WHAT FACTORS HAVE AFFECTED THE DEVITOPMENT OF THE RELIGIOUS
ETHOS AT THJ5 UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA AND HOW DOES TKIS
DETERMINE VOLUNTARY RELIGIOUS INVOLVEMENT
AMONG STUDENTS, STAFF, AND ALUMNI?
by Denis LaClare
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of PROVIDENCE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY in Partial Fulfilhent of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS National Library Bibliothèque nationale 191 of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services senfices bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. nie Wellington OttawaON K1A ON4 OttawaON K1AON4 Canada canada
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une Licence non exclusive licence dowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfichelfilm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique .
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Chapter 1. ANANALYSIS OF THE RELIGIOUS IMPLICATIONS OF THE FOUNDING OF THE UMVERSITY OF MANITOBA ...... 1 1 Pre-1877: Religious Factors and the Founding of the U of M
1817: Religious Beliefs and Intentions of the U of M Founding Fathers
1877: Religious Beliefs and Practices of U of M Staff and Students
2. FORTY YEARS OF CONFLlCT: IDENTIFYING FACTORS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RELIGIOUS EïHOS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA ...... 38 1877-1904 - The Amendment Factor 1876-1904- The Bryce Factor 1904-1917- The Secularist Factor
3. APA T; vYY OR PROACTIVITY ?: RELIGION AND CULTURE AT THE THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA ...... 70
19 17- 1945 - The Early Years: The Marginaiization of the Colleges 1945- 19% - The Latter Years: The World at Our Doorstep 1997-2001 - The Future Years: The Idea Of A University: 200 1
4. SUMMARY AM3 CONCLUSIONS ...... 106
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 119
Appendix 1. UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA COAT OF ARMS ...... 123 INTRODUCTION
University students constitute approxirnately one percent of the worldfspopulation. In essence, they are the powerful percentage, becoming leaders in virtually every sector of society. Therefore, the predorninant philosophy or world view of the university will contribute greatiy to the shaping of society. Many western universities, including the University of Manitoba,* were founded as religious institutions intending to have a pitive affect on students, the neighboring society and the world. This initial purpose has ken replaced wi th various perspectives on the deof the university and religious life among students, staff, and alumni. Why should an attempt be made to understand the religious ethos of an instinition like the U of M and its affect upon its members? It rnay be difficult to comprehend al1 the facets of this topic in i ts entirety, but in the words of J. R. R. Tolkien, "1t is not Our part to master al1 the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who [ive alter rnay have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule."l This study, in essence, is a11 about taking a closer look at one "field" and the significance of its religious ethos and influence among its students, staff, and alumni who have and will continue to shape society for better or for worse.
* - The "University of Manitoba" wili most often be abbreviated to read "U of M."
J. R. R. Tolkien. The Rewn of the King (New York: Bdlantiw Books. 1965). 190. While sorne research has ken conducteci surrounding the history of the U of M, litile attention has been given to its religious history and evolution. Yet, when the original intentions of the founders of the U of M are considered, an obvious interplay between the
University as an academic institution and a center for religious practice and instruction on be
O bserved. Today that relationshi p is inconspicuous. There has been drawn a dividing line between faith and reason, church and state, the academy and religious practice. The uneasy relationship continues, however, as religious colleges and students groups from vanous perspectives continue to interact wi th the university community. The scope of this thesis includes the pmess of evolution. Changes in any social institution, including the university, are inevitable. However, any drastic change in the originally proposed purpose and direction of the institution in question should be explored and analyzed. Perhaps this type of historical research is lacking because the university
continues to change so lapidly. It is quickly assumed that the present and future condition of
the university is what matters. In Apd of 1996 several public lectures were given entitled
"The Passionate Intellect: The Idea of a University: 2001." Distinguished lectmrs explored the university of the future, envisioning the collaboration of technical and classical education.
Such visions should be reminiscent of the history of the U of M. What characterized the U of M in 1877? What was the purpose of the education it offered? Were religious factors involved in the shaping and development of the University? Each of these questions deserve attention, because the present and future conditions of the U of M are contingent on its past. Stanley Hauemas of Duke University has provided an excellent scenario to consider. As a professor of religious studies, he has a unique perspective on the role of religion within academic spheres. He asserts that a dynarnic relationship does exist between religion and the university: Wany excellent historicai and critical essays have been written about what kind of relation has and ought to pertain between the church and the university. Yet this question, like so many other kinds of perennial questions, remains unresolved. Moreover, it is not even clear how one can make progress toward resolution since it is seldom clear exactly what are
the issues involved, " 2 It is the aim of this research project to identify significant issues pertaining to the development of the religious ethos of the U of M. Anyone even slightly acquainted with the
history of the western university is aware that a transformation has taken place. The evolution of the university from a "ChristianNto a "secularn institution is evidenced throughout North Amenca Harvard, Duke, and the U of M are just three examples. This phenornenon is worthy of further study, as Hauerwas aptly demonstrates "Why and how this transformation
took place no doubt involve complex social and intellectual issues. Even if 1 had the competence to account for the Ioss of Christian control of their universi ties, that is not my
primary concem. Rather, 1 am only interested in noting this change insofar as i t helps us now
to face this issue of how as Christians we are to understand Our cornmitment to, and participation in, the life of the modem university."3 This study will focus on the microcosmic nature of the process described above. As the development of the religious nature of the U of M is identified and understood within the context of the University as a whole, the parallel religious involvement of its membership will become more apparent. In this present age of sectariankm and special interest groups vying for control of institutions, some may think it would be more relevant to discover who
has maintained the balance of control within the U of M, and who will do so in the futme.
For pragrnatic purposes this is undoubtedly of great interest to many; however, other related
issues must be considered if we are to undentand the changing nature of the University. Therefore, attention will be given to the developing religious ethos, and concurrent religious involvement, of the University community. The foliowing statement alludes to a vital part of this study: "1 certainly do not believe it is possible or desirable to recapture Duke or Harvard as Christian universities. The question is not whether Duke can be Christian; but rather how
Stanley Hauenuas, Chrk~ianExistence Today (Dumam. NC : The ïabyrinth Press, l988), 183.
Ibid., 238. Christians should understand what they are doing as teachers, administrators, and students at
Duke, Harvard, and the University of North ~arolina"4Of course, in this case, the U of M will be the focus of attention.
It would be remiss to overlook the philosophical presuppositions surrounding the founding, evolution, and present condition of the U of M. Complex issues are usually involved in trying to identify factors that have contnbuted to the secularization of any given institution. Factors such as infiuentiai people, policies, and constitutional change have often thoroughly altered the philosophical and moral landscape of the univenity. Failure to explore these oft-uncharted regions will continue to leave university enthusiasts, as well as the general student population and the public at large, with gross misconceptions about the role of the local university within the community.
A critique of the university may seem harmless enough. Surprisingly, those few people who have questioned the sanctity of the modem university have ken vigorousl y challenged. While it is considered popular and praiseworthy for social commentators to berate educators for their inability to manufacture marketable graduates, it is silently forbidden to tarnper with the inner workings of that great hall of leaniing, the university. In rire Closing of the American Mind Allan Bloom provides a cornprehensive survey of students, nihilism, and the university. He does not hesitate to assign blame for the decaying state of university education. He chides individuals and their influence upon great and srnail alike for the crisis of the university which has rendered it virtually incapable of tmly
"educatingn students. The "educatedn, according to BIoom, are those well-versed in the Great Books -- those of Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, and the Bible, to narne a few. Today's student has ken influenced away from such sources of greatness, leaving thern and the education they do aquire as hollow shells, as incomplete entities. They do not understand the meaning of life and exist simply to fulfill the whimsical desires that drive them. In short, the book's
Ibid., 238. sub-titie explicitiy states its focus: "How Higher Education Has Failed Democracy and
Impovenshed the Souls of Today's Students." As will be seen, the development of the religious ethos of the U of M clearly reveals a growing sense of aimlessness among the members of the university community. An analysis of that process will explore the alleged impoverishment, or regession, that 1 have alluded to above. As will be observed, the exaltation of what has been dubbed liberal education may have at its epicenter a determined intolerance. Academic freedorn, and the subsequent possibility of contributing to the completeness of students, are potentially in jeopardy. Evenis such as the University of Manitoba Faculty Association strike of 1995 helped to bring those controversial issues to the surface. Yet, unlaiown to virtually the entire University comrnunity, similar issues rooted in the fundamentai quest for personal development and education were passionately debated during the early years of its development. Perhaps this is indicative that while the ethos of an instinition invariably evolves, core human ideals such as the pursuit of knowledge remind the immediate community to vie for their preservation. It is evident that numerous issues pertaining to the life of the University have changed over the pst one-hundred and twenty years. For example, today the rnajority of U of M students are somewhat bewildered that someone would challenge their presuppositional frarnework for ethical relativism. They assume it is self-evident, without understanding the philosophic ongins of their belief. It functions moderately well in their pragmatic world; they see no reason to question seriously i ts validi ty or explore alternatives. This is prima1 evidence that today's students are becoming increasingly bewildered. They resist thoughtful alternatives. "Liberal education provides access to these alternatives, many of which go against the grain of Our nature or Our times. The liberally educated person is one who is able to resist the easy and preferred answers, not because he is obstinate but because he knows others worthy of consideration. "5It would be unfair of any party to hold contemporary
AUm Blmm. ïïze Closing ofthe Amicm Mind (New York, NY:Simon & Schusta. 1981). 21. students fully responsible for their apparent emptiness. The developments which have led to
their moral and intellectual impoverishment can be traced; however, this is not an exercise in mere criticism. One cannot function in a purely judicative mamer, for the evolutionary processes which have affected tcxiay's student are pervasive. Factors conûibuting toward the current state of the U of M's religious climate are numerous and complex. One could belabor the fact that most classics are never read by the
majonty of students during their undergraduate years. Or, the general indifference to the alleged moral and intellectual benefits of the Great Books demonstrated by the University
cornmunity could be denounced. The Greek philosophers, Shakespeare, Aquinas, and the Bible have obviously brought the student to the intersection of the temporal and the etemai. They not only pose problems but they explore significant answers that, when contemplated, contribute to the holistic development of the student. Attention could be drawn to Manitoba youth who arrive at University vimidly unaquainted with the Bible, something that early professors of the U of M would not have understd. Today, most professors expect that students have disregardeci the Bible. In 1877, it is quable that every professor read the Bible regulariy, as nearly al1 were members of the clergy. In many ways, the changing religious ethos of one Canadian university refiects a
colossal shift in thinking that has pervaded western culture. It would be beneficial to recount the dominant themes of the Enlightenrnent to reveal the common thread that persists until today. Religious improprieties, abuses, and constraints were discarded for the quest "to
know." The development of scientific theories such as those formulated by Newton made God unnecessary for the origin and sustenance of the universe. Later, other European thinkers such as Kant, Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau systematically continued to "dismantle the soul." The process was not complete until Nietzsche declared that "God is dead." This daim was made toward the end of the nineteenth century, concurrent to the establishment of the U of M. Although religious faith was still respected and practiced arnong virtually al1 U of M students, it would soon be the target, albeit subtle, of a growing secularism that contributed to the nineteenth century's designation as "The Crisis of ~aith."6Contrary to popular belief, Nietzsche's proclamation was not a triumphalistic one. Nietzsche held that religion and the sacred were extremely important; however, without room in reason for a transcendent perspective, there was no longer a founâational bais for morality. "Man, who loved and needed Goci, has Iost his Father and Savior without possibility of resurrection. The joy of liberation one finds in Mmhas tumed into terror at man's unprotectedness ... as he
[Nietzsche] understood it, men in our current decrepitude could take it easy if they believed Gd,nature, or history provides values. Such belief was salutary as long as the objectified creations of man were shll noble and vital. But in the present exhaustion of the old values, men must be brought to the abyss, temfied by their danger and nauseated by what could become of them, in order to make them aware of the responsibility of their fate."' 1s such philosophic pondering pertinent to this research problem? It is, when it is realized that while change is inevitable, specific factors have empowered significant religious realignment- While the majority of today's University of Manitoba students would daim some allegiance to Gd,their values would indicate the predominance of subliminal atheism.
