Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2)

Catalystthe

Civic Engagement Creates Change 4

Put Faith into Action... 6

Building on 40 years (and more)... 7

I N S I D E

constrained the voluntary sector’s ability to publicly advocate for alternative

approaches to a sustainable economy.

2) The constraint of the mainstream view of government’s economic role

Should government stimulus spending have aimed simply to “increase aggregate

income,” or should it also include simultaneous concern for the redistributional

impact of its stimulus spending? Shouldn’t it also help reverse the “growing gap

between rich and poor”?

Church work for a sustainable economy

is constrained by the mainstream

economic view that government

should spend on things which

bolster the traditional economy,

and need not aim also to create

the just social infrastructure

required to enable families and

communities to participate in

good, long-term, full time work.

The church’s prophetic voice –

that calls government to create

policy that addresses the needs of

the marginalized, those whom the Bible

identifies as the “widow, the poor, and the

orphan” – runs up against a narrow view of government simply stimulating

growth in a market economy.

Ecologically-sound economic recovery policies must also simultaneously serve

those “falling through the cracks.”

3) The constraint of the “normal & self-evident”

A third constraint churches face in working for a sustainable economy is rooted in

our tendency to view economics through the prism of what we consider “normal.”

If the Christian community takes a “view from the outside” at the “normal”

economy, we would see new realities.

First, we would see that our current economy and economic debate is not, first

and foremost, about a sustainable economy at all, but instead is premised on the

assumption of continuous rapid economic growth.

Second, taking a “view from the outside” would help us see that our drive to

constant economic growth is integrally linked to a number of unprecedented,

interlocking global challenges, i.e. resource depletion, increasing levels of

pollution, species extinctions, climate change, poverty and hunger in the global

south, global human migrations, etc.

To Build a Sustainable Economy...By John Hiemstra

Many people of faith are inspired by the idea of

a “sustainable economy,” that is, to dream

dreams and envision images of:

• an economy that is actually based

on care and enough;

• that prioritizes the immediate needs

of the most vulnerable;

• that closes the growing gap between rich

and poor;

• an economy that is based on long-term

ecological sustainability;

• that is mindful of the needs of future

generations;

• and that removes factors that feed

cycles of violent conflict.

The churches and the voluntary sector face at

least four constraints in working for a sustainable

economy.

1) The constraint of established expectations

The recent financial crises (2008-2009) brought

into plain view what our governments expected

the role of churches to be in economic life.

While the Canadian government increased

spending in mainstream segments of the

economy (physical infrastructure and support

for the financial sector), churches and faith-

based NGOs were expected to charitably rescue

those who fell through the cracks of the

government’s Action Plan and existing

government services.

This service role is a classic role that the

churches have willingly played over the ages,

and generally done so effectively. The central

motive has been “the love of God and

neighbour,” that is, “We give, because much has

been given to us.”

However, the government’s expectation that

business, churches and NGOs would simply

follow each of their established roles, while the

government fixed the traditional economy

through public spending on infrastructure, really...continued on page 3

Citizens for Public Justice

the Catalyst Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2) 2

In Review

CPJ is pleased to welcome

David Pollock as our new

Finance and Administration

Coordinator. David brings

a wealth of knowledge

and experience having

previously served as the Executive

Director for the Tatamagouche Centre

and the Pembina Institute.

In September, we were

happy to be joined by two

new interns. Jennifer

Prosser, a graduate in

Political Science / Social

Justice and Peace studies

2010 AGM

CPJ on Top of the Hill

Welcome and Congratulations!

A Faithful Response to Poverty

CPJ members, board and staff gathered

on May 27 for CPJ’s 2010 Annual General

Meeting. Led by board Chair Kathy

Vandergrift, the meeting included reports

from Executive Director Joe Gunn and

board Treasurer Frederick Wind.

We were pleased to welcome new board

members Dwayne Hodgson (Ottawa,

ON), John Murphy (Canning, NS), Will

Postma (Toronto, ON), and Ericka

Stephens-Rennie (Ottawa, ON) and to

affirm Frederick Wind (Whitby, ON) for a

second term on the board.

