Care of Soul

I have been thinking about this blog and the original premise. It was/is a way for me to make sense out of my ministry as a healthcare chaplain. But I have given some thought to the terms "care of Soul" and what it means. Soul and Spirit, to some, are interchangable. The soul or Spirit of the individual is thought to the essence of who each person is. It is something intertwined with our personality, and is something more than just thoughts and feelings. Soul is about awareness. Philosophers have debated for millenia about what is reality and why we exist. Decartes talks about awareness of one's existence.
Care of Soul is about attending to the inner experience and being aware of Self. Often there are things about us, that bother us, that we try to ignore, things that we don't want to deal with or try to forget. I'm not saying that we need to dwell on something or pick it apart. (Therapy can be helpful but not that everything needs to become an issue.) Care of soul is about being aware of what is going on within us and noticing. "Oh, I got a little anxious when the driver did that." or "Oh, I was happy to hear that event occurred." It's more like a .. curiosity we'll say than a need to panic and examine everything inkling about life.

So at the dawn of a new decade, it is time to rethink and reassess life and its curiosities.

Vancouver Sun Article by Douglas Todd December 21, 2009

The Fraser Health Authority's decision to terminate 12 spiritual care directors is a sign it is not operating at the highest levels of medical innovation.

To put it more bluntly, the sudden firing of the spiritual care coordinators is a strong indicator that the Fraser Health Authority's leadership is living in the Jurassic Age, when dinosaurs roamed.

Fraser Health's administrators appear painfully ignorant of contemporary scientific research into healing.

They don't seem to realize that, since 2001, more than 5,000 research studies have been published showing a strong correlation between patients' spirituality and their physical and mental well-being.

But Fraser Health does not appear to respect this university research into how spirituality and religion have been shown to, among other things, reduce patients' physical and mental disease rates and the time they spend in hospitals.

Instead, Fraser Health also has been slashing what it questionably calls other "non-core" services, including social workers/counsellors, addiction programs and psychiatry for troubled youths.

There is no doubt strong pressure on rising health care costs.

But those pressures have precious little to do with non-denominational spiritual care coordinators, who used to be known as chaplains.

The high price tag for medical care has mostly to do with the ever-rising expectations of the public and the escalating cost of technology -- equipment and diagnostic testing -- as well as drugs, not to mention the often high earnings of many physicians, medical specialists and administrators.

With Fraser Health running an annual budget of $2.48 billion, it appears short-sighted to chop 12 spiritual care directors trained in supporting people with all kinds of grave illnesses.

The $650,000 the spiritual caregivers collectively earn is less than 1/4,000th of the Fraser Health's $2.48 billion annual budget, which apparently has to be trimmed by $10 million due to provincial government shortfalls.

There has been an outcry about the November firings by an unusual coalition of religious and secular leaders, according to Christoph Reiners, pastor of Peace Lutheran Church in Abbotsford.

The loose coalition includes mainline Protestants, Catholics, evangelicals, Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims, New Democratic Party MLAs and regional mayors. But the coalition has been told by Fraser Health CEO Nigel Murray not to waste their breath.

Nevertheless, Murray and his advisers would do well to catch up on the extensive scientific research outlined in the seminal book, Spirituality in Patient Care, by Dr. Harold Koenig, a Duke University psychiatrist who has arguably done more than anyone to gather academic data on the positive benefits of integrating spirituality into clinical practice.

Spirituality in Patient Care, for instance, cites a major study in the New England Journal of Medicine showing that 90 per cent of medical patients report using religion and spirituality to cope with and make sense of physical illness. Forty per cent said it's the "most important" way they do so.

Additional studies, including at Duke Medical Center, have found that people who receive spiritual or religious support are less prone to disease, and spend fewer days in hospital on average than non-religious people with the same acute or chronic conditions.

Spirituality in Patient Care also points to dozens of studies showing North Americans who feel sustained by their religious convictions and communities are inclined to live longer and suffer less from depression, anxiety, suicidal tendencies and addictions.

Despite this overwhelming data linking a vibrant spirituality with good health, Koenig is realistic enough to recognize spiritual care coordinators are not a panacea for all that ails patients.

Not every patient wants spiritual support, for instance. Sometimes, as Koenig says, religion can get in the way of healing, including patients who take an unhealthy fatalistic view that their disease is "God's will" or "Allah's will" and there's nothing they should try to do about it.

To be fair, Fraser Health is not the only unimaginative medical organization in North America cutting chaplains and others, such as social workers and counsellors, who often provide spiritual and emotional back-up to patients.

These behind-the-times medical organizations are flagrantly disregarding the recommendations of major mainstream North American-wide professional bodies, including those devoted to hospital accreditation, nursing and medical education.

All these major medical bodies, reports Spirituality in Patient Care, have gone on record urging hospitals to improve spiritual care for patients, both through the use of chaplains and by heightening the spiritual literacy of physicians, nurses and social workers.

The recent research linking spirituality with good patient care points to a win-win situation.

At a relatively low cost, the majority of patients who ask for spiritual support could receive the help they need to heal.

As well, Canadian taxpayers could in the long-run save money through reduced incidence of disease and shorter hospital stays.

dtodd@vancouversun.com

Read Douglas Todd's blog at www.vancouversun.com/thesearch

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Cleaning my computer files again...

Our Father Who Art In Heaven.
Yes?
Don't interrupt me. I'm praying.
But -- you called ME!
Called you?
No, I didn't call you.
I'm praying.
Our Father who art in Heaven.
There -- you did it again!
Did what?
Called ME.
You said,
"Our Father who art in Heaven"
Well, here I am....
What's on your mind?
But I didn't mean anything by it.
I was, you know, just saying my prayers for the day.
I always say the Lord's Prayer.
It makes me feel good,
kind of like fulfilling a duty.
Well, all right.
Go on.
Okay, Hallowed be thy name .
Hold it right there.
What do you mean by that?
By what?
By "Hallowed be thy name"?
It means, it means . . good grief,
I don't know what it means.
How in the world should I know?
It's just a part of the prayer.
By the way, what does it mean?
It means honored, holy, wonderful.
Hey, that makes sense..
I never thought about what 'hallowed' meant before.
Thanks.
Thy Kingdom come,
Thy will be done,
on earth as it is in Heaven.
Do you really mean that?
Sure, why not?
What are you doing about it?
Doing? Why, nothing, I guess.

I just think it would be kind of neat if you got

control, of everything down here like you have up

there. We're kinda in a mess down here you know.
Yes, I know;
but, have I got control of you?
Well, I go to church.
That isn't what I asked you.
What about your bad temper?
You've really got a problem there, you know.
And then there's the way you spend

your money -- all on yourself.
And what about the kind of books you read ?
Now hold on just a minute!
Stop picking on me!
I'm just as good as some of the rest

of those People at church!

Excuse ME..
I thought you were praying
for my will to be done.
If that is to happen,
it will have to start with the ones
who are praying for it.
Like you -- for example ..
Oh, all right. I guess I do have some hang-ups.
Now that you mention it,
I could probably name some others.
So could I.
I haven't thought about it very much until now,
but I really would like to cut out some of those things.
I would like to, you know, be really free.
Good.
Now we're getting somewhere.

We'll work together -- You and ME.
I'm proud of You.
Look, Lord, if you don't mind,
I need to finish up here.
This is taking a lot longer than it usually does.
Give us this day, our daily bread.
You need to cut out the bread..
You're overweight as it is.
Hey, wait a minute! What is this?
Here I was doing my religious duty,
and all of a sudden you break in
and remind me of all my hang-ups.
Praying is a dangerous thing.
You just might get what you ask for.
Remember, you called ME -- and here I am.
It's too late to stop now.
Keep praying. ( pause . . )
Well, go on.
I'm scared to.
Scared? Of what?
I know what you'll say.
Try ME.
Forgive us our sins,

as we forgive those who sin against us.
What about Ann?
See? I knew it!
I knew you would bring her up!
Why, Lord, she's told lies about me, spread stories.
She never paid back the money she owes me.
I've sworn to get even with her!
But -- your prayer --
What about your prayer?
I didn't -- mean it..
Well, at least you're honest.
But, it's quite a load carrying around all that

bitterness and resentment isn't it?
Yes, but I'll feel better as soon as I get even with her.
Boy, have I got some plans for her.
She'll wish she had never been born.
No, you won't feel any better.
You'll feel worse.
Revenge isn't sweet.
You know how unhappy you are --
Well, I can change that.
You can? How?
Forgive Ann.
Then, I'll forgive you;
And the hate and the sin,
will be Ann's problem -- not yours.
You will have settled the problem
as far as you are concerned.
Oh, you know, you're right.
You always are.
And more than I want revenge,
I want to be right with You . . (sigh).
All right, all right . .
I forgive her.
There now!
Wonderful!
How do you feel?
Hmmmm. Well, not bad.
Not bad at all!
In fact, I feel pretty great!
You know, I don't think I'll go to bed uptight tonight.
I haven't been getting much rest, you know.
Yeah, I know.
But, you're not through with your prayer, are you?