Obviously, there was an evocation of ideas contrary to those traditiondly held by the founding religious colleges of the U of M. They must have originated, in whole or part, [rom the minds of the ni neteenth century's most influentid thinkers: Charles Danvin, Si gmund Freud, Kari Marx, and Frederick Nietzsche. Like Nietzsche, contemporary students find themselves in a quandary: "Nietzsche was ineluctably lead to meditation on the coming to be of God -- on God-creation -- for God is the highest value, on which the others depend. God is not creative, for God is not. But Gd as made by man reflects what man is, unbeknownst to hirnself. Gdis said to have made the wodd of concem to us out of nothing; so man makes
Paui Cox. "TheIssue is Perception." The Bridge. Issue 6.Nov. 1995.4.
Bloorn, 195,198. something, God, out of nothing."g So, a strong case can be made for the Nietzscheanization of university students. It is less subtle today than in the late nineteenth cenniry. While his ideas may have just kengaining acceptance then, they have been entrenched on universities today; "So, Nietzsche came to Amen a...@s] naturaiization was accomplished in many waves: some of us went to Europe to find hm;he carne with the émigrés; and most recently professors of comparative literature have gotten heavily into the import business ...."9
The eradication of Gd,virtue, and the meaning of life continue to have their effect upon students. Modemity has demanded trite answers to questions that plagued the minds of the great in centuries pst. Slogans such as "God is dead," "desex," and "death with dignity" are simplistic means of dealing with complex issues. Each of these have ken consistendy espoused in one form or another on the U of M campus. The issue of sale sex has been trivialized, and few are prepared to engage in meaningful, mature discussion. In 1995 there was a pane1 discussion at the U of M on the topic, "Sex and Gen X." The panel of two professors, including the Margaret Laurence Chair in Wornen's Studies, and the third, a lecturer and Christian philosopher, were acutely aware of issues surrounding sex and this generation. However, their interaction with the snident audience made it apparent that emotional, not intellectual or moral issues, were at the core of student experience.
While this exarnple may be a subsidiary of religious ethics, numerous could be recounted that represent an alarming divergence between traditional religious faith as exemplified by the three founding colleges of the U of M, and the status quo of today's student In 1989 Canadian Challenge magazine reporteci that a member of a Christian group at the U of M was talking to a student about God when they were "boboldly approached by
'The Myth of Gen X: Defia Genaatioo." A Guide to Celebratim 95. Jan. 27.1995, University of Manitoba, 6. another student who intemipted ..., 'Excuse me, but God is dead,' he siated, then walked away.... A few minutes later, the same student returned and repeated his comment, 'God is dead' 11 It tumed out that this student was part of an assemblage of philosophy students who had overheard the conversation. They were deists; their god was impersonal and unknowable.
Unable to accept a naturalistic explanation for Me, they opted for sorneone who "got the bail rolling." Since then, God has quietiy retired to his quarters and wishes not to be disturbed. In many ways, these young undergraduates illustrate quite remarkably the shift in thinking that began to transform the U of M from a "Christian" institution into a secular one. In his preface to The Secuiarizution of the Academy George Marsden States, "Both for comparative purposes and out of interest in the subjects in their own right, this analysis includes overviews of Amencan Catholic, British, and Canadian UNversities. Obviously, there are many other dimensions of the topic and other cornparisons that remain to be explored." 12 Marsden's coIlaborative work provides a macrocosmic perspective on the secularization of the religious environments of several universities. The essays explore "the history of the remarkable revolution from a little over a century ago, when Christianity was a leading force in higher education, to today. when at most it is tolerated as a peripherai enterprise and often is simply excluded."13 The unique religious history of the U of M is one example among many of this secularization process. This snidy is a microcosmic view of that transformation that began "a little over a century ago" in Winnipeg. It will serve as an exploration of the essentid responsibility of the university; "It is, in the first place, always to maintain the permanent questions front and center. This is done primarily by preserving -- by keeping alive - the works of those who best addressed these questions. " 14 Addi tionall y, the
l l Tanya Offmins. Wds Alive and Weil. Thank You." Canadian Chuiknge magazine. DeCernber 19û9, IO.
George Manden. The Seculmirafion o/the Academy (New York. NY: Oxford University Press. 1992). vi.
l3 Ibid.. vi. religious beliefs and intentions of the founding fathers of the U of M will serve as a reminder of those permanent questions.
As the essential occurrences surrounding the shaping of the religious ethos of the U of M are examined, the words of Sirnrnias in his dialogue with Socrates about the essence and pursuit of knowledge should be considered:
.A is very diificult if not impossibIe in this Neto achieve certaiflty about these questions. at the Same time it is uîteriy feeble not to use every effort in testing the available theories, or to leave off before we bave considered them in every way, and corne to the end of our resources. It is our duty to do one of two things: uther to ascertain the facts, whether by seeking instniction or by persad discovery; or, if this is impossible, to select the bat and most dependabIe theory which humaa intelligena can supply. and use it as a raft to ride the seas of life- that is, assuming tbat we camiot make our jwmey with greater confidence and sedty by the suer means of a divine revelatioa l5 As will be seen, the pst and present condition, as wel1 as the future potential of the U of M, have exemplified an uneasy relations hi p between the sacred and the secular.
l5 Plato, ï3e Lacr Days of Socrates (Loadon: Penguin Books. 1954). 139. AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELIGIOUS IMPLICATIONS OF THE FOUNDING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA
Several factors that will be discussed in this chapter have implications that exceed commonly held religious parameters. Likewise matters that would not irnmediately be recognized as pertaining to "religion" will be introduced. Issues related to the religious landscape of the University of Manitoba will be included. Therefore, "religious factorsn
[below] encompass politicaily motivated decisions about the founding of the U of M that eventuall y affect i ts emerging religious ethos. This holistic approach will demonstrate that the religious decomposition of the U of M was not a casualty but the result of specific decisions.
Pre-1877Religious Factors And The Founding Of The U Of M Several complex issues surrounded the founding of the University of Manitoba Religious factors were the most signifiant among them. The Red River Settlement included the expansion of three church missions: the Roman Catholic, which traced its rmts to the missionaries who arrived in the 1820s; the Anglican, which was spearheaded by Reverend John West in 1820; and the Presbyterian, which sprang from the Selkirk Settlers of Kildonan and the pastomte of Reverend John Black in 185 1.1 The three churches eventually became a federation of colleges - St Boniface College, St. John's College, and Manitoba College. A vivid picture of the religious ethos on be painted of this pre-univeisity em AI1 three churçhes engaged in evangelical work, in addition to providing education for the children and youth who attendeci the parish schmls. The colleges were founded to provide higher education for laymen as well as for those desirous of Christian ministry.
St. Boniface College was founded in 1854, St John's in 1866, and Manitoba College in
1871.2 This trilogy of colleges attempted to provide an integrated system of faith and learning that appeared to meet the needs of the Red River community.
The creation of the Province of Manitoba in 1871 attracted settlers from the British Isles and other parts of Canada. The province grew fmm 15,000 settlers in 1871 to more than 60,000by the end of that decade.3 Not surprisingly, there was a renewed demand for secondary education. A public school system had ken established for primary schooling, but there was no provision made for higher education. Compounding the demand for education was a growing nurnber of denominational communities that were strongly considering the establishment their own srnall colleges. It began to appear that Manitoba would undergo the sarne conflict over higher education that had occurred in Ontano among its denominational schools. While the majority of the population favored the integration of religion and education, they could not afford the fiscal burden that denominational universities would introduce.
