What I Like about the Canadian Experiment

There is a trend in the air. Even as politics seems to become more divided than ever, more and more people that I meet seem to reject being put easily in one party category or the other. Like me, people are finding much to value in both the liberal and conservative perspectives. You can see this in the Christian church also.  More and more people are no longer seeing their denominational less as a tribal affiliation. In other words, people like Baptists for instance are also finding treasures in the liturgical traditions and vise versa. As an Anglican I found found spiritual nourishment in the Franciscan, Celtic, Anabaptist, Eastern Orthodox and Monastic traditions. And I am not alone. This is a strong mark of the emerging church. However, tt seems to me that this is less of an intentional project as it is an attitude, an attitude that is comprehensive as opposed to an attitude that easily partitions and categorizes. I think that it reflects an appreciation of complexity that is not easily reducible.

It is my interest in this comprehensive attitude that I think attracts me to the Canadian project so much. Because of the unique history of Canada and the different interests competing for recognition, the Canadian project seems to have built into it this comprehensive attitude. This comprehensive attitude really seems to be apparent after the tenure of Pierre Trudeau and his patriation of the Canadian Constitution. His favourite achievement in that move was of course the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As biographer John English observes, "because of Trudeau's view that you station rights in individuals to counter the collective forces of what he would see as tribal nationalism." Trudeau was one of the strongest federalists that this country has known, and he wanted to play down the regional and linguistic identities in order to promote a stronger national identity. But there is an obvious tension here that makes Canada so interesting. Trudeau was a strong prime minister, but not strong enough to pull people out of their regional identities in the way you might find in the United States where there is regional difference to be sure, but definitely subordinated to the American identity. In Canada it does not seem to be so straight forward; there is both an embrace of Trudeau's passion for individual rights and a very strong emphasis on linguistic, ethnic and regional identity.

You can see this most strongly in questions around the French language laws in Quebec and in debates about Aboriginal group rights, but in many other places as well. In the United States one would see these as contradictory positions. But Canadians don't seem willing to agree. It is not that it is easy to resolve the tensions, and the tensions are quite strong and the problems quite thorny. However, Canadians seem to think that there is something essential that would be lost if one position was simply subordinated to the other. We see this in the commitment to multi-culturalism and pluralism as well as the historic decision to create a political system that is both democratic and monarchical. This should be profoundly contradictory, and yet the Canadians seem to make it work. It is what I appreciate about the Canadian system.

History of the Anglican Church of Canada

Chapter Four: The Second American War

This chapter of the ACC takes place during a time of great uncertainty in the Western World. It was the time of revolution: the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Of the two of course the French was the more radical. In that conflict the “ancient order” of church and monarchy came down and was replaced with a militantly secular republic. Out of this of course rose Napoleon, and once again all of Europe was at war.

So what did Charles Inglis do? Bless his soul, he started founding educational institutions. He realized early on that the people of Canada would have to educated themselves in order to become a mature country. While his undertaking encountered political problems by and large he was successful and some of them are still with us today. In the rest of the ACC the institution was really starting to come together. Over these years Bishops were consecrated in Quebec and Toronto. Part of the problem for the Bishop in Quebec is that while the Anglican church was in theory the Establishment Church, in fact the governor of the province was really courting the Roman Catholic church as it was the dominant church in Quebec.

It was also at this time that the first Anglican cathedral outside of the British Isles. King George was generous to this new church in Quebec by donating books, hangings, vessels for communion and two great silver candlesticks for the altar. And in all of this the population was steadily growing through the influx of British settlers and through the influx of American settlers. New parishes were being built. It all looked good until the beginning of the Second American War in 1812. It is interesting to note that once again the Americans expected the Canadians to rise up and join them which “was not unreasonable since nine-tenths of the new settlers had come from the States, and only about a quarter of these were Loyalists.” However, they joined together to repulse the Americans

Except for the war this was not a time of dramatic activity. In some ways it seems very mundane. And yet it strikes me that this is really the work of the church. Much of it is mundane. We wake up every morning, eat breakfast and go out to labour for the kingdom of God. It is not necessarily heroic but it is our calling, and we have done it for centuries.

Edmonton Politics and Incarnational Living

Tonight I went to the Ward 7 political forum tonight to watch the debates. I am not actually a resident of Ward 7 but I am a political junkie. Many of the issues discussed were ones of many big cities:

1) The blight of urban sprawl

2) The funding of athletic arenas

3) Issue of the density of social housing

4) Issues of crime and drugs

Though there was a couple of issues were specific to Edmonton

5) Development of the Municipal Airport

6) LRT expansion and the funding of it.

