Canadian church threatened with losing charity status for revoking woman's membership over same-sex relationship

  • Thread starter Thread starter ATraveller
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey @PennyinCanada, @Gingersnaps4, @Roguish,

I think the article linked (together with the OP) is very misleading. The article states:
K. M. [abbreviation mine] lost her membership at Calvary Baptist Church in Oshawa
Click to expand...
What exactly is that “membership”? Is it a paying job? Is it helping around the parish? Or is it “excommunication”? (said in the full article - and is actually an echo from an extrapolating lifesitenews blog). We don’t actually know! The article doesn’t state what membership is.

Then, I doesn’t seem that “Calvary Baptist Church in Oshawa” is catholic.

What is interesting is following the article to the original statement:
She became a member and got actively involved as a youth leader.
Click to expand...
Well, here we could ask if a person actively cohabiting in a same sex relationship is the best choice to be teaching catechesis (they don’t seem catholic, so I think the term catechesis doesn’t apply.) I would say the parents themselves wouldn’t want the person teaching “Sunday school” preferring instead someone with a different profile in terms of doctrinal positions, and I deem the parents competent to make that choice. Again, in this case the State can’t intervene, because those private associations have freedom to choose who they deem most competent for those tasks.
 
Last edited:
It’s not uncommon for many Protestant churches, including Baptist, to have a set of criteria for who gets to be a “member” of their church. Many of them require members to follow a set of requirements for things like behavior, tithing and volunteering, and people do get kicked out. It’s not like Catholic churches where people can freely drop in and out, aren’t required to formally register or contribute, and nobody is paying attention to your behavior unless you’re in a public position at the parish.
 
Last edited:
Gingersnaps4 said:
I think there is going to become a point when churches in Canada must make the decision to drop charity status and pay taxes.
Click to expand...
Which would actually hurt the poor the most because we know that would cripple and shut down many institutions connected to churches. And the tax dollars wouldn’t be given to the poor. It would go into pet projects and slush funds of the government, which the Trudeau government has plenty of, at least $9 billion last time I checked.

It wouldn’t be pleasant but if that ever happens, which I don’t believe will, the Church will manage.
Bartering and volunteering makes taxation quite difficult. (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) It’s the harassment and intimidation that’s the real problem. Again, the Church has gone through much worse.
 
ATraveller said:
They may try to break us but our hope is in Christ. Loyalty is to Christ and not people. The Church has survived much worse persecution. Today, we have underground churches in hostile countries that are thriving. Keep calm and carry on.
Click to expand...
I should clarify here. “They” refers to political activists who are bent on eradicating Christianity. They’ll use anything to accomplish that. Events like these are used as a pretext to close churches down and squeeze Christianity out of the public sphere.
I don’t know many ordinary SSA or gay individuals, religious or not, who seek such things. It’s the few jerks with lots of money and political clout, straight and gay, who do such things in the name of “helping” SSA/LGBT people.
 
Last edited:
hardly, quebec is an atheist wasteland and has been for a few decades now, the churches are empty aned struggling to even keep their doors open
 
I too don’t believe he will succeed. It’s the harassment and intimidation that’s the problem. I know, I know. The world has plenty of jerks. Still, harassment and intimidation is wrong.
 
Last edited:
ATraveller said:
I too don’t believe he will succeed. It’s the harassment and intimidation that’s the problem. I know, I know. The world has plenty of jerks. Still, harassment and intimidation is wrong.
Click to expand...
It is also discrimination. The summer help program shows he can do it. That was a fleece for more activity.
 
Last edited:
angell1 said:
I work for crA, this is probably not gogoing to even go anywhere
Click to expand...
I hope you are right but as one already affected by the same attitude within the Alberta Government/Dept. Of Education I am not convinced.
 
I actually think it will happen within the next few decades, in Canada. They’ve already gotten away with holding individuals and business hostage by making them “pledge allegiance” to a certain set of morals. You can’t even run for office there if you don’t support those things if I heard correctly. Which is an astonishing lack of religious freedom from an American POV. People here wouldn’t tolerate that at all, at least not at this point in time.
 
In a way, to me this draws parallels to communist China. Minus the violence of course, but I can’t believe the PM there has gotten away with what he has done, so far. To actually tell people they are shut out of public office if they have a religious belief. So that it can never be challenged. It’s pretty sickening.
 
