Another print in this portfolio depicts Italian explorer John Cabot also bearing a sword, unfurling the cross of St. George flag. Having disembarked his ship Matthew, he claims the land “discovered” in the name of King Henry VII of England, who, with help from merchants in Bristol, financed Cabot's search for the route to the East! Did he land in Newfoundland, in Labrador, or Cape Breton Island? The two prints depict the genesis  of the French and British struggle through centuries about sovereignty over  the “discovered” Indigenous lands and resources and the oppresion of the Indigenous Peoples.

A propos:   Copied from a Facebook post, from the “Department of Anticolonial History” displaying  the following text  on a brass plaque placed - who knows where - by Republic of Archaeology.ca led by archaeologist Joanne Hammond!!

~  ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Promulgated in 1493 by Pope Alexander VI, the illegitimate Doctrine of Discovery’s first consequence for northern Turtle Island – Canada – arrived in 1497 and then another in 1534. The Kings of England and France were the beneficiaries of claims to the lands by Cabot and Cartier. 

The Indigenous Peoples of Canada have been paying a very long lasting and costly price for these presumptuous  European  assertions of domination.

Skyla Hart, is an Indigenous Cree and Ojibway student in grade 10 of a Winnipeg high school. As a protests, she won’t stand for the singing of “Oh, Canada” because, she says, Canada is a colonized country. She is well aware that this is not just a fact of past history. The traumatic effects continue today. Her mum Raven Hart, who attended Lebret Residential School as did her mother, supports her teenage daughter.   Her words are clear:   “Canada was built on the demise of Indigenous People, the dispossession of the Indigenous people from their lands, their language, and their culture. “   

Skyla’s respectful protest was successful. She is now free at school to sit for the anthem. She states she will not stand until there is a new national anthem. She also welcomes the opportunity to help others in the school learn what Indigenous people have so long experienced.

Skyla's protest prodded me to look at the anthem(s) to see in what ways it was objectionable. Both the English-language and French-language versions bear close attention. 

The line “Our home and native land” omits the fact, of course,  that the Crown, by a variety of less than scrupulous and fair means dispossessed Indigenous Peoples of the bulk of their land and resources. Not taking this fact seriously is a fundamental flaw not only in the anthem but also in the ongoing relationship between Indigenous and Settler peoples. Taking out the “and” and replacing it with “on” would be a more accurate and just reflection of the Canadian reality.  

I also stumbled over the words “the true north – strong and free.”  Canada hasn't been as truthful about the history of our relationship with Indigenous Peoples and there is good reason to think twice about “free”. There was no freedom granted by the Indian Act.  Indigenous peoples were deprived of their freedom to be themselves and the freedom to enjoy and benefit from their traditional lands. As legislation, the Indian Act casts a huge pall over the human rights commitments Canada proclaims and Canadians promote.

The French-language version too merits scrutiny. In it we find the two key symbols which have been the basis for the oppression of Canada’s Indigenous Peoples. As portrayed in the Kelly painting above, both the sword and the cross point to what was to befall the Indigenous Peoples. In the lyrics of the French version of the anthem we have the words: “Car ton bras sait porter l’épée il sait porter la croix [for your arm knows to bear the sword, it knows to carry the cross]. In a song abstracted from history one might take the meaning to be that the faith can grow while the sword ensures the safety of those living a faith reflective of the Gospel. But we have a real, live Canadian history that defies those meanings.

The colonizing sword and cross were not beneficent partners. The Residential School system is the starkest evidence. Raven Hart and her mother were just two of the thousands of children plucked by immoral legislation and the ordered enforcement of armed RCMP officers – the power of the sword - to attend church-run residential schools.   I believe  that the Christ of the cross was there with the children in their trials, suffering, and death.  Nothing can justify what happened in either crucifixion setting.

Colonizing government pursued genocidal aims in step-by-step policies disabling the aspirations of Indigenous Peoples to be self-determining and whole. Assimilating indigeneity into the white “melting pot” of Euro-culture - erasing the Indian presence – and extinguishing Indigenous claims to land and resources were the over-arching colonial goals for far too long.   

In schools and in reserves, Indigenous spirituality was suppressed and Christian religion - the cross - and its beliefs, practices, and obedience imposed. Legislation inflicted unilaterally upon Indigenous Peoples arose from no spirit of respect, care, and compassion. It was generated by an assumption of superiority, righteousness, empowered by the wealth from stolen lands and weapons to conquer others deemed primitive and savage. This was an anthropology of human disrespect, infantilizing others by illegitimate power, too readily blessed by religious authority.  

The imposed religion and the dehumanization which Indigenous Peoples experienced witnesses more to the absence of the divine than to Gospel.  Apologies by Christian churches for the way they allowed and participated in this dehumanization are the very least they can offer. Much more, however, is required to transform the relationship – reconciliation. Pawning responsibility for this oppression off to “individuals behaving badly” – ministers, priests, nuns, teachers, staffers, etc. – is not good enough. It’s a dodge, an avoidance of accountability. Churches – whether they have apologized or not - must look into their theological and ecclesiological bases that allowed church leaders to conclude that such systematic dehumanization was acceptable.   

It wasn’t!! When seriously measured by the norms that Jesus prescribes for those who identify with him and his Way, we can only be embarrassed and ashamed by the failure of Canadian Christianity and its institutional churches to live Jesus’ Gospel. 

This “histoire” was no “épopée des plus brillants exploits.” It was, lamentably, mainly a history of conquest which demands confession, apology, conversion, and thoroughgoing root-and-branch processes leading to transformation.  

Such transformation requires serious engagement of equals together using all resources necessary to come to a new relationship – a relationship of respect, of shared vision, of generosity and compassion, and clear-headed realism – of justice. “All resources necessary” means ensuring that Indigenous peoples have the resources – money, facilities, gifted expert leadership - they need to work as equals with representatives of the colonial Settler population. Indigenous Peoples have been illegally  “dispossessed” of inestimable assets – many-trillions of dollars – their land and resource heritage. So, we dare not fail to expend what is necessary to change the unacceptable reality.

   

Legal bases of Indigenous rights and claims are already in hand. These have been clearly established and adjudicated by laws, treaties, Constitution Act, and Courts. Now is the time draw the consequences of these bases,  to act together to create a society where all can thrive and bless each other.

The political seriousness and leadership are, however, still missing. Leadership to promote this change is still not evident. Canada has governments, including the present ones, which keep throwing money at “Indigenous problems”, but are not willing to accept responsibility for addressing the fundamentals that keep Indigenous Peoples dependent and colonial Settler peoples in dominant and self-justifying roles.   

No tinkering will accomplish a transformation. We need courageous political leaders – across party lines – to work together with Indigenous leadership to effect the core changes that will dismantle the colonial settler framework perpetuated by the Indian Act. What a new reality will look like is less than clear. But for me the “two-row wampum” image speaks of the kind of partnership that is based on mutual respect, shared resources, and a common vision for the well-being of all Canadians and the northern Turtle Island domain.

I hope Skyla has great success in sharing learning with her school-mates. I hope Settler and Indigenous leaders join the learning and discern a clear vision that moves us beyond the Doctrine of Discovery and its destructive consequences.  Perhaps then with Skyla, we can sing with gusto and joy  a newly worded anthem about “brillants exploits”  of Canada that all can gratefully  call “home”.