By Reese Currie, Compass Distributors

A friend recently e-mailed me to say that he had signed a petition calling for a referendum on the "same-sex marriage" issue.

I have been praying for some time about what I should be doing about gay marriage. The Scripture passage I get when I pray is Romans 12:18, "If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men" (NKJV). I take that to mean literally all men (and women), even if they be of a different religion, a different sexual orientation, etc. It doesn’t mean that I agree with them or their actions, or will not point out my reasons for disagreement; but I will remain "peaceable."

If there were a law afoot to force churches to perform homosexual marriages, I would not be "peaceable," because then the homosexuals would be directly attacking my ability to practice my beliefs, and thereby would not be living peaceably with me! However, despite many a preacher’s claim to the contrary, that’s not going to happen, at least not in this go-round. The decision by Canada’s Supreme Court protects the right of religious organizations not to perform homosexual marriages.

Even if that were the case, I’m not sure I would be supporting a referendum on the issue. I don’t really want John Q. Public deciding human rights issues. Someday, a referendum could be held on whether to permit Christians to practice their religion on Canadian soil. With the number of aggrieved secularists, Hindus, Muslims, Jews, and other anti-Christian groups in Canada, I wouldn’t want to bank on a positive result from such a referendum. Therefore I think holding one on same-sex marriage would set a terrible precedent that may cause extreme problems for Christians down the road.

My concern is not so much with homosexuals that are fighting for the right to marry; they are members of Canadian society and can fight for whatever it is they feel they should have. I am more concerned about the activities of the churches on this matter. As Paul wrote, "For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside?" (1 Corinthians 5:12, NKJV).

Those outside the church are not bound to the rules that we have inside the church. But it would seem that Canadian churches don’t consider themselves bound to these rules either. If people consider themselves Christians, their rule of faith is the Bible. The Bible is clear in God’s condemnation of homosexual activity, in both the Old and New Testaments, for instance, Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Romans 1:26-27, etc. Therefore the churches that approve of homosexual marriage, such as the United Church of Canada, are heretical and in opposition to God.

The United Church of Canada’s stance is made clear in a letter from the moderator of the United Church of Canada, Dr. Peter Short. This letter can be viewed on-line at http://www.united-church.ca/communications/news/moderator/050117.

I would like to give my comments on a few excerpts of this man’s letter, which was supposedly sent to all the ministers of parliament. Please note that being a doctor of theology apparently doesn’t mean one has mastery of the English language (or the Bible, for that matter), and the grammatical errors in my quotations are his and not mine.

Dr. Short writes, "Whether or not you agree with what I am setting before you, I think you should be equipped with the knowledge that the General Council of Canada’s largest Protestant denomination welcomes equal marriage."

Note that his term for "same-sex marriage" is "equal marriage." Although he later admits that not all people in the United Church support homosexual marriage, what he is attempting to do here is called influence peddling. Basically, he is suggesting that the United Church will vote as a block for parties that favor homosexual marriage and against parties that oppose it. It is nothing more than a petty threat couched in the typically unctuous language of liberal Protestants.

Dr. Short continues, "I believe that this decision has been reached not by abandoning Christian faith, tradition, and values, but by implementing them. I write to you in the hope that you will resist the assumption that anyone who speaks from Christian faith, tradition, and values must be against equal marriage."

Actually, anyone who speaks from Christian faith must be against same-sex marriage, because the Bible directly opposes homosexuality. The word for supposed Christians who do not adhere to Christian doctrine is "heretics."

Here is how Dr. Short explains his deviant position:

"Some will protest that we must have faith in the Bible, and that the Bible takes an unfavourable view of intimate same-sex relationship (sic). But I would answer that Christian faith is not an uncritical repetition of a received text. It is a mindful commitment to the power of love, to which the text seeks to give witness. Every generation of the Christian faith must decide how they will honour that demand of love in the living of their days. Changing circumstances and changing ideas are not the enemy of faith."

This demonstrates that the god of the United Church is not the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible says, "For I am the LORD, I do not change" (Malachi 3:6a, NKJV).

