Canadian Evangelical Christians Voice Regret over Homosexual Marriage Law

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) has voiced its regret over the passage of Bill C-38, the Civil Marriage Act, which will legalise marriage between same-sex couples in all courthouses and city halls in Canada. The EFC fears the new law will have detrimental effects to both the family and religious freedom in the country.

Bruce Clemenger, president of the EFC, said: "Today our government has chosen to redefine the foundational institution of our society. The consequences of this massive social experiment have not been fully examined or understood."

Clemenger warned more specifically of the danger for children if the emphasis within the family is shifted from child to adult. He said: "With the passage of this legislation, the government has reconfigured marriage as a primarily adult-centered institution, and surrendered its ability to champion the rights of children to know and be raised by a mother and a father."

The EFC firmly rejected the new law, continuing to defend marriage as the union between man and woman.

"By reason of faith, conscience, practice and teaching, the EFC cannot accept this new definition of marriage. Evangelical pastors and congregations will continue to celebrate and promote marriage as the exclusive and enduring union of one man and one woman," said Clemenger.

He continued by saying the EFC "will continue to use the language of husband and wife and promote marriage as the real and symbolic affirmation of, and commitment to, the child's right to know and experience a mother and a father."

The campaign by the EFC to uphold the traditional definition of marriage in the courts and before Parliament has been running for over a decade now. The EFC has promised to continue with this work.

"The unique, distinct nature of heterosexual marriage is no longer recognized in our law and public policy, but we will continue to promote and teach the biblical understanding of marriage in our families and churches."

The EFC also raised concerns over religious intolerance that might arise as a result of this new law. Janet Epp Buckingham, director of law and public policy for the EFC, dismissed the protection offered in the bill as inadequate.

She said: "There is little doubt that religious freedom will be compromised by this change in the definition of marriage. The amendments to the bill will provide some measure of protection for religious freedom, but they are not sufficient and cannot address the consequences of this legislation in areas of provincial responsibility."

According to Buckingham, the EFC will continue to espouse the traditional view of marriage, even if it encounters prosecution: "Despite the very real threats to freedom of conscience and religion, we will not allow fear of recrimination or prosecution to dictate what our faith community believes and teaches in this regard."

She went on to stress that marriage is primarily a religious institution, created by religion, not the state: "Marriage was not created by the state but was recognised by the state for certain purposes. Therefore, it cannot be changed by the state."

Buckingham said: "The EFC will continue to press for the freedom to dissent from the new legal definition of marriage and its consequences, and work to ensure the provinces and territories enact legislation to protect freedom of religion and conscience in this regard."