Author Archives: The Webmaster

Grace Orleans Overture re: Governance Model Protection

Posted on by

The Session of Grace Orleans humbly submits the following overture to the Presbytery of Ottawa requesting that the Presbytery of Ottawa transmit the overture to the General Assembly, preferably with approval, with the request that the overture be referred to Assembly Council.

Overture re: Governance Model Protecting Congregations with a Traditional Understanding of the Bible

To the Venerable the General Assembly:

WHEREAS, the discussion of human sexuality issues has been before the Presbyterian Church in Canada for at least the past thirty years; it is time to bring it to a conclusion that protects congregations with a traditional understanding of the Bible; and

WHEREAS, the Session and congregation of Grace, Orleans ON, has yet to see a definitive response to an Overture submitted five years ago regarding Gracious Dismissal, having experienced significant pain both in the congregation and the loss of its pastor of many years, and significant conflict over this issue, with the Assembly apparently showing little regard for congregations that hold firmly to the traditional understanding of marriage and sexual ethics; and

WHEREAS, the 145th General Assembly was presented with four potential courses of action: “A” (traditional), “B” (full inclusion), “C” (one denomination with three theological streams), and “D” (current practice but with a local option); and

WHEREAS, Option “B” (full inclusion) emerged with undisclosed majority support, there was clearly a rift finally seen after the Tuesday of deciding option B, and heard from many commissioners in the Court on Wednesday night. Consequently, a fifth course of action was hastily developed before Thursday morning which resulted in a majority of commissioners voting to refer the following decisions to presbyteries:

“That the Presbyterian Church in Canada holds two parallel definitions of marriage and recognizes that faithful, Holy Spirit filled, Christ centred, God honouring people can understand marriage as a covenant relationship between a man and a woman or as a covenant relationship between two adult persons. That congregations, sessions, ruling and teaching elders be granted liberty of conscience and action on marriage.”

“That congregations and presbyteries may call and ordain as ministers and elect and ordain as ruling elders LGBTQI persons (married or single) with the provision that liberty of conscience and action regarding participation in ordinations, inductions and installations be granted to ministers and ruling elders;” and

WHEREAS, in November 2019, following the publishing of the remits, two law firms with significant religious freedom, constitutional and human rights expertise have offered their opinions and advice concerning the legal effect of the Remits, if adopted. Their conclusions are, in some cases in opposition to the opinion provided by Cassels LLP in 2018 and, more importantly, they address the wording of the Remits – which the Cassels opinion could not. These opinions, offered by Kuhn LLP, supported by Miller-Thomson, and summarized below, raise significant concerns about any possible protections for clergy, Sessions, Presbyteries, congregations and the denomination as a whole concerning those who hold to a traditional understanding of the Bible:

“It is not clear from the language of the Remits how they would be applied or interpreted within the PCC polity.” Moreover, “the interpretation of the Clerks of Assembly on the impact of adoption of the Remits do not take into account what Canadian federal and provincial law may require of PCC congregations, Presbyteries, ministers or ruling elders.” (Summary Notes from Kuhn LLP, Legal Counsel, Abbotsford, BC. 12 Nov 2019, paragraph 1)

“The law currently protects clergy from being compelled by statute to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies against their religious beliefs, particularly in two provinces and one territory that have enacted statutory protections. However, this may not be the case in provinces in which such legislation does not exist or in the longer term given current trends in the law and how the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been interpreted and applied in recent legal cases.” (Summary Notes from Kuhn LLP, Legal Counsel, Abbotsford, BC. 12 Nov 2019, paragraph 2)

“The adoption of the Remits will make it more difficult for PCC ministers to establish a sincerely held religious belief opposing the morality of same-sex marriages, particularly if they are compelled by the PCC to accept ordination of ministers and ruling elders who are in such relationships.” (Summary Notes from Kuhn LLP, Legal Counsel, Abbotsford, BC. 12 Nov 2019, paragraph 2)

The adoption of Remit B may expose the PCC, individual ministers, and congregations to liability for discrimination for refusal to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, or allow church property to be used for same-sex wedding ceremonies and celebrations. (Summary Notes from Kuhn LLP, Legal Counsel, Abbotsford, BC. 12 Nov 2019, paragraphs 3 and 4)

