A victory for religious freedom in Canada

Whether it offers any insight on the upcoming Trinity Western University law school case is unknown, but the Supreme Court of Canada has just delivered an important defence of freedom of religion and association in its ruling on an expelled member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Church elders had disfellowshipped Randy Wall from his local congregation in Alberta. Wall sought a judicial review of the decision, arguing the resulting church community’s shunning of him negatively affected his real estate business.

Both a lower court and the Alberta Court of Appeal ruled the courts had jurisdiction in the case. The Jehovah’s Witnesses appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, with the Catholic Civil Rights League and other religious organizations intervening on the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ behalf.

On Thursday the Supreme Court handed down its unanimous decision: “Courts should not decide matters of religious dogma,” Justice Malcolm Rowe wrote. “In the end, religious groups are free to determine their own membership and rules.”

Citing a previous court ruling, the Supreme Court noted, “Secular judicial determinations of theological or religious disputes, or of contentious matters of religious doctrine, unjustifiably entangle the court in the affairs of religion.”  The courts have neither legitimacy nor institutional capacity to deal with such issues, and have repeatedly declined to consider them.

It’s a reassuring outcome for freedom of religion and association in Canada. Whether you agree or not with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their decision to expel a member for his behaviour, the fact remains that a religious organization or community should not have to fear government interference in internal matters such as membership.

Prior to the decision, CCRL executive director Christian Elia said, “Freedom of religion entails that religious groups have the right to self-govern in accordance with their faith tradition.”

“The state must not get involved in internal disciplinary measures exercised by religions within the realm of their own clerical system and congregational membership,” Elia said.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is similarly pleased by the ruling. It had intervened in the case to argue freedom of association under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows private, voluntary associations to determine and enforce membership criteria.

“It is an unjustifiable violation of the freedom of association to compel members of a voluntary association to associate involuntarily with an individual that the members have determined does not meet, or no longer meets, the membership criteria the association has established,” said Justice Centre president John Carpay.

Indeed, one can only imagine the implications if the court had ruled otherwise. Consider the stakes that could be involved for the Catholic Church in Canada when it comes to issues like male-only priesthood, excommunication, marriage tribunal decisions, or even administration of the sacraments.

Canada is now waiting for the Supreme Court to rule on a similarly important case, Trinity Western University’s efforts to have a law school. A decision is expected soon, and there are comparable issues involved. At stake are a religious organization’s right to set behavioural guidelines for its religious community, and whether outside interests such as the B.C. Law Society can force compliance with its own desires.

The Archdiocese of Vancouver has acted as an intervenor at each stage of the law school legal challenge because, as Archbishop Miller says, the TWU ruling will have “the potential to affect hundreds of thousands of students in Catholic schools and, indeed, all people of faith in Canada.”

Let’s pray that the wisdom the Supreme Court has shown in this decision is reflected when it hands down its ruling on Trinity Western University.