Jordan Villanueva’s article, “Cooperating When We Disagree,” is written to urge Southern Baptists to consider the “mistakes of Texas” as the fear of deepening fractures escalate in anticipation of the 2024 SBC annual meeting in Indianapolis. As a pastor of a church affiliated with the BGCT, or Texas Baptists, I resonate with Villanueva’s assessment of the awkward nature of two state conventions in Texas. He is not alone in wishing more could be done for the gospel if Baptists in Texas had not split in the late 1990s. While his appeal to broad cooperation for the gospel is admirable (and in lockstep with the Texas Baptists ethos), I believe each heading of his article reveals the fragility of his argument.
Cooperation Implies Conviction
Villanueva rightly suggests that cooperation does imply some level of disagreement. Even within our local congregation there are differing views of controversial topics like the Millennium, the age of the Earth, and Reformed theology. Yet the reason our local congregation holds together is not because we welcome disagreements, but because we have a set of clarified convictions adopted in our bylaws: the Baptist Faith & Message 2000. In the same manner, our national and state conventions can only be held together by embracing a set of core convictions, and at times, these convictions should be clarified by the messengers.
As a pastor leading our church to cooperate with others for the Great Commission and Great Commandment, I am not seeking ministry partners who disagree with us, but rather those who share common convictions about the gospel and biblical truth. As the messengers from cooperating churches seek to clarify those sets of convictions this summer, our pursuit should be convictional cooperation, not mere toleration.
Scripture Must Be Our Case
If “functional ecclesiology” is to be defined or shaped by something other than Scripture, then what other “theological authorities” should we look to? Any faithful student of Scripture knows that theology is not done in a vacuum, and perspectives from systematic, biblical, and historical theology will all come into play in developing one’s ecclesiology. Yet properly understood, all three of these disciplines seek to be subject to Scripture rather supersede it.
Baptist ecclesiology is defined by Scripture, and Scripture alone must be the case for our cooperation. History and tradition may help us clarify past understandings of biblical matters, but they are always subject to Scripture. There is a biblical reason we believe in autonomous, independent churches rather than a Council of Bishops like our Methodists brothers. There is a biblical reason we believe in one office of pastor/elder/overseer rather than “teaching elders” and “ruling elders” like our Presbyterian friends. There is a biblical reason Southern Baptists have—and always should—defend that the pastoral office is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.
Personally, I support the Law Amendment because it appeals to Scripture, and it is the task of the messengers to affirm or reject it based upon Scripture. History is informative, but no other source besides Scripture should define the boundaries of Baptist cooperation. When we discover we are in error or have a need to clarify an urgent issue of the day, hermeneutics must surpass history and tradition.
Be Wary of Compromising the Work of God
The New Testament is laced with repeated admonitions for believers to pursue unity. Paul instructs the Ephesian church to be “eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3, ESV). Yet for every appeal for unity, the New Testament also comes with a warning to the church to reject false teachers who would corrupt the church, pleading with believers to “contend” for the faith (Jude 3). While I believe the biblical context for these passages refer to local congregational unity, many of the principles can be applied to conventional unity.
While Villanueva is correct in his assessment that Baptists have often contended against each other rather than for a common faith, our missional cooperation must be regulated by doctrinal clarity. At some point, all Bible-believing churches must guard against doctrinal compromise, even if it may seem to have a steep missiological cost. Even Texas Baptists, arguably one of the most theologically broad state conventions, has chosen to draw the line and take a stand for biblical fidelity by removing churches who embrace LGBTQ ideology. I applaud Texas Baptists for remaining consistent on this issue in accordance with its messenger-approved convention rules, but more importantly because the Word of God is clear on these matters.
While the missional cost of disagreements must be weighed, so must the missional cost of clear compromise. There may be disagreements about where the messengers choose to draw the line regarding missional cooperation, but those who uphold the authority of Scripture recognize that there is always a line to defend and remain vigilant in its defense. As the preamble to the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 reads, “Each generation of Christians bears the responsibility of guarding the treasury of truth that has been entrusted to us [II Timothy 1:14]. Facing a new century, Southern Baptists must meet the demands and duties of the present hour.”
We Must Strive To Be Correct
Could we be wrong? Yes. Southern Baptists have been wrong in the past (simply see our history regarding slavery and abortion), and unless the Lord tarries, we will undoubtedly be wrong again in the future. Humility is a Christian virtue, and as James 4:6 states, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” All Christians should be wary of prideful arrogance, and no God-fearing Southern Baptist should claim individual infallibility.
But humility and conviction are not opposites; rather, they should go hand-in-hand. The Baptist distinctive of “soul competency” believes that individuals are indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and that they should make humble and convictional decisions in accordance with the Scriptures as God leads. Baptists are a convictional people and, I believe, a semper reformanda people. I urge Southern Baptists in this moment to reject the fear of error and embrace bold beliefs as we pursue God’s truth together.
Conclusion
A May 2005 booklet by Paul Powell of Truett Seminary decried the Conservative Resurgence in the SBC as a “fundamentalist takeover” and called the newly formed SBTC “a splinter group of ultra-conservative Texas churches.” He urged Texas Baptists to acknowledge Texas was quickly becoming a multi-ethnic “mission field” and to keep convention dollars in the Lone Star State. As a proud Texan, I admit this state-centered impulse is consistent with our cowboy culture. I love Texas and want to see it reached for Christ.
Yet roughly 20 years later, 2022 NAMB evangelism reports from state conventions reveal that despite sending a higher percentage of funds outside the state, this “splinter group” has grown remarkably and is even more effective at reaching Texas than the “traditional” Baptists of the BGCT. While Texas Baptists reported 14,191 baptisms for 5,108 congregations, the SBTC reported 13,324 baptisms for 2,712 churches – a much higher rate per church. Even when considering church attendance size, the SBTC outpaces the BGCT in baptisms by a noticeable margin.
In Texas, time has shown that holding to conservative doctrine propels, rather than hinders, evangelism. The BGCT is now facing an increase of posturing from a small but vocal number of CBF-aligned churches who are calling for an outright recognition of women to the pastorate, and I believe this trend will only increase. I acknowledge this reality as the pastor of a BGCT church literally across the street from BGCT-affiliated Wayland Baptist University and in the BGCT stronghold of West Texas rooting for the ongoing missional success of our state convention. I firmly believe that at the local, state, and national level, our united mission will be accelerated by doctrinal clarity rather than theological compromise.
Villanueva is right to lament the awkward two-convention system in Texas and ponder how much we could do if both conventions were realigned. I agree wholeheartedly with this desire, and I pray for a gospel-driven unity based upon the Word of God in local, state, and national partnerships. However, I believe this will best be accomplished by strengthening doctrinal clarity around the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 and rejecting romanticized appeals for compromise. Texas—and the SBC at large—should glean from the “mistakes of Texas” by humbly holding to a conviction-based missional cooperation under the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.
Editor's Note: As a part of its commitment to fostering conversation within the Southern Baptist Convention, the Baptist Review may publish editorials that espouse viewpoints that are not necessarily shared by the TBR team or other contributors. We welcome submissions for responses and rebuttals to any editorials as we seek to host meaningful conversations about the present and future of our convention.
Taylor Lassiter
Taylor Lassiter is the pastor of College Heights Baptist Church in Plainview, Texas. He has a B.A. from Lubbock Christian University, an M.A. from Dallas Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. in Biblical Studies with an emphasis on Missiology/Church Revitalization from Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Taylor and his wife, Meredith, have been married since 2008 and they have three sons, Timothy, Caleb, and Samuel.