*** UPDATED WITH NEW FOOTNOTES May 29, 2026***
May 28, 2026
Four weeks ago, my church was removed from the Prairies Region of the Fellowship of Evangelical Baptists. I was, of course, disappointed, but recognized the will of the convention to choose its partners and resolved to simply carry out the ministry to my church which the Lord has entrusted to me and my fellow elders.
However, on May 8, we, along with all 550 churches of the National Fellowship, received a communication from Steve Jones (National President) and Jon Stairs (Chairman of the National Council). This email challenged Tim Stephens’ honesty, and further accused all three of our churches of being divisive. For several years now I have argued that the matters addressed below were better addressed in a more private setting - with a Christian Arbitration ministry particularly because I was convinced it was the more biblical and proper audience to receive such information. For years the Regional Board resisted that attempt; preferring public accusations against the churches rather than an independent third party to evaluate the evidence, testimony, documentary evidence and other facts. My attempts over several years now were to avoid the very thing I will do in this letter. I am compelled by scripture-informed conscience to share what follows below. Two things motivate me to respond in a public fashion: First, had it only been an accusation against me, I would have likely remained silent, but Steve and Jon publicly accused two other faithful servants of God and my conscience could not let that stand. Second, the email contradicts facts which I, given my proximity and involvement, know both Steve and Jon are aware of.
As you will see below, our removal was not about complementarianism alone (we never stated that it was); it was about complementarianism and the unethical and unlawful lengths to which Regional leadership has gone in order to prevent men who advocate for convictions similar to those held by FEB Central from having influence on the dwindling[1] Prairies Region. Our story is somewhat different from the FEBPac story; it is primarily about successful ethical charges being brought against the Prairies leadership and the joint effort between them, FEBPac and FEB National to defy and escape the successful FEB Prairies convention resolution of 2025 which placed the Regional Office under a third party ethics investigation.
I urge you to take up Steve Jones’ challenge to honour Proverbs 18:17 which reads, “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.” You have heard Steve and Jon state that the Prairies matters had nothing at all to do with complementarianism and that the expelled churches were divisive. Below I will show that National was aware for years that this indeed was connected with gender roles. The charge of divisiveness was grounded in the accusation that we three churches sought public division. However, I will show below that Steve Jones knew this was demonstrably false from our repeated involvement of Steve to help in these matters in 2018, 2022, 2023, 2024, and again in 2025.
I will begin by arranging the material chronologically, and then once that is established, approach the matters thematically.
April 2018. Tim Stephens informs the Prairies Regional Board and Steve Jones that Calvary Baptist Church in Edmonton has female pastors, elders and preachers and was endorsing Native Spirituality. This church was the church most closely connected to the Regional Office. Members of this church included the Regional Director and Regional Board members. Tim is informed that this church’s practice is acceptable by both National and Regional Leadership.[2] He is thus informed that he will be kept from being involved in Regional leadership.
2018. Calvary Baptist Church was “questioning, and at times living outside of their Statement of Faith, and as such outside of the FPI Statement of Faith”[3], specifically related to the Bible, Gender and Leadership and Marriage. This church, home to Regional staff and a Fellowship International missionary, had become LGBTQ affirming[4].
2020. Calvary Baptist is placed on Associate (Disciplinary) status. Three years later, they are received back into full membership status after renouncing homosexual marriage. However, in lieu of elders, they now have a leadership team which is open to women and have women regularly preaching in the Lord’s Day worship services.
April 12, 2021. The Regional Director (RD) Mark Breitkreuz (by zoom), and vice chairman, Arden Boville[5] (in person), join a Park City Gospel Church (PCGC) elders meeting. At that meeting, PCGC is warned not to be associated with Fairview Baptist because the RD, based on a visit to this church, felt that the church would turn some women off of church. He noted their homeschool culture as evidence of this problem.
2022. After PCGC brought concerns about the RD blackballing Fairview in 2021 over the church’s expressed concerns about gender roles— he intentionally misled the Nominating Committee in order to keep a member of PCGC off of the Regional Board. The Chair corrects Mark and Jordan Vetro is subsequently added to the Regional Board.