Government assistance was inevitable if a legitimate academic institution was to be fomed and sustained. The dispute in Ontano had intensified when King's College
From Rurd Pmklund to UrhC'enter: One Hundred Yemof Growth ut the Universiîy of Manitoba, 1877-1977. A University of Manitoba Centenniai Fbject, (w'ipeg: Hyperion Press, 1978). 1.
* W.L. Morton One University (Aylesbury and London: McCleiid and Stewart, 1957).18. received a land grant for hi gher education. C hurch denominations argued that there should either be no govemment aid in the establishment of denominational colleges or al1 denominations should be permitted to share the benefits apportioned to King's College. The result of the much-disputed issue was the chartering of a nurnber of universities. University of Toronto, formedy the Anglican King's College, became a secular institution while others were affiliateci with churches. These di fficul ties surrounding the charteri ng and govemance of universi ties and colleges in other parts of Canada would not deter those interested in organizing a viable public university to serve the educational needs of the province of Manitoba. The convocation of Manitoba College in 1816 was significant for its graduates, as well as for those who would corne after them. The need for a universi ty was discussed at length by seveml professors, including Reverend George Bryce, scholar of Manitoba College, and
Reverend James Robertson, pastor of Winnipeg's Knox Church. 5 Their discussions proved to be the outline for the U of M which would be founded just one year later. These plans included a university college with the affiliation of the Catholic, Anglican, and their own Pres byterian college. During this time of speculation, an individual emerged who would give specific direction to the establishment of the U of M. Alexander Morris, the Lieutenant-Govemor of Manitoba, was well acquainted with the inception of institutes of higher learning. His father, William Morris, had been one of the founders of McGill University and had ken aware of the heated debate over the founding of Ontario's first universities. He foresaw great hmin the repetition of Ontario's mode1 and proposed one nondenominational
The University of Toronto adILS Colleges. 1827-1906."Origin and Development of ihe University of Torcmtow(Toronto: The University Library , 1%). 9-38.
rdiegiana," Manitoba Free Press. Jan. 5. 1876. unpaginated, and "lnner History of the University of Manitoba, Manitoba Free Press, Nov. 17,1900.9. university for the province of Manitoba 6 Such a state-supported institution with affiliated religious colleges would be a unique intermediary prototype among Canada's denominational and state universities. Unfortunately, like many prototypes, it would
invite much cnticism, inner conflict, and a crisis of identity would not be easily rectified. There were obstacles preventing the immediate cooperation of the three religious coileges. St. John's College, led by Bishop Robert Machray, agreed in principle to a non- denominational universi ty provided his affiliated college be given the power to coder degrees in divinity. Bishop Taché of St Boniface College faced a complex dilemma He wanted to foster the spirit of cooperation exemplified during the settlement of the Red River area, but cultural factors prevented him from giving a comprehensive Catholic endorsement. As an embodiment of French-Catholicism in Manitoba, he represented the cultural and religious heritage of St. Boniface College. The preservation of this heritage in a non-denominational, provincial university was at stake. The solution became evident when the Legislature granted degree-granting powers to the colleges. This satisfied St. John's College in particulai-. St. Boniface College also agreed to affiliate wi th the
University as it was guamnteed, along with the other two cotleges, "the security of their autonomy. " 7 Several other problems emerged which created an atmosphere of tension between the govenunent of Manitoba and the three colleges. The Attorney-General thought the process of official recognition and vision of the university to be premature. Questions of whether the universi ty should be modeled after the University of ond don, * and whether i t
Maniîoba Free Press. Nov. 17.1900.9.
Letter from Archbishop Tache io Sir John Thompson, Minirter of Educaiion. Dec. 27. 1889. Minutes of University Council, 1,326.
* The University of london mode1 was originally acceptable to the three founding reiigious colleges of the U of M as it gave them control of teaching and curricula. Tt aiso ensurecl their autonomy, and made the University a subsidiary of their federation. Of the ihree coileges, St Boniface was most concerneci about the government of Manitoba eventually Wng contrd of the U of M. and subsequmdy threatenhg their reiigious and cuIWdistinctions. The London mode1 was intended to be a safeguard against that psibili ty . should be a teaching as well as an exarnining body arose. The deliberations were overshadowed by the zealous insistence of Lieutenant-Govemor Moms who eventually
persuaded al1 parties. On April8, 1877, a bill was introduced to the Legislature creating the U of M as "one university for the whole of Manibba." 8
Despite the passing of a bill io legdize the new University, several daunting problems threatened to implode the four-fold alliance between the three religious colleges and the provincial legislature. Undercurrents of doubt concerning the feasibility of the young University were unwisely disregarded after intense, but relatively brief debate. The fear that had gripped the colleges, particularly over the power to confer degrees and provide the only source of professors, was allayed by the governrnent's promise of autonomy. And although various members of the religious colleges were reluciant to commit themselves to the enterprise, they were eventually convinced to join the consortium. Ironicall y the govemment of Manitoba also voiced its concems sbout the timing of the conception of the universi ty. ûriginall y it was the clergy of the three colleges that had drearned of providing quality, integrated education of faith and reason for the burgeoning Red River settlement. The momentum had clearly been on the side of the religious colleges. They were already esiablished teaching institutions with respectable, qualified clergy serving as resident scholars. It appeared that the Province of Manitoba wanted a share of this exciting endeavor. Yet the official word was that they, too, had reservations, as illustrateci in the Manitoba Free Press of the time: "The Government has been urged during the past two years to submit a measure for the institution of a University and the Governrnent have consented, and in doing so have endeavoured as far as possible to meet the views of the different parties seeking the establishment. The Government think the bill premature, but have been so repeatedly urged that they have
Minutes of University Councii. 1.2%. brought it down. The bill only provides for a university to gant degrees, and for
graduating purposes, but will not be a teaching university." 9 The strength of the U of M upon its founding in 1877 can be adequately measured
only with respect to its weakest link. That link, upon close examination, seems to have
been the philosophical expectations held by each of the four endorsing bodies. The shared hope was to provide recognized university education for the growing population of Manitoba. While this vision was noble, it lacked a comprehensive mission statement that would have been wholeheartedly received by each of the four parties involved. Beneath the surface of the hastily-assembled agreement to fom a provincial
univenity was either an obvious lack of communication or an inability of those involved
to recount the facts. Reports about the progression of plans that would eventually be consumrnated in the University Act of 1877 are apparent1y contradictory. The Govemment asserted that it had ken "repeatedly urged" to officially establish a university by different parties interes ted in settling the matter. However, in a presentation to the Literary Society of Manitoba College in 1900 Dr. B ryce, one of the founding fathers of the U of M, stated:
Whether the Governor (Alexander Moms, Lieutenant Govemor of Manitoba, 1&77) feared the opposition of the Coiieges, or wished a free hand in this project, or was not sure of the feasibility of his plan, no one seems to know. Certain it is, that he never proposeci the matter to the Archbishop of St. Boniface (îaché), the Archbishop of Rupert's Land (Machray), or to myself as representative of Manitoba Coiiege, other than by perfraps a casiütl reference in conversations as to the desirability of such a thing. It was never brought before the Coiiege Boards for consideration. But wi th remarkable persistence Govemar Morris kept the matter before bis ministers and canied his point- l0 However, as L. F. Wilmot has document&, dl three founding fathers were acutely aware of the proceedings to form a university. In his short history of the
University of Manitoba ( 1898), Machray s tated that *the Lieutenant Govemor, the Honourable Alexander Moris, ... took a great interest in the matter for hirnself and for
MunifoboFree Press, Feb. 10. Iû77.3.
l0 ibid.. Nov. 17. 1900.9. others with whom he had conversations, more particularly the Archbishop of St.
Boniface, the Archbishop of Rupert's Land and the Reverend Dr. Bryce.. .. " 1 This was confimed by Archbishop Tache. In a letter to Edmund Moms, the son of former Govemor Moms, Tache refers to the elder Moms' role as a leader in spearheading the establishment of the university "Another great service rendered by the Honorable Mr. Morris is his exertion and success with regard to the establishment of Manitoba
University. Under his direction we succeeded in establis hing in a new counq a
University which was nothing but a source of satisfaction to ail those concerned with it so long as it kept within the bounds so highly recommended and approved by your beloved father (italics mine)." 12 It has kenestablished that the three founding fathers were aware of the processes involved in the inauguration of the new educational institution; however, as the next chapter will demonstrate, statements made by these sarne religious and academic leaders indicate various degrees of discontent with the manner in which those processes transpired. Another account provides the necessary evidence to explain how the University
Act could be passed by the Legislature and simultaneously gamer the support of the three founding colleges . Archbishop Machray's nephew, Robert Machray, succinctly portrays the dynarnics of these complex of events:
In inûducing the measure in the Legislature, the Minister who had it in charge, the Hon. Joseph Royal ... said that the Govemment felt that the foundation of a Provincial University might be somewhat prematum, but chat ibis step had been urged upon them for two years pst. He did not mention any name, but it was understd that the bill had been inspired by the Lieutenant Governor, the Hon. Aiexander Morris .... Perhaps the measure was in part the resuit of conversations M.Morris had with the heads of the three incorporated Colleges then in existence -- St Boniface, St. John's, and Manitoba, but
L. F. Wilrnot, The Christian Churches of the Red Riva Settlwent and the Foundation of the University of Manitoba: An Historic.1 AnaIysis of the Procas of Transition Frm Frontier College to University." (unpublished MA. ihesis, University of Manitoba, 19'79).3.
l2 A. L. Glenn, 'A History of the University of Manitoba, February 20.1 û77 to Febniary 28, 1927." (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Manitoba. 1927), 27. none of hem had anything to do with its king brought forward before the local Parliament 13 As will be seen, the circumstances surrounding the passing of the University Act in 1877 refiected the i~er-workingsof diplomacy on the part of Lieutenant Govemor Morris, as well as a passivity that characterized the collective response of the three religious colleges.
