A TALE OF TWO TRUDEAUS.

A TALE OF TWO TRUDEAUS:

The Current Challenge to the Place of Christian Faith in Canada’s Public Life.

By Paul Merkley.

………………………..

From the beginning, Canada has allowed a place in her public life for expression of our indebtedness to the God of the Bible – the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel.

The status of this concept in our present constitution is secured by reason of wording that appears in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which stands as the preamble to the Canada Act of 1982 – the principal source for our current constitution. Here we read, “Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.. (https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const)

Our experience of independent national life, now a matter of a century-and-a-half, has demonstrated that occasional public expression of this indebtedness is necessary for sustaining broadly-shared confidence in divine protection over our public life.

This acknowledgment is in every way compatible with individual, personal, and private acceptance of the great variety of other religious commitments –as well as well as the options of agnosticism and atheism.

A close study of the historical record bears out, in fact, that it is only under this practice – that is, in a context where nominal affirmation of the God of the Bible exists side by side with a reasonable agnosticism when national symbols are invoked – that “peace, order, and good government” in fact do exist as a matter of history.

In light of this historical reality, we should be taking very seriously the fact that at the very top of our political life there is taking hold today an attitude of contempt for Christianity, its legacy and its values. In preamble to an address to a convocation of scientists, Julie Payette, our twenty-ninth Governor-General, appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, on July 13, 2017, brazenly put to use the prestige of her office to launch a dogmatic assault upon the theological premise which, as just noted, is embedded in our Constitution. “So many people,” she opined, “still believe, want to believe that maybe taking a sugar pill will cure cancer if you will it good enough and that your future and every single one of the people here’s personalities [sic!!!] can be determined by looking at planets coming in front of invented constellations!”

This excursion from the world of biblical faith into the world of daily newspaper horoscopy demeans the former while it insults the intelligence of just about every adult. The reporter who quotes this blast describes it as having been “met with the delight of many scientists and researchers in the room.” No doubt. And this could arguably be the most depressing aspect of the story. Such segue from the context of Biblically-based religion into the world of horoscopes is meant to level down the former to the philosophical and moral of paganism.

A more basic question might be: Are today’s scientists so lacking in self-respect that words as cluttered and confused as Payette’s seemed not to bother anybody in that roomful of post-graduate scientists? In fact, the reception, we are told, was rapturous.

Plainly, the purpose of Payette’s words was to establish in the public record an ex officio declaration of contempt for the religious belonging of most of the people whom she is supposed to represent. Would she dare express similar contempt, ex officio, for hockey?

Clearly, our Governor-General calculates that   Canadian people are indifferent to the reputation of the faith that has informed public life of Canada from its beginning…a calculation that the Canadian public is not bothered by such an expression of contempt for the principles that are plainly stated in the document which embodies our present Constitution – the Canada Act of 1982.

The least worrying part of the Governor-General’s observation here is not in the words, but in the spirit – a brazen and palpable contempt for the religious faith which (the best studies show) is shared by two-thirds of the Canadian public. In this light, it is amazing that this bombshell has gone virtually un-noticed:

A few alert critics were, however, disturbed by the mean-spirited character of Payette’s pronouncement. Conservative political strategist Alise Mills a senior associate with Sussex Strategy Group, said that Payette went way over the line with her speech, which Mills characterized as not only “political” but “mean-spirited.” “I definitely agree science is key,” she said, “but I think there is a better way to do that without making fun of other people.”

As I watched the chattering classes and prominent Liberal politicians storm to Payette’s defence, it occurred to me how indistinguishable the latter group is from the former. Many Liberal partisans would have seen the criticism as God-bothering nonsense from a bunch of conservative dinosaurs…. To the extent “middle class” means anything, in an electoral sense, it means a large group of people who aren’t rich, who don’t have three university degrees, who have never even visited France let alone failed to properly disclose a chateau they own there, and who are more likely than not to believe in God ….With her dig at religion, Julie Payette plays a dangerous game… The chattering classes might be just fine with an anti-religious Governor General. The folks who put Julie Payette in Rideau Hall certainly shouldn’t be…. [The intellect5ual elites think:] Why shouldn’t a scientist, appointed as the Queen’s representative in Ottawa, take the odd jab at the two-thirds of benighted Canadians who believe in God (per Angus Reid in 2015), and the 53 per cent who believe God is “active in this world.” (Julie Payette Speech Mocked People With Religious Beliefs, Critic Says https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-with-her-dig-at-religion-julie-payette-plays-a-dangerous-game-for-liberals.)

Mills rightly noted that “Payette wasn’t just promoting science, she was mocking people with religious beliefs, and specifically, evangelical Christians who don’t believe evolutionary science.”

A political-science student of literalist bent would detect a discrepancy between this proclamation of Canada’s Governor-General and the founding document of the nation that she has hired on to serve.

In similar vein, Chris Selley, writing in the National Post, notes: “I definitely agree science is key but I think there is a better way to do that without making fun of other people.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau didn’t seem to have any issue with what Payette said, saying, “I applaud the firmness with which she stands in support of science and the truth.”

Interestingly, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who possesses three-quarters of an undergraduate B.A., went to Twitter to congratulate the Governor General for “speaking up for science.”

In comparison and contrast with Justin Trudeau, his much-better-educated father, Pierre Trudeau, (Prime Minister, 1968-1979) did everything humanly possible to keep the matter of his active Catholic practise out of our view during his lifetime. In this, he was a zealous as was Prime Minister W.L.M. King to keep from public view his devotion to spiritual mediumship. Trudeau succeeded to the extent that it was only long after his death that the archival historians found the evidence of his daily attendance at morning Mass. No doubt, Trudeau calculated that such information – so hard to reconcile with his carefully-cultivated image as the “swinger” — would not be a political asset. And no doubt he was right.

Justin Trudeau has been, at least in one sense, more open about his Catholic belonging while at the same time having, at least on record, much less commitment to practice of that faith. Certainly, there has never been any suggestion of daily attendance at mass. Indeed, he has been reluctant to give a straight answer to the question of whether he attends mass at all these day.

Still, Justin Trudeau states, “My own personal faith is an extremely important part of who I am and the values that I try to lead with.”

The question occurs: Is it better for a public man’s reputation that he should be found, after his death, to have worked as furiously as Pierre Trudeau did to put his public off the scent of his religious practise—or (as Justin Trudeau does today) that he should so publicly declare his contempt for the role that religion does in fact have in the daily lives of most Canadians?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………