Peter Witkowski SBC

The Truth and Unity Amendment Debate: What’s Really Going on & Why it Matters

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!

Peter Witkowski SBC

Tree Beard and the Case for Thoughtful Conservative Baptist Collaboration

To facilitate greater cooperation within the Southern Baptist Convention (and one could argue within broader evangelicalism) conservative Baptists who cherish scriptural fidelity need to embrace the reasonableness of J.R. Tolkien’s Treebeard. In other words, if conservative Baptists hope to nudge their convention back towards right doctrine, they must allow for diversity on nonessential Baptist doctrines and practices, embrace all who follow the essential doctrines, and oppose all who oppose the essential doctrines.  

A Quick Trip to Middle Earth

Treebeard, the mythical tree shepherd of Fangorn forest, first appears to the hobbits Merry and Pippin in the second volume of the Lord of the Rings. After telling Treebeard of their quest to keep the all-powerful ring out of the grasp of the evil Lord Sauron, the hobbits ask Treebeard the all-important question of whose side the Ent was on. ‘“And what about yourself?’ asked Merry (74).”

Treebeard responds as follows: “I am not altogether on anybody’s side, because nobody is altogether on my side, if you understand me: nobody cares for the woods as I care for them, not even the Elves. Still, I take more kindly to Elves than to others…And there are some things, of course, whose side I am altogether not on…I am against them altogether…these Orcs, and their masters (Two Towers, 75).”

In this short paragraph Tolkien moves his plot forward and provides conservative Southern Baptists with an analogy for proper, meaningful, and yet wisely limited cooperation.

Allow for Diversity on Non-Essentials

First, conservative Southern Baptists must allow for diversity on non-essential doctrines and issues, acknowledging that no one else will ever be fully aligned with them on every subject and topic. No person in this fallen and confused world will be perfectly aligned with his brothers and sisters at every point. To borrow from Treebeard, no one will care for the woods, one’s secondary theological priorities, and one’s pet projects with the same fervor as the one who made them his pet project. Even the most seasoned and friendly of reformed Baptist can and will diverge at points as Albert Mohler and Danny Akin’s controversy over the rightness of sporting a hoodie in the pulpit has made clear. If conservative Baptists make absolute fidelity to their personal worldview the test of cooperation, they will find themselves isolated, alone, and able to influence precious little outside their homes.

Embrace Those Who Follow The Essentials

Second, conservative Southern Baptists should partner with anyone who supports the essentials of the Baptist Faith. When putting together coalitions to define marriage as between a man and a woman, to end abortion, or to restrict the office of pastor and elder to biblically qualified men, conservative Baptists should walk beside all who share their convictions even if they diverge over secondary matters such as politics, education, the plurality of elders, spontaneous baptisms, and Calvinism.

In arguing for broad cooperation, I am neither attempting to minimize nor cancel the debates being had by the Never-Trumpers and the Pro-Trump advocates or those being had by Calvinists and Arminians. Such robust conversations over these and a host of other issues should continue in Christian charity. I believe the SBC is better for such discussions. But I also believe that we can still partner with those with whom we disagree on lesser things to advance the essentials of the Baptist faith. In other words, instead of criticizing Ents for not being more Evlish or Elves for not being more Entish, some Baptist for not being more Trumpish, conservative Baptists should embrace the spirit of Merry and Pippin who promised Treebeard that, “We will do what can (77).” Wherever the roads traveled by the various tribes of conservative and even pragmatic Baptists “go together (77)” conservative should embrace those who will walk with them.

Oppose Those Who Oppose the Essential

Third, conservative Baptists must not partner with Orcs who openly undermine the essentials of the Baptist Faith. Conservative Baptists cannot cooperate with those who do not share their view of salvation, the authority of Scripture, and Baptist Confessions because such individuals traveling away from and not further into the historical Christian.

For example, Southern Baptists cannot partner with those who deny the trinity or the doctrine of justification by faith alone. To walk with them, Baptist would have to surrender the essential claims of the gospel. As a theologian of old noted, “Unity without the gospel is a worthless unity; it is the very unity of hell (106).” Conservative Baptists cannot partner with fellow Baptists if the deny essential elements of the gospel.  

They also cannot partner with those who deny the authority of Scripture.” Those who follow the path of “Thus says the watching world’ or the path of “Thus says the attorneys” or the path of “Thus says the latest public opinion poll” will in short order cease to walk the path of “Thus says the Lord.”  As the authors who helped compose the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 note, “We believe that true cooperation is grounded in a common commitment to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and in a common obedience to the Bible as the Word of God (145).” Baptist unity flows through scriptural authority.

Lastly, conservative Baptist cannot walk with those who seek to undermine Baptist confessional statements. While confessional and doctrinal statements fall short of the authority of Scripture, they do form the foundation of Baptist cooperation and preserve the SBC from rejecting the clear teaching of the Bible. For example, if the SBC allows messengers to interpret the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 in a way that allows for practices that contradict a direct reading of their confession, then the basis of SBC cooperation will shift from its doctrinal statement to the whims of its messengers’ feelings about those doctrinal statements. In other words, the basis of unity will shift from a shared understanding of the Scriptures as articulated in the document to a shared understanding of someone’s opinions of that document. Such a shift leads one away from the path of historic Baptist faith and until it places them at odds with the essentials of the Baptist faith. Conservative Baptists must reject such cooperation. They cannot partner with Orcs on their path to Moria.

But they can work for the betterment of Orcs and extend grace to those that turn from their Orcish errors. Past mistakes and divergence on essential doctrines should not keep conservative Baptists working with those newly return to historic conservative Baptist positions. Instead of chiding their slowness, conservative Baptists should praise their transformation. If ever a people understood the need for grace, mercy, and forgiveness it should be conservative Baptists who value the gospel precisely because they have experienced the unmerited forgiveness and love of the Lord and Savior. May we have a heart like Treebeard and Merry and Pippin make common cause with all who long to advance the essentials of the Baptist faith.

