PCC Covenant Opening Worship

The text of Rev. Jonathan Hong’s message during PCC Covenant opening worship on Monday, January 25th, 2021.

I once posted in social media a picture of me wearing a Toronto Blue Jays cap, and my cousin posted along the lines that I look like “a thug from the hood”, to which I replied, “I didn’t choose the thug life, the thug life chose me.”

Most of us here could say something similar about our denomination. We’ve been born into or have been a part of the PCC for a long time. I, however, like many of you did have the special opportunity of really affirming our denomination through my ordination vows, as I pledged myself and swore to uphold our subordinate standards. At the core of this decision was the belief that our denomination, the PCC, held Scripture to be our authority, our rule of faith and life. In June of this year, we will return to GA, and most likely to deal with the remits regarding human sexuality, remits desiring to change our doctrine, remits which are in contradiction to Scripture, remits which indicate that our Scriptures are no longer our authority, our rule of faith and life. It’s not that I don’t believe the discussions that we will be having today under the monikers of “stay and pray”, “leave”, “divide into two”, and “the undecided” are not important. They are important. But I believe our primary importance, that which is our primary responsibility to our denomination at GA this year, is to call them to account, to warn them that what has been the bedrock of our denomination for 145 years, namely the adherence to the authority of Scripture, is being rejected and undermined. As to what will happen to our buildings, our assets, our churches, our ministry charges, we trust in Christ, who as Romans 8:32 states, “He who did not spare His own Son, but gave Him up for us all, how will He not also along with Him graciously give us all things?” Which means to me that in life, we already have the victory through His Son, and whatever we need, Christ will give us. If we are robbed of our buildings, assets, churches, we still have Christ and will be given all that we need. We are able then to be the recipients of injustice and not retaliate in a manner which betrays the way of Christ. We can, as Jesus states in Matthew 5:38, not resist an evil person, turn the other cheek for another slap, and hand over our coat in addition to our shirt. Again, what consoles me, enables me to even think of being able to do this, is because not only do I know that I have all things in Christ, but that our Lord will come again and judge, and we will all have to stand before Him. For this very reason, to use the language of Ezekiel as watchmen on the watchtower, it is our responsibility and obligation to warn our friends, sisters and brothers in the PCC, about this judgment. Not because we want them to have their just deserts, but because we love them and want their good. So, this is a plea to you today, in addition to the important discussions that will be taking place today, to plan out various courses of action in response to the remits at this General Assembly. I pray that we will stand together to uphold our responsibility to God and our denomination by warning our denomination of the wrong direction we’re heading and calling them to account. Thank you for listening.

I just want to pray for us before we continue in worship. God, we just want to thank You for the privilege of being the PCC. In our hearts, we are so broken with those who want to take the PCC in a different direction, Lord. I know this brings a lot of pain to our hearts, a lot of sadness. But God, console our hearts at this time. Help us to see and realize that in Christ, we have all things, and that You will give us the consummation of everything in the new age, when we see You face to face, when heaven and earth become one. But God, until then, help us to realize that our primary calling is to be faithful to You and to continue to be a witness to You. Help us not to falter; help us not to fear from doing that, Lord God. And so, thank You for this opportunity where we will get to share and talk and discuss where we feel as if You are leading us. So, thank You that You speak to us and that You are with us. We pray this in Your name. Amen.

Gracious Dismissal Final Report

In recent months, we’ve heard a lot about the need for clarity as we share statistics and information pertaining to the COVID-19 virus. There is a similar need for openness in the church. This week, Assembly Council published the minutes of its October 27, 2020, meeting in which the report of its Gracious Dismissal Committee was on the agenda. A majority on the council voted not to receive it “until at least after the General Assembly has dealt with Remits B and C.” Notwithstanding this decision, the report in its entirety was included in the minutes as part of a written dissent. We believe this report is of deep interest to the church. Therefore, without taking sides, we present the report of the Committee.

Final Report to Assembly Council from Gracious Dismissal Committee

March 22, 2020

To Assembly Council:

Background

Over the past 5 years Overtures have been made to General Assembly requesting, in general, that The Presbyterian Church in Canada permit congregations to leave the denomination with their property if the denomination approves either a redefinition of marriage to include same sex couples or the ordination of those leaders who are in a same sex marriage. The phrase “Gracious Dismissal” was used to describe the process articulated in and the prayer of the Overtures (further discussion about the term “Gracious Dismissal” is set out below). An ancillary issue is whether congregations that owned their property prior to 1925 are treated differently than other congregations.

In response to the Overtures, in 2016 the Clerks of Assembly presented to General Assembly a subsequently adopted response that concluded that there was not a process to permit Gracious Dismissal due to both the polity of the denomination and the statutory restrictions set out in the Act to Incorporate The Trustee Board of The Presbyterian Church in Canada (1939) (“Trustee Board Act”). The polity of The Presbyterian Church in Canada does not allow for a congregation to leave the denomination: the congregation by definition must dissolve if it does not remain. If the congregation dissolves, its assets and liabilities vest in the Trustee Board … Read more

Victory On The “Losing” Side

This blog represents the thoughts of the author. While they may reflect the theological position of The Renewal Fellowship, they should not be seen as an official statement.

As we wait for the next General Assembly, many of us in PCC orthodoxy are praying, listening, discussing, discerning and planning.

It appears that a future General Assembly will approve the proposed parallel definitions of marriage in which “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.”

The expectation is not fatalistic, just realistic.

Among those in orthodoxy, three directions have emerged: depart from the PCC, divide the denomination into theological wings, and remain in the fold as witnesses to orthodoxy. (There’s a fourth camp: those who are undecided which path they might choose. But they remain amorphous.)

Regarding that third movement, also known as “stay and pray”, evangelicals might look to The United Church of Canada for inspiration. Yes, that denomination. Many in orthodoxy have distanced themselves from their counterparts in the UC.

But evangelicals are alive and well in the UC. They lead thriving congregations whose websites and language look right at home in the world of evangelicals. Many UC evangelicals find strength and solace in Cruxifusion, a network of ministers who are centred on Christ. They’re described by chair Rev. Greg Smith-Young as “ETOC: evangelical, traditional, orthodox, conservative” witnesses.

It is not a fringe group. Membership in Cruxifusion now totals approximately 500 and includes ministers, deacons, candidates for clergy and some lay members. It’s a pretty healthy number in a denomination with approximately 2,800 congregations.

Intrigued, Renewal’s board gathered by Zoom with some members of the Cruxifusion board of directors and supporters on a recent Saturday morning to hear their stories.

Cruxifusion is “a lifeline,” said one southern Ontario minister. To her, the network is like family. “You are not alone.”

Indeed, the description of “family” was tossed out a lot during our two-hour gathering. What does a family do for each other but to love, listen, encourage and provide shelter. Cruxifusion’s website banner (www.cruxifusion.ca) sums it up: “Supporting, inspiring, connecting Christ-centred ministry personnel within the United Church of Canada.”

Said an Alberta minister: “I could not serve in ministry without this network.”

“We’re here to support each other,” added a Southern Ontario minister.

Smith-Young says the network has no official standing in the denomination. “The UC recognizes us as a support network, but with no formal status. Our focus is to build relationships, as a connecting and supporting organization. Our goal is not at a formal level to lobby the denomination.”

No politics allowed. Cruxifusion is “not trying to convert the church. We just want to be faithful,” said the southern Ontario minister.

“It’s not an anxious prophetic voice,” said the Alberta minister.

That’s noteworthy, considering the history of renewal movements in the UC. Cruxifusion was born from the same theological roots of the former United Church Renewal Fellowship, Community of Concern, National Alliance of Covenanting Congregations and Church Alive. But their culture is remarkably different.

