one body—Christ’s body? Will we be more united in advancing God’s kingdom together, for all people? We should expect that from this Family Gathering.

We can ensure such an outcome by preparing ourselves in the same ways I’ve already mentioned.

Will we come from the meeting changed?

We should expect to return home from the annual meeting changed, and not just in any way, but changed to be verifiably more like Christ. What good is a Baptist meeting if we don’t come away more like Christ?

The way we discuss challenging issues will reveal how much like Christ we are. We don’t even have to get to the point of agreement to demonstrate whether we are or are not like Christ.

The spirit of our families will reveal whether Christ is at the center of them. Our families don’t have to be perfect for people to see the love of Christ at work within them.

How we do life together with people unlike us—especially after we aren’t at the Family Gathering anymore—will reveal the fruit of the Spirit in us. Not every fruit on the tree has to be photogenic for others to see we really are not of this world.

We also don’t have to check off all three of the above all at this one meeting. We can leave that up to the One who changes us, but we ought to prepare to be made more like Christ in some way while we are together.

We may think we’re just going to attend another BGCT annual meeting. We need to expect more than that.

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 are those of the author.

Baptists are “a missionary people,” Elijah Brown, general secretary of the Baptist World Alliance, told those gathered in Stavanger, Norway, for the 2023 BWA annual meeting.

For centuries, missions has been at the core of who we are. Missions is so important to Baptists that those in the United States split over the issue of whether slaveholders could be appointed as missionaries, birthing the Southern Baptist Convention—and all its subsequent history, good and bad.

Yes, when Baptists talk about missions, we talk about monumental things. But our talk about missions tends to be one-sided in the United States.

The story Baptists in the United States often have told about missions tends to go something like this: If it wasn’t for us and our missionaries and mission efforts, the world wouldn’t know about Jesus.

Put another way: If the world is going to know about Jesus, we have to go tell the world, we have to send our missionaries, we have to give our money. And if we don’t do it, it won’t get done.

This isn’t a verbatim recital of our story about missions. Rather, it is a distillation of the insinuated and perhaps also unintended message. A consequence of this message, however, has been the overestimation of our place in the world alongside a devaluing of other Christians around the world.

BWA provides a needed corrective to this problem.

True international relationships

I have spent the last three days with Baptists from all over the world. If you’ve never done that, you should make a point to do it at least once in your life, and sooner rather than later.

The annual meeting next July will be in Lagos, Nigeria, followed by the 23rd Baptist World Congress in Brisbane, Australia, July 7-12, 2025.

These annual meetings aren’t about the places, though. They’re about the people. Getting to be with people from all over the world is always a fantastic experience, especially if you don’t spend the whole time cloistered among compatriots but actually spend time with people from around the world.

When you engage in conversation or share a meal with someone from another part of the world, you learn, you grow, you are expanded. And when this person is a fellow follower of Christ in the same faith tradition as yourself, you gain new insight into your shared faith. I have yet to spend time with a fellow follower of Christ from outside the United States when I wasn’t challenged and deepened in my own relationship and walk with Christ.

But these annual meetings aren’t centrally about the people. They are centrally about the one Lord we share, into whom we are baptized, by whom we are called and who is the source and reason for our mission. In fact, there is no reason for all these people to come together once a year except for what God is doing in and through them.

That’s what these annual meetings are about—what God is doing in and through Baptists all over the world.

This week, as we have discussed missions, our brothers and sisters from around the world have been a source of joy and wonder. Consider a few examples from my time with them in Stavanger.

True international missions

I traveled with a pastor from the Middle East. He said I could tell you where he lives and works, but I’ve been programmed to use the general designation “Middle East” and can’t bring myself yet to name his location.

Anyway, we enjoyed our conversation on the flight to Stavanger and set aside time later in the week to eat breakfast together. Over breakfast, he told me his church of about 30 to 40 people planted a church in a far more difficult area of the Middle East than where he lives, and his church is funding the work themselves.

As mentioned in one of our news stories about the BWA annual meeting, Nepalese refugees living in Tasmania, Australia, and who became Christians there through the work of Australian Baptists, asked to be sent to Germany to share the gospel with Nepalese refugees living there.

Fernando Brandão, executive director of Junta de Missões Nacionais in Brazil, happily reported his convention has deployed more than 2,000 missionaries.

Elijah Brown told those who attended an information session about the newly launched Global Baptist Mission Network that Moldova—one of the poorest countries in Europe—has 20 missionaries, and Venezuela—despite its catastrophic economic collapse—has 100 missionaries who planted 50 new churches last year.

Baptists in Papua New Guinea—a country that has featured so prominently in so many tales of foreign missions, as Baptists in the United States used to call international missions—are about to send their first missionary, Brown added.

True mission story

If it ever really was up to Baptists in America to evangelize the world—in truth, it never was—it’s certainly not the case anymore and hasn’t been for 20 or 30 years or more. Some in the United States might count this to our shame. I would count this as joy.

Consider these numbers shared during the 2023 BWA annual meeting. Over the last 10 years, European Baptists have declined by 2 percent, North American Baptists have declined by 5 percent, Baptists in Asia and the Pacific have increased by 26 percent, Baptists in Latin America have increased by 27 percent, Caribbean Baptists have increased by 71 percent, and Baptists in Africa have increased by 102 percent.

Scott Pilgrim, executive director of Baptist Mission Australia, told us that by 2030, 70 percent of the world’s Christians will be in the Global South, and by 2060, 40 percent of the world’s Christians will be in Africa.

From what Baptists in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean are showing, not only will they be among the majority of the world’s Christians, they will be among those leading the way in missions. In truth, they are leading the way already.

As U.S. Baptists and Christians talk about missions, we need to tell a different story. We have told ourselves for too long tales of our own importance, and in our believing it, we have grown complacent. Our fire has gone out.

We need to tell a new story—the true story—about what we are learning from our brothers and sisters around the world. And we need to be inspired by them, that our own passion for Christ and what he told us to do will be rekindled. Lord, may it be so.

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 are those of the author.

Maybe it’s just me, but it seems people are thirsty. We need water.

Ask people from Lubbock to Amarillo who endured record rainfall earlier this month and they might say, “No more water, please.” Plenty of other West Texans gladly would take some more.

But I’m not referring to the chemical compound H₂O. I’m referring to a different kind of water and a different kind of thirst. Yes, I’m referring to something biblical.

