Article
by Dr. John B. McDonald
There was a radical
shift in Canadian society on Friday, June 15, 2018. Perhaps we could say
that the dominant culture showed its true colors.
I refer to the
decision of the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) in the case of Trinity Western
University (TWU) and the law societies of two Canadian provinces, British
Columbia and Ontario.
Do not stop reading
if you are not from Canada because we will dig into the implications for all
followers of Jesus wherever you live.
Before proposing a
way forward, let me explain briefly what happened.
WHAT HAPPENED?
TWU is a private
Christian university that proposed establishing a law school. Students (as well
as faculty and other employees) of TWU are required to enter into a Community Covenant Agreement (Covenant).
The provision in the
Covenant that was unacceptable to the SCC requires members of the TWU
community to abstain from “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of
marriage between a man and a woman.”
In 2001, the SCC
decided the same basic issue between TWU and the British Columbia College of
Teachers regarding the training of teachers. In that case, the SCC decided in
favor of TWU.
Let me also note
that another provision of the Covenant is to “treat all persons with respect
and dignity, and uphold their God-given worth from conception to death.” In
both cases before the SCC, there was no evidence of bias by TWU graduates
against LGBTQ people.
In 2005, same-sex
marriage became legal in Canada. Neither TWU nor
its Covenant recognizes same-sex marriage on the basis that it is contrary to
their faith-position based upon the Bible.
Law societies are
responsible for protecting the public interest in determining the
qualifications of those practicing law within their respective jurisdictions.
In this case, they decided that they would not accept graduates of the proposed
TWU law school because of the limitations of sexual intimacy defined by the
Covenant.
Seven of the nine
justices of the SCC agreed with the law societies and decided the
faith-position of TWU was not acceptable. As one commentator put it, only
secular standards now apply in the public square.
I disagree with the
decision of the SCC, but as it is Canada's court-of-last-resort, that “ship has
sailed.”
Why are people asking
me if I was going to comment on this case?
WHO ARE YOU?
Here are four things
you may, or may not, know about me:
1. I
graduated from the law school of the University of British Columbia in
1976 and practiced law for decades.
2. The Right
Honourable Beverly McLachlin (recently retired Chief
Justice of the SCC) and I were trained by the same principal (i.e.,
a senior lawyer) – she was his first articling student; I was his third (and
last).
I have not yet met
Justice McLachlin, but our common beginnings have
given me an interest in her lengthy career. She is a fine judge who has served
Canada well.
3. I have
been bi-vocational for most of my professional career. That means I
practiced law while teaching the Bible and serving in a variety of situations.
For about nine years I served full-time as pastor-teacher of a Metro-Vancouver
church. I now serve with Outreach Canada Ministries.
4. I studied
at TWU and was awarded a Doctor of Ministry degree in 2012. TWU is a
first-class educational institution that serves Canada well.
Now, for a bit of
history to show us where we are as a Church in Canada.
RINGING BELLS AND
WRINGING HANDS
By the Edict of Thessalonica (380 AD) the
Roman Emperor, Theodosius I, made Christianity the sole authorized religion of
the Roman Empire. From that time, Christianity in Europe and elsewhere became a
state-sanctioned, and often state-supported, institution. Some felt that this
was something to celebrate – a time for ringing bells.
I submit that
was not a good thing. Why?
For one, the
Church had to shift some of its loyalty to the state to maintain its
patronage. There was an implicit reluctance to “bite the hand that fed
it.”
When Christians
lived without state-sponsorship their loyalty to Christ was clear in life,
ethics, and doctrine – and they often suffered for it. During these times the
impact for good of followers living and serving faithfully was
undeniable.
In more recent
history, the compromise of German Christian churches to Nazi policies during
Hitler's rise to power is stark evidence of the danger of state-sponsorship.
Eric Metaxas’ well-written biography Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy (2010) recounts some of these dangers and their impact
upon the lives and testimonies of Christians.
In the aftermath of
World War II, German Christians were wringing their hands wondering how
they had become implicated in the atrocities that occurred. Many of
those Christians had enjoyed state-sponsorship in state-sanctioned churches –
they had not lived faithful, Christ-like lives. What did they expect?
Today, many North
American Christians and their denominations appear to be more
interested in politics than Christ-likeness. They (I should say, "we") have shifted not only our loyalty but also our
hopes, to political and legal institutions relying upon legislative and
judicial activism. Now, we are wringing our hands wondering how we could have
lost the SCC case. I predict that we will see more erosion of those privileges
in Canadian society that we think are our rights. What do we
expect?
Perhaps this is our
wake-up call – an invitation to repentance for a Church that (at least in part)
has become entitled and self-important.
RINGING TRUE
We need to
move from wringing our hands to ringing true – being what we
are called to be as followers of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I will continue this
is in future posts, but for now, let me begin with one helpful concept, the
concept of 'story'.
First, is the nature
of the “world.” In the New
Testament, the word “world” has a range of meaning including the physical
planet (John 21:25) and humanity (John 3:16). It also refers to “the present condition
of human affairs in alienation from and opposition to God” (Vine – see John 7:7; 1 John 2:15). The social order
is part of the world in this latter sense.
As the SCC is part
of our social order – the world that is alienated from and opposed to God – you
may be disappointed by their decision, but you should not be surprised.
Second, in
participating so fully in the “world” and playing by its rules, we tacitly live
in the World’s story. This story is shaped
and enforced by the dominant culture or power in which we live. Is there
an alternate story?
It was Walter Brueggemann's The Prophetic Imagination that confirmed my understanding that God has an alternate story.
For instance, at one time, the Israelites lived within the story shaped and
enforced by Pharaoh's Egypt. Moses invited the Israelites to live in God's
Story. Exodus is the "rest of the story."
Third, if we do
not know God's Story we cannot live God's
Story. This is not about withdrawing from society, it is
about living a different story from the one pushed on us by our cultures.
It is surprising how many of us do not know God's Story.