Frank Gower (priest at Holy Apostles, Moosonee) had left a message on the answering machine yesterday, although I didn’t retrieve it until last night. There’s another funeral scheduled in Moosonee; would I take it? I returned the call, spoke with Mrs. Gower (who was taking messages) and declined. The ‘Family Service’ could be taken by one of the lay readers at Moosonee. And the funeral itself was scheduled for 2 pm, which meant that there was no way I could get back to Moose Factory for the night. (Funerals predictably start at least an hour after the scheduled time; they can last well over one hour; and the last chopper leaves promptly at 4 PM.) Additionally, the family wanted the funeral to be held at the RC cathedral. The RC Bishop (appropriately) requires that the request to come from the Moosonee parish (Holy Apostles) and requires the specific identity of the responsible person representing that Anglican parish to the RC Cathedral (and Bishop.) I don’t want to be that person.
Non-church people reading this may dismiss the episode as yet another matter of the Church getting (or not getting) its act together. But there are at least three things going on. And they’re interesting, at least, to me. And some readers undoubtedly will want to straighten me out on one or a number of these following points.
DEPLOYMENT
There are three potential resources so far as a priest is concerned: Moose Factory (me), Kashechewan (Cliff Dee), Timmins or South Porcupine (Frank Gower). (In fact, there are more priests besides Frank in the Timmins area.) Some of us (like Frank) are part-time. Some (like Cliff and me) are full time. Because Frank is associated with Holy Apostles on a part-time basis, he is there only for a fraction of any given week. He ordinarily travels north and south, to and from, Moosonee on the train. He can arrive in Moosonee on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday. He can depart on Tuesday, Thursday, or Saturday. To get a daily schedule, he has to fly, and at considerably greater expense. He can even charter a plane, at much greater expense. Your options increase as you (or the family) spend more money. Moose Factory is the only place served by choppers alone; and, as we know, they can be extremely erratic. In fact, if one is prepared to spend money in adverse conditions – problems with daylight, weather, or machines — one may get from Moosonee to Toronto much faster than one will ever get from Moosonee to Moose Factory. I have dismissed skidoo travel across the ice as an option as unsafe and unreliable, until EVERYBODY tells me it’s safe. On Sunday Bobby was not too sure.
If Frank is not ordinarily scheduled to be in Moosonee when a funeral like this comes up, he may be able to revise his schedule. Or he may request the help of another priest to stand in his stead for the intervention. That’s what happened this time around. And I am setting limits on my own availability. My reasons, obviously, are that I have enough to do here without taking an entire day out for the funeral itself, time in addition to that in preparation, and time after the whole thing getting my head back together. Also, I can’t really honestly represent myself to the RC Bishop as having any real control over the conduct of the service, if I have not been intimate to the planning process as it goes forward. And I will not knowingly risk being stuck off The Island.
So, I drew the line – not something a priest does comfortably; we’re bred to be there then. But when things get stretched really thin, it’s best to draw the line, if you are to preserve any hope of maintaining your own level of functionality. And there are other issues.
MINISTRY LEADERSHIP
By now someone might have thought of a question I have been asking myself and (anyone else) for quite some time: Isn’t there some individual in Moosonee right now who could stand behind a lectern and read some prayers and scripture passages from the written page of a book? Well, there probably are several people who could do just that – and, in fact, do it far better and more sensitively than I ever could. (I am not always seen as being highly sensitive.) So why isn’t that person – or those people – ready to go? Death is an unpleasant fact of life. We all have to deal with it. Every community knows about it. What’s the problem at Moosonee? The problem is that you could always pick up the phone and dial 1-800-PRIEST. And up would pop an Anglican priest.