Richard Shillington, a policy analyst with

Informetrica presented on Recession,

Recovery and Poverty: Is the End Near?

CPJ’s policy analyst Karri Munn-Venn

called for faithful action in response to

the challenges presented.

During the board meeting immediately

following the AGM, a new executive was

elected. Mark Huyser-Wierenga (Edmonton,

AB), Chair; Jim Joosse (Edmonton, AB),

Vice Chair; Jake Kuiken (Calgary, AB),

Secretary; Frederick Wind, Treasurer; and

Sheila McKinley (Chatham, ON) is the

new liaison with the program committee.

Thanks were expressed to outgoing

members for their passion and dedication:

Emily Hutten, Maria Paez-Victor, and

Nick Van Dyk. A special thanks needs to

go to Kathy who served tirelessly, first as

CPJ’s Vice Chair and then Chair, as well as

participating in the program advisory

committee.

The number of supporters of Dignity for

All continues to grow, particularly among

Members of Parliament (60) and Senators

(12). Close to 6,000 Canadians have

endorsed the campaign, but many more

are needed. Visit www.dignityforall.ca

and sign on today!

Citizens for Public Justice 309 Cooper Street, #501

Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0G5

tel. 613-232-0275

toll-free 1-800-667-8046

e-mail: cpj@cpj.ca

web: www.cpj.ca

Citizens for Public Justice’s mission

is to promote public justice in

Canada by shaping key public policy

debates through research and

analysis, publishing and public

dialogue. CPJ encourages citizens,

leaders in society and governments

to support policies and practices

which reflect God’s call for love,

justice and stewardship.

CPJ annual membership fee,

includes the Catalyst:

$50 / $25 (low-income)

the Catalyst, a publication of

Citizens for Public Justice (CPJ),

reports on public justice issues in

Canada and reviews CPJ activities.

Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2)

ISSN 0824-2062

Agreement no. 40022119

the Catalyst subscription:

$20 (three issues)

from King’s University College, is our

Public Justice Intern. Callandra Cochrane,

a student at the Laurentian Leadership

Centre, will also be with us until Christmas.

A special welcome goes to Mira Danielle

Pasma-Helleman. Congratulations to

Chandra and Matt on the arrival of their

new little one – and all the best for a

wonderful maternity leave!

An Act to Eliminate Poverty in Canada was

tabled in the House just prior to the

summer break. The private member’s bill

was drafted by Member of Parliament

Tony Martin (NDP) with the support of

MPs Mike Savage (Liberal) and Yves

Lessard (Bloc). It mandates the creation of

a federal poverty elimination strategy, as

called for in the Dignity for All campaign.

Policy analyst Chandra Pasma spoke at

the press conference announcing the new

bill on June 16, expressing CPJ’s hope that

cross-partisan support will continue until

this critical bill is passed into law.

In mid-August CPJ’s policy team, led by

Public Justice Intern Rebekah Sears,

prepared a brief for the House of

Commons Standing Committee on

Finance with our recommendations for

Budget 2011. The recession exposed a

social deficit and CPJ is calling for a

responsible and caring budget focusing

on building sustainable and lasting

change.

Rebekah, Jennifer Prosser, Joe, Kathryn

Cummings and Karri laced up their

sneakers to “OutRun Poverty” on

September 18. In this photo they are seen

carrying the Dignity for All campaign

banner with local MP Paul Dewar. This

Ottawa event was a part of the

international week of action, as the

nations of the world met at the UN to

analyze progress towards realization of

the Millennium Development Goals. CPJ’s

message? The Canadian government

needs to keep its promises to end poverty

at home and abroad.

3 the Catalyst Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2)

Former CPJ policy analyst John Hiemstra is

professor of political studies at King’s University

College in Edmonton. This is an edited version, used

with permission, of his speech to the Canadian

Council of Churches, on May 18 on Parliament Hill.

...continued from page 1

Viewing these interlocking challenges “from the outside” makes

clear that we are at a crossroads; either we immediately begin

refashioning our economy into a sustainable economy or we

face severe consequences.

