UNITED CHURCH OF CANADA AND HOMOSEXUALITY

This is Canada's second largest Protestant denomination, and one of the most liberal. It is exceeded in size only by the Roman Catholic and (very recently) by the Anglican Church. It was formed in 1925 by a merger of most congregations of the Congregationalist, Methodist and Presbyterian churches. Some Presbyterian congregations remained part of a separate mainline religious organization; some Methodists split off to form the very conservative Free Methodists. It has had a history of tackling publicly the really tough social issues. Some cynics might say that they have a continual urge to shoot themselves in the foot, or to form a circular firing squad. It can be argued that they lose membership whenever they enter into one of these debates. But they have also gained members, partly because of the respect that Canadians have for the Church's courage and openness.

In the mid-1930, the hot topic was the ordination of women, a matter that they had inherited from their founding churches. The debates were fierce. The liberals within the congregation quoted scriptures that showed that there should be no differentiation between male and female in Christianity. The conservatives quoted other scriptures about women keeping quiet in church, and not taking positions of leadership. There was fear that the debates would split the church. Centuries of tradition were cited. Tempers ran high. Finally, formal sexism in the church came to an end when Lydia Gruchy was ordained as their first female minister in 1936. The church survived and grew.

A half century later, the entire sequence was repeated. Quotations from the Bible were cited; fears of a split in the church arose once again. This time, the topic was homosexuality. The General Council of the United Church of Canada in 1988-AUG decided to stop barring openly gay or lesbian people from the ministry.

We describe events leading up to the 1988 decision in some detail, because it is likely to be repeated in other religious organizations in the future:

1972: the Church's General Council commissioned a comprehensive study of human sexuality
1980: a task force on sexuality presented its report In God's Image...Male and Female. It concluded: ..."there is no reason in principle why mature, self-accepting homosexuals, any more than mature, self-accepting heterosexuals, should not be ordained or commissioned.". The General Council called for more study.
An openly lesbian candidate applied for ordination to the Hamilton [ON] Conference, but was turned down because of her sexual orientation. The Hamilton Conference later asked the United Church to specifically bar homosexuals from the ministry.
1982: Representatives of homosexual groups across Canada formed Affirm, a mutual support group of United Church homosexual members.
The Church established a task group to study sexual orientation and the ministry. They received input from the newly created Affirm group. They also listened to the United Church Renewal Fellowship (UCRF) a conservative group which was formed in 1966 to promote a return to traditional values within the church.
1984: Their task group's report, Sexual Orientation and the Eligibility for the Order of Ministry was issued. Section E, Recommendation 7.1.2 recommended:
"That in and of itself, sexual orientation should not be a factor determining membership in the Order of Ministry of the United Church of Canada"

Response from the church membership (to judge by letters to the editor of their official publication The United Church Observer) was over 85% negative. The UCRF prepared an article Healing for the Homosexual, Healing for the Church which argued that the solution to "The Issue" was to convert homosexuals to heterosexuality.
At the General Council of 1984, a motion was presented to recognize two members of Affirm as non-voting, corresponding members. It was narrowly defeated. This triggered the creation of a new group within the United Church Friends of Affirm. Council decided to postpone a decision on "The Issue" until a subsequent meeting (1986 or 1988). The National Coordinating Group for the Programme of Study and Dialogue on Sexual Orientations, Lifestyles and Ministry was created.
1988: Many hundreds of local discussion groups had debated "The Issue". About 90% of their reports were opposed to ordaining non-heterosexuals. The National Coordinating Group... issued its final report in early 1988. They deviated from the clear message sent by the local groups by recommending:
- that the church welcome "sexually active single adults, lesbian, gay and bisexual people into all aspects of the life and ministry of the Church"
- that the church "develop liturgies celebrating their covenantal relationships"
The reaction by members and their congregations was explosive. A conservative Committee of Concern was organized to oppose the report; they issued a Declaration of Dissent. A poll taken by the Church revealed that only 28% of the membership favored the admission of active homosexuals into the ministry.
At the General Council, two members of Affirm and one member from the Committee of Concern (COC) were elected as non-voting corresponding members (delegates). A group of Christian, anti-homosexual Fundamentalists from the United States crashed the meeting and attempted to disrupt proceedings. They were gently ejected. Their open display of hatred for gays and lesbians may well have changed many delegates' minds in favor of homosexual ordination; it is impossible to tell. After much heated debate and maneuvering, Council passed a resolution with approximately a 3:1 vote:
"A) That all persons, regardless of their sexual orientation, who profess Jesus Christ and obedience to Him, are welcome to be or become full member of the Church. B) All members of the Church are eligible to be considered for the Ordered Ministry."

A strange event had happened. The majority of delegates had come to the Council with a bias against ordaining homosexuals, but with an open mind. They heard the heart wrenching testimonies of devout gay and lesbian church members; many probably met an openly homosexual person for the first time in their life; they debated little else among themselves; they searched their souls and prayed to learn God's will. And most changed their mind!
The resolution was subsequently amended to include:
"that all Christian people are called to a lifestyle patterned on obedience to Jesus Christ."
Another resolution was passed that called for more discussion and examination of "The Issue" and to urge the church to fight discrimination against homosexuals both in and beyond the church.
Post 1988: In common with most liberal Christian churches in Canada, membership within the United Church has been continuously decreasing for 3 decades. Active churchgoing has also declined in the country generally, and is now only approaching 20% of the adult population. It is difficult to determine how much of the decline after 1988 was due to "The Issue". Some congregations have left the United Church; others have split. The Committee of Concern, Church Alive, The National Association of Coventanting Congregations and the United Church Renewal Fellowship have criticized the headquarters staff for ramrodding radical legislation through council and for stifling freedom of speech. These conclusions are difficult to support: Of the almost 400 voting delegates to the 1988 Council, half were clergy and half laity; only 5 were from the Church headquarters. No minister seems to have lost his/her position by speaking out against the decision.
Three Councils have passed and left the resolution intact. An openly gay candidate for the ministry has been ordained (name and date unknown at this time). As of 1995, no resolution has been passed to permit the formal recognition of gay or lesbian committed partnerships. The four conservative renewal groups listed above continue to hold national Faithfulness Today meetings. In 1990, they attracted 700 participants; in 1994, there were 400. In 1996, about 225 people attended.

Human Rights Legislation
Since 1977, the United Church has been publicly urging the Canadian Federal Government to amend Canada's human rights laws to extend equal protection against discrimination to gays and lesbians. In 1996, both the United and Anglican Churches supported the legislation proposed by the Government. The four United Church renewal organizations urged that the human rights legislation be amended to define sexual orientation to mean "sexual attraction and inclination, but not any kind of sexual behaviour". This would mean that a gay or lesbian person could not be fired from their job by a mean-spirited employer because of their sexual orientation; but they could be fired if they fell in love and entered into a committed relationship with another person. The government ignored the efforts by the United Church's renewal groups and by many Evangelical religious organizations. In mid-1996, the legislation was passed by an overwhelming percentage of Members of Parliament in a free vote (i.e. a vote where the MPs could vote according to the conscience without regard to the position of their party).

Return to the OCRT home page. Return to the Homosexuality and Religion.

Reference Used

Michael Riordon, "The First Stone: Homosexuality and the United Church" , McClelland & Stewart, Toronto, (1990)

UNITED CHURCH OF CANADA AND HOMOSEXUALITY

Human Rights Legislation

Reference Used