Go on....
Oh, all right.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
Good! Good! I'll do that.
Just don't put yourself in a place
where you can be tempted.
What do you mean by that?
You know what I mean.
Yeah. I know.
Okay.
Go ahead... Finish your prayer.
For Thine is the kingdom,
and the power,
and the glory forever.
Amen.
Do you know what would bring me glory --
What would really make me happy?
No, but I'd like to know.
I want to please you now..
I've really made a mess of things..
I want to truly follow you...
I can see now how great that would be.
So, tell me . . .
How do I make you happy?
YOU just did.

I did.......

Quote

Quote from Plainviews commentator

Another resource I have found helpful, as recommended by a friend and colleague, is Mollenkott's
Omnigender (book). A seasoned chaplain at a staff chaplains' retreat yesterday stated (in relationship to a film clip and discussion about the movie Philadelphia) something like,“we as chaplains do not minister to a lifestyle but to the soul of the person, to the child of God that is created in the image of God.”

What's on my Ipod Parting Glass.. (From movie Waking Ned Devine)

All the money that e'er I had
I spent it in good company
And all the harm I've ever done
Alas, It was to none but me
And all I've done for want of wit
To memory now, I can't recall
So fill to me the parting glass
Goodnight and joy be to you all!

Fill to me the parting glass
And drink a health whate'er befalls
Then gently rise and softly call
Goodnight and joy be to you all!

Of all the comrades that e'er I had
They're sorry for my going away
And all the sweethearts that e'er I had
They'd wish me one more day to stay.
Since it fell into my lot
that I should rise, and you should not
I'll gently rise and softly call
Goodnight and joy be to you all!

But since it fell into my lot
That I should rise and you should not
I'll gently rise and softly call
Goodnight and joy be to you all!

So fill to me the parting glass
And drink a health whate'er befalls
Then gently rise and softly call
Goodnight and joy be to you all!

My first wedding

Tomorrow I will officiate at my first wedding! A patient has requested to get married. I met him today and have spoken to the bride on the phone. So today I had to learn what the process is for me to officiate. I thought that I had a registry book but apparently I didn't apply for one from Vital Statistics yet, so I've had to phone a colleague to borrow theirs. Luckily, it is in the evening so I have time to get the book.

What a way to end a weird week.

Photos from Tibetan Art

Courtesy of my colleague (ripped off of Facebook)

Tibetan Sacred Art Tour

Today, my colleagues and I went to a local church for the Tibetan Sacred Art Tour 2009 where we watched monks creating a sand mandala. I have never actually watched the process before but have seen photos. I didn't realize that they use metal funnels to place the sand. They have to be very precise in the design despite having a template. All the while, the monks were praying. Interesting process.

Article of Interest... Three Clergymen, Three Faiths, One Friendship

Fighting for the Importance of Spiritual Health

Book recommendation

Earlier this month, a colleague asked me for book recommendations to help move her spiritually. I thought about it and scoured my Goodreads listings, and thought about it some more. I asked how does she think she wants to be moved? Is she feeling dry? wanting to learn some specific area, what have you? Her response was "if you were my CPE supervisor, what you recommend for me to grow spiritually? and in my job?"

So I gave it some more thought and have come up with some books that I think are good for various reasons. I realize that some times you are enthralled with a book or show or saying because it spoke to you at a certain time for a certain situation, but when you review/re-read the book, it doesn't speak to you in the same way. The "WOW" factor is gone. But that doesn't mean that you don't get something out of the same thing.

I have been purging the house. (or trying to for the past few months, and got sidetracked by oh, a job, cooking food, going to Italy for a dream vacation, and refusing to have visitors in as it is piling up in the first floor, and now we are preparing for renos of my kitchen... let's not go there.) Anyhow, I have resumed the purging trying to do one project or room a day. Today, it was the bookcase in my bed room. I haven't counted the list, but I would say there are at least..... 50 to 70. Most are theology textbooks that I have not looked at since... graduating. In some cases, they are from theology degree #1 -- some 10 years ago. So I KNOW the rule.. if you haven't used it in 6 months... toss it!! Books are different, you do tend to reread or have sentimental attachment. Anyhow, books are going. The lists are posted on Facebook and what isn't taken by friends, will be posted on Craigslist or Freecycle, the rest will go to the book table at my church.

So the book that I had recommended to my colleague was The Passion of Reverend Nash. But that is not the one that I meant as I think I read these 2 books close in time and the plot is similar and I messed them up. I found this book at Chapters for $2. So I figured 2 bucks is 2 bucks. But it was a good 2 bucks.

Anyhow, the other book is by Anne Hines called The Spiral Garden. This is a book about a female minister who takes over a failing parish and the book is introduced this way... Moses never saw the Promised Land. King David didn't get to build the Temple. Jesus preached an unpopular message and died on the cross. Reverend Ruth Broggan thinks God has something to answer for. Unsatisfied with traditional teachings, Broggan takes a radical approach to finding the meaning of life.

(unfortunately there is no comprehensive review by others, other than this blip that seems to be on most websites but is not a reader's comment.)

So Ruth ends up in a new parish and things are going along with her ministry. She is figuring this congregation and their issues out, plus her life is a bit a of mess. (face it, ministers are humans too, we are all ministers, but yes those of us CALLED are expected to perform to a higher standard... I won't go in to that here.) Anyhow, she gets fed up with stuff and decides that she will shut her self up in the manse (her house provided by the parish/congregation) and refuse to come out until she is satisified with the answer from God about all the mess that is going on in the world. This is triggered by her involvement with a congregant's crisis that did not end well and hence Ruth felt she could have handled it better.

There well, hopefully I did not spoil the book for you. It is a good read and I hope to review it once I finish my current novel.

In purging, I have discovered a multitude of books that I bought or "found" (got for free ... from someone or somewhere) that for one reason or other I have yet to read. Either the mood struck me, but I haven't gotten around to reading it yet, or I haven't been in the mood wasn't right, or they were dull.. there are some novels that I have TRIED to read numerous times, but can't because they are dry or ... something. Reading Lolita in Tehran is one of these books, In the Middle of a Life is another such novel.... ugh. So the first, I will try again, but the second... has been put in the get rid of pile as I have had it longer than Lolita. (Also, I now remember that I had 2 copies, both free, but didn't realize that this was the case.) Another reason for the "unread" books, good intentions, what have you, is that there are SOOO many books and I have so little shelf room that in some cases the books have been stacked 3 rows deep that I haven't seen them. The shelves have been organized though. Previously I had organized them by in 2 categories, READ and TO READ. When they are read, they get moved to the left side of the book case. Further categories are novels, fuffy novels, psych books, philosophy, theology books (texts left over, but NOT so many now* singsong voice*), Fun books like my Peanuts collection, biographies, work related books with further categories of text like, or fluffy. And then the novels and books that have a spiritual theme. There are alot of these as well, due to my unconscious gravitation towards these types of books.

Some of these categories can fool you though. The definition of "spirituality" type book can be blatant like C.S. Lewis, Henri Nouwen, ... or they have under currents, subtle like the writing of Jodi Picoult, My Sister's Keeper and the current read, The Tenth Circle.

Ok, it is 11: 30 and I have updated and rambled a lot on all of my blogs. It is time for bed. But hopefully this makes up for a "dry spell' of writing that has plagued me for the past while.

Ethics as presented on TV and the realism of such dilemma

Last night, I decided to watch a new show just to see what it was about. Due to the nature of my work, in the hospital, I prefer not to watch dramas related to hospitals, like ER, Scrubs, Grey's Anatonomy. I tuned in when I saw that it was Mandy Patinkin in a guest starring role. He was FABULOUS!! The premise of the episode entitled "the Luckiest Man" is that Mandy's character, Victor, has ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease) and after a car accident, ends up in hospital on life support. His daughter is not ready to face his death while he chooses to end his life by being an organ donor. After meeting various patients, such as the video clip he decides that he wants to give his organs to other people.