Those four groups formed at various times and each had a slightly different focus, whether spiritual, political or theological. When the UC decided to ordain those in LGB communities in 1988, many members of those renewal groups departed the denomination. Those who remained in the UC wrestled with their purpose. In time, they struggled with membership and energy.

In the 1990s and early 2000s, said Smith-Young, “there were a lot of younger ministers coming into the church who were more orthodox. They wanted to talk about Jesus. Their beliefs were consistent with the creeds. . . An evangelical influence was detected in the seminaries. Jesus has been calling these people. Students were coming in with different questions then earlier, and professors were noticing. These students were not questioning the tenets of the faith; they were embracing them.”

Smith-Young was among them. But a decade into ministry, he felt worn down by the reality that in many parts of the UC, Christ was not celebrated. He considered leaving the denomination.

“It was not around sexual orientation. It was because Christ was not celebrated; worship was a sham. It was harder and harder to maintain joy in ministry, even though I loved my congregation. The renewal groups offered no hope for me to regain that joy.”

In 2010, one of leaders from the older renewal movement invited him to a gathering of young ministers of like mind. A year later, Cruxifusion arose with 50 young ministers, most under the age of 50. Buoyed by $50,000 in leftover funds from the four groups, they sought encouragement and a voice.

Evangelicals in the UC sometimes encounter “heretical” beliefs and worship practices. They serve alongside some colleagues who are far removed from orthodoxy. Being unashamedly evangelical in a mostly-liberal mainline denomination has attracted some critical voices and they’ve been accused of hate. Rather than fight, they choose to witness Christ. They encourage their members to be involved in the leadership of the church.

Although it’s taken some time to develop, Cruxifusion is now “known for what we stand for, not what we’re against,” said the southwestern Ontario minister.

While Cruxifusion speaks orthodoxy, there are various translations.

“We may agree on scripture, but disagree on the interpretation,” said Smith-Young.

Said one Ontario minister: “We may not be on the same page theologically, but we’re in the same chapter.”

For example, those who call themselves traditional but who marry same-sex couples “would say they’re following orthodoxy.” At the end of the day, they remain united in their belief in Christ “as Lord and saviour” as stated on the website description.

_____________________

 

Are there lessons from the Cruxifusion story for those in PCC orthodoxy? And can we learn anything from the UC experience?

After gay ordination was affirmed, many in the UC were wounded. Smith-Young was entering ministry at the time and remembers the pain and bitterness.

“I wish I could go back to those a generation ahead of me and say, ‘I grieve for you. Something bad happened to you.’ Their pain was so deep. A spirit of resentment and woundedness became part of the life of that movement. That was not attractive to me. I didn’t want to become part of the renewal groups of the UC.”

For those of us in PCC orthodoxy, that’s worth noting. Righteous anger is a painful reality. It’s beautiful in the way it echoes the words of Christ spoken against the church leaders of his day who twisted the meaning of scripture and reinterpreted Mosaic law for their own gain.

But what fruit would result? If the ship has sailed, there’s little to be gained by gazing at the horizon or shouting into the sunset. No anger or politicking would change the course. The younger UC ministers who formed Cruxifusion recognized that. They were cut from different cloth than their evangelical predecessors; not necessarily more accepting of the gay lifestyle but certainly less offended by it. They recognized that no amount of politicking was going to change a church that was yoked to contemporary culture. So they did what they could. They prayed early and often, witnessed Christ, planted the seeds and allowed the Holy Spirit to do the heavy lifting. And they didn’t allow the enemy to get them down. And all of that continues in the present tense.

____________________

 

During our online gathering, a Western Canada UC minister observed that Cruxifusion allowed her to be “humble enough to be led by Christ.” Ponder that. How many of us are willing to put down the sword and simply love our enemies? (Make no mistake about that: Christ told us clearly in Luke 11:23 and Matthew 12:30 that “anyone who isn’t with me opposes me.” Those who have departed from the teachings of Christ are not with Christ and are opposed to him. In this paradigm, there are winners and losers.) She noted how being on the “losing side” of sexuality politics, as defined by the progressives, was actually a gift: it allowed grace, humility and love to flow. Being on the “winning side” fueled self righteousness.

In the eyes of the world, wasn’t Christ on the losing side then and does He not reside there now? Absolutely. True followers of Christ remain on the trash heap of history, not inheriting the world but heirs to the Kingdom instead.

Flowing with grace, humility and love – that’s the dream for many. And doing so while proclaiming Christ and striving to deny ourselves in order to walk with Him. Now there’s victory.

_____________________

 

The PCC and the UC share much of the same polity ethos and nomenclature. While it’s interesting to compare and contrast the UC’s four renewal groups with the presence of different groups and movements in the current PCC landscape, our situations are also different.

Cruxifusion’s witness and work may be inspiring to those of us in PCC orthodoxy who yearn for peace while remaining as witnesses to some form of orthodoxy. This is not to offer up Cruxifusion as a wholesale model for those in PCC orthodoxy. They are in a different context.

_____________________

 

People in Cruxifusion are often asked about their name. The explanation is a testimony in itself: Crux is Latin for “Cross” and fusion means joining two parts together, creating a union. Their identity statement says it’s all about unity: “His cross fuses us, making us one.”

Allow me to take that a step further. In a nuclear sense, it results in a release of energy. Medically, vertebrae are rejoined to produce stability, strength and a new lease on life. The implications are powerful. It’s not my intent here to redefine another organization’s ethos or mess with the etymology. I’m merely suggesting that if the power of the Holy Spirit is present, amazing things can happen.

May this be something to ponder, as our praying, listening, discussing, discerning and planning continues.

We Need to Create New Wineskins

Opinion: It’s time for the church to issue its own marriage licences.

This writer is old enough to remember the burning of draft cards to protest the Vietnam war and bras being burned to somehow advance a feminist agenda. Similarly, as both a protest and affirmation, he would have no difficulty shredding his government-issued marriage licence. If Presbyterian Church in Canada (PCC) clergy, who hold to the Biblical view of marriage, took this not so radical step we could then begin the now necessary imperative of reclaiming marriage as the purview of the church. It is possible.

How have I found myself in league with the radicals of old? Our provincial governments have disgorged such a plethora of definitions of marriage it is no longer recognizable. When the defining template is simply cohabiting beyond a weekend fling, involving anyone of either gender, or now ungendered persons, marriage as God ordained it and as practiced for millennia has been shuffled into meaningless irrelevancy. What once could be identified as marriage is now so open ended, it is obliged to eventually include all manner of relationships. For example, the polygamies in Bountiful, BC, are referred to as marriages even though no government licences were issued. The spiral began decades ago when common law relationships were given legal equivalency by the CRA for the spousal tax deduction.

The muddle over marriage definition in the PCC, so aptly illustrated in the 2019 General Assembly Remits and its underpinning theological issue of the authority of Scripture, is forcing some to leave the denomination. Others, who also hold to the Biblical view of marriage, will “stay and pray.” Alternately, a middle option would be to create, source and manage a non geographical Synod or Presbytery comprised of PCC clergy, members and adherents who hold to a higher view of Scripture than is currently evidenced across the spectrum of the PCC. Strife and detraction from our witness to Christ is our future without surgery as the present constituency of the PCC is not going to change. No one has the heart for discipline. We need to create this new wineskin. Jesus never said you could not put old wine into a new wineskin and he did say, what some of us already affirm, that “the old wine is better”. The “old wine” of our historic Scriptural authority with its affirmation of male/female marriage is not just better, it is best. If the new presbytery/synod attracts sufficient numbers it should be able to negotiate in strength with the remnant of the PCC a sufficient minimal legal relationship so as to guarantee retention of congregational buildings and pensions.

