Rioux | Drôles de prières

When is a prayer a prayer, and when is it more a political event. Other examples would arguably include the Annual March for Life and telling that most Christian religious figures oppose the ban:

…La France a toujours résisté à la tentation de légiférer sur ces prières, consciente que la religion a toute sa place dans les lieux publics pourvu qu’elle ne gêne pas l’ordre public et que sa présence ne relève pas de la provocation. Il n’est pas besoin d’être diplômé en théologie pour savoir que, dans nos pays, la prière n’est pas un banal instrument d’agit-prop. Ce prosélytisme exacerbé est en contradiction avec nos traditions culturelles et le sens même de la prière, celle-ci étant généralement considérée comme un geste intime et personnel qui exige le recueillement et ne saurait donc être confondu avec des slogans militants hurlés par une foule hystérique. Comment s’étonner dès lors que, en s’exhibant ainsi sur la voie publique, ces hommes (car les femmes en sont exclues) provoquent des réactions de rejet ? Et, à plus forte raison, s’ils le font un dimanche devant une église !

Pour peu que l’on daigne sortir de sa bulle, on constatera que ces prières publiques sont aujourd’hui instrumentalisées aussi bien sur Downing Street que devant la porte de Brandebourg. Si l’idée de la laïcité est étrangère à l’islam, se pourrait-il que, comme le voile, ces prières soient une façon pour lui de marquer son territoire ?

L’idée n’est pas nouvelle. On ne compte plus les intellectuels qui, durant tout le XXe siècle, et même avant, ont démontré le caractère conquérant de l’islam. Admirateur de la richesse de la culture musulmane, l’islamologue français Roger Arnaldez fut un ami du grand écrivain égyptien Taha Hussein, l’un des artisans de la renaissance intellectuelle arabe (la Nahda). Il considérait que « la conquête est pour les musulmans un moyen normal, voulu et conduit par Dieu, pour répandre la foi dans les pays des infidèles ». Cette conquête n’est pas toujours le fait des armes, écrivait-il dès 1994, mais « d’une volonté non seulement de convertir des individus, ce qui est normal, mais de prendre pied et position dans la vie sociale et politique des pays de l’ancien Dar al-Harb [où l’islam n’a pas triomphé]. Il n’est plus alors question de djihad armé, moins encore de terrorisme, mais d’un projet de conquête insinueuse qui n’en est pas moins une conquête ».

Tout en reconnaissant que ces thèses pouvaient être contestées, l’islamologue membre de l’Académie des sciences morales et politiques de France jugeait que « l’Islam, par beaucoup de ses traits et par son histoire passée, pose des problèmes que ne pose aucune autre des grandes religions. Il en résulte qu’on doit, à son égard, rester très attentif et garder une attitude de grande prudence »….

Source: Chronique | Drôles de prières

Globe editorial: A premier goes out on wing and a prayer

Valid questions but some of the public prayers have been more political than spiritual in nature:

…It is already presumed that whatever law the government tables will infringe on an individual’s freedoms of expression, of religion, of conscience and of peaceful assembly, and then duck behind the notwithstanding clause. But how far will the government go?

What happens to a Quaker standing silently in a park? Is the government aware that this can constitute a form of prayer? Should the person be detained for questioning? 

What about someone doing yoga in a park? While yoga is generally a secular practice in Canada, it can for some be a devotional exercise and a communion with a higher power. How will the government know what intentions the person doing yoga al fresco has set?

What about doing tai chi in a park? It, too, is most often a secular, meditative practice in Canada. It is not a religion in and of itself, but it can be used as part of a spiritual journey by people of different faiths. Like yoga, it depends on intention.

What about Falun Gong, a modern religious movement devoted to a god-like leader that has been banned in China? Its practitioners are often seen outdoors in parks, and sometimes on sidewalks in front of Chinese consulates, their hands clasped in the prayer position. Will Beijing suddenly have an ally in the suppression of Falun Gong members? 

What about the annual Roman Catholic Good Friday procession in Old Montreal, an event involving public prayer? Will that still be allowed? It could make a secularist uncomfortable.

Or what about a soccer player who, smack in the middle of a public stadium, crosses himself before a game or when he scores a goal? Is that permissible?

If this seems ridiculous, it is no more ridiculous than the failing CAQ government taking a desperate swing at a divisive issue to save its skin.

How far Mr. Legault goes with this will be telling. Is it even possible to ban public prayer based on the actions of some Muslim protesters without also ensuring that people of other faiths and beliefs aren’t allowed to get away with the same infraction? 

Or is that the whole point – to again single out the one group that was most affected by Bill 21 and its ban on hijabs, and which has so often come under fire in Quebec?

Like yoga, it’s all about setting intentions. 

Source: A premier goes out on wing and a prayer

Public prayer debate doesn’t need to create winners and losers: John Milloy

Former Ontario cabinet minister John Milloy on public prayer:

In 2008, the legislature reviewed its policy concerning its practice of opening prayers. Although a decision was made to maintain the Lord’s Prayer as part of the daily routine, a rotation of prayers from other religions was added. Each day members begin by also hearing a recitation from one of Ontario’s other faith traditions — Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist and many others. Recognizing many Ontarians hold no religious views, a moment of silence is also included in the rotation.

The Ontario system is far from perfect. The continuing presence of the Lord’s Prayer troubles some, but within the Ontario practice may be the seeds of a different approach to the present situation.

A city council meeting that began each meeting with a prayer or reading from a different faith community would send a powerful message of respect for our many religious traditions. Including a moment of silence or a non-religious reading or meditation would give non-believers an equal and important voice. An approach such as this has been successfully used by the City of Edmonton. Each municipal meeting begins with a prayer or reflection, some non-religious in nature, chosen from a roster suggested by community members.

Politics is a rough-and-tumble game. It is easy in this hyper-partisan political world to lose sight of your immense responsibility as well as the seriousness of the issues before you. Taking a moment before the opening of a session and thinking about the gravity of the situation through prayer or reflection can be beneficial. Anything that reminds politicians that there is something beyond their own self-interests and the need to win re-election can only lead to better decision-making.

Whether approaching this ritual along the lines suggested would comply with the Supreme Court ruling is a question for legal experts and ultimately the courts themselves. But we have to find a way to make our diverse society work. Religious faith has much to offer. Religious traditions have often been at the forefront of progressive change, they are not afraid to challenge conventional wisdom and call on all of us to focus on something that transcends our immediate selfish needs. A society where no effort is made to accommodate and celebrate these beliefs and relegate them to merely a “private matter” is one that is greatly diminished.

Public prayer debate doesn’t need to create winners and losers | Toronto Star.