Peter Witkowski Discipleship, Ecclesiology

Praise the Lord for the Small Work of Small Days

The Lord often expands his kingdom through the ministry of small things though many western Christians tend to assume the opposite. They believe that God is best seen in megachurches and massive conferences that pull together thousands of people. And while God does work through large evangelical churches and parachurch ministries, the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob is just as much at work in the church of 10 as he is in the church of 10,000, as Ezra and his fellow Jewish exiles discovered thousands of years ago, when they began building the second temple.

Ezra and Small Days

Following the leadership of Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and others, the Jews of Ezra 3 set the foundation of the second temple in 536 BC bring 70 plus years of worship futility to an end. They rightfully long to celebrate and set aside a day to worship the Lord for his good gifts.

But as the worship unfolds with loud hymns and joyful praises, another dissonant sound begins to invade the service…the sound of weeping. Ezra describes the scene as follows: “But many of the priests and Levites and heads of fathers’ houses, old men who had seen the first house, wept with a loud voice when they saw the foundation of this house being laid, though many shouted aloud for joy (Ezra 3:12).” Instead of rejoicing in the laying of the temple foundation, these old men derided this day as a day of small works…a day that could not measure up to, much less rival, the glory of Solomon’s temple, whose every corner sparkled with ornate gold designs (Zech. 4:9; Hag. 2:4). As the quirky baseball coach Yogi Berra once noted, “The future ain’t what it used to be.”

Though cultures have changed a lot since then, the temptation to compare—and then complain about—God’s ongoing work remains in full force. Western evangelical denominations seemingly mourn their declining numbers without end and spend countless hours coming up with baptism strategies, giving campaigns, and church-growth proposals in an effort to recapture the glory of the 1950s. Similarly, local congregations can remain fixated on past glories, complaining about the smallness of their children’s ministry, the lack of people at worship, or their trickle of baptisms. They remember when the children’s ministry was busting at the seams, when the church had to hold two services to accommodate all its members, and when the church was spitting out baptismal candidates faster than Ford made cars. That was when God worked. But this?

The Glory of Small Days

But what evangelicals miss today—and what the Jews of Ezra’s day missed—is that the work of small things advances the kingdom of God just as much as the work of large things. What the old men mourning the temple foundation did not know was that this temple would one day house the glory of the Son of God. As the Lord told Zerubbabel: “Be strong, all you people of the land, declares the Lord. Work, for I am with you, declares the Lord of hosts… The latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former, says the Lord of hosts.” Jesus would come to worship and teach in this temple, guiding men and women to eternal life. Though this work seemed small, it would be used by God to advance his glory in ways those men could never imagine. In other words, the small works were not to be lamented but praised for they were even more glorious than the fomer.

What was true of the temple is true of every denomination and local church today. God is still advancing his glory through the ministry of small things. As Reuben Bredenhof notes in his book, The Ministry of Small Things,” The most glorious and everlasting foundation has been laid, and that is Christ (1 Cor 3:11). If we are building on him, then we need never despair, nor discourage these small beginnings.” God can and does use the woman teaching five children in Sunday school to regenerate the hearts of lost children. God can and does use the pastor faithfully counseling two to three members a year to sanctify and grow his people. God can and does use the finances of small church budgets to sponsor missionaries around the world. The hours spent advancing the gospel in small places, in small ways, are not wasted but are being used by God to expand his kingdom. One day soon, countless men and women will be gathered around the throne of God, praising Jesus because men and women were faithful in the day of small things. Praise the Lord for the small days of ministry.

Spurgeon and the Day of Small Things

The great preacher Charles Spurgeon, who preached to thousands and shaped much of nineteenth-century evangelism through his prolific ministry output, came to saving faith through the ministry of small things. On the snowy morning of January 6, 1850, teenage Spurgeon slipped into a small Methodist church that was even smaller than usual that morning. Because the church’s pastor could not even make the service, a senior deacon had to ascend to the pulpit in the pastor’s place. The faithful old saint preached a simple and yet direct message of salvation that God used to awaken and redeem Spurgeon’s heart. The Prince of Preachers was brought into the people of God because a man was faithful on the day of small things.

Small Things Are Essential

What was true of the second-temple era and of the nineteenth century is still true of the church today. The gospel goes forward because men and women like Zerubbabel, that deacon, and countless others keep up the ministry of small things. For example, my church exists today because our finance team faithfully collects and deposits the church’s offerings and pays bills. My church can gather for worship because the deacons faithfully show up early to unlock the church, because my church’s worship team faithfully practices during the week; because the nursery team faithfully watches the children; and because men set aside time to prepare prayers, Scripture readings, and sermons that guide the worship of the church. Worship occurs in my church and in millions of other churches across the world because men and women are doing small things. The next generation of Christians will be in heaven because this generation of Christians, like every other generation of Christians before it, delighted in the ministry of small things in small days. As Bredenhof notes, “we should remind ourselves that oftentimes the little things are the big things.”

Dear saint, do not grow weary in doing good. God is advancing his kingdom through the service of small days.

Final Thoughts

While all Christians should aspire to see the universe praising the Lord and should praise the Lord for grand displays of worship, they should also recognize that God is working in the small days as much as the great days. Brothers and sisters, when you see the smallness of your denomination or church, do not complain about what you lack and lament what you once were. Rather, rejoice in the knowledge that hearts are still being changed and that lives are still being sanctified. Rejoice in the small works of the Lord that are advancing his kingdom and filling up the reservations for the marriage supper of the Lamb. And then… do the next small thing.