Within this new Synod, the problems surrounding what constitutes marriage become resolved as clergy would cease to be agents of the state by possessing a government- issued marriage licence. The PCC has been caught up in the mess the government has made of what constitutes marriage and it is time for the church to take marriage back into its rightful Biblical purview. This Synod would issue its own licenses, perform marriages between men and women only and issue marriage certificates. The church would be free again to define marriage Biblically. The threat of legal harassment is eliminated as there is no longer an obligation to marry everyone. The government would be forced to recognize these marriages just as they must do now with other arrangements and sexual practices.

The burning of draft cards and bras occurred in a time of social chaos in the west. The church today needs to push back against the chaos in our society and church to restore into people’s lives the order that God first intended when he created man as male and female and gave us his gift of marriage.

Rev. James Statham is a past member of the Renewal Fellowship Board of Directors. He lives in Peachland, BC.

The Real Battle Is Local

This blog represents the thoughts of the author. While they may reflect the theological position of The Renewal Fellowship, they should not be seen as an official statement.

“The world has a mission – to capture and assimilate the church,” said apologist R.C. Sproul. “If the church becomes an echo of the world, the mission of the world is accomplished.”

In the minds of many who adhere to orthodoxy in The Presbyterian Church in Canada (PCC), the battle is lost on a denominational level. The fact that proposals to approve non-traditional marriage are well on their way to approval is proof that the church has been captured. Adoption of Remits “B” and “C” is seen by many as inevitable.

Three responses are emerging: leave, divide the PCC into separate wings, or simply “stay and pray”. Leadership will emerge and alliances will be chosen in the months ahead. Not every pastor, elder, and believer is called to enlist in a national movement. Alliances are not for everyone.

While the battle may be lost nationally, that’s not necessarily the case locally. We need to remember that the church is built from the ground up. It started with the Son of God who called a few fishermen. One person at a time, the movement grew. After the ascension, the church was founded by the apostles and other believers, one home at a time. This was the church in its purest form. And it remains so today. The congregation – some would say the small group – is the real church.

Of course, this is not to dismiss the usefulness of organization, for we can accomplish more together than we can apart. The point is to say that denominations don’t regenerate on their own; rather, they are to equip their local congregations to do that work.

On a collective, national level, the enemy has managed to infiltrate enough hearts and minds to ignore Scripture and use politics to change practices and beliefs. But the real church will thrive on the Holy Spirit power of those who adhere to Biblical authenticity on the streets, in our homes and workplaces, and in the local electronic media. That Holy Spirit power is working on the local level, through congregations.

Of course, the same secular forces which are successfully changing denominational doctrine – as if you can change the mind of God! – are also at work in the congregation. But there are many elders and believers whose hearts and minds have not been captured.

It’s a mixed bag. Rare is the congregation which is entirely of one mind in orthodoxy (orthodoxy being defined as beliefs and practices which are in line with those of the original apostles, who adhered to Christ’s commands to deny oneself, to carry one’s cross and follow Him, even unto death, rather than give in to the egregious lie, spun compellingly by Satan, that God didn’t really say that). There are congregations which are mostly of one mind. There are places which are divided to varying degrees. There are churches where the pastor identifies as traditional but whose congregation and elders largely are not.

We didn’t get into this situation overnight. The battle between orthodoxy and apostasy has been going on since the beginning of time. And it’s not leaving us until Christ returns and His kingdom is restored.

Until that time, we fight on the ground. For pastors who adhere to orthodoxy, it means boldly preaching the Word of God – and its sometimes-inconvenient truths – to anyone who has ears to hear, and to do so with love. Be the shepherd who mentors the ruling elders, who equips the flock with the tools to plant the seeds of faith. Be the believer who loves every single person and is bold enough to do good things for those who don’t share the same theology – and to do so in humility and submission to the Holy Spirit of Christ.

We are not alone. Renewal Fellowship and our many friends in orthodoxy – including PSALT, the Han-Ca presbyteries, many non-Anglo congregations and those who aren’t aligned formally with any group – are taking steps to work together in the months and years ahead of us. There are separate initiatives being developed to encourage and equip local church leaders to be better disciples. And there are many local things going on in congregations across the country.

In the same way a tree emerges from the group and is only as good as its roots, the church is only as strong as its congregations.

I’m not going to allow any change in doctrine to get me down, as grievous as it is. The enemy can change a few words, but he cannot change my heart.

Grace Orleans Overture re: Governance Model Protection

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.

One Man’s Holy Dissent

Any member of a court who has voted on a question and who disagrees with the outcome may register a dissent. The following was written in response to the Presbytery of Hamilton’s decision to support Remits “B” and “C”.

Rev. George Anderson
Rev. George Anderson

All things in the church start and end with Jesus Christ who is the Alpha and Omega for the church. He is our Lord and Saviour, our King and Head. He rules over His one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.

Hebrews says “Jesus, the same yesterday today and forever.” Jesus is unique and unchanging and His truth is unique and unchanging.

Approving the remits, and with them affirming that we hold to two parallel views of marriage, undermines the uniqueness of Jesus’ teaching on marriage (“Therefore a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife and the two shall become one flesh.” Matthew 19:5). This has been held by the Presbyterian and Reformed churches since the Reformation and the broader Catholic and Orthodox churches from the first century. If there are now two equally valid views of marriage, then this opens our doctrines up to two — or three — views of Jesus’ person or work or any other important doctrine.

The remits bring into question the very nature of the church of Christ which is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. (Living Faith 7.1.2-5.) Can we now be certain of being part of the one church any longer? We can no longer stand with the catholic global church of the past, present, or future. The clear teaching of the apostles is no longer our foundation.

Rather than foster unity in Christ, this change of doctrine is producing disruption and disharmony in our churches and goes against our ordination vows where we have repeatedly vowed as ministers and elders not to follow any divisive course.

The remits, while giving freedom of conscience and action to ministers and sessions at the congregational level, will deny freedom of conscience and action to traditional presbyters to vote on conscience in discerning calls at the presbytery level and traditional presbyteries will find themselves forced to pass calls which they would regard as unacceptable.

In an attempt to provide loving inclusion, the remits have seriously misinterpreted the meaning and practice of Christ’s saving love. Jesus said “If you obey my commandments, you will remain in my love” (John 15:10). This agape love which is full of both grace and truth is exemplified by Jesus when he said to the woman caught in adultery “Neither do I condemn you.” (grace). “Go and sin no more.” (truth). Thomas Merton, a RC theologian, has put it well: “Only this charity which is as strong as the Spirit of God Himself can save us from the lamentable error of pouring out on others a love that leads them into error and urges them to seek happiness where it can never be found.” (No Man is an Island, page 6)

This change in the doctrine of marriage puts at risk 30 years or more of a sound fruitful partnership with Korean, Arabic, Chinese, and African followers of Jesus who provide much needed spiritual vitality and mission vision in the PCC.

Jesus commands us with Peter to “Feed my lambs.” We will lose the biblical basis for clear teaching and guidance to our young people at a time when they most need it, as the Canadian culture descends further into gender and sexual contusion based on individual self-identity and moral relativism.

It is in Jesus and His powerful transforming love, which restores the broken image of God, that we find what Paul described in 1 Corinthians 5:11 “You were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit of God.” All of us, whatever our personal struggle, need Jesus to heal and restore us.

Remit Voting Results

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

Orthodoxy in the PCC – Where It’s At

In February 2020, The Renewal Fellowship convened three online gatherings of ministers, elders and congregants who adhere to a traditional view of doctrine and theology in The Presbyterian Church in Canada. The participants were, generally speaking, opposed to the remits (proposals) before our church courts to redefine marriage in order to create equal space for LGBTQI communities and to formally recognize the call and ordination of those in same-sex marriages.

