The national president of the Fellowship of Evangelical Baptist Churches of Canada sent out a public communication regarding our church’s removal from the Fellowship.[1] In that letter, the president stated that complementarianism was neither a related nor aggravating issue in our church’s removal. In fact, he maintains that to suggest as much is committing the same divisive behavior which warranted our removal. In the spirit of Proverbs 18:17 which says, “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him,” let me provide some needed context.
I began pastoring Fairview Baptist Church, Calgary in 2014. Fairview was started as a church in the Fellowship in 1960. As a new pastor, I read about the history of the church and the Fellowship and was pleased with what I saw, viewing myself in alignment with the founders of this association.
Our church was small in those days, and I was busy getting to know the people and learning the ropes in my first pastorate. It wasn’t until 2017 that our regional director first attended one of our services. I asked what church he attended and pulled up their website later that day. I was surprised to see that their last Sunday service had a non-Christian, indigenous woman “preaching” on reconciliation and encouraging the congregation to participate in a pow-wow and other pagan ceremonies to foster unity among peoples. As I looked further, their website listed a woman pastor, women elders, and women in their preaching team. Knowing the history of the Fellowship, I understood this to be a clear violation of our confessional standards.
I raised my concerns with the regional director and the leadership board or our region. They did not agree that this was a violation of our national bylaw which states, “the pastoral office in the church is reserved for qualified men recognized by the church for oversight of the doctrine and practice of the church” (4.1.a.iii). Rather, the regional director responded to my email saying, “Stand by your convictions, and lead well. But also keep your congregation open to the diversity that exists within our churches. I think that unity is achieved when we make allowances that are proper.”
Not satisfied with this, I sent an email concerning the matter to the churches of our region but was rebuked for divisive behavior. The leadership board wrote a letter to our church stating that “As mentioned to you earlier, it is our belief that this is not a doctrinal or bylaw issue, rather a difference in structure.”
At this point, I decided to keep my head down and concern myself with the affairs of our church rather than the region. However, in 2024, after the leadership board attempted to move our church to non-voting status, we met in person to discuss our differences. First on my list was our differences over complementarianism and my objection to women elders, pastors, and preachers in the region.
In response, the leadership board wrote a follow-up letter to our church saying, “The leadership board affirms the Fellowship Prairies Statement of Faith. We also acknowledge that each autonomous member church including Fairview Baptist Church has the right to implement their alignment with that statement in different ways.”[2] The leadership board has also written that they hold to the Position Statement on the Gender Issue but that it applies in different ways in different churches.[3]
My objection was (and remains) this: Have the churches of the Fellowship approved of the idea that “each autonomous member church has the right to implement their alignment with that statement [our shared Statement of Faith] in different ways”? I fail to see the point of having a bylaw that states “the pastoral office in the church is reserved for qualified men recognized by the church for oversight of the doctrine and practice of the church” if for some that looks like having women pastors, women elders, and women preachers.
So, while it is “technically” true that our church was not removed complementarian beliefs—most of the churches share our beliefs in this area—it is misleading to say complementarianism isn’t even related. We were removed for insisting that our regional leaders abide by the plain reading of our national bylaws and ensure all churches in our region uphold our common, complementarian confession. Every church removed in our region and the BC region were part of regional and national motions to ensure fidelity to our complementarian Position Statement on Gender. Coincidence? I think not.
Was it our behavior or beliefs that were problematic? I maintain that behavior and beliefs cannot be separated. Our belief is that Fellowship churches should not have women elders, pastors, or preachers. Our behavior was to insist to our leaders and fellow churches that this be the case. Both this belief and this behavior were problematic in our region. We spoke to leaders in person, wrote emails, brought awareness, made motions, and spoke to other churches. Some view this as a pattern of divisive behavior. We view this as the role of concerned churches in a “local-church-led movement” to ensure doctrinal fidelity to our shared confession. The establishment will always view reformers as divisive, and schismatic. To some, our behavior is contentious, however, our intent is to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). The distinction between contentious and contending may seem blurry at times, but I trust that the Lord, who will bring all things to light, will commend those faithful stewards who contended for the faith while facing accusations from other believers of being contentious (1 Cor 4:1-5).
While I’m now an outsider looking in, my desire for the Fellowship remains the same. I desire to see the Fellowship thrive and advance the gospel, holding in common important secondary issues like believers’ baptism and complementarianism. I desire this, not just to remain faithful to the historic roots of the Fellowship, but for the sake of biblical fidelity.
—Tim Stephens
[1] Click here to read the “Important update from Fellowship National Council” sent May 8, 2026.
[2] Letter dated October 8, 2024.
[3] In an April 24, 2025, letter to the churches, the region advised delegates to vote against our complementarian motion, saying, “The Fellowship Prairies Leadership Board has affirmed the Position Statement on the Gender Issue in Pastoral Leadership in Fellowship Churches as voted on at the National Convention, November 4, 1997. As such, Fellowship Prairies policy currently holds the complementarian position. However, as independent churches, the FPLB recognizes that each member church has the ability to apply this according to their own convictions while still subject to the interpretation and accountability of the Leadership Board and the Membership. In this, while we value clarity and staying true to God’s Word, we also recognize that at some points in fellowship together we need grace for each other – to allow each member church to apply the biblical model in different ways according to their principles. The FPLB reaffirms the region’s complementarian position, but feels this motion is too strong and the implications too severe to allow for grace and autonomy within the bounds of our Statement of Faith.”