There is no guarantee that congregations and Presbyteries could “refuse to employ ministers who are in same-sex marriages or who wish to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies.” (Summary Notes from Kuhn LLP, Legal Counsel, Abbotsford, BC. 12 Nov 2019, paragraph 5); and

WHEREAS, in its concluding statements, Kuhn LLP offers a way ahead that is in the spirit of Pathway C. In it they state that, “While there is no safe and guaranteed path to protect liberty of conscience and action, the best option (short of separating into two denominations) would be to defeat the adoption of the Remits and then either (a) maintain the status quo; or (b) to devolve theological teachings on same-sex intimacy and marriages to the Presbyteries and allow each congregation to join (or transfer to) a Presbytery that shares its religious belief and commitment. Before moving in this direction, the PCC should carefully set out the proposed changes to the Book of Forms such that the Presbyteries and General Assembly can actually understand the impacts of what is being proposed.” (Summary Notes from Kuhn LLP, Legal Counsel, Abbotsford, BC. 12 Nov 2019, paragraph 7)

THEREFORE, the Session of Grace, Orleans, Ontario, humbly overtures the Venerable, the 146th General Assembly to seek a way forward, in the spirit of “Pathway C: One Denomination – Three Streams,” presented in the 2019 report of the Special Committee of Former Moderators, to provide a Governance Model with a legally safeguarded, guaranteed and permanent place in The Presbyterian Church in Canada where congregations and clergy with a traditional understanding of the Bible can continue to do ministry in this denomination in a manner which reflects the same character, identity, ethos, and core teachings that are the way of our denomination honouring our existing subordinate standards; or to do otherwise as the General Assembly, in its wisdom, deems best.

20/20 Vision: Vigilant and Vital

Posted on by

More than 100 people joined us for the theme “20/20 Vision: Vigilant and Vital” on Saturday, April 25th, 2020, on Zoom. The addresses are available below both in video and in PDFs. Rev. Jonathan Hong spoke about the current theological division in the denomination: “Where are we now? How did we get here? Where to from here?” followed by a panel discussion with Rev. Christine O’Reilly, Rev. Douglas Rollwage, and Rev. Frances Savill and questions from some of the attendees. The event was moderated by the Renewal Fellowship Executive Director, Rev. Andy Cornell. The Annual General Meeting was convened by Renewal Board Chair, Rev. Ian Shaw.

Panelists

  • Rev. Jonathan Hong is English-language lead pastor at Toronto Korean Presbyterian Church, Toronto, Ontario.
  • Rev. Doug Rollwage is minister of Zion Presbyterian Church in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, and a past moderator of General Assembly.
  • Rev. Christine O’Reilly is minister of Knox Presbyterian Church in Thedford, Ontario.
  • Rev. Frances Savill is minister of Calvin Presbyterian Church in North Bay, Ontario.

Opening Worship


The Theme Speech
The text of Jonathan Hong’s theme speech, entitled “Everyone Did as They Saw Fit”, may also be downloaded in PDF format.

The Panel Discussion
The text of the remarks by the three panelists may also be downloaded in PDF format.


The Annual General Meeting
The Annual Reports and Balance Sheet and Reviewer’s Report for the year ending December 31, 2019, that were considered at the Annual General Meeting may be downloaded in PDF format.

Renewal News – Spring 2020

Posted on by

In this issue:

Remit Voting Results

Posted on by

From September 2019 through March 2020, each of the 45 presbyteries in the Presbyterian Church in Canada voted on the two remits concerning same-sex marriage and ordination. A majority of the 45 presbyteries approved, and that majority consists of at least half of the combined total of the constituent members on the rolls of presbyteries, so the remits will go to the next General Assembly, expected in 2021, which is free to vote “Yes” or “No”. The dates, results, and numbers below were supplied to us by members of the courts. Numbers in the “Roll” column are approximate, not official.