The crux of the episode is about quality of life. In the end, when we are seriously ill and lucky to have time to contemplate our lives, will we be content with what we have accomplished and will we be able to say what is a "good death". As Victor put it, "I would rather go with what dignity I have left." Ironically, it is also the annual donor reunion party that day. The daughter is taken to see the party by the doctor in charge of Victor's case. The doctor actually struggled with Victor's choice because he say it as suicide versus a "good death". After a change of heart, he has a heart to heart with the daughter who explains why she is reluctant to let her father go. The episode ends with Victor being wheeled down the hall to surgery where they will disconnect the life support and remove organs. The hall is lined with family members of recipients thanking Victor for the renewed chance of life with their loved one.

I realize that organ donation is not an easy subject nor is death. I also realize that the episode is shot from the American perspective, which is has different issues or regulations than Canadian systems.

***********
I cried my eyes out especially at the end as it is touching to see this actually shown to the public. (And did I say that Mandy was fabulous!!) It is a reality that a lot of people are not ready to face. When is it time to go? and what constitutes a good death? Definitions will vary depending on what role you play. Luckily at my facility, the issues of quality of life, dignity are considered in such cases. We check with patients often to ensure that this is the right choice for them and not just what the medical team thinks it should be, and also to ensure that it is not just a "bad day" that they just want over. Because over is over. No regrets are possible afterward once the deed of death is done.

One approach to rudeness....

I opened my copy of Psychology Today earlier this afternoon and got a kick out of this article. If I hadn't been on a crowded train heading home, I would have laughed out loud at some things, and said "way to go" at others.


Two-Minute Memoir: I See Rude People

One woman's battle to beat some manners into impolite society.
By Amy Alkon, published on November 01, 2009 - last reviewed on November 04, 2009

The fortysomething woman came within inches of crashing her Volvo station wagon into my car while simultaneously trying to park with one hand and yammer into the cell phone she was holding in the other. When I beeped to keep her from swerving into me, she vigorously and repeatedly flipped me the bird (I guess to punish me for existing, and directly behind her to boot). For her grand finale, she exited her car in workout gear, toting a yoga mat, and snarled back at me, "Just off to find a little inner peace, you redheaded bitch!"

Uh, have a nice day!

An aggressive lack of consideration for others is spreading across this country like a case of crabs through a sleepaway camp, and there isn't a lot standing in the way. Although people are quick to blame rampant rudeness on advances in technology, the unfortunate truth is, rudeness is the human condition. We modern humans are a bunch of grabby, self-involved jerks, the same as generations of humans before us. It's just that there are fewer constraints on our grabby, self-involved jerkhood than ever before. We're guided by quaint Stone Age brains, suited to manage social interactions within a small tribe—yet we're living in endlessly sprawling areas that would more accurately be called "stranger-hoods" than neighborhoods.
People understand how they're supposed to act because of social norms. But every time brutes engage in some form of social thuggery, they make it that much more acceptable for somebody else to do it. Others begin to imitate their behavior unthinkingly, or feel stupid or silly for feeling some compunction about following their lead.

For most of my life, I didn't pay much attention to rudeness. And then, one day, I just couldn't take it anymore. Overnight, I was like that "I see dead people" kid, except it was "I see rude people." They were everywhere: pushing, shoving, shouting into cell phones; leaving snotted-up Kleenex in the airplane seat pocket for the next passenger. Like Peter Parker, bitten by a radioactive spider and turned into Spiderman, I was transformed.
Intervention I: The Mobile Savage

A woman in the Hollywood Hills Starbucks decided to treat all the other customers there to a command performance of her impromptu spoken-word masterwork, "The Birthday Party Invitation." She made five very loud calls—each the same as the last—giving her name (Carol), detailed directions to a kid's birthday party at her house, plus the time, plus her home phone number. I left this message on her voice mail when I got home:

Carol, Carol, Carol...the microphone on a cell phone is actually quite sensitive. There's no need to yell. You look like a nice woman. You probably didn't realize that your repeated shouting into your cell phone drove a number of people out of the coffee bar today. Beyond that, you might consider that I'm just one of about 20 people who know that you live at "555 Ferngrove Street," and that you're having a bunch of six-year-olds over at 3 p.m. on Saturday. Now, I'm just a newspaper columnist, not a pedophile, but it's kind of an unnecessary security risk you're taking, huh? Bye!
Intervention II: It's Only Free for Telemarketers to Call You Because You Have Yet to Invoice Them

Even casual acquaintances know better than to dial my number on Monday or Tuesday, when I'm on deadline for my advice column, so the shrill ring of my phone late one Monday afternoon came as a surprise.

"Hello...? Hello...? HELLO?"

Was anybody even there? Not exactly. It took a couple of seconds for the recording to start: "Hello, this is Tim Snee, vice president of Smart & Final..."

Oh, is it? Great. Because if you're phoning me at home in the middle of my deadline, there's an appropriate next line to your call, and it goes something like "...and someone's died and left you a townhouse in the center of Paris."

But that wasn't Mr. Snee's message at all. Snee, I learned, was having some difficulty keeping shelves stocked at the warehouse store Smart & Final. He wanted to let his customers know they were working to solve the problem—lest anybody defect to Costco for their 100-packs of Charmin.

Yoohoo...Mr. Snee? You autodialed the wrong girl.

Now, I know most people just sigh and hang up when they get a call like Snee's—which is why we all get calls like Snee's. My time and energy are valuable, and he'd just helped himself to both. I drafted a letter spelling out my disgust for Snee's business practices and invoicing him for $63.20, and I e-mailed it to him:

Tim,

How dare you call me at home with a recorded message? I am on the Do Not Call list, and I value my privacy. You woke me up in the middle of my nap during my deadline. Consider this an invoice for disturbing me: $63.20, which is my hourly rate for writing, since I'll probably lose at least an hour thanks to your interruption. I'll now try to go back to sleep so I can get my writing done.

I'm considering reporting you to the California Attorney General. Have a bad day.

—Amy Alkon

A few days later, I got this e-mail from Randall Oliver, Smart & Final's "director of corporate communications":

Ms. Alkon:

I am very sorry that we disturbed you close to your writing deadline. Our message was meant to provide a helpful update to our customers, not to irritate them. Nearly all of the responses we have received have been very positive.

Really? Did other customers call you up and say, "I'm so lonely, nothing makes my day like getting a recorded message smack in the middle of my afternoon nap!"?

And finally, Oliver wrote:

We value you as a customer and hope to continue to do business with you. We'd be happy to send you a check for $63.20 as requested or alternatively would be even happier to provide you a $100 Smart Card for use at Smart & Final. Please let me know which option you would prefer.

I took the $100.

As wacky as my pranks may sound to some, behind every one is the message that it isn't crazy to expect people to have manners and consideration; it's crazy when we're seen as crazy for expecting it. If we're increasingly finding ourselves residents of Meanland, it's only because we aren't doing anything to change that. We get the society we create; or rather, the society we let happen to us. I'm hoping my book, I See Rude People, will galvanize at least a few people into performing their own interventions on the rude. But if we all just make an effort to treat strangers like they matter, maybe they'll be inspired to treat us like we matter, and maybe, just maybe, life won't feel quite so much like one long wrestling smackdown.

Excerpted from I See Rude People: One Woman's Battle to Beat Some Manners into Impolite Society by Amy Alkon (Nov. 27, 2009, McGraw-Hill)

Poem for the day

I have been reading Mitch Albom's new book, Have a Little Faith.
I won't go into it too much hear, suffice to say read it. It certainly has tidbits to chew on, to think on.

There is a poem quoted from Robert Browning Hamilton, that speaks volumes

I Walked a Mile with Pleasure

I walked a mile with Pleasure;
She chatted all the way;
But left me none the wiser
For all she had to say.

I walked a mile with Sorrow,
And ne’er a word said she;
But, oh! The things I learned from her,
When sorrow walked with me.

-Robert Browning Hamilton

Watch Diwali:India's Festival of Lights in Entertainment  |  View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

After a decade, Whitney Houston has returned from a roller coaster marriage and spoke on Oprah's show about her addiction and return to public life since the end of her marriage to Bobby Brown. I have waited for the return of this powerful voice with much hope and prayer for this woman. This is a clip from another talk show, but the video link is here. On the show, Whitney said that this song, written by R. Kelly, for Whitney is about her "higher power" (God) and likely her mother and daughter whom she described as her support.