People are thirsty for peace, but there is precious little peace.

We are thirsty for security, but fear propagates like zebra mussels in a Texas lake.

We thirst for economic relief, but the experts have managed only to slow inflation, not stop it.

We long for more constructive politics, but combative is the order of the day.

This is less an opinion about the issues we face than an echo of that pervasive cry: “We thirst.” It is also a call to wake up to our thirst and to carry more water to thirsty people.

Temporary water

When we aren’t thirsty, we can take all day to drink a glass of water. If we’ve been exercising or working outside in the summer heat, we can down a full glass of water in seconds without taking a breath. I’m referring to this kind of thirst, a longing in our bones.

I see this kind of thirst just about everywhere I look these days. I see it in local and global news. I see it in our denominational conversations. I see it in the kinds of videos that go viral.

One of those viral videos is Belgian shot-put and hammer-throw champion Jolien Boumkwo running 100-meter hurdles to save her team from disqualification. She took one for the team—as she put it—and provided a shot of joy in our cut-throat world. We’ll take sips of that all day.

Before too long, though, this shot of joy will be buried and forgotten under millions of views of other viral moments. Their momentary relief is heavy on the “momentary,” light on the “relief.”

Biblical water

Felisi Sorgwe, associate professor of theology at Houston Christian University, in his recent book I Will Be With You: God’s Favorite Promise, recounts the Israelites’ thirst in the wilderness. This wilderness was rocky, dusty, arid and barren, and they’d been in the middle of it for days, if not weeks. They were thirsty enough to fight about it.

Moses cried—complained—to God for help, and God said: “I will stand there before you by the rock at Horeb. Strike the rock [with your staff], and water will come out of it for the people to drink.”

Moses did as he was told (Exodus 17:1-7).

Amid lament over Israel’s unfaithfulness, Scripture recounts God providing water from that rock:

He split the rocks in the wilderness
and gave them water as abundant as the seas;
he brought streams out of a rocky crag
and made water flow down like rivers (Psalm 78:15–16).

While celebrating God’s love for Israel, Scripture remembers God’s provision of water:

He opened the rock,and water gushed out;
it flowed like a river in the desert (Psalm 105:41).

Paul reinterprets the literal water from the rock as spiritual water from the Rock:

They all … drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4).

Paul’s description of Jesus as the source of wilderness water squares with Jesus’ own self-description, as well as Old Testament prophecy.

Jeremiah called God the fountain of living water (Jeremiah 17:13).

Jesus told the Samaritan woman during their conversation at Jacob’s well: “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.” (John 4:13–14).

When we’re in a desert wilderness surrounded by miles and miles of sand and rock, we’ll settle for a momentary stream. All too often, that’s where we are, and that’s what we do.

Everlasting water

What causes you to long for God? Maybe a better way to ask that is: What causes you to be aware of your longing for God?

Sometimes, busyness gets in the way of our awareness. Sometimes, fear or anger, bitterness or worry does. Often, satiation with lesser things gets in the way.

But then, I read a book like A.W. Tozer’s Knowledge of the Holy or listen to beautiful songs of worship such as Fernando Ortega’s albums The Shadow of Your Wings or Come Down O Love Divine, and I am reminded what I most want and need—what I long for most profoundly—is God.

In those moments, I can’t help but turn to God to find fulfilment in God’s completeness—Father, Son, Spirit; Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer. And God meets my longing.

Do I have to continually return to God for this fulfilling water? Yes. But I’ve not found the bottom of the well yet, though I’ve quickly found the bottom of so many other promises.

The world needs us to be fully awake to our longing for this everlasting water, for us to know full well its source, and for us to be satisfied by it. Because when we are, we become directional signs pointing other thirsty souls straight to who will quench their deepest thirst.

The world is enduring a summer drought of the soul. The world is thirsty and grabbing for a glass of water, sometimes finding momentary satisfaction, often meeting a mirage.

May we be made awake to what we really long for, may we turn directly to God to be made complete in God’s completeness, and may we carry this water to a thirsty world.

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 are those of the author.

To all women in ministry: I made an unwise decision that affects you, and I am sorry. I did not stand beside you when I should have.

I published two op-eds—a Voices article on April 3 and an editorial on May 17—responding to and referencing a list of Southern Baptist churches with women as pastors in various roles. Prior to those articles being published, the compiler of the list sent it to pastors throughout the Southern Baptist Convention.

Some people used the list to harass women named on it. I made the decision to host a copy of that list on our website as a means of holding the list compiler accountable. In both the articles, I included a link to the list.

I don’t know if any harassment came as a result of the list being on our website, but the possibility is there. I did not intend for anyone to be harassed—least of all women in ministry—and yet it happened.

We removed the list and links to it from our website after one of you contacted me this week expressing concern about the list being on our website. I am grateful that person contacted me. It shouldn’t have taken that for the list to be removed.

Women should not be harassed—especially by fellow Christians. Women, who are created in God’s image and carry the breath of God just as men, should not be harassed. I am grieved and angry women have been harassed for following God’s call to serve in ministry.

It also shouldn’t take having a woman in ministry in your life to feel that way. But it did for me.

God called my wife to ministry, as well as one of her sisters. I know how seriously they take God’s call, and I’ve seen their dedication to God lived out over decades.

When I was a pastor, I affirmed women in ministry. Affirming women in ministry is important enough to my wife and me that when I left the pastorate to become editor of the Baptist Standard, we joined a church that shares our conviction and also affirms women in ministry.

To all women in ministry, whatever your title—pastor, minister, director, leader, missionary, deacon, teacher, musician, chaplain, communicator, assistant, volunteer, spouse, parent or otherwise—God’s call on you should not be doubted, mocked or minimized—certainly not more than God’s call on a man.

On the contrary, the fact you have endured hardships, questions, doubts, criticisms and more just for being a woman following God’s call is worthy of honor and respect.

Women in ministry, whatever your title or role, you need our encouragement. You need our prayer and support. You need us to work alongside you.

My decision to host the list did the opposite, and I am sorry.

My apology cannot be the end of the story. Affirmation of women in ministry must be born out in action. What must follow is for me to encourage you directly and to stand alongside you, taking hits with you and dividing the load. I encourage others who affirm women in ministry to do the same.

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 are those solely of the author.

Messengers to the 2023 Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting approved at least three items of business with a singular message. They couldn’t have been more clear in communicating they believe only men can be pastors—of any kind.

