C. DOUGLAS JAY:  FAITHFUL VISIONARY

(Republished with author's permission from Touchstone - Theology Shaping Witness.  Vol. 41, June, 2023, No. 1)(Photo: courtesy Victoria University)

By Phyllis D. Airhart,

Professor Emerita of the History of Christianity,  Emmanuel College of Victoria University in the University of Toronto.

My introduction to C. Douglas Jay was as a voice on the other end of a telephone call on a Monday evening in December 1983. A few days later I flew from Chicago to Toronto to be interviewed for the position in church history that was opening at Emmanuel College with John Webster Grant’s

retirement. It is not going too far to say that meeting Doug Jay for the first time changed my life.

The search committee was willing to take what appeared then (and looks to me even now after retirement) to be a huge gamble. I was, after all, still a graduate student. I had applied in order to practice putting together my first curriculum vitae and was not expecting an interview, much

less an offer. Yet he and the committee he chaired were somehow able to imagine me as a professor at Emmanuel—perhaps more readily than I at first saw myself in that role. My admiration for Doug’s visionary leadership grew over the years as I learned more about the breadth of his accomplishments.

What I experienced in the aftermath of my first encounter was typical of his various roles: his gift for imagining the potential of persons and institutions and a gentle but tenacious resolve in guiding them.

Ecumenical Trailblazer

Doug was a boy from rural Ontario whose theological journey took him around the world, making his mark in denominational, ecumenical, and interfaith circles along the way. He was born on 10 October 1925 in Monticello, Ontario, to the Rev. Charles and Luella Jay, four months after their Methodist congregation became part of the new United Church of Canada. He quickly showed himself to be extraordinarily accomplished.  He graduated from the University of Toronto with a Bachelor of Arts in

philosophy and history in 1946, marrying Ruth Crooker that same year.

Queen’s University was the first to recognize his promise as a teacher, hiring him after the war to teach logic to classes mostly made up of veterans around his own age. But he chose Emmanuel College rather than Queen’s to pursue his theological education and graduated in 1950 with the Sanford Gold

Medal for the highest standing. He was ordained to further study that year and moved with Ruth to Edinburgh, returning in 1952 with his PhD in hand.  After serving his required ministerial placement in

two rural pastoral charges (Elk Lake and Trafalgar in Ontario), he returned  to Victoria University yet again in 1955, this time to teach philosophy of religion and Christian ethics at Emmanuel.

A search of the University of Toronto Library database shows a list of articles and books authored by “C. Douglas Jay” covering subjects ranging from “Logical Analysis, Theological Positivism, and Metaphysics” to residential schools, Canadian identity, and theological education. What does not show up is arguably his most important work as a scholar faithful to the church. As secretary of the United Church’s Commission on World Mission, he was principal author of a report prepared for the 1966 General Council that comprised nearly one hundred pages in the Record of Proceedings. The sixteen recommendations at the end formed the basis for a new direction in the United Church’s mission policy, with the eleventh signaling an openness to other faiths that differed from past approaches to missions and evangelism: “The church should recognize that God is creatively and redemptively at work in the religious life of all mankind.” 161

Preparing the R.P. Mackay Memorial Lectures gave Doug an opportunity to introduce to a wider audience the church’s emerging understanding of “world mission” and its relation to evangelism. In a series of lectures he delivered at theological colleges across Canada in 1966-67 and published as World Mission and World Civilization, he described how the ecumenical task had recently shifted from focusing on global missionary enterprises—“missions”—to making “an effective Christian presence in the world.” 162 He later came to see the tragedy of the residential schools in Canada as an illustration closer to home of the consequences of earlier methods. He admitted that what was now considered cultural abuse or genocide closely paralleled past missiological approaches that were still

practiced, especially in Third World contexts. 163

Reflecting on the report of the Commission on World Mission thirty years later, Doug claimed that “the United Church pioneered in the establishment of an interfaith dialogue portfolio,” ahead of similar initiatives in the World Council of Churches by several years. 164

As his Emmanuel colleague Roger Hutchinson looked back on Doug’s accomplishments, he astutely suggested that the report’s significance for the United Church itself was in pushing it “to the edge of where it was prepared  to  go at that time.” 165   Its stance was more controversial than some members of the Commission perhaps realized, with no guarantee of acceptance in the wider church.

