Home » Bermuda » Media Coverage of the Bermuda Trial

Comments or questions are welcome at ask.victor.shepherd@gmail.com

Media Coverage of the Bermuda Trial

By in Bermuda on .

Thursday, June 03, 1999

Church at odds with its doctrine

Ian Hunter
National Post

John Wesley (1703-1791) was the English evangelist who founded Methodism. In addition to writing volumes of theology, history and biography, in his lifetime he preached something in excess of 4,000 sermons. So John Wesley’s views are not in doubt; strict adherence to the precepts of historic Christianity was central to his teaching.

In 1885 and 1889 two parcels of land in Bermuda were conveyed to trustees, “to be used for the celebration of the worship of Almighty God . . . in accordance with the doctrine, rules, and usages of the Methodist Church and for no other uses, intents, or purpose whatsoever.” For a century thereafter, Grace Methodist church honoured this trust. A 1930 statute confirmed the church’s purpose was to provide a place of worship conformable to the teachings of John Wesley; meanwhile, the Bermuda church became a presbytery of the United Church of Canada.

And in 1988, the 32nd General Council of the United Church of Canada voted to ordain practising homosexuals.

The majority of the congregation worshipping at Grace Methodist church in Bermuda considered this decision contrary to Christian teaching, contrary to the teachings of John Wesley, and, most important, contrary to the trust by which the church derived its existence. They brought their concerns to Synod. Synod’s response was to seek to impose a new minister. Worship became fractious. On Sunday mornings the old and new ministers vied for the congregation’s attention; one announced one hymn, the other another. Since the organ was loudest, victory went to the first occupant of the organist’s stool.

Eventually both sides went to court. No one knows more about John Wesley and his theology than Dr. Victor Shepherd, himself an ordained minister in the United Church of Canada, and holder of the chair of Wesley Studies at Tyndale Seminary in Toronto. Dr. Shepherd was called from Canada to testify as an expert witness. His evidence, the court’s acceptance of it, and the resultant Supreme Court of Canada decision have implications for Canadian congregations that think the United Church of Canada has lapsed into apostasy. Dr. Shepherd testified: “Neither in its formal nor in its informal theology is the United Church consistent with Wesley’s 25 Articles of Religion.” More specifically, “The documents on sexuality would be rejected outright by Wesley. The new Creed and the Amendments to the Hymn Book Voices United are non-Methodist. The ‘Authority of Scripture’ is totally offensive to Wesley’s 25 Articles, and ‘Mending the World’ violates the principle centrepiece of the Christian Faith and therefore of Methodism, namely the uniqueness of Jesus Christ.”

Based on this evidence, Madam Justice Wade-Miller held that the current teaching and practice of the United Church of Canada is inconsistent with the trust by which Grace Methodist church came into being. She declared: “The UCC’s decision to admit homosexuals is a deviation from the original doctrinal standards of the 25 Articles of Faith of John Wesley.” Where congregational schisms occur over matters of doctrine, she held that the issue must be resolved in favour of the side that adheres to the original principles of the doctrine. In this case, the congregation of Grace Methodist church, not the Synod of the United Church, adhered to the “doctrine, polity and practice of Methodism,” and were entitled to the property.

The United Church Observer called Madam Justice Wade-Miller’s decision “a bombshell,” and acknowledged it could have “far-reaching legal implications.” Ian Outerbridge, the Toronto lawyer who acted for Grace Methodist, concluded the decision calls into question the 1925 Basis of Union by which Presbyterians, Methodists and others first came together to form the United Church of Canada.

But let Dr. Victor Shepherd, whose expert evidence was decisive in the Bermuda decision, have the last word: “A Supreme Court Judge within the British Commonwealth has pronounced the United Church to be wholly at odds with its own doctrinal basis. This I think has momentous significance. If a church is defined by its doctrine, are we a church? Not only that, but if the legal entity is related to the entity so defined, what is the legal status of the United Church? . . . Where are we with respect to church discipline?”