Summary Remit B Vote Remit B Roll Remit C Vote Remit C Roll
Approving 33 957 30 870
Disapproving 12 347 15 436
No. Presbytery Vote
Date		 Remit B Remit C Roll
1 Cape Breton Nov 26 Approve Approve 20
2 Newfoundland Nov 13 Approve Approve 7
3 Pictou Nov 19 Approve Approve 22
4 Halifax-Lunenburg Nov 19 Approve Approve 22
5 New Brunswick Nov 27 Approve Approve
6 PEI Jan 14 Approve Disapprove 29
7 Quebec Mar 7 Approve Approve 11
8 Montreal Oct 15 Disapprove Disapprove 50
9 Seaway-Glengarry Jan 21 Approve Approve 24
10 Ottawa Feb 18 Approve Disapprove 43
11 Lanark and Renfrew Nov 19 Disapprove Approve 23
12 Kingston Feb 18 Approve Approve 21
13 Lindsay-Peterborough Dec 4 Approve Approve 27
14 Pickering Feb 19 Approve Approve
15 East Toronto Jan 7 Approve Approve 63
16 West Toronto Feb 11 Approve Approve 37
17 Brampton Jan 28 Approve Approve 61
18 Oak Ridges Feb 25 Disapprove Disapprove 45
19 Barrie March 10 Approve Approve 55
20 Temiskaming Approve Approve
21 Algoma North Bay Nov 19 Disapprove Disapprove 8
22 Waterloo-Wellington Jan 14 Approve Approve 47
23 Eastern Han-Ca Nov 12 Disapprove Disapprove 38
24 Hamilton Feb 11 Approve Approve 62
25 Niagara Nov 20 Approve Approve 32
26 Paris Feb 5 Disapprove Disapprove 25
27 London Oct 8 Approve Approve 31
28 Essex-Kent Feb 18 Approve Approve 19
29 Lambton-West Middlesex Jan 15 Disapprove Disapprove 21
30 Huron-Perth Sept 25 Approve Approve 28
31 Grey-Bruce-Maitland Jan 14 Approve Approve 35
32 Superior Feb 7 Approve Approve 6
33 Winnipeg Mar 19 Approve Approve
34 Brandon Nov 20 Approve Approve 12
35 Assiniboia Nov 16 Approve Disapprove 17
36 Northern Saskatchewan Approve Approve 9
37 Peace River Sept 7 Disapprove Disapprove 5
38 Edmonton-Lakeland Sept 17 Approve Approve 24
39 Central Alberta Mar 19 Approve Approve
40 Calgary-Macleod Nov 5 Approve Approve 38
41 Kootenay Nov 15 Disapprove Disapprove 8
42 Kamloops Oct 18 Disapprove Disapprove 15
43 Westminster Nov 16 Disapprove Disapprove 60
44 Vancouver Island Jan 28 Approve Disapprove 21
45 Western Han-Ca Nov 19 Disapprove Disapprove 38

Cheyne Stoney Creek Overture re: Two-Stream Structure

Posted on by

The Session of Cheyne Stoney Creek humbly submits the following overture to the Presbytery of Hamilton requesting that the Presbytery of Hamilton transmit the overture to the General Assembly, preferably with approval, with the request that the overture be referred to Assembly Council.

To the Venerable, the General Assembly of The Presbyterian Church in Canada:

WHEREAS, since 2014 many studies, overtures, and debates focusing on LGBTQI matters have revealed a deeply divided denomination; and

WHEREAS, despite many serious attempts to resolve these deep divisions, the numerous dissents and expressions of profound pain at the 145th General Assembly demonstrate that these separations remain and discussion across the church indicates that they could even be deepening; and

WHEREAS, although Remits B and C, adopted at the 145th General Assembly, were intended to bridge these differences, they do not effectively do so for many in our denomination; and

WHEREAS, whether Remits B and C are adopted or defeated, these divisions will continue to dominate our denomination; and

WHEREAS, it will be difficult for presbyters with different understandings of the biblical view on marriage to be mutually responsible to and submissive to one another; and

WHEREAS, whether Remits B and C are adopted or defeated, a significant number of members, regardless of their theology, may consider leaving, causing great pain, reducing many congregations’ viability, and decreasing resources for ministry, mission, and Presbyterian Sharing; and

WHEREAS, the changes proposed through Remits B and C do not safeguard either ecclesiastically or civilly the freedom of conscience and action as indicated by the variation in how the terms are defined in the opinion of the General Assembly clerks in “Presbyterian Connections” (September 2019), in the opinion from the legal firm Kuhn LLP, and in the opinion from the legal firm Miller Thomson LLP; and

WHEREAS, congregations need to be guaranteed a permanent place in the PCC where they can continue to do ministry in an ecclesiastical structure that safeguards a shared understanding of key Christian doctrines such as the authority of Scripture, the virgin birth, the resurrection, holy living and heterosexual marriage that are affirmed in our subordinate standards to which all our ministers and elders subscribed at their ordinations; and