2022. Fellowship Baptist Church Edmonton (FBCE) inquires of both Mark Breitkreuz (Prairies RD) and Steve Jones (National President) regarding egalitarianism in the Pacific and Prairies Regions. Steve Jones tells FBCE that he is unaware that any Pacific churches had female elders. The Prairies RD indicates that churches in Prairies who held to the model that women can lead/teach/preach so long as they were part of a team led by a man at the top were seen as operating faithfully under the Fellowship standards.[6]
2023. FBCE, after several months of meeting with a FEB International missionary partner who was also on staff in the Prairies Region, and also a member of Calvary Baptist, determined that because his convictions related to gender roles in the church did not align with Fellowship standards, they would end the partnership. The elders send a letter to FEB National to inform them of the decision and the rationale behind it.[7] One year later they were facing public disciplinary action from the Prairies Region.
2023. The RD intentionally misled the Nominating Committee in order to add a preferred candidate and to prevent a member of Fairview Baptist (Calgary) from being added to the Regional Board. After a number of days his false assertion is again corrected (by others), but given a new Chair, the actions taken were not overturned.
June 2023. PCGC sends a letter to the Regional Board alleging ethics and bylaw violations by the RD and new Chair. PCGC’s pastor enlists Steve Jones’ help to avoid a larger dispute.
July 2023. The Regional Board removes Jordan Vetro from the Regional Board for agreeing with allegations against the RD[8].
April 2024. The Regional Board brings disciplinary action against PCGC, Fairview, and Fellowship Baptist Edmonton. No cause or required notice[9] was provided. The churches enlist Steve Jones to help convince the Regional Board to drop the planned disciplinary action before it was publicized. Though they (the Regional Board) proceed with the disciplinary action, it fails. Instead, the churches and the Board enter mediation.
October 2024. Mediation. Many of the allegations are admitted and the Board receives numerous chastisements.[10] The Board is told to make public corrections of false statements.
January 2025. The Regional Board does not accept the proposals of the churches in response to the mediation team’s advice. They insist they have the authority to unilaterally either select an arbitrator or the party who chooses that arbitrator. When the Regional Board would not consent to an arbitrator’s authority (or ability) to report to the Regional Convention, the churches asked Steve Jones to help convince the Board to accept a third-party arbitration conducted by a reputable Christian Arbitration ministry. The Board does not accept this offer.
April/May 2025. Fairview, PCGC, and Fellowship Edmonton bring a motion to Equip to align the Region’s practice with the complementarian standards of the FEB. This, opposed by both the Regional and National leaders, fails. PCGC and Fairview also bring a motion which seeks to place the Regional Board’s leaders under an investigation by a Christian Arbitration ministry for misconduct against certain churches[11]. This motion passes.
July 2025, Tim Stephens (Fairview), along with Derek deVries (PCGC) and two pastors each from FEBPac and FEB Central promote a motion for the 2025 FEB National convention which would codify the 1997 position statement. The leadership of FEBPac, Prairies and National express opposition to and/or repeated cautions about this motion. It is called divisive and it is argued that it infringes on local church autonomy.[12] In 2026, all four leaders of this motion west of Ontario (two from FEBPac and two from Prairies) were expelled under the leadership of Brent Chapman.
September 2025. Both the National and Regional Boards inform the Regional Churches that the motion for investigation into ethical misconduct will not be honoured. Instead the Regional Board unilaterally selects Brent Chapman, the RD from Pacific as sole arbitrator. The churches immediately object, in accordance with the Arbitration Act[13]. Brent advises the churches that the only way to prevent him from acting as arbitrator would be to take the matter to a civil court; he claimed that the ruling of the 2025 convention which forbade the action (which he was taking) was not sufficiently authoritative[14]. We note this fails the biblical standards of 1 Corinthians 6 which forbids doing the very thing which Brent requires the churches to do in order to challenge his appointment as arbitrator.
February 2026. Brent leads the expulsion of 8 FEBPac churches who advocated for compliance with the complementarian standards of the FEB.
March 2026. Brent’s arbitration report is completed without the involvement of any of the three churches[15]. He recommends a separation between the Region and these churches[16]. Note that the three churches and many critical witnesses did not participate in this “arbitration” on the grounds that it violated the expressed will of Regional Convention 2025[17], which stated the matter was one of ethical misconduct and bylaw violations of the leadership (covered by sections 3, 5 and 7) instead of a mere “dispute or controversy” (covered by section 9 of the bylaws).[18] It was an arbitration with only one side participating, overseen by a party unilaterally selected by that side in the identical position as that side, involved in a similar conflict in his own Region, and who had recently made public comments condemning the actions of the other party. The churches find that to be a gross miscarriage of justice.
April 30, 2026. With the aid of National leadership[19] and Pacific leadership, the Prairies Regional Board successfully expels Fairview, PCGC, and Fellowship Edmonton.