Ian Hunter is Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Law at the University of Western Ontario.

Bermuda Bombshell

Doctrinal issues loom large as judge awards property
to dissident Methodists

The Observer
September 1998
by Mike Milne

Gwynneth and Willard Lightbourne led faction claiming church building and manse.

In a court case that could have far reaching legal implications, a Supreme Court judge in Bermuda has not only awarded a $2-million property to a small group of renegade Methodists but questioned the United Church’s adherence to its own doctrine.

In the surface, the fight for Grace Methodist Church pitted a faction backed By Bermuda Synod (a Presbytery in the United Church’s Maritime Conference) against one opposed to the United Church’s liberal theology and decisions on gay ordination (Church, May 1997). When it came to court last March, however, the case gave some Canadian opponents of liberal United Church policies a chance to re-argue the case against gay ordination that had been effectively lost in the courts of the church.

Toronto Lawyer Ian Outerbridge, an authority on the United Church Manual who has represented several clergy in legal battles against the church, joined the rebel Methodists’ local legal team as Queen’s Counsel. Rev. Victor Shepherd, minister at Streetsville (Ont.) United, a John Wesley scholar and outspoken opponent of gay ordination, provided expert testimony on the United Church’s current theological position as it relates to Wesley’s 25 Articles.

While the discontent among many of Bermuda’s Methodists has its roots in the gap between Bermudian conservatism and the liberal theology and policies of the national United Church, the fight over Grace Methodist Church, was over use of the church and manse property on the island’s north shore.

Because the church’s deed clearly states the property would revert to the heirs of the original donors unless used for ‘religious and moral purposes in accordance with the doctrine, rules and usages of the Methodist Church and for no other uses intents or purposes whatever,” the dissident faction, led by lay preachers Gwynneth and Willard Lightbourne, set out to prove they were the true heirs of the Methodist heritage while the United Church has strayed.

Bermuda Synod and its lawyers, for their part, believing the judge wouldn’t entertain theological arguments, simply dealt with the deed as a non-theological property matter, confident that Synod’s Methodism could not be challenged. As Synod Secretary Rev. Victor MacLeod says, he and Synod’s lawyers were “very much surprised,” when the court ruled on theology.

Judge Norma Wade-Miller herself expressed surprise that the Synod offered no expert witnesses to counter Shepherd’s Wesleyan analysis of current United Church theology. (The details of his testimony had been given to Synod’s lawyers at least a week before the trial began.) Although Synod’s lawyer tried to dismiss Shepherd’s statements as only an opinion, the judge accepted Shepherd’s testimony that the United Church has contravened Wesley’s 25 Articles “in its articulation of its formal theology and its fostering of its day-to-day operative theology.”

Figure 2
Shepherd: doctrinal witness.

Figure 3
Outerbridge: case sets precedent.

Shepherd, who occupies the chair of Wesley Studies at Toronto’s Tyndale Seminary, traveled to Bermuda for the week-long trial last March. During the trial Shepherd testified that United Church documents on sexuality, the New Creed, amendments in Voices United and the Authority of Scripture and the Mending the World reports would have been rejected by Wesley and that the Executive of General Council’s recent theological exchange with the moderator also violates the 25 Articles.

Wesley’s 25 Articles are central to Methodist doctrine and are also “congruent” with the 20 Articles of Faith in the United Church’s Basis of Union, Shepherd testified, adding that the United Church has strayed form the Basis of Union. As Shepherd explained in a later interview, “You can’t for a minute pretend that you can square the pronouncements of the United Church over the past 10 years with Wesley.”

Although the congregation at Grace Methodist is the first in the mid-Atlantic British colony to wind up in the courts, it’s not the only one in Bermuda to seek separation from the United Church. A majority of Methodists voted to stay within the United Church in a 1993 referendum which say congregations with predominantly black membership voting strongly in favor of leaving the United Church, while the larger, racially mixed or predominantly white congregations voted to stay. The Cobb’s Hill Methodist Church and Somerset Wesleyan Methodist churches were already operating independently of Synod when the fight over Grace church began in earnest over two years ago.