Third, by developing a larger view, beyond the constraints of the

“normal,” we would see that society’s single-minded pursuit of

economic growth is actually based on faith-like assumptions

derived from the Enlightenment’s narrative of “endless

progress.” Our complicity in society’s obsession with economic

growth is perhaps the most important constraint on achieving a

sustainable economy.

While continuing the churches’ role in “service” and “advocacy

for redistribution,” churches and the voluntary sector need to

discern the deeper structural and faith depth-levels of our

current economy and society. Recognizing this allows us to shift

the public conversation to the deeper issues. In this case the key

question becomes: What is the economy for, anyway?

Then, the churches’ work for a sustainable economy should be

rooted in confession, repentance and commitment to a new way

of life. This renewal must begin in our faith communities,

because we are complicit, to various degrees, in society’s faith in

progress and obsessive commitment to economic growth.

4) The constraint of contested justifications for constitutional

democracy

Just as our deepest convictions shape our preferred “economy,”

so too the different ways Canadians understand and justify

“democracy” can result in the divergent operation of, and

outcomes within, our political system. For purposes of

illustration, let’s examine two of many justifications/visions for

constitutional democracy operating in Canadian society.

In one vision, democracy is seen simply as a mechanism that

serves to translate the “will of the people” into policy outcomes.

The “liberal” side of the “liberal democratic” form of

government is designed to protect the free exercise of individual

wills from government interference and oppression, by

guaranteeing liberties, rights, and the rule of law. Democracy in

this viewpoint becomes a realm in which “elected majority

governments” claim the legitimate-moral right to impose their

will – at least until they lose the next election.

In another vision, put forward by some Christian traditions,

democracy is the realm in which we seek out the common good.

Citizens and governments also work together to discern the

government’s public justice role in achieving this common good.

The space, process and institutions of constitutional democracy

are, therefore, defined not by the imposition of a majority’s or a

government’s will, but by communal discussion and debate over

achieving the common good and doing governmental public justice.

These different, sometimes conflicting, visions for constitutional

democracy (along with others) can be found at play in various

debates:

a) Private interest above public interest

Some argue that it’s acceptable to hold a political party’s private

interest in re-election above the pursuit of the public interest.

This seems to reflect the first view of democracy. It is weak in

that it threatens to undermine the very thrust of constitutional

democracy, namely, the discernment and implementation of

publicly just measures to further the common good.

b) Public funding for interest groups representing “the most

vulnerable”

The current government practice of withdrawing public funding

from many interest groups is purportedly based on a

democratically-justified, deficit-cutting policy. In the first vision,

where democracy is viewed as a power-contest in which

government responds to interest group demands, this policy is

“fair” because the majority demands it. The second vision of

democracy would ask that groups with the least resources –

groups representing women, first nations, and the poor and

marginalized – continue to be publicly supported in order to

justly participate.

The complication has arisen, however, that interests groups are

often not neutral interpreters of their interests and therefore

often clash with the policy of the funding government. Some

churches have used a public justice approach to argue that

funding of interest groups be maintained, but that the public

funding structure should be adjusted to allow marginalized

groups to be free to form various interest groups, reflecting their

various visions of life, as a way of representing their interests to

government.

c) Aversion to judicializing politics & policy-making

Many media reports suggest that government is “dismantling

human rights policies and mechanisms,” weakening adherence

to international rights agreements, and so on. Different visions

for constitutional democracy come to the surface in this debate

as well.

Deep-seated disagreement exists in Canadian society on the

proper understanding of rights and the role of the courts. This

deserves to be openly debated. It is critical, therefore, that the

churches be clear on their depth-level justifications for

democracy, and what this means for the role of the judiciary.

The churches’ work for a sustainable economy needs to be

advanced in a context where there is not simply one vision of

constitutional democracy. At some point, this plurality of

justifications for constitutional democracy will clash, overlap

and fuse. It is imperative that faith communities actively engage

in reflection and study on how Christian convictions inform our

understandings of constitutional democracy and how it should

best operate.