What the readers of Steve and Jon’s email might find to be helpful background information is that they have both repeatedly stated that they believe they are bound ethically and by the National Bylaws to “support the Regions”. When serious concerns about Regional leaders (both Pacific and Prairies) were brought privately to their attention, they stated that their hands were tied because they were required to publicly support the Regional offices[20]. Steve Jones told PCGC’s leadership that the previous President’s tenure amounts to “a monkey on his back” because he was not seen as supportive enough of the Regional offices - and so Steve has felt a mandate to do differently[21]. The reader should read Steve and Jon’s communication in that light; they are pre-committed to supporting the actions of Regional leaders.
With the space remaining below, my objective is to use the timeline material above to thematically demonstrate two things: First, that National, in contradiction to what they indicated in their May 8 letter, has known that this conflict in the Prairies has its roots in matters related to convictions regarding gender roles. Second, that National is aware that the churches involved in this matter did not initiate the public nature of this matter, but faithfully and repeatedly, through appropriate channels, made private attempts to raise concerns, bring clarity, and bring congruence to our national standards. They know this because they were involved; they were involved because we repeatedly asked them to be. I will reference the above timeline and will expand on it as necessary.
I was surprised to see Jon and Steve disputing Tim’s very measured statement that, “while the issue of our Region does not directly involve complementarianism, it is a related or aggravating issue.” Allow me to share our own story of involvement in this conflict.
My church joined the FEB in 2018 after disassociating from a denomination over matters of ecclesiology and egalitarianism. In 2020, we learned that the Regional Director's church in Edmonton was being charged with being affirming of homosexuality. We were thankful the Region was taking action, but wondered how this could have happened under the nose of the RD. These things do not come out of nowhere; they are always preceded by many other obvious indicators, most especially egalitarianism. We later learned that Tim Stephens had warned the RD and the Regional Board about egalitarianism in this church the same year[22] it began to embrace errant views of gender and sexuality— and that he was rebuked for doing so.
On April 12, 2021, the RD and the vice chair of the Region joined the elders of my church for a meeting. Mark (the RD) was attending via zoom, but the Vice Chair (Arden) was attending in person at PCGC. In that meeting the RD passionately warned my elders against supporting Tim Stephens and Fairview Baptist Church. It is perhaps hard to remember, but Tim was arrested one month later and had not yet become well-known. The RD said that if we knew who the church was, we would never support them. We asked him what he meant by that and expected him to share something about COVID. Instead, he described a visit to Tim’s church long before COVID. He was struck by the obvious homeschooling culture - and expected we would be as well. He went on to say that he was worried that Tim’s church would leave an impression on some women which would be counterproductive to the Gospel. In Mark’s view, this should have been sufficient for us to distance ourselves from Fairview. When we challenged Mark on the propriety of those statements, his behaviour became so problematic that the then Vice Chair of the Region agreed, against Mark’s wishes, that the meeting should come to an end. Arden stayed after the meeting and offered his apologies to PCGC’s elders, expressing his appreciation for our church and promising that the RD’s behaviour would be corrected.
When we involved the then current Chair of the Regional Board, Ian Smith both then and one year later, he agreed that Mark’s behaviour was problematic and that this was not out of character. He assured us that Mark’s views related to homeschooling and women were not representative of the Prairies Region and that the board would take action to correct and discipline him. Shortly afterwards, the Chair did a missions term, and has since taken a pastorate in another denomination. He was replaced by Ben Smith who, from that point forward, defended the RD’s actions against these churches.
This interaction was actually Mark making good on a promise that he made to Tim Stephens in 2018, when, after Mark rebuked Tim for challenging the egalitarianism of Mark’s church, Mark told him that Tim would never be involved in the leadership of the Region. Mark spread negative reports about Tim long before COVID and Tim was even removed from the email list inviting pastors to local FEB gatherings. This is all the more problematic when Mark repeatedly accused Tim of not being involved in the Region. On numerous occasions, FEB pastors asked to have Tim’s email added to that list.
The conflict continued in 2022 when I was a member of the Region’s nominating committee. Prior to that meeting, I contacted the then chair, Ian Smith, to get familiarized with the process and to ask what new members the board might be seeking. Ian told me that the board had expressed a desire to add another member from Manitoba as there was only one at the time. Due to a church emergency, Ian could not attend the first nominating committee meeting. During that meeting, the associate Pastor from my church (Jordan Vetro, who now pastors a Fellowship church in Woodstock, ON) was discussed as a candidate, and was endorsed by the then Regional Board Chair (Arden Boville) who also ministers in Winnipeg. I was surprised when the RD opposed his nomination on the grounds that the Regional Board had already decided that there could be no more board members from Manitoba (there was only one). After the meeting I spoke to Mark and he doubled down on this assertion. I then reached out to the Chair, who confirmed that Mark had misled the committee. Mark had added PCGC to the list of churches which “didn’t get it” and whose influence should be suppressed in the Region. Because Ian intervened to correct Mark, Jordan was nominated and elected to the Regional Board in 2022.