The purpose of the gatherings was, firstly, to encourage one another in the light of the fact that a majority of presbyteries have approved the remits. They will now come before General Assembly in June for final consideration. The second purpose was to determine what our next steps might be and to what extent there is a willingness to respond with a unified voice.

Gatherings were held on February 11, 12, and 18 using Zoom conferencing technology. A total of 64 people – defined by computer connections – signed up. But the actual number of participants was more than 90, considering the fact that one connection was in a church meeting room with at least two-dozen watching and listening, and another was in a church meeting with a half-dozen others. Every region in Canada was represented. There were 30 ministers and 34 lay people.

We began each of the conversations with the following question: “Is some sort of theological separation in The Presbyterian Church in Canada now inevitable in order to avoid a mass exodus?” In other words, can revisionists and those in orthodoxy continue to work together in the PCC if the remits are adopted? The question defines theological separation as the creation of separate courts in the PCC to allow the orthodox and revisionists to have control over their own doctrine.

When reading the responses, it’s important to consider the following.

  • The participants were not chosen; rather, they responded to invitations that were directed to those in orthodoxy via Renewal Fellowship’s email database and RF and PSALT’s Facebook pages. We wanted to be focused on the agenda and not be drawn into a debate, so we were careful to allow participation by only those who were in orthodoxy.
  • To allow participants to speak freely, we pledged anonymity. Identification is limited to gender, ordination status, and geography: West (British Columbia to Manitoba), Central (Ontario and Quebec) and Atlantic.
  • The events were moderated by Renewal Fellowship Executive Director Rev. Andy Cornell, who reports that throughout all three gatherings, all participants were respectful of one another.
  • Each statement was spoken, not written, during live conversations in which dozens of people listened to one another and responded not only to questions from the moderator but also to those raised by each other.
  • All three conversations had the same starting point, but each went in a slightly different direction as the conversations evolved. Occasionally, the moderator would inject new questions based on the statements made by participants.

The first section of quotes are direct responses to the opening question. They are followed by quotes on related matters which naturally arose as the conversation evolved.

INDEX TO THIS ARTICLE:

“YES” TO THEOLOGICAL SEPARATION IF THE REMITS PASS

Male minister, Central
Yes, I think there does need to be some kind of separation. … I don’t believe at this point that it needs to be separate, like a withdrawal from the PCC. I think there are possibilities without officially calling it pathway ‘C’ (because I think that ship has sailed and that there’s baggage there now.) I think there are maybe some options to separate into presbyteries or synods or whatever the policy needs to be to allow to allow a continuing, orthodox, traditional view in The Presbyterian Church in Canada.

Male minister, West
Do we need a formal separation? Absolutely. We have a rapidly changing external social situation that’s going on right now, which is very quickly going to move into the church, if it hasn’t started already, where you have heard the concerns over harm. We need that formal separation within the denomination to protect us from those who would take that tack within the church, because it will be coming very quickly. After we approve the current remits, the pressure that’s going on politically outside of the church is not going to take as long as it did to get into the church with previous issues. And the other thing is that for those of us who hold an orthodox view of human sexuality, the legal opinion already made this very clear that we are in a very vulnerable situation, externally without any legal formal separation. Inside our denomination or even apart from our denomination where we can claim an honest religious conviction about this and at least try to protect ourselves under the freedom of religion and the Charter of Rights. So, yes, we absolutely need that formal separation within the church, if not an outright legal separation where we are simply sharing administrative resources.

Male minister, Central
Definitely, yes, we need something very much different. And I would suggest that what we need to do is to pour our energies into thinking about and creating as need be what that future reality might become. I think the church is deeply divided. I think it’s on a theological level.

Male minister, Atlantic
However much I love the PCC, I’m thinking the question really needs to be something like, is some sort of formal theological separation necessary to facilitate such a mass exodus? And the reason I say that is that my experience in the courts of the church … we talk about things along the lines of options. I think we’re hoping for sympathy. We’re hoping for respect. We’re hoping that people understand our point of view. I have not experienced that at all. … We have to realize that our position in orthodoxy is not a friendly position in our culture. In [Knox College professor] Charles Fensham’s interview in Maclean’s, he essentially said that orthodoxy is hateful. It’s passive bullying. Now I understand that to sit around the table at presbytery with people, we have to agree to certain things like for example, women’s ordination. We all have to accept it, believe in it. We can’t function if we don’t. How can we function in presbytery if people think that we hate them, and it doesn’t matter what we say? They think we hate them and I think that we have to recognize that our situation and that parallel definitions is just toleration for a little while. And so, personally, I think … we need to be prepared to do something. We need to have an option ready. And I know I’ve said it before, but in 1925, people just got up and left assembly.

Female elder, Central
In my own presbytery, it has really become almost a hostile place. I’m the moderator this year. And it is a painful exercise to come to presbytery, as some of you will have read the very unkind post that one of our members of our presbytery posted on the PCC Facebook page that was actually directed at a member of clergy who holds the orthodox view. … So I don’t think that we can really go on like this. It’s spilling over into so many other issues and for us in my own church, I think fundamentally, we just really want to get on to doing missional work. We want to stop talking about this. We want this to stop being an issue that eats away at our souls. … I don’t think that’s just going to magically go away. And the liberty of conscience piece, I also don’t really believe for a second that that’s going to hold for any length of time, and I know some of you as clergy are much more vulnerable than I am in this regard. But I think the legal piece around liberty of conscience with the double definition, I think that leaves you vulnerable. I know, some clergy speaking already have at least given up their state licence to perform marriage just to offer themselves some protection. So it’s just my desire to say how much I support all of you as clergy in this endeavour. And I thank you for your courage to stand up for your own personal convictions and your faith.

Male elder, Central
I’m coming to think more and more that it is because we just can’t talk about it on any kind of scriptural basis or any basis other than the one that the proponents of this change dictate.

Female minister, Central
Is some sort of formal theological separation in the PCC now inevitable in order to avoid a mass exodus? I think it might prevent some mass exodus. However, I think that at the congregational level is where we’re going to really suffer. For example, in our particular church … we have the luxury of having two ministers that are both orthodox in persuasion but our session is not unified. And our church is not unified either. And so at the congregational level, it really concerns me about what will happen after the remits are passed.

Male elder, Central
I think a split is inevitable, regardless of whether the remits pass or not. If they are defeated, people who support the remits are going to be upset and walk away, and the issue itself will not go away. If the remits pass, there are a lot of people who aren’t going to be able to go along with them, and they’re going to leave.

Male minister, Central
This would be the third time I’ve been through this. And one part of me thinks there’s an inevitability about this. And if the remits pass, it’s going to be hard times ahead for those of us who consider ourselves orthodox and hard times for our congregations.

Male minister, Central
I don’t see how it doesn’t either go to a session or congregational vote, whether you are affirming or not affirming. If I follow what Assembly seems to be doing, in passing these agreements, every congregation and/or session is going to have to decide one way or the other. So then the question is, is how do we leave? Do we leave the PCC entirely or do we divide within? And that brings up another question: what if it’s just the minister who is orthodox and the session and congregation or majority are affirming?

Male minister, Central
I don’t know if anything’s inevitable right now. But I do know that a number of us are feeling that the only way that our church will work again … in God’s way is by some kind of thing in line with the spirit of option [Pathway] C, which was not granted at the last General Assembly. … It’s two streams that would align people with like-minded theologies, mission, accountability, and fellowship so that we would we would not constantly be feeling like what’s the next thing to happen if who are we in fellowship with really don’t believe the Apostles’ Creed or these kinds of things.

