O Canada
My friend Neil Wilson, a thoughtful and patriotic Western Canadian send me this analysis of our national anthem. I asked him if I could post it here, and to my delight, he has agreed.
Thanks, Neil.
+++++++++++
A friend and I were discussing various documents that contribute to the structure of any given society, i.e. constitutions, written law, philosophic essays, The Bible, religious documents etcetera. To be effective, this intellectual property needs to be written in absolutes and held in distinguished regard. These documents are to be written in truth and in the positive, reflecting the ideals aspired by the citizenry in majority.
Authors that have enthusiasm to generate thought provoking text that reflects the passion of a nation are scarce these days. I think of C. Lavallee and R. Stanley Weir, responsible for the lyrics and melody of our National Anthem; the intent and vision that they wished to see sustained in perpetuity.
?O Canada! Our home and native land!? ?Our home,? as defined by our fore-fathers and ?our home? as defined by our current orders of government and its interests, is quite contradictory. ?Our Home? is the exclusive home of the state, and we are tenants; the control of it is out of our hands! ?and native land?, after many generations and counting, Canada is not considered our native land. How long do people have to live here to be considered native to Canada. The state definition of ?native? needs a revamp.
?True patriot?s love in all thy Son?s command?. The patriots living here today that fought tyranny and oppression to keep Canada free from such, are wondering why they did it; their patriotism wanes as their sons lose command of their country. We have autocracy and oppression by different means. The ?Son?s ?command? referred to in this line has lost influence while we socially engineer the ?new age Canada?.
?With glowing hearts we see thee rise?, Watching Canada rise within the values of a welfare state, does not make hearts glow. There is solace that we are fed and have the creature comforts that much of the world does not enjoy; for that, we are grateful, but that acquisition is the product of the hands and hearts of those before us and our continued assured welfare will be the burden of following generations. We have risen? to government dependency, which is not a glowing attribute.
?The true North Strong and Free?, North? Certainly. Strong? The Canadian Military, commendable in ability, is token compared to what we had proportionately in the late 1800?s. The ability to defend our borders has been peddled to our national neighbours much to the chagrin of our veterans and reserve components. ?O Canada we stand on guard for thee? is then not our line to use.
The newer revised version of ?O Canada? uses the next line ?God keep our land, glorious and free?. The mention of ?God? in parliamentary circles gives many of its members the ?willies?. Rather than be the basis of reference to societal development, God is considered an impediment to government agenda. It is only those respectful of God within our orders of government that are keeping an even keel. Government/man increasingly believe that the ailments of society can be cured by compromise and appeasement to deviate behaviour with little regard to Godly/Christian Principle. We are concerned that Canada is not held favourably in the eyes of God.
The last repeated lines, ?O Canada, we stand on guard for thee?, indicates that WE are responsible for the preservation of this country and if WE do what is necessary to preserve and further maintain it, one day, OUR National Anthem written to pronounce the true spirit and intent of the common Canadian, will be sung in truth.
Neil E. Wilson (chair) The Canadian Constitution Committee.
March 20, 2001. reopened, February 10, 2004.
Thanks, Neil.
+++++++++++
A friend and I were discussing various documents that contribute to the structure of any given society, i.e. constitutions, written law, philosophic essays, The Bible, religious documents etcetera. To be effective, this intellectual property needs to be written in absolutes and held in distinguished regard. These documents are to be written in truth and in the positive, reflecting the ideals aspired by the citizenry in majority.
Authors that have enthusiasm to generate thought provoking text that reflects the passion of a nation are scarce these days. I think of C. Lavallee and R. Stanley Weir, responsible for the lyrics and melody of our National Anthem; the intent and vision that they wished to see sustained in perpetuity.
?O Canada! Our home and native land!? ?Our home,? as defined by our fore-fathers and ?our home? as defined by our current orders of government and its interests, is quite contradictory. ?Our Home? is the exclusive home of the state, and we are tenants; the control of it is out of our hands! ?and native land?, after many generations and counting, Canada is not considered our native land. How long do people have to live here to be considered native to Canada. The state definition of ?native? needs a revamp.
?True patriot?s love in all thy Son?s command?. The patriots living here today that fought tyranny and oppression to keep Canada free from such, are wondering why they did it; their patriotism wanes as their sons lose command of their country. We have autocracy and oppression by different means. The ?Son?s ?command? referred to in this line has lost influence while we socially engineer the ?new age Canada?.
?With glowing hearts we see thee rise?, Watching Canada rise within the values of a welfare state, does not make hearts glow. There is solace that we are fed and have the creature comforts that much of the world does not enjoy; for that, we are grateful, but that acquisition is the product of the hands and hearts of those before us and our continued assured welfare will be the burden of following generations. We have risen? to government dependency, which is not a glowing attribute.
?The true North Strong and Free?, North? Certainly. Strong? The Canadian Military, commendable in ability, is token compared to what we had proportionately in the late 1800?s. The ability to defend our borders has been peddled to our national neighbours much to the chagrin of our veterans and reserve components. ?O Canada we stand on guard for thee? is then not our line to use.
The newer revised version of ?O Canada? uses the next line ?God keep our land, glorious and free?. The mention of ?God? in parliamentary circles gives many of its members the ?willies?. Rather than be the basis of reference to societal development, God is considered an impediment to government agenda. It is only those respectful of God within our orders of government that are keeping an even keel. Government/man increasingly believe that the ailments of society can be cured by compromise and appeasement to deviate behaviour with little regard to Godly/Christian Principle. We are concerned that Canada is not held favourably in the eyes of God.
The last repeated lines, ?O Canada, we stand on guard for thee?, indicates that WE are responsible for the preservation of this country and if WE do what is necessary to preserve and further maintain it, one day, OUR National Anthem written to pronounce the true spirit and intent of the common Canadian, will be sung in truth.
Neil E. Wilson (chair) The Canadian Constitution Committee.
March 20, 2001. reopened, February 10, 2004.
posted by kaqchikel at
2/20/2005 12:35:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home