Those days are over – but not always in the public mind. Here at Moose Factory, Raymond, Bobby, and Ronnie have all read the Burial Service. They did so when there were no other options. Moosonee does not have that kind of leadership. Why? Well, they never thought they needed it; they could always call in a priest. As always, the priest would do everything, would want to do everything. Since that would take care of the matter, there was nothing that needed fixing. I have learned that there also were lay readers who would also serve in situations like this; but they have all moved away; and they have not been replaced. Evidently it’s only when there’s a vacuum of this kind of leadership that folks will start asking questions and doing things. My posturing an easy availability (however dishonestly) simply occludes the vacuum that’s been there for some time. If the vacuum is going to be remedied, it will be addressed – looked at, understood. The people who address the vacuum will be the people who care about the parish and who are committed to its healthiness. If those people exist and mobilize, things will happen very quickly. If those people do not exist or do not mobilize, there is nothing anyone else can do for the parish, anyway. The parish has to find its own internal strength in order to build.
Hate to play hardball. But that’s where the land lies.
CULTURAL ISSUES
The following is my own material, though I’ve quizzed a number of people on the subject. They do not all agree with each other. And none of them would, I suspect, agree with all of what follows. They all have minds of their own and are perfectly candid when they think I really have gone off the road and into the ditch. For what’s worth, however, at this moment in time, this is how I organize a number of inter-related issues.
The scenario goes something like this. This is a cultural thing. People have always counted on the priest being there. And the priest has always been there. So, in the case of a wedding or a funeral, the family makes the arrangements; and the priest is there. The priest then represents The Church (whatever that means) and serves the family’s interests, as the consensus of the family defines those interests. The priest is not acting like a priest, or the priest isn’t a real priest, if the priest isn’t there doing that. It’s the priest’s business to make everything expected happen. That’s why there are priests. Also, the priest doesn’t just DO the Funeral Service. For the duration of the immediate crisis, the priest becomes part of the family and is included in the family structure and dynamic. One would conclude from this that the priest would be intimate with the family in the day(s) before the funeral, would preside at the funeral, and would be present to the family at least until the gathering disbands.
Of course, all of that probably is true universally. We’re talking about humanity. The difference here is the extent of the difference, the shape of the role of the priest, and the peculiar nature of changes over the last generation or so.
This just isn’t how you deal with virtually anyone else when you want that person to come into your life and make an intervention. Why? Because it doesn’t work. And people know that. It doesn’t work, because if you want someone to do something, not only do you have to explain what needs to be done, but you also have to understand what the intervener is willing or able to do. That dialogue may extend over several conversations before an understanding or agreement is achieved. That certainly happens – in most cases, though not all – prior to a wedding or before you get your car fixed. Often it does not happen prior to a funeral, because the time between death and funeral is so short, and there is neither time nor opportunity for that dialogue.
In many of the situations I have encountered here the deceased was an Anglican; the next generation clearly is not; and there are no shared presuppositions about what we are doing, or why, or how. So, the family approaches the funeral in crisis and with assumptions that have roots running deep into the past, perhaps, but not always into the present reality. Again, that probably is universally true. How do you get intimate with a stranger quickly about these precious and vulnerable sensibilities? The difference here again is in the extent of that difference — as well as in the specific nature of some of those assumptions. There are two important sets of assumptions.
The Holy Man:
The first, believe it or not, relates to the shaman or medicine man. All my interlocutors have explained to me that the white missionary priest has never been confused, either in the imagination or in the language, with the indigenous shaman or medicine man. Granted. But, with the medicine man, assuming he was present, how might the family’s behavior be different? I don’t think it would be very different. Again, we are talking about a universal reflex that happens in time of bereavement and stress. The Cree customarily had one or two religious figures for each extended family – who shared in the life of that family and who were part of that family. Prior to any crisis there was plenty of common ground: shared memories, relationships, a clear understanding of who we are and what we are about as a social unit.