Texas Baptists with differing views of women in ministry have responded on social media with great grief about these actions by SBC messengers. Some who also believe only men can be pastors see these actions by SBC messengers as diminishing the SBC.

These Texas Baptists and many others want the Baptist General Convention of Texas to allow for difference over women in ministry while maintaining cooperation among churches who differ on this issue.

The actions taken by SBC messengers this week make clear we are past the time when such cooperation can be assumed. It must be stated clearly.

Many Texas Baptists celebrate that a church’s position on women in ministry is not a test of fellowship with the BGCT—a worthy thing to celebrate. The BGCT’s upcoming annual meeting in McAllen July 17-18 is a good place and time to make that position official.

Some Texas Baptists already are thinking along those lines. I applaud that and encourage appropriate actions before, during and after the 2023 BGCT annual meeting that maintain our current differences over women in ministry and that edify the whole convention.

Steps to excluding churches with women as pastors

For that purpose, the kinds of actions taken by SBC messengers to cement opposition to women as pastors is instructive. Three particular actions clearly communicate that opposition.

These actions were to exclude two churches with women pastors, to adopt a resolution about the office of “bishop/elder/pastor,” and to pass a constitutional amendment barring churches who affirm, appoint or employ women as pastors of any kind.

The exclusion of Saddleback Church and Fern Creek Baptist Church is straightforward.

The constitutional amendment also is fairly straightforward, though the wording was amended to state it in the positive rather than the negative. “Does not affirm, appoint, or employ a woman as a pastor of any kind” was amended to “affirms, appoints, or employs only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture.”

The adopted resolution needs a little more explanation since it does not explicitly mention men or women. The last “resolved” of Resolution 6—an effort to make clear the SBC acknowledges only two offices in a local church: bishop/elder/pastor and deacon—was amended to remove “while autonomous churches may differ in their uses and categories regarding titles for staff members.”

In the larger context of all the discussion surrounding women in pastoral roles and what constitutes an appropriate title for a woman on a local church’s ministerial staff, this resolution as amended intends to communicate SBC churches cannot differ on the issue of women as pastors. In the SBC, the pastoral office is for men only.

In fairness, Resolution 5 also was adopted. It seeks to clearly praise, affirm, honor, equip and cultivate the call of women to fulfill the Great Commission.

Logical extension of stated position

Excluding churches with women as pastors is a logical extension of the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message—also amended during the 2023 SBC annual meeting. “Article 6: The Church” states: “While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor/elder/overseer is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.” “Elder/overseer” was added this week.

The BGCT includes churches who affirm the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message—which does not limit the role of pastors to men—and churches who affirm the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message—which does, demonstrating it is possible to differ on this issue and still cooperate.

The actions taken to solidify the SBC’s opposition to women as pastors highlights the need for other cooperative bodies—such as the BGCT—to make clear their official position on women in ministry. If the BGCT wishes to maintain “harmonious cooperation” amid differences over women in ministry, that position needs to be clearly stated by BGCT messengers.

Clearly stating women as pastors will not be a test of fellowship with the BGCT will alleviate concern that exists currently among Texas Baptists. That concern exists as a logical extension of no official position being clearly stated.

State the position clearly

During his address to the BGCT Executive Board in May, Craig Christina—BGCT associate executive director and acting executive director—described the BGCT’s historic stance on women in ministry. We published his comments in our Voices column.

Christina began by noting he does not “see it as [his] role to speak on behalf of the [BGCT],” because BGCT messengers to annual meetings and an Executive Board between those annual meetings speak for the convention.

He laid out the biblical basis for the BGCT’s stance and pointed out the BGCT’s faithfulness to the Bible despite disagreement about women in ministry.

“Among Texas Baptists, conformity over the role of women in the church is neither a test of fellowship nor a condition of cooperation,” Christina stated.

“We neither insist on uniform practices or ministry titles, nor do we compel the conscience of any Baptist to adhere to the conclusions of another on this issue. Of the theological issues we consider worthy of defining harmonious cooperation in the BGCT, the issue of women in ministry is not among them,” he continued.

Messengers to the 2023 BGCT annual meeting July 17-18 in McAllen can and should make this position official and unequivocal.

State the position humbly

As BGCT messengers make their historic stance their official position, they should be committed to doing so humbly.

Throughout almost all the floor discussion about the three actions taken by SBC messengers, speakers in favor of the actions declared their position to be “God’s way,” “faithful to Scripture” and faithful to the truth. When the opposing view was labeled explicitly, it was disparaged as an “interpretation.”

The truth is both sides of the discussion are an interpretation of Scripture. To think otherwise and to say or imply only “their” view is an interpretation is itself a violation of Scripture, which instructs us to be humble.

So, let us make clear and official that Texas Baptists come to Scripture together, honestly and humbly, and agree to differ over the role of women in ministry. And let us welcome others who do likewise.

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 are those of the author.

Baptists are at it again, and once again, autonomy of the local church is being deployed in an effort to settle the dispute.

Autonomy of the local church is the historic Baptist principle—a core value—that holds each congregation governs itself with no outside interference. As a core principle held for hundreds of years and propagated around the globe, it makes sense for Southern Baptists to swing with it in their current fight over women in ministry.

There is a problem, however, that the principle can’t solve, because the principle creates the problem. The problem is that the independence provided the local church by local autonomy collides with the independence of every other local church, association or convention—each of which also is autonomous—when they try to work together.

For Baptists to continue working together without giving up the principle of local autonomy, I see one way forward.

Autonomy a historic Baptist principle

Before describing the way forward, a look at the historic understanding of autonomy of the local church is warranted.

E.Y. Mullins, one of Southern Baptists preeminent thinkers and president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, published Baptist Beliefs in 1912. In the section on “The Church,” he describes autonomy of the local church as follows, starting with a reference to religious liberty. I will quote him at length because it’s that important.

[The church] must not form alliances of any kind with the state so that it surrenders any of its own functions or assumes any of the functions of civil government. Its government is democratic and autonomous. Each church is free and independent. No church or group of churches has any authority over any other church.

Co-operation in Christian work, however, is one of the highest duties and privileges of the churches of Jesus Christ. Yet in so doing they do not form or constitute an ecclesiasticism with functions and powers to be authoritatively exercised over the local bodies.

