I call them my "scholarly hive mind," people who study religion in Canada from different perspectives. Whenever a new report about religion in Canada comes out, I ask them to weigh in. Like happened recently with a new Angus Reid Institute study that I wrote about in the Winnipeg Free Press.
I can never include everything they share with me in my columns in the newspaper, so here are their full comments on the report.
John Stackhouse, Crandall University
Of course Canadians-in-general are leery of evangelicals and Muslims. They represent the only two religions visible on the cultural landscape that disrupt the easy course of the post-Sixties agenda of self-realization, prosperity, security, and justice (for approved minorities).
Hindus in Canada are neither populous nor prominent. Sikhs show up significantly only in the Vancouver and Toronto suburbs. Buddhists have that nice Dalai Lama to speak for them, while most Canadians couldn’t name four more important facts about that religion. (“Aren’t they into compassion and mindfulness? That’s nice!”)
If the Chinese who have helped overheat Vancouver’s housing market were identifiable with a religion, that religion would be named alongside evangelicalism and Islam. And God help our Jewish neighbours if Canada experiences an economic downturn.
Meanwhile, then, it’s those noisy, Trump-loving, sport-spoiling evangelicals and those ominous, women-shrouding, terrorist-abetting Muslims we have to watch out for.
And why not the Catholics? Everyone knows that Catholicism in Canada nowadays has only the slightest purchase on its members (exhibit A: artificial birth control; exhibit B: abortion; exhibit C: attendance at mass and confession).
The clergy are so utterly disqualified from public respect because of the continuing tide of sexual scandals around the world that the junior members just long to be quiet and kind while the senior members speak irrelevantly into the air, when they dare to speak at all.
We are not yet in an era of cultural wars, thank God. But the dominant attitude of Boomerish consumerism, fervent-but-selective moralism, and as-you-like-it spirituality militates against conspicuous recalcitrance.
Witness the brief nod by court after legislature after professional college toward religious rights per the Charter as they are then swiftly set aside in the interests of What Matters More. Evangelicals and Muslims are the two most obvious groups who refuse to entirely get with the program.
So no wonder the rest of the crowd suspect and resent them. They’re always threatening to ruin the party and rain on the parade.
Sam Reimer, Crandall University
I suspect that part of the reason that evangelicals’ religiosity is so high is because the less committed evangelicals are disaffiliating. It is, after all, the least popular religion. Interestingly, this disaffiliation trend does not seem to be the case for Muslims, who (based on some reports) often increase their religiosity when they land in Canada (at least for the first generation).
The majority of Canadians were raised in a religious tradition: I wonder if the questions asked here help us understand much about faith transmission (e.g., Did you go through your religion’s formal entry process?).
We know that parental commitment is the highest predictor of faith transmission, but it requires two parents who share the same religious views and who both model active religiosity at home. The questions don’t really get at these factors.
My (late, RIP) friend Gary Bouma said that Australians and Canadians are fine with religion unless it is serious religion. I assume he meant commitment to those religions that makes exclusive claims.
Of course, past and present failures, and media coverage of them, affect perceptions of religious groups as well. It is not surprising then, that Evangelicals and Muslims are viewed as more damaging and also feel the most “shut out” by society. This is much higher for evangelicals who feel the society is moving away from their beliefs, and a more privileged Christianity in the past.
Will immigration help sustain Canada’s religious communities? Well, that depends which ones. Obviously, they will not help sustain the United Church much, nor most mainline Protestant groups.
Immigration will help maintain (particularly charismatic) evangelical churches, and Catholicism to a lesser degree, but obviously they will sustain and grow non-Christian world religions. But for how many generations? That we don’t know.
Joel Thiessen, Ambrose University
Subcultural narratives, attitudes, and practices related to ‘us’ and ‘them’ go a long way to explain Evangelicals and Muslims as outsiders on several fronts (e.g., more religiously committed).
This is reinforced with the one question on ‘your family participated in religious events.’ Evangelicals (50%) and Muslims (42%) stand out in this regard, reinforcing the role of family-based religious socialization behaviours in particular.
