Baptists have a confessional responsibility. In line with this confessional responsibility is an agreement about cooperation in the calling of training ministers of the gospel and planting of churches at home and abroad.
The specific issue about confessional identity and denominational cooperation is highlighted in the resolution that passed at the 2026 SBC in Orlando: A cooperating church “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.”
Such a constitutional requirement, arising from the confession of faith, is legitimate in light of the foundational purpose of the Convention to “carry into effect the benevolent intentions of our constituents, by organizing a plan for eliciting, combining, and directing the energies of the whole denomination in one sacred effort for the propagation of the gospel.”
It is entirely fitting, even necessary, in “organizing a plan” that the constitutional standards of such cooperation include a specific agreement on the qualifications of the teacher/gospel proclaimer in those churches that we found and of the varied tasks assigned to those who are sent. The constitutional requirement is an outflow of the legitimacy of the confessional status of the requirements for pastor. I will propose reasons for the confessional status of this requirement.
Scripture Embodies Principles that Require Clear Statements of Faith
Scripture arises because of divine revelation (Eph. 3:5). Scripture is inspired of God (2 Tim. 3:16) and includes what Paul described to Timothy as “my teaching” in which Timothy should continue. In 1 Corinthians 2, Paul said that those things that could not be known by empirical investigation or philosophical ratiocination “to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God” (1 Cor. 2:10). He sustains all things in their existence and “works all things after the counsel of his own will” (Eph. 4:11) and thus cannot err in either His knowledge of all things or His statements about any portion of creation or any of His decrees.
Consequently, Scripture is inerrant, Scripture is clear, Scripture is sufficient. We do not go beyond Scripture in the formation of biblical doctrine, nor do we stop short of all that Scripture says on any subject. We do not have the prerogative to make instruction from God concerning anything — including His redemptive community — negotiable. We may neither invent nor omit.
Scripture sets truth in opposition to error. Truth is a characteristic of an accurate understanding of all that God has made and all that He has said. Falling into heresy is leaving the truth, like Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim. 2:17–18).
Regeneration is from the truth (Col. 1:5–7). James wrote, “Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth (James 1:18).
Apostolic witness constituted truth in accord with the promise of Christ of the combined witness of Father, Son, and Spirit in the Spirit’s work of revelation and inspiration (John 16:13–15). Those who embrace the teaching of the apostles follow the Spirit of truth (1 John 4:5–6).
Truth calls for careful articulation and distinguishing one thing from another, and energizes a system of connections in a number of biblical propositions (2 Cor. 11:2–4). Truth is coherent, synthetic, and systematic. Paul often refers to “the faith,” the full deposit of divine revelation.
That term occurs more than 25 times in the New Testament. It implies inter-doctrinal coherence and is assumed by Paul as he delineates the serious doctrinal issues that follow from the denial of resurrection (1 Cor. 15:12–19). Paul’s argument in Romans 8:26–35 gives an order of doctrinal implications arising from divine foreknowledge.
Truth is saving. A true knowledge about righteousness is saving truth (Rom. 10:1–4; 8–10). Paul was concerned that the Galatian Christians, who had been running well, were being drawn away from obeying the truth (Gal. 5:1–10). In 1 Corinthians 15:1–2, Paul told the church in Corinth in a long series of propositions necessary for a true understanding of the gospel, calling it “the gospel I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you” (1 Cor. 15:1–2). A willingness to be imprecise on matters of truth is a denial of the revelatory character of Scripture and the saving nature of truth argued and applied.
Were it not for the application of the principles of absolute revealed truth, necessary coherence, and synthesis, we could not confess with confidence the words of the Apostles’ Creed, the Creed of Nicea, the Chalcedonian formula, or the statement on justification in the Charleston Association Confession of Faith.
Scripture has many examples of confessions both for witness and worship (Deut. 6:4ff; Matt. 16:16; 1 Tim. 1:15; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 Tim. 4:9–10; 2 Tim. 1:8–14; 2 Tim. 2:11; Phil. 2:5–11; 1 John 4:2ff; Rev. 4:8, 11; Rev. 5:9, 12–14, and others.)
