Southern Baptists again reject strict prohibition on women pastors
Southern Baptists again reject strict prohibition on women pastors
Show Caption
Hide Caption
The Southern Baptist Convention in 2025: The key issues
The Southern Baptist Convention is the nation's largest Protestant denomination denomination. It is headquartered in Nashville.
The Southern Baptist Convention is the nation's largest Protestant denomination.
The convention has 12.7 million members in the United States.
Southern Baptists have long held to a view called complementarianism, which prescribes different roles for men and women.
In recent years, the Southern Baptist Convention has taken a stricter stance on churches with female pastors and some members sought to enshrine a ban into the SBC's constitution.
For the second year in a row, a vote on the ban has failed to garner the needed two-thirds majority to pass.
DALLAS — The Southern Baptist Convention on Wednesday again spurned a constitutional ban on female pastors as the prohibition's proponents failed to move the needle on a contentious issue that has prompted several years of debate and the exit of multiple congregations from the nation's largest Protestant denomination.
For the second year in a row, 61% of SBC messengers, or delegates, voted for the measure, just short of the required two-thirds majority.
The matter has tested the Nashville-based denomination's commitment to church autonomy as some churches choose to embrace more egalitarian views about women in ministry rather than complementarianism, which prescribes different roles for men and women.
The SBC has disfellowshipped several prominent churches because of female pastors within the last several years, including Saddleback Church, a megachurch in Southern California; Fern Creek Baptist of Louisville, Kentucky; and First Baptist Church Alexandria in Virginia.
Others, like NewSpring Church in South Carolina, have left voluntarily.
James Goforth, senior pastor at First Baptist Church in Ferguson, Missouri, spoke against the measure, calling it an unnecessary distraction from more important issues.
Southern Baptist meeting: Southern Baptists vote to seek repeal of historic same-sex marriage ruling
But Alexander Odum, pastor at Northside Baptist Church in Fort Myers, Florida, expressed frustration with such characterizations, noting that the SBC's credentials committee had initially failed to recommend Saddleback's ouster in 2022 despite the church employing a female senior pastor. The SBC eventually expelled Saddleback in 2023.
"That yearlong delay was the direct result of the committee not having clarity," Odum said. "There is no reason to run away from our biblical beliefs about the office of pastor."
The motion limiting pastor and church elder roles to men only was introduced by Juan Sanchez, senior pastor of High Pointe Baptist Church in Austin, Texas, who said the measure simply echoed Baptist principles but was needed to provide clarity for the nation's largest group of evangelical Christians.
Related: Southern Baptists repeat feuds over SBC public policy arm, women pastors at Dallas event
He noted that some have worried about the legal ramifications of passing the measure but said it was important to adhere to biblical principles.
"There will always be legal concerns," Sanchez said. "We are not a people governed by attorneys. We are a people governed by a book."
Approval of the ban could have risked the departure of additional churches from the denomination, which is struggling to maintain its membership of just under 13 million. But the measure's backers have said adherence to doctrine should trump membership concerns, despite opponents' concerns that it would be too repressive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Democratic drama: Union leader exits underscore DNC divisions
The departure of two major union presidents from their posts at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is raising questions about lingering internal divisions as the party seeks to regroup. On Sunday, news surfaced that American Federation of Teachers union President Randi Weingarten and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees President Lee Saunders would decline to be reappointed as at-large members of the committee. Both endorsed DNC Chair Ken Martin's former opponent Ben Wikler in the party chair's race earlier this year, and both were later removed by Martin from the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee. The two cited internal disagreements in their decisions to leave the DNC; their exits are the latest examples of internal disagreements within the party spilling out into the open. 'It shows that we're not united,' said Douglas Wilson, a North Carolina-based Democratic strategist. 'Everytime we have a situation where prominent people are exiting their posts, not the party but their posts at the DNC, that becomes the narrative as opposed to what the Trump administration is doing.' Other Democrats have brushed off the departures as not completely out of the ordinary. 