WHEREAS, it is essential to help both those who hold an affirming position regarding human sexuality and those who hold a traditional position regarding human sexuality to be able to obey the way they believe God is calling them to lovingly serve the LGBTQI community, to perform marriages, and to conduct ordinations, even although those ways are very different; and

WHEREAS, the concept of restructuring the PCC underlying Pathway C of the former Moderators’ report was supported by numerous dissenters to the Pathway B decision at the 2019 General Assembly; and

WHEREAS, the spirit embodied in the Pathway C restructuring allows for a large number of people within our denomination to maintain their understanding of Scripture’s authority and to respect those who differ; and

WHEREAS, a Pathway C restructuring permits a possible combined pension plan, while acknowledging that the theological positions of the Affirming stream and the Traditional stream are too different to expect harmonious continuation without a definite legal separation;

THEREFORE, the Session of Cheyne Presbyterian Church, Stoney Creek, Ontario, humbly overtures the 146th General Assembly of The Presbyterian Church in Canada to create a process and legislation that will graciously restructure The Presbyterian Church in Canada to form two separate entities – Affirming and Traditional – embracing the spirit of Pathway C of the Special Committee of Former Moderators’ Report, allowing each congregation to choose to follow their understanding of God’s will within a legally separate entity, which should protect the civil liability of leadership who continue to follow their vows;
Or to do otherwise as the General Assembly in its wisdom may deem best.

Overture from Eastern Han-Ca Presbytery

Posted on by

To the Venerable 146th General Assembly of The Presbyterian Church in Canada:

WHEREAS, Korean congregations from 1967 onwards entered into a mutual covenant with The Presbyterian Church in Canada for the reason that our theological and doctrinal beliefs, expression of faith and worship, and governance were in consonance with those of The Presbyterian Church in Canada; and

WHEREAS, these beliefs of The Presbyterian Church in Canada are found in our subordinate standards – the Westminster Confession of Faith adopted in 1875 and 1889, the Declaration Concerning Church and Nation of 1954, and Living Faith (and its translations) adopted in 1998; and

WHEREAS, each minister and elder ordained in The Presbyterian Church in Canada has vowed to accept and uphold the teaching and doctrine contained in our subordinate standards, and under the continual illumination and correction of the Holy Spirit speaking in Scriptures; and

WHEREAS, the decisions and recommendations made at the 145th General Assembly of The Presbyterian Church in Canada in 2019 indicate a departure in the beliefs, character and identity of The Presbyterian Church in Canada, and now presents itself to be a different denomination from the one with which we first entered into mutual covenant; and

WHEREAS, this change in the nature of our denomination is clearly evident in Remits B and C of the 145th General Assembly of The Presbyterian Church in Canada, which are in contradiction to our subordinate standards; and

WHEREAS, this change in the nature of our denomination is not only evident in the proposals outlined in Remits B and C, but are rather symptomatic of the wider departure in beliefs of our denomination as evidenced in the statement by the convenor of the Special Committee re Implications of Option B (Inclusion) and adopted by the 2019 General Assembly without objection, “In truth we differ theologically on many things; the role of scripture, the virgin birth, the resurrection, the place of children, of women and the priorities of the church” (2019 A&P, p. 49), much of which also contradicts our subordinate standards (our beliefs on Scripture – WCF I, XIV.i,XIV.ii, XVIII.ii, XIX, XXI.v; LF – 1.3, 1.4, 5, 8.1.5; our beliefs on the virgin birth – WCF 8.2; LF 3.2.1; our beliefs on the resurrection – WCF VIII.iv, XIII.i, XXXII; LF 2.1.4, 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 10.4); and

WHEREAS, this departure from the subordinate standards by many in the denomination is not without a damaging effect and impact upon Han-Ca congregations, and greatly undermines the evangelism and the public witness of Han-Ca congregations within the Korean-Canadian community, and poses a real and significant challenge for the pastoral ministry of current members, some of whom have expressed the intent to withdraw membership and leave the Presbyterian Church in Canada because of the change in the nature of the denomination as evidenced in the remits; and

WHEREAS, the continued movement away from the subordinate standards of The Presbyterian Church in Canada that were the basis of our covenant with the denomination, despite the unambiguous opposition of Han-Ca Presbyteries’ congregations, has functioned to silence the collective voice of the ethnically Korean congregations within a largely dominant-culture denomination, and threatens the existence of our congregations as we currently stand; and