It is an Orthodox Baptist Commitment
Baptists have some examples of persons and denominations who have purposefully resisted the unifying use of confessions. W.B. Johnson, in his debate with J.L. Reynolds, had “an insuperable objection” to confessions as tests of orthodoxy because he denied confession’s doctrine of imputation. E.Y. Mullins, who spoke in favor of confessions as a necessary qualification for service in denominational entities, nevertheless said that “as soon as [creeds] become binding they become divisive” and “inevitably lead to mischief in the church” and become “a chain to bind, not wings on which the soul may fly.” John Gale, among the non-subscriber General Baptists, wanted only that “most valuable form of sound words contain’d in the Scriptures” and became Unitarian.
In 1922, the Northern Baptist Convention rejected the adoption of the NHC and substituted the view of the classic Liberal Cornelius Woelfkin that “the New Testament is the all-sufficient ground of our faith and practice, and we need no other statement.” The CBF objected in particular to the creedal status of inerrancy and the prohibition of women as pastor/teacher.
The most formative position, however, has been the approval of confessional definition for Baptist witness. John Spilsbury, the pastor of the first Particular Baptist church, said that agreement on a confession of faith was necessary to “declare the fitness of the matter for the form.” The Second Baptist Church in Boston stated “it a Duty incumbent upon us to make a declaration of our Faith and Practice, to the Honour of Christ, and the glory of his Name.” To condense a long list of such historical examples of Baptists who have used confessions both for definition and for protection, I mention J.P. Boyce, who argued that “the very duties which God enjoins upon the Churches plainly suppose the application of every principle involved in the establishment of creeds” [Boyce, Three Changes in Theological Institutions]. B.H. Carroll affirmed on many occasions and contexts that “a church with a little creed is a church with a little life.”
Should Pastoral Qualification be a Confessional Issue?
So, we ask, “Is the New Testament material about qualifications for church office sufficiently clear and contextually important to include in a confession of faith?” Yes, it is.
In Ephesians 4, Paul listed the ongoing ministry of the church to reside in the gifts of the pastor/teacher. The work of the pastor/teacher encapsulates the three other gifts given by Christ in His ascension. The pastor/teacher’s source of content is the revelatory material of the apostles and prophets, and he is admonished to “do the work of an evangelist.” He equips the local congregation for “works of service, to the building up of the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God” (Eph. 4:11–13). For this reason, the pastor/teacher is to be “apt to teach” (1 Tim. 3:2) as his primary function.
A pastor’s qualifications, both of character and of pedagogical function, are set forth as a “faithful saying” (1 Tim. 3:1). We find this phrase employed in 1 Timothy 1:15 where the phrase “worthy of all acceptation (or full acceptance)” expands the meaning. There, its content is central to the very existence of Christianity: “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.”
A “faithful saying, worthy of all (or full) acceptance” summarizes the work of the ministry described in 1 Timothy 4:9, where Timothy is admonished to “instruct the brethren in these things” as a good minister of Jesus Christ, “nourished in the words of faith and of the good doctrine which you have carefully followed” (1 Tim. 4:6). He is to give attention to the “public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching” (1 Tim. 4:13). He is to “pay close attention” to himself and to “your teaching,” for in the content of what is taught resides the salvation both of himself and his hearers. Elders who “rule well” and who “work hard at preaching and teaching” are worthy of double honor (1 Tim. 5:17).
Timothy is to guard the deposit of revelation Paul received (1 Tim. 6:20) as a “standard of sound words,” and he is to commit these things “to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 1:13; 2:2). Another faithful saying of 2 Timothy 2:11–13 emphasizes persevering courage amid pressure to deny one’s apostolic confession of Christ: “If we deny Him, He also will deny us.”
In light of that, Timothy is to avoid useless and vain striving about profitless words but to give himself as one “approved of God” by “rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15), for some have “strayed concerning the truth” and “overthrow the faith of some.” The servant of the Lord, however, must be “able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition” (2 Tim. 2:24–25). His ability to detect error, his knowledge of the inspired Scripture, including Paul’s doctrine, must be so thorough and sound that he will be ready at all times to preach the Word and to “convince, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and teaching” (2 Tim. 4:2) for some cannot endure sound doctrine.
To Titus, Paul described a bishop as one who is “holding fast the faithful words as he has been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict” (Titus 1:9). His teaching is to be so clear and forceful and his doctrine so sound that in the case of the “many insubordinate … idle talkers and deceivers,” their “mouths must be stopped.” Paul calls on Titus to “rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith” (Titus 1:13). Titus must, therefore, “speak the things that are proper for sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1). He is to “speak, admonish, exhort.” Concerning the gospel and its implications for holiness and good works, he is to “speak, exhort, and rebuke with all authority” (Titus 2:15).