When one faction at Grace, led by the Lightbournes, informed Synod more than two years ago that it wanted to cease United Church affiliation, a group of opposing congregation members appealed for Synod’s help. The result was competing worship services, bitter public exchanges, changed locks, a series of lawsuits and finally a week-long trial last March.

While admitting that control of Brace Methodist’s valuable property on Bermuda’s north shore was at the heart of the recent lawsuit, Outerbridge says the theological significance is farther-ranging. It means, he says, that “the party line at [United Church national offices on} Bloor St. is wrong. They have change the Basis of Union. And it’s been shown judicially.”

Added Shepherd: “A Supreme Court judge within the British Commonwealth has pronounced the United Church to be wholly at odds with its own doctrinal basis. This I think has momentous significance. If a church is defined by its doctrine, are we a church? Not only that, but if the legal entity is related to the entity so defined, what is the legal status of the United Church? Where are we with respect to wills and bequests? Where are we with respect to church discipline?”

While the principles that underlie the Bermuda case may have some application in Canadian court cases dealing with similar property situations, the Bermuda decision, even if upheld by the British Privy Council in appeal, would likely have only “persuasive value” in Canada, according to United Church staff lawyer Cynthia Gunn.

According to Outerbridge, the legal precedents and principles which helped win the Bermuda case could be used to ask Canadian courts to hand United Church property over t members who adhere to the Basis of Union, which outlines the United Church’s stated doctrine. The lawyer – who has a family connection to Bermuda – also admits, though, that any such attempt would take deep pockets and great determination, And such a case, no doubt, would not go unchallenged by expert theologians arguing the United Church’s case.

According to Rev. Peter Wyatt, General Council general secretary for theology and faith, the judge in the Bermuda case accepted the ‘assumption that fidelity to Methodism is constituted by a strict iteration of Wesleyan statement of the late 18th century.” While Shepherd said Wesley “abhorred novelty or change” and would have opposed United Church statements and policies around sexuality, Wyatt says, “I think it’s quite a leap to say that Wesley would have some down on the side of narrow definition and strict interpretation” and never spoke directly on questions of the ordination of self-declared homosexuals.

Rev. Catherine Gaw, executive secretary of Maritime Conference, who visited Bermuda shortly after the decision was released and attended a home worship service with members of Grace Methodist Church who remain loyal to Synod, calls the judge’s ruling “troubling” and admits there may be some attempt to use the ruling in Canada. However, she says she was also baffled by the courts acceptance of an interpretation of Wesley.

“How do you speak for a man who’s been dead for, what, about 200 years? I mean, it’s been a while since John Wesley shared his thought with us.”

According to Shepherd, though, the Bermuda decision has nothing to do with what Wesley might say today but what he actually set out as doctrine during his own time. “the crucial thing . . . is the precise nature of doctrine.” While General Council decisions and edicts aren’t doctrine, says Shepherd, most people don’t understand that. “A lot of people assume that because we are a non-creedal church we are atheological. And that’s not the case at all.”

For the members of the dissident congregation at Grace Methodist (35-50 attend worship regularly) the task of remaining faithful to Methodism continues. They hope to call an ordained minister sometime in the future and have invited Shepherd to visit this fall, to preach and spend a week offering workshops on Wesley’s teachings.

Meanwhile, Lightbourne says, “We didn’t want to do to court, but they (Synod) wanted to put is in the streets. . . I think we always felt we would have settled God’s business without going to the courts. We regret it and it has cost us dearly” Neither Lightbourne nor the Synod will say how much the legal case has cost; but are trying to raise money to defray their legal expenses. While the Lightbournes, successful local hotel owners and businesspeople, financed their own legal case, Synod paid its lawyers with the help of Maritime Conference.

The other cost, though, which is just as hard to estimate, is in lost confidence in the United Church’s Bermuda ministry and the long-term implications of deciding religious questions in courts of law. While Bermuda Synod may continue to provide ministers to the four racially mixed congregations, Marsden Memorial congregation – another largely black congregations that has already split over the gay ordination question – will likely be next to leave Synod.