WHEREAS, the provision for liberty of conscience and liberty of action in the remits does not mitigate the aforementioned threats and challenges to the healthy ministry of the congregations within the Han-Ca presbyteries because of the denominationally-sanctioned departure from the subordinate standards; and

WHEREAS, the liberty of conscience and action provided in the remits is not clearly defined and, according to the Book of Forms, cannot be guaranteed in perpetuity, and may be removed by a subsequent declaratory act, similar to the Declaratory Acts of 1982 and 1989 (BOF 11.2) in regards to women’s ordination;

THEREFORE, the Presbytery of Eastern Han-Ca humbly overtures the Venerable, the 146th General Assembly of The Presbyterian Church in Canada to create a safeguarded, guaranteed and permanent place with theological separation in the form of a theologically and doctrinally autonomous Synod where congregations that uphold the existing subordinate standards in the Han-Ca presbyteries and elsewhere can continue to be fully participating members in covenant with The Presbyterian Church in Canada, just as the presbyteries of Eastern and Western Han-Ca were formed on the basis of a distinct and separate language and culture in order that the ordained ministers, ruling elders, and congregations could fully participate in the denomination; or to do otherwise as the General Assembly in its wisdom deems best.

Grace West Hill Overture re: Safe Place for Congregations

Posted on by

To the Venerable the General Assembly:

WHEREAS, the beliefs of The Presbyterian Church in Canada are defined in our subordinate standards – the Westminster Confession of Faith as adopted in 1875 and 1889, the Declaration concerning Church and Nation of 1954, and Living Faith (Foi Vivante and 산 믿음) as adopted in 1998; and

WHEREAS, every minister and elder in The Presbyterian Church in Canada affirmed our subordinate standards in their ordination vows; and

WHEREAS, General Assemblies of our denomination, despite these ordination vows, have nevertheless for several years been discussing changes, referred to as human sexuality issues, that would contravene our subordinate standards, and contravene a traditional understanding of the Bible held for 2000 years and still held by the vast majority of the worldwide holy catholic church; and

WHEREAS, the 2019 General Assembly approved and remitted to presbyteries under the Barrier Act that:

  • The Presbyterian Church in Canada holds two parallel definitions of marriage and recognizes that faithful, Holy Spirit filled, Christ centred, God honouring people can understand marriage as a covenant relationship between a man and a woman or as a covenant relationship between two adult persons. That congregations, sessions, ruling and teaching elders be granted liberty of conscience and action on marriage.
  • That congregations and presbyteries may call and ordain as ministers and elect and ordain as ruling elders LGBTQI persons (married or single) with the provision that liberty of conscience and action regarding participation in ordinations, inductions and installations be granted to ministers and ruling elders; and

WHEREAS, the 2019 General Assembly did not choose “Pathway C: One Denomination – Three Streams”, which was presented by the Special Committee of Former Moderators and would have provided a safe place within the denomination for congregations and clergy with a traditional understanding of the Bible and also for those who embrace a different understanding; and

WHEREAS, many people, congregations and clergy with a traditional understanding of the Bible are feeling unwanted and excluded by our denomination; and

WHEREAS, people with a traditional understanding of the Bible are considering leaving our denomination, or have left our denomination, in response to General Assembly discussions and actions; and

WHEREAS, some congregations and clergy with a traditional understanding of the Bible are wondering:

  • whether our denomination will approve remits which will require ministers and elders to vow to uphold views which conflict with a traditional understanding of the Bible,
  • how long our denomination, regardless of the outcome of the remits, will continue to provide a safe place where they can act in full accordance with a traditional understanding of the Bible,
  • whether they will need to seek next steps in finding a place where they can be faithful to their gospel call;

THEREFORE, the Session of Grace, West Hill, Toronto, Ontario, humbly overtures the Venerable, the 146th General Assembly to seek a way forward, in the spirit of “Pathway C: One Denomination – Three Streams”, presented in the 2019 report of the Special Committee of Former Moderators, to provide a safeguarded, guaranteed and permanent place in The Presbyterian Church in Canada where congregations and clergy with a traditional understanding of the Bible can continue to do ministry in this denomination in a manner which reflects the same character, identity, ethos, and core teachings that were the way of our denomination during the formation and adoption of our existing subordinate standards; or to do otherwise as the General Assembly, in its wisdom, deems best.