The voluntary principle is the heart of the Scripture teaching as to the individual and as to local churches. … [T]he organization and government of the local church proceeds on the principle of the voluntary association of free individuals in obedience to Christ and for purposes set forth by him.

Church discipline is simply the group protecting itself against the individual. The church has no power of coercion in the religious life of the individual. … The right of the church, however, to protect itself against the disorderly individual is an unalienable right in Christ.

Mullins then applies the principle to the relationship between local churches and “general bodies,” which he explains “are not composed of churches but of individuals.” Set aside that Mullins seems to equivocate on the composition of churches when he refers to how they relate to “general bodies.”

In all such co-operation or refusal to co-operate … the church neither assumes authority over the general body, nor submits to the authority of that body. The relation is voluntary on both sides.

Where a church is out of harmony with a general body it cannot legislate the general body into harmony with itself but it can withdraw if necessary without the consent of the general body.

… General bodies are themselves autonomous. No Baptist general body has authority over another. … Each body is self determining …

There are certain necessities which arise out of these principles of Baptist organization. 1. The necessity for clear thinking in order to avoid confusion in ideals and collision in the practical work of the Kingdom. 2. The necessity for well defined limits of function and aim in the general body to avoid the assumption of church functions. 3. The necessity for courtesy and respect as between Baptist general bodies (pgs. 64-67).

It is noteworthy that Mullins’ explanation of Baptist beliefs is predicated on the New Hampshire Declaration of Faith—a decidedly Calvinist document—which he notes was “adopted by the Landmark Convention and the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary” prior to publication of his book (p. 84).

Recent skirmishes over autonomy

In the interest of “clear thinking” and “courtesy and respect,” Baptists—particularly Southern—need to reexamine their understanding and use of autonomy of the local church.

I raised this issue in a June 2019 editorial about boundaries. Then as now, I was concerned about what appears to be differing understandings of autonomy of the local church. The example I cited was the debate surrounding whether churches who affirm same-sex marriage should and could be excluded from the Baptist General Convention of Texas.

Those who favored the inclusion of affirming churches argued the BGCT should not impinge on the decisions of a local church by excluding affirming churches. Ultimately, the BGCT messengers exercised their autonomy by voting in 2016 to exclude affirming churches.

Given Mullins’ description of the principle, one could ask, “Whose autonomy carried the day—the messengers or the local churches who remained affirming?” Some argue both retained their autonomy, but only up to a point. The affirming churches’ autonomy did not grant them authority to remain in the BGCT against the will of the majority.

The prior summer in a July 2018 editorial, I described the issue in relation to Southern Baptists being at odds over how to hold their churches and leaders accountable for sexual misconduct and abuse.

SBC denominational leaders insisted autonomy of the local church meant they could not hold local churches accountable. Many grassroots Southern Baptists weren’t buying that defense. Ultimately, the messengers overruled the convention’s top leadership in 2021 and called for a third-party investigation and the establishment of accountability measures.

A local church has the autonomy to employ a minister convicted of sexual abuse or assault, and SBC messengers have the autonomy to exclude that church from membership in the convention. Here again, the two spheres of autonomy seem to collide at the point of cooperation.

Present dispute over autonomy

The presenting issue for the 2023 SBC annual meeting is the denomination’s position on women in ministry. Specifically, messengers will decide whether to approve a constitutional amendment proposed by Virginia pastor Mike Law that would exclude churches from the SBC who “affirm, appoint, or employ a woman as a pastor of any kind.”

Messengers also will vote whether to approve Saddleback Church’s appeal and reinstate the church to fellowship with the SBC. The SBC Executive Committee voted in February to disfellowship Saddleback for “having a female teaching pastor functioning in the office of pastor.”

Rick Warren, founding pastor of Saddleback, released an open letter and a series of videos in response to what he characterizes as some SBC leaders’ denial of decline in favor of “in-fighting over secondary issues, like what you call your staff.”

In the first video of the series, Warren contends “the SBC has been ‘creeping toward a centralization where the local churches are losing their independence and autonomy, and we are increasingly controlled by our institutions and bureaucracies who have been systematically increasing their power to enforce uniformity.’”

In his open letter, Warren charges: “The current ruling of the Executive Committee … will open a Pandora’s box of unintended consequences unless we reject [the ruling]. It will fundamentally destroy FOUR historic Southern Baptist distinctives upon which the Convention was organized by our founders.

“It will: 1) change the basis of our cooperation 2) change the basis of our identity 3) centralize power in the Executive Committee and take away autonomy from the churches, and 4) turn our confession into a creed, which Baptists have always opposed.”

To defend Saddleback’s position on women in ministry alongside its continued relationship with the SBC, Warren deploys autonomy of the local church. As with the two examples cited above, the question will come down to whose autonomous assertion will carry the day.

Recent history shows two autonomous bodies cannot maintain their full autonomy—as each understands it—and still cooperate. Autonomy is not boundless.

The way forward with autonomy

I’ll say it again: In the interest of “clear thinking” and “courtesy and respect,” Baptists—particularly Southern—need to reexamine their understanding and use of autonomy of the local church.

Such a reexamination is necessary because what may have made perfect sense to Baptists in 1912—enough so for it to be championed by Baptist apologists at least since then—no longer is understood clearly.

What seems clear is if Baptists are to maintain cooperation among and beyond local churches, a moderated autonomy needs to be described. A moderated autonomy would spell out what essential agreements are necessary for local churches to cooperate in such things as associations and conventions. SBC President Bart Barber has advocated for as much.

The Baptist Faith and Message—all three versions of which were adopted after Mullins’ Baptist Beliefs was published—used to be enough of a reference point for cooperation. The divisions within Southern Baptist life over the last 40 years, however, make it clear the Baptist Faith and Message no longer is commonly understood, as Barber himself suggests.

To get to this moderated autonomy, Baptists need to ask such questions as: “Does local church autonomy supersede the autonomy of associations and conventions, or are those autonomies equally authoritative? How should the autonomy of those ‘general bodies’ be defined to allow for cooperation?”

If Baptists are to cease fracturing into ever-smaller groups, they will have to agree to a moderated autonomy that holds the collective as important as the individual. Unfortunately, such a position seems an increasingly harder sell, especially for Baptists in America—where polarization is strong and fewer people care about denominational peculiarities.

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 are those solely of the author.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

With the recent release of GPT-4 and other artificial intelligence platforms, that assertion seems truer than ever.

The problem, however, isn’t that truth is strange but that we seem increasingly less able to know what is true.

