Church and State.

As nation-states and governments matured, the influence of the church in the daily lives of people diminished

There are two opposing theories of government and law; descending and ascending. The "top-down", or descending, approach says that the authority to govern is granted by God. Those who favour the "bottom-up", or ascending, system say the people are the source of the authority to govern.

Today, we can see both systems of government in use. Iran is what's called a "theocracy." Its religious leaders are also its government leaders. All power, both religious and secular, is in the hands of Islamic Mullahs (religious scholars and leaders). Afghanistan is the only other example of a theocracy.

Some countries have government systems in which religion plays a very important role. In Israel, the parliament contains several parties based on conservative Jewish principles. These religiously based parties often exercise an influence that far exceeds their numbers. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India tends to favour Hindus in its policies. In October 1999, the BJP at the head of a coalition of parties won the country's election.

In other states, religious leaders have a powerful influence over government without having any formal role. Churches may put their support behind one political party and condemn another. In South America, high church officials are frequent visitors at presidential palaces where it's safe to say that government policies are discussed and approval sought. In the Philippines, the Roman Catholic Church has a tradition of being outspoken on political matters. In 1986, the church was the rallying, point for the popular overthrow of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

Then, there are the countries where religion plays a small part in politics and government. This is the case in Scandinavia, the United States, and Australia among others. Of course, anyone running for office in these countries is still careful not to offend religious groups. It's even important to court religious congregations in some cases. For example, there is a strong Jewish vote in the United States, particularly in New York. Presidential candidates usually make statements of firm support for Israel in order not to lose this vote.

Other nations actively oppose religion. Usually based on communism, these countries include China, Cuba, and North Korea. The government may say it is following the philosophy of Karl Marx, the man who wrote the instruction book for communism - "The Communist Manifesto." Marx called religion "the opiate of the masses," by which he meant that the ruling elites used religion to drug oppressed people into quiet submission.

The real reason that communist governments oppose religions today is because they might become a focus point for popular discontent. Just look at the way the Chinese government has clamped down on the Falun Gong movement.

Followers of Falun Gong say it is not a religion but a system of meditation, exercises, and philosophy that brings health and morality to its practitioners. But, to the dictatorship that governs China it looks like a religion and as such will be stamped out. The country's leadership started out calling the Falun Gong movement an illegal group. By late fall 1999, it was being called an "evil cult," it was banned, and its leaders and followers were being arrested by the thousands.

China's communist leaders are concerned that Falun Gong is becoming too powerful. Charles Hutzer of the Associated Press reported in October 1999 that the crackdown on Falun Gong reflects "the communists own slipping hold on Chinese society. The struggle, at heart, is a battle for the loyalty of China's people."

Of course, the line drawn between church and state is rarely as clear cut as this. Canada is a country where the extremes of China or Iran are unthinkable. It sits on the middle ground: halfway between the total religious control of a theocracy and the complete suppression of religion in an atheist state. Ours is a bottom-up nation; the people are supreme.

So, why does the first line of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms read: "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law ..."? We can trace the origin of this confusing riddle way back to Pope Gelasius I.

Gelasius led the Roman Catholic Church for only four years (492-496) but he came up with something called "the twos-words doctrine." According to Pope Gelasius I, the church and the state had co-equal status; the church looked after spiritual matters while the state took on secular affairs. But, in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III made more extreme claims. He said that the Holy Roman Emperor (state) was subordinate to the Pope (church). The church's view being that its job of looking after souls was far more important that caring for bodies.

Several Holy Roman Emperors found Pope Innocent's claim hard to swallow and a struggle for supremacy between church and state got underway. And, while this was going on, other forces of social upheaval were gathering.

The concept of the nation-state was growing. Populations didn't take kindly to being dictated to by either a Pope or an Emperor. Protestantism was gaining support, particularly in northern Europe, bringing with it another source of division.

Let's go now to the city of Prague in 1618. It's late spring in the capital of what was then Bohemia, and William Slavata and Jaroslav Martinic are sitting at their desks in Hradschin Castle. The two men are governors appointed by Holy Roman Emperor Matthias to administer Bohemia. They have refused permission for some local people to build Protestant chapels, and the locals are really ticked.

Suddenly, a mob bursts in on the two governors. The angry Protestants seize Martinic and Slavata and throw them out of the third floor window of their office. Luckily for the two governors they land in a pile of rotting garbage and escape serious injury. The incident has gone down in history as "The Defenestration of Prague" and it touched off the Thirty Years' War.

Almost before you could say "Defenestration," wars were breaking out all over Europe. Before it was over, Sweden, Denmark, Poland, Russia, the Netherlands, France, Spain, and Austria were involved. Much of the fighting was in what is now Germany and was then scores of city-states, principalities, and other small entities.

The Treaty of Westphalia (1648) brought the whole mess to an end. The Treaty re-drew the map of Europe but it also established the sovereignty and independence of each state of the Holy Roman Empire. It meant the end of the dream of an empire governed jointly by a Pope and an Emperor. From now on, the church and the state were separated, and the separation would grow wider over time.

The Treaty of Westphalia also forced each nation to choose whether to follow the Protestant or the Roman Catholic path. They couldn't have both; in effect, they had to establish a "religious monopoly." In general, the national religious establishments of Europe remained intact well into the 18th century, when the French Revolution (1789-99) blew everything apart. Although, to this day, the Church of England stands largely on the foundation built in the English struggles of the 17th century.