The assertion that the U of M was founded premanirely was not made without reason. If both the govemment and the colleges felt swayed by Lieutenant Govemor Moms, what motivated him to support so zealously the passing of the University Act? Prior to the Act, the most significant gathering in support of the university idea had been the evening of January 28,1876, when members of Manitoba College gathered to distribute prizes and scholarships. Speeches and discussions were lively and enthusiastic. Included among them was an address delivered by Reverend James Robertson of Knox Church, Winnipeg. Despite his rousing speech, "the views expressed at this meeting can only be taken as an index of the feeling of one group of college leaders and there is no reason to suppose that these men contemplated any attempt to bnng the University question to an issue in the near future. Yet a year later the University Act was on the
Statute Book. " 14 In his depiction of the chah of events that lead to the passing of the
University Act, Robert Machray noted, "It may be said without hesitation, that no other country ever had such an institution provided for so early in its history.' l5 To confîrm that progression to finalize at least the establishment of the institution was made in haste, W. L Morton, who chronic' ..d the history of the U of M, stated: "The New University, in short, was forced on a reluctant govemment and lukewarm colleges
l3 R. Machray. Li@ o/Roberl Machtay (Toronto: The MacMillan Co. of Canada. M. 1909). n2-273.
l4 Glenn, 25.
l5 Machray. 273. by the Lieutenant-Govemorts zeal." 16 Without the political maneuverings of Morris, the U of M simply would not have been established, at least not as early as 1877. Much political ground ha.to be covered from the time that initial enthusiasm for a new university was felt at the meeting of Manitoba College in 1816, and the signing of the
University Act in 1877. It was increasingly evident that "Such an undertaking could hardly have ken accornplished had it not been for the persistence of Govemor Mo~ris, who was anxious to have the Act establishing a University for the Province passed before the close of his terni of office in 1827. * 17 This ambition was not hidden by Moms. In a letter to Lord Dufferin on January 25, 1817, he discloseci his intentions; "Our legislature opens on the thirtieth, and among Our propals is a University on the mode1 of London. I hope to ernbrace in it al1 the colleges - Protestant and Catholic." l8 After the University Act was passed, Monis wmte a letter to Sir John A. McDonaId that could not conceai the pride and enthusiasm of his accomplishment; "You will see that the Lord Dufferin spoke in the highest terms of my last achievernent - the Manitoba University." l9 Sornewhat disconcerting is Morris's apparent shrewdness in his dealings with the clergy and his political allies. Upon closer analysis, he masterfully accomplished his goal of attaining his last achievernent. Instead of patientiy addressing the concems expressed by the potential rnembers of the university, he convinced the three college heads to cooperate by appealing to what would apparent1y be bes t for their particular religious schools. And he never attempted to do so in a joint meeting where inconsistencies could be checked or divergent opinions shared. Instead, his public relations plan meant "urging upon paché] the advisability of joining with the two other colleges, to secure a university
l6 Morton. 23.
l7 Glenn. 27.
l8 Ibid.. 27.
l9 Ibid.. 28. in Manitobaw20Whatever one may conclude about the motives or methods that the Govemor employed, the Act of 1877 irreversibly set in motion a changing religious ethos that would effect the lives of al1 who would be associated with the U of M. From these several factors relating to the founding of the U of M, several conclusion may be drawn. First, the events must be considered with respect to the context
of li fe in the Red River area. In particular, the responsi bili ties of the founding fathers were numerous. As College heads, they were responsible for maintainhg the quality of education within their own college walls. Administration, preaching, lecturing, writing, and studying were just a part of their weekly fare. Obligations often diverted their attention away from their colleges to mission societies and churches of which they played
an active part in developing. As Rev. Bryce noted of that hectic time, "To al1 of us stmggling to make ends meet, and to keep a fair show More the world in Our colleges,
the university idea seemed ... unreal. ... "21 Another leature of this era that must not be ovedooked was the selfless spirit that characterized the Red River setdement. Each of the parties associated wi th pioneenng a university were well acquainted with pioneering a new society. They were familiar wi th sacrifice, compromise, and cooperation. This evident humility would serve as a restraining factor for those who may have been lured by the power, prestige, or sheer adventure of king a charter member of Manitoba's fint univenity. It should not be naïvely assumed that any one of the four key players in the establishment of the U of M was entirely selfless or without chamcter flaws. Neither should one conclude that three respected men of the cloth who were serious about their religious faith would be given to open selfish ambition. Numerous articles and letters to the editor (about the university question) published in the Manitoba Free Press suggested that Machray, Taché, Bryce
Letter fmm Archbishop Ta& to Sir Jolm Thompson,Minista of Educatiou, Dec. 27,1889, Minutes of University Cod,1.325.
21 Manimba Free Press. Nov. 17.1900.9- and their colleges may not have shared a vibrant 'intercollegiate fellowshipn,but allegations of oppominism were sûictiy avoided.22 One need only consider what would be necessary to establish a university in
today's society: tremendous resources, personal drive, prodigious effort and undaunting determination. It would have been no less so one-hundred and twenty years ago. From a bureaucratic perspective, the task of unifying three perfécdy autonornous denominational colleges under the umbrella of a provincial university had never ken atiernpted in Canada Further, questions of financing, buildings, professorships, degrees, cumcula, and related matters, loomed in the mincis of the three colleges. Each of the college leaders had ken pnvileged to enjoyed illustrious careers as members of their own denominations; however, the prospect of entering into an agreement wi th other denominational colleges, dong with the provincial govemment, was beyond their sphere of expertise. So, while it is evident that the three colleges desired a joint university to serve as a hub for the continued ducational integration of faith and reason, they were reluctant to chart assertively and pointedly the precise confessional direction of the new enterprise. This is understandable w hen one considers that their lack of political ambition and drive was rnanifest in the life of Lieutenant Governor Moms, who relieved them of that responsi bi li ty.
1877: Religious Beliefs And Intentions Of The U of M Founding Fathers
From its inception the U of M's religious ethos can be adequately understood only with respect to each of the three colleges. The spiritual climate of St. Boniface College was described in these words: "The atmosphere of the college was devoutly Catholic, the
22 Ibid. May 17. 1901.7. spirit Quebec-French, pious, merry and vigorous.. .a classical college modeled on those of Quebec, a college of clerical foundation and governrnent..in which religion was at the center of al1 education." 23 St. John's College was likewise a mission and church college, with a clerical foundation and govemrnent It too embodied the union of religion and leaniing, offering training to its clergy for minisiry in the church and to laymen for service in the professions. 24 Manitoba College was not unlike her affiliates. As a descendant of Resbyterian theological and classical colleges of the East, its intentions were also clear -- to provide education, both spiritual and secular, that would prepare candidates for the ministry and the professions.25 Another Resbyterian college, Queen's, had maintained the union of theology and the liberal arts. Manitoba College, on the other hand, followed in the Knox College tradition. It felt obligated to place theological learning above secular, making theology its principal objective, offering only a preparatory course in the liberal arts.26
The union of the three religious colleges firmly established the U of M as an institution that sought to integrate faith and reason. The pitfalls that debilitated schools in Ontario seemed to be averted in Manitoba, providing a unique system of education that fostered ngorous instruction wi thin divene religious traditions. It appeared that the frontier community would be wellequipped with men qualified for the ministry and for numerous professions, preserving the culture and faith of their fathers. Yet, as one reflects on this issue of value preservation, one is reminded of the ngorous debate in ment years about the significance of the intentions of "founding
25 C. L. MacDonaid, "George Bryce. Manitoba Scientist, Churchman and Historiaa. 1844-193 1." (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Manitoba, 1983)- 9.
26 Morton, 26. fathers". The 'Religious Right' in the United States has exerted much energy in trying to establish the "factsHsurrounding the establishment of the Union. This has ken done for two apparent purposes: first, to remind Arnericans of their religious heritage, at least in so
far as i t can be traced to the pilgrims; and second, to justify their attempts to control
contemporary politics and culture as the spiritual descendants of these founding fathen.
The slogan "One Nation Under Godu is still a desimble rallying cry for a substantial percentage of the Amencan population. O! tan from varying phi losophical persuasions are vehemently opposed to this ideal. 27 The question of relevance is whether or not the founding fathers of the U of M were characterized by an identifiable religious philosophy. If so, did this understanding of their faith permeate their professed intentions for the shaping of the U of M? Let us then consider these questions. Three individuals, considered to be the founding fathers, must be understood in order to distinguish whether their religious beliefs and intentions had an effect on the principle religious ethos of the University.
