The CBOQ Assembly in 2020 will be remembered as presenting a clear choice between two competing values: church autonomy and faithful witness. Canadian Baptists have been hurtling towards this confrontation for years.
In 2014, my colleague Marc Bertrand and I wrote an article called “Canaries In The Coalmine” [1]. In it we detailed a variety of manifestations within the CBOQ that provided compelling evidence of an underlying theological rot that demanded urgent attention from the association as a whole. You can read more about that <LINK ca.thegospelcoalition.org/columns/ad-fontes/what-in-the-world-is-going-on-with-the-cboq/>here</link>.
For the next few years most of our efforts as <LINK www.adfontes.ca/home/index.php>a renewal society</link> focused on foundation building. We identified the root problem as hermeneutics. Our people had begun to adopt a way of reading the bible that allowed them to alter, edit and avoid texts which brought them into conflict with cultural norms. To combat that, we began hosting conferences on hermeneutics and biblical studies. We brought in a variety of professors and teachers in the field in an effort to build up what had largely fallen down.
However, in 2017 a line was crossed in our denomination which required us to take a more direct and confrontational approach. In an article I wrote called “<LINK www.adfontes.ca/posts/post/article/has-a-rubicon-been-crossed-in-the-cboq/index.php>Has A Rubicon Been Crossed In The CBOQ?</link>” I reviewed a statement that had been released by one of our churches on LGBTQ2 issues. You can find that statement <LINK www.danforthchurch.com/lgbtq-statement/>here</link>. In the statement the church made it clear that they would now accept LGBTQ2 people into positions of leadership within the congregation.
As such, in 2018 I co-authored a motion that was presented to our annual Assembly and is now known as “The Orillia Motion”. You can find it on page two as linked <LINK baptist.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Summary-2017-Digital.pdf>here</link>. The full text of the motion reads as follows:
“In recognition that our current covenant, membership requirements and policies are not adequate for the new challenges we are facing as a family of CBOQ churches we propose that a committee be struck with the following mandate:
- To study, discuss and detail how churches can reach out to LGBTQ persons in love and Gospel concern without contradicting the clear teachings of the Bible concerning the sinfulness of homosexual behaviour and the essential goodness of God’s design for sexuality and gender.
- To adapt and update as necessary the document known as “This We Believe” towards the end of it serving as a summary of our core doctrines and practices and as the standard for church and clergy discipline within the CBOQ.
- To submit updated policies, covenant agreements and membership requirements in light of the above.
It is further proposed that said committee have representation from the full spectrum of CBOQ churches and that it be chaired by the Executive Minister Tim McCoy. The committee to report and to present the above requested documents for general discussion by March 1st 2018 towards the end of affirmation and adoption at Assembly 2018.”
To read a full summary of that Assembly and how this matter was handled, see <LINK www.adfontes.ca/posts/post/article/an-interesting-day-at-cboq-assembly/index.php>here</link>.
Assembly was not given the opportunity to discuss the issue at length as a motion was made to refer the matter to the Board. The Board subsequently released the following statement:
"Given the range of questions and suggestions that the CBOQ Board of Directors has received, it has tasked Executive Minister, Rev. Tim McCoy, to direct CBOQ staff to develop a plan addressing issues and challenges which may include social, philosophical and theological perspectives related to CBOQ identity and beliefs. Such options may include forums and/or consultations throughout the constituency. The Board is scheduled to receive and discuss the Executive Minister’s proposed plan at its fall 2017 meeting."
Over the next two years, committees were struck and meetings were held that honoured the spirit of that statement. Feedback was received, convictions were shared, conversations were facilitated and a massive underlying division was revealed.
When it came to ministry and outreach to the LGBTQ2 community, the CBOQ was a house divided.
Our approaches to this issue were all over the map. We have churches that are not welcoming, we have churches that welcome without affirming, we have churches that welcome and affirm and we have churches that welcome, affirm, celebrate and would ordain if that option were presently available.
Our diversity on this issue is unsustainable and it appears, that everyone is aware of it.