But what struck me about the discussions was the importance of residency and place to the candidates and the audience. It was extremely important that the candidates lived in the community or were from the community. The reason is obvious of course, it seems to resonate that only someone who has lengthy experience in the neighbourhood can really represent the neighbourhood. They understand the challenges because they have lived through them in the same way. The reason I bring it up on the blog is that it got me to thinking about the role of a priest in the community. Does the same need for place for a politician also apply to a priest? Would the priest who would be the most effective  be the one who has been in the community for a long time, who has lived through many of the same issues his or her parishioners, who understands the needs, the customs, and the rhythms of life? 

There is not an obvious yes to the question as there have been many effective priests who have come from outside a community and done wonderful things. And yet I can't let go of a nagging suspicion that there is something important about localness. Do you love both the people and the place? I can't but think that this makes a difference.  For me, while I was parachuted in, I have now lived in my neighbourhood awhile: seven years. My kids go to the local school; I am on the school council; I participate in things around the neighbourhood. And it is only now really that I feel that I really understand the community of which my church is a part of. 

Lengthy tenure in the Anglican church however seems to be changing. Most people would say that the days of a parish priest who was in the parish for 20 or 30 years is long gone. The reason of course is the danger that with such a long tenure the parish can go stale. But do you lose something in not being local for a long time, like most of the parishioners? True incarnational living.

Why do Canadians act like they do?

One of the books that I enjoyed reading and which helped me quite a bit to articulate the differences between Canadians and Americans is Pierre Berton’s little book called Why We Act Like Canadians. It is a little dated in that events have obviously moved on since the early 80’s but the core is still very relevant. Each of the chapters is a letter written to a person named Sam who is supposed to be an American. Obviously the reference is to Uncle Sam. Each of the letters outlines a particular difference between the two peoples. It is helpful because Americans often have difficulty understanding that Canadians are different with some very different values.

In the first two chapters Berton takes us on a long tour of the North West Mounted Police which in time would come to be known as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. For Berton, it seems hard to overstate the place the RCMP has in the mythology of the Canadian psyche. In fact they mark the main difference between the Wild West of the United States and the peaceful West of Canada. He argues that in fact there was nothing wild about the West in Canada because of the NWMP who kept the peace. In fact, they were really a military unit disguised as police in order not to offend the Americans. But their purpose was to keep the Americans in line.  There is a great story he tells in which there is a famous gunslinger in Western town who is carrying a gun which was illegal. A NWM Policeman approached him and asked for the gun. The gunslinger replied “no man alive has ever taken my gun.” To which the mountie replied that may well be, but I am taking it. It was then that Berton tells us the gunslinger realized that he was no longer in the States. The point for Burton is that whereas for Americans the central virtues are freedom and liberty, for Canadians these are subordinated to a passion for “peace, order and strong government.” This is not to say that freedom and liberty are not values for Canadians but rather they are only valuable in a peaceful context. He writes, “the respect for authority, the hunger for security, the yearning for peace, order and good, strong government, the rejection of the permissive and the ‘libertine’ – are national qualities that unite us all.”

The third letter explores the theme of loyalism and the early Canadian reaction to the Americans. One of the things that has struck me as I have read various histories is the fact that for years Americans just could not understand why the Canadians did not want to join the United States. The assumption at the time of the American Revolution and the War of 1812 is that the Canadians would jump right in. Berton argues that there are two reasons for this. First, there was a strong trust and loyalty to the institutions of church and crown even if there was not always a love. He writes about his own father who close to the present time that he was, “loyal to the Church of England, which he saw as a bulwark against radical and un-British nonconformist; loyal to the British connection – life the others, he called himself a United Empire Loyalist; and loyal to the Conservative party, which we Canadians still dub the Tory party.” The other aspect was a horror at the American way of life which was seen as chaotic, irreligious and materialistic. It was common to see the Americans as caring for nothing but money. (This is still a common view!) Berton has a humorous theory for this. In the War of 1812 he writes that for the first time the Canadians saw a different kind of American: “These were not the easy-going farmers who lived as neighbours… These were Southerners – Indian fighters, backwoodsmen, brawlers and eye-gougers – individuals all… Thus, in the years that followed, when Canadians heard the word “British,” they could not help seeing a line of disciplined men, uniformed, marching in perfect order. But the word “American” conjured up a different vision: a horde of ragged frontiersmen, slipping like phantoms through the trees, squirrel rifles at the alert, each acting on his own – a mob of wild men, perfectly prepared to take a scalp or burn a house in defiance of orders.” There has always been a wariness of the Americans partly because there were so many of them and their economy so large, and in the Canadian mind there has always been a vigilance against the encroaching influence. One of the interesting parts of Berton’s book which is obviously dated is his assumption that Canadians “have shunned commercialism in our culture.” Unfortunately, I don’t think that one could say this today.

