Faith Meets Life: Welcoming culture, along with religion, into Canada
One of the points that the controversial Deepa Mehta film, Water, makes is that religion has a powerful political effect on the society that embraces it.
In the movie, an Indian community has lived under the sway of Hinduism for many centuries. According to the film, sacred texts dictate that a widow cannot remarry. She must live in isolation with other widows for the remainder of her life. Thus the establishment of widows' houses and, the sexual exploitation of the residents.
The formative influence of religion on a society is a point that regularly gets lost among political commentators and cultural observers.
For example, Prime Ministers and journalists (understandably) are at pains every day to claim that they are not against Islam, but only against extremists, exceptions to the faith. Some seem to make special efforts to disconnect objectionable behaviour from the religious views of the persons exhibiting the behaviour, except, sometimes, where Catholics and “Christian Fundamentalists” are involved.
The Globe and Mail this week reports on a recent poll of Canadians, which showed the majority of people in this country remain committed to multiculturalism, that is, the welcoming of people of diverse (among other things) religions. At the same time the Canadians polled insist that immigrants must abide by the Canadian rejection of the discrimination against women. Our hope is that such discrimination has no permanent roots in the religious commitments of new immigrants.
All in all, we are tempted to assume that the society-shaping power of the centuries old religions they bring will largely evaporate. The more extreme political influences of religion can easily be shucked off. Once people come here, they will of course begin life under the Canadian mantras of toleration and diversity, leaving their Hindu, Islamic, Sikh or other mantras at the door. Their religions are anaemic.
Both commentators on the (international) right, and commentators on the left, it seems to me, do not deal well with the role of religion in political empowerment. Those on the right are quick to reject any further inclusion of people of non-western religions. It's just too dangerous, to sum up their main argument.
Those on the left, perhaps still swimming in the waters of their own rejection of Christianity, seem to believe that the political influence of non-western religions can be ignored as easily as the most formative religion in the west is ignored by they themselves.
What is needed, I think, is a middle way. A society cannot welcome unlimited numbers of people who possess a powerful faith that will shape the lives of those people, without eventually being profoundly affected. Therefore, as the commentators on the right point out, a society (ours included) must look long and hard at what kind of influences it wants to welcome, and in what numbers.
On the other hand, this should not lead to a rejection of immigrants. For, as many in our country insist, Canada must be a welcome place for refugees and others seeking to escape chaos and extreme difficulty. We must not, in the interest of national self-protection, close down our borders. Rather, we must seek to protect the vulnerable, those here at home and those living abroad who legitimately look for shelter here.
Interestingly, many of those currently lobbying the federal government to do a better job of welcoming and integrating troubled immigrants and refugees into Canadian society represent Christian churches.
Sorry. Religion strikes again.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
In the movie, an Indian community has lived under the sway of Hinduism for many centuries. According to the film, sacred texts dictate that a widow cannot remarry. She must live in isolation with other widows for the remainder of her life. Thus the establishment of widows' houses and, the sexual exploitation of the residents.
The formative influence of religion on a society is a point that regularly gets lost among political commentators and cultural observers.
For example, Prime Ministers and journalists (understandably) are at pains every day to claim that they are not against Islam, but only against extremists, exceptions to the faith. Some seem to make special efforts to disconnect objectionable behaviour from the religious views of the persons exhibiting the behaviour, except, sometimes, where Catholics and “Christian Fundamentalists” are involved.
The Globe and Mail this week reports on a recent poll of Canadians, which showed the majority of people in this country remain committed to multiculturalism, that is, the welcoming of people of diverse (among other things) religions. At the same time the Canadians polled insist that immigrants must abide by the Canadian rejection of the discrimination against women. Our hope is that such discrimination has no permanent roots in the religious commitments of new immigrants.
All in all, we are tempted to assume that the society-shaping power of the centuries old religions they bring will largely evaporate. The more extreme political influences of religion can easily be shucked off. Once people come here, they will of course begin life under the Canadian mantras of toleration and diversity, leaving their Hindu, Islamic, Sikh or other mantras at the door. Their religions are anaemic.
Both commentators on the (international) right, and commentators on the left, it seems to me, do not deal well with the role of religion in political empowerment. Those on the right are quick to reject any further inclusion of people of non-western religions. It's just too dangerous, to sum up their main argument.
Those on the left, perhaps still swimming in the waters of their own rejection of Christianity, seem to believe that the political influence of non-western religions can be ignored as easily as the most formative religion in the west is ignored by they themselves.
What is needed, I think, is a middle way. A society cannot welcome unlimited numbers of people who possess a powerful faith that will shape the lives of those people, without eventually being profoundly affected. Therefore, as the commentators on the right point out, a society (ours included) must look long and hard at what kind of influences it wants to welcome, and in what numbers.
On the other hand, this should not lead to a rejection of immigrants. For, as many in our country insist, Canada must be a welcome place for refugees and others seeking to escape chaos and extreme difficulty. We must not, in the interest of national self-protection, close down our borders. Rather, we must seek to protect the vulnerable, those here at home and those living abroad who legitimately look for shelter here.
Interestingly, many of those currently lobbying the federal government to do a better job of welcoming and integrating troubled immigrants and refugees into Canadian society represent Christian churches.
Sorry. Religion strikes again.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