Dealing with the constraints on public policy advocacy

If the churches are serious about engaging public debate over

the development of a sustainable economy, they must be aware

of a variety of constraints. Most notably, the churches need to

listen to, learn from, and often confront, the contending visions

of the role of churches, government’s economic role,

assumptions of “normal”, and what is a constitutional

democracy operating in our pluralistic society.

the Catalyst Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2) 4

Civic Engagement Creates ChangeCivic Engagement Creates ChangeBy Rebekah Sears

Civic engagement places new possibilities on the horizon

Many of these actions came after months of consultations with

anti-poverty advocates and organizations, research and cross-

party discussions. Many Parliamentarians are personally

concerned: much of their motivation comes from speaking with

constituents, advocacy groups and concerned citizens – people

like you and me.

The House of Commons Committee on Human Resources, Skills

Development and Persons with Disabilities (HUMA) has been

working on a report on the role of the federal government in

poverty eradication for almost two years. After conducting

research from across the country and looking at various sectors,

HUMA hopes to release the report this autumn. Like the Senate

report, it will require an official response by the government.

What can you do?

October 17 marks the International Day for the Eradication of

Poverty. Events will be held across Canada and the rest of the

world. This is an excellent opportunity to remind Canadian

Parliamentarians about the state of poverty in our own country

and press the need for a federal poverty reduction plan.

Please consider joining the chorus of voices calling for the

elimination of poverty in Canada this fall. Join CPJ’s anti-poverty

efforts, contact your Member of Parliament and your provincial

and municipal representatives. Make sure that you, your family

and friends and your faith community have signed onto

Dignity for All: the Campaign for a Poverty-Free Canada

(www.dignityforall.ca).

Remind your MP of the unanimous motions they made in 1989

and 2009 to eliminate poverty in Canada and also demand their

support for Bill C-545, the anti-poverty Act. Fulfill the

unanimous motion and push the bill forward!

As we enter this fall season, momentum is building for change

and now is the time to get involved and make our voices heard.

Christians and public justice advocates need to be at the

forefront of these changes. CPJ intends to be involved in events

around October 17, and will impact the action on Parliament Hill

throughout the autumn. Please join us!

For years, Canadian social justice advocates have been

vehemently campaigning for the federal government to combat

poverty in Canada.

Public justice calls for a society where people can hold the

government accountable, encouraging active participation and

engagement from everyone. But sometimes at the end of the

day we wonder if our voices have been heard, if we have made

a difference, or if all of these efforts are falling on deaf ears.

Several events from the past year indicate that advocates have

reason to hope and persevere. Change in government policy can

sometimes take months if not years, but recently there has been

major progress in the movement to convince the federal

government to establish a poverty elimination plan, geared

towards eradicating poverty in Canada. Action in the autumn of

2010 could make all the difference.

Progress in 2009 and 2010

On November 24, 2009, Parliament passed a unanimous

resolution that committed the government to develop a

national strategy to eliminate poverty in Canada. By no

coincidence, this resolution came on the 20th anniversary of the

unanimous promise to eradicate child poverty in Canada by the

year 2000 – a goal that obviously has yet to be achieved. Will the

new resolution be a deliberate acknowledgement of the need to

follow through, or another broken promise?

Two weeks later the Senate Subcommittee on Cities released a

serious report on the situation of poverty in Canada, In from the

Margins: A Call to Action on Poverty, Housing and Homelessness.

In this report, the committee outlined over 70 recommendations

for federal government action. The government’s response to

these recommendations, issued on September 27, was to take

them “under advisement.” Canadians will be able to gauge the

political will in Ottawa to advance poverty eradication measures

only when a more fulsome indication of government resolve is

publicized.

In June, New Democrat Member of Parliament Tony Martin

introduced Private Member’s Bill C-545, An Act to Eliminate

Poverty in Canada. The bill was seconded by Liberal MP Michael

Savage and Bloc MP Yves Lessard. Bill C-545 calls for the

development of a federal strategy to eliminate poverty in

Canada and the creation of a Poverty Commissioner to report

progress to Parliament and oversee the whole process. Rebekah Sears was CPJ’s Public Justice Intern

in 2009-2010.