As I lay me down
Heaven hear me now
I'm lost without a call
After giving it my all

Winter storms has come
And darken my sun
After all
That we've been through
Who on Earth
Can I turn to

I look to you
I look to you

After all
My strength is gone
In you I can move on

I look to you
I look to you

And when melodies
Are gone
In you
I hear a song

I look to you

Poem

When there is no time to say goodbye….

Shock and wonder.

Disbelief.

Sorrow.

These are the emotions felt.

Memories of the last words.

Were they kind?

Did I miss a sign? Micro fraction? Flicker?

Was there any inkling that this was coming?

Death has come like a thief in the night.

We fall asleep

Or blink …

And it has creeped in.

Taking from us our chance to say goodbye.

Wondering about the last minutes of life

The last breath. alone.

When there is no time to say goodbye…

There is only a hole in a heart.

October 6, 2009

This poem was written by me. A patient died unexpectedly at their home. I had known him for a number of years, but I always wonder that no matter how long you have a relationship with a person, can you really say that you knew that person well? Social psychologists talk about the masks that we wear. We put on different masks depending on the setting that we are in. We are one way with our family, work place, friends, in store, on the bus. We show different aspects but no one really has the full picture of who we are.

Regardless of how long I know someone, I also wonder what I can do to "know" that person better. I wonder if anyone achieves this in a lifetime.

Scenes from Another World

I went on vacation to Italy and other countries this past month. We went to a lot of historical sites and archeological museums. One of the interesting aspects is not just the amazing detail of the sculptures and artwork, but rather the fact that they are really really old. And it is awe inspiring that I am able to see and touch something from another life time.

November 7, 2009 event

This looks neat. I think that it is good to be open to new events and experiences.

Part 2 of article

This is the second part of an article from the Vancouver Sun, talking about the 'war' between spirituality and religion. The author purports that spirituality is a personal thing while religion relates to the corporate nature of spiritual practice.

While it is difficult to find a balance between the personal and the corporate, Todd puts forth that a "good" religion is one that allows for growth and movements within the personal/corporate sphere. Humanity is constantly changing and growing and hence religion as one main structure of the human expression of Self needs to be able to change and grow with people. I wonder at the persons who do identify themselves as "not religious, but spiritual". Often when this statement is made to me, it is a defense mechanism usually meaning "don't shove your beliefs and judgments on me. That is the last thing that I need." I have always thought that those persons who have an aversion to "organized religion" are reacted to either a bad experience, misconceptions, or both. Often people attend worship services, but aren't educated about the practices that follow. It is not like someone says " we will now sing this song, or pray this prayer for reason 'X', " but rather, after someone has attended for a while, it is understood," this is just how we do this". However, along with the need for structure, it should not be so rigid that it staganates growth of the worshipper, but it should also not be so flexible that there is an "anything goes" thinking. This is the difficulty of defining worship and spiritual practices -- they do change as our understanding changes. But one must consider "what am I doing this for? or who? " and "does this practice help me to grow and challenge my understanding of the world?" If the answer is "I don't know" to the first questions, and "no" to the second... then maybe we need to think about why something isn't working for us or others and to discuss this with someone we trust.

SECOND OF TWO PARTS

Which is better: Religion or spirituality? Many people, especially on the West Coast of North America, now firmly believe that it's much better to be "spiritual" rather than "religious."

Before offering my answer to the question, however, it's crucial to explain the common definitions going round today of "religion" and "spirituality," plus a few of the widespread complaints against both.

Some of the many, many people today who stress "I'm spiritual, but not religious" feel strongly about defining religion as an absolutistic and dogmatic belief system locked up in an institution.

Their condemnation has some validity, even though they're not correct in portraying ALL religion as doctrinaire.

There can be no doubt that institutional religion frequently regresses to blind obedience and self-righteousness.

That's the assertion, for instance, of Vancouver's world-famous spiritual writer, Eckhart Tolle, author of The Power of Now. The people who champion "spirituality" generally use the term to refer to the private and free development of a person's private inner life.

Tolle, for instance, is typical of many in the way he describes spirituality as personal "transformation" to an "awakened" state, detached from one's ego and even from "belief" itself .

The main charges against Tolle's popular form of self-spirituality are that it can become privatistic, leading to self-absorption, narcissism, naivety, anti-intellectualism and an anything-goes moral relativism. Critics say those who follow private spirituality are often unwilling to engage wider society and, in failing to do so, support the social status quo.

Just as there is something to the prevailing attack on "religion," there is also some truth to this critique of "spirituality."

But the mutual bombardments do not at all comprise the whole story of "spirituality" and "religion."

There are more comprehensive ways of looking at both, which will expand the debate far beyond a simplistic argument that one is good and the other is bad.

There are many valid definitions of "spirituality," a term that has only become hot in the past decade.

But I think one of the best and broadest definitions of "spirituality" is that it is "the ways humans have sought to find meaning in the world." However, I have to immediately add that I join the renowned American sociologist of religion, Robert Bellah, in suggesting that religion, at its deepest level, is about the same process -- forming human meaning.

In today's religion-wary culture, many won't like this overlapping definition of "spirituality" and "religion." But if you accept it, you would have to conclude that, at least in their ideal form, both can be beneficial.

There is another link between the two terms. Even though "spirituality" is now used to refer exclusively to a human's inner life, many private spiritualities, if they prove persuasive to enough people, eventually develop into more structured communal worldviews.

That is what happened with the experiences and teachings of Moses, Buddha, Socrates, Jesus, Mohammed and Baha'u'llah.

It's also what is happening with some best-selling contemporary spiritual teachers, as their thinking becomes more formalized through study groups and inter-connected communities.

In other words, it appears that the thing Western society is really debating these days is the difference in value between private spirituality and community-based spirituality, which is also sometimes known as institutional religion.

Contrary to what many people like to believe, I am not convinced personal spirituality and communal religion are mutually exclusive. They are complementary.

And both need to be approached in a self-critical way.

Any institutional religion that is habitually dogmatic and that fails to nurture a sense of personal spirituality, of personal choice and transformation, is empty.

And any personal spirituality that remains merely private, that doesn't make an effort to directly connect with others, with the real world, with community life, is trivial.

So where does that leave us with the question: Which is better: Spirituality or religion?

The short answer is they are both important.

However, I will go out on an unpopular limb for the longer answer.

I would suggest that institutional religion - when it is truly self-correcting, non-authoritarian and encouraging of authenticity (which it often, admittedly, is not) -- is more complete than private spirituality.

Let me briefly make my case for the value of religion in institutional form:

• Institutional religion, at its best, can be open, evolving and self- reforming -- even while attempting to define and remain true to core values, beliefs and practices.

• A religious institution can incorporate a multitude of personal spiritual practices, including the self-spirituality and nature spirituality that are popular today.

• Religious institutions, ideally, create a sense of community, which often contribute to the well-being of individuals.

• Religious institutions can offer checks and balances on private belief and practice. They can help isolated individuals avoid going off on unhealthy, wrong-headed or dangerous spiritual tangents.

• As a community, a religion can accomplish things that isolated individuals cannot. Institutions can plan and strategize, creating force fields for positive transition, both within individuals and in the wider society.

Ultimately, I like the way that Washington state scholar Patricia O'Connell Killen talks about the value of religions, which she also calls "wisdom traditions."

Unlike private spiritualities, community-based religions can, at their optimum, help people realize they're not the centre of the universe, Killen says. They can also, through their collected knowledge, historical perspective and shared values, be invaluable in helping people face life's inevitable suffering. In doing so, they can renew personal and public hope.

In the end, I don't believe we need to buy into the current nasty war between (personal) spirituality and (community-based) religion.

After all, that creates a false either/or choice.

What we can do instead is foster more interaction between spirituality and religion, since they are simply different aspects of the same thing: Humans' eternal search for meaning.

Quote -- cleaning files from my desk

Learning a language
is learning what people are really saying.
The non-verbal as well as the verbal language...
You must go deeper...
And discover what it means
To listen deeply to another...
In order to understand people in both their pain and in their grief, to
Understand what they are really asking so you can hold their wound,
Their pain and that flows from it...
You must go deeper and discover what it means to see another-
To see the light shining in the darkness..
To give hope and trust.