Several markers that cultural Catholicism persists (far higher affiliation than belief or practice), alongside clear markers akin to the secular end of the continuum among those who identify as Catholic (e.g., 28% of Catholics don’t believe in God or a higher power; only 43% of Catholics want a religious funeral).
I was surprised to see the proportion of people who find themselves in religious traditions who were not raised in a religious tradition (as high as 30% among Mainline Protestants and as low as 14% among Muslims). More recent qualitative research into conversion experiences, pathways, and narratives in late modern Canadian society would be fascinating here. I was surprised with how high some of these figures were.
While the narrative earlier in the report is that QC and BC are among the most secular provinces, we shouldn’t lose sight of the data half-way through the report on the two provinces with the highest proportion of people to not be raised in a religious tradition – BC (36%) and AB (34%) – the two provinces with the highest proportion of religious nones, as my research with Sarah showed.
Perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised, but it was noteworthy to see how few wanted a religious funeral. Maybe qualitative research exists on this social shift, but if not, a study should be done. I am co-teaching an interdisciplinary course on ‘death and dying’ next year, and this would be an interesting line of inquiry.
Perceived and/or Experienced Polarization – fascinating (and unsurprising) to see the negative views among many in Canada toward Evangelicals and Muslims, especially Evangelicals. In turn, Evangelical perceptions of persecution toward their group are very strong.
Paying attention to polarization rhetoric, perceptions, and experiences is worth tracking closely in the years ahead, and we need more qualitative data to understand better the processes, mechanisms, and narratives that give rise to group perceptions of the ‘other.’
Media is certainly part of the story, but I think there is more in play too (e.g., family, school, politics, social media). Sarah and I explored some of this in one of our chapters on religious nones ,and I look forward to learning more here from the recent book by Paul, Patricia, and Sarah, Religion at the Edge.
Intriguing to see that Muslims (38%) and Sikhs (39%) were the most likely to say that Canadian society makes room for their personal values and faith. This might suggest that prevailing narratives on multiculturalism and diversity are progressively taking root.
However, Muslims were also the second most likely to say Canadian society shuts out their personal values and faith (26%). Clearly, a lot of work remains on the diversity/inclusion front too.
Sarah Wilkins-Laflamme, University of Waterloo
Those with no religion/non-believers don't get much exposure to organized religion in their everyday lives anymore. Their religious literacy is usually quite low.
Often one of the only places they hear about religion now is in the media when there's a negative news story about religion (unmarked graves at formerly Catholic-run residential schools; sex abuse scandals; right-wing evangelicalism from the US and in the Freedom Convoy; the occasional pastor who refuses to comply with health restrictions; etc.).
The nonreligious don't come into much contact with the 'better' sides of religion, such as the social services certain religious groups provide, or the sense of community religion often provides for more religiously committed individuals.
The negative views are also picked up and reinforced by non-religious individuals' social networks who often share the same nonreligion and views.
Muslims and Evangelicals still get the short end of the stick here, being the most disliked groups for many years now. Buddhists are usually the most liked group, although this Angus Reid/Cardus series of surveys didn't ask about Buddhists.
And I also think it's worth pointing out the extremely negative views Evangelicals hold towards atheists and Muslims, although the report did not focus on this result.
Most of the trends presented in the report were not all that surprising, and are a continuation of what's been found in previous surveys and years. The one finding that was more surprising for me was the one Joel also mentioned: the high rates of individuals who said they come from a no religion background but are now into religion. These rates are higher than other surveys have shown them to be.
It might be that a currently religiously committed individual has a different definition of what a nonreligious upbringing looks like (some, but not as much, religion), versus a currently nonreligious individual. More research needed on this.
Recent Stats Can General Social Surveys (from 2018 and 2019) are showing a steep decline in rates of cultural Catholicism in QC (in favor of no religion). Also, the report got the 2019 Stats Can GSS rate of no religion wrong...it's not just over one quarter, but now over one third of the general adult population in Canada who says they have no religion.
Rick Hiemstra, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada
The headline grabbing question in this poll was “In your view, would you say the overall presence of each of these in Canadian public life is benefitting or damaging Canada or Canadian society?” and the possible responses were:
- Damaging;
- No real
impact;
- Benefitting;
- Don’t know/Can’t say.