Male congregant, Central
I think the answer to the question will really depend on the outcome of the General Assembly meeting this June. But I do not see the outcome of that General Assembly putting an end point to this ongoing discussion. I think whatever decision is made by the General Assembly will not please everyone. I think we all know that. And so, the controversy will not end with that. I think a lot of people have been seeking to find ways to accommodate all of us.

Male minister, Atlantic
Yes to some sort of theological separation. I think regardless of what happens with the remits in June 2020, some kind of separation will be taking place. Because you can’t put the genie back in the bottle. The deep-seated theological divisions within the denomination have been nakedly revealed. And so now it’s a matter of where do we go from here? And that’s more or less where my thoughts lie and they lie actually along the lines of, how do we get there? And that has to do with the basis of authority if the denomination in fact becomes formally apostate. How can those who are orthodox among us submit ourselves to an apostate authority. Hence, I’m struggling with what form of theological separation would take place? There have been various overtures … seeking some kind of a structural reorganization as well as an overture with respect to gracious dismissal which is being worked on. … But one of the pressing questions in my mind has to do with what can we do in the interim. … Should we, in Orthodoxy, wait for the denomination basically to create some kind of a restructuring to allow our presence? I struggle with that because we would basically be submitting ourselves to what has become apostate church courts. Or should we be taking some kind of a proactive action in the interim, waiting for restructuring to take place and create new structures even without permission of the established structures of the church?

Female elder, Central
To be aligned with an orthodox path in a presbytery or synod to me would be more sense. We’re not out there on our own. There’s more strength in numbers, there’s more fellowship for us. But how do we actually do that? I don’t really know.

Male minister, Central
I can say it’s very hard to be planning on leaving the denomination at this point before the decisions are made. We can talk as much as we like. We’ve struck committees to look at options … And yet at the same time, we’re trying to be faithful, first and foremost, to the Lord. Is that not our first and foremost accountability? So this is part of the difficulty in the leadership question that you’ve raised. How do you appropriately show leadership in this time in a timely manner?

Male minister, Central
We are in consultation with other [same-language] congregations in Canada and we all are united in regard to our beliefs. When these remits pass, we cannot see ourselves continue to be under this church. So there should be, or we have to go through, some kind of separation. Whether this separation will be joining another denomination or establishing a new denomination … we will not be able to continue as a congregation that belongs to PCC, as it confesses to the two definitions for marriages. Our church – the pastors, the elders, the session, the congregation, the whole congregation – are united in this matter. … I wonder if we make a survey of congregations that will be willing to become like, an orthodox, separate wing or denomination or whatever. How many churches will be willing to do this? … So when we plan for the future, at least we would know how many congregations will be able to make a separate stand. … And of course, we have to be obedient to God’s Word and also obedient to God’s glory. So it’s quite clear for us what we will do. The question is, with whom will we be able to move forwards away from this new reality?

Male minister, Central
God has a plan for this church, and He has a plan for each one of us. And I lived that plan back in 1988, where I stepped out. I gave my notice six months ahead, didn’t know where I was going. And six weeks before I was out on the streets, he opened up a door for me to start a new church. And so I see this: back then we saw that the United Church was leaving us, we didn’t leave the United Church. I see a similar thing here that the Presbyterian Church is leaving us, not us leaving the Presbyterian Church. … I think that it’s important for us to have a group of people meet and set up some guidelines, and then perhaps take the next step. … We’re under bondage; we want freedom and there’s such a freedom to be able to lead and to worship God without having to deal with all of the stuff that that the denomination puts on us. I lived in that freedom. I would love to live in that freedom again. And so I want to encourage us all that God has a plan. He knows what He’s doing, and we need to need to follow Him and listen to His Spirit because He is speaking to us. And He’s going to show us exactly what direction we should take, and I believe that with my whole heart.

Male elder, Central
This is a done deal and it will be passed. So I’m not sure why we’re waiting any longer. We really need to start to explore a form of separation or having a distinctive group separated from the group that now are for the remits.

Male minister, West
I certainly know for my own congregation, they will not live with this decision. Under no circumstances do I see them going along with it. … Most are not even willing to look at a kind of meeting-in-the-middle situation. If the church changes its teaching, they want out.

Male minister, Central
I believe that a complete separation from an apostate church and church court system is really the only faithful option before us, sadly.

“WAIT AND SEE” IN REGARD TO THEOLOGICAL SEPARATION IF REMITS PASS

Male minister, Central
It’s definitely something worth considering. And it may be a way of finding a place to keep our assets and to be faithful to the Word of God without interference. … And it might also give us more time beyond General Assembly 2020 to see what the Lord is doing with our own congregations and with various other congregations and how they’re leading. It’s not procrastinating, but [providing] more time for discernment while providing a window to be faithful without interference from others.

Male minister, Central
[In my presbytery] we have four congregations that are either closing or on the verge of closing. … And we have some people who, I think, would be tempted at least to be quite vindictive towards those of us who are evangelicals, orthodox, or whatever term you want to use. But I think we’re going to be so preoccupied with dealing with closing congregations and just with the palliative reality of our denomination. … I want to see what God’s going to do to renew this denomination once the dust settles on all that death. And maybe the powers that be are going to not wait and maybe the priority really is, as some people have said, to come after conservatives. But I’m cautiously hopeful that we’re doing in each of our congregations what we can to pursue what we need to in terms of mission. That’s what we’ve all been doing. How long has it been since the national church really contributed to evangelism and mission of many different kinds in our local settings? I can’t remember a time. So, for me, it’s business as usual that way until someone comes right in my face and says you have to do this, or you can’t do that.

Male minister, Central
I’m so interested to know where are our Korean language presbyteries? The Chinese churches, the Arabic and African congregations, the ethnic congregations of our denomination. I don’t want to do anything without conversation with them and to know where they’re going and what they’re doing. I want to lean in with them. … I am probably at a different place, personally, than where the congregation is. Our congregation would be very diverse on this issue. But they probably just want to stay together and they don’t really want to deal with the issue too much. But that really puts me in a bind to know how I respond to having to leave my congregation. … Certainly my experience is that … many [congregations here] are on their last legs numerically. So it definitely will be a different church in 20 years’ time.

Male minister, West
Our people locally need to know that we are engaged in some clear leadership and direction on this with some clear options ready. I believe we also need to be able to work together and … certainly with the Koreans and the ethnic churches. … I raise the question of whether we should be talking about gracious separation as opposed to gracious dismissal, because my concern is that it’s perceived that if we’re angry enough to leave, we’re expecting somebody to be gracious to us when we go. I know that’s not the intention of those words. But I think what comes across or we’re making a commitment to be ungracious as we go as well. So I think that that needs to be something to think about. Somebody has mentioned giving up licences in a marriage, like finances, I’d be in any other thing that we’re concerned with. And [what about congregations which] receive Canadian Ministries grants? … [They] receive a lot of contributions from across the country, probably from people that are all over the map on this issue.