5 the Catalyst Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2)

In the summer of 2008, the Catalyst published a front page

article by Cheryl Mahaffy entitled, “Tar sands fever threatens

Edmonton farmland.” The story won an award from the

Canadian Church Press, and due to reader interest, we decided

to revisit the issue to see what has changed…

The application of French oil giant, Total, to construct and

operate a facility designed to upgrade bitumen (extra heavy oil)

into synthetic crude oil, was approved by the Alberta Energy

Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) on September 16. This

will be the sixth upgrader to be given a green light in the

“Heartland” region near Alberta’s capital city.

Wayne Groot, a third-generation potato farmer, has been living

with his family in the midst of the expansive “Upgrader Alley” –

about 10 km from the proposed Total site.

Wayne anticipated that the ERCB would approve Total’s project,

as “not one single oil sands application has ever been turned

down in this province.”

Public Justice – Small potatoes?

Wayne testified in June 2010 at the ERCB public hearing on

Total’s proposed facility. He was previously involved in hearings

for both the Northwest and Petro-Canada upgraders and has

participated in a committee called Citizens for Responsible

Development to help resolve issues between local citizens and

industrial interests.

Wayne’s advocacy is a result of a variety of concerns: the

unsustainable impact of further industrialization on his farm and

family, uncertainty and anxiety associated with the effect of air

pollution, massive neighbouring land sellouts, and the

destruction of valuable farmland for mushrooming upgrader

projects over the past decade.

Balancing competing interests

Only one local resident was granted standing at the ten days of

public hearings in June. Wayne was denied official standing by

the Board since he lives outside the five kilometer “affected

zone.” Granted only a swift appearance he nevertheless stressed

the upgrader’s contributions to poor air quality and the

destruction of prime agricultural farmland.

He challenged the historical balance of the Board’s rulings,

asserting that development of Alberta’s energy resources had

not taken place in a manner that is “fair, responsible and in the

public interest,” as claimed by the ERCB mission statement.

What is the idea of public interest as professed by the ERCB? In

a series of email exchanges with the ERCB legal department,

Wayne engaged the Board’s understanding of the concept:

“Although I think I can understand why the ERCB does not have

a specific definition of the public interest, they must have some

criteria that they can use in their deliberations for what the

public interest is. If they have no criteria, how they can deem

something to be in the public interest?”

By overlooking deterioration in the quality of life of local citizens

and the environment, Wayne feels the Board has equated the

public interest with economic gain – at the expense of social and

environmental concerns. (The upgrader will contribute an

estimated $200 million in annual provincial taxes.)

Advocating for the bigger picture

Wayne also questions the very need for the project. Part of

Wayne’s rationale for action is premised on the need to “stress

the big picture of what is going on in the area and while we have

the chance, raise awareness of the impact of our lifestyle on our

ecological footprint.”

In 2009, Wayne was featured in a series of web-episodes

initiated by Greenpeace as part of its “Stop the Tar Sands”

Campaign. The video exposed the changing landscape in the

region and revealed a form of fatalism arising as a byproduct of

interest politics and big money: “I think a lot of [farmers] are not

happy to get out. But people are resigned that big industry is

going to win, so they get out while they have a chance. I am not

yet ready to do that.”

Wayne recognizes that while “We are not stopping these

projects, we are making it harder for them to push them

through…it’s always small groups that start change. And we

believe we can make change.”

Opposing Alberta’s “Upgrader Alley:”farming vs. the tar sands

By Salim Hammad

Salim Hammad, an Ottawa-based graduate in

economics and political studies, is interested in the

social ramifications of energy related projects.