'There is zero daylight between Chairman Martin and the vast, vast majority of DNC members,' said New York state Sen. James Skoufis (D), who ran for DNC chair earlier this year and backed Martin after dropping out. 'There are always going to be a couple of members, a few members who from administration to administration are not going to be completely aligned and are not going to want to continue as members. And so that always happens,' he said. Weingarten and Saunders informed Martin in separate letters that they were declining to be nominated as at-large members of the DNC. 'While I am a proud Democrat, I appear to be out of step with the leadership you are forging, and I do not want to be the one who keeps questioning why we are not enlarging our tent and actively trying to engage more and more of our community,' Weingarten wrote to Martin in a letter dated June 5. In his letter dated May 27, Saunders wrote to Martin that 'this moment demands unwavering focus, discipline, and clarity.' 'It demands that we devote every ounce of our energy to defending our members, protecting our collective bargaining rights and making sure that all workers know we are in their corner and we are fighting,' Saunders wrote. A source close to the DNC told The Hill that Weingarten's exit did not come as a surprise. 'Ever since the horse she bet on in the chair's race lost, she has always been on the other side of the fence as Ken — this is no surprise,' the source said. And in a statement following news Saunders was leaving the committee, DNC Labor Council Chair Stuart Appelbaum praised Martin as a leader who understands 'workers are the backbone of the Democratic Party.' A separate Democratic source described Weingarten's and Saunders's support of Wikler during the race as 'hyperintense,' noting they were 'bitter' with the outcome of the race. 'It was very clear to me that they were looking to blow up the DNC,' the source said. '[Martin] is not looking to blow the place up.' The two unions represent significant Democratic constituencies. The American Federation of Teachers boasts more than 1.8 million members while American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees has more than 1.3 million members. The groups and their leaders are also expected to continue to play major roles in the Democratic ecosystem. Some Democrats note that Weingarten's and Saunders's departures come after Republicans made inroads with some union constituencies in 2024. 'Although Republicans are not sweeping unions, Republicans are starting to be viewed by union members as the party of the people who have to take a shower after work or in this case the people who have to take an Excedrin after work,' Wilson said. Critics of the departures have been quick to label the moves as 'a distraction,' noting how the two letters surfaced Sunday evening. 'We don't have to have all of these disputes and conversations in the public sphere because it does not help the overall cause and the overall good,' said Antjuan Seawright, a Democratic strategist and former adviser to former DNC Chair Jaime Harrison. 'No matter what the disagreement may be, it does not compare to the disagreements that we have with the other side,' he continued. John Verdejo, a DNC member from North Carolina, said he sees the situation as coming down to 'bruised egos.' 'The fact they decided to go public with this, on a matter that is internal, on top of all that is going on, speaks volumes and more about them,' Verdejo said. Last week, the DNC was moving forward after David Hogg announced he would not be vying for his spot as vice chair in the DNC after an overwhelming majority of committee members voted to redo the vice chair elections of Hogg and Pennsylvania state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, who was elected again to the post on Saturday. Hogg has faced backlash from Democrats for launching his organization, Leaders We Deserve, that would primary incumbent House Democrats in an effort to bring about generational change within the party, all while he was serving as a vice chair. Weingarten expressed support in April for Hogg's efforts to get involved in Democratic primaries, but her exit letter was written prior to Hogg's decision to not run for vice chair again. 'It's very obvious to most that Randi was channeling that disappointment with the [chair] race through David Hogg because David Hogg obviously was a very significant disrupter,' the second Democratic source said. Seawright argued that the departures present Martin with the opportunity to bring new members into the vacated spots. 'Randi has been around the DNC for a very long time so maybe her resignation is another opportunity for another generation of leadership who wants to do the work ahead that's going to be required of us as Democrats,' he said.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
How else could Iran retaliate over the ongoing Israeli strikes targeting the country?