We used to know truth by how well a thing matched our experience or our parents’ descriptions. We could trust our senses and know whether what we saw or heard was true.

But truth is getting harder and harder to discern. And that’s a problem we need to address.

Warnings about AI

Artificial intelligence is aggravating this problem, because all too often we lack the patience for discernment. Consider a recent example.

An image circulated May 22 of a supposed explosion at the Pentagon complex outside Washington, D.C. On May 23, fact checkers reported the image “had telltale signs of an AI-generated forgery.” But this correction didn’t arrive before stock markets reacted, however negligibly, to the initial report.

Geoffrey Hinton, a so-called “godfather of AI,” knew this and worse was coming. NBC News reported May 1 that he left Google, where he developed AI technology, so he could warn about the dangers of AI.

Then, this one sentence dropped yesterday, May 30: “Mitigating the risk of extinction from A.I. should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks, such as pandemics and nuclear war.”

This chilling warning reported in the New York Times and elsewhere “was signed by more than 350 executives, researchers and engineers working in A.I.,” including Hinton. Among their concerns is that AI soon could “be used at scale to spread misinformation”—or falsehoods and distortions of the truth that purportedly come from trusted sources.

If such warnings by the very inventors of AI are correct, we may be approaching a time when our age-old ways of knowing the truth fail us. Anyone who wants to be believed and trusted—especially those proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ—ought to be concerned about this.

An AI experiment

As an experiment with truth, I asked a friend with a ChatGPT account to send me “a 100-word opinion in the style of Eric Black on autonomy of the local church.” He sent it to me, along with a second produced by Bard, another AI platform. Both are included at the end of this editorial.

The text of each opinion is generally as correct as one should expect from a 100-word summary of autonomy of the local church. The problem isn’t so much with the words.

The problem is neither opinion was written by me, nor do they sound like me. But you might not know that if you don’t know me or I didn’t tell you. And then, you might be suspicious about the truthfulness of my confession.

If truth is so easily distorted, how are we to convince anyone we are telling the truth?

‘Truth’ as a useful thing

Some would have us dispense with the notion of truth altogether, or at least the idea of a truth that is true for everyone. Truth is relative, so they say. This school of thought holds sway over much of our culture. I wonder if it’s ready for radical relativity.

Others contend a more cynical view of truth, arguing truth is a function of power. Michel Foucault (1926–1984), a French philosopher who radicalized Friedrich Nietzsche’s view of power, contended those with power determine what is true. In this way, they create “truth” and wield it as a tool of control.

If Foucault is right, is AI just another tool of the powerful, and how does it serve those in power? Our imaginations can run wild with these questions. The less imaginative can watch movies and read books about the possibilities.

Meanwhile, some of those who developed AI are telling us to forget these kinds of questions altogether, and in utterly stark terms, they are warning us to shut down the whole thing now. They believe AI is becoming more useful to its own soulless self than it is to any human in power.

What are we to do?

Most of us are not AI developers. Most of us are not in seats of power where we can turn it off, slow it down or try to direct its course. Most of us are watching it all unfold, still trying to understand yesterday’s news as today’s news arrives, wondering what—if any of it—is true.

Amid the alarm bells, my mind goes back to a tent. Blind Isaac is lying in bed. He’s sent Esau for deer and promised him a blessing. Unbeknownst to him, Rachel has a plan.

She sends Jacob, covered in Esau’s scent, to Isaac with a bowl of stew. It’s too soon for Esau to be back, and Isaac’s suspicious … but not long enough. He knows the voice isn’t right, but the smell and the feel are Esau. The stew is good. So, he gives away the blessing … too soon.

Had Isaac waited for both his sons to be at his bedside, he wouldn’t have had to question his faculties. The truth would have been plain enough. There’s a lesson in there for us.

We may not be able to trust everything we see, read and hear as readily as we once did, but truth is still discernable if we will not give the blessing away too soon.

In a world where what appears to be true can be distorted so easily—and so quickly—we must leave room for and allow the Holy Spirit to do for us what all too often we cannot do ourselves. We must allow the Spirit to guide us into all truth (John 16:13).

But to do that, we’re going to have to cede control to the Holy Spirit. And maybe that’s the real problem. We want control, and neither AI nor the Holy Spirit promises us that.

*******

Opinion produced by ChatGPT:

Write editorial in the style of Eric Black, Editor of the Baptist Standard, on autonomy of the local church. Use one hundred words.

“In the rich tapestry of Baptist life, the cherished principle of the autonomy of the local church weaves a thread that holds us together. Rooted in Scripture and etched in our heritage, this bedrock belief empowers congregations to govern themselves and follow their own convictions under the lordship of Christ. It is a sacred trust, a divine gift that must be cherished and safeguarded. As we navigate a rapidly changing world, let us not forget the beauty and strength of this autonomy. May we embrace it with humility, honoring the autonomy of our fellow churches and joining hands in the shared mission of advancing God’s kingdom.”

Opinion produced by Bard:

A 100-word editorial in the style of Eric Black, Editor of the Baptist Standard, on the autonomy of the local church:

“The autonomy of the local church is a fundamental principle of Baptist life. It is the right of each local church to govern itself according to its own conscience, without interference from any other church or denomination. This freedom allows churches to adapt to the needs of their own communities and to be creative in their witness to the world.

“Of course, the autonomy of the local church is not absolute. Churches are still bound by the teachings of the Bible and by the principles of Christian love and justice. However, within these limits, churches should be free to make their own decisions. This freedom is essential for the vitality and growth of the church.

“In conclusion, the autonomy of the local church is a fundamental principle of Baptist life. It is a right that should be cherished and defended.”

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 are those solely of the author.

CAUTION: The contents of this editorial may be disturbing to some readers.

Gun violence is the asphyxiating fumes of a toxic brew. Our response to it has been anemic, at best.

What is this toxic brew? It’s not any one thing but is a cauldron of misplaced values, disregard for others, materialism, lust for violence, entitlement, hatred, suspicion, fear, illness and more. Rather than dumping out the pot, we hurl slogans: “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.”

Slogans are a dodge from our shared responsibility. To say, “People kill people,” is to gloss over the fact a person with an AR-15 can kill more people more quickly and efficiently than someone with a pistol. We shouldn’t shirk our responsibility to deal with the shooter and the gun.

