SBTS Dean, Hershael York, Reveals Unbiblical *Nuanced* Mindset Behind Restoring Adulterous Pastors
The recent restoration of Pastor Johnny Hunt by a group of four pastors after a brief six-month hiatus from ministry has reignited discussions amongst evangelicals in regard to the issue of pastoral disqualification, including questions about what sins would disqualify a pastor from ministry and the question of whether a pastor who is removed from the pastorate for the sin of adultery should ever be restored to the pulpit.
Pastor Emeritus of FBC Woodstock, Hunt was either involved in a “brief, improper encounter” with a woman who was not his wife (Johnny’s account), or the aggressor in a sexual assault against a family friend more than a decade ago. Either account is clearly a disqualifying event for a pastor, and as a result of the story becoming public, Hunt was formally suspended from FBC Woodstock in June of 2022, prior to the recent restoration.
In a recent episode of “Pastor Well”, the pastoral leadership vlog of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the flagship of the SBC seminaries, Hershael York, Dean of the School of Theology and Colonel Sanders doppelganger, attempted to address the issue of permanent pastoral disqualification.
One would expect the dean of an SBC seminary to address such an issue with a direct appeal to the Pastoral Epistles, but York took a much more nuanced and eisegetical approach to the issue, more fitting for an institution like the Gospel Coalition than an SBC seminary. The only scripture referenced in the twelve-minute-long vlog is 1 Corinthians 11:27-29, a passage where the Apostle Paul discusses sickness and death as the consequences of partaking of the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner:
“You know when Paul talked about sitting at the Lord’s table, and he told the church at Corinth that anyone who takes this unworthily in an unworthy manner eats and drinks damnation to himself, he said for this cause many of you are sick and some even sleep.
Now that’s when he’s writing to the church members at Corinth for the way they partake of the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner. If that’s true of church members, how much more so is that true of the pastor who’s administering the Lord’s Supper, if he is serving the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner, because he’s regarding sin in his heart and life that he knows is there and he will not repent? He will not forsake the sin. That’s a very serious matter.”
While York’s assertion about the seriousness of unrepentant pastors bringing judgement down upon themselves is true, it doesn’t address the question of what sins are disqualifying, and more specifically, whether a pastor who is caught in adultery can be Biblically restored. At this point in the argument, York decides to throw his theological truck into a four-wheel drive and vault headlong into the ditch of eisegesis, giving his own opinion on the matter without any regard for what the scripture definitively and directly says about the issue.
“But now I know the question meant more than… that it was what’s permanently disqualifying, and I would say this: anything that is such a breach in a pastor’s life that the knowledge of that sin becomes greater than the pastor’s reputation and character. So most commonly I get asked this about adultery, “if a pastor commits adultery can he ever serve as a pastor again”, and I’m going to give a nuanced answer here.
I’m going to say “probably not. And that’s a strange answer, but frankly I think that you can never pastor so long as your sin is notorious. So long as it becomes the thing people know about you, and only if you have walked the long hard Road of repentance so clearly, so transparently, and for so long a time that your reputation as a repentant person dominates your reputation as a sinner. And I don’t know how long that is. I know it’s a long time, but your repentance has to become more notorious than your sin.”
This was the point where York, or any other pastor, teacher, or Bible scholar who dares to enter the discussion, should yield to the apostolic instruction contained in passages that directly reference pastoral qualifications, notably 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1.
The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.
Notably, the term “husband of one wife” in verse 2 means a “one woman man”, a term that is especially pertinent to the issue of disqualification by adultery. While God can change the heart of an adulterer and bring about repentance in the life of a pastor who fell into adultery, that pastor by definition, can no longer ever be called a “one woman man”.
All sin is forgivable by the grace of God, but some sins have permanent consequences. As a result of the infidelity, a pastor who falls into the sin of adultery should not be allowed to return to the pastorate, lest he “fall into disgrace”, tarnishing both his own reputation and the reputation of the church. The scripture doesn’t give an exception for time passed or a scale of the notoriety of sin versus notoriety of repentance. Pastors must be a “one woman man”.
In the age of brand-building megachurch pastors who craft their church on the foundation of personality rather than a bride of Christ-centered mentality where no man is more important than the body itself, this message is especially unpopular. Men like Johnny Hunt who fall into adultery need churches that love both the bride of Christ and individual adulterous pastors enough to emphatically say “no” regarding the possibility of restoration to pastoral ministry.
York does seem to understand the deep need for repentance of fallen pastoral adulterers, but his explanation of whether they can be restored to pastoral ministry lacks the resoluteness that can be found in the instruction of the pastoral epistles.
Such an explanation explains why the SBC is in such a pickle. If the denomination’s most prominent theologians don’t yield to scripture in matters that the scriptures directly address, how can one expect them to properly use the equity of scripture to address matters that scripture doesn’t directly address?
About Author
Right, a good reputation is just one requirement among many. But the first and foremost, most obvious, requirement is that he be a born-again Christian. The Bible says in 1 John 3, and many other passages, that one who is born of God will not continue in sin. Which would mean when one is continuing in sin, there are only two possibilities: either he never was born again, or he lost his salvation. In my understanding of scripture as a whole, the answer is that he was never born again. Others may interpret passages such as Heb. 6:4-8, to mean that he lost his salvation. But in either case, the bottom line is that he isn’t saved. In my opinion, egregious sins don’t just happen at the spur of the moment, particularly if one persists. If it reaches the point where he has strayed far enough to commit sins as bad as adultery, he’s been suppressing the conviction of the Holy Spirit and continuing in sin for significant period of time.
He’s not only not qualified for the ministry, but as far as I understand the scripture, it would indicate that he’s not even a Christian.
It’s a fruit of the antinomian perversion of the grace of God into a license for immorality, that has historically been prevalent in the Baptist church. The idea that as long as somebody goes to the altar and says a prayer at some point in his life, then it doesn’t matter how bad he “backslides” he’s still saved. That false notion is contrary to scripture.
The articles on this site just keep getting worse. You may think that making fun of the way that Dr. York looks is funny and helps your case against him, but it does not. You also make authoritative assertions like this, “Either account is clearly a disqualifying event for a pastor” and then don’t show why that is the case.
Yes, there is a qualification for an elder to be a “husband of one wife” or “one woman man” or however you want to spin that particular Greek phrase, but A.T. Robertson even says that the meaning of the phrase is clearly “one at a time”. By your lazy interpretation, someone who had more than one girlfriend before getting married might just be forever disqualified from being an elder.
Y’all need to get an editor or a Bible scholar – or both – before you write more stupid articles like this.
The office of Pastor is not a right for anyone that wants it. ANY sin such as described above is permanently disqualifying. The individual may be restored to the Church but he cannot be restored to the pastorate. Period. That is an honor reserved for those that are qualified