If they have no criteria, how can they deem

something to be in the public interest?

the Catalyst Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2) 6

Put our Faith into Action: Supporting a National Housing Strategy

By Trixie Ling

Between 150,000 and 300,000 people experience

homelessness every year in Canada. 150,000 to

300,000 people; this includes individuals with

invisible disabilities, urban aboriginal families,

and newcomers with low-wage jobs, among

others. Affordable, adequate, and secure

housing is crucial for sustaining health and

well-being, yet far too many people are

vulnerable to complex challenges that make

it impossible.

The right to adequate housing is affirmed

under the United Nations Declaration on

Human Rights, which acknowledges “the right

of everyone to an adequate standard of living

for him and his family, including adequate food,

clothing and housing.” It is reiterated in a

number of international human rights treaties,

many of which have been ratified by the

Government of Canada. Sadly however, despite the

fractured collection of housing initiatives in Canada, the federal

government has not gone nearly far enough to address the crisis

of affordable housing.

All this could change with the passage of Bill C-304, An Act to

ensure secure, adequate, accessible and affordable housing for

Canadians. The Bill, introduced by Vancouver East Member of

Parliament Libby Davies (NDP) in the spring of 2009, requires the

federal government to work with provinces and municipalities to

develop targets and timelines for the elimination of

homelessness. It also requires that a housing strategy include a

process for independent monitoring of progress made, as well as

a complaints procedure to address possible violations of the

right to adequate housing.

“This is the most important piece of social policy legislation to

come before Parliament this year,” said Leilani Farha, Executive

Director Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation and

Dignity for All Campaign Committee member. “In compliance

with the Government’s obligation under the International

Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, this Bill

requires the federal government to work with all levels of

government and stakeholders to develop a national strategy to

end homelessness and paves the

way to ensuring adequate housing

as a fundamental human right for

everyone in Canada.”

Multi-party support has allowed Bill

C-304 to successfully pass second

reading (i.e. approval in principle.)

It even survived the clause-by-

clause review in committee, and

the prorogation of Parliament. Yet

there is still significant risk that this bill

will not become law.

An amended version of the Affordable

Housing Act was reported to the

House of Commons on March 24.

Most of the amendments made in

committee are widely seen as adding

significant strength to the proposed

legislation. However, the addition of an opt-out clause for

Quebec may cause the bill to fall on a point of procedure. This

amendment was ruled inadmissible on the grounds that it is

inconsistent with the purpose of the bill. Still, after some delay,

Bill C-304 is now scheduled to go back to the House for debate

on October 20. A final vote will follow later in the fall.

The Liberals and NDP remain firmly behind the Affordable

Housing Act, but its passage requires an additional 31 votes

from the total pool of Conservative and Bloc MPs.

Action on affordable housing is critically needed. So too are

measures to address the underlying issues of poverty and social

exclusion. As individuals and communities of faith, we must get

involved and actively address issues of housing insecurity and

poverty. We can:

• Engage our MPs: call, write letters, visit and urge them to

support a national housing strategy.

• Support Dignity for All: the Campaign for a Poverty-Free

Canada and its call for a federal anti-poverty Act.

• Tell others about the crisis of poverty, housing, and

homelessness, and encourage them to take action.

As Christians, we are called to do justice. We must respond

faithfully to the needs of the poor and homeless. We must face

up to the challenge to care for our neighbours, and to work

towards a just and peaceful society where everyone has a sense

of belonging and a place to call home.

Trixie Ling is a graduate student doing her Masters

of Public Policy at Simon Fraser University in

Vancouver. She was CPJ's first Public Justice Intern

in 2007-2008.

Bill C-304 has the potential to significantly raise the bar

for Canadian social policy. Following close on its heels is

another key legislative initiative. Bill C-545, An Act to

Eliminate Poverty in Canada, would oblige the federal

government to establish and implement a multi-faceted

strategy for poverty elimination, in consultation with

the provincial, territorial, municipal and Aboriginal

governments and with civil society organizations.

7 the Catalyst Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2)

Next year, Canada will celebrate the 40th anniversary of the

introduction of a federal multiculturalism policy, announced in

1971. While the policy has evolved, it has always sought to

challenge Canadians to recognize and celebrate cultural

pluralism. Rejecting the “melting pot” image, the framework

seeks to value the unique stories of those who make up the

Canadian fabric. While policies can be critiqued, I like this

objective.

