Review of Dennis Gruending, Pulpit and Politics: Competing Religious Ideologies in Canadian Public Life, 2011. By Ron Dart.
I have taught Ideology and Politics for many years, and the dominant ideology that has often shaped how politics and ideology is taught at university is secularism. Such an approach to the teaching of ideology and politics tends to either ignore or marginalize religion. There has been a decided turn by some in the last few years (text books are catching up with such a reality) to both recognize the importance of religion and politics and how ideology, religion and politics inform one another. Pulpit and Politics: Competing Religious Ideologies in Canadian Public Life takes plough to hard soul in this emerging area of research and reflection within the Canadian context. Needless to say, there has been plenty of work done in this area in the USA.
Pulpit and Politics is divided into nine sections: 1) Political and Religious Polarization in 2011, 2) Religious Right, 3) See How They Vote, 4) Religious Progressives, 5) Politics and Pulpit, 6) Catholics Left and Right, 7) Peace and War, 8) Accommodation and 9) Seen from Abroad. There can be no doubt where Gruending has planted his solid flag in the ideological culture wars. The religious progressives are held high and offered an affirmative Amen and the conservatives are seen as the demons that need to be routed. Gruending has, rightly so, connected the dots between far right conservatives, soft right conservatives and conservatives who are now in power. The family tree has its in house battles on a variety of hot button issues and how such issues should be priorized and why. The coalition between Roman Catholics, Evangelicals and the right of centre Jewish constituency must be noted. But, there are Catholics, Jews and Evangelicals on the centre, centre left also. Gruending traces and tracks, in a series of short and pithy articles, how, mostly, Christianity continues to shape and massage politics.
Pulpit and Politics is, in some ways, a thinner and toned down version of Marci McDonald’s tome, The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada (2010)- Marci did two rather long interviews with me for her book. Both books have dared to venture, to their courageous credit, into the real yet often ignored world of religion and politics in Canada. Such a move is imperative if the deeper and more significant reality of politics is ever going to be understood. A secular approach to politics is a one eyed Cyclops and, as such, misses much. Both McDonald and Gruending see with both eyes, and, in doing so, see much better. Both McDonald and Gruending, though, tend to blow the whistle on the conservatives.
It is significant that the subtitle of Gruending’s missive is ‘Competing Religious Ideologies in Canadian Public Life’. This offers the curious reader a hint of what is about to come. There are the conservatives and the progressives. There is a sort of either-or scenario offered the reader—such is the nature of ideology and ideologues. Conservative ideologues often naively assume their agenda is right, true and good as do progressive ideologues. Critical thinking tends to be the first victim of ideologies. Each and all are expected to salute before their clan and tribe. Is an ideological path the direction that Canadians wish to trek in public life? A thoughtful person might inquire about the good insights of both the conservatives and progressives and the Achilles heel in both tribes? We are in an age in which we need thoughtful political philosophers in Canada that transcend the left-right dualism that so often dominates and demeans much political thought and action in Canada.
Gruending mentions a couple of times the Red Tory tradition in Pulpit and Politics, and George Grant appears but once in Gruending’s tract for the times. I have written a few books on Red Toryism, Grant and other classical Canadian Tories—perhaps, if Canadians knew more about such worthies, we could step beyond our ideological impasse.
Do purchase Pulpit and Politics, but realize that just as secularism is a narrow minded ideology that is best to leave behind, so the ideology of conservatism-progressivism is equally problematic. In short, do read Pulpit and Politics with all the detailed and historic incisive insights offered but also the obvious blind spots and ideological bent to the political tale so well told.
Ron Dart
Thanks Ron, sounds like a great read. I wonder what percentage of the population that puts me in? 😉
Thank you for reviewing my book Pulpit and Politics. You did so with skill and insight, although not without criticism. You mention the Red Tory tradition and how it could well have something to offer today that might allow us to “step beyond our ideological impasse.” I have a good deal of regard for the Red Tory tradition. In fact, I wrote a biography called Emmett Hall: Establishment Radical about the late Supreme Court Justice whose Royal Commission recommended medicare for Canada. Hall was a law school classmate of John Diefenbaker’s and certainly he fit the description of a Red Tory. My question is this: Are there any Red Tories around these days? I read recently in the New York Times that moderate Republicans are an endangered species in that party today. Similarly, I can think of virtually no Conservative MP today’s House of Commons who represents the honourable Red Tory tradition. Where have they gone? Can they possibly make a comeback? I would like to know.
Dennis,
First, let me say that I think all thoughtful Canadians should have a copy of your book, ‘Emmett Hall: Establishment Radical’.—it’s a real gem and keeper. The biography reminds me, in some ways, of John Boyko’s, ‘Bennett: The Rebel Who Challenged and Changed a Nation’ or the biography of Diefenbaker that called him a ‘Rogue Tory’. I have often, as did Grant in many ways, preferred Howard Green to Diefenbaker—Green had more of the Red in the Tory than did Diefenbaker.
You asked about Red Tories that are in power—let me mention a few still living with inconsistent Tory tendencies but in political power no more: Flora McDonald, Joe Clark, David Orchard, Hugh Segal, Douglas Roche (who you mention in pages 61-64 of ‘Pulpit and Politics’). Have you had much interaction with Larry Schmidt?—he is Ted’s brother. Larry is a fine thinker on both Grant and Simone Weil–good Red Tory instincts in Larry.
But, you asked about Red Tories In power–I tend to see the Red Tory vision, like a broken Ming Vase, shattered and scattered in frayed pieces in different political parties.
The Conservative party, like the Liberals, NDP and Green parties, hold fragments of the vision yet none within these parties has the will or ability to think beyond the tribalism of ideology, hence the marginalization of a consistent Red Toryism in Canada and distortion of such a vision in England (have your read Phillip Blond’s ‘Red Tory: How Left and right Have Broken Britain and How We Can Fix It’: 2010?). I have nattered on long enough. I do urge, though, that one and all should read ‘Pulpit and Politics’—such an informed missive will definitely raise the level of understanding of religion and politics to a higher level, and this is desperately needed.
Fiat Lux
Ron Dart