Alexander John Doull was born in Halifax to a Church of Scotland family. Orphaned within days of his birth, he received his higher education and ordination in England before returning to Canada, first to Montreal, before moving to Victoria B.C. as dean of the Cathedral in January 1910. On 25 November 1914 he was elected the first bishop of Kootenay, resigning in June 1933 to take up a position as assistant bishop and archdeacon in Sheffield before ill health compelled his resignation and return in the Okanagan Valley in 1935. "Alarmed by the vast number of non-Anglo-Saxon immigrants to British Columbia the bishop considered also that the province of Quebec was becoming injurious to Canada and he implored Anglo-Canadians to unite to counteract the influence of the French-speaking sections of the population" (p. 104). "The unemployment of the depression days was also of grave concern to him and he strongly supported the resolution brought forward at the diocesan synod (Vernon, 26-27 May 1931) which would establish movable camps as a means of relief" (p. 104). Bishop Doull attended the Lambeth Conferences of 1920 and 1930 and "was selected to serve with seventy others on the Committee for Church Union" (p. 105). "Throughout his entire ministry this matter of church union had been of utmost importance and he rejoiced when the United Church of Canada was formed in 1925, and he continued to speak for a union that would include all Christian people" (p. 106).
Author "is a daughter of Bishop Doull". -- p. 108.
As our country agonizes over the nature of our future, Archbishop E.W. Scott, Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, has written to Al Johnson, President of the CBC with "a degree of puzzlement concerning the absence of any discernable pattern in CBC programming indicating that the nature of these historic events calls for more from CBC that just news coverage."
The Archbishop questions, "Is it appropriate to cover these events as you might a coronation or state funeral,...requiring no more than passive participation as interested bystanders?"
The Primate declared that "in the face of an apparent choice by the national, elected government to forego extensive citizen involvement," the CBC should accept a "central role as catalyst and medium for a Canadian constitutional dialogue." He likened this role to that of the builders of CPR except that now it is "human barriers of prejudice, ignorance and isolation" which must be bridged.
Archbishop Scott calls for an immediate meeting of the Board of Directors of CBC, or decisive action by Mr. Johnson as Chief Executive Officer, to institute "a policy of informational, cultural and citizen access programming."
The full text of the Archbishop's letter is enclosed.
- 30 -
For further information, please contact:
Richard J. Berryman
600 Jarvis St., Toronto
Tel. (416) 924-9192 ext. 286
November 13th, 1980
Mr. Al Johnson
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
1500 Bronson Ave.
Ottawa, Ont. K1G 3J5
Dear Mr. Johnson:
We recall with appreciation CBC's balanced and informative coverage of the Quebec referendum campaign. Careful advance planning, combined with a true sense of the significance of the occasion for the country, enabled the Corporation to involved people in the debate while still avoiding the clear risk of Radio Canada becoming a matter of controversy. We recognize that the direction and tone set by the Board of Directors of the CBC, chaired by yourself, was instrumental in providing a most positive example to Canadians of what is so unique about good public broadcasting.
We are writing now to ask members of the CBC Board, through their Chairman, whether an analogous role for CBC has been considered and planned during the present constitutional process? Hearings of the Special Parliamentary Committee are almost upon us and we admit to a degree of puzzlement concerning the absence of any discernable pattern in CBC programming indicating that the nature of these historic events calls for more from CBC than just news coverage.
We ask members of the CBC Board, as trustees of the public interest, to reflect upon how CBC can best serve Canadian needs in a period of active constitutional revision. Can there be any higher priority for CBC than to maximize opportunities for informed citizen participation in the process? Is it appropriate to cover these events as you might a coronation or state funeral, events of great significance to the population but requiring no more than their passive participation as interested bystanders ?
As the most fundamental symbol of Canadian nationhood, patriation of our constitution is an occasion of great moment, the collective, irrevocable assertion of our political independence and freedom. What is currently proposed is indeed even more than patriation, an essentially new constitution in which basic rules of Parliamentary government and rights of citizens are altered, basic approaches to citizens' relations with government are changed, basic understandings of the country are revised.
The right of each citizen to become involved in such a process requires no defence. The opportunity presented to the nation by the fullest participation of our citizens ought to be equally evident. For what value is there to elaborating a new blueprint for interactions among the regions, the language groups, the heritages or beliefs of Canadians, and even between the sexes, when our citizens are not themselves committed to the spirit of accommodation? By leaving citizens as bystanders, we lose the precious opportunity to involve them in a process which begins with exchange, grows into understanding, and should ultimately ripen to tolerance and/or acceptance. It is equally an opportunity to create a constitution which captures, to the best of our abilities, Canadians' collective self-image of the heritage, life and aspirations we share as a country.