Fellowship National was once again made aware of the complementarian roots of this conflict in 2022 when FBCE sent a letter of concern to both the Prairies RD and the National President.[23] The topic of concern was egalitarian practice in both the Prairies and Pacific Regions.
I was once again on the Nominating Committee in 2023, which was now led by a different Chair, Ben Smith. This time, a candidate from Fairview was considered, Rob Barriault. Rob was interviewed and nominated by the committee with a glowing recommendation. In the Board meetings which eventually vetoed his nomination, his membership at Fairview was considered to be disqualifying by Board leaders. However, the settled and public reason given was that he had not attended convention or the regular local FEB pastors gatherings. This is problematic for a number of reasons. First, because, as noted above, Fairview was left off the invite list for these events. Second, because Rob is a lay member of Fairview, and none of the other lay Regional Board members had ever gone to Regional meetings prior to being nominated to the Board. This again was Mark making good on his promise to Tim five years earlier that because of his complementarian advocacy, his church would be prevented from having influence in the Region.
In the interview for a candidate promoted by the RD, the candidate informed the interviewers that, should he be elected to the Board, it would be his goal to shift the Region away from “majoring on minor matters and minoring on major matters”. When we asked him for an example of a minor issue that was being treated as a major one, his example of such a minor matter was the difference between biblical inerrancy and biblical infallibility. He believed that this was hindering the Great Commission. Regarding complementarianism, he affirmed the doctrine, but stated that he “was happy to live within that framework but also happy to partner with those who think differently” – “he would not spend too much time disputing it.”[24]
Mark (RD) and Ben (Chair) informed the committee that since a board member from this candidate’s church was coming off the board, we needed to nominate this candidate because the board always sought to have a member from this church, given that church’s size and health. In a lengthy phone conversation two days later with the Board Chair, he confirmed the practice and defended its propriety.[25] When I subsequently communicated with the Board registering my concern that a church be given a permanent seat on the board without convention approval, I was accused of inventing the whole matter; I was told that there was no such practice and was charged with lying and causing division. The Chair later admitted he did in fact make the statement but that he only did so out of a duty to “defend Mark” (the RD).
It was after these repeated problems that PCGC, in June of 2023, sent a letter to the Board bringing charges against the Regional Director and Chair, indicating that PCGC would shift our 4% General Fund giving from Regional to National until they meet with us to hear our concerns. In response, they refused to meet with us and removed Jordan Vetro from any and all Regional Board communications, decisions and meetings[26].
Fellowship National was once again notified of the complementarian roots of this conflict when, in 2023, FBCE informed Fellowship International of their decision to end a partnership with a Fellowship missionary who was also on staff at the Prairies Regional office when they determined his convictions did not align with Fellowship standards on gender roles in ministry.[27]
Further evidence that this matter is closely related to the question of complementarianism is found in the aftermath of the 2024 mediation. Though the mediator did not suggest it, the Prairies Board required Fairview to demonstrate acceptance of Calvary Baptist Church[28] in order to avoid binding arbitration. Recall that Fairview had brought concerns in 2018 about this church’s egalitarian practices, and that FBCE had done so in 2022. Fairview’s acceptance of this church and its gender roles was made an essential condition to avoid binding arbitration (and ultimately expulsion).
Finally, another piece of evidence which flatly contradicts Steve and Jon’s assertion that this has nothing at all to do with complementarianism is Brent Chapman’s report. In it he notes that the conflict involved, “comments made by the Regional Director on homeschooling… and a disagreement on ‘how complementarian’ Fellowship Prairies should be”[29].