The crisis revolves around the fact that the CBOQ leadership does not feel as though our current polity is robust enough to impose any sort of boundary on our fellowship. In a meeting that the CLRA leadership had with the CBOQ Executive Minister and Board President we were told that this was our fault. Not CLRA’s fault, but Assembly’s fault. Assembly had repeatedly refused to give to the head office the authority and clout needed to reign in churches operating outside the agreed upon theological and missiological boundaries.
There is some validity to that position.
In 1984 the Faith and Order Commission, presumably in pursuit of a common faith and reasonable order, was directed by Assembly to draft a Statement of Faith that would become binding upon member churches. However, as the Board itself reported in their commentary on the 2020 motions:
“The Faith and Order Committee’s work resulted in “a renewed appreciation of the diversity of belief, expression and practice among our Baptist churches and agencies” and “exposed possible difficulties in the event that CBOQ should adopt a definitive statement of faith at variance with those of local churches and Associations”. Accordingly, at the 1985 Assembly, the 1984 action to produce a statement of faith was rescinded and it was instead approved that the Faith and Order Committee produce what is now referred to as This We Believe to be “a resource document characterizing various convention emphasis and principles for purposes of worship, witness, education and mission” and “which reflects, in substance, the doctrines, practices and stance of member churches of the Baptist convention of Ontario and Québec.”
Thus, it is true that the Assembly in 1985 refused to pass a binding Statement of Faith and instead chose to release a resource document which characterized various convention emphases and principles and which reflects in substance the doctrines, practices and stance of member churches.
In other words, they released a marvelous statement that has absolutely no authority whatsoever.
That has become the practice and policy of the CBOQ for the last 35 years.
We have numerous covenants, documents, resources and statements but very few mechanisms that would ensure agreement or compliance by member churches.
A progressive advocacy group within the CBOQ known as The Gathering made that very clear in their mailout prior to Assembly 2020. They wanted the Board to know that they have never signed the Covenant produced by CBOQ relating to these matters and they have no intention of doing so. Their letter reads as follows:
“We wish to point out that the role of the Covenant document, signed by some-but-not-all member churches, has been overstated. While the Covenant does form part of the agreement between local churches which have joined the Convention after approximately 2003, it is not binding on those churches which affiliate with the CBOQ through their local associations and who were members prior to the institution of the covenant. If you consult the historical record you will be able to confirm that there was a considerable principled dissent expressed at the time of the Covenant's adoption, including by Burlington Baptist Church. For those dissenting churches which have not voluntarily entered into a covenant agreement with the convention, our autonomy as local churches to openly and respectfully disagree with other Convention churches on matters including but not limited to the position adopted by the Convention on same-sex marriage at the 2003 and 2004 Assemblies, remains unconditional.”
Thus, despite the repeated claims by the Board in their highly irregular commentary on the proposed 2020 motions, it is simply not true that we already have protocols and documents in place ensuring compliance on these issues. We do not. We have lovely documents and marvelous resources that have been signed by “some-but-not-all” member churches and we have a group within our association that is not only active, vocal and transparent in their non-compliance but is also actively circumventing those protocols and assisting others in so doing.
This is a direct citation from their <LINK www.gatheringbaptists.ca/credentialing-of-clergy.html>website</link>:
“The Gathering of Baptists will work with Provincial Governments to facilitate the granting of license to marry of its Gathering-credentialed clergy.”
Can’t get a license for that same sex wedding from the sticklers at CBOQ? No problem. The Gathering has you covered.
When you have a group within your association actively undermining and circumventing your policies and protocols then clearly your “honour system” for enforcement is inadequate to the task. Polity must be strengthened and more convictional and courageous leaders sought to enforce it.
That was the issue on the table at Assembly 2020.
Assembly 2020: Review and Analysis
This year’s Assembly was delayed by several months due to COVID-19. The decision was made to conduct the business portion of Assembly via Zoom. Obviously this is not the ideal context for a discussion of this nature, but given the years of lead up and the many public and personal forums provided for dialogue prior to the pandemic, the decision to proceed was entirely appropriate.
