I’ve been trying to discern why this most recent round of Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) misogyny has troubled me so. The SBC has been against women in ministry for decades (though notably, not since its inception). It shouldn’t bother me anymore; it does though.
Let me provide a little context for those unfamiliar with SBC drama.
An SBC Glossary
Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)
In 1845, Baptists in the South separated from the larger organization of Baptists in the US (called the Triennial Convention) because they believed enslaving human beings was consistent with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Baptists in northern US states rightly disagreed. Taking a stand against human trafficking seems like a reasonable place to draw the line, don’t you think? Anyway, churches in the South formed the Southern Baptist Convention. Today, SBC affiliated churches are located around the globe.
Southern Baptist Convention Constitution
The main governing document of the Southern Baptist Convention. https://www.sbc.net/about/what-we-do/legal-documentation/constitution/
The Baptist Faith and Message
The Baptist Faith and Message (BFM) details the beliefs of Southern Baptists. It’s not the constitution, but it is central to SBC governance. The first BFM, published in 1925, was overhauled in 1963. That one was amended in 2000. The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 (BFM2000) tweaked the wording of its predecessor and added clarifying language so there could be no doubt on certain issues such as the inerrancy of scripture, homosexuality, and women in ministry. Here’s the gist: inerrancy—good; homosexuality and women in ministry—bad.
Inerrancy
The definition of “inerrancy” is “the state of being without error.” In relation to scripture, inerrancy means that there are no factual errors or contradictions in scripture.
For example, the Bible tells us that Judas Iscariot died from suicide. Matthew 27:5 reports that Judas threw down the money he was paid to betray Christ, left, and hung himself. Acts 1:18 says that Judas used the blood money to purchase a field (meaning he did not throw away the money), and on that field he fell on his head, his body opened up, and he spilled his guts–literally.
According to inerrantists, this is not a contradiction. They would tell you that though scripture does not explicitly say so, Judas gathered the coins after he tossed them aside, bought the field, found a tree there, and hung himself; later, the rope completely disintegrated, the body flipped upside down, and fell so that it appeared Judas had fallen on his head and died.
Or—hear me out—Judas died by suicide. Some thought he died from hanging, others that he died from a fall of his own making. Either way, the truth—that Judas cut his life short by the choices he made—remains.
Infallibility
Like “inerrancy,” this term is defined as “without error.” Infallibility, though, means that not only was the Bible written without any factual errors or inconsistencies, it is also incapable of error. What, then, do we do with the passages that seem contradictory?
Take the differences in the four Gospel accounts. Each writer wrote from personal experience. They remembered things differently and their writings reflect that. But if the text itself is infallible, we must suppress intellectual curiosity.
A MODERN LITERARY EXAMPLE
Entertain, if you will, a modern literary example. Imagine there were four versions of the birth story of Harry Potter.
- In three of them, Harry was born a wizard.
- In version A, he learned about his magical powers on his first birthday when he started speaking to snakes.
- In version B, he discovered his abilities when he stepped over a broom and suddenly started flying.
- In version C, he found out he was a wizard when he got a letter delivered by an owl.
- In the fourth version, Harry is born a dragon, cared for by a motorcycle riding giant, who transformed Harry into a human wizard on his 11th birthday.
If you know the Harry Potter story, then you know each of these versions offers a bit of truth. Still, they are different and they can’t all be factually accurate.
This is what the idea of inerrancy/infallibility of scripture asks of us: believe that four very different stories are not different at all.
Complementarianism
Complementarianism is the idea that men and women, while equal in value before God, have distinct roles that are complimentary and (in theory) equally important. Complementarians believe that women are subject to the authority of men in the church, home, and to a certain degree in society.
Egalitarianism
Egalitarianists believe that all people are equally valuable and that God can call humanity to any role God chooses.
The SBC today
Okay, so the BFM2000 adopted the complementarian view and specifies that no ministerial leadership roles can be held by women. This is not the SBC Constitution, you understand, but it makes the point
But alas, that explicit prohibition did not ease the minds of certain Baptist men who saw the gates of hell creeping open as the threat of ordained Baptist women loomed large. Cue the hero soundtrack…
Men Only amendment proposed
“I’ll save you!” Pastor Mike Law proclaimed (in my imagination), assuming a superhero stance. “I know exactly what to do! We won’t be friends with those churches anymore, and we’ll tell the whole world! That’ll show them.”
The SBC Constitution states in Article 3, “Composition,” that “The Convention will only deem a church to be in friendly cooperation with the Convention, and sympathetic with its purposes and work . . .[if].” Then it enumerates five conditions. These dos and don’ts explain what makes a church Southern Baptist and what can get one kicked to the SBC curb.
