In his June 3 “Voices” article “Truth is the loneliest number,” Jay Givens advocates for egalitarianism in a juxtaposition of truth and love, claiming Southern Baptists should “stop fighting over truth” and instead “listen to Jesus.”
Before addressing his concerns, I want to express my admiration for Dr. Givens. The church I pastor, College Heights Baptist Church in Plainview, is literally across the street from Wayland Baptist University where Givens now serves as a vice president.
Many of our college students have appreciated his instruction, church members who serve on staff and faculty at WBU have noted his cheerful spirit, and he has been cordial to me in our personal encounters.
Charitable dialogue is difficult to convey online, and I hope my response is received in good faith. My intent is to graciously respond from a complementarian perspective.
Definition, not degree
Givens suggests adding Al Mohler’s proposed Truth and Unity Amendment to Article III, Section 1 of the SBC Constitution places egalitarianism on par with racial discrimination and homosexual behavior.
To my knowledge, Mohler does not claim these issues are of equal moral weight. While Mohler mentions the proposed amendment alongside a previous measure regarding LGBT+ practice, he does so to indicate the finality of discussion on the topic, not for moral equivalence.
Article III is simply the portion of the SBC Constitution that defines friendly cooperation and is the logical place for such an amendment.
Simply because two matters are on the same document does not indicate they are morally or theologically equal. Even the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message has statements of varying degrees of importance.
Givens claims the convention should reconsider equating a “godly female pastor with a church that covers up the sex abuse.” Again, the question at hand is not of moral comparison, but how to address a church that openly contradicts the beliefs affirmed within the Baptist Faith and Message 2000.
Sign up for our weekly edition and get all our headlines in your inbox on Thursdays
Though the “Law Amendment” narrowly failed, roughly 90 percent of SBC messengers have voted to remove openly egalitarian churches. Similar votes have disfellowshipped those who knowingly employed convicted sex offenders, passing at an even greater percentage.
The messengers are not being asked if egalitarianism is on the same moral standing as sex abuse. They are considering constitutional process regarding an established doctrinal position.
Conviction, not coercion
In “Questions of Practice” and “Questions of Interpretation,” Givens asks if this is a “first-order issue.” Without citation, he appeals to historical precedent by stating cooperating churches “could have variance on minor doctrinal issues as long as they affirmed the major doctrinal statements, such as the divinity of Christ.”
Though I would advocate this has not been the historical practice of Baptists, I submit that simply because church practice may not be a first-order issue (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), it does not make it an unimportant issue.
Affirming the deity of Christ has never been the minimum for Baptist cooperation. Even our name “Baptist” indicates conviction on a second-tier issue—believer’s baptism.
Historic Baptist confessions of faith celebrate the role of unity on second-tier issues because they provide a foundation for convictional cooperation. Our Baptist forebearers unified around second-tier convictions, and it is historically consistent for present-day Baptists to choose to do so again.
Even Texas Baptists have removed churches who embrace LGBT+ practice, recognizing this as “outside of harmonious cooperation” demonstrating a convention has the freedom to define the parameters of cooperation based upon biblical issue. Legacy must not negate conviction.
Clarity, not confusion
Givens misses in his analysis of The Briefing podcast. Mohler was clearly expressing his opinion in response to a listener’s question, not speaking toward the proposed amendment.
Mohler rightly encourages church leaders to not be “offering confusion on this issue, but should lean into clarity,” especially if they are presenting this female staff member as pastor. Mohler graciously speaks in generic terms for confidentiality. His statement is regarding the church’s unclear terminology, not dismissing this woman’s perspective, calling, or service.
Givens continues with a list of egalitarian presumptions that complementarians like myself find unconvincing. Space constraints do not allow me to engage Given’s articles regarding Pheobe’s brief mention in Romans 16:1. He name-drops Huldah, Priscilla, and Mary Magdelene as if this catalog of women necessarily negate the complementarian position.
I agree each of these notable women play an important part in redemptive history, demonstrating God’s high value of women. Complementarians should celebrate women in every role not prohibited by Scripture, including the mission field, university presidents, committees, and a host of other key positions.
However, God’s consistent use of godly women does not confuse complimentarians, nor does it supersede the biblical instructions that the role of pastor/elder/overseer is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.
I recommend Women in the Church: An Interpretation and Application of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 and Thomas Schreiner’s excellent article on 1 Timothy 2:12 to those who would desire to engage in the exegetical issues.
Regarding Second Baptist Church in Houston’s hypothetical removal due to Anne Graham Lotz preaching in 2021, the answer is simply “yes” if they continue the practice. The size of a church does not give it a pass, nor does a secular holiday for mothers give a congregation a one-day exception.
Every autonomous church is free to act under the rule of the Lord of the conscience, but this does not grant an automatic right to cooperation with others who hold differing convictions, regardless of size or history.
Humility, not hubris
Givens nears his conclusion with an unfounded assertion, stating Paul “primarily emphasized love and unity against those who sought purity of faith.”
I believe it is unfair and incorrect to compare the unsaved Judaizers with Baptists who are seeking a way to clarify cooperation in accordance with their statement of faith. While Paul requires “speaking the truth in love,” the apostle never instructs believers to emphasize love and unity against the truth. Rather, love “rejoices in the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:6).
Is truth the “loneliest number?” Perhaps. Even the Apostle Paul stood alone at the end of his life. Despite desertion, he knew “the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed …” (2 Timothy 4:17).
I support the Truth and Unity Amendment, not from personal hubris, but a desire for my convention to demonstrate its ongoing obedience to Scripture. I believe those who humbly hold fast to God’s word may find the truth isn’t so lonely, because the Lord is there. May the Lord strengthen those who would stand on matters of biblical conviction, even if they stand alone.
Taylor Lassiter is senior pastor of College Heights Baptist Church in Plainview. The views expressed in this opinion article are those of the author.
We seek to connect God’s story and God’s people around the world. To learn more about God’s story, click here.
Send comments and feedback to Eric Black, our editor. For comments to be published, please specify “letter to the editor.” Maximum length for publication is 300 words.