On Nov. 9, a declaration by 43 faith groups summarizing the traditional understanding of marriage was presented at an Ottawa press conference. The statement highlighted marriage’s importance as the primary nurturer of children. It also noted the threat to freedom of religion and freedom of expression posed by the implementation of same-sex “marriage.”

The “Declaration on Marriage” was designed to provide “guidance” to MPs as to what marriage truly means and was released in the weeks before the government is expected to bring forth a motion requesting Parliament revisit the marriage issue with a view to restoring the traditional definition. This was altered in June 2005, when Paul Martin’s government redefined marriage to include same-sex couples.

The declaration begins: “We, the undersigned, abide in our affirmation of the institution of marriage: the public covenanting together of a man and a woman in a loving, enduring and exclusive relationship through which our society may be enriched. Marriage bridges and celebrates sexual difference and is the primary relationship within which children are begotten and nurtured.”

The declaration was signed by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Ukranian Orthodox Church of Canada, the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and the Islamic Shiite Supreme Council of Canada, as well 38 other Christian and religious leaders, including the Evangelical Mennonite Conference, the Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec, the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto, the National Alliance of Covenanting Congregations, the United Brethren Church in Canada and Reformed Church in America, Canadian Synod.

The signatories called upon the government to revisit the marriage issue and restore the traditional definition of marriage: “To ensure that future generations do not lose the distinctive and fundamental institution of marriage, we appeal to the members of the Parliament of Canada and to all Canadians to reconsider the decision to redefine marriage and to work together to re-establish in law and public policy the historic and universal definition of marriage which reflects its unique and essential nature.”

The declaration added: “As a social institution, marriage is primarily concerned with the common good and not individual rights. The marriage of a woman and a man, therefore, merits deferential government protection and social recognition.

“Redefining marriage as being ‘between two persons’ eclipses the essence and full purpose of marriage; the inner connection between marriage, the complementarity of the sexes, procreation and the raising of children is lost. When severed from its nature and purpose, marriage becomes simply a euphemism for a committed relationship between two consenting adults.”

Noting that “the freedom of conscience of marriage officials … is already being violated,” the signatories wondered whether churches “will … be afforded the public space to present their beliefs and the freedom to abide by them” if their understanding of marriage differs from the legal definition.

At the press conference, Bruce Clemenger, president of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, said the government must revisit the issue and consider the future consequences of granting same-sex couples marriage rights. “The consequences won’t be realized for perhaps a generation or more,” he said. “What we’re calling for is a pause, to revisit the issue.”

Catholic Civil Rights League president Phil Horgan said in a press release that the number and diversity of the groups signing onto the “Declaration on Marriage” shows “that many Canadians do not consider the redefinition of marriage to be closed.”

See Page 5 for complete document and list of signatories.