Law proposed an additional stipulation for affiliated churches. This sixth condition would decree that an SBC church “Does not affirm, appoint, or employ a woman as a pastor of any kind.” The SBC bylaws require a super majority vote of two-thirds in order for amendments to pass. So far, this resolution has not achieved the necessary support. Relieved? Don’t be.
SBC Convention 2026
The SBC will hold its 2026 convention June 9-10 in Orlando, Florida, and the news is already abuzz on the issue of the Enemy. The Enemy, of course, is ordained women, not Satan, though I suppose some would not be able to detect a difference.
Enter Al Mohler, the president of Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, KY. Brother Al is proposing his own amendment to the SBC Constitution. Like Law’s amendment, Mohler’s will state that if you want to be an SBC church, then you will not “act to affirm, appoint or endorse a woman serving in the office or function of a pastor/elder/overseer, such as preaching to the assembled congregation.” See Mohler to call for ‘Truth & Unity’ amendment to SBC Constitution at annual meeting | Baptist Press.
Why this matters to me
Now back to why this is all up in my craw. Incidentally, did you know that “craw” means both a bird’s throat and an animal’s stomach? Me either.
The Southern Baptist Convention’s stance on women in ministry is exactly as pivotal to my daily life as the views snake handling churches have on the issue. For the record, in most of those congregations, women are allowed to play with the rattlers as they are so led (presumably by God). However, if the Lord leads a woman to the pulpit, she’s out of luck, even if she has a really sweet asp.
But I digress.
There are worse things
The SBC’s decisions will not impact my ministry at Ecclesia Baptist. We disfellowshipped ourselves from the national SBC organization a few years back and were kicked out of the local branch before that. But still, my throat tightens and my heart races when I hear the SBC news. Granted, it’s not the worst thing I hear on the news. The way the US treats Cuba brings me to my knees; the behavior of ICE has literally kept me up at night; and then there’s the Israel/Palestinian disaster plus the war in Iran and the one in Ukraine.
But y’all, I can’t stand that the SBC is so consumed by the evil of women in ministry. I was raised by the SBC. I learned about women in ministry in Sunday school, Vacation Bible School, missions’ activities, and Training Union. This is so counter to everything the SBC churches of my youth taught me about following Christ.
Inerrancy fueling the fight
The doctrine of inerrancy informs SBC’s position. Most often, I see 1 Timothy 3:1–7 and Titus 1 quoted as the basis for their prohibition against women pastors. There are a dozen or so additional passages that can be interpreted either way (a quick google search will pull these up for you: “Bible verses about women in ministry”), but the SBC discounts those as insufficient proof. Consequently, I could type until my fingers fall off, quoting every biblical example of women in ministry and reciting every Bible verse that suggests a different view from the SBC’s. My efforts would be fruitless.
Good Faith Media & Baptist Women in Ministry.
It’s God’s call
And frankly, it’s less a biblical issue for me than a spiritual one. The Bible did not call me to preach. God did. And believe you me, I spent over two full decades trying to point out God’s doctrinal error. God kept calling. And when I did go to divinity school? I felt pure, supernatural peace. I had never experienced anything like it. As Ecclesia’s pastor, I feel that peace regularly—every time I’m in the pulpit. When I am preaching, I feel most aligned with God’s will for my life. I can’t explain it with biblical references. I only know that I feel completely alive—as if I had been made to do this work. It’s the kind of feeling I want everyone to experience.
And that’s the problem with the SBC’s Boys-Only Pulpit Club. It tells little girls and godly women of all ages that if they hear God calling them to preach, they are hearing God wrongly. Do they know how persistent God is? The Hound of Heaven is not going to quit calling. I know. I sent God to voicemail before voicemail existed.
False Teaching
The SBC tells their congregations to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ—to invite Jesus into their hearts. But when Jesus calls female believers, the men of the SBC get the final say on whether the call is legitimate or not. It makes me physically ill to think of the ramifications of this kind of domination. It’s wrong. It’s dangerous. And it is anything BUT Christ-like.
When the SBC says God cannot call women to pastor churches, I believe they are using God’s name in vain. Their misogynistic rhetoric makes me cringe as I do when God’s name is misused in any other way.
So maybe that’s why the SBC patriarchy troubles me so: because it is false teaching—the very thing Southern Baptist Churches have always warned me about.
A few other resources on this topic that I found interesting.
Baptist Women in Ministry website
Baptist News Global: In conversation with Meredith Stone about Mohler Amendment