The next letter is about the difference in which Canadians think about ethnic diversity. Rather than being an American melting pot, the Canadians talk about a mosaic in which the ethnic groups who settled were encouraged to keep their own cultures and identities (Aboriginals obviously excepted). He argues that Canada is the richer for it. The point here is multi-culturalism. However, it was not born of idealism but by the harsh realities of history. Canada as a country started out as two different nations, one French and one English. (Again, the Aboriginal nations don’t really make it into Berton’s book.)  Accommodation had to be made for the two groups to live together. Then the government wanted “proper-thinking Brits” to settle here but got Slavic peasants instead. So he writes, the made a virtue of ethnicity. What came out of all of this was something very interesting: a much different way of thinking about national identity.

The final letters are about the geography of Canada. One cannot stress enough how the geography of Canada has affected the history. Canada is vast; the distances are mind boggling. It is also a northern country in which the weather can be brutally harsh. As well there is a huge sheet of un-farmable rock that spans the majority of the country called the Canadian Shield. To connect the country the railroad had to blast through parts of it. It is a very dramatic story.

I enjoyed this book very much. I almost wish that it were current. I would enjoy his impressions of Canadian society almost thirty years later. Would he still see Canadian identity as strong as it was, or has it become more Americanized through commercialism and common cultural tastes?

Book Study: Pierre Elliott Trudeau by Nino Ricci

I think that this series of books called Extraordinary Canadians is going to be really interesting. It is a series edited by John Ralston Saul in 18 volumes. The first one I read was the one about Pierre Trudeau. I saw it on the shelf at the library and picked it right up. Having come from the US, I didn’t know much about Trudeau except for the fact that a lot of people near where I live don’t think very highly of him. Actually that is a bit of an understatement. J But I picked up the book because I wanted to read more about this iconic character.

The book actually turned out to be really helpful in highlighting many of the internal debates about what it means to be a Canadian, because if there was one person in the middle of the debates it was Trudeau. In this look I am not so much interested in looking at Trudeau as I am at trying to understand two defining Canadian issues that Trudeau was at the heart of: multiculturalism and federalism.

1) Multiculturalism: to help get ready for my citizenship test I have a little booklet entitled Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship. It is a document that goes through Canadian history, geography and values. One of the central values of Canada the booklet tells us is Multiculturalism: “A fundamental characteristic of the Canadian heritage and identity. Canadians celebrate the gift of one another’s presence and work hard to respect pluralism and live in harmony.” These values are, of course, enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the document which was the passion of Trudeau and which he worked so hard to put into the constitution when he had it repatriated in 1982.

Looking at Canada’s history, this actually would not be an obvious value. At best, most of the emphasis seems to be on biculturalism. At the beginning of the book, the author, who is of Italian origin, reflects that when he thought of Canada as a child, it meant something to do with being English which he was not a part of. Or for a French Canadian it had to do with French heritage. And it is worth noting that the Aboriginal identity of Canada did not seem to be taken seriously before the 1960’s.

Trudeau expanded this into multiculturalism, but for paradoxical reasons. Usually when we think of cultural identity, we think of shared history and blood, and loyalty to a particular place and time. But Trudeau was suspicious about such bonds. From his experience in Quebec, he felt that this kind of nationalistic tie was ultimately destructive and parochial. He was more interested in universal values that would trump local identity. His real desire seemed to be to become a citizen of the world and to create Canada something along those lines. The Charter was the grand piece moving toward this goal. As Ricci reflects, “However much a charter would protect the right to difference, it would ultimately be assimilationist in its emphasis on universality and on the individual…”

Was Trudeau successful? It is hard to tell. On one level it is clear that Canada is very multicultural in a profoundly interesting way. One of my favourite festivals here in Edmonton is Heritage Days, which is a three day celebration of culture, food, arts and dance.  I love every minute. To me it seems that the trends is that, as people become Canadian, they are not throwing off their cultural heritage and becoming universal people. I have my suspicions that it is difficult or impossible to be a universal person cut off from shared history and story. But on the other hand, people from differing parts of the world that I have spoken to love being Canadian. Perhaps not in every case, but it seems to me that on the whole they embrace their Canadian citizenship as compatible with their various cultural inheritances. At the very least Trudeau was successful in changing the landscape. I don’t think Canada could ever go back to a pure emphasis on Englishness or even biculturalism.  Canada has changed.

2) Federalism: If Trudeau had an overriding passion it was for federalism. I was not sure what he meant by it until I read about the mockery with which he treated Joe Clark’s definition of Canada as “a community of communities.” Trudeau joked that this meant that Canada would just become a community of different shopping centres. But jokes aside, it points to an important issue of identity.  It is clear that a common identity has not come easy to Canadians. From the beginning, Canada was at least two European heritage nations and several Aboriginal nations brought together under a single government but not a central identity.  This shared identity then had to be hammered out. And of course for many Canadians there is a strong attachment and loyalty to region rather than country. And so there does seem to be a lot to say for Clark’s assessment of Canada. At its heart, Canada is a group of communities that choose to stay together.