As you have seen above, Steve Jones and Jon Stairs are aware of the most pertinent elements of this history. In 2018 Steve was approached by Fairview’s leadership, in 2022 and 2023 by FBCE’s leadership and in 2023, 2024, and 2025 by PCGC’s leadership. It is therefore inexcusable that they would state,
Please note the third paragraph that clearly states that these churches were not removed for “theological differences or complementarian convictions.” One of the pastors from the removed churches posted on his public blog, “While the issue of our Region does not directly involve complementarianism, it is a related or aggravating issue.” We believe that it is not related at all and that the second clause is an example of why the churches were removed as it spreads divisiveness. We disagree with a few pastors in our movement who are stating that these three churches were removed because of their complementarianism. It is important that we follow Proverbs 18:17, “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.” Very few in our movement have had the opportunity to hear both sides as we have on these matters and we encourage all to remain impartial as James 2:9 warns against showing favouritism. (Emphasis added).[30]
While this statement definitely fits with the narrative coming from the Prairies and Pacific Regional Boards[31], and shows the support which they have pledged for them, it simply does not fit with the facts. Steve and Jon evidently want the eastern churches to believe there is no national crisis over complementarianism and conservative theology; there clearly is.
I called Steve Jones the day before the Convention at which my church was removed – April 29, 2026. During that phone call I reminded Steve of all the attempts that I made to avoid this being a publicly divisive matter. I reminded him that he knew the charge that I had made the matter public was false; I reached out to him in 2023, 2024, and in 2025 to help resolve the matter in a less public way (which I have shown above and will show below). I told him that if he simply publicly stated those things, there would be a good chance that the convention would not vote to expel my church. He replied, “Derek, everything you have just said is true; however, I am under the authority of my board and they have instructed me not to say anything”. I told him that if he were publicly charged with sin and I had exonerating evidence, I would share it even if my board told me not to, because that is what is required by Scripture[32]. He told me that I should leave it between him and the Holy Spirit. That is where I left it; during the meeting in which I was being charged with division for making the matter public, I did not tell the convention about my conversations with Steve. However, after Steve’s email on May 8, 2026, I now feel free to share this information with a broader audience.
The charges against the three churches rely heavily on the narrative that we repeatedly made the conflict a public one and were thus sinfully divisive. However, in June 2023, when my church sent the letter to the Regional Board, I also personally reached out to Steve Jones to ask for his help in addressing this privately so as to avoid a public conflict - and he agreed. While Steve made recommendations to the Regional Board, they did not take them and in October 2023 we were told that the board had ruled (without speaking to us) that there was no sin or wrongdoing on the part of the Regional Director or Board Chair and we were told to consider the matter closed.
Early in 2024, we were told the board had chosen a mediator, and that there would be a meeting on the second last week of April in Edmonton. We purchased airfare and booked hotels. When I was suddenly hospitalized with an unknown severe illness I reached out to the mediation team and the board, letting them know I could not travel and asked how we might continue the mediation process in spite of my illness. Though I was unable to participate, the Board met anyways, and in that meeting (without me) concluded that they should bring my church, Fellowship Edmonton and Fairview under public discipline the next week at Regional Convention (the bylaws require cause and a twenty day notice to be given[33]). I asked the RD what the cause was and his justification was that a year earlier we charged him with misconduct and it was not yet resolved[34]. As the board had not yet given the delegates notice, there was still a chance the matter could be kept from becoming public. Again I reached out to Steve Jones, advising him of the board’s plan and asking him for his help in preventing this from being made public. The bylaws invite a defense statement from a church facing discipline; we told Steve we would wait until 11PM the night before the vote to share our statement with the churches - giving him time to convince the Regional Board to avoid publicizing the conflict. He agreed. At 11:00 PM, the board informed us that they still planned to bring the public disciplinary charges against us the next day, and we finally sent our defense statements to the Regional Churches. The matter, for the first time, had been made public, despite reaching out to Steve Jones to help prevent this from happening.
In the Fall of 2024, we participated in Mediation with the Board and a mediation team of two men. We were pleased with the response from the mediators, which included a charge to the board to publicly rescind false public statements against the churches. The Board sent us a letter with a proposal for moving forward. We considered it and sent one to the Board. The next response we received was early 2025; the Regional Board had already decided that the mediation failed and had already set binding arbitration into motion. After the churches agreed to terms with the arbitrator they proposed, the Regional Board’s objections to those terms meant that the proposal fell through. We again reached out to Steve, informing him that we would participate in binding arbitration, but only one with a truly third party arbitrator either mutually selected by the parties, appointed by the court, or one selected by the mediation team. We suggested two well-known Christian Arbitration ministries. We told Steve that we were prepared to send this proposal to the Convention, but preferred that it would be done quietly and privately to guard unity. We asked him to make that proposal to the Regional Board so that we could keep the matter as quiet as possible. Steve agreed, but the Board would not agree to our proposal. Therefore two weeks before the Convention, we reluctantly sent our proposal to the churches. This proposal[35], which rooted the conflict in the RD’s opposition to Fairview on gender-role grounds and which placed the Regional Board under investigation for ethical and bylaw misconduct by a third-party, was successfully adopted by a majority vote of convention. However the Regional Board, with the public support of the National Office (as I will show below), later defied it. Instead they unilaterally selected an arbitrator (Brent Chapman) who was involved in a similar conflict in his Region, and who had already publicly accused Derek and Tim of slander and divisiveness[36].