Rev. Charles Swan, a retired minister from Bermuda who served United Church pastorates in Canada before retiring, says Maritime Conference’s main downfall has been its failure to place Bermudians in Bermuda’s Methodist pulpits. The court decision, he says, could serve notice that “maybe the Maritime Conference has outlived its usefulness on the island and maybe it’s time to pull out gracefully.”

For now, Bermuda Synod carries on, is getting further legal advice on the decision and plans to appeal.

The legitimate heirs of Methodism

Bermuda’s Supreme Court rules that
the UCC has abandoned its doctrinal foundations

by Les Sillars
Alberta Report
July 13, 1998

The Community of Concern, a conservative ‘renewal’ group in the United Church of Canada (UCC), has won a few small moral victories since the ordination of homosexual minister began in 1988,but has lost all the institutional battles. Until June 10, that is, when the Supreme Court of Bermuda found that the UCC, having abandoned its doctrinal foundation, has no claim to the property of a Bermuda congregation that wanted to leave the Synod of the Wesleyan Methodist Church of Bermuda. That synod is governed by the Maritime Conference of the UCC.

After the UCC decided to ordain practicing gays, many conservative congregations considered leaving. Legally, however, church property is held in trust by the denomination. Thus the people could leave, but the building would stay with the UCC. Most felt it was too traumatic to leave the church where they were married or their parents buried, and so only a few congregations left, despite the increasingly liberal bent of the UCC leadership.

But some Wesleyan Methodists in Bermuda became increasingly unhappy over gay ordination, gay marriage and the erosion of the authority of Scripture, notes Madam Justice Norma Wade-Miller of the Bermuda Supreme Court. The Wesleyan Methodists of Bermuda are part of the UCC because in 1930, five years after the Methodists, Congregationalists and some Presbyterians merged to from the UCC, the Bermuda churches were looking for ties to a larger body that could provide support, train clergy, and so on.

In 1993, in response to the liberal Declaration of the 32nd General Council of the UCC, the Bermuda synod voted on UCC membership but decided to stay. However, at Grace Methodist in Hamilton, where the members voted 83% in favour of leaving, the church elders decided that if the synod would not leave the UCC, they would leave the synod. In 1995, led by church elder Willard Lightbourne, they informed the synod that the church intended to leave and were told that the property belonged to the UCC. With acrimony building, the synod announced that it would take over Sunday services beginning July 1, 1996.

This led to a rather chaotic incident when Rev. Victor MacLeod, secretary to the synod, showed up to conduct the July 7 service. Rev. Mr. MacLeod had lined up a piano player for the service, but the usual organist also showed up, took her seat, and announced that she would be playing the organ – but not for the synod. “I proceeded to attempt to conduct the service with disruption from Mr. Lightbourne.” recounts Rev. MacLeod. “We announced one hymn, Mr. Lightbourne called another, and the organist, being the louder, was disruptive. We gave communion, but it was a disruptive service.”

The synod changed the locks on the church, but the congregation managed to change them back ‘and thereafter remain in possession, worshipping every Sunday up to the present time,’ noted Madam Justice Wade-Miller. The Lightbourne faction and the synod subsequently filed lawsuits against each other over the property. Eventually, the suits wound their way to the Supreme Court.

Madam Justice Wade-Miller noted that the property was deeded to the church in two parcels in 1885 and 1899. Both deeds specified that the land be used for worship ‘and for other religious and moral purposes in accordance with the doctrine, rules and usages of the Methodist church and for no other uses, intents or purposes whatsoever, “The Lightbourne faction contended that the UCC had departed from the teachings of Methodism, its founder John Wesley, and in particular from the church’s own 1925 Basis of Union. Therefore, it argued, the congregation was the rightful heir to the property.

