|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Religious neutrality and public officials
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Forthview:
I just looked at the flag of St. Malo, and yeah, their cross does look a lot like the one in the Quebec flag. Though I think the majority of Quebecois are descended from settlers from Normandy, with Bretons being second. So I'm not sure if the Quebec flag would have been meant to represent a Breton city.
Maybe that's a common way that crosses are portrayed on French flags?
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Forthview:
I just looked at the flag of St. Malo, and yeah, their cross does look a lot like the one in the Quebec flag. Though I think the majority of Quebecois are descended from settlers from Normandy, with Bretons being second. So I'm not sure if the Quebec flag would have been meant to represent a Breton city.
Maybe that's a common way that crosses are portrayed on French flags?
It's fairly common for French military and regimental flags of the ancien régime. Flag freaks (vexillomanes) may find this page of interest.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Forthview:
I just looked at the flag of St. Malo, and yeah, their cross does look a lot like the one in the Quebec flag. Though I think the majority of Quebecois are descended from settlers from Normandy, with Bretons being second. So I'm not sure if the Quebec flag would have been meant to represent a Breton city.
Maybe that's a common way that crosses are portrayed on French flags?
It's fairly common for French military and regimental flags of the ancien régime. Flag freaks (vexillomanes) may find this page of interest. An early separatist flag had the Sacred Heart impressed on the provincial flag-- I am not sure if we are likely to see that used.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
According to a factoid I saw today, there are about 300 women in Quebec that wear the niqab or other full-face covering. The population of Quebec is about 8.2 million, so by my math, that's 0.003% of the population.
The only point of the legislation is to harass a very small number of women who practice their religion in a certain way. Inevitably, this will be interpreted by some as permission to harass all visibly Muslim women. I wonder what will happen if a Quebecoise bride wants to wear a veil while having a civil wedding or a veiled nun wants to ride the bus ...
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Stetson, why should it be that the Canadian flags of British provenance with crosses on them simply indicate a link with the 'old country',but the flag of Quebec with a different cross on it indicates Christianity ? Surely it could, like the flags of British . For many people of Quebec the 'old country' is France and in particular with the Breton city of St-Malo. Surely they have as much right to be as proud of their 'origins' as the people of the Anglophone parts of Canada sometimes are.
Now ,if the crucifix in the government building in question is only there to say 'Catholics are the bosses here' then it depends what you mean by 'bosses'.If I understand correctly Catholics and those of Catholic background form by far the majority of the population in the province , does this necessarily mean that those who are not Catholics are second class citizens ?
If so, what happens if the Head of State attends in Canada in an official capacity an Anglican church, does that indicate 'the Protestant ?s are the bosses here' ?
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Having lived on the fringes of French Canada for many years, I do not know if I would say that francophone Québécois look upon France as the old country in the way that my Ottawa Valley relations look upon Scotland as the old country. The relations between Québec and France are complex, but the Québécois are quite aware that France preferred to keep Guadeloupe and let Canada go when they were given the choice in 1763.
The Cross in the Assembly is not, I would suggest, a religious symbol, but rather a nationalist symbol in religious form. The crosses on flags would follow the same pattern. Still, many semiologists would challenge me to wrestling matches on this one.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
If so, what happens if the Head of State attends in Canada in an official capacity an Anglican church, does that indicate 'the Protestant ?s are the bosses here' ?
As far as I know, if the Queen attends an Anglican service in Canada, she does so as a private citizen, or at least not as Supreme Governor of the Church Of Canada.
Because there is no such church. Anglicanism in Canada has no governmental connections whatsoever.
And yes, you could argue that there is at least a residue of "Protestants are the boss here" in the Queen retaining her status as Supreme Governor in the UK. Which is a little bit of symbolism that doesn't bother me overmuch(the UK is still a pretty tolerant country), unless the British government were to announce a plan to forbid people from giving or receiving government services while wearing religious symbols, in the name of SECULARISM, all the while steadfastly refusing to disestablish the C Of E.
In that case, yes, the Brits would be open to the same charge of double-standards that I and others are levelling at the Quebec government.
quote:
Now ,if the crucifix in the government building in question is only there to say 'Catholics are the bosses here' then it depends what you mean by 'bosses'.If I understand correctly Catholics and those of Catholic background form by far the majority of the population in the province , does this necessarily mean that those who are not Catholics are second class citizens ?
