Sometimes the biggest changes come about through the smallest shifts. As was evidenced last week in the reaction to Quebec’s report on “reasonable accommodation,” francophones are beginning to push back against years of cultural shifts that were made to make Quebec more inclusive of other nationalities. The shifts may have seemed small at the time, but suddenly it appears that Quebecers feel their unique identity is being threatened.
Last fall, my friend Elizabeth returned to her native England for a visit. Born and raised there, she still considered it to be a significant part of her family heritage. But she soon realized that in the years that had transpired since her previous visit, the once-clear identity of her homeland had been transformed.
Prince Charles is considering becoming the defender of “faiths” rather than of the Church of England. There is even discussion about whether government buildings should fly the Union Jack because its cross is apparently far too obvious for a pluralistic society.
Important and historical symbols are disappearing, leading her to say, with a sense of sadness, “That’s not my England, anymore.”
Across Canada, there is a similar trend to purge our public places of any symbols associated with the Judeo-Christian religion that was so instrumental in the founding of our country. Since 1971, our policy of official multiculturalism has opened the door to an influx of cultures and beliefs. While much of it has been positive and multiculturalism has become synonymous with the Canadian way of life, there remains a sense that our core values and beliefs are being diluted and Canadians may increasingly be feeling that our new pledge of “reasonable accommodation” may become a mantra of “enough is enough.”
The problem isn’t creating new ways to accommodate new cultures; it’s that we seem dedicated to destroy the old ways in doing so. For some reason, our willingness to protect individual/group rights to religious expression for historical or cultural purposes seems to end when it comes to majority Canadian or Christian beliefs.
Anyone remember the Swiss Air Flight 111 crash over Peggy’s Cove? In true Canadian fashion, any Christian references were kept out of the public memorial service — in the name of official multiculturalism. But — and this is the point — other faith leaders were not similarly censored.
In Ontario, an all-party committee is considering a controversial proposal of alternatives to replace the daily reading of the Lord’s Prayer at the Ontario legislature. Premier Dalton McGuinty believes the legislature must reflect the diversity of Ontario and therefore “be Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or agnostic.” Common sense dictates that for any prayer to be so all-inclusive, it would have to be utterly meaningless. But beyond that Ontarians should ask McGuinty why he feels all these religions should be equally represented.
Some cultures propagate hatred against other groups based on race, gender or sexual preference. We would never support some of their laws or the discrimination that is inherent to their laws. We don’t believe polygamy should be legal, for instance. So why should we strive for our public prayers to equally reflect those values?
Those who say God must be banished from our public places in the interests of maintaining a secular and inclusive pluralistic society are foolish. Our public forums cannot — and should not — reflect every interest of a pluralistic society. So let’s move past the notion that we must be all-inclusive.
The Lord’s Prayer — like it or not — is an important expression of foundational Canadian values. It serves as an important reminder that JudeoChristian principles have provided an unchanging moral reference point for the creation of laws that govern, conduct and protect the common good in western society.
It also reminds us that Canada itself was created based on Christian principles. Sir Leonard Tilley, a former premier of New Brunswick, proposed that Canada be called “The Dominion of Canada” based on Psalm 72:8 — it declares that God shall have dominion from sea to sea. And that the preamble to our Charter of Rights and Freedoms reminds us of our origins by bluntly stating that “Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God. . . .”
It should be noted that the Judeo-Christian tradition is unique in that it acknowledges man’s free will to choose or to reject God. As such, public reference to God doesn’t force unbelievers to accept a common faith, it simply acknowledges the common faith that built our nation and is so foundational to the freedom we enjoy. Perhaps that’s why Ontarians don’t seem willing to let this one go.
Angry citizens crashed the government’s website with 7,000 e-mails of protest in just one day and have maintained the public pressure ever since.
G.K. Chesterton once wrote, “If you leave a white post alone, it will soon be a black post. If you particularly want it to be white, you must be always painting it again. . . .”
It’s time to act. Our cultural fence is in drastic need of repair.
- Defender to defendant - Saturday January 29, 2011 at 9:16 am
- Grief or glamour? - Saturday January 22, 2011 at 8:24 am
- Forget blame game - Saturday January 15, 2011 at 7:48 am
