tour<\/a> across Canada, but his shows kept getting cancelled.\u00a0<\/p>\nThe cities of Charlottetown, Moncton and Quebec City cancelled his shows, often citing safety concerns. Parks Canada also cancelled his permit to play at York Redoubt National Historic Site at the Halifax Harbour.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ministerios Restauraci\u00f3n offered to host Feucht for a free event on July 25. Four city inspectors came to the church that morning, warning the church would be punished if it hosted the event, the church\u2019s lawsuit says.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The church held the event anyway, while police were stationed outside. About 150 people gathered to sing songs, led by Feucht and his band, hear a sermon and take the Lord\u2019s Supper, a Christian sacrament.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The only disturbance during the event, which lasted just over two hours, was when a protester threw a smoke bomb, the church\u2019s lawsuit says.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In August, Ministerios Restauraci\u00f3n was fined for using its building in a way not allowed by the city\u2019s bylaws. The bylaws say the church property is to be used as a religious establishment, particularly as a place of worship.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Thank you for being a paid subscriber. Your support makes our original and Canadian-focused journalism possible. \ud83c\udde8\ud83c\udde6 <\/p>\n
Subscribe to Editor’s Picks. Receive our free Saturday newsletter featuring our best stories from the week.<\/p>\n
In media reports at the time, spokespeople for Montreal\u2019s mayor said the church was fined because the event \u201cgoes against the values of inclusion, solidarity, and respect that are promoted in Montreal.\u201d<\/p>\n
But Olivier Seguin, Ministerios Restauraci\u00f3n\u2019s lawyer, says the city used a law for a reason other than its intended purpose.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cThey tried to use a bylaw that is meant to regulate noise [and] parking to silence, to impede on free speech,\u201d he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The city\u2019s statements in the media show they issued the fine because they disagree with Feucht, he says.<\/p>\n
\u201c[The church] basically wants to be free to worship the way they want and say the things they feel, without having to fear that the city will use bylaws that are meant for different purposes in order to silence them.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
The city declined to comment on this story, saying it cannot say anything because the case is before the courts.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Misunderstanding religion?<\/p>\n
The fine shows that Montreal\u2019s government does not understand that different Christian traditions worship in different ways, says Corentin Messina, communications and public relations director at R\u00e9seau \u00e9vang\u00e9lique du Qu\u00e9bec, another one of the Christian organizations seeking to intervene in the case.<\/p>\n
Many people in Quebec associate Christian worship with the formal Catholic Mass, he says. They may not think a band leading a congregation in song is a form of religious worship.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere is really a misunderstanding of what\u2019s religious and what\u2019s not, and the rights of religious minorities,\u201d said Messina. Evangelical Protestants make up only about three to five per cent of Quebec\u2019s population, he says.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Messina does not think the government has an \u201cagenda\u201d to target evangelicals.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cThey don\u2019t understand religion and the laws about religious liberty.\u201d<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, cases like this have some Quebec pastors worried about what governments may do if they preach religious teachings that contradict<\/a> common societal views, he says.<\/p>\nClemenger, at the EFC, agrees the fine reflects misunderstandings about religion. \u201cWhat took place at the church is perfectly consistent with the form and style of worship of churches across the province,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
The EFC is asking to intervene in the case so that churches, and all other places of worship, \u201chave the freedom to do what they\u2019re intended to be able to do.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Interveners are organizations that provide information to the court about legal questions and issues raised by a case. They are not directly involved in the case, although their arguments may align with one of the involved parties.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u2018Clear violation\u2019<\/p>\n
Both Clemenger and Messina say their interventions are not to be taken as personal endorsements of Sean Feucht.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cOur intervention is not in any way indication of an endorsement of him,\u201d said Clemenger.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The case is a clear example of a government violating a church\u2019s freedom of religion and freedom of expression, says Richard Moon, a retired law professor at the University of Windsor who has written extensively about freedom of religion.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cOur courts have understood a religious practice to be really anything that a person, that an individual considers to be spiritually significant,\u201d he said in an interview.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cI don\u2019t think there would be any question, at least in my mind, that this performance by this Christian singer would count as a form of worship.\u201d<\/p>\n
No one was forced to go to Ministerios Restauraci\u00f3n to hear Feucht, he says. No one was being exposed to his views unwillingly.<\/p>\n
Moon says he personally disagrees with Feucht\u2019s opposition to same-sex marriage. But the singer is still allowed to express his moral beliefs, as long as he is not vilifying LGBTQ people or saying they are less than human.<\/p>\n
\u201cSimply holding the view and expressing the view that homosexuality is sinful or immoral would not count as hate speech under our law,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
The church\u2019s case is set to be heard before the Superior Court in Quebec. The trial date has not yet been set.<\/p>\n
Canadian Affairs is one of the few outlets in Canada offering reported coverage of religion and faith. Our coverage is made possible in part thanks to the financial support of contributing community members. <\/p>\n
\n\tRelated Posts\n<\/p>\n
\t\t