By Lauren Sedemeester
For much of its modern history, particularly since the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canada has upheld freedom of religion as a foundational democratic value. Canadians have generally been able to worship freely, teach their beliefs, and participate in public life without fear of legal penalty, provided such expression does not incite violence or hatred. This has reflected a long-standing assumption that faith may be expressed publicly as well as privately.
Rising Concern Around Bill C-9
However, with the introduction of Bill C-9 late last year, concerns have grown within some faith communities about the future scope of this freedom. While the bill is presented as legislation aimed at addressing hate crimes and protecting vulnerable groups, critics and some legal commentators have raised concerns that aspects of its language or interpretation could, if broadly applied, place pressure on public religious expression.
According to legal analysis by the Canadian Council of Christian Charities, Bill C-9 proposes several changes to Canada’s hate crime framework, including a broader statutory definition of “hatred” and changes to existing safeguards in hate speech law. Some commentators say the bill could limit or remove reliance on what is often called a “good faith religious defence” in certain speech-related cases, though the exact impact would depend on the final wording of the law and how courts interpret it. This defence has been used in case law as a factor in helping distinguish protected religious expression from deliberate incitement or hate speech in certain cases.
Some legal observers have also raised concerns that Bill C-9 would remove the requirement for federal Attorney General approval before certain hate propaganda cases can proceed, potentially lowering safeguards against inconsistent prosecutions. Critics argue this could give prosecutors more discretion, which may increase uncertainty in borderline cases involving religious speech. For critics, the concern is not only prosecution, but the broader uncertainty it may create for public speech.
Supporters of the bill, however, argue that these measures are necessary in light of growing antisemitism, violence, and extremist activity. They maintain that the legislation is not meant to restrict Christian belief or the teaching of Scripture. Justice Minister Sean Fraser has stated that Canadians would still be free to “pray, preach, teach, interpret scripture, and express religious belief in good faith”.
Canadian courts have long had to balance religious freedom with legal limits under the Charter when it conflicts with other rights or public interests. In R v Jones, the Supreme Court heard the case of a Christian pastor who challenged government control of homeschooling and religious education. Although the Court recognised the importance of religious freedom, it ruled that the government still has the authority to regulate educational standards. The case illustrates how Canadian courts have historically balanced religious freedom with broader public interests — a tension that many Christians believe is becoming increasingly significant in current debates around Bill C-9.
Concerns From Faith Communities
Several Christian organisations and legal observers remain concerned about how the legislation may affect religious expression in practice. Critics point to comments made during parliamentary committee discussions, where a Liberal MP reportedly questioned whether certain Biblical passages — including texts in Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and Romans — should continue to fall under the protection of the “good faith” religious defence. For many Christians, this reinforced concerns that Scripture itself could increasingly come under legal scrutiny.
Critics express concern that, depending on how “hatred” is interpreted and applied, public statements rooted in Biblical convictions on issues such as sexuality, gender, and morality could, in some contexts, be subject to complaint or investigation under hate speech provisions. This tension touches deeply on how Christians can faithfully hold and express Biblical truth in a changing cultural environment.
The Question of a “Chilling Effect”
Most Christians would strongly agree that hatred and violence should be opposed. However, critics argue that legislation designed to protect vulnerable groups could unintentionally create a climate where believers feel hesitant to speak openly about their faith for fear of legal consequences or public backlash.
Some legal commentators warn that uncertainty over how “hatred” may be interpreted could encourage self-censorship among churches, pastors, teachers, and individuals. This concern refers to the possibility that individuals and institutions may limit public expression of moral or theological views, even when communicated in a lawful and respectful manner, due to uncertainty about interpretation or the risk of complaints.
In one reported Canadian case, a teacher was dismissed after expressing a pro-life view in a classroom following a student complaint. Critics say this reflects growing concern that expressing traditional Christian beliefs in public institutions — especially in education — may increasingly lead to professional or social consequences. Such cases are often cited as examples of how cultural pressure can work alongside legal systems, even when the issue does not involve criminal law directly.
At the centre of the debate is a careful balance: protecting people from genuine harm while also preserving freedom of religion and speech, including the right to express deeply held moral and theological convictions, even when unpopular. For Christians, this includes the call to “speak truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15).
Some critics argue that the concern lies not only in the intention, but in how legislation may be interpreted and applied over time. They warn that ambiguity in defining “hatred” could contribute to a “chilling effect”, where individuals and churches become more cautious in expressing religious convictions in public debate, especially on moral issues.
Some commentators further note that if the definition of “hatred” is broad or applied inconsistently, it may become harder for people to know when religious speech could lead to complaints or legal scrutiny.
A Broader Cultural Shift
Many believers see this debate as part of a broader cultural shift across much of the Western world, where traditional Christian beliefs are increasingly viewed with suspicion in the public square. Some analysts also point to the influence of Quebec’s strong secular tradition, often referred to as laïcité, which emphasises strict separation between religion and public life.
Whether Bill C-9 ultimately proves these concerns justified remains to be seen. However, for many Canadian Christians, the debate is already revealing a growing tension between modern cultural values and historic freedoms of conscience and faith. For the Church, this moment calls for wisdom, courage, and prayerful discernment.
Please pray that:
- Those shaping and interpreting laws such as Bill C-9 would protect vulnerable people from genuine hatred and violence while also safeguarding freedom of religion, conscience, and speech.
- Believers working in public institutions would have wisdom, grace, and boldness to express their faith faithfully and respectfully without fear or compromise.
- Christians would not become silent out of fear of backlash or misunderstanding, but would continue to speak truth with love, humility, and compassion.
- The Church would stay grounded in Scripture, strengthened in conviction, and united in love. Ask God to preserve a bold and faithful witness in Canada, and to equip the Church to respond to cultural and legal pressures with wisdom, grace, and unwavering trust in Christ.
Sources:
https://www.cccb.ca/media-release/proposed-restrictions-on-religious-freedom-bill-c-9/
https://www.mnnonline.org/news/three-ways-to-pray-for-canadas-religious-freedom-amid-bill-c-9-debates/
https://www.cccc.org/news_blogs/legal/2025/12/09/bill-c-9-whats-at-stake-for-religious-expression/
https://nypost.com/2026/04/07/media/canada-hate-bill-could-be-weaponized-against-people-of-faith-conservative-lawmaker-warns/
https://www.parl.ca/documentviewer/en/45-1/bill/C-9/third-reading
https://www.christian.org.uk/news/canada-teacher-fired-expressing-pro-life-view/
https://publicsquaremag.org/faith/church-state/how-canadas-bill-c-9-would-have-reimagined-religious-liberty/