When the writer of Hebrews commands his readers to “Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you,” he goes on to say, “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account” (Heb. 13:7, 17).
We must now reiterate this question in a plain and straightforward manner: “Does the Bible contain sufficient material about the character and duties of the teaching ministry of the church to formulate, to synthesize, a doctrine?” Comparing Scripture with Scripture, can we know what Paul meant when he said, “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet” (1 Tim. 2:11–12). He does not base this on a particular contextual alarm about the women of Ephesus, but on the order of nature in creation and the order of reception and responsibility in revelation. At the very heart of the eldership, bishopric, pastor/teacher is the duty to teach all in the congregation soundness in faith and to exercise authority through instruction in doctrine, relationships, and moral uprightness. Paul specifically forbids these functions and, therefore, this office to women.
Is not this accumulation sufficient to support the rather modest synthesis, “The office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture” (BF&M VI)?
If an article of a confession is biblically justified and denominationally confirmed by its inclusion in the confession and is elemental to the distinctive doctrine of the denomination, relativizing its importance and its defining character is simply wrong. Either dismiss the article entirely by discussion and vote of the denomination, or allow its authority as a biblically derived affirmation to have its proper influence.
The confession was adopted under the assumption that churches desiring such a confederation considered themselves of like faith and order. Arguments claiming unity is built on sameness of mission, not sameness of doctrine, miss the point that mission is defined by doctrine.
A church-planting mission, in addition to clear Christological and soteriological doctrinal unity, must be particularly careful to maintain unity in commitment as to biblical qualifications for teachers, exhorters, and yes, rebukers, of these churches. This is seen as warranted by the plain meaning of Scripture and comparison with several biblical texts listed in the proof text apparatus of the confession. That such a requirement is constitutional as well as confessional is legitimate for the specific cooperative enterprises undertaken by the churches of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Carroll’s Comments
The comment of B.H. Carroll on the passage in 1 Timothy 2:9, and following in comparison with 1 Corinthians 14:34–35, summarizes the clarity and the seriousness of these Pauline injunctions: “The custom in some congregations of having a woman as pastor is in flat contradiction to this apostolic teaching and is open rebellion against Christ our king, and high treason against his sovereignty, and against nature as well as grace. It unsexes both the woman who usurps this authority and the men who submit to it. Under no circumstance conceivable is it justifiable.” In writing about the phrase, “the pattern of sound words,” Carroll added, “Modern people say, ‘Don’t have much creed, and when you state it, don’t let it take any form. Somebody might object.’” He then sealed his point in saying, “No man is true to the faith who departs from the pattern.”
Those who object to the BF&M confessional article limiting the office of pastor/teacher to men or think that it is unworthy of strict conformity as a denominational qualification should consider seriously both parts of Carroll’s pungent observations. To hold lightly, and with flexible conviction, a confessional article and argue that a church is free to ignore and contradict it relativizes a plain ecclesiological proposition of Scripture. It violates the terms on which the confederation of churches was established.
It says, “Paul’s instructions can be followed by those so disposed but others may choose their own way.” The creed, so goes the objection, must submit to varieties of opinion and the personal sense of mission of individual Christians. We must beware, however, that we do not engage in “flat contradiction to this apostolic teaching,” and set ourselves “in open rebellion against Christ our king.” Certainly, we are not back to the practice of conceding that confessional infidelity is a sign of spiritual maturity, a deeper grasp of the mind of Christ, and educational superiority.
Likewise in his commentary on 1 Timothy in the American Commentary series, Hezekiah Harvey — considering the text carefully in the setting of Paul’s argument concerning creation, fall, and redemption — says, “The passage plainly denies to woman the office of the ministry” on the ground of creation order and is therefore “valid in all places and in all ages; and the rule excluding woman from the office of the ministry in the church, of which they form the ground, is consequently universal and perpetual.”
Neither exegetically, confessionally, nor ecclesiologically should this issue be a point of controversy among Baptists. The Bible is our sole authority — the confession gives clear expression to a coherent, canonically derived understanding of the Bible’s teaching; the churches and the denomination obey the text to be found sincere and blameless, filled with the fruit of righteousness.
— Tom J. Nettles taught church history for more than 40 years in Southern Baptist seminaries, including 25 at Southern Seminary in Louisville. He is the author of many important books on church history and historical theology including Baptists and the Bible, By His Grace and For His Glory, and most recently Baptist History for Kids, published by Courier Publishing.