Bishop Robert Machray (1831-1904) Robert Machray was born in Scotland and attended Cambridge University. He became a member of the Church of England while in college, and was ordained as Reverend in 1855. He anived in Manitoba ten years later to become the Bishop of
Rupert's Land. One of his earl y accomplis hments was the reopening of St. John's College, which had been closed in 1859. He later became Warden of the College and Headmaster
27 Harvey Cox. Atlantic Monthly. The Warring Visions of the Religious Right," [l ] hûp:llwww.theatlantic.~~mlatlantidissu~[Accessed 1 Mar Professor Harvey Cox of Harvard Divinity Schd visits Fat Robertson's Regent University, which turns out to be a microcosm of the theological and intellectmi turbulence within what is often mistakedy seen as a monoliitbic "religious nghtn in Arnerica. In this article Cox discusses the alleged "dominion theology"of Robertson's Regent University and the 1.7-~xiiiiion-meniberChristian Coalition. One of the main objectives of the movement is to s trategicall y place Chnstians in positions of influence within American culture, thus helping to estabiish "one nation under W."According to Cox, this ided "@va many people the jitters." of the School in 1874.28 This increasing interest and involvement in Red River education positioned Reverend Machray for an integral role in the shaping of the new udversity, which was smn to become a reality in Winnipeg. Machray was a significant player in the role of St John's College as a member of the U of M. As Chancellor of St John's, he had smng doubts about the timing of the formation of a public university, mainly because of a lack of secondary schools in the Red River area which would provide the university with students. He had been consulted as early as 1876, the sarne year he had re-established St John's as a mission and cathedral college. 29 Machray supported the idea of an " Undenominational University" wi th affiliate colleges such as St John's. While he dso doubted whether the provincial legislahire would grant it, he vied for the right of St John's to confer divinity degrees upon its pduates.30 Bishop Machray became the U of M's fi rst chancellor, a psition he would hold periodicaily until his death in 1904.31 He was considered "the most influentid of the founding fathers and an evolutionist."32 This unusual description was given Machray in relation to his views about the organization and cumculum of the university. He strongly favored the gradua1 process of giving the university, as well as the colleges, the right to teach. At the heart of this issue was whether higher education would fa11 into the hands of the secular state. If this were to happen, Machray argued, it would lead to the disintegration of the University. He was, then, a strong supporter of the integration of
28 From Rurai Pmkiand to UrhCeruer: One Hundred Years of Growth of the University of Manitoba. 1877-1977. A University of Manitoba Centennial Projece, Winnipeg: Hyperion Press, 1978, 114.
29 W J. Speace. University of Manitoba Histoïical Notes. 1871- 1917. Winnipeg. 1918.. 24.
Machray ,275. faith and Ieaming and was reluctant to submit the future of the liberal arts to secular influences.
The society of the 1870s did not have difficulty imagining ordained clergy as influentid educators. Nor did they think it strange that a scholar and professor should be interesteci in religion, personal faith, and the propagation of the Christian message. Machray's own words identify him with deeply Christian matters. In a speech addressing the "Society for the Propagation of the Gospel" in London, England, Machray remarked,
"In the Providence of God 1 have ken present at the birth of a new people."33 His life was devoted to the nurturing of personal and comrnunity faith, as well as with the advancement of Christianity among the "new people" of Manitoba.
While Machray was an ordained member of the clergy, he did not daim to be a preacher or evangelist. His gifts and service Iay in the areas of leadership, teaching and administration. Nonetheless, he was perceived to be more than a mere educator. His nephew Robert, former Canon of St. John's College in Winnipeg, described his uncle in this manner: "His chief characteristic was a high and nobie sense of duty. Munificent in disposition, untiring in industry, indomitable in perseverance, he lived a long, full life, marked by singleness of purpose and no little self-sacrifice. Withal he was a sympathetic, loving, tender-hearted man. Nothing of a mystic, he yet lived by faith in the Unseen and the Eternal; not in the Ieast a pietist, and hating cant, his religious feeling flowed deep and strong, nourishing al1 the roots of his being.*This description, even allowing for family bias, introduces us to a man who was more than simply religious. His life and influence could not be confineci and explained by mere academic rigors. His perception of the world, including university education, was tempered by an unswerving conviction of the intimate involvement of the Christian God.
33 Machray. preface. v.
34 Ibid.. xv. In the modem era credentials alone often satisfy the requirements for academic posts and responsibilities. To be sure, Bishop Machray emed his academic and religious distinctions (D.D., D.C.L., Archbishop of Rupert's Land, Rimate of al1 Canada, Prelate of the Order of St Michael and St George). Nonetheless, his character equaied his formal recognition and tities. His successur, Archbishop Matheson, recounts the following:
1 cm see him yet going through the donnitories... at twelve o'clock at night ... If a boy were suffering from a cold and had rmy elevation in temperature, his sWc was a hot bath. foilowed by a dose of Dover's Powder. He insisteci on p.eparing the bath water himself, tes ting it with his ban d... . He adminis tered the bath himself and "cbied"(he always used that word) the patient with his own bands. 1 rememk how proud I was when, as a Junior Master in the Schd, 1 was raised to the dignity of king dowed to take the Bishop's place and bathe a sick boy. Whm Ieaving the donnitory and the boys said, "Good-night, sir," 1 felt that there was a tone of homage and loydty in kirvoices that 1had never realised [sic] before. Up to that the the most 1 was pennitted to do was to hdd the candle in one hand and the Bishop's epismpal ring in the other, and, as 1 saw him, 1 thought of a Great Person Who came to minister and not be ministered unto. Who girded Himseif with a towel and washed His disciples' Today, such actions would undoubtedly be forbidden. Even if they were not, it would be a rare occasion to see a college head volunteer for such mundane ta&. Machray himself was introduced to a life of humble service within the confïnes of his own home, when as "a very small child, me] leamed the letters of the alphabet from a large Family ~ible."36His Bible would not leave his side for the rest of his life. At the age of eighteen, while attending Aberdeen, he taught a class of Sunday School at John Knox Church, and nurtured a secret drearn to become a ~ler~yrnan.37He was an avid participator in the missionary societies of his day, inciuding the Aberdeen Missionary ~ociety.38When his time at Aberdeen came to a close, several of his professors urged him to go to Cambridge. He was enthusiastic about the prospect, not, as many of his peers had ken, because of the Fellowships, but to fulfill the desire of his heart to enter into the
35 Ibid.. 242-243.
36 Ibid.. 4.
37 Ibid.. 28.
38 Ibid.. 30. ministry of the C hurch of ~ngland.39Perhaps this is the main reason that while Archbishop Machray was an advocate of liberal education, he held to the preeminence of Bi blical instruction. It would be easy to conclude that the Archbishop was simply a religious man.
After dl, that was his professional caiiing. However, he was well acquainted with substantive themes in Christian life and doctrine. For example, when called upon to preach while visiting Pisa, My, he chose for his text, "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. ... who do not live according to the sidul nature but according to the Spint" (Rom. 8: 1,4).40 His commitment to live "according to the Spirit" was evident in the allocation of educational funds. Machray "so arranged his Cathedral system that the revenues denved from educational endowments held by St John's College not only furnished incomes for Professors, but, at the sarne time, were made availab!e for missions ...."41 In 1874. just three years pnor to the founding of the U of M, Machray preached the sermon at the installation of Canon Grisdale at St. John's Cathedral. He clearly reveais his intentions for an integrated cooperative between the religious college and education: "The Cathedral Church of &y times... was the Mission Church of the littie band of missionaries that round their Bishop struggled to uplift the
Cross and carry the hdings of a Saviour into surrounding heathenism ...The Christian world owes almost everything to Cathedrals and Iike institutions. Amid the dense darkness and untutored roughness of medieval times whatever was elevating and humanising found a refuge there."4* Perhaps these are the best examples of Archbishop Machray's conviction in the integration of faith and leaming. The question remains
39 Ibid.. 36.
4û Ibid.. 70.
41 IW. 249.
42 Ibid.. 248. whether that integration would withstand the immediate and distant challenges of the forces of secuiarization which would be introduced to the University of Manitoba,
Reverend George Brvce ( 1844- 193 1) George Bryce was among those who discussed the possibility of forrning a university at the convocation of Manitoba College in 18%. A graduate of University and Knox colleges in Toronto. Bryce was considered a widely read scholar and heir of classic Presbyterian theology.43 For Bryce, Knox College served as a mode1 for Manitoba College before and after its junction with St. John's and St Boniface colleges to form the U of M. Theologicd leaming was to hold a place of preeminence over secular learning. However, Blyce was cornfortable with the prospect of calling laity to the govemrnent of higher education, a characteristic which would "aid in the transformation of the original university (of Manitoba) from a federation of three clerical and classical colleges to its [present] organization of a state university with which the denominational colleges are affiliated. '44 While Bryce was determined to uphold the principles of faith and learning to which he was committed, hs pragmatic nature was occasionally demonstmted... at tirnes at the expense of better judgment.45 Later. as will be seen, he diligently raised funds to provide for chairs in the sciences, which opened the door for the furtherance of a subtie but insistent wave of secularism.* Again, without diminishing the effects of his many
43 D.C. Masiers. Protertunt Church Colleges in C&: A Hirtory (Toronto: University of Toronto Ress, 1966). 93.
44 Morton. 26.
45 Mmi10ba Free Press, Feb. 4.1905.20. Note: In a letter to the aditor. Bryce was called upon to account for plagiarizing an historical work by J. J. Hagrave.
* Much more attention will be given to Rev. Bryce in Chapter 2. as he played a major dein the development of the religious ehof the U of M. contributions to the U of M, Professor Bryce may have overlooked the significant contributions made by Archbishop Machray in establishing the University. While there
still remains some questions about the manner in which Govemor Moms executed the
University Act of 187'7, a substantial portion of the weight of responsibility was shouldered by Archbishop Machray .
Bishop Taché (lm-1894)
Another of the three founding fathers was St. Boniface College's Bishop
Alexandre Antoine Taché. Taché was bom in Rividre du Loup and educated in classical colleges in Lower Canada. He came to the Red River district to serve in northern
missionary work in 1855 after joining the Oblate Order the previous year. He becarne the Bishop of St. Boniface after the death of Provencher and was made Archbishop in 1871. This position shaped the course upon which Taché would embark in his dealings wi th the
enthusiasts of the University. As Pmvencher's successor, he was obligated to uphold the principles upon which St Boniface College had been established - the furtherance of French-Catholic religion and culture. 4 Discussions about the founding of a university for Manitoba had not progresseci far when Taché made it clear that his willingness to cooperate with the other colleges did not include a compromise of the essential distinctives of his college. His personal convictions were deeply rooted in the French-Catholic community of which he was a vital member. As St Boniface's representative to the meetings surrounding the founding of the University of Manitoba, TachC was cautious not to forfei t his wllege's distinctives. His fears were appeased, however, when he made an important discovery while in
Frorn RdPmWand to Utban Cenrer: One Hundred Yems of Growth ai rhe Univenity of Mmi~ba,1877- 1977. A University of Manitoba Centennial Project, ~in&pegHyperion Ress. 1978. 121. Quebec City during the winter of 1886-7: "... I saw a calendar of the University of London; I studied the principal [sic] feaiures of the institution and satisfied rnysel f that 1 would allow the College of St Boniface to join the desired University of Manitoba, provided that the teaching of our students would remain entirely under Our contr01."4~ The phrase "perfect autonomyn aptly summarizes Tache's most vital demand. His intentions for the college of St. Boniface would hinge on the fulfillment or reneging of that request Additionally, the controversy that would arise over this clause in the constitution of the new university would mark an entrenchment of opposing ideals in the development of the religious ethos that Taché assumed had been averted.