The implications of ecumenism and religious pluralism drew Doug’s attention in other contexts. He was a consultant for the World Council of Churches, attending meetings that took him around the world as part of its program on Dialogue with People of Living Faiths and Ideologies. 166   He was

also involved with the Association of Theological Schools (ATS) before and after his retirement, serving as its president from 1984-86. His presidential address urged theological educators to see ATS’s bi-national association as “a modest sign or symbol of our intent to transcend national or other partisan interests which circumscribe the global dimensions of the gospel,” insisting  that “nothing less than a genuinely global consciousness” would suffice to meet that task. 167

Adroit Administrator

Doug had new opportunities to put his ecumenical principles into practice when he stepped away from his teaching position at Emmanuel in 1969 to become the founding director of a groundbreaking venture that became the Toronto School of Theology (TST). On the occasion of his 90th

birthday, TST’s boardroom was named in his honour and his leadership commemorated with a plaque that recognized his role in guiding the new  undertaking in ecumenical theological education “with clear-sighted vision, exceptional gifts of leadership, unstinting dedication, and enormous tact.  168

Doug returned to Emmanuel in 1981 and until his retirement served as principal for what his obituary described as “nine challenging years.” I admit that I had a twinge of conscience as I read those words in the Globe and Mail, for not everyone was happy with the announcement that the church history position had gone to a then young woman in her first academic job. I later heard from an acquaintance that Doug had joked that he was sleeping with the letter from my dissertation supervisor at the University of Chicago under his pillow. It was something we still laughed about years later. But I suspect he had more troublesome issues to deal with than my appointment.

There were hints at the formal installation ceremony of challenges ahead. John Webster Grant brought greetings from the faculty, lauding Doug’s leadership at TST as showing “an admirable talent for bringing members of the community together in conference and ensuring that all points of view received a fair hearing.” He expressed confidence that Doug’s “enigmatic smile” and “proven toughness” would lead to “creative resolution of inevitable tension.” 169

Doug acknowledged the prospect of tension in his own address, identifying its “basic source” as Emmanuel’s “dual citizenship”: belonging “simultaneously to the sphere of church and

higher education.” 170   Being seen by some as an unduly conservative institution, unwilling to change, and by others irresponsibly liberal or even radical was another challenge he anticipated. 171   I can attest that Doug did indeed display patience in listening to all points of view, although his faculty didn’t always appreciate the lengthy meetings that consensus-building entailed! His fairness was matched by a firmness more quietly wielded.

I saw flashes of toughness as I thumbed through archival documents from his years as principal. He rightly predicted that the college’s relationship to the church would be a source of tension, some of it related to a group of conservative ministers and members who came together as the Community of Concern in 1988. Although it was the ordination of gay ministers that galvanized the organization, other theological “concerns” had been smoldering for years. Matters came to a head for Emmanuel when the president of Community of Concern made headlines with a statement that questioned the theological integrity of the United Church’s  theological schools. Doug’s response was diplomatic but unyielding in his defence of Emmanuel’s reputation. He drew attention to the college’s recently revised mission statement that had affirmed “the central significance of Jesus Christ within a trinitarian understanding of God” and the centrality of the Bible as “the primary witness to God’s creative, reconciliatory, redemptive activity in the world.”

The conciliatory tone turned tougher when he pointed out that it had never been his own practice to be “narrowly defensive, let alone threaten lawsuits even when statements are made that could be construed as libelous”; yet he warned that the college was being “grossly misrepresented by sweeping generalizations.” Doug’s letter did not end criticism of the college but seems to have lowered the temperature; at least no lawsuits followed! 172

Doug was also mindful of Emmanuel’s university setting where excellence in both teaching and research were taken into consideration when assessing faculty performance and institutional accreditation. As chair of search committees for over half a dozen faculty positions, he had a hand in

shaping an ethos where both were valued. He aimed to raise the profile of faculty research, and a grant from the Lilly Endowment that he oversaw was designed to provide seed money for initiatives such as the Centre for the Study of Religion in Canada that has since expanded its mandate as the

Centre for Religion and Its Contexts. He brought together a mix of established and younger scholars in Bible, history, theology, and ethics to work with practitioners in a variety of pastoral areas. His intelligence and insight shaped us as a faculty in ways that had institutional repercussions spanning four decades. I was the youngest of those appointees, and the last to retire in 2020.

A grant from ATS after his retirement supported further research on the globalization of theological education. Reflecting on his findings, he declared: “If it was ever justifiable to ignore religious diversity in theological education, that time is past.”  Unless religious diversity was addressed in the theological curriculum, students would be left miseducated.” Rather than adding courses to an already crowded

curriculum, he suggested approaching diversity in “the ethos throughout the whole curriculum.” 173 That openness to sharing the curriculum with other faith traditions contributed to a spirit of theological hospitality at Emmanuel that led years later to initiatives in interreligious education.