Gingersnaps4 said:
You can’t even run for office there if you don’t support those things if I heard correctly. Which is an astonishing lack of religious freedom from an American POV. People here wouldn’t tolerate that at all, at least not at this point in time.
Click to expand...
We already have this. You can’t run as a Democrat or Republican without pledging allegiance to a very set number of things. It wasn’t always like this.
 
Anti-abortion Democrats are allowed to run for office in the US even if being pro-life is not a part of their platform and you aren’t as likely to win. As a matter of fact, as of Aug 2018 there were 43 House Democrats listed as members of the Democrats For Life group Coalition. Now, I dare say a pro-life Democrat could never make it past the primary as a presidential candidate, but they are still not forbidden to try.
 
Last edited:
If you google Lifesite news Trudeau you will see a lot of shocking items.

Will Trudeau demand news organizations support abortion, LBGT agenda to receive tax breaks?

Trudeau gov’t demands Canada Post to cease delivering publication lacking ‘diversity’

Canadian Gov’t offers huge tax breaks to ‘trusted’ news organizations 11 months prior to election

Trudeau gov’t gives $88k to abortion groups and denies funds to Christian orgs

And it goes on. The gears are already in motion.
 
Hi, I’m was raised as a Southern Baptist. You can become a full member of a Baptist church if you can prove you have been baptized by full immersion. Non-members are welcome to attend services and classes. Communion is a non-issue because it’s only given out once or twice a year. It is considered symbolic only.

If you don’t have full immersion baptism, you are required to learn the basics of the faith (as the Southern Baptists interpret it). Then, you go to the pastor. He asks you some key questions. You’re probably required to say a sinner’s prayer in your own way. Basically, you ask Jesus to come into your heart and forgive your sins. You make a public statement of faith. Then you are baptized.

In the Southern Baptist Church, prospective member would never be asked about your personal life. You’re on the honor system. The only “notorious” sinners kicked out were paid junior ministers.

A Southern Baptist church can’t “excommunicate” anyone. There are no bishops, elders, or any other authority. Southern Baptists believe that salvation comes from God. Salvation cannot be taken away. All people are equal before the Bible. A member can be told to leave a particular church. But there aren’t any negative outcomes – unless you go to the press and make a big deal about it.
 
Last edited:
I appreciate your perspective, however, my in-laws include Baptists who were the kids of a minister and my grandma was also a Baptist, and I’m speaking from my perspective.
As I’m sure you know, there are many different varieties of Baptists and many churches calling themselves “Baptist” where the minister is setting the rules and they may be doing something different from your church. I have no idea whether you as a Baptist would consider these churches legitimate Baptist churches, but they do use the name.

Apart from my personal knowledge, I’ve also read/ heard in the past several news stories about Baptist churches where the minister revoked, or tried to revoke, memberships of church members over things like not contributing sufficient funds to the church or not attending services or not doing something else. The stories make the news usually because some of the church members are upset over the revocations, so I would presume it’s kind of a big step, but it does happen.

Edited to add, here are two recent examples of such a news story involving a Baptist church


https://www.kark.com/news/local-news/church-revokes-mans-membership-over-his-sexual-choice/247107996
 
Last edited:
@Tis_Bearself, I spoke only of Southern Baptists in my post. I’m sorry I didn’t make that clear.

I’m no longer a Baptist. I became Catholic in 1990 at age 29. I think a traditional Southern Baptist would say a true Christian church should profess the following:
  • A person must believe in basic teachings of the faith (Trinity, Virgin Birth, Jesus as Savior, etc.)
  • The Bible is the literal, inerrant word of God.
  • A person must have a “born again” experience to be saved from hell.
  • Baptism by immersion is required in obedience to Jesus. (Infant baptism is not legitimate.
  • You saved by grace, not of works.
I hope that helps. Otherwise, you have my permission to take two Excedrin. 😃
 
Last edited:
Understood. I’m vaguely aware there are different types of Baptists and that Southern Baptist is a particular group. I must admit I’m not that knowledgeable on the specific differences.
 
Terminology tends to create confusion because different traditions have subtle differences.

Inside the category of corrective discipline, people might use the term “church discipline” to refer to any act of correction, whether that involves privately and informally warning a friend or formally removing someone from membership in a church. When it gets to this last step, people frequently use the word “excommunication.” Among Protestants, excommunication does not refer to removing someone from salvation (which the church is incapable doing). It refers to removing someone from membership in the church and participation in the Lord’s Supper. To excommunicate is to ex-communion someone, kind of like a reverse baptism.
Click to expand...
In the 19th century, Baptist churches in America excommunicated an average of 2% of their members per year
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top