In many countries including Canada, the embrace of

multiculturalism has, in recent years, loosened within a context

of discomfort, suspicion, panic or fear towards that which (or

who) is different. Those practicing “other” religions, speaking

“other” languages, wearing “other” clothes may find themselves

encouraged to limit these expressions to private life. They then

keep those spaces of a shared public life which look familiar to

the “others” who established these norms in years past. And yet,

we Canadians are folks defined by stories of coming together.

That which holds us together is, in part, a dialogue, one that

(ideally) fosters a sense that we are welcome, wanting to be

known, complete with valued stories of interest.

I've grown up within a Dutch immigrant community, where the

church was central. Beyond the church, the significance of fully

living out one's expression of faith was paramount. My

grandparents, with their families and friends, established lives in

Canada complemented by social institutions and networks

wherein faith was, and is, manifest across everyday life. This

included schools, the workplace, political bodies and beyond.

These lived expressions of faith and spirituality likely contribute

to this community's sense of well-being – without taking away a

sense of being “Canadian.” I can only imagine this same passion

(and sense of calling) compels the development of mosques, of

temples, of cultural centres, of social networks defined by other

cultures and faith traditions. Indeed, these networks and

institutions may also enable individuals to join with other

Canadians in living a full expression of their spiritualities and

faith stories, potentially fostering a sense of well-being for them.

I felt privileged to participate earlier this summer in a discussion

among Christian and Muslim leaders in an Ottawa

neighbourhood where adults wished to provide enhanced

supports for vulnerable youth. Those gathered listened to each

other and to the stories of varied efforts in backing youth.

Together, we identified value in providing social care to, and

connecting with, youth from within one's particular cultural and

faith story. These always-evolving stories may provide context,

and a sense of continuity and connection – not to be detached

from the concerns of socio-economic well-being – woven into

the everyday stuff of life to enhance feelings of security.

In openness to the significance of these stories for individual

well-being, we may also realize the greater commonalities we

share with our neighbours. As we are joined together in concern

for our family and community, and for living according to our

sense of purpose in this place, we’ll engage in what Edward Said

referred to as "the common enterprise of promoting human

community."

The work of public justice offers a rich possibility to create this

shared space for dialogue. In my hometown of Ottawa, I'm

grateful for the Multifaith Housing Initiative (MHI), an

organization joining faith communities in the common purpose

of providing affordable housing. Later this fall, through the MHI,

a Jewish synagogue will host an opportunity for all to learn how

the provision of affordable housing ties into the holiday of

Sukkot, to Jewish living (and a call to social action) and to the

concept of Tzedakah (meaning charity, fairness or justice).

Canada is commonly regarded as a global leader in constructing

a sense of national community from a multicultural reality. As

tensions between faith communities arise around the world, we

are not immune from the tendency to name something

unknown as different and potentially problematic. In this

context, our responsibility to listen, to recognize and to engage

is crucial. Over the summer, CPJ had the opportunity to engage

Professor Lori Beaman, lead investigator with a federally-funded

international "Religion and Diversity" project. The project seeks

to draw on Canadian and international experience to study the

challenges and opportunities presented by religious diversity.

Recognizing the mutual constitution of religion and everyday

contemporary social life, the project looks to identify a path

beyond tolerance towards deep equality – towards a path

whereby each of us might live out expressions of our stories – in

a just and peaceful society.

So as we celebrate 40 years of formally recognizing multicultural

realities, my hope is that we might each be inspired by our own

experiences to co-construct a public life where all Canadians,

each secure in his or her own story, feels a part of our Canadian

human community.

Building on 40 years (and more)....By Mike Bulthuis

Mike Bulthuis is a geographer and a member

of CPJ’s Board.