It appears that conservative churches in the East assure themselves that this is merely a western Fellowship problem, and that National is simply doing its job to stay neutral; that they are not complicit in the aggression against conservative complementarian churches in the West. I have already shown above some of National’s involvement. Sadly, there is more. I will name just a few other examples.
After the 2025 Prairies Convention placed the Regional Board under a third party investigation overseen by a Christian arbitration ministry, the Regional Board reached out to National. Both decided that the successful misconduct investigation resolution should not be honoured. Jon and Steve gave us a head’s up, which we appreciated, and we took the opportunity to speak to Jon by zoom to speak about the letter. We challenged the wording of their proposed letter which stated that the motion was “out of order”, especially given their repeated assertion that they were not a court of appeals. In the end, Jon agreed to amend the communication, removing the claim that the motion was out of order. However, when National did later send a letter to the Prairies Region, this communication included the statement that the motion was “out of order”.[37] The Prairies Board, in concert with National, sent a letter to the Regional Churches that same day[38]. We spoke with Jon and Steve, pointing out that the communication included the very phrase they committed to removing[39]. We received an apology, and were assured that a public correction would be made[40]. However, several months afterwards, on March 31, 2026, I emailed Jon reminding him of his commitment to make that correction. His response is as follows:
You are correct that we have not made that retraction as yet. I have learned in counselling [sic] to make amends for wrong-doing I’ve done to others, except when to do so would harm them or others further. In this case, our amends need to show both integrity and neutrality at a time when we deem it to do the least or no harm. Our retraction will be forthcoming, but at a time when we sense the Lord thinks it best and we ask for your patience in this matter.[41]
Jon Stairs intentionally waited to make this public correction until the day after the vote to remove our churches.
National’s legal counsel was also present at the convention. He was asked whether or not, in his opinion, the Arbitration Act permits a single party in a dispute to unilaterally appoint an arbitrator against the wishes of the other party. He told the convention that this was permitted by the Act[42]. At another point in the meeting, he was asked if the delegates were permitted to vote against the Board’s motion to expel the three churches. He repeatedly stated that the delegates were legally required to vote in favour of the motion to expel the churches; they legally had to submit to Brent’s report[43]. When asked, neither he nor the Board would state that the board would be required to honour the results of the motion to expel if it failed. Without Steve and Jon’s information and with these instructions, the motion to expel was successful.
As I have shown above, the National Office knew that this matter was certainly connected to disputes over complementarianism and also that the churches made patient and repeated efforts to address these matters in a way that avoided public division. It seems that at some point the Fellowship was transformed from being a church-led/focused movement to a Regional Office-centered movement. It is also apparent that the National Office made a decision some time ago that they would support the broadening of acceptable offices and roles for women in leadership over and against the expressed will of the National Convention. Furthermore, it seems also that National has agreed with both Pacific and Prairies on a definition of the word divisive different from what is found in Fellowship standards or, more importantly, than what is found in God’s Word.
It is understandable that we want to be fellowship baptists in that we don’t want to be isolated and hyper-independent. However, the locus of that interdependency must be on shared doctrinal commitments established by the will of the churches, of conventions. Instead, it seems we have inadvertently adopted a form of interdependence finding its locus in denominational leaders. Yet this is more akin to an episcopalian ecclesiology, not a baptist one– not even a fellowship baptist ecclesiology. The center of unity is not to be found in denominational leaders, but in doctrine and the expressed will of churches in conventions. As has been the case in other once conservative denominations, it is an ecclesiological problem which manifests in the conflict regarding gender roles in ministry and other pressures from the culture around us. The trend is that the push towards inclusion for egalitarian practice receives cover and approval from denominational leaders often in spite of convention-established norms. Sadly it is also the case that those pushing in the opposite direction often receive the ire of denominational leaders who see such advocacy, no matter the form it takes, as divisiveness[44].