But this wasn’t enough for Trudeau. He thought that there had to be more to being a Canadian. There was more than just regional identity; there was such a thing as Canadian identity. He found this in the universal ideals mentioned earlier and in federalism. Trudeau wrote this about federalism:

Federalism has all along been a product of reason in politics. It was born of a decision by pragmatic politicians to face facts as they are, particularly by the fact of the heterogeneity of the world’s population.  It is an attempt to find a rational compromise between the divergent interest groups which history has thrown together; but it is a compromise based on the will of the people.

For Trudeau, Canadian identity could not be about ethnicity or common history. If it was, then the Canadian experiment would fail along ethnic and linguistic lines. He was convinced that there had to be something stronger and more universal which would hold the differing groups together. This was at the heart of his appeal to federalism and a much stronger central government than many were comfortable with. Was he successful? Again, it is hard to tell. The government is definitely more centralized. And it does seem to me in talking to people that they do think that there is such a thing as a Canadian identity. However, there are often a lot of laughs as people try to figure out exactly what that is.

Canadian Anglican First

Today the Canadian church calendar commemorates the first Eucharist celebrated in Canada. It was in 1578 at Frobisher Bay. It was part of the English exploration of the area when the captain of the ship Judith noted that they celebrated Communion together:

Tewsdaie, the xxiiith daie: we did receave the Communion altogether, contynewing that daie in prayer and thanks giving to god." 


The odd thing about the commemoration is that it was celebrated on the 23rd of July. Not exactly sure why we are celebrating on the 4th of September.

Anglicanism: The Next Generation

I have blessed pets at a St. Francis' service but I have to confess that I have never blessed a cellphone or blackberry. Maybe it is just the wave of the Future. From the Globe and Mail:

Anglican church to offer ‘grace for gadgets’ service as a way of staying relevant in high-tech times.

This Project

It is interesting to me to see how this project is evolving. It already has three parts and will probably become more! Goodness. The first part is the original project: researching the history of the ACC and looking at how that history has created the modern Canadian Anglican church in all of its various facets. The second part growing out of the first has become the bigger question of what does it mean to be an Anglican. And now the third part is tied up with my application to become a Canadian citizen and learning what it means to be a Canadian as opposed to being an American. It is interesting how the two countries have traveled much of the same path and yet have done it in such different ways and with different mindsets. For this part of the project I find that I have been reading about Canadian history and Canadian culture as well as looking again at American history with perhaps a new set of eyes. I will comment more on all of this, but I realize that I have to be careful else this project explodes into something bigger than I can handle!

The Anglican Church of Canada by Philip Carrington part III

Chapter 3: The Coming of the Loyalists

Coming from the States but desiring to be a Canadian this chapter in Canadian history caught me by surprise when I first read history from a Canadian perspective seven years ago. As an American of course I had always learned history from the perspective that the American revolutionaries were the good guys and that the Loyalists were traitors to the cause. They were the ones who would rather be loyal to a distant and tyrannical king rather than loyal to their local communities. Now this is simplistic of course, but we are talking about high school American history courses. But it is also the case that this is the reading of history one gets if they tour around the revolutionary sites in the States.

I have enjoyed reading Canadian histories written from a Canadian perspective because it really does bring home the truth that history sounds very different depending on who writes it. In this chapter of the ACC it is not the revolutionaries who are at the heart of the story but rather those who did not betray their country and allegiance, but rather those who stayed loyal regardless of the personal cost. And as Carrington tell us the cost was great indeed. These were the loyalists. For Carrington, these families and individuals are “entitled to at least as much sympathy as we bestow on the Acadians of unfortunate memory.” The idea is that for political reasons they were uprooted from their homes and communites losing much in the process and emigrated north to what was still British North America. A great many of these loyalists became refugees in Halifax, and the city had a hard time coping with the masses. It was here that the were given the nickname Blue-Noses which was a parody of their title of honour the True Blues. And it is here in this influx that we get the feeling that the Anglican Church of Canada truly begins.

In Carrington’s telling of the story two names really stand out, John Stuart and Charles Inglis. John Stuart was one of those indefatigable men on the frontier that we often read about. However, in this case he was an Anglican priest. Just reading his story makes me tired. I can’t imagine traveling the distances he did to preach the Gospel and serve his various congregations. He was a large man, six foot four inches and had quite a presence. He traveled north with the Mohawks who remained loyal to the British crown. He worked closely with the chief Joseph Brant who would become known as another great Canadian. Together they build up the mission and built a new church at Ft. Hunter. Together they would translate the prayer book and parts of the Bible into the Mohawk tongue. Stuart was a prisoner for two years then served as a military chaplain, opened a school and looked after several congregations during the war. After the war he was given charge of the parish in Kingston but he really traveled all over upper Canada from settlement to settlement ministering to the people. For awhile he was the only priest in Upper Canada. His range was tremendous and while he never  became a bishop he has been given the title, “the father of Upper Canada.”