The question itself was about “presence,” not what these groups did or did not do. I think we should be concerned that the mere presence or existence of a group is being characterized as damaging, or that people are being pushed to think of their neighbours in these terms.
This is polarizing language (damaging-benefitting) and one can only hope that those writing the survey were unaware of what they were doing. We have far too many historical and contemporary examples of what happens in societies when a group is reduced in the public consciousness to a threat.
It is reasonable to ask, “What does a society do with a damaging group?” If their existence is damaging, is their existence tolerated?
Listing “damaging” groups validates and reinforces prejudice. Surely we can all be more careful with each other’s safety and reputations.
Kevin Flatt, Redeemer University
From the point of view of Canadian history, dealing with deep religious and cultural differences has been a recurring challenge that we've sometimes handled reasonably well (coexistence of English-Protestant majority and French-Canadian minority) and sometimes very poorly (relations with Indigenous peoples).
Our federal structure of government can be understood primarily as an attempt to allow for religious-cultural difference in the perennially contested areas of education, access to public institutions, and customs/laws regarding family, marriage, and children.
This structure has worked reasonably well for safeguarding the distinct identity of French Canadians in Quebec, and to some extent (though less well) for French Canadian minorities in other provinces.
In today's context, it's mainly evangelical Protestants and Muslims who have thick religious commitments that are out of step with the predominantly secular hegemonic culture.
Like the old Anglo-Protestant/French-Catholic and the continuing Indigenous/settler divide, these differences have profound implications for education, access to the public square, and family/marriage/sexuality.
And like them, the differences between evangelicals and Muslims and the Canadian majority tend to produce fear and distrust on all sides.
Unfortunately, the structures we built to accommodate the Anglo-Protestant/French-Catholic "two solitudes" have not been adapted or extended to accommodate evangelicals and Muslims now that mainline Protestants, most Catholics, and "nones" have largely converged around a shared secular progressivism since the 1960s.
Our main creative response to the English-French divide—provincial jurisdiction—can't really help evangelicals and Muslims due to their geographical distribution as fairly small minorities in most places.
Let's take the example of evangelicals and education in Ontario. In the 1950s and 1960s, when my parents were in school, most evangelicals would have found the public school system hospitable if somewhat uninspiring (it had, after all, a generically mainline Protestant ethos).
By the 1980s and 1990s, when my generation was in school, overtly Christian elements had been stripped from the system due to the combined effects of social change and the Charter, and the system seemed somewhat alien to evangelicals but more or less religiously neutral.
Today, in my children's generation, most of the evangelicals I know (including several public school teachers) perceive the system as overtly hostile and heavily invested in disabusing their children of their parents' core values. Most of those who can afford to do so are sending their kids to private Christian schools or homeschooling them, usually at great financial sacrifice, while they pay public school taxes and watch their Catholic and progressive secular neighbours enjoy public funding for the schools that reflect their values and teach them to their children.
Even leaving aside the question of whether this is just, it is not a formula for long-term social harmony. It is likely, in fact, to produce alienation and even radicalization. (Side note: is anyone tracking trends in the area of withdrawal from public schooling? Anecdotally, the evangelical exodus from public schools seemed to have accelerated massively even before COVID, and I have heard similar things about the Muslim community.)
Sadly, these survey results do not provide much hope for the future improvement of the prospects of religious outlier groups in Canada. I find it alarming that on balance nearly all groups think the mere presence of evangelicals and Muslims is "damaging to Canada." I share Rick's concern about the wording of that question, too.
Speaking purely as an evangelical, I'm painfully aware that some of our more newsworthy representatives don't do us any favours. But as a society we can't make our willingness to tolerate the very existence of a group contingent on their perceived approvability according to the tastes of the majority.
On a more hopeful note, it was very encouraging to see that large majorities of Canadians of all stripes think that freedom of conscience and religion makes Canada a better country.
It is worrisome to see that most groups of Canadians think freedom of conscience and religion is diminishing in Canada; even more worrisome if they are correct (as they probably are, in my view).
But combined with the on-balance
positive view of religious contributions that most Canadians have, maybe there
is a small opening here for a more tolerant and accommodating approach to deep
religious difference.