Renewal News – Winter 2020

Posted on by

In This Issue:

Renewal News Winter 2020

Our Members

Posted on by

We are believers. We are Presbyterian. And we are men and women working and praying for the church to be renewed as a more authentic expression of what Christ wanted in his church: rooted in scriptural truth, guided and inspired by the Holy Spirit, putting Christ above all things.

We are ministers and ruling elders, members and adherents, musicians and organists, Sunday School teachers and youth leaders, students and retirees.

We represent every province and presbytery.

At last count, our membership stood at 426 members/adherents and 104 ministers.

Presbytery of Eastern Han-Ca Statement on the Remits

Posted on by

(This document can be downloaded)

I. Recommendation

The recommendation to the congregations in our Presbytery is that they vote “No” to the remits handed down by GA 2019. The following are both the rationales for a “No” vote, and the implications of a “Yes” vote should the remits pass.

II. Rationales and Implications

A. An Introduced Definition of Marriage in Contradiction to Scripture

Should the remits pass an alternative definition of marriage that is in contradiction to the scriptures will be introduced. The general implication is as a result we fear being regarded as those who do not uphold to the teaching and authority of Scripture. One direct implication to our churches is the loss of our credibility to witness and do ministry amongst the various people groups, of which Koreans are just one. Han-Ca churches take very seriously the work of missions, and already we are experiencing the refusal from outside organizations to partner with our churches because of the nature of the debate we are having in our denomination over the topic of human sexuality. Another direct implication is the projected large exodus of members leaving our churches for churches that adhere to biblical teaching, which coheres with longstanding historical interpretations, rooted in our tradition and creeds. The Korean people hold our scriptures in high regard, and there are plenty of alternative churches where this can be found.

B. Two “Parallel” Definitions: Problems of Coherence and Contradiction

There is a lack of coherence, and the presence of contradiction between the current definition of marriage, “as that between a man and a woman,” with the newly introduced definition of marriage, “as that between two adult persons.” These two definitions are not in parallel. The traditional understanding of marriage is in direct contradiction to two of the three permutations of the latter definition. Both cannot possibly be true at the same time (Law of Non-Contradiction), meaning that when one definition is taught, the other definition is simultaneously being negated. Are we allowed to do this? We are concerned about both our credibility when it comes to teaching our children, and also our integrity when it comes to being an effective witness. As we teach the children of our churches our credibility needs to be supported by our denomination, for the very reasons that we already live in a cultural milieu which in many ways attempts to undermine the authority and the content of our teaching. Moreover, to have integrity, we believe that what we teach needs to be in-line with the teaching of the denomination to which we belong. When the outside is not in alignment with the inside, we cannot be authentic, and our witness will prove ineffective.

C. A Denial of Our Subordinate Standards?

This introduced, alternative definition of marriage goes against our subordinate standards, to which every Minister and Elder in the PCC affirmed in their ordination vows. The vows that we affirmed and made promise to at our ordinations once reflected the nature of the denomination to which we were entering into covenant. We fear that the PCC now no longer reflects these subordinate standards, and this made blatantly evident in the statement of the convener of the special committee formed to discuss the implications of Option B at GA 2019:

… it seems that our differences are insurmountable. In truth we differ theologically on many things; the role of scripture, the virgin birth, the resurrection, the place of children, of women and the priorities of the church. (GA 2019, 9th Sederunt: Pg.3, emphasis added)

Does this statement reflect the true nature of our current denomination? The denomination as it identifies and expresses itself today is not the same denomination to which our churches first entered into covenant with over 50 years ago—and this breaks our hearts.

D. The Trajectory Forward if the Remits Pass

The trajectory of this way forward, if the remits are passed, is one in which those who hold to the traditional view of marriage will likely lose their liberty of conscience and also their place and space in this denomination.