Such slogans also belie the fact guns really can kill you, just as so many other dangerous and regulated things can. The difference is those other dangerous things don’t have a Second Amendment protecting them. Nor do they have our slogans: “Fentanyl doesn’t kill people. People kill people.”

Another oft-repeated refrain—“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”—may evoke visions of American military victories and Old West justice, both of which we love. Nevertheless, it cedes the terms of the fight to the “bad guy.”

When we let the “bad guy” set the terms, we’ve already lost. It’s time for the “good guys” to set the terms. But this means we have to be clear about who are the “good guys.”

Defining “good” and “bad”

When we divide the world into “good guys” and “bad guys,” we naturally designate ourselves as the “good.” But this is to turn a blind eye to how we are involved in the “bad.” We may not have pulled the trigger, but we are part of the toxic brew.

We are among those who have spread or encouraged demeaning views of other people. We are among those who can’t seem to get enough of violence. We are among those who demand our rights like the prodigal son calling for his inheritance early.

During his appearance on Fox News Sunday with Shannon Bream, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott laid responsibility for the May 6 mass shooting at the Allen Outlet Mall on mental health. He said people want a short-term solution—alluding to gun regulation—but what’s needed is the long-term solution of addressing mental health.

Abbott is partly right. We do need to address mental health, and we need all hands on deck. But it will be a tough row to hoe, because Abbott’s long-term solution will require nothing less than a cultural 180 in how we think about mental health. For we are among those who have belittled and underfunded mental health. Long-term solution, indeed.

Alongside mental health

Alongside addressing mental health, we need legislative action addressing gun access. We’re currently headed toward one of two possibilities—a continuing arms race with the “bad guys” or imposing a police state. We don’t want either of these.

During the summer after my sophomore year in high school—and two years after the U.S. apprehension of Manuel Noriega—my church’s youth choir went to Panama on a mission trip. Armed guards were outside businesses all over Panama City, their guns at the ready.

We stopped for lunch at a McDonald’s—as Americans are wont to do—and as we ate our hamburgers, a guard stood directly behind us holding a shotgun. As is obvious, that made an impression on me.

The same is true at the Texas Capitol this session, where Texas DPS officers are posted throughout the complex, one officer in each pair or group with an assault rifle at the ready. The message is clear: We aren’t safe, not if it takes another AR-15—or two or 10—to save us.

This is not the sort of society we want to live in in the United States or anywhere.

The other possibility—a never-ending arms race in which the “good guys” constantly are trying to stay ahead of the “bad guys”—should be just as untenable to us. There is an upper limit to that race—the stuff superpowers fret over—and to think we are willing to reach for that limit is proof we’re in a toxic brew.

There must be and can be a short-term and long-term solution to gun violence that doesn’t require us to aim for utopia and end up in the dirt.

During the most recent Baptist General Convention of Texas Executive Board meeting, my friend Pastor Paul Kim addressed his fellow board members with a question he shouldn’t have had to ask.

In his opening remarks, he shouldn’t have had to remember the lives of three Korean American Texas Baptists killed May 6 at the Allen Outlet Mall. He shouldn’t have had to remind Texas Baptists about our commitment to the sanctity of life.

Furthermore, it shouldn’t have been the responsibility of someone from the Korean American community—or Uvalde or other mass shooting survivor community—to ask something so simple. It should have been all of us asking: “Can we as Texas Baptists make a statement about gun violence?”

But Paul was the one to ask, because we just keep stirring the pot.

Today needs to be different

Today needs to be different. Why today? Because today, May 24, marks one year since a gunman killed 19 children and two adults inside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.

Less than one month ago—May 6—a gunman killed eight people at the Allen Outlet Mall.

May 18, 2018, a student gunman killed eight students and two teachers at Santa Fe High School in Santa Fe, Texas.

Just six months before the Santa Fe High School shooting—Nov. 5, 2017—a gunman killed 26 people and wounded 20 others inside First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs.

Aug. 3, 2019, a gunman—from Allen, no less—killed 23 and wounded 26 people in an El Paso Walmart.

Before the month was out, another gunman killed seven and wounded 25 people in the Midland-Odessa area.

During a press conference following the Midland-Odessa shooting, Gov. Abbott said: “We know that words alone are inadequate. Words must be met with action.”

“I have been to too many of these events. I am heartbroken by the crying of the people of the state of Texas. I am tired of the dying of the people of the state of Texas. Too many Texans are in mourning, too many Texans have lost their lives,” he added.

Yet here we are.

Thoughts and prayers aren’t enough, to borrow the title of Taylor Schumann’s book. We must do more. We must do better. And we can.

At a minimum, Texas Baptists can make the statement Pastor Kim called for. But we can do more. We have the Christian Life Commission addressing the issue. We also have among us lawmakers and judges, professors and teachers, pastors and business owners, children and adults and more—all of whom can join together to tip the cauldron over and dump out the toxic brew.

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 are those solely of the author.

The 2023 Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting is less than one month away and promises to be another interesting meeting for SBC-watchers. What people seem most interested in are the convention’s presidential election and whether the SBC will vote out a group of churches, including Saddleback.

Many also want to know if a constitutional amendment will be adopted. The amendment, proposed by Virginia pastor Mike Law, would exclude churches with women pastors.

This amendment was referred to the SBC Executive Committee during the 2022 SBC annual meeting. To date, the Executive Committee has not decided whether to send it back to the messengers, but messengers could vote to bring it to the floor regardless.

One factor not to be overlooked in this matter is the creation of a standing credentials committee in 2019. Messengers to that year’s annual meeting approved creation of the committee to provide a more efficient way to hold SBC churches accountable for instances of sexual abuse in those churches.

Current SBC president Bart Barber, who is seeking a second term, believes that efficiency measure created another need—intentional or not—related to women pastors. He spelled out that need in a video he tweeted May 10. Barber and Law agree theologically about women pastors, but not about what to do structurally with churches who employ them.

Barber would like to be the convention president who appoints a task force to address the structural issue by examining and recommending clarifications to the SBC’s constitution, bylaws and statement of faith. But will he or Mike Stone preside?

Barber or Stone?

The presidential election is a fairly straightforward question. There are two nominees: Bart Barber, the incumbent, and Mike Stone, who is making his second attempt after losing—barely—to Ed Litton in 2021.

Stone is the choice of the Conservative Baptist Network. With the election taking place in New Orleans, some believe CBN will make a strong showing. Not Dallas-in-1985 strong, but strong for the current SBC.