We understand that members of CBC's Board -- in the face of an apparent choice by the national, elected government to forego extensive citizen involvement -- cannot lightly set a course for the corporation which might conceivably be perceived as a challenge to federal policy. There is no reason to believe that the same broad support would be forthcoming, as it was from two administrations during the referendum debate, for a CBC policy of greatly expanded public affairs programming and of extensive freetime, citizen access in order to animate participation by Canadians in the constitutional process. At least, on the positive side, the Board does not (yet) have to contend with Cabinet-level accusations of CBC being riddled with Western separatists. We ask members of the Board of CBC to consider most carefully the distinction between the federal interest and the national or public interest, for where the two are not synonymous, it is the latter which forms their ultimate mandate.
Should the Corporation accept what would be obviously a central role, as catalyst and medium for a Canadian constitutional dialogue, it would undertake a task in the electronic 1980's equivalent to the work of the railroad nation-builders a century ago. Only it is the human barriers or prejudice, ignorance, and isolation which the CBC must bridge, as the CPR once spanned the mountains, gorges and swamps of the Canadian terrain. In response to the most disheartening observation of the Task Force on Canadian Unity, that:
"Sometimes the country seemed to us to be composed of a multiplicity of solitudes, islands of self-contained activity and discourse disconnected from their neighbour and tragically unaware of the whole which contained them all. When one speaks, the others did not listen..."
We look to this nation's electronic media as the prime instrument of exchange and contact among our "multiplicity of solitudes", as you did yourself earlier this year before a committee of the CRTC:
"It is by radio and television, more than any other means, that Canadians live together, the events of their country -- that we experience together what we are and what we can do -- in drama and sport, in music and film, in community and individual endeavour. It is by radio and television that we are enriched by our heritages and by different identities -- the triumphs and the troubles of this country".
Unlike the Quebec referendum debate, the present constitutional process has no fixed ending, no compelling occasion for citizen involvement such as a vote, and no clear dichotomy of "oui" and "non"; but there are some datelines if not deadlines for decision. Fair balance in programming will be most difficult to achieve given the diversity of Canadian voices on constitutional issues, compounded by the absence of any one or two clearcut themes in a debate which is too infant to have yet developed a focus. This underlines for us the urgency of planning within CBC for such a complex enterprise. A special, immediate meeting of the Board of Directors of CBC, solely on the matter of CBC's role in the constitutional process, would be in our opinion justified by present circumstances. Canadians may never have been in such need as now of their national broadcasting service. If for some reason this is not possible, we would assume you make the necessary decision as the Chief Executive Officer.
We look to CBC for a policy of informational, cultural and citizen access programming which will inform, sensitize, and challenge Canadians regarding constitutional renewal. We trust we are not mistaken in our understanding of what national public broadcasting is all about for Canada during this critical period.
This letter comes to you following discussion with a number of concerned Canadians in many parts of Canada -- some active in the Church and others not. It also has the general endorsation of the National Executive Council of the Anglican Church of Canada which spent several hours sharing concerns and views about the constitutional situation at its recent meeting held from November 5th to 7th, 1980.
"The attitudes of members of the Church of England towards Protestant evangelism of the French Canadian Roman Catholic population of Lower Canada from 1839- to 1848, and their involvement in the pan-evangelical French Canadian Missionary Society (FCMS) were based on a number of factors. A vocal minority of evangelical Anglicans were convinced of the need for an Anglican presence in the FCMS. Others were more willing to support a separate, denominational French mission, responding to a distaste for involvement with sectarian groups. Their activity occasioned the formation in 1841 of a short-lived Anglican rival to the FCMS, and, in 1848, the opening of the Sabrevois mission. This specifically Anglican mission, while evangelical in origin and support, was in tone balanced, discreet and quiet, showing clearly the moderating influence of Bishop George Jehoshaphat Mountain of Quebec. It built on the success of the Anglican mission schools in attracting French-Canadian Roman Catholic pupils, and on the conversion of a large, respectable French-Canadian family at Sabrevois. Bishop Mountain's concern that the Church of England possess as means to respond to enquiring French-speaking Roman Catholics was fully met" (p. 18).