There were 3 motions under discussion, presented by 3 different churches in our wider Association.
The first motion, submitted by Forest Baptist Church read as follows:
Preamble
The recent wrestling within the CBOQ convention over the appropriate way to minister the gospel to the LGBTQ+ community has reminded us that association requires more than history and a common name to maintain unity among members. Although we believe that each individual and church is answerable to God for their personal convictions, we also believe doctrinal unity is necessary for a body of churches to partner in the proclamation of the gospel. It is the hope of Forest Baptist Church that the following motion moves our convention of churches to open God's word together to define the essential doctrines of the faith and to make them binding on all member churches so that we can partner together in advancing the gospel of Jesus Christ in Canada and around the world. Now therefore, Forest Baptist Church moves as follows:
Formal Proposal
A committee of CBOQ ordained ministers is to be formed at the earliest reasonable time by the CBOQ board in order to draft a concise statement of faith that would upon ratification in accordance with the By-laws to be made binding on all CBOQ churches, CBOQ board members and directors, CBOQ ordained ministers, and CBOQ staff. This committee will be responsible to have the proposed statement of faith prepared in time for ratification by the CBOQ member churches at CBOQ Assembly 2023.
As mentioned above, in a highly irregular move, the CBOQ Board decided to accompany this motion with an extended commentary attempting to explain why passing it should not be necessary. They spoke at length about the purpose of the CBOQ which is:
“To preach, teach, promote, disseminate, advance, demonstrate, encourage, and implement the Gospel of Jesus Christ and related truths of the Holy Bible and thus fulfill the command of our Lord and saviour that his gospel be preached in all the world as a witness for all nations, all in accordance with the core values of the CBOQ as amended from time to time.” (emphasis added in the original document)
However, as the commentary continued, it became clear that the only Core Value that should rightly speak to this issue, in their opinion, was the value of local church autonomy. The need to “preach, teach, promote, disseminate, advance, demonstrate, encourage, and implement the Gospel of Jesus Christ and related truths of the Holy Bible" was deemed to be secondary and subject to the approval of CBOQ values which may be amended from time to time.
The Board commentary concluded with these discouraging words:
“While it is certainly possible at the upcoming 2020 Assembly to authorize the FBC's proposed motion and for work to commence on a new consolidated statement of faith, it is important to be aware that CBOQ has already carefully considered the issue of a comprehensive statement of faith and has taken steps in years past to consolidate its foundational religious principles and beliefs in This We Believe.”
Translation: We tried this once before and you said no.
There was only 13 minutes assigned for the discussion of this motion and about 10 minutes of that was wasted, as a member read a long preamble to a motion to defer which then had to be seconded and then voted on. It was resoundingly voted down. No time was added for discussion of the original motion, meaning that a motion of this significance was given roughly 3 minutes of discussion by the delegates. Time was called and the vote held.
The motion was defeated 258 to 170.
The second motion, submitted by First Baptist Church, Leamington read as follows:
Preamble
As a congregation First Baptist Church, Leamington believes that those entrusted with leadership in the CBOQ must formally uphold moral and theological positions consistent with Holy Scripture and with previous resolutions/motions made by CBOQ. Some examples of such resolutions/motions are as follows:
WHEREAS, we affirm the dignity and value of all persons and our responsibility to introduce them to the loving, reconciling ministry of Jesus Christ and the life-changing transformation described in scripture; and,
Whereas, Assembly 2003 passed a motion on the Definition of Marriage which stated, "marriage is to be between one man and one woman for life to the exclusion of all others" (Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:5-6, Ephesians 5:31 ); and,
Whereas, the September 2003 Council passed a resolution directing all BCOQ pastors/chaplains/counsellors, who are registered to perform marriages, not to officiate or co-officiate at any same-sex marriage ceremony and recommended that, in situations of non-compliance, his/her permanent registration to marry be revoked; and,
Whereas, we believe that the Bible teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman only, to legitimize same-sex marriage would be contrary to the understanding of the BCOQ based on Scripture and would harm its ministries (Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9); and,
Whereas, Assembly 2004 approved the standard that all BCOQ pastors/chaplains/counsellors, who are registered to perform marriages are not to officiate or co-officiate at any same-sex marriage ceremony; and,
Whereas, Assembly 2004 approved that in the event an accredited pastor/ chaplain/ counsellor officiates or co-officiates at a same-sex marriage ceremony he/ she will be subject to disciplinary review as provided for in the BCOQ Protocol for Discipline, Reinstatement and Restoration Manual (a.k.a. The Red Book).
