What's in a Word
When we were clearing out my parents-in-laws' house last year, I found a sweater with a beautiful First Nation's design on it that was the right size for my step daughter, Paige. So I took a photo and sent it to her, asking if she wanted the sweater.
Paige asked me if the sweater came from a First Nation's company. I said I wasn't sure, but that the name sounded First Nations. Paige asked if I could check, as she didn't want to wear something that was an example of cultural appropriation.
That had not crossed my mind at all. I had heard of the concept of cultural appropriation of course: businesses using Indigenous designs and clothing styles to make money when they had no connection to the culture itself. But sure enough, when I looked up the company that made the shirt, it was based overseas, no connection to any First Nation at all, even though name was clearly chosen to sound like it was. It was an obvious example of cultural appropriation. Paige did not take the shirt, we gave it to the Salvation Army.
It was a real eye opener for me. How easy it is to do lip service to Canada's Indigenous peoples while actually doing harm.
I was thinking about that conversation with Paige as I prepared for today, and it got me wondering if there were other areas where non-indigenous people have good intentions, but are perhaps missing the mark.
One area that came to mind is the acknowledgment of territory that we use at the beginning of our service. It's something that has become common across Canada at many events, from the opening of government sessions to hockey games to classrooms. We begin by someone stating that we meet on the traditional territory of the Indigenous group who live in the area. In BC we specify that we meet on the unceded traditional territory of the local First Nation.
It's good that this is happening, but what exactly does it mean? How much do most of us know about the treaties with Indigenous people in our area? Or in the areas that we hear about when we watch a hockey game? Or any other event?
Journalist Patrick Mascoe challenges our approach to using territorial acknowledgment. He says:
“(This) has now become our national pledge of allegiance (simply insert appropriate Indigenous name) and if we say these magical words enough, everything will be all right. As if we think these very words will have the power to erase white guilt and restore Indigenous pride.”
That's something to think about, isn't it. This is not to say we shouldn't use acknowledgments, they're very important, but it's like with the shirt I wanted to give Paige, let's do our homework, let's know the full story of the words we're using.
The story goes back over 400 years ago to when Europeans began to arrive in land we now know as Canada. Both French and English negotiated treaties with the Indigenous peoples they encountered. In fact, Britain made quite a point of negotiating treaties, the Government of Canada website on the topic says:
“The Royal Proclamation of 1763 decreed that First Nations should not be disturbed in their use and enjoyment of the land. It also declared that only the Crown could acquire land from First Nations, and only through treaty-making.
The Royal Proclamation set the framework for negotiation based on co-operation rather than conquest.”
That sounds wonderful, but I don't think most First Nations, Inuit and Metis groups would agree that they were “not disturbed in their use and enjoyment of the land,” nor that the treaties were “based on cooperation rather than conquest.”
While some treaties attempted to be fair, many others were negotiated at gunpoint or with desperate leaders whose people were starving. And by 1923 the federal government made it a criminal offense for a First Nation to hire a lawyer to pursue land claims settlements – apparently the era of cooperation was over.
When we acknowledge territory, we use the word “traditional territory” because that recognizes that treaties weren't very fair. Traditional territory includes all the land a particular nation would have covered, not just the land the government of Canada or Britain decided to give them.
In BC, Yukon and parts of Ontario and Quebec, treaties were never negotiated before 1923. In other words, the Indigenous groups there never gave up their land. That's why here in Comox we speak of the unceded territory of the Komox First Nation. The land was never ceded, never given, to Canada. In BC and Yukon treaty negotiations reopened in '90s and are still ongoing.
Did you know that the Komox First Nation is in stage 4 of 6 in treaty negotiations? That means they are at the stage of negotiation of an agreement in principle. They've been at that stage since 2007. It seems to me that if we're going to talk about living on the unceded territory of the Komox First Nation, we should know something about what that means, and what it means today.
Catherine McKenney, a First Nations city councillor in Ottawa, another area where treaties were never made, says: “It’s important for people to understand that this is unceded, unsurrendered land that we’re on. The goal of acknowledgment is that it leads to real action. It doesn’t cost anything to say it, but it has to be followed by action.”
So if we're going to use that acknowledgment every Sunday, we need to be prepared to think about what it means to us and be prepared to do something. One important step is realizing that treaties aren't just for Indigenous people, we are all treaty people.
Treaties aren't historical documents, they're living ones, that's why we do the acknowledgments. So we non-indigenous people are a part of treaties too and we need to understand them and honor them.
I found a creed written by the All My Relations Network, a First Nations group of the United Church in Saskatchewan in 2011 that expresses this beautifully. I will read it and later in service will invite you to read it with me, as you're comfortable.
We are, all of us, Treaty People:
original inhabitants
and those who came later—
inheritors of a diverse history,
dwellers in a common land,
travellers toward a better day.
We have known friendship and animosity,
cooperation and oppression, blessing and pain.
And now we embrace the sacred covenant
that heralds a new beginning:
that softens the heart
and dismantles the prisons of
the present and the past.
We joyfully claim our rights and responsibilities
as Treaty People.
Amen.
I see so much hope in that statement, especially the line about a new beginning that softens the heart and dismantles the prisons of the present and the past. It says once we acknowledge the pain of the past, together we can create a new relationship, a new sacred covenant.
Murray Pruden, the Indigenous Minister for the Pacific Mountain Region of the United Church, held a town hall meeting this week about Indigenous Heritage Month. His comments were very similar to the Treaty People's creed when asked where the United Church goes from here. He said it's all about relationship, our relationship with the land, our relationship with each other. He said, We come from the same dirt, the same earth, made by the same creator.
The words of Psalm 72 offer us guidance on being treaty people, on creating a new relationship and sacred covenant. It speaks of God's anointed ruling with justice, upholding the poor, opposing the oppressor, of all creation being part of just living.
God's anointed is another word for Messiah, and in some Jewish traditions, promised Messiah isn't a specific person, it's all people of faith working together.
I love that image, that we are all God's anointed, Indigenous and non-indigenous, black and white -- all my relations, called to work together to bring about a world of hope and justice.
So when it comes to relationships between Indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in Canada, let's not wait around for our leaders to figure things out, let's each be God's anointed, working for justice and right relationship wherever we can, as individuals and together as a community of faith.
It's not an easy path. It means learning new things and challenging old assumptions. But if the past few weeks have taught us anything, it's that we must be open to learning and changing how we see the world around us, or we will not be part of a just and compassionate society.
May we be guided by our Creator in creating right relationship and in embracing our rights and responsibilities as treaty people and as God's people.