When the first missionaries moved in, although they might not have fit that specific indigenous role of holiness, they could, and clearly did, fill the pastoral – or human relations – need. In any given village the missionary priest might be very busy, indeed. He would be busy in the village and busy in the bush, camping and traveling with families. But, if he kept at the job and managed his time and energy carefully, he generally could keep up with the families’ emotional and spiritual demands – at least to the point where the folk perceived that their needs were being addressed – not perfectly, perhaps, but, on the whole, not too badly, either. I imagine that the priest was the clearing house for many, many relationships, going from one family to the next, for a moment or two being part of each. He would have been the quintessential pastor.
The breakdown now occurs in two dimensions at the same time. First: The families who have become inactive or otherwise isolated from an Anglican congregation, revert, under stress, to that model of holiness, compassion, and integrity — to which they had been introduced as children but no longer practice — as a way of getting through the crisis. The family members, individually, might be highly ambivalent about approaching the Anglican Church for a funeral, having been so distant for so long and, perhaps, having been involved with other religious traditions. But, collectively the family grabs on to the memory and the myth that had sustained them in previous generations – however superficial that memory may now be. The memory has become so superficial for some that it doesn’t really work. But they can’t discern for themselves any other that will work, either – at least none other that will work by itself to the exclusion of others. THEN, when the family makes its overture to the Church, there’s no priest available. When that happens, they’re stuck. They don’t have another model to flip into. For them the fault lies with the Church and the priest who are not doing what they used to do and what they ought to be doing now. There has to be that one figure – or a clone of that figure – for the thing to work, even if that figure, personally, is utterly foreign and therefore artificial. There is no conception of Church, as a community to which I might belong personally or as a place where I might find the context in which I can grow. All of that happens in the context of the family, as defined and understood by the family. The Church’s only role in the matter is to provide the holy person – no matter how superficial or artificial that holiness has become.
There is this tectonic shift going on where one culture meets another, and the two are not necessarily compatible. It shows up here especially in the interface between marginalized families and Church communities (or a congregational understanding of The Church.) Although The Cree figured out how to employ The (White European) Church out of their own cultural reference, generations ago, that accommodation now is either breaking down or being reconfigured as they and The Anglican Church are faced with increasing secularization, multi denominationalism, and market place norms (all on The Cree side) and a growing understanding by The Church of holiness and ministry as common properties of the entire congregation, including the priest (but not just the priest.) In a sense, in this place, anyway, when the marginalized families are stressed and when they reach out for a model of The Church in their crisis, it seems to me that they revert to the model of years ago – a model that The Church already is working hard to grow out of.
Guilt:
There is a second assumption at work that muddies all of the above. That is the guilt – real or imagined – of The Church. This relates to the (again, real or imagined) perpetration and/or collusion by The Church not simply in the matter of the Residential Schools with their stories of abuse and barbarities resulting in contemporary litigation but also in a much more widespread cultural aggression against native peoples in general and against their culture in particular. This aggression was pervasive, long-term, and powerful. Somehow The Cree survived. Presently they are recovering their culture – or what they remember of it. At the same time they are metamorphosing – as their culture mixes, however easily or uneasily, with the culture to the south. One might defend The Church with the point that its intentions were good, even if some of its people were not. And by any reasonable criteria The Church is working assertively to redress the wrong, do justice, pick up, and go on. But the point, here, relates to perceptions of The Church – particularly those perceptions of the profoundly marginalized. And it’s that mind I am trying to understand.
So, the First Part of the assumption: The Church is guilty, at least, by way of association.
For some of those who had left community with the Church some time ago and who now return only for a funeral, if you are an Anglican, you have dirt on your hands. If you didn’t have dirt on your hands, you wouldn’t be an Anglican; you wouldn’t want to be an Anglican. Put positively: a way of declaring your cleanliness or innocence of soul or freedom from the burden of the past would be to disassociate yourself from The Anglican Church. (Our Pentecostal brothers and sisters constantly remind each other of this; and they remind us as well – whenever they get the opportunity.) Even though I am from another country and from another culture, I am white and I am an Anglican (Episcopalianism notwithstanding) and I am perceived from this frame of reference. There’s nothing I can do to stop it. I CAN decline participate in the scenario when I think I discern it. And I can offer another model – of hope, acceptance if not agreement, transparency of commitment. But basically I have to endure it.