While it is true that there are many things in the Old Testament that a Christian need not be concerned with, it is only on the authority of Christ Himself that these things have been done away with. For instance, look at how food restrictions are done away with in Acts 10:9-16. The United Church claims to have the authority of Christ in doing away with the laws against homosexuality, but this is unsupportable. Their own desires and lusts are their word of faith, not the Bible. Paul spoke of these types in 2 Timothy 4:3-4, "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables" (NKJV).

Dr. Short continues, "In Christian tradition the measure by which we choose a course of action is the measure of the love of Christ, a measure that judges even scripture. It is never legitimate to use the words of scripture to promote a loveless agenda."

There are two things wrong with this statement. The first is, it opposes the clear teaching of Christ concerning the primacy of Scripture over tradition. Jesus harangued the Pharisees because their traditions contravene Scripture. He says, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" And after some explanation, He says, "Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition" (Matthew 15:3b, 6b, NKJV).

True Christian tradition cannot contravene Christ’s own teaching. We do not know where the United Church’s tradition comes from, but it is not "Christian" tradition because it contravenes the teachings of Jesus Christ.

The second thing that is wrong with this statement is that it implies that the opposition of same-sex marriage is a "loveless" position. There are all kinds of loving reasons for opposing same-sex marriage.

For instance, there is love for the children who will be adopted by same-sex couples. Children who grow up with same-sex parents will have no childhood experience of the relationship between a man and a woman, and, if heterosexual, they will be handicapped for life in their intimate love relationships, having no model from their childhood. It is true that some children will have bad examples from their heterosexual parents, but this is the exception, not the rule. Children will have no example of how to live in a heterosexual relationship from their same-sex parents, and that is not an exception; that will be the case every single time.

Another loving reason for opposing same-sex marriage is love for God, and the resultant desire to keep His Word rather than discarding it like yesterday’s garbage, as the United Church does. There is also love for one’s country, and not wanting it to be destroyed in risky social experiments that cannot be undone.

Dr. Short continues, "In the end, faith, tradition, and values do not decide for us. They equip us to take up the responsible and difficult task of deciding for ourselves. This deciding is itself an act of faith. So we pray for one another, we struggle to live in the love of Christ, and we take our step in humble trust that the next generation will deal generously with us, knowing we did our best with the vision of love God gave us for our day."

God did not give the United Church of Canada its "vision of love", because God cannot give people "visions" that contradict what He has already revealed.

In 1 Timothy 1:10, Paul demonstrates that homosexuality is contrary to sound doctrine when he says, "…for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine…" Note that "sodomites" are practicing homosexuals. Homosexual behaviour is contrary to sound doctrine.

In 1 Timothy 6:3-5, Paul says, "If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself" (NKJV).

Well, the "Right Reverend" Dr. Peter Short is a man that teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. Dr. Peter Short is proud, knowing nothing; he is a man of a corrupt mind, and he is destitute of the truth. According to his own words, his position is held by everyone else in the United Church’s "General Council."

The Scriptural command concerning such people is to withdraw ourselves from them. Let me spell out what that means, since it apparently isn’t obvious to everyone.

First, it means that the members of the United Church, a church that opposes Christ’s doctrine, if they consider themselves Christian, must renounce their memberships in that church. They must "withdraw themselves."

Second, it means that those churches that are in ecumenical relationships with the United Church of Canada are in direct opposition to God’s Word. They, too, must "withdraw themselves" from relationship with the United Church. This is especially true of those churches that ostensibly oppose gay marriage, while their supposed "ecumenical partner in mission," the United Church of Canada, is fully supportive of gay marriage.

The Evangelical Federation of Canada and the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops have both come out against gay marriage—but only after a protracted delay. That’s because both groups were effectively silenced by the Canada Revenue Agency, Canada’s equivalent of the IRS in the United States.

These groups "wimped out" because CRA threatened to revoke their tax exempt status if they spoke out on "moral issues" and in particular homosexual marriage during Canada’s 2004 Federal Election. Given, CRA has guidelines that apply to all charities forbidding "partisan activity" and were therefore within their rights to issue the warning. But that doesn’t give the Evangelical Federation of Canada or the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops any right to cave in to this pressure. They should have been willing to give up their tax-exempt status to proclaim the Christian doctrine on this matter.