Jean Vanier-the Broken Body

Column from Vancouver Sun

Has 'religion' outlived its usefulness?

Despite the arguments that spirituality is somehow better, both seek to bring people together

Douglas Todd

Vancouver Sun

Saturday, August 29, 2009

CREDIT: Steve Bosch, Vancouver Sun, Files Eckhart Tolle is a New Age teacher who blends elements of Buddhism and Hinduism into his philosophy.

'Many people are already aware of the difference between spirituality and religion. They realize that having a belief system -- a set of thoughts that you regard as the absolute truth -- does not make you spiritual no matter what the nature of those beliefs is."

That's the influential opinion of one of the world's most famous living spiritual teachers. Vancouver-based Eckhart Tolle, promoted by Oprah Winfrey, has sold millions of copies of his books, including The Power of Now.

His repeated message is "religion" is bad (oppressive) and "spirituality" is good (liberating).

As Tolle writes in his latest mega-seller, A New Earth: Awakening to Life's Purpose, religious people are convinced "unless you believe exactly as they do, you are wrong in their eyes, and in the not-too-distant past, they would have felt justified in killing you for that. And some still do, even now."

Tolle is promoting what is fast becoming conventional wisdom in the western world: "Religion" is institutional, almost always authoritarian. "Religion" is equated with the Crusades, terrorism and judgmental U.S. televangelists.

"Religion," in the mind of Tolle and those who read his books in more than 30 languages, is rigid and divisive and absolutistic.

This same anti-religion message is being advanced by spiritual authors such as Neale Donald Walsch, author of the best-selling Conversations with God, and a host of other New Age teachers. To them "religion" is "fundamentalism."

In contrast, Tolle prefers the term "spiritual," which he describes as "the transformation of consciousness" -- to a state of "awakening."

In line with Tolle, many people in Canada, perhaps even most, now find it necessary to tell anyone who cares to listen: "I'm not religious, but I'm spiritual."

The conviction that "religion" is essentially evil is now so pervasive in our culture that I am having even observant evangelical Christians, Jews and Muslims also tell me: "I'm not religious, but I'm spiritual."

How did western society get to this point, where religion has become a dirty word?

Much of it has to do with shifting definitions.

What, after all, is "spiritual?"

What is "religious?"

Unless these important words are defined, people can spend a lot of time going round in conversational circles.

Let's start with "religion."

The Oxford Dictionary defines "religion" as "the belief in and worship of a superhuman power, esp. a personal God or gods." Oxford adds that religion is "a particular system of faith and worship." Most interesting is that the Latin root of "religion" is "to bind together."

Even though I quibble with this Oxford definition of religion, I accept it's relatively straightforward compared to the ever-evolving meanings of the amazingly popular and vague word, "spiritual."

American philosopher Ken Wilber is highly aware of the problems that occur when people don't nail down what they mean by "spiritual." He cites several usages.

One common understanding of "spiritual" is that it's a state of consciousness, such as those achieved through meditation, he says. Another definition of "spiritual" refers to embodying an attitude, such as love or wisdom.

A third use of "spiritual" restricts it to higher states of consciousness or maturity. I'll add a fourth definition of "spiritual" -- how a person finds ultimate meaning.

Although it's hard to tell with Tolle, since he's not overly systematic, he seems to basically define "spiritual" in line with Wilber's first definition -- as a state of mind, as the state of being detached from one's ego.

Mark Shibley, of Southern Oregon University, suggests there are two major types of alternative spiritualities (as distinct from organized religions) operating in North America, which often overlap.

The first type most fits Tolle and Walsch. Shibley calls what they promote "self-spirituality."

They focus on the self as sacred. Tolle and Walsch, both of whom live in the Pacific Northwest, or Cascadia, where self-spirituality is commonplace, emphasize private psychological practice over doctrine.

The second major spiritual group adheres to Earth reverence. They stress that nature is divine. They tend to have mystical moments not in churches or temples, but in the wilderness.

Now that we've fleshed out the terms, religious and spiritual, let's get down to the big question.

Which is better?

Spiritual or religious?

If you define "religion" as Tolle and Walsch do -- as rigidly institutional, fundamentalist and self-righteous -- you would have to opt for "spiritual." After all, personal "transformation" seems more authentic than this harsh, top-down religion.

But if you keep in mind the dictionary definition of "religion" -- that it's a "system of faith" that may serve to "bind together" humans with each other, the world and a transcendent reality -- the rivalry between the two becomes not so clear-cut.

Is it not possible to be "spiritual," to practise inner transformation, at the same time one is "religious," that is, working to bond with a higher power and wider community through shared beliefs?

The great sociologist, Robert Bellah, in a recent article in the Buddhist magazine, Tricycle, writes that making a sharp distinction between religion and spirituality creates a false dichotomy. And that's what Tolle does.

The author of ground-breaking books, such as Habits of the Heart, helpfully broadens the definition of religion to, "the many ways humans have sought to find meaning, to make sense of their lives."

I find Bellah's definition better than even the one supplied by the Oxford Dictionary, since it can include religions that posit no God or gods, such as forms of Buddhism.

It's also close to the definition I tend to use most for "spiritual." And, in many ways, the definitions are interchangeable.

Bellah also persuasively maintains that trying to rid the world of religion -- since it's often corrupted -- would be absurd.

It would be like saying, "Let's get rid of the economy," because it often does harmful things.

"Religion meets a human need, and if you get rid of it in one form, it will come back in another," Bellah says.

That, indeed, is what is happening with contemporary "spirituality."

Even though Tolle's promoters always stress that he is "not aligned with any particular religion or tradition," his teachings are dependent on ideas that have emerged over the millennia from Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity and western philosophy.

And try as Tolle and many others might to emphasize that "spirituality" is only an inner, private experience, the hundreds of spiritual groups that are forming around Tolle's work, at his encouragement, are developing their own shared beliefs, thoughts, practices, orthodoxies and sense of community.

Just like a religion.

- - -

Read Douglas Todd's blog at www.vancouversun.com/

thesearch

Next week: What it takes for "religion" and "spirituality" to be healthy.

© The Vancouver Sun 2009

What do you do when you know your patient is going to die?

What do you do when you know your patient is going to die?

What do you feel inside?

Death is a hard thing for us to face. In the field of healthcare and spiritual care, death is a prominent player. While part of our work is to provide support and comfort for patients, family and staff involved in a death, it doesn’t seem to get easier. And when you have spent years investing your care and energy into the life’s story of a person, it is not easy to walk away unscathed.

I did not plan to get into this line of work. I did not aspire to be a “midwife for the dying”. I started my ministry career at the age of 23. I love stories. I am fascinated by books and movies. That is why I do this work. I get to hear stories from my patients and to be a part of their story. I am sure that others in this field will agree that some stories are hard to hear, while others are hard to watch. So after meeting the person and journeying with them, it is hard to not be untouched by their life. It is often said at funerals that whether we knew the deceased well, or whether we knew the deceased in passing, the fact that they are gone from this earth will have an impact on us. What that is I do not know. I think that some deaths are harder to deal with than others, for the attachments that come from the relationships. While we maintain the professionalism and boundaries, I think that there are some lives and deaths that impact us more than others. So when you have invested time and energy, and the story has taken its hold, how do you feel when you know that your patient is going to die? What do you do?

**********************************************

I have given this some more thought. The question of "what do you do/feel when you know that your patient is going to die?" A lot of people find it interesting that I refer to them as "MY" patients and commented on this. I realize that I am not a doctor nor am I the primary caregiver who influences the success of their treatment, but considering the area of expertise and the time that I have invested in the relationship, I will think of the individual as "my patient". So hence I suppose that the attachment that one feels to the person who is dying is of consideration in the matter what one thinks or feels when you know that they are dying.

The relationship of caregiving is very intimate. In pastoral/spiritual care, people will bear their souls to another who is virtually a stranger. Hence the depth of the relationship and the content can have influence to the emotions of the care provider when the patient's condition deteriorates. I have had various patients that I have known for numerous years. It is a different reaction for one to die versus another, and I think that it is dependent on the type of relationship that has been cultivated and whether or not the death was anticipated.

So I pose the question to my fellow chaplains/spiritual care providers, what is your reaction when YOUR patient dies? What do you do? What do you feel?

