Over the last few weeks, Dr. Albert Mohler’s Truth and Unity Amendment has faced increasing opposition on a diversity of fronts. Though the arguments put forward address a wide swath of issues, they can all be traced back to two very similar visions for the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) intent on the same end: an SBC that cooperates with churches led by women pastors/elders/overseers.

The Heart of the Amendment

Next week during the 2026 annual meeting, Dr. Mohler will propose his amendment to Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the SBC Constitution. It will ensure that each church which cooperates with (or in other words is a part of the SBC), “Does not act to affirm, appoint, or endorse a woman serving in the office or function of a pastor/elder/overseer, specifically preaching to the assembled congregation.” This amendment will help guarantee that the SBC’s constitution and practice will align with the SBC’s doctrinal statement, the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. It 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.” In short, Mohler’s amendment seeks to ensure that the SBC will only cooperate and partner with churches that appoint qualified men to the office of pastor/elder/overseer. In other words, it will further enshrine the historic, Baptist complementarian view of manhood and womanhood into the life and practice of the SBC. 

The Heart of the Opposition

Though those familiar with the SBC would expect such an amendment to be almost universally supported, many voices with ties to Southern Baptist institutions and to state conventions have come out against it citing one of two related reasons. First, some oppose the amendment because they believe the office of pastor/elder/overseer should be open to qualified men and women. A second (and I suspect the larger of the two) opposes the amendment because they believe that the office of pastor/elder/overseer is not open to women. But they also believe that the SBC should still cooperate with churches that have women pastors. Both groups hope to drive the SBC away from its historic Baptist understandings so that they can remake the SBC into a free association of churches that openly partner with churches led by men and women pastors/elders/overseers for the sake of advancing the gospel.

Admittedly, few if any of those in positions of at the Executive Committee, the International Mission Board (IMB), the North American Mission Board (NAMB), the SBC’s Seminaries, the state conventions, or other prominent Baptist groups have made such direct appeals to the messengers who will decide whether or not to accept the amendment.

To date, those who oppose the amendment have taken a more evasive tack. They speak about how they respect Mohler, about how they support Southern Seminary, or about how they have identified with complementarian principles in years past. But then they go on to speak against Mohler’s amendment, citing its lack of historical precedent, their fear that the amendment will harm women, their worry that it will infringe upon local church autonomy, or the amendment’s failure to remove unqualified men from their SBC pastorates. And if those arguments fail, they toss out the mission card. The SBC meets to evangelize the lost, not to criticize the missteps of a few sincere sisters.

Though nice and at times well-reasoned, these arguments all have the same foundation. They are put forward by those Southern Baptists who believe that women can be pastors/elders/overseers or by those who believe that the SBC should cooperate with churches that have women pastors/elders/overseers. And make no mistake, both groups that oppose the Mohler amendment possess the same goal: cooperating with churches pastored by women for the sake of missions.   

A Plea for an Open Debate

Though I disagree with those who oppose the Truth and Unity Amendment and plan to vote for it, I still believe the issue should be debated in good faith on the convention floor. I call on both the opponents and supporters of the Truth and Unity Amendment to speak openly and honestly of their vision for the SBC this June.

Dear SBC messengers, if you believe the Scriptures permit a woman to serve as a pastor/elder/overseer, then I encourage you to make the argument from the Scriptures on the convention floor and in your blogs and podcasts. If you believe that the SBC should cooperate with churches that have women pastors/elders/overseers, I encourage you to make that argument lovingly from the Scriptures from the convention floor and in your blogs and podcasts. And if you share my belief that the office of pastor/elder/overseer is for qualified men, then I invite you to join me in lovingly making that argument from the floor of the convention and in your blogs and podcasts. Let’s speak openly of our visions for the future of the SBC.

Final Thoughts

I understand that my vision for the SBC may be out of step with the vision being put forward by most of the Executive Committee, NAMB, the IMB, and countless state conventions. I also understand that my vision for the SBC may be rebuffed by the messengers. But I long for it to be rebuffed by messengers who understand the issues and not those who have been confused by secondary arguments that keep the two egalitarian visions for the SBC hidden in the murky waters of vagueness. I long for the leaders and the messengers to courageously, lovingly, and respectfully share their visions for the SBC, stating whether they do or do not want the SBC to cooperate with churches led by women pastors/elders/overseers. May the Lord bless the SBC with such clarity as these matters come to the convention floor. May truth and unity win!

Leave a Reply