In fact, it would seem to me that "tax-exempt" status itself may be unscriptural. When asked whether it was right to pay taxes, Jesus said, "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:21, NKJV).

Another passage speaks volumes with regard to "tax exempt status." Matthew 17:24-27 says, "When they had come from Capernaum, those who received the temple tax came to Peter and said, ‘Does your Teacher not pay the temple tax?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ And when he had come into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, ‘What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, from their sons or from strangers?’ Peter said to Him, ‘From strangers.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Then the sons are free. Nevertheless, lest we offend them, go to the sea, cast in a hook, and take the fish that comes up first. And when you have opened its mouth, you will find a piece of money; take than and give it to them for Me and you'" (NKJV).

Here we see a principle that perhaps God’s sons through Christ ought to be exempt from a form of tax (the temple tax), but Jesus paid the tax anyway. So even if we are entitled to tax exemption in Canada (as charities), it does not mean that we must exercise our tax exemption; we can give it up for the sake of our witness.

From either story, we must understand that, if someone threatens to silence the church by taking away our tax-exempt status, the church should let that status go rather than be silenced and controlled by the state.

You can read more about this state coercion of the church at http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/jan/10012102. (The Catholic perspective on this news item is also interesting, and can be viewed on Catholic World News, at http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=31431; the best part is the reaction from readers who wrote in.)

In the homosexual marriage debate, the phrase "the separation of church and state" has been spoken about a great deal by the proponents of same-sex marriage. It is implied that Christians should have no say in how their government is run because they are Christians. In fact, the "separation of church and state" is a Christian doctrine, which means that the state cannot dictate the denomination that its citizens must attend. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Christians not being permitted to speak out on the moral issues of the day. It is interesting that the "separation of church and state" is being trotted out while the government of Canada (regardless of the ruling party) violates the principle by attempting to control the churches through coercion.

It is also interesting to note that no such threats were made against the United Church of Canada, which is Canada’s state church, even though it is vocally supportive of same-sex marriage. The wording of the CRA was, "The best thing for a charity to do, especially during an election, is to stay away from those issues" because speaking on those issues could be interpreted as partisan activity. Are we to understand that the United Church’s speaking in favor of homosexual marriage is acceptable simply because it is the same stance held by Canada’s Liberal Party? (Note: The Conservative Party, in power at this time, continues to see churches oppressed by the Canada Revenue Agency for their views on abortion and homosexuality, despite their supposedly Christian stand on the issues.)

Apart from the tax-exemption issue, it has to be noted that EFC churches and the Roman Catholic Church both participate in ecumenical activities with the United Church of Canada, and thereby are found in the hypocritical position of supporting a church that supports homosexual marriage while being against it themselves. The mass confusion of ecumenism is extremely costly to the cause of Christ.

The very concept that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms grants a right to homosexual marriage is ludicrous. The document starts with the words, "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:".

Rights that must disregard the supremacy of God, therefore, are not legitimate rights according to the Charter’s own wording. Even if one were to appeal that the document does not specifically name the Christian God, the fact is, 99.9% of the world’s religious adherents are part of religious bodies that affirm the classical definition of marriage and oppose same-sex marriage.

It’s not surprising that the two major political parties in Canada disregard the supremacy of God, but frankly, it’s pretty sad that all of our churches do as well. Though it appears they have partially repented now, the EFC and Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops remained silent on the issue during the election, putting tax-exempt status ahead of God. As always, the United Church of Canada puts its own liberal agenda ahead of God.

Finally, the EFC, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, and the United Church of Canada all are willing to sacrifice a coherent stance in this matter on the altar of ecumenism. Rather than separating from a church that opposes sound doctrine, as the Bible commands, these organizations continue in a state of ecumenical confusion, supporting one side of an issue while at the same time supporting churches that support the other side of the same issue. Is it any wonder that twentieth century ecumenism has rendered the modern church so remarkably ineffective?

Canada’s Churches and the Gay Marriage Debate is Copyright © 2005 by Compass Distributors.

All Scripture taken from The Holy Bible, New King James Version (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, Inc.) 1982