Feb 152012
 

By Don

Recently on the SEA Facebook page there was some discussion about the Speech from the Throne made by Alberta’s Lieutenant Governor, Don Ethell.  There was criticism levelled at the Speech for what as I see as two main issues:  the content of the Speech itself and then about references made to God at the conclusion of the Speech.  It quickly became clear that I am in the minority as I see no fault with the Lieutenant Governor’s remarks and see no reason to criticize the man or office, at least in this case.  So, let me explain my reasoning on each issue.

Content
Regarding the content of the Speech, it is not the responsibility of the Lieutenant Governor.  He or she simply reads what is provided to them by the government of the day.  The content of the Speech is the sole responsibility of that government and most often of the Premier at the time. 

The Lieutenant Governor has no legislative role other than providing Royal Assent to bills passed by the Legislative Assembly.  They cannot introduce, endorse or criticize proposed legislation until and unless it comes before them after having been passed in the Legislative Assembly.  Even then, Royal Assent can only be withheld if the Lieutenant Governor deems the legislation to infringe on the rights of Albertans or intrudes upon Federal authority.

So, while there may very well be grounds to criticize the content of the Speech from the Throne, the responsibility for the content of this speech rests squarely with the current government of Alberta and Premier Redford, and not with the Lieutenant Governor.  More information about the role and duties of the Lieutenant Governor is available at www.lieutenantgovernor.ab.ca/141.htm.

God
As for the Lieutenant Governor’s remarks about God, the question is, are they appropriate?  At the close of the speech, he said, “May God bless you all. God bless Alberta. God bless Canada. God save the Queen.”

My answer is “yes”.  While I am certainly an atheist and wish that it wasn’t appropriate for the Lieutenant Governor to refer to God in an official capacity, my wish has no bearing on the reality of the situation.  So, why is it appropriate for him to have made such remarks?  There are several reasons and we need to look at them individually.

The Lieutenant Governor is the representative of Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II.  As such, his authority derives from Her and it is the Lieutenant Governor’s obligation to discharge his duties in the way in which Her Majesty would.  In addition to being Queen, Elizabeth II holds a number of other titles, much as all her predecessors did.  In amongst these are two that are of significance to this issue:  Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

Elizabeth II is not merely the Head of State of Canada (and some small collection of islands off mainland Europe), but she holds the title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England.  Many folks imagine that the Archbishop of Canterbury is the head of the Church and is on equal footing with Pope Benedict XVI.  He is not, he is subordinate to Her Majesty and she is the equal of the Pope, at least in ecclesiastical matters. 

The title Defender of the Faith is a separate position and dates back to 1521 when it was conferred upon Henry VIII by Pope Leo X.  This simply reinforces Her Majesty’s position as having a religious role and authority.  Simply put, Elizabeth II is a religious leader as much as the head of any government so it is entirely appropriate for any of her representatives to speak of God at any time during the course of their duties.

Finally, we do not live in a secular nation.  There are certainly grounds for the claim to be made that we live in a “Christian nation”, far more so than the claim could be made in the United States.  Why do I say this?  The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html) opens with these words:

“Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:”

Notice that “God” is initially capitalized.  The authors of the Charter had a very specific god in mind and it isn’t Odin, Zeus, Quetzacoatl, Shiva or Gaia.  Let me make this point very clear, it is not just a passing government of the day that recognizes a god.  It is the very foundational documents of our nation that recognize the existence of a very specific God.

Now do I agree that this is the way things should be?  No.  I wish Her Majesty would divest herself of the titles Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England.  I wish our foundational documents were amended to remove any recognition of a god(s) or God.  But just like the fantasies of the religious, my wishes have no impact on the reality of the situation.  It will take work to change things.  So, are we all up to it?  That really is the question that matters.

 Posted by at 11:05 PM