On the basis of clear Biblical teaching, formal Assembly decisions, and CBOQ resolutions FBC, Leamington makes the below proposal.
Formal Proposal
NOW THEREFORE be it resolved, that all CBOQ Staff and CBOQ Board Members affirm the sinfulness of homosexual expression and affirm that biblical marriage is between one man and one woman exclusively.
Once again, the Board provided extensive accompanying commentary. The commentary by the Board was three times as long as the preamble and motion itself. In it, they reminded the delegates once again that the CBOQ already has documents that cover the concerns represented in the motions. The fact that the existing documents are non-binding was not mentioned. Nor was the fact that the Board had received written confirmation from a group of member churches that there was in fact wide-spread disregard for these written documents. The delegates were simply told that no further action on these matters was required. The delegates were then told that adoption of this motion could result in “potential legal challenges”.
Translation: We don’t need this, and if we proceed there may be a price to pay as an Association.
Once again, discussion of the motion was limited to approximately 13 minutes, 8 of which were wasted in a second motion to defer which was again defeated resoundingly. Much of the remaining time was spent discussing a potential wording change that was then rejected by the original mover.
The motion as written was defeated 233-209.
For the record that is a 52.7% to 47% vote.
The CBOQ is truly a house divided.
The third motion, submitted by Walsh Baptist Church read as follows:
Preamble
WHEREAS, we affirm the dignity and value of all persons and our responsibility to introduce them to the loving, reconciling ministry of Jesus Christ and the life-changing transformation described in scripture; and,
Whereas, Assembly 2003 passed a motion on the Definition of Marriage which stated, "marriage is to be between one man and one woman for life to the exclusion of all others" (Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:5-6, Ephesians 5:31); and,
Whereas, the September 2003 Council passed a resolution directing all BCOQ pastors/chaplains/counsellors, who are registered to perform marriages, not to officiate or co-officiate at any same-sex marriage ceremony and recommended that, in situations of non-compliance, his/her permanent registration to marry be revoked; and,
Whereas, we believe that the Bible teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman only, to legitimize same-sex marriage would be contrary to the understanding of the BCOQ based on Scripture and would harm its ministries (Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9)
Whereas, Assembly 2004 approved the standard that all BCOQ pastors/ chaplains/ counsellors, who are registered to perform marriages are not to officiate or co-officiate at any same-sex marriage ceremony;
Whereas, Assembly 2004 approved that in the event an accredited pastor/ chaplain/counsellor officiates or co-officiates at a same-sex marriage ceremony he/ she will be subject to disciplinary review as provided for in the BCOQ Protocol for Discipline, Reinstatement and Restoration Manual (a.k.a. The Red Book).
Formal Proposal
NOW THEREFORE be it resolved, that no CBOQ church establish a practicing homosexual as a member, leader, deacon, elder or pastor of the church.
And, that any CBOQ church who elects to affirm the practice of homosexuality or to establish a practicing homosexual as member, leader, deacon, elder or pastor be removed from membership in the CBOQ by the CBOQ Board within 6 months of the discovery of such an action.
Once again, the Board provided extensive accompanying commentary. The argument this time was much more forceful and revealing. The Board declared:
“If the WBC member proposal is approved at the 2020 AGM it will result in CBOQ having to impose, for the first time, specific qualification requirements on its member churches regarding their own individual membership at the local church level. Such “top down” type of direction from CBOQ to its local church members would be inconsistent with CBOQ’s historical and current organizational structure as an association of local churches and specifically its vision of being “A family of churches, transformed by Christ, revealing God's Kingdom”. (Emphasis added in the original document).