The second person of note was Charles Inglis. In the buildup to the war he was a staunch loyalist reading the prayers for the King and the Royal Family right up to the time when there were rebel troops in the city. He had all of his property confiscated and went to England. It was at this time that England was thinking about creating a Bishop for Canada. Part of the problem lay with the fact that the church had been reduced to a subservient branch of the government by this point. The Georges had to approve all of the Bishops and they largely used these appointment to reward people who did favours to the crown or for family.  But after much deliberation they finally consecrated Inglis as the Bishop of Nova Scotia but with jurisdiction going much further west. He was not however to be called a Lord Bishop and was not given a seat on the Legislative Council. One amusing fact when he arrived in Nova Scotia is that he did not think much of his clergy. He wrote, “of eleven clergy four are diligent useful clergymen, three are indifferent neither doing much good nor harm; as for the remaining four, it would be happy for the Church if they were not in her orders.” Right away he started doing visitations, issuing injunctions and directives on various points. He performed the first Confirmations in Canada at St. Paul’s. It is at this point that the ACC really seems to be taking root. There are regular services in all of the areas of Canada and a church structure is being established. Of course all of this in a time that is leading up to yet another war. 

Lac Ste. Anne

I have already gotten a little behind with what I wanted to do. But last Wednesday I came down with a vicious cold and then got a bad throat infection and only now am I really back to normal. Tomorrow I will start posting on the books again, but today I wanted to talk about an experience this afternoon.

I had driven out to Gunn to visit with a friend at the Gunn Centre there. It is located on lake St. Anne or as they call it here Lac Ste. Anne. I knew that there was a Catholic Mission here that has famous pilgrimages so after I was done visiting I drove around the lake looking for it. I almost gave up when I finally found the parish.

It was a stunningly beautiful day. Warm with a brilliant blue sky with thick puffy clouds. At the site there is a large open air shrine for Masses and then a large set of stations of the cross leading down to the water. Then at the waters edge there is a little pavilion and a bench where the water's edge used to be, but it is now about 50 yards out. I was just sitting on the bench praying/ thinking/ just enjoying the day when a white pick up truck drove up with a man who obviously enjoyed talking. It turned out he was the gentleman who helped organize the pilgrimages and was in charge of the security. He was very gracious and told me the story of the lake.

It used to be called Spirit Lake by the Aboriginals who lived there before the Europeans came and was an important place. When the Europeans came the story goes that a priest, a man from the Hudson's Bay company, a metis leader and four others were by the lake edge when St. Anne, the mother of St. Mary appeared to them. Quickly they built a church there and the site became known as a place of healing waters and miracles. People come from all over the world to pray. He told the story of a group of Italians who flew into Edmonton International Airport, drove to Lac Ste. Anne, spent four hours, then went back to the airport and flew back to Italy. He had several other stories. There was the time when nine cardinals (not the birds) came in full robes and went into the water up to their shoulders!

 It is considered sacred ground to the Aboriginal community. The pilgrimage is a celebration of both Catholic faith and Aboriginal faith and culture. Yet he said that whereas the pilgrimages used to be close to 100% Aboriginal, it is no longer. More of a 60/40 mix. It is really drawing more and more people from all cultures from around the world: Asians, Africans, and so on. And like me they are not all Catholic.

While it is not an Anglican place, I was thinking about it in terms of my project. Experiences like this are helping to me see the fascinating juxtaposition that faith in Canada represents. Lac Ste. Anne is a potent mix of place, history and culture. It is an example of where European faith is transformed in a North American context that creates a sacred location that people from all over the world want to experience. It is truly amazing when you think about it. As I read the history of the churches in Canada it is obvious that they are not exactly the same as the ones that left European shores. There is something about the frontier experience that subtly seems to have an effect on the Christian culture. It seems to have a invigorating effect as the faith has to look at itself anew in a different context. I find that I love studying this theme. And I definitely plan to come back to Lac. Ste. Anne when I am in the area.

Cool Canadian Resource

Well its cool if you are a geek. Which I am. It is not a new site, but if you are interested in the facts about Canada this is the place. It is from Statistics Canada. They have a site called The Daily and as titled they publish daily. It is a statistical look at all kinds of issues facing Canadians. For instance today they look at the probable crop production of the farmers on the Prairies:

Prairie farmers reported they expect to produce less wheat and canola in 2010 compared with 2009, while farmers in Ontario and Quebec could produce more soybeans. Summerfallow (land on which no crop will be grown during the year) increased in the Prairies to the highest level since 1999, mostly because of flooding in many regions during the 2010 planting season.

