“Reason #1: This is not a new conversation within our Fellowship but is a conversation that has already been happening for over 30 years. Our churches already voted on a Position Statement in 1997 that was passed with an overwhelming majority (83%). In addition, an amendment was made to our National Bylaw in 2004, in an effort to clarify that the Pastoral office is limited to Biblically qualified men. I think many of us were under the impression that the issue was discussed long ago and firmly settled. As it turns out, that is not the case nationally. While dialogue is always desirable, we are already 30 years into this conversation. We believe that (1) extensive dialogue has already happened, (2) a clear Position Statement has already been adopted, and (3) a Bylaw amendment has already been made. The dialogue already having taken place, it is now time for convictional action on the part of our churches to bring our practice into conformity with our position.
Reason #2: In our two lengthy calls with Jonathan Stairs and President Jones, we asked what the proposed process would involve and what the desired outcome of this suggested process would be. We received no clear details on what the process would entail, and no assurances that the desired outcome of this process is to lead our Fellowship into a firmly complementarian practice that lines
up with the convictions outlined in our existing Position Document and National Bylaws. We have been told by FEB National that this process will seek to “bring congruence between the bylaws and our newly revised Affirmation of Faith.” After carefully reviewing the newly revised Affirmation of Faith, we are unpersuaded that the proposed process of seeking ‘congruence’ will lead our Fellowship into a stronger complementarian position and practice than what we currently have. The desired outcome of our motion is very clear: we want to ensure that our practice lines up with our position. As we are not certain that the desired outcome of a two-to-three-year process will correspond to the desired outcome that we are seeking through this motion, we respectfully declined to rescind our motion and to press forward to a vote which will put the matter before the delegates of our churches.
Reason #3: By far, the most important reason why we believe that immediate action is needed is because one Fellowship Church (New West Community) has been suspended by their Region, and 10 others are under threat of suspension simply for advocating in their Region for adherence to our existing National Bylaws. A two-to-three-year process will not, in any way, help these brother Pastors and their churches who are under an immediate threat of disciplinary action. We understand that the suspension is being framed by their Regional Leadership in terms of ‘divisiveness’ rather than ‘doctrine’. This was made clear in the recent communication from FEB National. Our opinion, in reviewing the evidence, is that we do not believe that the accusation of ‘divisiveness’ is warranted, and thus we feel strongly that a gross injustice is being committed in the BC Region. This is an urgent situation, and it requires urgent action. These churches have no court of appeal beyond their own Regional Leadership. This is a very serious constitutional crisis, and it needs to be urgently addressed. We should not leave these brothers to fend for themselves and face the possibility of excommunication or suspension before a lengthy consultation process has been completed.”
Access the full document: https://keepfebcomplementarian.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Second-Letter-to-FEB-Churches.pdf