The controversy intensified w hen proponen ts of secular education planned to arnend the constitution to provide for professorships. Taché attempted to counter this growing opposition and in a letter to the Minister of Justice made his intentions for the founding and the future of the U of M unmistakeably clex "Likely you have aiso received affidavits purporting to refute my assertions with regard to the original intent, at the time, of the founden of the University. To this 1 repl y that 1 emphaticaily maintain that the position I took at the outset is exactly the one I maintain in my letter to you. 1 myself suggested that the words 'on the mode1 of the University of London' should be inserted in the preamble and the Act would maintain the clause: 'there shall be no professorships or other teachership in the universi ty.4 While the other two founders of the U of M were apparently satisfied with the changes that allowed for professorshi ps, Taché maintaineci that the original intentions of those founders (above) were, at least technically, the same as his own. Tach6 had ken convinced to join the other two colleges to form the U of M on the bais of autonomy. With his cooperation guaranteed and ratified in the University Act of 1877, opposing
47 Lette from Archbishop Taché to Sir John Tbompson. Minister of Education. Dec. 27. 1889. Minutes of University Council, 1,325, U of M Dept of Archives and Special Collections. parties managed to alter the wording of the preamble to allow for professorships. Tache's regret conceming those constitutional changes was evident in his letter to the Minister of Education; "1 never knew that the words 'at present' had been inserted within the just now cited clause, but after it was too late to remedy the insertion."49 Taché's reflections on those eariy developments shed light on the philosophical disparity behveen himself and the other founding fathers. Unlike Machray and Bryce, Tache was not primarily concerned with developing a progressive university that would equip students for the professions. In his own words, he "was exceedingly anxious to go as far as possible to meet the views and desires of the other colleges," but had "no experience myself in University matters ...."50 Instead, Tach6 was deeply concemed with preserving the religious values that he believed were essential to the students of St. Boniface College. The provision of autonorny had apparently ensured the preservation of the values that Tache had maintained within the confines of St. Boniface College, and now hoped would remain intact within the jurisdication of the U of M. From Taché's perspective, the progression of events was unforninate: "Our dear young University has already done a great deal of good, and has ken a source of enjoyrnent to its members. 1 have no doubt but it would have continued king so, if the principle of its constitution had been preserved. Unfortunately the equilibrium is disturbed; the classical affiliate colleges have lost the security of their autonomy...."si The guarded optimism of Archbishop Machray and the unrestrained spirit of progressiveness exemplified in Bryce were not to be found in Taché as he pondered the future of the U of M: " ... in a near future [our] own teaching may be disregarded. The council of the University itself has prepared the loss of his own control; political influences are getting hold of the resul t of Our work and sacrifices for the twelve last
49 Ibid.. 324.
Ibid.. 325.
5 1 ïbid., 326. ye..Nobody knows what can be expected within the twelve next months or after. ... As far as 1 am concemed, and in the face of the resolution adopted by the majonty of the Council (when sickness prevented me from king present) 1 declare that 1 have nothing to retract from what 1 have written to you. "52 1t could be concludeci that Tache was simply the victim of circumstance. He was unaware of the alterations to the original constitution, unable to attend an extremely important Council meeting, and unprepared to remedy what he felt was an increasing dependence upon political influences. The aitemauve synopsis would be that Tach& traditional religious and culturai values prevented him from arcomodating a progressive vision for the U of M. Such openness would have undoubtedly threatened the static nature of St. Boniface College, and would have eliminated much of the heated debate and subsequent turmoil that characterized the
U of M in successive years leading up to the Amendments to the University Act of 19 17.
1877: Religious Beliefs And Practices Of U of M Staff And Students The original convocation of the University of Manitoba in 187'7 provides some evidence of the religious constitution of the participants. Of thirty people present, nine were members of the clergy.53 While it is impossible to reconstnict a profile of a typical collegian during this inaugural year, we can draw a composite image reflecting some of the religious characteristics of the colleges of U of M.
In his address to the Synoci in May 1877 Archbishop Machray reported that churches were king erected as growth was evident in both the country and Church. He went on to comment on the question of education, saying that 'There is nothing to prevent in our schools the daily recognition of the necessity of the divine blessing, and of
SZ Ibid., 326.324.
53 University of Manitoba Hisroncal Notes. 18n-1917. .3. the VJord of God as the source of dl wisdorn and knowledge, in the opening and closing of the school by a simple fom of prayer and the reading of Gocl's Word. Further. there is nothing that should prevent the leanllng of the Apostles' Creed, the Ten Commandments, and the Lord's Prayer, and the use of a catechism explaining these that would bring before the minds of the young the leading facts of revealed religion and of the Christian faith." s4 This thoroughly Christian perspective on education was not an oddity in its day. If one thing was shared among the three founding colleges it was a determination to elevate Christian teachings above dl others. What was said to describe St. Boniface College was congruous of the three founding colleges that constituted the infant university - "religion was at the center of al1 education."55 Similarly Reverend Bqce was described in relation to "The institutions to which he devoted his remarkable energies; a non-sectarian public school systern, a literate but evangelical church, and a modem university.. .. " 56 Machray had been described as a "moderate evangelical" (Wilmot, 100). This depiction would adequately portray the mainstream of life, faith, and thought that üanspired within the walls of the U of M. In addition to the expected denominational affiliation between a student and his college, there was a vital religious life to be enjoyed. Headlines in college papers of the day recount spiritual retreats that were well attended by the student body. Additionally, in
1877 the Manitoba Free Press included along its left margin a daily section which included religious news. Church activities were mentioned, along with guest speakers and preachers, who were often directly or indirectly associated with the U of M as professors or clergy. Perhaps Archbishop Tache's candid statement about his role arnong students under his care illuminates the hue religious ethos of the U of M in its inaugural year. His
54 Machray, 27û-27 1.
55 Mortm. 24.
MacDonald. 34. desire was to provide a quali ty education for the students of St. Boniface. This, in his words, constituted 'the sacred obligation of my position as spiritual guide of my people." 57 Undoubtedly the three founding fathers, as well as the professors, desired to direct their young students in a comprehensive quest for God and the knowledge of His worfd.
It is evident that several complex issues surrounded the founding of the U of M. Arnong them were matters that would contribute to the current and future developrnent of its religious ethos. At this point, one might ponder the circumstances sumunding the
University Act of 1817 and conclude that Govemor Morris demonstrated refined ski11 as an arbiter of divergent opinions and desires as expressed by the three religious colleges. Complimenting his influence was the mature and tempered initiative of Archbishop Machray, whose leadership in rnatters of education and religion was unmatched by his pers. We could also attribute the eventuai success of the alliance of the colleges to the cooperative and flexible spirit of Archbishop Taché whose only demand was to ensure governing autonomy for St. Boniface College. While this is historically defensible, it would not be telling the whole stow as i t pertains to the evolution of the spiri tua1 climate of the University.
As will be demonstrated in the following chapters, a process of secularization began to occur within the U of M during its early years. While this phenornenon becomes more obvious as the University's political controversies unfold, it was present, inconspicuously, at its inception. * Archbishop Machray made the following statement in
1877: "1 acknowledge the first importance in these days of a good secular education...."58 If, as an Archbishop, Machray believed in the priority of a 'worldly" or "temporal"
Minutes of University Councii. 1.325.
* "Secular."according to Webster. is "temporal;woridly; not of the church."(Webster's Handy Coliege Dictionary. 1981). s.v. "secular." education, we could conclude that his views were incoherent, the result of irrational, binary thinking. Yet, a clarification seems to have been made: "It is perfectly impossible for any separate Protestant denomination to undertake the work of efficiently supplying the primary education in its panshes. Therefore we must endeavor to work heartily with the system that is established by the State, and, as far as we can, supply its deficiencies.... I see no necessity for Our Protestant schools king depnved of what 1 consider the precious privilege of religious teaching.... For various reasons 1 view with deep regret and suspicion its absence .... Such teaching is necessary for setting up what is the oni y true standard of nght and wrong."59 Machray's penchant for cooperating with secular bodies came out of necessity. He seemed to understand the role of the secular in classic terms. Defined historically, "the word secular is a positive word in the Christian's vocabulary. The church has always had a good view of that which was regardeci as secular. In the Middle Ages, for example, men were ordained to a specific role in the priesthood that was called the 'secular priesthood.' These were men who had responsibilities who took them out of the institution of the church to minister in the world where there were specific needs requiring the healing touch or the pnestly mission of the church."~This ideal does not conflict with that of
Archbishop Machray and the other two founding fathers as they considered their role in the university. However, not al1 the players in its establishment and development were of the sarne mind. This subtle philosophical difference, amplifieci by a failure on the part of the religious colleges to discern a serious threat to their ideal, would lead to quick and permanent forfeitures in the Christian nature of the U of M that would not be recouped. Examples of this evolutionary process are discussed in forthcoming chapters. For now, the Reverend James Robertson's acclaimed speech to his colleagues of Manitoba College in 1876 will serve as an example of that seed of secularism that eventually usurped philosophical control of the U of M. As he envisioned the U of M just months before its inception, he predicted that "Such a college would liberalize men. Too frequently sectarian colleges make men narrow. The best men in the country could mingle with each other irrespective of religious convictions, and the tendency would be to make the population homogeneous. Men would forget in public affairs what church or nationality they formerly belonged to, and act as intelligent citizens of this new country, for the general good."61 In the afterrnath of denorninationai conflict that plagued Ontario's colleges, it is commendable that the Reverend Robertson was impassioned by such a vision; however, the absence of a carefully outlined plan to maintain the distinctives of any institution will surely lead to its deterioration. Since this is an investigation of the religious nature of an academic institution, it would suffice to recount these words: "Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down to estimate the cost to see if he had enough money to coniplete it? For if he lays the foundation and is not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, saying, This fellow began to build and was notable to finish."62 Cleary, the religious colleges had aligned themselves with a vision of an integrated education of fai th and reason. However, that Christian ideal did not permeate the shaping of the University in subsequent years. The laying of the foundation did not ensure that the tower would be completed, at least not in accordance with the intended plans of the three original architects. Not long ago the author was telling a U of M student that his university was founded by three Christian colleges. His response was, "1 never would have guessed!" A
* Glenn. 25.