In the West, farmers reported that crop production will decline from 2009 levels, the result of persistent wet conditions in many areas.

This is interesting because in my newspaper this morning they were saying that in Alberta we were looking at higher than average yields. Anyway, worth looking at.

Anglicanism

As I am thinking through this project it is becoming more clear that to answer the question of what it is to be a Canadian Anglican there needs to be some thought given as to what it means to be an Anglican. Of course that is not as easy to answer as you might think. It is sort of like the old puzzle, "what is love?" Everybody knows what it is, but it is notoriously difficult to define.

At the minimalist end one could think of Anglicanism as a shared heritage dating back to either the Elizabethan settlement or even to the first stirrings of Christianity in the British Isles. Most people would say that it is at least a bit more than that. At the maximalist end people argue that Anglicanism is a theological method based on various configurations of Scripture, Tradition and Reason. But this leads to difficult conversations about what exactly what reason is and even tradition is notoriously controversial. So while there may be truth to this it is not exacting.

I would like to explore this concept in this blog by looking out for articles and news items that reflect. To step out a bit I think of Anglicanism in terms such as this: I see it as something of an historical experiment which created (unwillingly) a bit tent Christianity which holds together several different forms of Christian belief and which focuses more on liturgy as its vehicle for articulating belief rather than confessional statements.

The Anglican Church of Canada by Philip Carrington

Chapter Two: The French Wars

An essential part of the history of Canada is the story of the efforts of both the French and the English to increase their dominance in North America. For decades these two powers were at war continually capturing, losing and re-capturing various pieces of Canadian real-estate. Into all of this the Anglican Church in Canada started in fits and starts. It is notable that during one of the several short times of peace a new religious associated was formed in 1698 called The Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge. This was an organization that was going to become very important and whose important work was the distribution of religious literature through libraries and book stores. This group in turn formed another society that was to be hugely influential called the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. Both of these were under the patronage of the Crown and the Archbishops in England.

It was at this time that the first church buildings were being built in Canada. There is an interesting emphasis on communion vessels given to various churches by Queen Anne. These vessels are interesting because they will come up a few times in the next generation. These royal gifts are now in the care of St. Paul’s church in Halifax, the oldest Anglican church in Canada still running.

In some sense the beginning of a stable Anglican church was the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. This ended the French wars for a full thirty years and gave some stability to the frontier. It was during this time that with the help of the SPG “clergy were appointed, churches were build, and schools started.” The rest of the period is kind of a dreary repetition of war, peace, war breaks out again, peace, more war, a little peace, some more war… It was during this time that the Acadians were expelled and finally the Battle of the Plains in 1759 which effectively ended the French wars on this continent.

As I said earlier there is a real sense here that the Anglican church came in fits and starts depending of British interests and the state of the wars. I would like to end this post with a quote I enjoyed from the book. It is about different groups working together to create the Canadian experiment:

“We pause to make a point which will often appear in our history, the ability of Canadians of different races and religions to work together in unity without surrendering their native loyalties or culture. It is a kind of national partnership which calls for sympathetic imagination, Christian character, and realistic thinking.” P.35

The Real Canada

In my attempt to really learn about the culture and history of Canada I think that I have to finally break down and read....yes.... Anne of Green Gables.

The Anglican Church of Canada by Philip Carrington

Chapter 1: The First Canadians

The history of the Anglican Church of Canada (ACC) obviously starts quite late in the overall history of Canada. Carrington begins his history observing the fact that obviously the first Canadians, the first nations and Inuit, had been navigating these shores for centuries, as well there are various encounters with Europeans from 1000AD on. However, the ACC starts with the focused explorations of European sailors such as John Cabot and Jacques Cartier.

(As a bit of a side note, it is hard not to react against the arrogance of a man like Cartier who claims entire lands without consultation and who kidnaps men and takes them to France against their will. However, for the purposes of these notes I think that I have to first learn the story as it played out. It is interesting to note that it is at least partly in reaction to such arrogance that the ACC just repudiated the doctrine of discovery that these early explorers operated under. How that effects the way that we tell the story of Canada is yet to be worked out. Needless to say this book was written before such a conversation had taken place.)

What is notable about the early history of the ACC is how closely it is caught up in British imperial interests in North America. All of the early religious services are part of early explorations or early colonies that were settled for economic reasons. As well the conversion of the first nations that the Europeans encountered had much to do with the alliances that were formed. Carrington writes,

The Huron and Algonquin Indians to the north were friendly with the French, and became Roman Catholic; the Mohawk and Iroquois to the south were friendly with the Dutch, and later on with the English, and ultimately became Anglicans. (23)

Carrington observes that there were no signs of any conscious or organized effort on the part of the church of England “to bring the influence of religion to bear on the new world.” Rather, most of the credit for the introduction for the introduction of Anglicanism he gives to laymen who used the prayer book to bolster the religious faith aboard ships or in early colonies. It was not until 1649 that England created the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in New England, and since this was the year after Charles lost his head this was not a Prayer Book organization!