Farsighted Christian Ethicist Doug Jay never left behind the field to which he was first appointed

at Emmanuel. On some matters of Christian ethics, his discerning analysis  was ignored—or was perhaps too far ahead of its time to gain traction. For instance, how to deal with misinformation in a changing media environment was the subject of a TST symposium published as a booklet on Truth in

Advertising that he co-authored soon after he became director. While it focused on how to analyze “truth norms” for various types of truth-claims in advertising, the concluding paragraph warned that newspapers, magazines, movies, and television programs were prone to the same abuses: “The

shocking and terrifying danger we felt impelled to point out here … is the subtle slanting of news in its very reporting.” The “patient search” for standards that the symposium called for is still ongoing some forty years later, complicated by the new quandaries of social media. 174

“Environmentalists and Banks Square Off” was a headline in the Globe and Mail’s business section that caught my eye as I worked on this profile. Coming across Doug’s correspondence related to a magazine article that was never published was a reminder that long before Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG), Canadian churches had been players in faceoffs with financial institutions. In 1981 Doug was invited by P.B.C. (Brian) Beauchamp, the public affairs manager at the Canadian Imperial

Bank of Commerce, to write about “The Role of the Church in Today’s Society.” The letter explained that the bank had launched Spectrum, a new publication dealing with issues of broad public concern. Beauchamp had turned to Doug seeking answers to “questions that are troubling sincere people, within the Church and outside” about its role in “an increasingly interdependent global society.” Beauchamp listed eight questions that showed particular interest in the political activism of some churches and sensitivity to criticism of business practices. Was the “aggressive” activism of some church groups representative of the whole?  Should the church be interested in social or political issues, some of them foreign rather than domestic, or “should it confine itself to spiritual and doctrinal matters?” 175

Doug addressed the fundamental issue head-on in the opening paragraph of his article. He acknowledged that the Anglican and United churches, along with other church-related groups, had been at the forefront of outspoken responses to social issues that were to some “surprising and

alarming.” He went on to defend their activism, explaining that it was not a new or unprecedented role but inspired by a prophetic tradition that dated from biblical times. 176 He commended the work of interchurch coalitions that had brought Protestants and Catholics together, among them the Taskforce on the Churches and Corporate Responsibility, GATT-Fly (focused on monitoring international trade), and Project North (an ally of Indigenous opposition to the Mackenzie Valley pipeline)—advocacy groups that might well have been on radar of business executives. 177

Doug admitted that some religious activists had lost credibility due to prophetic zeal, deliberate misrepresentation, over-simplification of complex issues, and attention-grabbing tactics. Yet his measured conclusion was to urge cooperation among social justice advocates, specialists,

government, and other agencies to solve social problems that were beyond the churches’ expertise. 178 His attention to environmental issues was particularly prescient. To him it was apparent that “a finite planet” could not  sustain unlimited growth and the environmental deterioration accompanying

it. 179  There was, he added, much to learn from “native peoples…and other important allies in the environmental and ecological groups which are protesting the unrestrained exploitation of   nature by the dominant technocratic culture.” 180

After submitting the Spectrum article, Doug received a generous honorarium of $3,000. However, the bank withdrew the publication offer two months before it was scheduled to go to press in the April 1982 issue.  An apologetic letter from Beauchamp delivered the news; after  “considerable discussion,” the editorial board had decided to delay it until “certain other areas of widespread interest have been covered” since it was  likely to be of interest to “only a specialized segment” of the magazine’s audience. The editorial board retained exclusive rights to the article “consistent with the payment of the honorarium.” 181 Doug’s reply expressed disappointment on learning that the decision was based not on his article’s lack of merit but “on appraisal of addressing your target audience on this theme at this time.” There was a hint of annoyance in his request to be kept informed “as to when the article might see the light of day.” 182

Doug had good reason to be miffed: he had covered the topics suggested by the public affairs manager’s questions, though admittedly his in-depth responses were not “dumbed down” for a mass audience. Possibly the editorial board expected a viewpoint more favourable to the financial

“establishment” rather than of a defence of a prophetic gospel. The article was never published; Spectrum appears to have ceased publication shortly thereafter. 183

CONCLUSION

Doug retired as principal of Emmanuel College in 1991, was appointed as professor emeritus 1992, and at the time of his death on the first day of 2021 in his 96th year was principal emeritus. By then he had accumulated a long list of achievements and honours: member of the Order of Canada (1988), the Governor-General’s Commemorative Medal for the 125th Anniversary of Confederation, the Award for Outstanding Service from ATS (1988), an Arbor Award from U of T (2001), medals for both the

Queen’s Golden and Diamond Jubilee (2002 and 2012), Distinguished Alumni Award from the Emmanuel College Alumni Association (2012), and five honorary degrees.