62 Luke 1428-30 MV (New International Version). few days later the sarne student said, "I told my friends about the founding of the U of M and they couldn't believe it" Although they never fuily anticipated its occurrence, the three founding fathers would likely be in awe of the proround change that has occurred at
the U of M. ?kat startling and perhaps inevitable evolutionary process of secularization will be the focus of the remainder of this thesis. FORTY YEARS OF CONFUCï.: IDENMFYING FACïORS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RELIGIOUS ETHOS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA
18774904: The Amendment Factor
The period from 1817-1904 was undoubtedly the most significant in shaping the religious ethos of the U of M. it did not take long before evidence of divergent interests of governance became apparent at the University. As early as October 18'77, a single issue cleariy influenced the future religious life of the University. The issue in question was the consti tutional debate over whether the U of M could be a teaching university. The answer to that question would alter the original course of education that was agreed upon by the founding fathers -- that of a unified partnership among the three colleges to integrate fai th and leaming under the banner of a non-teaching university. W. J. Spence, who occupied the role of Registm beginning in 1910,compiled historical notes which clearly outline the functions of the U of M from its inception in 1877. They were "ordinarily confined to those of prescribing standards of education and cumcula of snidies, and of conducting examinations thereon, and confemng degrees - the work of instruction king conflned to the affiliated colleges." He also noted the tumultuous times the University was experiencing as the question of teaching and
ultimately control of the direction of the University, was discussed. Indeed, it was a matter of controversy for years as to whether or not the University could under the charter undertake any teachi ng. The matter was never taken lightly. Bishop Tach6 of St. Boniface College was extremely reluctant to plunge his denominational college into the txiad that would form the University of Manitoba. He was aware of the nsk of losing the "perfect autonomy" that would ensure the preservation of French-Catholic cultural, religious, and educational ideals that made it unique. Only when he was assured of this autonomy did he relent and
agree to become a founding member of the new institution. The loss of "perfect
autonorny" that was understd to be part of the original agreement is shrouded in
controversy. At the heart of this controversy was the University Act of 1877. The Honorable Joseph Royal was the Attorney-General of Manitoba at the time.
Since the govemment had been persuaded to accept the mode1 of a provincial university,
the Act would formalize and Iegalize the new institution. On April8, 1877, Royal introduced a bill into the provincial legislature. The preamble stated that it was desirable to "establish one university for th? whole of ~anitoba"2This was obviously acceptable by all, as the Red River missions of the three founding colleges were eager to provide a quality education to al1 who qualified. The confusion began as the preambk continued. It stated that the University of Manitoba was to be modeled alter the University of London. Section 10 mentioned that there would be no teacherships in the university. It was this very clause that satisfid Bishop Tach6 and the Roman Catholic contingent.3
l University of Manitoba Historicai Notes. lm-1917.22.
Minutes of University Corncil, L. 2%.
Letter from Archbishop Taché to Sir John Thompson. Mnister of Educaiion. Dec. 27.1889. Minutes of University Cod,1,324. The bill introduced on April8 was later amended. A subtle but significant aiteration to the preamble went unnoticed for two years. This change directly infiuenced the development of the religious ethos of the U of M. The words "on the mode1 of the University of London" were deleted, and after the phrase "thereshall be no professorships or teacherships," the words "at present" were added.4 Officially bilingual. the province of Manitoba produceci copies of the University Act in both languages; the English version included the phrase "on the mode1 of the University of London." The French copy dso contained these words, but apparentiy did not contain the words "a présent" following iiie phrase conceming the absence of professorships. TachC was also unaware that the phrase had been added to the English copy; "1 never knew that the words 'at present' had been inserted within the... clause. but after it was too late to remedy the insertion." 5 The cohesion of the fledgling University was short-lived. Just six months after its official inauguration, problems began to surface. Aftrr intense debate it became apparent that the nature of the character of the university remained in question. Several individuals proposeci that U of M incorporate the mandate of a teaching university. To this Bishop Taché laid aside his usual cooperativeness and protested formaily any changes to the University Act of April8, which had ensured teaching autonomy for the three religious colleges. His next decision proved to illuminate and agi tate the deep problems that had remained beneath or near the surface of the university teaching debate. Archbishop Tacht stated, Y.. 1 do not wish to ask for any special privilege or favor for St. Boniface College, but what 1 desire and what 1 would suggest is that in the patent granting to the University the lands allowed by the statute some clause or word may be inserted affording a
Letter from Hou. Joseph Royal. A ttorncyGenera1 of Manitoba, to Archbishop Taché. Nov. 30. 1889, Minutes of University Council, 1.329.
Letter fmm Archt~ishopTache to Sir John Thompson, Minister of Education. Dec. 27 1889. Minutes of University Council. 1,324. protection to any pariicular college connecteci with the University and constituting a part thereof whose rights and position rnay be affected or interfered with in the event of the said university altering its constitution or moàifying its original plan."6 As a result of Tache's protest, the inconsiskncies between the original University Act and the English and French copies given to the colleges were discovered. The signifieance of this development must not be ovedooked. The intentions of those who wished to make the U of M a teaching university must be called into question.
Why did they want cumculum development and implementation to be taken from the hands of the three founding colleges? Or,to the contrary, were Taché's cornplaints unwarranted? In any case, the characteristically cooperative Taché was adamant: " 1 would never have consented that the College of St Boniface should join and become an integral part of a University in which teaching would be imparted without any control which could protect the students of Our college in their religious belief.n7Despite the understandable fury of Tache and the St. Boniface contingent, the other voting representatives of the University were not about to uphold the apparent intentions of the founding fathers and the constitution that they had agreed upon. After reconsidering the evidence and Tache's formal protest, the Council concluded that the intent of the original Act to establish the U of M allowed for the future implementation of chairs and professorships. The vote was seventeen in favor, seven against.8 It is disturbing to note the division of interests and subsequent power struggle that occurred just six rnonths akrthe hopeful amalgamation of the three religious colleges. There are several reasonable explanations for these discrepancies. First, while the
Letter from Archbishop Tache to Sir John Thmpson. Minister of Ed-tim. .4ugust 1889. Minutes of University Council, 1,303-304.
Letter fmm Archbishop Tachf to Sir John Thompson, Minioter of Education, Dec. 27. 1889. Minutes of University Council, 1,324.
8 Minutes of Uni versity Councü. 1,302-305. founding religious fathers were ini tiall y agreed that only thei r respective colleges would be responsible for teaching, govemment interests were cleariy more liberai. In his speech iniroducing the University Act of 1877, Attorney-General Joseph Royal was reported to have said that teaching by the University might be possible in the future. "The bill only provides for a university to grant degrees, and for graduating purposes, but will not be a teaching institution. The bill, however, provides that hereafter chairs may be attached and endowed, and become a teaching institution as we11."9 Royal later denied these reports, saying that the press must have misunderstood his comrnents, reporting something he did not Say. He insisted that he had rejected the idea that the colleges would lose their exclusive nght to teach the university's students. "... 1 am most positive in stating that, to rny knowledge, it was never underst ood... by anyone inierested in the passage of the measure that the University was ever to become, at any period in its existence, a teaching body." '0 The situation is problematic for two reasons. First, it was clear that Archbishop Tach6 recognized that the religious beliefs of Catholic students would be in jeopardy if teaching chairs were eventuail y granted to non-religious professors. His concems were justifiable. Few would argue that university professors, in any era, are wi thout significant influence over their students. Having understood that their colleges would be given "perfect autonomy," Tache and his fellow college heads were cornfortable with the proceedings of the government. I t is not clear whether Attorney-General Joseph Royal said, "hereafter chairs may be attached and endowed, and [the University of ManitobaJ become a teaching institution as well." The point is that the Manitoba Free Press reported that he made such a provision for the new university, just one day following Royal's speech. Apparently, this should have elicited an outpounng of protest from the three
Mitoba Free Press, Report on speech d Hm Joseph Royal. Feb. 10.18î7.3.