“NO” TO THEOLOGICAL SEPARATION IF THE REMITS PASS

Male minister, Central
Let’s say one of my children comes out as gay or lesbian. Now would I separate myself from them and have no relationship with them whatsoever? In some sense, like if you do separate us and think that ‘well, I don’t have to deal with this issue ever again,’ you might think that initially that it’s easier. But the problem is that we don’t get a chance to speak into the life of my children anymore. You do your thing. I do my thing, and that’s that. And so when we had that [RF/PSALT Thriving in Babylon] conference at Vaughan Community Church, one of the ministers from the United Church came and spoke. He said there were a group of evangelical pastors in the United Church where their role is simply to just keep lifting up Jesus into the denomination. And I wasn’t sure if I should laugh or cry when I heard that. I mean, it seems so obvious. That’s what we are here to do as a church. But people have to actually, you know, formalize that and that’s one of the reasons they exist. And there is a stream within that denomination for people who think like that. Our identity in Christ is so much more than just sexual orientation. And I think a lot of us really want to kind of move forward so that we could focus on mission instead of this keep sidelining us. But the question that I asked was, well, what’s stopping us? So why can’t we actually have gatherings of, you know, churches that are actually like minded and ask questions like, “Where is the church right now? What’s the mission of the church? What’s the opportunity of the church in the midst of all this turmoil and these uncertainties and how can we still stay on mission?” I would just love to have gatherings like that. And I think if we could have gatherings like that to just renew us and refresh us and be around like-minded brothers and sisters, even as we continue to live with this reality because even if we separate and leave a denomination, this issue is not going to go away in our country. For us who are dealing with this right now to still be able to deal and offer support and wisdom to one another, even as we work through this and the denomination, and hopefully they’ll equip us better to also deal with it and to be sensitive to people in these areas, but also to people where we need to stand for. So do I feel we need to separate? And I feel like why should we leave? You know, this is our house. This is our place that God is a lot of us. And so I hope that we can still stay and still, for people who are like minded, find gatherings and have maybe conferences where we can get together to really be an encouragement and go beyond this issue and really get down to the business of mission.

ON THE HUNGER FOR LEADERSHIP AND VISION

Male minister, Central
We need to find a new reality. I think we need to advocate within the system as much as we can for things like gracious dismissal. But ultimately, I’m of the opinion that we really have to give ourselves now to defining what is going to come next that we can corporately engage. And one of the things I’d like to comment on is a tremendous need in this discussion for vision. I don’t hear about it very much. But I have a real desire to be part of something in the future. It’s hard to describe what that might be, but a real passion to be part of something that is Christ-centred, with a high view of Scripture, truly evangelistic, and missional. And I just think that we can talk a lot about where we’re at and the struggles that we have, but it’s time to start saying, with real energy, what can we create now? Can that happen with the PCC? I’m open to that. … While there might be some sort of organizational connection, we would need to create a new entity for myself and my congregation to remain within the PCC. But beyond that, what are the options? That’s what I’m asking myself now, is there another denomination that we might join? Do we want to create our own denomination if need be? My concern is that we not wait too long to have some really concrete options before us. In the church where I serve – and I imagine it’s not unlike a lot of the others who are sharing today – there are people who will leave if this decision is made unless we can give clear leadership and direction about other options for the future. And as I say, June’s not very far away. What our session is doing is beginning to really work hard to know how to lead our congregations through the next six months, essentially, so that we can hold on to a lot of really great people. But we need to provide them with concrete options, so that they will stay with us, and then help us to create what is yet to come.

Male minister, Atlantic
I think that we need to be prepared to do something like that. We need to be prepared across the country. Say we can’t live in this sort of situation. It’s sort of like when a marriage breaks down, maybe there’s no longer cohabitation. But we recognize there’s legal things, there’s administrative things that need to be resolved. I think we’re in that sort of situation. …. The people in my congregation are asking me, what are we going to do? What’s the plan? What are the options out there? And I think we need a plan and we need an option so that we can be free to do the work of the Kingdom. That’s what we need to do to do the work of the kingdom, and everybody needs to do that.

Male minister, Central
I am very thankful for the work that the two Han-Ca presbyteries have done, the gatherings that they had, I think they’re key as well as other ethnic churches. If they can provide some leadership in this area, I look for that. I hope for that and that’s great.

Male minister, Central
I’m sure people have heard of all the different kinds of statements that different groups of ministers and or elders have done in different denominations. One is called the Nashville statement. Is there any benefit in terms of moving forward with a sense of togetherness, momentum, hopefulness, goodness. Has it already been done? Or did I miss a group of ministers and elders signing on to some positive, life-filled statement, saying, “Hey, this is how we see human sexuality and the good life,” and being signed by a couple of hundred ministers and elders.

Female minister, West
I think there’s a point where it’s time to do something new. … My fear is that we get to June, things pass, and then we just find ourselves in some level of chaos. But if we could remain in for a longer term, I think that that would be good. I also really feel that we need to be doing this kind of thing and thinking through some of it ahead of time. In our congregation there’s a lot of people who are very clear on what they’re going to do if this vote happens in June, and we’re really desperately trying to hold on to them and hold our congregation together, so we don’t have all kinds of people flying out the doors of our churches after those remits go through in June.

Male minister, West
I’m wondering if at this point that it would be possible to appoint a small group of people who have a gift for articulating vision and structure to clearly articulate some options. It could be a group that would engage the diversity. It would be good to have one or two Korean representatives and other ethnic people on that group. They could put together a clear sense of two or three or four different ideas of what kind of approaches we could take at this point. With a large group like this, we’re certainly expressing concerns, but we need to get to a point where we’ve developed something that we embrace humbly and with an openness but that at least we have a clearly articulated understanding of options of which way to go.

Male minister, Atlantic
I do believe there is a growing impatience and there is a lack of leadership and I’ve been hesitant to jump into the vacuum. And someone else may be better qualified to do that than I am. … And I’m not sure that a cookie-cutter approach where one size fits all [would work]. … We have very diverse congregations across the board and very different, unique missional situations, and each congregation needs to discern for itself. Which is most advantageous to serving the mission of Christ?

Male minister, Atlantic
I want to reiterate a prayer request that God would raise up wise leadership in the coming months as we move toward General Assembly and post General Assembly.

ON NEXT STEPS

Male minister, Atlantic
Perhaps a not exactly a new body, but sort of a steering committee that is not formally under the auspices of Renewal Fellowship or formally under the auspices of PSALT. But there does need to be some area that some group of people that can provide some touchpoint and leadership for orthodoxy, in the event that there are groups leaving to possibly various places. Is this group some sort of clearing house advocacy group, a group that can that can keep the issues before the courts of the church and yet not necessarily be painted with the Renewal Fellowship or the PSALT banner?

Male minister, Central
The logistics of trying to establish something brand new without any support from an existing denomination would be massive. Really difficult.. … It would be better to have an interim organization we can join with, and then launch something in Canada. The logistics of that are huge and it would be much better to join with someone else. Why multiply the number of denominations if we could join with something existing. That’s what happened in the United Church.

Male minister, Central
I would stop short of thinking that joining Han-Ca’s the way to go. … I just think there are probably a number of barriers that would be difficult to overcome joining the Han-Ca presbyteries. However, I do agree that the idea of being able to move presbyteries is a good one. And the question that comes to my mind is, you know, are there current presbyteries who would say, well, we’re going to put it in our standing orders or whatever, we’re going to make a decision at the presbytery level to become, to borrow an Old Testament phrase, to become presbyteries of refuge and who would be open to other congregations joining them? … I’d love to see two options in Toronto … Maybe you have an orthodox option and a progressive option, whatever. I would rather see that than saying, well, we’re all just going to go to Han-Ca.

Male minister, Central
I see some people have thrown up the name ECO [Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians] the denomination that was formed after the PCUSA made the change. There’s a denomination I personally would love to be a part of, because they are Christ-centered. They do have a high view of Scripture, they are passionately evangelistic, they are missional. You know, they encourage, if not require, I’m not sure, but all churches to have a vision and the mission statement, you know, so they’re intentional about what they’re about, rather than just carrying on doing what they’ve always done. See, that’s an environment where we would thrive.

Male minister, Central
I wonder, we may have a God-given opportunity, right in our faces and that is forming some kind of formal alliance with Eastern or Western Han-Ca.