Well, the guy who put the cross up there pretty clearly considered non-Catholics to be second-class citizens. See for example...
Roncarelli Vs. Duplessis
...to get an idea of how he treated religious minorities who dared step on the toes of the Catholic Church. (He went a bit easier on the WASP economic elite, for obvious reasons.)
That said, it is possible to support the continued presence of the Crucifix in the legislature, without wanting a return to the days when Jehovah's Witnesses were locked up for handing out the Watchtower. The point is, if you support that remaining there, it's kind of hard to expect anyone to take seriously your claim that a policy forbidding Muslims from wearing religious symbols while getting government services is motivated by religious neutrality.
I have to get to work now. I might write more later.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Augustine wrote:
quote:
The Cross in the Assembly is not, I would suggest, a religious symbol, but rather a nationalist symbol in religious form.
But then, could a man wearing Sikh headgear claim that he's not really doing it for religious reasons, just as a statement in favour of an independent Punjab(or whatever region Sikh separatists want as their own)?
Or is it only the state that gets the benefit of the doubt when arguing that their use of a religious symbol isn't really religious at all?
As for the provincial flags, I think their use of the Union Jack etc is like a Korean restaurant in Toronto hanging up the flag of South Korea in their lobby. The flag itself contains the Tao symbol and I Ching characters, but promotion of those ideas is not the reason the flag is being displayed.
It's a bit different if the Tao symbol were displayed by itself, not as part of a national flag. Then I would assume the point, at least in part, is to promote Taoism.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Stetson,just to be clear I would not at all want to restrict anyone in the performance of what they see as their religious duties or in conforming, wherever possible, to the ideas of their own culture.
I am regularly in the Arab countries of the Middle East and am aware of their attitude to religious culture and also to the presence of non-Muslims in their society - both positives and negatives.
I am also old enough to remember the days when Catholics in Scotland were regularly subject to petty discriminations, sometimes indeed more than petty.
For me, however, these days are long past. I am in no way worried by the Queen being the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, nor in any way by the fact that there are many more Protestants than Catholics in my country. As followers of Christ we have much to learn from each other, and indeed we have to learn from followers of other religions also.
What saddens me is that some people would seem to associate the presence of an image of Christ on the cross in a government building as a symbol of Catholic dominance over other religions or other forms of Christianity. It may have been this a long time ago, but is this still the case in today's Canada ?
Thank you ,Stetson, for giving me information about the particular case involving Duplessis
and thank you SPK for telling me about the Jesuit Estates Act and the compensation eventually offered to the Jesuits for the seizure of their land.
I hope that the Province of Quebec can find a way forward which will respect all who live within its borders.
I agree with Augustine that French speaking Canadians are less likely than English speaking Canadians to talk about possible ancestors in Europe. I often work in Scotland with French Canadians, who are not usually coming to seek their ancestors in this country as some Anglophone Canadians might be doing. They are, however, usually aware of the fact that the origins of their language lie in France and French speaking culture and history - a major religious site for French Canadians being Ste Anne de Beaupre which is a reminder of the major
Breton shrine of Ste Anne d'Auray.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
...What saddens me is that some people would seem to associate the presence of an image of Christ on the cross in a government building as a symbol of Catholic dominance over other religions or other forms of Christianity. It may have been this a long time ago, but is this still the case in today's Canada ?....
I do hope you're also sad that the people in the room with that crucifix actually voted to outlaw another religion's practices. Not a long time ago. In today's Canada.
If it saddens you to call it "Catholic" domination, what would you prefer? Pure laine* domination? Francophone domination? Cultural Chistianity domination? Nativist domination?
Personally, I'm sad that Quebec's distinct identity is being used (yet again) as a political excuse to promote hatred. That's not what the notwithstanding clause is for, folks.
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_laine
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Forthview writes:
quote:
They are, however, usually aware of the fact that the origins of their language lie in France and French speaking culture and history - a major religious site for French Canadians being Ste Anne de Beaupre which is a reminder of the major
Breton shrine of Ste Anne d'Auray.