We have been removed from the Fellowship; it is no longer our association. While I still care about the Fellowship and desire the best for it, it is no longer my responsibility to see to it that it comes back to the foundations upon which it was founded. Steve and Jon’s email prompted my conscience to do what I believe they ought to have done; that is, when faithful men are accused publicly, and you have information which could vindicate them, you must come forward[45]. I pray that what I have shared will help faithful pastors and elders, particularly those in the east, to see that brothers Tim Stephens and Jason Hagen, like the expelled brothers in Pacific, were not divisive, and were not lying about the complementarian connections to this conflict. Rather, they were simply contending for the faithfulness of what was, until recently, their fellowship. May those who read this letter do the same.
Praying for God’s glory to be shown to and through the Fellowship,
Derek deVries
Park City Gospel Church
[1] In 2018, the Prairies Region had 33 churches; it now has 22.
[2] The Regional Director told him “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”. When Tim asked about getting involved in Regional Leadership, the Regional Director told him that he would never be part of Regional Leadership.
[3] Click here for a letter from Regional Board Chair, Ian Smith, to Regional Churches, May 2020. Note that the letter, dated 2020 indicates that Calvary had been engaged in discipline-worthy ministry for at least a year and a half - which places it back into 2018, the same year Tim Stephens was rebuked and blacklisted for bringing concerns about the church’s commitments to Fellowship governing documents.
[4] It is important to note that the Regional Director and Fellowship Missionary at Calvary were not in favour of the LGBTQ affirming views.
[5] Arden resigned from the Regional Board in protest in 2025 over the RD’s misconduct and the ways that the Board has responded to these churches. His open resignation letter can be found by clicking here.
[6] Click here to see email exchange between FBCE and Steve Jones and Mark Breitkreuz.
[7] Click here to see the FBCE letter to Fellowship International.
[8] The Bylaws provide no provision for the board to remove a sitting board member other than for a violation of bylaws or law. The convention alone has the ability to remove a board member without cause. While the Board has at times denied this took place, they have also admitted it from time to time- including during the 2024 mediation. Documentary evidence and testimony confirms that this was done and that it was done against the expressed will of Pastor Vetro. Click here to read more details, specifically on page 3.
[9] Bylaw #3 requires grounds and 20 days notice.
[10] The mediator, Clint Humfrey, would say publicly in 2026, after the churches were removed for divisiveness, “I have participated in mediation with some of these parties. I am deeply grieved at the actions of Fellowship Prairies. The churches that have been voted out (how is this possible?) were fully committed to the doctrinal terms of the Fellowship, and were very patient in calling the Fellowship to ethical consistency. Very sad day in the West” (Twitter).
At the time (2024), the mediation team stated that the board seemed to operate by fiat, that the organizational integrity issues were exacerbated by personal integrity issues from the leaders of the board, that the issues were serious and needed to be changed immediately or there would be a “horrible future” for Fellowship Prairies.
[11] Click here to view the successful resolution placing Prairies leadership under a third-party investigation for ethical misconduct.
[13] Click here to see the churches’ argument that, since the Regional Convention is the highest authority, Brent should submit to the ruling of the Convention and abandon the “arbitration”.
[14] Click here to read Brent Chapman’s email.
[15] The churches are alleged to have resisted arbitration, in contravention of their annual commitments to governing documents which include arbitration. Our response is as follows:
First, the record will demonstrate that we did not resist Arbitration (even though we did object to its necessity); we insisted that our participation in legally binding arbitration was contingent on it actually complying with the Bylaws and the Acts which prohibit partiality in all aspects of the Arbitration, including the selection of the Arbitrator. On numerous occasions we offered to participate in binding Arbitration; we offered this in writing on January 18, 2025 and on March 7, 2025. We offered this via phone call to Steve Jones on April 4, 2025.
Second, we consistently argued that this was not a matter for section 9, which is the portion of the bylaws which involve disputes and controversies and utilizes mediation and arbitration, but one for sections 3, 5, and 7, which address discipline of churches and/or board members. On April 21, 2023 in an email to the Regional Board, I wrote,
Regarding Mark Evans highlighting the Bylaws for conflict resolution: First of all, it is not best to consider this a dispute… Given that we are dealing not merely with disputes, but with matters of sin, we need to go to the section of the Bylaws which deals with discipline. That section is 3.03 and states that the membership of the corporation has the authority to bring appropriate discipline.
At the 2025 Regional Convention, the Convention agreed - and they are the highest authority available to make this decision.