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — As Israel pounds Iran with airstrikes targeting military facilities and its nuclear sites, officials in Tehran have proposed a variety of steps the Islamic Republic could take outside of launching retaliatory missile barrages. Those proposals mirror those previously floated by Iran in confrontations with either Israel or the United States in that last few decades. They included disrupting maritime shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, potentially leaving the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and other attacks by militants. Here's a look at what those options could mean — both to Iran and the wider Middle East. Targeting the Strait of Hormuz The Strait of Hormuz is the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, through which some 20% of all oil traded globally passes. The strait is in the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, which at its narrowest point is just 33 kilometers (21 miles) wide. The width of the shipping lane in either direction is only 3 kilometers (2 miles). Anything affecting it ripples through global energy markets, potentially raising the price of crude oil. That then trickles down to consumers through what they pay for gasoline and other oil products. There has been a wave of attacks on ships attributed to Iran since 2019, following President Donald Trump's decision to unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and re-imposing crushing sanctions on Tehran. U.S. forces routinely travel through the strait, despite sometimes-tense encounters with Iran's Revolutionary Guard, a paramilitary force answerable only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based 5th Fleet conducts those operations, known as freedom of navigation missions, to ensure the waterway remains open to business. Iran views those passages as challenging its sovereignty — as if it operated off the coast of the U.S. Since the Israeli attacks began, Iranian officials have repeatedly raised blocking the strait — which likely would draw an immediate American response. Withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Experts fear Tehran could respond to the strike by deciding to fully end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, abandon the the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and rush toward a bomb. As a member of the treaty, Iran is obligated to explain the any radioactive traces outside of declared sites and to provide assurances that they are not being used as part of a nuclear weapons program. Iran insists its program is peaceful, though it is the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. U.S. intelligence agencies and the IAEA assess Iran hasn't had an organized military nuclear program since 2003. There is precedence for the concern. North Korea said it withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and tested a nuclear weapon in 2006. However, again, if Iran withdrew from the treaty, it could draw the U.S. into the fight, something Tehran so far has been seeking to avoid. Asymmetric attacks by militants Iran could encourage more asymmetric attacks, targeting Jewish tourists, synagogues or Israeli diplomatic missions as it has done in the past. However, it's been a rough few years for those forces. Iran's allies, the self-described 'Axis of Resistance,' have been severely hurt by ongoing Israeli attacks since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, particularly Lebanon's Hezbollah and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Iran has long used those groups as both an asymmetrical way to attack Israel and as a shield against a direct assault. Iraqi groups backed by Iran so far haven't gotten involved, leaving just Yemen's Houthi rebels as the only member of the axis to launch attacks on Israel since its campaign against Iran began. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
How else could Iran retaliate over the ongoing Israeli strikes targeting the country?
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — As Israel pounds Iran with airstrikes targeting military facilities and its nuclear sites, officials in Tehran have proposed a variety of steps the Islamic Republic could take outside of launching retaliatory missile barrages. Those proposals mirror those previously floated by Iran in confrontations with either Israel or the United States in that last few decades. They included disrupting maritime shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, potentially leaving the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and other attacks by militants. Here's a look at what those options could mean — both to Iran and the wider Middle East. Targeting the Strait of Hormuz The Strait of Hormuz is the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, through which some 20% of all oil traded globally passes. The strait is in the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, which at its narrowest point is just 33 kilometers (21 miles) wide. The width of the shipping lane in either direction is only 3 kilometers (2 miles). Anything affecting it ripples through global energy markets, potentially raising the price of crude oil. That then trickles down to consumers through what they pay for gasoline and other oil products. There has been a wave of attacks on ships attributed to Iran since 2019, following President Donald Trump's decision to unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and re-imposing crushing sanctions on Tehran. U.S. forces routinely travel through the strait, despite sometimes-tense encounters with Iran's Revolutionary Guard, a paramilitary force answerable only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based 5th Fleet conducts those operations, known as freedom of navigation missions, to ensure the waterway remains open to business. Iran views those passages as challenging its sovereignty — as if it operated off the coast of the U.S. Since the Israeli attacks began, Iranian officials have repeatedly raised blocking the strait — which likely would draw an immediate American response. Withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Experts fear Tehran could respond to the strike by deciding to fully end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, abandon the the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and rush toward a bomb. As a member of the treaty, Iran is obligated to explain the any radioactive traces outside of declared sites and to provide assurances that they are not being used as part of a nuclear weapons program. Iran insists its program is peaceful, though it is the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. U.S. intelligence agencies and the IAEA assess Iran hasn't had an organized military nuclear program since 2003. There is precedence for the concern. North Korea said it withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and tested a nuclear weapon in 2006. However, again, if Iran withdrew from the treaty, it could draw the U.S. into the fight, something Tehran so far has been seeking to avoid. Asymmetric attacks by militants Iran could encourage more asymmetric attacks, targeting Jewish tourists, synagogues or Israeli diplomatic missions as it has done in the past. However, it's been a rough few years for those forces. Iran's allies, the self-described 'Axis of Resistance,' have been severely hurt by ongoing Israeli attacks since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, particularly Lebanon's Hezbollah and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Iran has long used those groups as both an asymmetrical way to attack Israel and as a shield against a direct assault.