What was interesting to me which I didn’t know was that the 1662 BCP was created with the needs of New England in mind.

John Stuart, August 17 Commemoration

I meant to post this yesterday:

John Stuart died in 1811. He is remembered as an Anglican missionary among the Mohawks and the first resident priest in Upper Canada. He has been born in Pennsylvania and raised a Presbyterian, but became an Anglican and ordained a priest in 1770. He was sent to northern New York by the SPG where he won the trust and affection of the Mohawk people. During the American Revolution he remained loyal to the British crown and in 1781 fled to Canada. He also did much to keep the Mohawks loyal to the British crown. He became the priest in Kingston which meant that for years he was the only priest in Upper Canada. Today he is remembered as the “father of the Episcopal Church in Upper Canada.

(Information taken from All the Saints p 250)

How to Get There

One of the things we are considering is how to get there. I know that it is a bit early in the process but we are already thinking of our itinerary and how we are going to spend our time in our travels. The big problem right now is how to get there. These are the options that we have now:

1) All of us fly to Toronto, rent a car, do the trip then fly back from St. John's.
Advantage: Saves time. Disadvantage: My guess is it will be tremendously expensive though we have to research the details.
2) All of us drive our car to Toronto to start the trip.
Advantage: We will have our own car so we don't have to rent and no plan tickets to purchase. Disadvantage: with two little kids in the car we can only drive six to maybe eight hours a day. And doing this day after day, my guess it will be unpleasant. Also add a lot of time. Also the return trip. This option most probably will not happen.
3) I drive to Toronto by myself and Stephanie and the girls fly to Toronto and they will fly back from St. John's.
Advantages: I can drive more hours per day by myself. In fact I don't think it will be a lot of extra time. Disadvantage: We will have to buy three tickets and Stephanie will have to manage the girls on the plane by herself.
4) Same as option 3 but we also rent a medium size camping trailer.
Advantage: don't have to rent hotel rooms for two months and better than tent camping. Disadvantages: Same as three.

Those are the options that I can think of. But I will have to do some research to see what our costs will be.

First Forays

One of the surprising things that I have discovered in doing some of my initial research to gather a reading list is the lack of readily available materials on the history of the Anglican Church of Canada. There are some books to be sure, but many of them are out of print which I have had to order. It has been a bit of a treasure hunt. Any suggestions for great materials would be much appreciated!

The first two books that I will be blogging through are a general history of the ACC up to the second world war called The Anglican Church in Canada by Philip Carrington and a study commissioned by the ACC in 2002 called Stained Glass, Sweet Grass, Hosannas and Songs by Sally Edmonds Preiner. My plan will be to blog the main points of each chapter and then some of my own comments.

The first book is helpful as a general introduction although it is a bit dated. It came out in the early 60’s and tracks general Canadian history while commenting on what is going on at the time in the ACC. It seems a bit more triumphalistic than one would write today but it is interesting in identifying the major themes that come up again and again in the history of the ACC. Carrington seems to be an interesting fellow. He was a bishop of the Diocese of Quebec as well as the Metropolitan of Canada. He wrote several books other than this one including The Boy Scouts Camp Book in 1918. That seems very well rounded!

The second book is obviously more current and it looks like a study initiated by the ACC to look at the issues facing the church today. Topics covered include declining congregations, youth involvement, multicultural interpretations of Anglicanism, styles of worship (BCP/BAS), local outreach, social justice, residential schools, homosexuality, and even what it means to be an Anglican. The issue that it seems to raise from a cursory glance is the fact that our diversity is quite plain, which raises the question of what it is that keeps us together. Obviously this is one of the questions that I am interested in exploring in quite some depth: what is it about Anglicanism that keeps us together.

Together, the two books seem like a good place to start, one historical and one more current; one looking at historical themes and threads and the other looking at current themes and threads. It will be interesting to see if they mesh or clash! 

Blog Introduction

Hello and welcome to my blog. Thanks for dropping in for a look. This blog is being created as part of my Sabbatical project and trip which will take place during the summer of 2012 with a prepatory trip in 2011. My name is Stephen London and I am a priest in the Diocese of Edmonton. In our Diocese we are lucky to have the possibility of a Sabbatical every seven years, and it is just about time for me. Yea! The bishop has approved my proposal and even given tentative approval to some of the funding. Yea again!