Then, the Second Part: You have no moral authority or charism.
It’s because you are guilty that you have no moral authority. Therefore, when I approach you regarding a rite or service, you have no authority to decline my request; and you have no MORAL option but to cooperate. My authority comes from the (however uneasy) consensus of the family; and you are our means by which we will accomplish what we have to do. Of course, you may exercise the brute power that still resides in your office to refuse my request(s), but we who are now free of the Anglican (or white man’s) burden are where power will soon reside. The shell that is presently the Anglican Church will cease to exist when the last Anglican Elder is buried. And the rest of us will go on with what is authentic – whether that is another denomination, church, or whatever. (It’s to this mind that the funeral home industry would be a commodious response. That is, a family could use the funeral home as a shell in which to accomplish the observances it desires without getting entangled with any faith community. The family would be free to do anything it wanted to do regarding any formal observance. The family would then be free of any association with the funeral home, once they paid the bill. I predict that when there is enough money in these communities, there will be funeral homes — and for precisely this reason.)
There are two roots here: One is a parallel to the original White European dismissal of the aborigine’s traditional charism. I understand that the first missionaries simply dismissed the charism of aboriginal religion as invalid. Now the process occurs – in the other direction. The other root is relates to the aborigine’s pragmatic appropriation of The Church’s pastoral care– only this time it is far more tenuous because the pastoral care isn’t there. (Remember what started this discussion? I just can’t get there.)
So, maybe I exaggerate — but not by much, with some. In any case, my purpose here is to identify and describe the issue; and the issue abides, I suspect, however vaguely, in some quarters of the public mind.
It’s a bitter pill for me to swallow. But whatever amount of anger there is towards white people and white institutions (even when those institutions are mostly non-white) it’s fully understandable, however tragic. It resonates to the rage expressed by oppressed people everywhere, including those in The States. (In fact, in The States, the journey of The Episcopal Church with or without the Black Community is much more pronounced. Prior to the Civil War Anglican (or Episcopalian) clergy pastored large numbers of Black parishioners with remarkable care and affection. With Emancipation those Black congregants evaporated virtually over-night and formed their own distinctive churches and denominations. The fault lay not in the pastors – some of whom were broken by the event – but by the contamination of The Church by the slave-holding establishment.) To me it makes sense; there’s nothing crazy about this. And while I may like to say that I, as a minority person, am free of the chips on my own shoulder, I know I am lying when I do that. We are products of our history. Some wounds heal; some do not. There are many deep wounds here, and if they are to heal at all, they will heal slowly.
So, bits and pieces of this undifferentiated guilt are part of the cloud we Anglicans operate under these days, and that cloud keeps us humble (maybe.) In a way, this attitude could be the best thing that ever happened to The Anglicans. It might just make Christians out of us. It will separate those who wish to exercise their commitments in a tangible way from those who don’t care. And gone are the days when Father knows best – or when The Church is simply ‘Father.’ Hopefully, it will keep the pressure on those of us who ARE committed to a life in this kind of a congregation to find our own authenticity and to act from that authenticity. Our identity will simply have to come from within our own Body. We may well become a tiny minority Church, as indeed we were and are in the States, albeit for different reasons. That doesn’t bother me at all. These notes are written on a MAC. I like small churches more than big churches, anyway. There’s just a tiny bit of the Amish in me. ‘Be ye separate!’
Well, now that I’ve been here four months, that’s my take on the matter – for now. If I haven’t already slid off the road, I’ve sniffed out at least part of the resistance to change – resistance although change has already occurred and is presently accelerating. I’ll probably come back to this thread later, anyway.