The Anglican Church of Canada has just completed a through-going self-criticism in the presence of third world critics. A four day "Partners in Mission" consultation wound up on Tuesday, May 29 at the University of Toronto.
The concept of Partners in Mission is an accepted one in the Anglican Communion throughout the world. It involves one of the twenty-seven independent, self-governing churches which constitute the Anglican Communion, in a process of critical examination of its programmes, life, structures and priorities in the presence of "Partners" from other countries, churches and cultures. Canadian Anglicans have acted as Partners in such consultations in several African churches and in Ireland, the USA, the Caribbean, South America and Asia.
During the past week more than a hundred Canadian Anglicans, representing the Church's thirty dioceses from Newfoundland to Vancouver Island, and north beyond the Arctic Circle, gathered in the nation's Capital. They were joined by Partners from Burundi, West Africa, the Sudan and South Africa, from the West Indies, New Zealand, Ireland and England, the USA and Asia. There were also representatives from the Lutheran and Roman Catholic Churches in Canada.
In their final report to the consultation, these Partners said, "We have come from continents which have experienced poverty, despair, effects of nuclear holocaust, inhuman racist regimes, military dictatorships, trampling of human rights and division of nations on ideological grounds. We have come too, from countries which are rich and affluent, and from sectors in the Third World which share in those riches and those who do not. In these situations we have experienced sufferings of all kinds - the rat-race of consuming more and more, of being bored, lonely and fearful. Yet we know that through these sufferings we also experience hope for we worship the crucified and risen Lord. In this spirit we share four examples of challenges we see based upon what we have seen and heard at this Consultation."
Their four areas of challenge were the Natives of Canada, the French Fact, the Ministry of the Laity and the Ecumenical Dimension.
The Partners observed, "The Natives of Canada have suffered through hundreds of years of genocide. Entire tribes and people have vanished from the face of the earth. Many of them today live in poverty, illness, early death rates and little or no education. To correct these wrongs requires a change in attitude, a death to the old ways and a rebirth under God." They agreed that they "must commend the Anglican Church of Canada for its long history of ministry to the Native People," but questioned whether native people have been trained for or allowed to assume positions of leadership in the church's structures.
They declared that "lumping the Native problem with the white rural or white isolated area problem will not work." The Partners had all travelled fairly extensively in Canada prior to the Consultation. From that experience and from their discussions in Ottawa, they concluded that there is a "strong undercurrent of prejudice against the Native People in Canada." They acknowledged that there are no simplistic answers, but urged the creation of a more adequately staffed Native "desk or portfolio" on a national basis.
The Partners described the French Fact as, "A people under the threat of losing its identity, its right to live according to its culture, can hardly act as a partner and may become, as a consequence, a burden to the country instead of taking its place as an enriching part of the cultural mosaic of Canada." They continued, "In a word, a whole mentality must be surrendered in order to communicate within the new milieu," and urged that "The Church must study this matter in the spirit of Christ, that is, in a spirit of love, detachment and sharing."
They added, "while fighting for the rights of this or that group, we must not forget that rights are first and foremost human rights; they are not French, they are not English; they are human, but they apply to French or English or Indians or West Indians."
An "inherited clericalism...which is still accepted as the norm" came under sharp criticism in the section of the Partners' report on the Ministry of the Laity. "The real participation of the laity in the mission of the church may pose a threat to the clergy" but that participation must not be "considered a privilege, a temporal innovation or a concession to the spirit of modern times." "A multitude of habits, ready-made judgements and reactions need to be stripped away from us before we can expect to progress very far in dealing with the key issue of the ministry of the laity."
In discussing the Ecumenical Dimensions, the Partners declared, "The general impression given is that the Anglican Church of Canada is self-sufficient and does not naturally look outside itself, whether to other churches in Canada or to other Anglican churches around the world, for working partners in the process of developing the issues which face them in their common service of the Mission of Christ to the world."
Although in principle the Anglican Church of Canada is committed to the "Lund Declaration" (that churches should not do separately what it is possible from them to do ecumenically), the Partners suggested that should mean "looking first to see what things can be done together and not regarding ecumenical cooperation as an optional extra."
The over-all report from the total membership of the Consultation is wide-ranging and lengthy. The discussions gradually crystallized into eight areas in the life of the church today:
- Mission: Theology and Practice
- Christian Lifestyle
- Commitment and Stewardship
- Ministry: Lay/Clergy
- Social Justice and Action
- Ethnic, Cultural and Linguistic Groups
- Communications and Structures
In each section there was a thorough evaluation of the present situation in the Anglican Church of Canada and an attempt to discover strengths and weaknesses in its life. Strategies for the future were also developed.