One could argue that the motion was directed specifically at preserving the “transforming” nature of the Gospel that we present, and one could further argue that while it is true that this motion would represent a departure from the current culture of the CBOQ it is in no way inconsistent with the historical culture of the CBOQ. As the author of the Walsh motion has conclusively <LINK www.adfontes.ca/posts/post/article/clra-confession-article-viii/index.php>argued elsewhere</link>, historically, CBOQ churches understood that while local churches are free to determine their doctrine according to conscience and interpretation, certain interpretations would place those local churches outside the boundaries of the common association. In essence, the CBOQ used to say to churches: “You are free to believe as you feel the Spirit leads you as you study Holy Scripture, but if you believe THAT then you can no longer associate with US.”
It is from that history that we have currently departed.
Thankfully, the discussion of this third motion was not interrupted by another pointless motion to defer. A full 13 minutes was given to this matter. To the credit of all, the discussion was civil, clear and convictional, disproving the common fear that dialogue of this sort will lead to division. On the contrary, it has been the suppression of dialogue that has led to division. Canadian Baptists tend to err on the side of civility and so the more dialogue, the better, under most circumstances.
Marc Bertrand spoke passionately and gently to this matter following which Reverend Ogilvie of The Gathering spoke in rebuttal. He also was passionate, gentle and clear. He asked the question of the hour: “What type of Baptists do we want to be?”
A fair question.
Far too often we have been told that “Baptists do not do this”; “Baptists don’t have binding Statements of Faith.”
Such statements are demonstrably untrue.
The Southern Baptists have a binding Statement of Faith, as do the Fellowship Baptists, as do the North American Baptists – as do even some of our sister Canadian Baptist Associations in Canada!
There is very little that can be said about “Baptists”; rather we must say: “WE BAPTISTS do not have a binding statement of faith, but some of US BAPTISTS would like to. How shall the Assembly decide?”
The honesty and charity on both sides represented the very best of what WE CANADIAN BAPTISTS OF ONTARIO AND QUEBEC are capable of when given the opportunity to dialogue.
In due course, the motion was put to the vote.
It was voted down by a count of 248 to 185.
Case closed.
The Assembly has spoken clearly. We will not have a binding Statement of Faith. We will not insist that Board members and head office staff clearly indicate their unfeigned affirmation of our policies and protocols and we will not discipline churches who affirm by membership or ordination practicing homosexual people.
In his closing statement, the Executive Minister wanted us to be clear that the CBOQ has NOT changed its definition of marriage. It still believes that marriage is between one man and one woman exclusively.
I believe that to be true.
I am happy to go on record affirming that to be true: Our Executive Minister holds to a biblical definition of marriage and our official resource documents continue to reflect that.
However, just as clear, and just as undeniable is the fact that Assembly has decided not to enforce non-compliance with this position. The doors are open. The fence torn down. And chaos follows after.
It is neither safe nor wise to remain in association with churches and leaders who refuse to enforce their own convictions. It is neither safe nor wise to remain in association with churches and leaders who by their own inaction obscure and pollute the Gospel. And thus, while it grieves my heart to say it, the CBOQ is no longer an association that I can in good conscience remain a part of.
There are many good people and many good friends who will decide otherwise, but as far as I can see, this is a decision we cannot come back from. The choice was clear: Canadian Baptist polity or compelling Christian witness.
We chose poorly and now the die is cast.
Even still, come Lord Jesus!
Pastor Paul Carter
N.B. This article has been slightly revised to better reflect the process related to the 2017 motion.
To listen to the most recent episodes of Pastor Paul’s Into The Word devotional podcast on the TGC Canada website see <LINK canada.thegospelcoalition.org/into-the-word/>here</link>. You can also find it on iTunes. To access the entire library of available episodes see <LINK www.intotheword.ca/>here</link>.
[1] We were asked to take it down and we did. For historical record, now that the decisions have all been made, I will repost it on the CLRA website.