But in a way, isn't our life like this? If you think about it, our lives are being narrated, perhaps in our head, or by others as they observe our actions. So what does your "story" tell others? is it a romance, tragedy, action, comedy or adventure story? I suppose in the end, we want to think that the story told by our lives teaches others by our examples, of a life well-lived.
Thoughts?

Thunderstorm...

Chaplaincy article

Paging God: Religion in the Halls of Medicine’

Chaplains play important roles in hospitals

By Sarah Sweeney

Harvard News Office

What happens when a Buddhist monk visiting the United States is hospitalized, terminally ill with liver cancer? Does religion interfere with his medical care? What about his Buddhist brethren, unable to join him bedside? Who will provide the appropriate services and ceremonies? Well, says Wendy Cadge, that’s where hospital chaplains come in.

Chaplains are just one of the ways in which hospitals and religion cross-pollinate — but, says sociologist Cadge, a current fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, this cross-pollination can sometimes be a tricky business.

“Does religion and spirituality influence your health?” asked Cadge. “I don’t think this is an unimportant question. … Social institutions — temples, churches, mosques — … are often involved in the answer to this question in ways that are rarely studied or talked about.”

Cadge visited the ailing monk in a Catholic hospital in Pennsylvania. “He was going to die — not in a temple … but in this local hospital,” she recollected. “I wondered if he was awake how he would feel about being treated in a Catholic hospital. I wondered if the hospital had a priest or a chaplain, if that person might come by.”

Cadge explained that at most hospitals, the question of religion is a blank box on admissions paperwork. When she asked a hospital clerk why the information was relevant, he responded, “I don’t know. I guess it’s in case you die.”

The lasting image of the dying monk in his hospital bed in Pennsylvania left Cadge with an arsenal of questions. How do religion and spirituality interact with medicine?

Through research at major, non-religious-affiliated hospitals across the country, Cadge explored this question by shadowing hospital chaplains, analyzing the roles they play and how they affect the religious and spiritual goings-on inside hospitals.

In a talk inside the Radcliffe Gymnasium, titled “Paging God: Religion in the Halls of Medicine,” Cadge said most people think of chaplains as the people wandering the halls of hospitals, making bedside calls. But Cadge explained that chaplains have many perspectives on the work they perform and define their responsibilities in a multitude of ways. Chaplains are involved in almost all aspects of hospital life, said Cadge. In their most basic definition, these chaplains visit with ill patients; but their role in hospitals is, in fact, complex and much-debated.

The treatment of the sick and dying in hospitals raises profound religious and spiritual issues. In their not-quite-formal, not-quite-defined roles, chaplains address these questions. They are intermediaries for patients and families; guides who help navigate through emotional and complicated end-of-life issues. Yet, in an article for the Web site Religion Dispatches (www.religiondispatches.org), Cadge says that chaplains “have little voice when it comes to public conversations about religion and medicine in this country.”

A reason for this, Cadge surmised, is that there are relatively few chaplains in the United States — roughly 10,000. And, in general, chaplains lack medical training, and, as Cadge points out in the article, “Many of the country’s leading voices around religion, spirituality, health, and medicine are physicians.”

Even as atheism continues to rise in the United States, Gallup polls consistently show 95 percent of Americans still believe in a higher power; 70-85 percent of Americans pray for their own health and their family’s; and 72 percent believe God can cure people outside of medical science. What’s more, 60 percent of Americans and 20 percent of medical professionals think a person in a persistent vegetative state can be saved by a miracle.

So, it’s not surprising, perhaps, that in Cadge’s hospital research, which took her to intensive care and neonatal units, she found that it was common among non-chaplain staff to privately pray for their patients, regardless of their patients’ religious beliefs or whether or not they had solicited religious help.

Differences in religious viewpoints is an important issue for Cadge, who wanted to know how chaplains adapt to patients with different religions, and how patients with various religions and beliefs perceive chaplains.

Most of the chaplains Cadge observed would serve patients regardless of their denomination, and if patients or families requested a religious-specific prayer or ritual, the chaplain would oblige. Other times, chaplains simply sat in with patients, a person to talk to. Cadge recalled chaplains who collected prayers from families. Most were written on Post-It notes left tacked to makeshift memorials created by families to honor their loved ones who had died in the hospital. The chaplains put them in shoeboxes; and when the shoeboxes overflowed, the chaplains didn’t toss them out, the prayers were ceremoniously burned.

Cadge documented designated spaces in hospitals reserved for prayer; these chapels range from traditional church-looking rooms to rooms meant to be all-encompassing, or “interfaith,” outfitted with alcoves with specific religious symbols and texts.

The scope of a chaplain’s work varies with patients, but a chaplain’s responsibilities are deep and vast. “The one thing I found which most chaplains do … is working around death, often managing death for hospitals,” said Cadge, who noted that in some hospitals she visited, chaplains were paged for every trauma coming into the emergency room, and some were responsible for coordinating plans with the morgue and serving as a liaison for families.

“Part of a chaplain’s task is to help people find something to be hopeful about,” said Cadge, quoting a chaplain identified only as Karen. Karen also told Cadge, “People come literally from all over the world. We chaplains are the ones who make these people not be strangers. … We invite them into the community so that this becomes a safe haven in some regard.”

John, another chaplain Cadge encountered, had a different view. He believes a chaplain is “just someone who walks in, takes [patients] as they are, listens to their stories. … The most we can offer them is just a listening ear and a caring heart.”

A lot of a chaplain’s work is about healing, explained Cadge, quoting Karen. “A lot of work we chaplains do is about reconciliation, to help people to feel whole, to bring them back to what has been to what is, to what can be, either in this life or the next.”

Quotes

I have no idea where this is really from, but it is scrawled on a paper in my office.

" Human disease is a normal state of the species, not a moral judgment. It's not the disease that evil, it is the thought that it can happen to you. "

"Maybe people were not human beings seeking spiritual experiences, but spiritual beings seeking human experience."

Spoon theory

I was cleaning my office again and found this printout. It was sent to me by a friend who suffers from chronic pain/illness. She shared it with me as an easier way to describe "what it is like" for her. Below is a link for The Spoon theory, which I'm sure has been used in various ways to teach various things. I think that it is important to read as it give insight to the little things of life and our priorities.

Spoon Theory

Article for thought...

This week, I found an "old" copy of the MacLean's magazine, from May 4th. The Cover article got my attention. In this diverse culture and multifaith/multicultural Canada, you would think that the statistics would be more favored. I think that a lot of people would be influenced by experience, (good or bad) and or by media image. We believe what we have been told/taught, and it is easy to characterize someone as "them" vs. humanizing the others. Often dialogue does not happen, or it is one sided, and hence there can be a view of intolerance. I am posting the article in full as sometimes the links will disappear over time.

What Canadians think of Sikhs, Jews, Christians, Muslims . . .

Apr 28, 2009 by John Geddes

Canadians like to think of their country as a model for the world of how all sorts of people can get along together. But when it comes to the major faiths other than Christianity, a new poll conducted for Maclean’s finds that many Canadians harbour deeply troubling biases. Multiculturalism? Although by now it might seem an ingrained national creed, fewer than one in three Canadians can find it in their hearts to view Islam or Sikhism in a favourable light. Diversity? Canadians may embrace it in theory, but only a minority say they would find it acceptable if one of their kids came home engaged to a Muslim, Hindu or Sikh. Understanding? There’s not enough to prevent media images of war and terrorism from convincing almost half of Canadians that mainstream Islam encourages violence.

The poll, by Angus Reid Strategies, surveyed 1,002 randomly selected Canadians on religion at a moment when issues of identity are a hot topic in Ottawa. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has led a push by the Conservative government to revamp citizenship law, emphasizing the need for real bonds to Canada, and Kenney is looking for ways to encourage immigrants to integrate faster and more fully into Canadian society. But as federal policy strives to encourage newcomers to put down roots and fit in, the poll highlights an equal need for the Canadian majority to take a hard look at its distorted preconceptions about religious minorities. “It astonishes and saddens me as a Canadian,” said Angus Reid chief research officer Andrew Grenville, who has been probing Canadians’ views on religion for 16 years. “I don’t think the findings reflect well on Canada at all.”