To prove the point, Grace Methodist’s lawyer, Ian Outerbridge of Mississauga, called an expert witness: Victor Shepherd, pastor of Streetsville United Church in Mississauga and Chair of Wesley Studies at that city’s Tyndale Seminary. The 32nd General Council’s inability to affirm that homosexuality is a sin ‘is in fact a blatant denial of the authority of Scripture,” testified Dr. Shepherd. He cited various Scripture passages and John Wesley’s commentary on Romans 1: “Receiving the just recompense of their error, their idolatry, being punished with that unnatural lust, which was as horrible a dishonour to the body, as their idolatry was to God.”

Mr. Shepherd also noted the denomination’s ultra-ecumenical assertion that “all authentic religions can mediate salvation” and its refusal to discipline its moderator, Rev. Bill Phipps, who last year denied the deity of Christ and the bodily resurrection. After noting with surprise that the UCC declined to call its own expert theological witness, Madam Justice Wade-Miller ruled for Grace Methodist. Mr. Shepherd says that the UCC did not call such an expert because it knew that claiming it upholds traditional Methodism is like saying the Pope is not Catholic.

Mr. Shepherd points out “how ironic it is that a secular court has to decide that a church is violating its own doctrine.” Gordon Ross, an associate of Mr. Outerbridge, admits that the Bermuda decision not binding on Canadian courts but, as the ruling of a ‘court of competent jurisdiction’ within the Commonwealth, would be influential. “Our view is that property is held by way of an expressed trust for the purpose of the founding doctrines, in this case the Basis of Union of the UCC,” says Mr. Ross. “If a Canadian court were to conclude that the UCC has so evolved its policies and doctrines that it is no longer in sync with the Basis of Union, then its claim to the property goes up in smoke.”

Such a ruling would spark a mass exodus of churches from the liberal, mainline denominations to more conservative break-away groups, according to Rev. Chris Jukes, who recently left the Anglican Church of Canada over theological differences with his superiors. Rev. Mr. Jukes, now in the Communion of Evangelical Episcopal Churches, adds that if a denomination can theologically forsake its members and then keep the property that they spent decades paying for, “it’s tantamount to theft.”

The affects of the Bermuda ruling could ripple into the U.S. James Heidinger is president of Good News, a renewal movement within the 8.5-million-member United Methodist Church. He says the denomination is still reeling after a Nebraska pastor who performed a lesbian marriage was acquitted in a March 13 church trial. About 200 United Methodist pastors have now said they will perform their own lesbian weddings. “All this has rocked the church like nothing else I’ve seen,” says Mr. Heidinger. Even before the Bermuda decision, “there has already been some talk of whether [evangelical United Methodists] might challenge the trust clause at the point of who is the legitimate heir of Methodism.”

So far, no conservative congregation in Canada or the U.S. has stepped forward to launch a test case, and this is unlikely until the appeals are finished. The UCC has already notified Mr. Outerbridge’s office that it will seek permission to appeal to the Privy Council of the United Kingdom, which is the ultimate court of appeal for the British dependency.

A church that filed the case and lost could be held liable for the costs, adds Mr. Ross, but the worst legal consequence is that the status quo would continue. Although the UCC might be tempted to argue that its theology has ‘evolved,’ Mr. Ross points out that the UCC has, one small step at a time, fundamentally changed its belief and practice but has ignored proper amending procedures for the Basis of Union. Therefore, as a defining theological document the Basis of Union should still be paramount. UCC representatives were unavailable for comment.

Bermuda ruling sets stage for
United Church split

Decision allowing members to quit church and take building with them opens door for conservative exodus in Canada

By Bob Harvey
Ottawa Citizen

A recent Bermuda court decision could open the doors for hundreds of conservative United Church congregations in Canada to quit the denomination and take their buildings with them.

Judge Norma Wade-Miller ruled on June 10 that a Bermuda congregation of the United Church could retain ownership of its property because the denomination fundamentally altered its theology when it began ordaining homosexuals.

