cybercoma

Canadian Order of Precedence: Religious Leaders

26 posts in this topic

I'm looking through the Order of Precedence in Canada in a book and I see that religious leaders come before the Supreme Court Justices, Members of the House of Commons, and Senators. So I check Wikipedia (because if it's on Wikipedia it has to be true, right?) and sure enough #20 religious leaders. What does this mean exactly? Why are they ranked ahead of our MPs, Senators and Supreme Court judges? Seems very odd to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_order_of_precedence

Edited by cybercoma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cueing bambino the all knowing...clean up aisle 3

Erm... Can't help on that one, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm... Can't help on that one, sorry.

Help us, Obi Wan! You're our only hope!

Seriously though, I can't seem to find any other information on this. It seems odd to have religious leaders on the list, yet no indication of exactly what is meant by that.

Edited by cybercoma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's on Parliament's website too

http://www.pch.gc.ca/pgm/ceem-cced/prtcl/precedence-eng.cfm#fn8

#14: Representatives of Faith Communities

The footnote says, "The religious dignitaries will be senior Canadian representatives of faith communities having a significant presence in a relevant jurisdiction. The relative precedence of the representatives of faith communities is to be governed by the date of their assumption in their present office, their representatives being given the same relative precedence."

What are faith communities? What does significant presence mean? It's all so odd to me.

Especially considering who they're above: supreme court judges, members of parliament, and senators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm... Can't help on that one, sorry.

WTF ?

Tuesday November 28th, 2011. A day in infamy.

(ya know you couldve BS'd us and all would be cool)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll ask His Excellency David Johnston on Twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are faith communities? What does significant presence mean? It's all so odd to me.

Especially considering who they're above: supreme court judges, members of parliament, and senators.

Why? It says right at the top of our constitution, before anything else, that we recognize the supremacy of God.

I know it's often assumed this is just for show but think about the pretext it sets for a top down governing paradigm. This notion that power in our country flows up from the people is actually the quaint one.

We probably shouldn't trouble ourselves with such inconvenient questions. Mr Canada's appeal that Canadians should look to Mr Harper as a child does their father comes to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? It says right at the top of our constitution, before anything else, that we recognize the supremacy of God.

Where's the "top" of our constitution?

Besides, it's the Queen who tops the order of precedence, not the religious leaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's the "top" of our constitution?

Besides, it's the Queen who tops the order of precedence, not the religious leaders.

The Crown on her head - the conduit through which God's authority to govern is channeled.

It all runs downhill from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The footnote says, "The religious dignitaries will be senior Canadian representatives of faith communities having a significant presence in a relevant jurisdiction. The relative precedence of the representatives of faith communities is to be governed by the date of their assumption in their present office, their representatives being given the same relative precedence."

What are faith communities? What does significant presence mean? It's all so odd to me.

The order of precedence is a protocol rule/guideline to help organise and run events at which numerous dignitaries of varying rank will be present. I imagine the representatives of faith communities are included because official events frequently include representatives of whatever "faith communities" (First Nations, Christian, Jewish, Muslim) have a "significant presence" in the jurisdiction (i.e. the largest segments of the population adhere to those faiths); they perform smudging ceremonies, read a prayer, a dissertation, or something like that. I just don't know why the representatives of faith communities are placed in precedence together between territorial premiers and puisne justices of the Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Crown on her head - the conduit through which God's authority to govern is channeled.

The crown on her head is a piece of metal decorated with some ermine and precious and semi-precious stones. It isn't a part of the constitution, and it isn't (nor has it ever been) a conduit for divine power.

Were you really meaning to refer to the top of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, where the preamble states "Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law"?

[ed.: c/e]

Edited by g_bambino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't know why the representatives of faith communities are placed in precedence together between territorial premiers and puisne justices of the Supreme Court.

You don't think there was ever any deliberate attempt to symbolically represent the religious order of things in our official institutions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The crown on her head is a piece of metal decorated with some ermine and precious and semi-precious stones.

It's also imbued with religious faith. It's a fetish, a powerful one given the importance of religion in our society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You don't think there was ever any deliberate attempt to symbolically represent the religious order of things in our official institutions?

Even if I did, I'd still be left wondering why religious leaders fall specifically between territorial premiers and puisne justices of the Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's also imbued with religious faith.

Only by those who choose to imbue it with such meaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The order is a little odd, I notice Conrad Black is even higher up the food chain (assuming he's still in it) than the premiers and SC justices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you really meaning to refer to the top of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, where the preamble states "Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law"?

[ed.: c/e]

Why is that there anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is that there anyway?

Beats me.

What has any of this got to do with the place of faith communities' representatives in the official order of precedence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beats me.

What has any of this got to do with the place of faith communities' representatives in the official order of precedence?

That religion gets a placement at all in our order just irks me I guess.

It symbolizes a certain unchanging conservative backwardness, a determination to progress into the future with our gaze forever fixed on the rear view mirror. It's anachronistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That religion gets a placement at all in our order just irks me I guess.

So, public events should include no figures representing faith communities? No smudging ceremony at a commemoration of National Aboriginal Day? No prayer read during Remembrance Day ceremonies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, public events should include no figures representing faith communities? No smudging ceremony at a commemoration of National Aboriginal Day? No prayer read during Remembrance Day ceremonies?

I'm not bothered by events like these. I can appreciate the good in having a few symbols that bind older societies and cultures together over the long term.

The unchanging top down paradigm in particular that religiosity helps set in place or the way it does is what bugs me. To me religion in our government helps to symbolize a rigid inflexibility and resistance to changes in the way we're governed. To question or suggest changes to government is almost akin to apostasy the way some people cling to our traditions.

I'm not saying religion is the skeletal framework of the government but it certainly provides a conceptual one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not bothered by events like these. I can appreciate the good in having a few symbols that bind older societies and cultures together over the long term.

Then you shouldn't be bothered by the space for religious leaders reserved in the order of precedence. The order isn't some law setting out the structure of government, or anything like that. It's just a rule/guideline that assists event coordinators in arranging various people and objects: If the city of Calgary is putting on a National Aboriginal Day event that will be attended by the lieutenant governor, the premier, an MP, the mayor, First Nations leaders of the spiritual and political kind, the city bishop, etc., etc., the Alberta order of precedence tells the organisers in what order each should ascend the dais and be seated on it, in what order the dignitaries are addressed by speakers, who's precedes who's in the arrangement of flags, and the like. Orders of precedence don't place religion in government; they’re just protocol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you shouldn't be bothered by the space for religious leaders reserved in the order of precedence. The order isn't some law setting out the structure of government, or anything like that.

I realize this Order of Precedence reflects ceremonial protocol, I'm simply saying religious influences, especially Christianity helps set out our concepts of government, ie that it forever remain a top down hierarchical system where authority and power are concentrated as if it were wealth and where resistance to change is paramount.

Like Christianity our system of government is inflexible, unchanging, hidebound and at increasing odds with reality.

Edited by eyeball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I realize this Order of Precedence reflects ceremonial protocol, I'm simply saying religious influences, especially Christianity helps set out our concepts of government, ie that it forever remain a top down hierarchical system where authority and power are concentrated as if it were wealth and where resistance to change is paramount.

I'm pretty sure that form of structure was in place long before Christianity existed and will continue after it's gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now