I’m not predicting who will win. Call that what you want.

What about Saddleback?

The more involved and more interesting question is what the SBC will do about women pastors—senior or otherwise—and the churches who employ them, such as Saddleback.

Part of the question is whether messengers to the convention will agree with the SBC Executive Committee’s approval of the Credentials Committee’s determination that Saddleback is “not in friendly cooperation with the Convention, on the basis that the church has a faith and practice that does not closely identify with the Convention’s adopted statement of faith, as demonstrated by the church having a female teaching pastor functioning in the office of pastor.”

Will Saddleback messengers get to decide whether and how churches like them are excluded from the SBC? Stay tuned to find out.

Amending the constitution

The other part of the question about women pastors is whether any SBC governing documents will be amended to prohibit them outright.

Law’s proposal mentioned earlier would amend Article III of the SBC constitution—establishing the criteria for “friendly cooperation” between churches and the convention—to exclude churches that “affirm, appoint, or employ a woman as a pastor of any kind.”

Law made this motion during the 2022 SBC annual meeting, where it was referred to the SBC Executive Committee. Following the annual meeting, he posted a letter explaining the rationale for his motion. Later, Law assembled a list of supposed SBC churches with women pastors on staff.

His motion, letter and list have generated considerable discussion on social media and elsewhere about who the Bible says can and cannot be a pastor, and whether the titles “pastor” and “minister” are interchangeable. It’s also caused many churches to wonder what their relationship to the SBC will be following this year’s annual meeting.

As with the SBC presidency, I’m not ready to make a prediction about the messengers’ will on women pastors. Like December 2020, a month is long enough for anything to happen in SBC politics to shift messenger opinions. Enter Barber’s tweet.

Clarifying a vague phrase

In his video, Barber cited Article III of the SBC Constitution, which states the first requirement for a church to be in friendly cooperation with the convention. Such a church must have “a faith and practice which closely identifies with the Convention’s adopted statement of faith”—or Baptist Faith and Message.

“Nobody knows what ‘closely identified with’ means in terms of actually applying it to the case of individual churches,” Barber said, calling the phrase “vague on purpose” and written deliberately “to put phraseology in there that nobody can pin down, that nobody knows what it means.”

Barber noted that, historically, messengers defined “closely identified with,” but now having a standing Credentials Committee creates the need for messengers to “speak plainly” about what “closely identified with” means in relation to the Baptist Faith and Message. Does a church have to hold to every word of the statement to be included in the SBC?

In Barber’s estimation, messengers “adding in language about the office of pastor” ensures the Credentials Committee doesn’t “fill in the blanks” itself, thereby exercising more authority than messengers would want the committee to have.

Barber believes messengers should be allowed to vote on Law’s amendment, but he doesn’t believe the amendment will solve the problem. He also thinks an examination of the SBC’s constitution, bylaws and statement of faith is needed—a motion he expects to be made during the 2023 annual meeting.

Bottom line

The bottom line is the SBC does not believe women should be senior pastors. Many in the SBC are also anxious about women in any other ministerial position being given the title “pastor.” But can women be any other subcategory of pastor and their churches still be part of the SBC? We shall see.

Some in the SBC want doctrinal purity and mean to exclude woman as pastors in any form. Others desire structural clarity and seem willing to exclude women as pastors if the language is clearly stated to do so.

At the end of the day, the boundaries seem likely to become more rigid than clear. Which makes me wonder what outcome Jesus wants from all of this.

EDITOR’S NOTE (June 20, 2023): A link to Mike Law’s list was removed after the list was used to harass women and churches named in it.

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 are those solely of the author.

The news of the last week has been one troubling story after another. It’s the kind of bad news to which we give some attention (but not for too long), feel bad about (but not for too long), and move on from (as soon as possible).

We may move on because we think, as bad as the news is, it doesn’t really involve us, not directly anyway.

But it does. This week’s news involves us, and we need to get more involved.

Ethnic and religious persecution

We received word last week that mobs had “destroyed at least 40 churches and forced thousands of Kuki, Zomi and other minority hill-dwelling tribes … from their homes in the Manipur State of northeast India.”

We may think, “This sounds like a terrible situation,” and brush it off as a people and place we know nothing about. We may call it a shame and go on to the next thing. But there’s more to the story we shouldn’t ignore.

Imagine having to move to a new place because you are not safe in the place you call home. Imagine after leaving all you know to go to that new place, you become unsafe there, too.

Go a step further. You aren’t unsafe just because you’re “not from around here.” You are unsafe because of who and how you worship, because you’re a Christian. And it’s not just you in danger. It’s your whole family and community.

This is the case for many of the Kuki, Zomi and other tribes, many of whom have been Christians for generations.

You may not picture yourself in their situation, but you are if you claim to follow Jesus and go by the name “Christian,” because all who follow Christ are baptized into one body, one Spirit (Ephesians 4:4-5). We are one, then, with our Kuki, Zomi and other brothers and sisters in Christ who are suffering in Manipur.

Yes, this involves us.

Race and gun violence

Perhaps the news from Manipur was overshadowed—and understandably so—by the horrific mass shooting May 6 at the Allen Premium Outlet Mall.

This one hit closer to home for many Baptist Standard readers. Texas is no stranger to mass shootings, two of which were inside Texas Baptist churches. The horrific Uvalde school massacre almost one year ago is still fresh in our minds. At least one of the children killed—Lexi Rubio—attended a Texas Baptist church, and her great-grandfather was a Texas Baptist pastor.

There also are a significant number of Baptist Standard readers who live in or near Allen or who consider Allen part of their extended community.

Most news reports in the days following the Allen shooting are focusing on the gunman’s white supremacist views and the fact four of the eight killed were “of Asian descent.” Investigators and reporters are searching for a motive.

Part of the story that hasn’t received much attention to this point: three of those killed—Kang Shin Young, 35; Cho Kyu Song, 37; James Cho, 3—attended a Texas Baptist church. Kang and Cho’s 6-year-old son William was seriously injured but survived.

Yes, this involves us.

How we’re involved

In a general sense, what is happening in Manipur and what happened in Allen involve us, because we all are created in God’s image and are loved by God. I’ve already mentioned these stories involve us more specifically, because they involve our brothers and sisters in Christ.

An even more specific way these stories involve Texas Baptists is through the ministry our churches share through the Baptist General Convention of Texas. If your church is affiliated with the BGCT, you have a three-fold interest in paying attention to what is happening in numerous places around the world.