Those findings leave little doubt that Canadians with a Christian background travel through life benefiting from a broad tendency of their fellow citizens to view their religion more favourably than any other. Across Canada, 72 per cent said they have a “generally favourable opinion” of Christianity. At the other end of the spectrum, Islam scored the lowest favourability rating, just 28 per cent. Sikhism didn’t fare much better at 30 per cent, and Hinduism was rated favourably by 41 per cent. Both Buddhism, at 57 per cent, and Judaism, 53 per cent, were rated favourably by more than half the population—but even Jews and Buddhists might reasonably ask if that’s a glass-half-full or glass-half-empty result.

Bernie Farber, chief executive officer of the Canadian Jewish Congress, said he was shocked that so many Canadians responding to a poll were willing to be so open about their negative feelings toward minority religions. “It tells me,” Farber said, “that our journey from intolerance to tolerance, to where we can actually celebrate each other’s cultures, is elusive.”

From the perspective of Sikhs and, especially, Muslims, that’s putting it mildly. When asked if they thought “the mainstream beliefs” of the major religions “encourage violence or are mostly peaceful,” only 10 per cent said they thought Christianity teaches violence. But fully 45 per cent said they believe Islam does, and a sizable 26 per cent saw Sikhism as encouraging violence. By comparison, just 13 per cent perceived violence in Hindu teachings and 14 per cent in Jewish religion. A tiny four per cent said they think of Buddhism as encouraging violence.

Ihsaan Gardee, executive director of the Council on Islamic-American Relations Canada, said “reductive reasoning” in media coverage of armed conflict in largely Islamic countries is a big part of the problem. Violence in countries with Muslim populations is portrayed as rooted in their religions in what Gardee calls a “clash of civilizations” world view. “They’re not looking at the social and economic context in which these things are happening,” Gardee said. “It can’t be reduced to Islam, per se.”

Clearly, Islam and Sikhism face the highest hurdles when it comes to persuading many Canadians they are not inherently violent faiths. The problem varies across regions. By far the highest percentage who viewed Islam as encouraging violence was found in Quebec, 57 per cent. Sikh doctrine is mostly likely to be viewed as violent in the province where about half of Canadian Sikhs live: 30 per cent of British Columbians said they think Sikhism encourages violence.

Palbinder Shergill, a Vancouver lawyer who has long represented the World Sikh Organization of Canada on legal matters, said she might have expected such negative opinions about Sikhism in the 1990s. Back then, the 1985 Air India bombing, the work of Sikh separatist terrorists, was still a fresh memory. “Air India has had a very lasting negative legacy for the Sikh community,” Shergill said. “The majority of imagery of Sikhs in the media typically associates the community with that sort of violence.”

Patient work trying to overcome the widespread view of Sikhs as dangerous seemed to be paying off, she said—until recently. Shergill said Sikhs have lately faced a “huge resurgence” of the sorts of challenges to their distinctive practices that they thought were put to rest 15 years or so ago. In Ontario, a Sikh man is fighting in court for the right to wear a turban, but not a helmet, when he rides his motorcycle. In Montreal last week, Judge Gilles Ouellet found a Sikh boy guilty of having threatened two other boys with a hair pin, used to keep his hair neat under his turban.

But Ouellet said the boy didn’t use his kirpan, the small symbolic dagger many Sikh men carry. The judge gave him an unconditional discharge, leaving him with a clean record, and said the case would never have reached his bench if the incident hadn’t had a religious dimension. “Too much importance has been given this case,” he said. “This matter should end here.”

Shergill suspects that many more Canadians read about the initial charge being laid than the remarks of the obviously frustrated judge. And the fact that this episode unfolded in Quebec is not incidental. The province appears to be an incubator of deep suspicions concerning minority faiths.

A mere 17 per cent of Quebecers said they have a favourable opinion of Islam, and just 15 per cent view Sikhism favourably. Only 36 per cent of Quebecers said they hold a favourable opinion of Judaism, far below the national average, and in sharp contrast to neighbouring Ontario, where 59 per cent expressed a favourable view of the Jewish religion. “It’s sadly not a shock,” Farber said.

Farber said his group, a 90-year-old advocacy organization for Canadian Jews, recently rebranded its Quebec wing as the Quebec Jewish Congress, a bid to highlight its roots in the province and reach out to francophone Quebecers. He said Quebec’s perennial anxieties about the survival of the French language play into attitudes toward minorities. “There are built-in fears there that have to be overcome,” he said. In fact, all religions were regarded less positively in Quebec than in Canada as a whole, including Christianity, which 67 per cent of Quebecers view favourably, five points below the Canadian average.

A heated debate over how far to go in “reasonable accommodation” of minorities gripped Quebec in 2007 and 2008. A commission headed by sociologist Gérard Bouchard and philosopher Charles Taylor toured the province holding often controversial hearings on the subject, ultimately concluding in a final report that Quebec needed to adapt, but that its cultural foundations were not at risk.

Angus Reid took that debate national, asking how far governments should go to accommodate minorities. A strong majority of 62 per cent agree with the statement, “Laws and norms should not be modified to accommodate minorities.” A minority, 29 per cent, agreed with the alternative statement, “On some occasions, it makes sense to modify specific laws and norms to accommodate minorities.” Another nine per cent weren’t sure. In Quebec, 74 per cent were against changing laws or norms, the highest negative response rate on the accommodation question in the country.

Recent campaign trail experience in Canada has taught politicians to be cautious about anything that smacks of a concession to religious minorities. John Tory, the former leader of Ontario’s Conservatives, was largely expected to win the province’s 2007 election, until he pledged to extend public funding to all religious schools. That promise proved deeply unpopular, even with his party’s base. The Angus Reid poll suggests that lesson can be broadly applied. It found 51 per cent oppose funding of Christian schools, and the level of opposition soars from 68 per cent to 75 per cent for all other religions. On even hotter-button religious issues, opposition is overwhelming. Only 23 per cent would allow veiled voting, and just three per cent Islamic sharia law—an even lower level of support than the eight per cent who would allow polygamy. There’s substantial sympathy for recognizing religious holidays, 45 per cent, but a solid majority still opposes the idea.

Leaders of religious groups contacted by Maclean’s commonly said their impression is that urban attitudes are more open, especially in Toronto and Vancouver—huge magnets for immigrants. Yet familiarity does not appear to be a reliable predictor of tolerance or acceptance. The Sikh community is prominent on the West Coast, but only 28 per cent of British Columbians surveyed reported a favourable impression of Sikhism. That was well below the figures in provinces where Sikhs are far less numerous, like neighbouring Alberta, where 47 per cent reported a favourable opinion of Sikhism, or Ontario, where Sikhism was rated favourably by 35 per cent.

Still, many advocates for Islamic and Sikh groups optimistically tout fostering personal contact—the sort of bonds that grow into friendships—as the key to creating acceptance of that religion. “The more that people have interactions with Muslims,” said Gardee from the Council on American-Islamic Relations Canada, “the more favourable an opinion they have of Muslims.”

To try to assess the extent and impact of friendships between Canadians of different faiths, Angus Reid asked, “Do you personally have any friends who are followers of any of these religions or not?” Not surprisingly, given that seven out of 10 Canadians identify themselves as Catholic or Protestant, the vast majority, 89 per cent, said they have Christian friends. Less predictably, given that only two per cent of the population follows Islam, fully 32 per cent of respondents claimed they have a Muslim friend. Only 16 per cent nationally reported having Sikh friends, but 36 per cent of British Columbians do. Across Canada, 45 per cent reported having Jewish friends, from a high of 61 per cent in Ontario to a low of 20 per cent in Quebec.

Digging into that data, Angus Reid checked to see if those who claimed to have friends of a particular religion tended to view that faith more positively. There is a correlation. Among those who said they don’t have any Muslim friends, a mere 18 per cent reported that their opinion of Islam is generally favourable. But among those who said they do have Muslim friends, 44 per cent had a favourable opinion of Islam.

For all other religions, well over half of the pool of people who have friends of a certain faith view that faith favourably: for example, 63 per cent of those with Sikh friends view Sikhism favourably, compared with just 23 per cent of those without Sikh friends. And 76 per cent of Canadians with Jewish friends are favourably disposed toward Judaism, while only 34 per cent of people with no Jewish friends have a favourable opinion of Judaism.

Beyond personal contact with adherents of different religions, there’s the question of whether Canadians really know much about what the various faiths profess. Asked about their level of knowledge, 86 per cent said they have a “good basic understanding” of Christianity, compared to just 32 per cent who make the same claim regarding Islam, 18 per cent for Hinduism, 12 per cent for Sikhism, 32 per cent for Buddhism and 40 per cent for Judaism. In fact, it’s a stretch to imagine that a third of Canadians really have a solid grounding in Islam. Or, to express that skepticism another way, is it likely that Canadians are much more likely to have a grasp of the basic tenets of Islam and Buddhism than of Sikhism and Hinduism?