III. Liberty of Conscience and Liberty of Action: A Myth

The piece written by the Rev. Stephen Kendall and Rev. Don Muir (respectively, Principal Clerk and Deputy Clerk) on the topic of Liberty of Conscience and Liberty of Action in the Presbyterian Connection, Fall Issue, 2019, is a highly interpretive discussion of the topic. It is observed that there was no title given to the written piece, but perhaps an apt one would be something along the lines of “Defining the Limits of Liberty of Conscience and Liberty of Action.” The repeated emphases of specific phrases are highly suggestive of the real limits of how “Liberty of Conscience” and “Liberty of Action” will play out in our current struggle related to human sexuality in the PCC. The following is a list of such phrases in their immediate context (emphasis added):

  1. “This [liberty of conscience] does not mean we can believe whatever we want”

  2. “There is a limit to our liberty of conscience, especially when it leads to what is damaging or contrary to God’s will”

  3. “How can we be certain to know what is correct? While this is an individual task, it is also the task of the church … in addition to our liberty of conscience being subordinate to God, God’s will and God’s word, it should also be subordinate to ‘lawfully appointed powers, either ecclesiastical or civil.’ We understand that the church has a role in dictating, or at least guiding, our liberty of conscience…”

  4. “this liberty is intended by God as a means for us to uphold and preserve one another in the faith, not to destroy one another. This section ([WCF], XX.IV) places upon the church the obligation to put limits on practices or even opinions that might be destructive to the peace and order that Christ intends for the church.”

  5. “The guidance it [WCF] gives with respect to action is that no action should lead to division in the church, or to the destruction of peace within the church.”

Moreover, the example of women’s ordination is provided to discuss how the topics of “Liberty of Conscience” and “Liberty of Action” played out in our denominational history. With the end result in 1989 being the addition of a final Declaratory Act which states that “freedom of action regarding ordinations was removed, and freedom of conscience, while still acknowledged, is conditioned by the obligation of presbyteries to obey church law and doctrine” (emphasis added).

The following is a summary of how we understand the written piece: there are limits to Liberty of Conscience, which in end is dictated by the church. Similarly, Liberty of Action is determined not by the individual, but by the larger governing body of the church. Furthermore, Liberty of Conscience, and especially Liberty of Action, cannot be upheld if the position being advocated for works against the primary concern of upholding the peace and unity of the church. Therefore, Liberty of Conscience and Liberty of Action will NOT serve as a safeguard.

IV. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms vis-a-vis Religious Freedom

The Charter in 1982 was formed to protect the political and civil rights of individuals in Canada. In the preamble to the charter the following words are found: “Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.” How does this statement fare in light of our current milieu and the many adjudications over controversial issues which appear to be questioning the reality of religious freedom? The following are some of the many current examples that appear to shed light on the current state of religious freedom:

  1. Government Summer Job Grants given to those who comply with their listed criteria, of which includes the matter of “sexual orientation”

  2. Human rights tribunals and the challenging of freedom of expression

  3. Quebec’s laws banning religious symbols (passed: formerly known as Bill 21) and the prohibition of face coverings (Bill 62)

  4. Trinity Western University and the Supreme Court’s denial of accreditation to become a law school because Trinity promotes “abstinence from sex outside of heterosexual marriage.”

In our day and age it is impossible to argue that religious freedom will continue unchallenged, and without serious pushback. Also what happens when the freedom of one party infringes on the freedom of another? In many cases freedom of expression predicated on religious belief or practice cannot stand up against the demands of other non-religiously related forms of freedom. Yes, currently we cannot be forced to officiate the marriages of same-sex individuals, but let us not be so naïve into thinking this will always be the case. However, what is of greater concern—especially when there is another change to the definition of marriage which excises the clause “as that between a man and a woman”—is the slow handing over of leadership and power to those in our churches who claim to adhere to this “progressive” view of marriage and sexuality.

V. Statements of the Presbytery of Eastern Han-Ca

  1. For the reasons listed above, the Presbytery of Eastern Han-Ca will be recommending a “No” vote to the 2019 GA Remits being handed down

  2. Our churches seek a safeguarded, guaranteed and permanent place in the PCC where we can continue to do ministry in this denomination in a manner which reflects the same character, identity, ethos, and core teachings that were present in this denomination when we first chose to enter into covenant with it, over 50 years ago. We desire this safeguarded, guaranteed and permanent place not only to be promised by the courts of our church, but also ratified and upheld by Canadian law.

  3. If this space cannot be provided, congregations in the Presbytery of Eastern Han-Ca will be forced to seek next steps into finding a place where we can be faithful to our gospel call.

  4. Congregations in the Presbytery of Eastern Han-Ca will continue to do faithful ministry, unabatedly, here at home in Canada, as well as abroad in the world. We will continue to love everyone, especially those belonging to the LGBTQI+ community. We will open our doors to all who want to know Christ. And we will call all towards holy living as indicated in our scriptures.