Third, while arbitration is the prescribed pathway for unresolved “disputes and controversies”, the Bylaws stipulate disciplinary action involving the Regional Convention for discipline of churches and/or board members. Calvary Baptist, for example, was never forced into binding arbitration when they were disciplined for being LGBTQ affirming; frankly we were treated much more aggressively than they were. Thus, signing Regional documents was clearly not a commitment to settle every issue via arbitration.
[16] Click here to read Brent Chapman’s Arbitration Report. Note that he acknowledges that none of the churches were involved in the Arbitration. It was thus literally one-sided.
[17] Click here to see the successful resolution of the Prairies 2025 Convention
[18] Click here to see Prairies Bylaws.
[19] See details below.
[20] In a zoom conversation with Jon Stairs on October 25, 2025, when he was asked why they supported FEBPac’s actions against its churches and did not challenge them on complementarianism, he stated that “we’re required to support the Regions”.
[21] In-person conversation in Edmonton, May 2025.
[22] 2018.
[23] Click here to see the email exchange from 2022.
[24] Click here to see notes from this interview made by current Prairies Board Vice Chair, Mark Evans.
[25] We challenged an unwritten rule which identifies a particular church as requiring a permanent seat on the board, especially given the unwritten rules which prohibit a number of churches from serving on the board.
[26] While the Board has repeatedly denied this happened, they will from time to time state that Jordan was “recused”. There are a number of issues with this statement. First, this view of recusal does not fit with Prairies Bylaws, Robert’s Rules, the Act, and with the Fellowship standards (cf. National Bylaw Section 10) for such. Secondly, Jordan was not merely removed for discussions about this matter; he was completely removed from any and all discussions. Third, if he was removed for a conflict of interest, why then were the two men who were charged with ethical misconduct also not “recused” from all board activity, let alone the deliberations and rulings of their own behaviour? Note also that in the case of Calvary’s discipline, the RD and other prairies staff were not removed, but were involved. Note that in the case of the disciplinary action against FBCE, Mark Evans was not removed from all board activity, though he had recently been a member under discipline at that church.
[27] Click here to see the letter FBCE sent to Fellowship International in 2023.
[28] Click here to see the Regional Board’s list of conditions for reconciliation with Fairview. Note that accepting Calvary’s use of women in leadership as an essential condition.
[29] Click here to read Brent’s Arbitration Report.
[30] Steve Jones and Jon Stairs, letter to Fellowship National churches, May 8, 2026.
[31] They have adopted the pithy alliterative motto, “this is about behaviour, not belief”.
[32] Leviticus 5:1 “If anyone sins in that he hears a public adjuration to testify, and though he is a witness, whether he has seen or come to know the matter, yet does not speak, he shall bear his iniquity”.
[33] Click here to read the Prairies Bylaws, article 3.
[34] Click here for this record of correspondence.
[35] Click here to read the successful resolution.
[36] Click here for the FEBPac (Brent Chapman) response to the actions taken by the six-person steering committee which Derek and Tim were members of.
[37] Click here to read the FEB National Board letter to the Prairies churches.
[38] Click here to read the FEB Prairies Board letter.
[39] Click here to read the PCGC letter to National.
[40] Click here to read Jon Stairs’ December 4, 2025 commitment to retracting National’s statement that the motion was “out of order”.
[41] Email from Jon Stairs to Derek deVries, March 31, 2026
[42] The Arbitration Act requires arbiters to be impartial and, where existing bylaws and/or arbitration agreements do not specify a selection process, provides parties with the ability to contest arbitrator appointments other than those appointed by the court. We did so immediately.
[43] Initially when asked if the delegates were legally bound to vote in favour of the motion, he replied, “no, they can vote however they want.” Yet when further clarification was sought, he said, “the arbitrator has made the decision, the region is bound by the arbitrator’s decision, so they are essentially bound to approve the arbitrator’s decision… I’m saying you’re pretty well bound to vote in favour of the arbitrator’s decision”.
[44] The motion to move the 1997 position statement to a policy statement, which received 57% of the votes cast at the 2025 National Convention, was itself called sad, rigid, tragic and divisive by the Prairies and Pacific Regional leaders. Given the statistics of the 2025 National delegates and the 2025 FEBPac and FEB Prairies convention votes on gender roles, we can conclude that 71% of delegates east of Winnipeg voted in favour of the 2025 complementarian motion. Thus, the FEBPac and FEB Prairies leaderships have concluded that a super-majority of churches east of Winnipeg are, by their definition, divisive.
[45] Leviticus 5:1 “If anyone sins in that he hears a public adjuration to testify, and though he is a witness, whether he has seen or come to know the matter, yet does not speak, he shall bear his iniquity”.