Male elder, Central
I’m kind of hearing an underlying desire for people to see a ‘plant a flag’ [group] around which traditional minded people can rally. … so that whatever happens in June, we have a sudden upwelling of people saying we can’t live with this. Boom, here’s our flag. Everybody rallies around it, rather than us feeling like we’re in a sea of chaos, a chaos of uncertainty. I think a lot of people are expressing maybe not in words but they’re looking for a flag to rally around or someplace to rally around whether that’s us or something else or what’s going to happen but I think that’s what you’re looking for.

ON TIMING AND URGENCY

Male minister, Central
We are experiencing growth in the congregation. And this growth actually has been kind of delayed or is being hindered somehow by our future plans, what we’re gonna do. And I know that for all of us, if not most of us here, the building and the assets is what’s putting a break on what we do. … two, three years is too long, it means a congregation can be killed and wiped out. Especially if we’re talking about an ethnic congregation that has decided to come here to Canada to mix with the Canadian societies and to look at churches around it. And all of a sudden they really get kind of surprised by our national church, you know, getting off the road. Two, three years is too long.

Male minister, Central
We do need to leave room for God to act and do something surprising. And frankly, if we wait – and I understand I really, really, really understand the urgency that you folks feel. … I grieve for the Presbyterian church because I believe that what they’re doing is they’re exchanging ethnic diversity for sexual diversity. Because this will turn away many of our ethnic churches, and I’ve had conversations recently with a very good friend of mine, who has commented that there is a real colonial approach here happening. The approach of those who are in favour tends to be, eventually, when everybody’s enlightened, they’ll realize we’re right. And that’s offensive. So I understand the urgency in ethnic congregations. I do want to encourage you to wait until after General Assembly because I think we’ll have more credibility at that point. And you might avoid a lot of heartache, legally. If we can act together.

ON THE UNDERLYING ISSUE

Male minister, Central
I’m of the opinion, like probably a lot of you, that behind this is a much bigger thing than just this topic. Really it’s around interpretation of the Scriptures and how we understand the Bible as prescriptive or just descriptive.

Male elder, Central
In my congregation’s session and probably in the congregation as a whole, there’s growing reluctance and aversion to discussing theology, talking about what the Scriptures say about this issue. And more so as we get closer to June and the decision. So let’s get on with it. We know what’s going to happen. And we need to deal with that. … The language that many other people use that are in favour of the change to my mind comes directly from the social justice movement, and the world outside the church. It’s invaded our church in a big way.

Female minister, West
I agree that the sexuality issues are really not the central issue that we’re dealing with. It’s an overall theology that that we’re seeing has shifted in our church and it’s been going on for a very long time. … I’ve been feeling that frustration for a long time. And I think that even if we could get past these issues of sexuality, we’re still going to be swimming upstream in terms of trying to be faithful to the Scriptures as we feel that God is revealing them to us. … I’m going into my last 10 years of ministry, and I don’t want to spend it feeling like I’m constantly in a battle with others in the denomination. … I don’t want to be hurting people. I don’t want to hurt my LGBTQI brothers and sisters in the church. But I also don’t want to be feeling like I’m in opposition.

Female minister, West
I think of a close colleague who said that her presbytery, when they were voting on the remits, she was the only one to mention the Scriptures. And that’s scary. In my eyes anyway, and those who were at General Assembly with me in June, also heard a fellow colleague say it’s not a Biblical issue, but a justice issue. And so how do we work together to keep the Scripture high, as I think all of us already do, but to try. And I guess it just scares me that Scriptures have almost been pushed out of the way and other things have taken precedence over them.

Male minister, Central
I think that the church is going in two separate directions. There are two trajectories. Maybe one is progressive, and one is orthodox. And it’s happening in lots of different denominations. And I think it’s the sign of the times, you know, the culture is having its influence. And people are somehow thinking that there’s a juxtaposition between Scripture and justice, which of course we wouldn’t hold. But that’s just another example and that progressive liberal church is just going to continue down a path. I believe that’s going to go well beyond this discussion. The other trajectory is a faithful one, and I think that one will thrive. The Church of Christ thrives when God’s people are faithful, and when Jesus is preached to them and so forth. That is the future of the church to me. Why wouldn’t we want to be a part of that? Why wouldn’t we want to create that? Why wouldn’t we want to give leadership to it?

Male minister, Central
I’ve grown up in the PCC. I’ve loved this denomination. What I’ve come to terms with already is that, in a sense, the church has changed. And it seems it’s being evidenced this year and probably will be at Assembly, but I don’t belong so much in it anymore. Theologically, I’m in a great minority position. And I’ve been waiting for some years now to discover if indeed, that is true. And if that is true, then it’s simply for me, personally, to respond to that reality. Do I want to stay in the church? Or do I not? And I’ve come to the conclusion that I don’t. What I want is to be part of something that is – I don’t want to put it this way but I’ll put it this way to make a point – that’s not like the PCC. That is, where orthodoxy is faithful to Scripture, there’s a high view of Scripture, really Christ-centered and eager to lead people into Jesus and to partner with similarly minded people, so that my ministry can thrive so that I can be encouraged and I can encourage others.

Female congregant, Central
I believe the root of this is an issue of theology. I did read both the doctrinal statements that were sent out about three years ago. And having read the one from the revisionist theology, I realized that what we were up against was something so large and so different. Most people would not read it, or would not understand that they were reading something that was taking us away from the Gospel. It was to me blasphemous, and it was even hard to read some of the accusations against the people in Scripture and their sexual orientation that is contained in that document. I think we need to be aware of what we are really facing. We are facing the work of the evil one in the church to divide us and to take us away from the basis of Scriptures. We certainly have been called in Scripture to show loving kindness and care of all people. However, we are not making this up. This is the Word of God to which we have committed ourselves and on which we will stand on the issue of human sexuality.

ON LEARNING FROM HISTORY

Male minister, Central
I was in the United Church in 1988 when the United Church passed these same issues. … And what happened was that we tried to look at ways of staying within the domination and being who we were within the changes that were taking place. But what ended up was 100 of us clergy left all at once, and we decided that we were going to form a new denomination, and in forming that new denomination, we called it the Congregational Christian Churches in Canada. And while we were doing that, the Congregational Church in Canada, which still had five churches, caught wind of it and invited us to join them and come underneath their authority. And so we created a brand new church. Now, that was a great step for all of us to do that. … And so, we spread far and wide all across the country. Churches were springing up. I never thought I’d start a new church from scratch, but did and it went gangbusters for about 15 or 20 years. Following that, I think what happens, part of what happened, was that those who were on the ground floor started to die. And so the new church went through some growing pains, and so today 30 years in, I was looking on the website recently and there’s only a handful of the original churches who still belong to that new denomination that we started. And so even though there was this euphoric, wonderful starting up a new funding church over the last 30 years, it’s sort of waned. Some churches have left, some people have left and so as they say, it was great while it started, but right now, it’s not what it was 30 years ago. So I guess what I’m saying is, is that if we’re looking at an option for starting something new, we need to look at the research what happened with us and see just so we don’t make the same mistakes, if that’s one of the roads that we want to go.