The Sabbatical plan is very simple. My wife, kids and I are going to travel across eastern Canada as well as a separate trip through Alberta and Saskatchewan to discover the history and present day expressions of the current Anglican Church of Canada. I am hoping for a real road trip adventure with the idea that we will videotape it all and create a documentary about what Anglicanism looked like 300 years ago and what it looks like today.

Our idea is that over two trips we will travel through Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, PEI, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland searching out the historically interesting places as well as the currently vibrant churches across parts of Western and Eastern Canada. We are going to write ahead to churches asking if we can videotape parts of their services and life together as well as hoping that there will be people who would be willing to be interviewed on tape about their stories and lives as Anglicans today. The church today obviously lives in a much different place in history than when it was first created and I am interested in exploring where there is continuity and where it has changed. It is my belief that the Holy Spirit is alive and well in the Anglican Church of Canada in many different forms. This is not to deny that there are lots of problems and challenges in the Anglican Church. Far from it! But I would love to see it all and document as much as I can. The other part of this trip is exploring the possibility of creating a collaborative work of art created by Anglicans across the country where we travel that can be displayed. But this has not yet been worked out.

Obviously such a trip does not start two years from now. It starts now. I have a lot of reading and exploring to do before we even get started. That is where this blog come in. It will be my tool to record all of my reading, thoughts and discoveries leading up to my trip and then we will blog the trip as we go. I realize that this might be read only by a few close friends but I am still very excited about this. I do hope there will be more. I am hoping that this blog will be interesting to people who are interested in the history of Canada and the history of the Anglican Church in particular, as well as explorations of current news stories around this topic, explorations of the challenges in the Anglican church as well as bits of Canadiana thrown in. The whole idea is to capture something of the spirit of ACC. Also, if you can suggest any must see parishes that we have to visit or the whole trip would be worthless, I would love the suggestion! Anyway, thanks for stopping by.

Following is an edited version of what I gave the Bishop:

Sabbatical Proposal for Stephen London

Objective:

My sabbatical objective is to make a series of short educational documentaries exploring and celebrating the history and present day spirit of the Anglican Church of Canada as well as exploring the diversity of what Anglicanism looks like in Canada.

Explanation:

I am relatively new to the Anglican Church of Canada (ACC), and for a long time I have had a desire to see and learn much more about the church in which I am a priest. I would love to have a chance to not just read about both of them but to really see and explore them. Added to this are my educational passions which are history (Church and Secular) and the theological questions around how Christian faith is enculturated and contextualized in particular places and times. My thought was that I could combine all of this in a cross country tour of eastern Canada documenting our travels, learnings and interviews in a blog as well as the short documentaries.

When:

The main portion of the sabbatical will take place over two months in the summer of 2012. However, the preparation for the sabbatical will take place over the two years leading up to it. Plus we are contemplating doing a practice run in the summer of 2011 through the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta.

Overview:

Our MO will be something as follows. Having researched the area ahead of time we will travel to the historically interesting spots and churches along the way to piece together the history of the various regions. We are hoping to write to significant churches ahead of time to see if they will let us videotape some of their worship and have some people who would be willing to be interviewed for the project. We would like to have some people talk to us on video about the history of their region and how that is a part of the life of the church today. Our real anticipation and passion here is to find that the Spirit of God is alive and thriving in these churches and we would love to see what it looks like and to show it to others. We are hoping that this part will be an encouragement to anyone who sees the documentaries.

The sharing part will be two fold: First, I am thinking that I would like to keep a conversational blog about all of my reading about the history of the church in the lead up to the trip and then while on the trip and day by day account of the trip. The second part is that we are thinking about creating three hour long movies about our trip divided into regions. We would have one on the church in upper and Lower Canada, one on Atlantic Canada and then one of the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta. (If we have as much fun doing this as I think we will then perhaps there might be future ones on BC and then the North. But this is outside of the scope of the present project.)

Technical Issues:

My goal for the documentary is that it will be a quality amateur production. Obviously the two significant issues here are that we only have limited resources and we are not trained in the art of documentary production. However, I am excited to learn about it over the next two years. I plan on taking a class on making movies. As well, we already have video editing software on our computer that we are already learning on. Also I am hoping that I can get some advice from various people who have more knowledge than I. My idea is to make some practice projects to work out the bugs and then to have a trial run during the summer of 2011 in Saskatchewan and Alberta. This is so that by the time we leave for the official trip I will have had several productions under my belt.

Educational component:

A large chunk of this will have to take place before the trip. My idea is to study quite a bit about the history of Canada and the ACC so that I would be fairly knowledgeable about the subject. I have already accumulated several histories of both. However, my hope is that the reading will be only a part of the educational component. I am really hoping that in traveling and interviewing Anglicans from across Canada will lead to surprising and unpredictable insights. It will be a much better video if it does!