More likely, the higher reported levels of “good basic understanding” actually represents superficial impressions gleaned from news reports, combined with images—both negative and positive—picked up from popular entertainment. Grenville pointed out that with common Old Testament roots, Christians, Muslims and Jews have a natural starting point for mutual understanding. As for Buddhism, he suggested the sixties cultural touchstones established good press. “Meditation, the Beatles, all these things that feel Buddhist, even if they’re not really Buddhist, feel friendly,” he said. “There haven’t been a lot of Buddhist wars.”

Muslims and Sikhs might well envy that vibe. But Buddhism is more than an odd case—it shows that even a fast-growing religion can avoid rubbing Canadians the wrong way. The Buddhist population increased 84 per cent between 1991 and the 2001 national census. Still, that left the total Buddhist population at only about 300,000, or around one per cent of the population—far too small for most Canadians to have anything beyond fleeting direct contact with the religion. Even so, Buddhism’s favourability rating of 57 per cent is four points higher than Judaism, a religion with much deeper roots in Canada. Buddhism was the only religion, including Christianity, for which more than half of people who said they don’t have a friend of that faith held a favourable opinion of it anyway.

Even among those who profess a broad acceptance of other religions, the prospect of one of your children marrying someone from an unfamiliar background can be a test of tolerance. On this delicate question, though, the poll suggests a paradox. Although only 28 per cent said they have a generally favourable opinion of Islam, fully 39 per cent declared that they would find it acceptable for one of their children to marry a Muslim. The pattern follows for the other minority faiths: Canadians surveyed were more likely to say they would approve of one of their kids marrying a follower of a given religion than tended to view that religion favourably. So while only 30 per cent view Sikhs favourably, 39 per cent wouldn’t object to a child marrying one. Similarly, 41 per cent have a favourable opinion of Hinduism, but 46 per cent would find their child’s marriage to a Hindu acceptable.

That pattern might signal an intriguing instinct to respect personal choice in marriage over misguided generalizations about religions. Still, the numbers hardly suggest open-armed tolerance: with respect to all three of Islam, Hinduism and Sikhism, less than half of those surveyed said they would find it acceptable for one of their children to marry a follower of those religions. For the marriage question, the results again suggest the usual stratification: Christianity is by far most widely accepted, followed by Judaism and Buddhism, with Islam, Hinduism and Sikhism facing the most negative feelings. A resounding 83 per cent would accept a child marrying a Christian, 53 per cent a Buddhist, and 56 per cent a Jew.

Overall, the findings suggest minority religions aren’t getting a fair shake from the majority. But there remain legitimate questions, even misgivings, about the relationship between mainstream believers and fringe extremists. Outsiders, including journalists, sometimes have trouble gauging how many Sikhs support groups that have sometimes resorted to terrorism in their quest to carve a separate state out of India. Earlier this month, for instance, portraits of the assassins of former Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi were reportedly on display in Surrey, B.C., at celebrations of Vaisakhi, the birth of Sikhism, and the images even appeared on T-shirts. Palbinder Shergill responds to questions about this sort of issue by making the simple, but fundamental, point that not everything a particular Sikh espouses should reflect on Sikhism as a whole.

Muslim groups also face a minefield of image challenges, which often flow from international affairs rather than domestic life. Gardee admits, for example, his organization’s campaign urging the federal government to bring home Omar Kahdr might convey the wrong impressions to some Canadians. After all, Khadr, the Canadian being held by the U.S. at the Guantánamo Bay detention facility, is the son of Ahmed Said Khadr, who was an al-Qaeda financier before he was killed in a gun battle in Pakistan in 2003. Other members of the Khadr family have made outrageous public comments. “Yes, some of the things his family have said have been troubling and outright disturbing,” Gardee said. “But as a Canadian citizen he still has rights. He’s a Canadian citizen and he’s a Muslim. That puts him squarely within our mandate to deal with.”

The problem of how to project a moderate face of Islam to a wider Canadian public is a pressing challenge. Within disparate Muslim communities—and the religion is anything but monolithic—the nature of mosque leadership is a subject of sometimes fierce debate. In fact, that argument is currently raging at Ottawa’s largest mosque, just a few minutes drive west of Parliament Hill. An imam recruited last year from Egypt to preach at the mosque is regarded by some who pray there as not fluent enough in English and too out of touch with modern Canadian society for the job. Others say he needs more time to find his place.

Karim Karim, a communications professor at Carleton University in Ottawa, recently released a report based on extensive surveys and focus group sessions in Canada, the U.S. and Britain that found Muslims in all three countries yearn for imams who better understand the West. “There was a lot of admiration for leaders who were engaging in issues of youth, poverty, employment, women’s issues,” Karim told Maclean’s, “rather than just knowing the theology and being able to recite the Quran.”

Perhaps a new generation of Muslim leaders more attuned to Canadian sensibilities can help bridge the obvious gaps in understanding. Karim points to negative connotations that have built up around a handful of loaded terms. According to him, sharia is a “very malleable, very diverse” set of ethics and values about leading a Muslim life—not a rigid legal code. He describes a fatwa as an “informed opinion by a learned scholar”—not a death edict. And Karim says most Muslims think of jihad as “a daily struggle to be a good Muslim.” But he adds, “It would be disingenuous on my part to say that, no, the other side does not exist. It does exist—the taking up of arms for a cause of justice.”

His willingness to try to explain details, convey nuances, even underline contradictions—it all suggests that Karim craves dialogue on a level the Angus Reid poll suggests too few Canadians are ready for. Even Grenville, who has long experience tracking all sorts of opinions, finds the landscape of attitude toward unfamiliar faiths bleak. “This runs counter to all we espouse,” he said. “We need to face up to the reality of it.” No doubt leaders of the fast-growing, little-understood religious minorities need to consider the image they project. But the rest of Canadians might try a little soul-searching, too. For a country that often boasts of modern identity based on acceptance of diversity, this poll suggests that’s still a goal to strive toward rather than an achieved reality.

Angus Reid’s online poll was conducted from April 14 to April 15, 2009. The margin of error is +/- 3.1 per cent, 19 times out of 20. The results were statistically weighted for education, age, gender and region to ensure a sample representative of the adult population of Canada.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/04/28/what-canadians-think-of-sikhs-jews-christians-muslims/ printed on Jul 22, 2009

One comment posted on the MacLean's site is

by Roseth @ Sunday, Apr. 26, 2009 – 16:44:07

Maclean’s John Geddes has provided a balanced and interesting delineation of the Angus Reid online poll. Islam, in particular, has been getting much negative attention since 911, much of it justified, if one look at the rabid, extremist Muslim factions. Sikhs also have been involved in extremist acts; the Air India affair being the worst example. Tamils, though practically “inventing” suicide attacks, have had less impact on Canadian society.

It is unfortunate that new Canadians bring their origin countries conflicts with them here, especially when it leads to violence in their adoptive country. It does seem that the current crop of immigrants, especially those with strong ethnic and religious connections, have more difficulty accepting and adjusting to the values of their host county, than did earlier arrivals. The extremist behaviour displayed by some groups, reflected in some youth and a few families such as the Khadr clan, is causing damage to the Muslim image everywhere, and one can fault, to a degree, the moderate Muslim community for not taking a more vocal and firm stance against the few recalcitrant extremists among them.

However, one need not be a historian to know that these problems have always been with us, in one form or another. For example, Irish Fenians caused much conflict and consternation both in Canada and the United States, including physical attacks and the assassination of a member of the Canadian parliament and former sympathiser, Thomas D’Arcy McGee, in 1868. The Irish have maintained a strong Irish cultural identity over the years, but no one would suggest today that they have failed to adapt to Canadian society.

It is unfortunate that extreme tribalism, both of the political/social and the religious mode, is allowed to prevail in our society, but it is difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. The same churches, temples, synagogues and mosques that serve as a support system for new arrivals, can also act as an incubator for extremism. We must always be vigilant in ferreting out the lunatic fringes, but also be mindful that given time, the greater good for our society will persevere. It did in the past, and it will do so in the future. Our ship of state is built for stormy weather, and behind the clouds the sun is still shining.