Not to be overlooked are his more personal accomplishments and honours: husband to Ruth, who predeceased him in 2012; father to David, Ian, Garth; grandfather and great-grandfather to their children; and minister emeritus at Christ First United Church in Mississauga in the community where he and Ruth had lived for many years.   “Quiet wisdom” is a phrase that recurs in citations and tributes to C. Douglas Jay. His is a vision that still inspires the mission of Emmanuel College and its creation of an interreligious curriculum that fosters intercultural dialogue. He valued the wisdom that was to be found in other faith communities while remaining committed to the teachings of his own. He was, and remains in my memory, a faithful visionary.

161 “World Mission,” Record of Proceedings (1966), 435.

162 C. Douglas Jay, World Mission and World Civilization (Toronto: Board of World Mission, United Church of Canada, [1967?]), 2–4.

163 C. Douglas Jay, “What Should We Learn from a Sorry Past?” In Trust 12, no. 3 (Spring 2001): 20.

164 C. Douglas Jay, “Missiological Implications of Christianizing the Social Order with Special Reference to the United Church of Canada,” Toronto Journal of Theology 12, no. 2 (1996): 278

165 “Ministry through Hope: C. Douglas Jay Exploring the Lines that Divide Humans,” EC News, Autumn 2013, https://issuu.com/vic_report/docs/ec_news_autumn_2013, 2. Roger was interviewed for the Emmanuel College newsletter after Doug was honoured by  the Emmanuel College Alumni/ae Association with the distinguished alumni/ae award.

166 John Webster Grant, “Biography of C. Douglas Jay,” in Theological Education in  Canada, ed. Graham Brown (Toronto: United Church Publishing House, 1998), 6-7.

167 C. Douglas Jay, “On Bi-Nationalism and Globalization: President’s Address to the Biennial Meeting,” Theological Education 23, no. 1 (Autumn 1986): 66.

168 Pamela Couture, “A Tribute to TST’s Founding Director, Rev. Dr. C. Douglas Jay,” Toronto Journal of Theology 37, no. 1 (2021): 1-2. The article includes reflections on Doug’s illustrious career made by Roger Hutchinson, who had served as the student representative on the search committee that selected him as director.

169 John Webster Grant, “Faculty Greetings,” 18 November 1981, Emmanuel College Principal’s Office fonds, Victoria University (Toronto) Archives (cited hereafter as VCA), Installation Jay, C.D., 2004.088V, 8-7.

170 C. Douglas Jay, “Installation Address,” 3, VCA, Installation Jay, C.D.,2004.088V, 8-7.

171 Ibid, 9.

172 Letter from C. Douglas Jay to John Trueman, 4 June 1990, VCA, Community of Concern, 2004.088V, 3-2.

173 C. Douglas Jay, “Theological Education beyond 2000: A Canadian Perspective,” Theological Education 36, no. 2 (Spring 2000): 12.

174 C. Douglas Jay, et al., Truth in Advertising: A Symposium of the Toronto School of Theology, University of Toronto (Toronto: Fitzhenry & Whiteside and Harper & Row, 1972), 37; emphasis in the original. The preface indicates that the material from the symposium was considered “a companion-piece to the already-published and highly-praised Report of the Committee on Advertising and Ethics,” which Doug had chaired for the United Church; cf. Record of Proceedings (1971), 252-67.

175 Letter from P.B.C. Beauchamp to C. Douglas, 9 July 1981, VCA, Magazine Article, 2017.13V, 4-2.

176 C. Douglas Jay, “The Role of the Church in Today’s Society, or What in the World Is the Church Doing?” 1-2, VCA, Magazine Article, 017.13V, 4-2.

177 Ibid, 4-5.

178 Ibid, 12.

179 Ibid, 4.

180 Ibid, 10.

181 Letter from P.B.C. Beauchamp to C. Douglas Jay, 10 February 1982, VUA, Magazine Article, 2017.13V, 4-2.

182 Letter from C. Douglas Jay to P.B.C. Beauchamp, VUA, Magazine Article, 2017.13V, 4-2.

183 Rod McQueen, A History of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (Toronto: ECW Press, 2021), 64 notes that bank changed the name of the publication Commercial Letter to Spectrum in 1979 but makes no reference to its demise. The University of Toronto Library catalogue has no record of it after the third volume.