The Demarays
Ottawa (Kanata) ON
January 6, 2004
To the members of the Council
Baptist Convention of Ontario & Quebec
Dear Christian Friends:
It has taken me some time actually to write this letter to you as I wanted to make certain that I would be clear in what I am trying to say. I am writing about your decision of September 2003. It is a decision that flies in the face of every reason that I have remained a Baptist. It challenges the autonomy of the local church to make its own decisions about how and to whom the congregation is called to minister. It challenges the local congregation's historic right to make decisions for itself. It indicates that as a denomination we no longer hold to the historic principles of soul competency, soul liberty, and the priesthood of all believers. Unfortunately, all of these issues are masked by the emotions tied up in the question of same gender marriage.
As I understood the motion approved at Assembly in June, we affirmed a
traditional definition of marriage, and resolved to urge the government of Canada to uphold that definition. We did not go any further than that in our approval. Your action has taken this decision much further than what was approved at Assembly. In fact, council has decided to make policy for the Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec, a right which is the prerogative of Assembly only. While taking an action that I am certain you thought to be in line with the decision of Assembly, you changed the definition of what it means to be a Baptist, apparently without so much as a moment's thought as to the import of what you were doing. I find this change of definition to be much more dangerous than the decision of the Ontario courts which we asked our government to appeal.
I am particularly disturbed by the decision to punish pastors who may feel led to support same gender couples in a committed relationship in affirming their relationship with the ritual we know of as marriage. First, any decision regarding a pastor's action in this area is really the right of the local congregation in discussion with the pastor. Secondly, interpretation and understanding of the biblical materials surrounding this issue are widely varied. To assume that your understanding must be imposed on others is uniquely contrary to our traditional Baptist position.
I have spent many years in prayerful study of the issue of homosexuality, studying the scriptures and trying to understand the issue from a variety of perspectives.
I have come to understand that the references in the Hebrew Scriptures deal with issues of ritual cleanliness. The traditional interpretation of the punishment of the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah as a condemnation of homosexual practices is even questioned by scripture itself. The prophet, Ezekiel, writes, "Here is the sin your sister Sodom committed.
She and her daughters were proud. They ate too much. They were not concerned about others. They did not help those who were poor and in need. They were very proud. They did many things that were evil in my sight. I hated those things. So I got rid of Sodom and her daughters, just as you have seen." (16:49-50 NIRV) As is often the case in scripture, the sins which separate us from God are those of injustice and basic lack of concern for those the less fortunate of our society.
Yet we still are most offended by sins of a sexual nature, while closing our eyes to those related to issues of justice, especially if we practice the injustices.
I have also discovered that the references of Paul in the Epistles are
primarily uttered in response to issues of breaking of covenant, in
particular that of unfaithfulness to one's spouse. I find it interesting that in all of the Gospel accounts there is no reference to any statement of Jesus on the issue of same gender relationships. If this issue was as important as we often claim that the scriptures suggest, any comment of Jesus concerning it would logically have been included by the early church as an authoritative word for the church to consider. In fact, the first account of an individual's baptism in the early church is Luke's account, in Acts, of the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch. This man contravenes many of the ritual purity laws of the Hebrew Scriptures just by who he is. He is impure, unnatural, and even gender compromised. Still he is acceptable for baptism, a sign of full acceptance into God's community. None of these things were thought to be a hindrance to baptism by Phillip, and obviously
by Luke in recounting the story.
For many reasons, I have come to a position on issues of homosexuality and gender issues that I know would not be held by many Baptists. I believe that I have been led by the Spirit of God to these understandings. I also believe that our traditional Baptist polity affirms my right to hold differing ideas from the norm and still to be able to live within the family of Christ.
In 1995, we held a policy discussion at Assembly that for many was
particularly hurtful. We discussed affirming the concept of women in
ministry. Several women who were already in ministry, or were considering it were deeply hurt by many of the comments made by some of the men in attendance. My own daughter, who at age 19 was a delegate at that assembly, was so deeply offended that she decided that the Baptist Convention was not a place where she could find her spiritual home.
At that time, Assembly voted strongly to affirm women in ministry and to encourage women to consider ministry. One of our Area Ministers then stood to ask assembly to assure those male pastors, unable to agree because of their understanding of scripture, that their ordination credentials would not be questioned, allowing their freedom to interpret scripture in ways that were not affirmed by the majority of the Assembly. Despite the fact that I cannot agree with their point of view, I voted in favour of the motion that was requested by that Area Minister, because I believe in that freedom which is Baptist. I am only asking that we give the same consideration in all such issues of interpretation.
I am enclosing a copy of a sermon which I preached on October 26, 2003,
Baptist Heritage Sunday, which addressed the issue that lies behind the
decision you took in September. I would ask you to reconsider the portion of your decision which is punitive of pastors who may hold a differing understanding of the scriptures and of the issues that obviously the majority of the Council holds. Whatever your decision, I pray that we may be able to find a resolution to this issue that will not be divisive of our Baptist family.
Yours in Christ:
Fred Demaray
close window
Gathering of Baptists News Page