Ian Outerbridge, the Toronto lawyer who won the case, says that although the Bermuda decision is not binding on Canadian courts, it does have application in Canada. He believes United Church congregations here could now make similar arguments and wrest title to their buildings from the denomination. However, the case would be expensive because it would inevitably be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

“It would take us forever and a year, and cost many hundreds of thousands of dollars, but it could happen now,” said Mr. Outerbridge.

Rev. Graham Scott, a conservative United Church of Canada theologian, agrees. He says the decision not only embarrasses the denomination, but also will stir up more discontent among Canadian congregations that are dissatisfied with the denomination’s steady drift toward a more liberal theology.

“If congregations could take their property with then, it wouldn’t surprise me if hundreds of congregations opted out,” said Mr. Scott, editor of the Theological Digest and Outlook, and president of Church Alive, a small theological reform group within the denomination.

At least 60 United Church congregations, who disagreed with the ordination of homosexuals, did quit the denomination in the early 1990s, and eventually joined the Reformed Church of Canada and the Congregational Churches of Canada. All of them were forced to leave church buildings that had been built with the aid of their contributions.

One of those Reformed Church congregations, in Dover Centre, in southwestern Ontario, launched a legal battle to retain ownership of its building, but the courts ruled that it did belong to the United Church of Canada.

Margaret Ogilvie, an authority on church law, and a professor at Carleton University, has argued the Dover Centre decision was flawed and could be overturned, and her legal analysis of church property rights was cited by the judge in the Bermuda trial.

Cynthia Gunn, legal counsel for the United Church of Canada, disagrees with the legal opinions of both Ms. Ogilvie and Mr. Outerbridge.

She says the Bermuda decision has no relevance for Canadian churches and courts, because the Bermuda situation is unique. She said Canadian legislation gives title to all church property to the denomination, whereas in Bermuda, there is no such overall title to all church property.

Grace Methodist, the congregation that has left the United Church and has now won title to its building, argued that its property was originally donated on condition that it be used for worship services conducted according to the theology of John Wesley, the 18th-century founder of the Methodist Church, one of the three denominations that merged in 1925 to form the United Church of Canada.

Bermuda’s Judge Wade-Miller ultimately agreed with the testimony of Victor Shepherd, of the Ontario Theological Seminary, who said Mr. Wesley would never have sanctioned the ordination of homosexuals.

The differences between Mr. Wesley’s theology and the current theology of the United Church of Canada “are so fundamental and deep-seated as to be irreconcilable,” Judge Wade-Miller wrote.

She ruled the church building should therefore go to the majority of the congregation, which has remained faithful to the Methodist traditions.

The United Church of Canada has eight affiliated congregations in Bermuda, which are still legally part of the Wesleyan Methodist Church of Bermuda. When the United Church decision in 1992 to allow the ordination of homosexuals, four largely black congregations, including Grace Methodist, objected to the changes. Although a majority of Bermuda Methodists later voted to remain with the United Church of Canada, more than 80 per cent of Grace Methodist’s members objected, and gave notice they would leave the Methodist synod and take their building with them. The three other black congregations have also since given notice they intend to quit the Methodist Synod and the United Church of Canada.

By July 1996, the dispute between the majority of the Grace congregation and the Methodist synod had escalated to the point of an angry farce. Competing factions both gathered in the church for worship services, and tried to drown each other out with a competing organist and pianist. Later the two factions each tried changing the locks on the church doors.

Since then, both factions have been holding services in the church at different times, while the dispute worked its way through the courts.

Rev. Victor MacLeod, secretary of the Bermuda synod, said the court’s decision will likely be appealed to a higher court, but that decision will not be made until later this summer. In the meantime, the Bermuda synod is seeking a court injunction to allow the minority group at Grace Methodist to continue worshipping in the building on Sundays.

United Church declared guilty
of doctrinal deviance

Bermuda’s Supreme Court rules the UCC has
wandered from its theological roots

by Kevin Heinrichs
Christian Week
July 14, 1998

BERMUDA – A legal storm over the United Church of Canada’s theology is threatening to blow north from Bermuda into Canada.