*tangent alert* I agree entirely with Forthview's statement on the part of the sentence leading to the dash. But as a certified pilgrimage expert, I can assure you that of the many who frequent or who are knowledgeable about the shrine of Sainte Anne de Beaupré, you would be astonishingly lucky to find one in 10 who would know of the Breton shrine. Saint Anne, of course, is the patron of Canada for RCs (along with Jean de Brébeuf f.d. 26 October) and is venerated particularly among Aboriginal RCs (viz., the annual pilgrimage to Lac Sainte Anne in Alberta), perhaps due to the great respect most First Peoples Canadians have for grandmothers.
Anglicans get Saint John the Baptist as their patron, of course, although at a low mass at Saint Onoforio's last week, the collect of martyrs was said for Jean de Brébeuf.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Soror magna- I was informed that the crucifix in question was placed in the chamber during the time of politician of a 'fascist hue' called Duplessis. I read that he died in 1959 and I judge that the crucifix predates his death. Probably,but not definitely more than 70 years ago.
If the Quebec government is persecuting people because of their religious beliefs now in today's Canada,then I would most certainly not agree with this.
On the other hand there is sometimes an understandable pride in being 'pure laine' or 'de vieille souche' and I would not hold that against anyone.
Do you know that there are in England some people who are very proud of 'coming over with the Conqueror' in 1066 ?
Equally I understand that there are some citizens of the USA who are proud to be able to trace their ancestry back to the Pilgrim Fathers.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Sainte Anne is the patron saint of Brittany,France,as well as secondary patron Saint Yves,a lawyer, whose portrait,along with a crucifix,would have been in every Breton courtroom until the separation of Church and State well over 100 years ago.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Do you know that there are in England some people who are very proud of 'coming over with the Conqueror' in 1066 ?
Yes, but they're dicks. There's a world of difference between being interested to find that your forebears were named Norman knights and being 'very proud' of that. Being proud of your 'blood line' is verging on the fascistic.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Do you know that there are in England some people who are very proud of 'coming over with the Conqueror' in 1066 ?
Yes, but they're dicks. There's a world of difference between being interested to find that your forebears were named Norman knights and being 'very proud' of that. Being proud of your 'blood line' is verging on the fascistic.
And simply weird. Pride in something that one hasn't achieved is madness.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Forthview wrote:
quote:
What saddens me is that some people would seem to associate the presence of an image of Christ on the cross in a government building as a symbol of Catholic dominance over other religions or other forms of Christianity. It may have been this a long time ago, but is this still the case in today's Canada ?
Well, I think the Aleut might have been onto something when he said that the Crucifix represented nationalism in a religious form, or something like that.
And to repeat myself from earlier on the thread: I think that for many people in Quebec, Catholicism is sort of a cultural dividing line. Most people don't really believe in its tenets, however nominal adherence and respect for the symbolism is used to distinguish old-stock Quebeckers(whose values are to be lionized) from newcomers(who can just go eff themselves).
But if a Muslim is told that she can't wear a headscarf while picking up her driver's license, but it's okay for the Assembly to have a crucifix hanging up, I think it's gonna be pretty easy for her to view that as religious discrimination, and I'm not sure how much luck you'd have trying to get her to see that it's really all just about culture.
And, just to be clear, I wouldn't really care about the Crucifix being left where it is in the Assembly, if the Quebec government wasn't otherwise making such a big deal about "secularism" when it comes to restricting the practices of religious minority groups.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Soror Magna wrote:
quote:
Personally, I'm sad that Quebec's distinct identity is being used (yet again) as a political excuse to promote hatred. That's not what the notwithstanding clause is for, folks.
Actually, the nothwithstanding clause hasn't been invoked(yet) in this controversy, and is not directly linked to Quebec's standing as a "distinct society", which has never managed to achieve constitutional recognition.
Section 33 was put into the Charter Of Rights at the insistence of a group of western premiers, and gives the various legislatures the right to over-rule Charter-based court rulings. (Quebec did not agree to anything about the Charter, but it went ahead anyway.)
The section says nothing about Quebec being a distinct society, or indeed, anything about Quebec at all. But it can be, and in fact has been, used to assert Quebec's autonomy against the courts, specifically in one case related to the restriction of English-language signs.
The idea of constitutionally recognizing Quebec as a "distinct society" was promoted by Prime Minister Mulroney in the 80s and 90s. Two attempts were made to get this passed into law, the first thwarted by provincial legislatures, the second by a national referendum.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