These reports will now receive wide distribution in the Dioceses and Ecclesiastical Provinces of the Church and in various national committees of General Synod, for study and discussion. They will have a major influence on the Church's National Programme Committee and National Executive Council when they meet this fall, and on the General Synod of the Church which will be held at the University of Trent in Peterborough in June 1980.
- 30 -
For copies of the reports or further information, please contact:
That this Synod, representing the Anglican Church of Canada, is deeply appreciative of the contributions made by the French speaking peoples of Canada to the cultural and spiritual heritage of our country, and looks forward to a growth in loving co-operation in which all Canadians will participate to the Glory of God and the well-being of our Nation.
That copies of this resolution be sent to the Prime Minister of Canada, the Right Hon. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, and His Eminence Cardinal Roy, of Quebec.
The mover and seconder agreed to change the phrase "the French speaking peoples of Canada," to "Canadians of French origin." CARRIED in both Houses.
"The Executive Council of General Synod in joint session with the Department of Christian Social Service at Banff in October 1963 requested our Department to give priority during the next year to a study of biculturalism in Canada, to prepare a submission to the Royal Commission on Biculturalism and Bilingualism, and `to create an informed opinion and a favourable climate in the Church on this subject so that unity and concord may be promoted among the people of Canada'. Accordingly a Committee chaired by the Bishop of Ottawa, the Right Reverend Ernest S. Reed, was created and commenced its work in January, 1964. Details of Committee membership and method of inquiry and study are set forth in the Committee's report to the Executive Council at Lennoxville in September 1964, found on page one of this Bulletin. `The Origins of Biculturalism in Canada' prepared by the Reverend Dr. H.H. Walsh, professor of Church History at the Montreal Diocesan Theological College and a member of the Faculty of Divinity at McGill University, made an excellent historical background and resource document for our study. We commend this article, which forms the first section of the Bulletin, to all who are concerned to understand some of the causes of our present unhappy divisions and misunderstandings. The full text of the Brief is given, preceded by introductory remarks made by the Most Reverend William L. Wright, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Department of Christian Social Service, who presented the submission of the Anglican Church to the Royal Commission. The perforated sheet attached is provided for the use of readers to record their opinions and their ideas regarding the role of the Anglican Church in furthering inter-cultural understanding, good will and unity in out nation". -- Intro.
Contents: Introduction / Maurice P. Wilkinson -- Bilingualism and Biculturalism : Excerpt from Journal of Proceedings of Executive Council and Departments, Lennoxville, Quebec, August 31 to September 3, 1964 (page 192-3) -- The Origins of Biculturalism in Canada / H.H. Walsh -- A Brief on Bilingualism and Biculturalism : Introduction by Archbishop Wright -- Expose sur le Bilingualisme et le Biculturalisme a soumettre devant La Commission Royale sur Le Bilingualisme et Le Biculturalisme.
That this National Executive Council of the Anglican Church of Canada currently in session, expresses thanksgiving that substantial progress has been achieved in the resolution of Canada's constitutional problem, and continues to hope that further negotiations may enable the Province of Quebec to feel itself a constituting part of our nationhood; but also expresses deep concern that:
1. the elimination of the recognition of the aboriginal and treaty rights of the Indian, Inuit and Metis people of Canada constitutes a crisis as significant as, and equivalent to, that between the Federal and Provincial governments;
2. failure to remedy this situation can only appear to our aboriginal people as calculated contempt for their rights by those who have the moral and constitutional responsibility to safeguard and honour them;
3. Canada will be identified in the eyes of the world as racially oppressive;
4. in our country fundamental moral principles could be sacrificed for political expediency; and above all
5. abdication of moral responsibility is fundamentally abhorrent and ultimately self-defeating,
and therefore urges that the Federal and Provincial governments re-instate the inherent rights of the aboriginal peoples in all appropriate legislation in the constitutional process. CARRIED
Copies of a letter were circulated, signed on behalf of Native people, addressed to all Christian leaders calling for support with their concern with the Constitution.
That this National Executive Council express its deep appreciation for the invaluable work of the Rev. Canon Reginald Turpin, in keeping the French/English question before The Anglican Church of Canada. CARRIED by applause