In ruling on a complex property dispute involving a Bermuda Methodist church, Bermuda Supreme Court judge Norma Wade-Miller wrote that “the current doctrinal standards of the UCC of Canada (sic) is at variance with the doctrines of the 25 Articles of Faith of John Wesley.”

How does a property dispute involving a Methodist church in Bermuda end up ruling on the theology of the United Church of Canada?

It started when two factions within the Grace Methodist Church congregation in Bermuda were at odds over their understanding of the UCC’s 1988 decision to permit the ordination of practicing homosexuals. One faction, including some trustees of the church, believed that the decision broke with church doctrine and therefore broke one of the conditions of the deed to the property: that the building be used for celebration and worship ‘in accordance with the doctrine rules and usages of the Methodist Chuch.” They argued that the church was no longer under the authority of the Bermuda Synod.

What does that have to do with the United Church?

Grace Methodist falls under the jurisdiction of the Synod of the Wesleyan Methodist Church of Bermuda which, in turn, is under the Maritime Conference of the UCC.

The judge agreed that the doctrine of the 25 Articles of Faith of the Methodist Church is congruent with the original 20 Articles of Faith of the United Church. The legal issue came down to whether the United Church had fundamentally departed form the principles and articles of John Wesley and Methodism since church union in 1925.

If so, the UCC and Bermuda Synod had forfeited their right to control the services of Grace Methodist Church.

Crossed the line

In her 34-page ruling, Judge Wade-Miller said, in effect, that the UCC had crossed that line.

She wrote that “The UCC’s decision to admit homosexuals is a deviation from the original doctrinal standards of the 25 Articles of Faith of John Wesley. I accept Dr. Shepherd’s opinion that UCC has, in its articulation of its formal theology and its fostering of its day to day operative theology, contravened the 25 Articles of the Methodist Church which was written by the late Reverend John Wesley.”

Victor Shepherd, pastor of Streetsville United Church in Streetsville, Ontario and chair of Wesley Studies at Tyndale Seminary, was the expert witness testifying on behalf of the trustees of the church. He is also a member of Community of Concern, an activist group working for reforms within the UCC.

“It means the church has been declared apostate,” says Shepherd. “The United Church has been put on trial doctrinally and been found wanting. I am pleased that an unbiased observer has ruled what the Community of Concern has said for 10 years….that the UCC characteristically violated its own doctrine. The UCC denies it, but it takes a secular court to rule what anyone with one eye open already knows.”

Appeal likely

Gordon Ross, a lawyer with the Toronto firm which represented the church trustees, says the ruling is significant because the General Council of the United Church of Canada has always insisted that there has been no fundamental departure form the Basis of Union in 1925.

“In Bermuda, the case was all about who has the right to the church property. Is the UCC upholding the Wesleyan tradition? The court held that [the UCC] had breached from fundamental teaching.”

Ross says the ruling puts into question a past Canadian ruling in a similar UCC church property dispute involving three Ontario congregations know as the Anderson case. They had also maintained that the congregations continued in the doctrinal standards on which they were founded, while the UCC deviated from them by permitting ordination of practicing homosexuals. The ruling, however, deemed that the churches were the property of the national church without addressing the doctrinal issue.

The Bermuda ruling will be appealed, but Ross says the judgement will likely be upheld because the UCC is ‘stuck’ with the evidence it presented at the trial. The fact that an expert witness did not testify to counter Shepherd’s opinions surprised even the judge, as she noted in her ruling.

Ross says the ruling itself is not binding on Canadian courts, but the principle involved is.

Further, an appeal would go to the Privy Council in England, under which Canadian law is obliged to consider. The Privy Council is the highest appeal court of any of the colonies within the empire of the Commonwealth. If a similar ruling is made there, says Ross, it may open the door for a Canadian to pursue legal action against the UCC for abandoning its doctrinal principles. In effect, the argument would go that the current UCC is ‘impersonating’ the church it claims to represent.

The UCC had no immediate statement regarding the case.