Male minister, Central
I think all of us are anxious about the freedom of conscience clause, if I can put it that way, and how long it’ll last. We’ve been offered the analogy of a marriage and clearly, that’s a legitimate one. But I feel like I was searching for an analogy for our circumstances and the PCC. I came up with the European Union. Okay, so we’ve got Wynford Drive, which is like Brussels, and they have some power, but each of us in our congregations are kind of like independent nation states, I would say. So my congregation here … to the extent that we have planned into the future, we’re going to wait and watch to see what happens. We have agreed as a session to return to the debate after General Assembly, assuming the decision is made to adopt the remits, which I think will be, but I remember [Bishop] Charlie Masters from ANIC (Anglican Network in Canada) the continuing conservative Anglican denomination speaking … at the first PSALT conference at Vaughan Community Church and saying some of you may think there’s this bright future for you, once you’ve left the denomination, but in fact, let me give you a wake up call here. You’re going to miss your building like you cannot imagine, and you’re going to find that people aren’t going to rally to your congregation, because you’ve stood for the truth. And that’s not to be defeatist about it.

Male minister, Central
What life was like for orthodox folks in the PCUSA after the decision was made, it became difficult. They experienced hostility. I think of those in the Anglican Church of Canada. It’s been very difficult for them. I’ve spoken to people who have lived through this sort of dynamic in several denominations, and they’re really quite clear, at least from their history, that it will be difficult for us to stay in the denomination. There is, I think we can all agree, a bit of a hostility at times toward orthodoxy that’s being expressed today, a bit of a militancy in various quarters. … I would suggest we’re probably going to be facing, after this issue is dealt with, many other issues: polyamory or who knows what’s to come. I personally don’t want to spend the rest of my ministry, which is slowly winding down, in such arguments and putting my energies toward battling. Again, I have a vision to be in a denomination or a synod, whatever we might be able to create. We can refocus our energies and our passions in a collegial way toward building the kingdom of God. And yeah, it’s a nice thought, I guess, in my mind that we could stay in and continue to witness to the Lord Jesus and to be faithful to Him. And that is certainly possible and there may be people obviously called to that, and I would celebrate that for them. But I think we have to be very realistic about the attitudes toward us in the church and what that will continue to produce for us. … .Again, my heart is to go in a different direction, to band together with people of like mind and to create an environment where we support each other, and we encourage one another, and we go forward with the like mind, build the kingdom of God. Everybody has to make that decision. They have to decide for themselves what God’s calling them to. But no, I don’t think it’s going to be simple or easy for those who stay in.

Male minister, Central
In [my presbytery] there are some people that do see this, the passing of the remits, as a stepping stone to, as I say, full inclusion. And even people I’ve talked to outside of the denomination see this as a stepping stone towards what they see as full inclusion. The other thing I was going to mention is that my experience with the Anglican Church and also with ANIC there was one friend, he had a place to go within ANIC. There was another friend who stayed within the Anglican Church, because he did not have that same security and was thinking about his family, so he was resistant to make that jump. So we talked about if there’s any movement, it is important for a lot of people to have a place to know that they’re not making a jump into oblivion.

ON “GRACIOUS DISMISSAL” AND BUILDINGS

Male minister, West
However we move forward, whether we’re constantly fighting or whatever, I don’t know. But we’re not surrendering the facilities here. And we’re not surrendering any other way either. But some of the African congregations might not be so tied to their buildings. And for them, it would be an easy jump to move over to some of the African Presbyterian churches that have a presence here in in Canada and simply join those denominations, being able to just find another place to meet. Most of them are not longstanding congregations within Canada. So there’s very little history tying them to buildings.

Male minister, Central
I also agree [with others who say] we’re not giving up the building. We’re not giving up the facility. We’re not walking away. I have spoken to people before about how if my wife and I ever have a fight, which never happens by the way, I don’t go sleep on the couch. And I don’t expect my wife is going to go sleep on the couch. It’s my bed. I can sleep in my bed. I’m not giving up my place in the bed; that’s my bed. That’s a similar thing here. I’m not going to walk away, just hand it all over and say, “Well, I guess we disagree.” … And if it gets to that point where it’s taken and we’re booted out of the denomination, all right I’ll go without the facilities and whatnot. But until that point, I don’t see why we should not just continue to be Presbyterian within The Presbyterian Church in Canada, claim every single inch of what the remits are supposedly saying. They say there’s an equal place for people have this understanding, take every single inch of that and say, well, that’s how we’re going to organize into our own presbyteries. Whether you permit it or not, this is what we’re going to start doing. So that’s more the approach I would rather take rather than some kind of mass exodus from the denomination.

Male minister, Atlantic
I spoke to [a denominational leader] and his word for what’s going on in the denomination was drama. And I thought about drama. It’s not how I perceive it; it’s not drama. This is the life of the church and I think we have to be faithful; we need to be faithful. And so I agree … I don’t think we should give up our buildings. But if they want to take them, then it’s like Hebrews: remember those earlier days you accepted the confiscation of your property with joy. I think we forget who we were, who we are. We forget who we are. My grandfather was in a church in 1925, and the story is they got up and they walked down the road and started over. You know, we forget who we are. Where are we? Do we really believe what we believe?

Male minister, West
What we worked for as the pioneers of this congregation … are we just leaving it behind? That is a very determining factor. How do we do that if we say this is the time to leave the denomination, so we can get that peace of mind. … Can we have the assurance that we’re going to keep our building and our assets? That’s a very huge thing for us.

Male minister, Central
We are concerned about the assets as was mentioned before. We’ve been in the building for many years. We worked hard to purchase it and build it up. We have many ambitious plans to expand but they are frozen now. Because of all of this movement that’s happening or this risk that’s happening, we cannot stand still for long. So we are determined that we will either separate completely or go under a different entity that’s with clearly-defined theology that’s orthodox and Biblical, and with no risk of being modified or revised in the future. We realize the value of the assets, but we’re willing to forego that, if that means we stay to the truth that we believe and that we adopt.

Male elder, Central
If you look at your budget, the amount of money we spend because we have a building, it’s a lot. It’s a huge chunk of the budget. If the money they’re giving is no longer going towards the building it can go towards something else, whether renting another space or in a renting in another church or somewhere else. … And I think it’s also worth noting that people have
already left. I know of several congregations in which several families, in some cases double digits, 20 to 40 people in some larger congregations, have already vacated just an anticipation of what might happen.

Male minister, Atlantic
So, as much as I hate to see some congregations leave, I think we’d be stronger together than apart. There are some congregations who could align themselves with another denomination quite readily and comfortably, theologically and continue their mission more effectively than to use up energy within the denomination. And I cannot hold them in any negative judgment for doing so. But that’s not my situation. We’ve just invested millions of dollars in new ministry facility. It’s not something that we can walk away from. We don’t have vast endowments, which some congregations do have that will perhaps allow them to do something like that. But that’s not our situation. So we’re kind of stuck. But we’re seeking to be faithful to mission in the meantime.

ON THE LACK OF UNITY IN MANY CONGREGATIONS

Male congregant, Central
On the question of leadership, it seems to very much depend on where a particular pastor finds himself in relation to his congregation. If he doesn’t feel he has the full backing of the congregation to take them in some other direction than the one the PCC seems to be going in, he will be naturally hesitant to take a leadership position, particularly if he hasn’t got a plan ‘B’. And so, my willingness to take a leadership position is predicated on that fact. So it’s a bit difficult to know where among ministers it’s going to come from if it doesn’t come from those who have a congregation that is, let’s say 80-90% with them.

Male minister, Central
A lot of us are trying to do contingency planning. … So we’ve had two extra and special congregational meetings. We’ve had two session retreats. We’ve had a number of papers presented to the congregation on the subject. And what I found is that it’s quite rare and odd that most people have not had any extra meetings, that there isn’t a lot of conversation in most congregations, that there isn’t much information or even talking to one another in the church for fear of division in the local church.

Compiled by Rev. Andy Cornell
Renewal Fellowship
Executive Director
<renewalfellowshippcc@gmail.com>

Cheyne Stoney Creek Overture re: Two-Stream Structure

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.