What is happening in places like Manipur is directly affecting your fellow Texas Baptists, such as the Greater Houston Burmese Christian Fellowship. They carry the weight of concern for their family and friends who are being hunted, brutalized and even killed in Manipur and areas to the east.

Likewise, what is for many of us a tragic news story is for New Song Church in Carrollton a propulsion into trauma. They will gather the evening of May 11 for a memorial service to mourn the loss of Kang Shin Young, Cho Kyu Song and James Cho. They will begin to do their best to care for William.

The burden is not Greater Houston Burmese Christian Fellowship’s alone. The mourning is not New Song Church’s alone. The burden and the mourning are ours, also.

Yes, this involves us.

Two ways to be more involved

We are involved in the news of this week, and alongside our prayers, we must do more than pray. But what? There are at least two things all of us can do to come alongside our brothers and sisters.

We can denounce racism and xenophobia. Neither has any place in Christ’s church and should find no quarter in our thoughts, speech or actions. Every opportunity we get, we can denounce racism and xenophobia.

“In Christ Jesus … there is neither Jew nor Gentile” (Galatians 3:28). Race, skin color, ethnicity, nationality—none of these make us better or worse than, superior or inferior to anyone else. We can make that abundantly clear everywhere we are.

We can denounce the sins of racism and xenophobia in sermons and Bible studies, in conversations with friends and coworkers, in social media posts and everywhere else we communicate. It’s really not hard.

We can advocate for religious freedom for all. Religious freedom doesn’t just happen in this world. We must work for it, and the work is within our reach.

We can promote religious freedom in all the same places and ways we denounce racism and xenophobia. We also can go to the halls of power and advocate for religious freedom among our lawmakers and diplomats.

These are only two things we can do. Though they may seem more abstract or controversial than “thoughts and prayers” or sending money, they have real-world consequence for real people—our brothers and sisters in Christ.

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 are those solely of the author.

Movement DFW commissioned a study in 2021 of youth in the Dallas-Fort Worth area to find out why they are leaving the church. I will quote one of their findings in whole, because I want you to pay close attention to it. Don’t react. Just listen.

“The majority of all those interviewed cited three reasons. They see church as (1) irrelevant: teaching is outdated and confusing; (2) unloving: lack of care for those who are different; (3) inauthentic: seeks to be manipulative.”

The important follow-up is “what Dallas-Fort Worth area young people want from their churches: (1) teaching that connects to their everyday lives, (2) to be heard and understood by their church leaders, (3) to be involved in and beloved by their church, (4) to see their friends experience that same welcome.”

I found a place where some of them can find—and do find—what they want from their churches. But it’s not the church. The church could be that place, though.

Where I found a model

Walking into the George R. Brown Convention Center in downtown Houston during the First Robotics World Championship mid-April felt like what it must be like entering the Olympic village. The air was electric with energy and excitement, and the sea of faces came from all over the world.

First Robotics reported more than 18,000 students and another 30,000-plus coaches, mentors, family and friends from 59 countries attended the 2023 championship.

What impressed me the most, though, was the concerted effort shown to welcome and care for every teenager there. Every one of them was valued. There’s a lesson in there for the church.

What’s this First Robotics thing?

For those unfamiliar with First Robotics competitions, it’s organized chaos. Local events generally have one field and regional events have two fields on which all participating teams compete. The massive first floor of the Houston convention center was covered with eight fields.

Three teams form an alliance—red or blue—and then work together to win the match against the other alliance. Alliances change from match to match as they progress through qualifying rounds toward the semi-finals and then finals. There’s more to it, but I only have so much space in this editorial.

First in Texas events might have 60 or 70 qualifying matches per event. The world championship had about 130 qualifying matches on each of the eight fields.

Each robot is built, programmed, marketed and driven by a team of students, each with their own role on the team. These robots aren’t small, and they’re fast. They can hurt you. Students have to be OSHA certified.

In addition to the students, each team has at least one coach and a group of adult mentors.

The core values of First Robotics

First founder Dean Kamen has thoroughly inculcated a set of core values into First Robotics, and he’s very evangelistic about them. They are:

• “Discovery: We explore new skills and ideas.
• Innovation: We use creativity and persistence to solve problems.
• Impact: We apply what we learn to improve our world.
• Inclusion: We respect each other and embrace our differences.
• Teamwork: We are stronger when we work together.
• Fun: We enjoy and celebrate what we do!”

Gracious Professionalism and Coopertition are two other First values. Both involve equal parts fierce competition, kindness, respect and cooperation.

From the time you walk in the door until you walk out—and all through the season leading up to the championship—these values are enacted consistently, top to bottom.

During his championship monologue, Kamen proclaimed the world would be a better place if everyone lived according to these values. And about 50,000 people—plus those watching online—believed him.

It’s no wonder children and youth who become involved in First Robotics enjoy it so much. They are valued, celebrated and challenged there in a way they may not be—and often aren’t—anywhere else. Many of the youth I saw in Houston would not find welcome in some of our churches. They also wouldn’t be valued or celebrated. I can say that because I’ve seen it.

What robotics taught me about the church

First Robotics is not the church. The church has some values and convictions First doesn’t have. But that doesn’t mean the church can’t learn from and interact with First Robotics.

I see in First Robotics a model for how the church can embody Jesus’ command to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.

First isn’t known for being judgmental; the church is. Because First welcomes all people without judgment, it stands as a clear example of what a gracious welcome might look like. Remember, welcome is one of the key things youth are looking for in a church. The church needs to ask: “Are we going to judge them or welcome them?”

First reignited in me the same deep excitement I had when I started a ministry to hot air balloonists in the mid-2000s. Hot air ballooning offers tangible ways to minister to people in key situations. So does robotics.

People who love Jesus and care about people and who also have mechanical, engineering, electrical, hydraulic, programming, marketing, fundraising or motivational skills can be mentors or coaches for a robotics team. First always is looking for adult mentors and coaches. Why shouldn’t followers of Jesus sign up?

Is there room in robotics for the church? Absolutely. Is there room in the church for robotics? I hope so, because “robotics” here is also a placeholder for a myriad of places Jesus is calling us to follow his lead and to embody his good news where people are. When we do that, young people won’t have to go looking for the church they want—and need. The church will already be with them.

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 are those solely of the author.