The Canadian Bible Society had a display in the Parish Hall last night – along with the gourmet-ham-and-scalloped-potato dinner. I bought a New Testament in Moose Factory Cree – with the approval of The Gathered. The nice lady from The Society will send me The Society’s Cree Primers that have been prepared especially for first grade students. She thinks that might help.
Cliff Dee called and wanted to know all about the funeral and me – straight from the old horse’s mouth. I gave him an earful. Bottom line: about the same investment of time, whether from Moose Factory or Timmins. Difference in Fares: about $40. Forty additional dollars (Canadian) also buys security; trains run when choppers don’t.
Late in the evening Monica and Theresa showed up for a cup of tea. Theresa is on The Island only for tonight. Tomorrow she flies to Attawapiskat. She seems very happy. We chatted for an hour or so. Somehow we got talking about my trips down the Attawapiskat River in the 70′s. And somehow that got her asking about mosquitoes. With a glint in her eye she asked if there were any – up River, back in the bush. I, of course, couldn’t remember but nary a one.
Theresa may have pulled off a breakthrough in the matter of Attawapiskat Village and DeBeers Mining Company.
The Mushkegowuck Council is the consortium of Bands – of which Attawapiskat is one. The Council has achieved a common understanding that they will negotiate as a whole on behalf of each of the constituent Bands. There is a formula for profit sharing. That means that the entire Council will represent Attawapiskat and will use the Council’s entire resources in the negotiations on Attawapiskat’s behalf. In return, while Attawapiskat will keep a hefty part of the profits from a settlement with DeBeers , it will not keep all. A major part of the profit is to be shared evenly by the other constituent Bands. Likewise, presumably, if there is a major deal in the air at another Village, again the Council will negotiate as one unit; that Village, then, will reap a hefty part of the windfall; but always a major part of the proceeds will go to the other constituent Bands. The West Side Cree are now in this thing together. That is, I think their Chiefs are behind the concept. They may yet have to sell it to their own individual Bands. I hope it sells.
DeBeers (and others) now have the entire Council to deal with – not just one isolated village that can easily fracture under the pressure of expert and persistent negotiation and maneuvering. An array of experts and consultants has been lined up to help the Mushkegowuck Council on their side of the negotiations. Negotiations fall into two areas: Short-term and Long-term. So far, only Short-term negotiations have taken place – with the Attawapiskat Band alone and only for the Exploratory Phase of the Project. Theresa had stopped the Exploratory Phase this fall, by refusing to renew The Band’s permission or license to continue that exploratory work, until or unless certain issues were resolved regarding the Long-term or major phase of the Project. DeBeers had stated this fall, when they ceased operations, that that was impossible. Some may have concluded, then, from that posture, that the entire deal was in jeopardy. DeBeers, reportedly, just wasn’t ready to negotiate a deal relative to the entire Project at this time. If the exploration were not completed, then, there would be no foundation on which to design the entire project. Phase Two (The Long-term Phase) could be discussed only after Phase One (The Short-term Phase) had been completed and the reports analyzed.
Now, those Long-term negotiations are scheduled to start up in January; and the entire Council is on board with those negotiations. All travel costs of the Cree negotiating team are to be paid by DeBeers. (If DeBeers wants a meeting in Toronto, fine, they pay.) Theresa already dreams of an adequately staffed medical clinic for the Village of Attawapiskat, itself. She worries about finding trained people who would work in such a remote place. I told her I have a young cousin, a medic, who just can’t wait.
If, years from now, these activities are seen as a quantum leap for The Cree, several names may be remembered then. But there always will be one name in particular: Theresa Hull, Chief of the Attawapiskat Band and Justice of The Peace. Theresa, alone, met DeBeers on the bridge, whilst summoning help. (Monica tells me – all in one breath: you’re exaggerating, again; it will be ten years before people fully realize what Theresa just did; it would have happened anyway. My response: you have the mind of a Cree; Theresa acted outside the norms of her culture to save the integrity of her culture.)