The concept of a state established church came across the Atlantic with the first European settlers, but it never really took root here. By the time the pioneer society was consolidated under the British Crown in 1763, there was already a wide diversity among Christian settlers. Then, United Empire Loyalists came north to escape the American Revolution. They brought with them a dislike for the whole notion of an established state religion.

So, no one religion was able to establish itself as dominant and state-sponsored in Canada. The country was, however, almost exclusively Christian. It remained this way until the 1960s, when immigrants of other faiths began settling in Canada. All people, of all faiths, have the right to worship in their own ways. Every religion is recognized as being of equal importance and value in Canada. It says so right in our Constitution.

Oh yes, the Constitution and the supremacy of God. In June 1999, Svend Robinson the Member of Parliament for Burnaby-Douglas in British Columbia tabled a petition in the House of Commons. The petition was signed by more than 1,000 of his constituents and called for removal of the reference to the supremacy of God from the Constitution. Mr. Robinson might have had a happier time if he'd gone out and whacked a hornet's nest with a hockey stick.

Passions were raised by the suggestion. Svend Robinson was kicked into the last row of seats in the House of Commons by his New Democratic Party Leader Alexa McDonough as a punishment. He was called some very nasty names.

Elsie Wayne, Progressive Conservative MP for Saint John, New Brunswick fumed that "This country was built on good, Christian values." She seemed ready to battle the issue, but her comment raised some other hackles. Was she saying the God referred to in the Constitution was the Christian God? It certainly seemed so. And, if that's the case, what about Canada's 1.1 million Muslims? Its 300,000 Jews? Its 70,000 Hindus? Or, the 1.8 million Canadians who have no religious affiliation.

Here's what philosophy professor Paul Russell at the University of British Columbia says about that: "Canada includes many people who believe in God but not a Christian God, and many others who do not believe in any god; yet, they all share the core values that are identified and specified in the body of the Charter [of Rights and Freedoms] ... freedom, equality, and the rule of law. You don't have to believe in (or deny) `the supremacy of God' to respect those basic (Canadian) values."

Professor Russell suggests that basing our Constitution on the supremacy of God puts it onto a very shaky foundation. There are thousands of different interpretations of who or what God is, even within the same broad religious groupings. Basing core values on such a multiplicity of views would, in Paul Russell's view, cause them to "crack and fragment into a thousand ... pieces, and would wash away like sand."

Writing in the Globe and Mail, columnist Michael Valpy agrees, but on different grounds: "There is public morality and private morality. The rule of law is the former. The relationship of Canada's people to God (and I say this as a practising Anglican) is private."

SUGGESTED ACTIVITIES:

1. Philosophy professor Paul Russell at the University of British Columbia suggested the following preamble to the Constitution instead of the reference to "the supremacy of God:" "Whereas, the people of Canada, whatever their origin or religion, are united in their common commitment to the fundamental principles of freedom, equality, and the democratic rule of law ..." Discuss how you think the preamble to the Constitution should read.

2. The Falun Gong movement in China may or may not be a serious challenge to the structure of government. But, other semi-religious groups have challenged state power in China in the past. Assign a group of students to research each of the following and to: present short reports to class: (a) The Yellow Turbans in the 2nd century AD, (b) The White Lotus Society in the 18th century, (c) The Eight Trigrams Society in the 19th century, (d) The Boxers in the 20th century.

Websites

Ontario Centre for Religious Tolerance - http://www.religioustolerance.org

International Interfaith Centre - http://www.interfaith-center.org/oxford/

FACT FILE

Canada was called a "Dominion" because the term is found in Psalm 72.8: "May he have dominion from sea to sea."

RELATED ARTICLE: TURF WARS

The separation of church and state doesn't mean there aren't still some areas of disagreement. Canada's governments have trodden on religious turf on many occasions. For example, Ottawa has been involved in defining the meaning of life and death. Provinces have made decisions about whether or not religious observances should be allowed in public schools. British Columbia has its "bubble zone law," which prevents people from demonstrating against abortion within sight of a clinic where abortions are carried out. Newfoundland's government, after a referendum in 1997, abandoned the province's 161-year-old religious school system. But, the churches can give as good as they get. The Most Reverend Frederick Henry is the Roman Catholic Bishop of Calgary. In 1998, he got into a spat with Alberta Premier Ralph Klein over video lottery terminals. Mr. Klein likes the VLTs because of the almost $500 million a year they raise in government revenue. Bishop Henry hates the machines which he calls the crack cocaine of gambling. In March 1999, a small coalition of religious groups in New Brunswick demanded a change in the province's human-rights law. Coalition members objected to the Human Rights Act which protects people from discrimination based on their sexual orientation. This protection meant that Fredericton's mayor was forced to declare a Gay Pride Weekend in his city.

RELATED ARTICLE: A RETURN TO VIRTUE

Falun Gong combines elements of Buddhism and Taoism with traditional Chinese exercise. Its leader, Li Hongzhi, says followers can improve their moral and physical well-being by channelling positive energy to the Falun. The Falun is said to be a wheel-like miniature of the universe located in the abdomen. Practitioners do slow-motion exercises at sunrise and sunset hands held in front of their stomachs to "spin the wheel of energy." It's easy to chuckle at this description but Falun Gong has an ardent following. Mr. Li calls for a return to virtue and compassion in a country that is full of corruption and inequality. At a time when people feel lonely and directionless, Falun Gong has an appeal because it promises to give life some meaning.