Groundings

the Catalyst Fall 2010 (Volume 33, Number 2)

Cultural anthropologist Mary Catherine

Bateson once wrote, “There are few things

as toxic as a bad metaphor. You can’t think

without metaphors.” Cognitive research

shows that she is right. A whole network of

conceptual metaphors operates mostly at a

subconscious level to support all our

abstract and theoretical thinking. So, if we

can’t think without metaphors, then it

reasons that bad metaphors could lead to

bad thinking with bad consequences.

When it comes to debates about

multiculturalism and diversity, have our

underlying metaphors been helpful or

problematic for us? What are the

underlying key metaphors that shape our

understanding and approach to these

matters? In Canada and the US, two major

metaphors have commonly been used to

convey each country’s different approaches to

cultural diversity: the mosaic for Canada

and the melting pot for the US. Each

metaphor has its strengths and weaknesses

for engaging the reality of diversity.

The melting pot image suggests an

emphasis on the blending of cultures to

create something new. This can lead to a lot

of positive thinking about how the

different cultures can learn from each other

and adopt each other’s strengths,

capitalizing on the commonalities and

reforming each other’s weaknesses. It can

lead to emphasing change and evolution of

cultures – the interaction between the

different cultures changes all of them into a

new hybrid culture as they melt and meld

together. To use a cooking analogy, the

different cultural ingredients are blended

together into a delicious stew!

Yet not all cultures in the North American

pot have equal flavours. The dominant

mainstream culture’s flavour is so strong

that it overpowers most other cultures’

contributions, unless those minority

cultures can reach a critical mass and start

asserting their flavours. Until then, instead

of blending together, the marginal cultures

are merely assimilated into the mainstream

and their positive contributions lost or

invisible.

1 Corinthians 12:12 – “Just asa body, though one, has manyparts, but all its many partsform one body, so it is withChrist.”

In contrast, the Canadian

mosaic comprised of different

colourful pieces arranged into

an aesthetically pleasing design

seeks to emphasize the uniqueness

and preservation of each culture.

Every cultural piece is colourful and

beautiful in its own right but when placed

together with other cultural pieces, we find a whole more beautiful than its parts.

This metaphor’s strength is its emphasis on the important, almost equal,

contribution of each culture. Every piece in the mosaic is necessary, otherwise the

pattern is unfinished. And each culture’s uniqueness must be preserved – if a mosaic

piece changes its colour, the pattern as a whole will be disrupted. There are no

suggestions of melting or blending; no hybrid culture but a collaboration of uniquely

preserved cultures to form a beautiful arrangement.

But this image fails to recognize that cultures do change colours; cultures are not as

static as a mosaic suggests. Cultural collaborations are not as neat as simply

lying next to each other untouched or unaffected by other cultures. Cultures

interact and change each other, whether they want to or not. So who gets to decide

what the overall pattern is supposed to look like? Does each cultural piece have an

equal say to what the overall pattern will be or is the pattern already decided by the

majority cultures?

I think some of these metaphors’ weaknesses are being played out in today’s

debates on various multicultural issues.

As Christians, however, are there biblical metaphors to inspire and shape our

engagement with diversity? I believe the apostle Paul’s “one body with many parts”

metaphor is more helpful thinking about diversity. The body metaphor for a

community emphasizes both uniqueness and unity. Each body part has its unique

properties and roles yet cannot function independently without the whole. And

even though all parts are not equal, all parts are indispensable; even “those parts of

the body that seem to be weaker.” (1 Cor. 12:22) Applied to cultural diversity, this

metaphor stresses the interaction and interdependence of different cultures for the

common good of the whole. For me, it combines the melting pot’s emphasis on

interaction between the cultures to create a new united reality, yet preserves the

mosaic’s stress on unique and indispensable contributions of each cultural part. It

avoids the pitfalls of assimilation on the one hand and of disunity on the other.

I hope Christians meditate and reflect deeply on the implications of this biblical

metaphor for our approach to diversity in our world.

Shiao Chong is the Christian Reformed Campus Minister serving at York

University, Toronto and Director of the York student club Leadership,

Culture and Christianity. He has served his denomination as an

Inter-Cultural Specialist at the regional level.

Metaphors for DiversityBy Shiao Chong