Io Lener from Hm.Joseph Royal, AttorneyGenerai of Manitoba, to Archbishop Tachd. Nov. 30. 1889. Minutes of University Council, 1,329. religious colleges. In particular, Tache would have been expected to spearhead the
protest, as his diligent negotiations secured constitution autonomy for the colleges. Strangely, arnong several letters to the editor of the Manitoba Free Press concerning the U of M, no cornplaint was issued by Taché or anyone else in immediate response to Royal's alleged provision for future teaching chairs. It wasn't until 1889 that a written account of Tache's thoughts on the matter were known. It was in a letter to Sir John Thompson that Tache pemed those profound words, "1 would never have consenteci that the College of Si. Boniface should join and become an integral part of a University in which teaching would be imparted without any conml which could protect the students of our college in their religious belief." l l Why did
Tach6 not make his impassioned remarks immediately after Royal's speech was published? There are two feasible possibilities for his delay. First, he was convinced that autonomy for the colleges was permanently secured. Clause 10 in his French copy of the University Act explicitly made that guarantee. An official, legal document, he may have thought, outweighed any statements made or reported to have ken made by a local newspaper. Additionally, Taché may have been confident of Royal's support as one farniliar with the interests of St Boniface College and as a fellow Roman Catholic. The alternative is that Taché was not aware of the Manitoba Free Press's publication of Royal's speech. While this may seem unthinkable, we must remember that Tach6 was a francophone. Confident that he understd as well as anyone the ternis of the University Act, he would consider it an unnecessas, inconvenience to purchase and read an anglophone report of what transpired in the previous day of Legislature. The fact that Royal's speech appeared in the paper is not tantamount to its complete acceptance by the founders of the University; however, since Royal oniy denied the account given in the February 10 edition of the Manitoba Free Ress when challenged by Tache two years
Letter fmm Archbishop Taehe to Sir John Thompaon, Minister of Education. Dec. 27.1889. Minutes of University Council, 1,324. later, it was obvious that no other protest was raised by Archbishop Machray, Reverend
Bryce, or any public citizen concerned wifh the future control of the University.
A second reason for the debate stemmed from the philosophical disposition of the new Attorney-General, Hon. Joseph Martin, toward the nature of the university. While former Attorney-General Joseph Royal had voiced his concems about the timeliness of
the formation of the university, it was apparent that Martin was not in favor of a university controlled by denominational clergy. W. L Morton, a former U of M professor who chronicled the debate between Taché and those representatives who voted in favor of amending the University Act to allow for the hinng of non-religious teachers, stated that Martin was an integral player in undermining the original Universiq Act: "It is ... probable that the opposition came from the Attorney-General and Minister of Education,
Hon. Joseph Martin, the father of the School Act of 1890, and a strong advocate of secular education." 12 As Morton suggests. Martin represented the growing interest of secular, governmental interest in the U of M. He would help to accelerate the rapid evolution of a denominational controlled university hoping to maintain an integrated education of faith and reason into a state-run secular institution. Two other factors which surely influenced the development of the religious ethos of the U of M during the early years were the emerging English Protestant majority vying for authoritative power within the University and a concurren tly increasing dislike for the ideals of Archbishop Tache. The cooperative spirit embodied in the Red River settlement initially characterized the educational system of the province of Manitoba; however, the early years of expansion of the U of M were met with disproportionate gmwth of
Protes tant Englis h-speakers in the province. The resul ts were signifiant. " More and more English and Protestant Manitobans were becoming impatient with the officia1 use of
French in a province in which the French had becorne a minority, and with the denominational school system in which the Protestant schools had become 'public' while the Catholic remained denominational. In fact, by 1889 the province was on the verge of a poli tic.explosion which abolished both the official use of French and the denominational school system." 13 Ironically, Canon J. O. Murray of St John's College argued in favor of an evolutionary process which would ultimately weaken the control of the denominational colleges, including his own, in the University. An excerpt frorn his article, "Manitoba's Place" reflects both his personal views and those of a growing number of Mani tobans: "The same trends of public opinion which were to establish a secular system of public
schmls in Manitoba in 1890 had become increasingly critical of the control of the
University by the denominational colleges, and dso of the teaching by the colleges of a largely classical cumculum. They wished to replace it by a university under a greater measure of state control and offering a Iarger degree of instruction in natural science. In brief, the old control of education by the Church, sprung from the missionary days of Red River, was beginning to be challengeci by the advocates of secular education directed by appointees of the state." 14 Growing rnomentum in favor of a secular university was evident prior to 1890. In particular, the Protestant Colleges appeared to be allied, if not intentionally, on the issue of assumed teaching by the university as early as 1889.15 Supporting their preference of a teaching university were the examples of traditional colleges in England and Ontario. Further, as enrollment and curriculum expansion compounded, they did not think that
l3 Ibid.. 4243.
IS Letter from Archbishop Tache to Sir John Tbompson. Minister of Jusda, Augusf 188% Minutes of University Council, 1, -289. their small religious colleges could service the demands of a diversi fying universi ty. * Additionally, it may have been felt that nonclassical disciplines such as the naturai sciences and medicine were beyond the areas of expertise that distinguished the three colleges -- namely, religious studies, Biblical languages. Latin, and philosophy. It must also be remembered that decisions were norrnally made at the U of M by representatives of Convocation, which made up the University Council. This council was constituted by elected graduates of the University. The original three were graduates of other Canadian universities who had resided in Manitoba at least two months pnor to the passing of the University Act of 18'77.16 The council grew from three rnembers in 1877, to seven in 1887, and to forty-four by 1889. When the number first grew from three to seven, none of the additions was French or Catholic. This, potentially, may have been the first substantial political nirning point in the secularization process ini tially advocated by some rnembers of St. John's and Manitoba College. One of the new representatives in 1889 was F. C. Wade, who moved that a cornmittee should be established by the council to consider the viability of the University to becorne a teaching body. In subsequent debate, much of which was quite heated, it was decided that the University would establish chairs in natural science, Honours mathematics, and Honours modem languages, chemistry, geology, physics, biology and physiology. Of direct significance to the development of the religious ethos was the movernent to determine the transference of taught subjects from the three religious colleges to the university based on a seventy-rive percent vote in favor. 17 Despite
* 7Khile financial confenis and the need for academic expertise ceriainiy contributed to the secularization of the U of M, it must be noted that Rev. Bryce of Manitoba CoUege was the one who eventually secured a substantial endownment for the installment of professod chairs from the private sec tor.
17 Special mceting to discuss the teaching of subjeas by the University. Minutes of University Councii. 1. Nov. 12, 1889,279. Archbishop Tache's formai protests and emotional opposition to the apparent hijackhg of the control of the religious colleges, the Univenity Council made i t official that the U of M wouid become a teaching university by the historic vote of seventeen to seven.
While this vote in favor consti tut& only seventy percent of the total membership of the council, it had ken established that while seventy-five percent was necessary to tnuisfer taught subjects from the religious colleges to the University, only fifty percent was required to detexmine the nature of the University. In this case, the seven who opposed were representatives of the French-Catholic St Boniface College. 1t is possible that the intense language and culture dispute over public education raging throughout the province of Manitoba influenced the outwme of the vote which would determine the nature and purpose of the U of M for the next one-hundred years. Two extremel y controversial events, when understood properl y, onnot help but mark the U of M during this important pendof its history. They were the modification of the University Act permitting the University to teach and the reconsideration of professonal chairs in various disciplines. As mentioned eari ier, Tache's vigorous opposition to this apparent affront of due process caused a discussion about the legality of the constitutional amendment in question. Even though it was indisputable that the original preamble stated that the U of M was modeled after the University of London and would not be responsible for professoral chairs, the University Council asserted that "the Act of the Legislature incorporating the University of Manitoba contemplated the establishment of chairs and professorships... in the course of time and did not provide that it should be founded on the mode1 of the University of London ...."18 The amendment in question took the influentid role of teaching out of the exclusive control of the Anglican, Presbyterian, and Catholic colleges and placed it in the hands of both the religious colleges and the University.
l8 fiutes of University Council. 1. Dec. 5.1889.305. It has ken observeci that individuals within St John's and Manitoba College advocated an evolutionary process allowing for progressive. secular disciplines to be offered as supplementary to religious instruction within the context of the University. While not surprising, it is disturbing that it was accomplished without the knowledge of one of their CO-founders,Archbishop Taché, for as Wilmot points out, "the whole success of the venture hinged on winning the cooperation of Tacht5."19 The pragmatic goal of convincing St. Boniface's Tache to join the university enterprise was not inherently problematic. This was accomplished with Tach6's full cooperation, since he was assured goveming autonomy as a member college. The amendment ailowing for a teaching university was questionable because of its apparent contradiction with the intentions of the original University Act and the expressed wishes of the founding colleges. Further, the manner in which the amendment transpired was inadequate; every other primas, interest in the University of Manitoba, with the exception of the TachC, was aware of the proposed constitu tiond changes. The main question remains: " Why was Taché not notified of the proposed amendment? A simple response is that his approval was not legally necessary. The bill to introduce the University Act was brought before the Legislative Assembly on the initiative of Govemor Morris. The passing of the bill and subsequent amendments were made by members of the House. The advice, both solicited and unsolicited, of the three founding fathers and their respective colleges was often given. Once TachC had agreed to induct St. Boniface as a founding college, his input on the question of university teaching governance was avoided. It was common knowledge that he would not succumb to peer pressure and allow for professorial chairs at the U of M. The means by which the amendments were executed cast some doubt upon the magnanimity of dl but Archbishop Taché, and perhaps Archbishop Machray. The
l9 Wilmot, 69. prearnble mistakenly retained the phrase, "on the mode1 of the University of London,"
while changing clause 10 to read, "There shall be no professorship or other teaching at present in the university" [italics mine]. This latter change sanctioned the establishment of future chairs outside the control of the religious colleges. Astonishingly, the French version given to Taché contained neither amendment.
The fact that the English copies of the University Act included the changes to the preamble concerning professorships held by the University, while Tachd's French copy did not, is somewhat unusual. It appears that the two Protestant colleges were determined to cooperate with the powers in govemment, most notably the Hon. Joseph Royal, in
order to move the infant university in the direction that was most expedient. The validity of this assertion will be established as we proceed, but initiai evidence indicates that the
new course for the U of M was charted primarily by Reverend Bryce and the advocates of secuIarization.
Sometime prior to the passing of the bill, Reverend Bryce and Mr. Biggs of Manitoba College paid a visit to Royal. 20 While the contents of that conversation are not available, it anbe deduced that it led to the controversial and unethical changes that were made to the University Act Archbishop Machray accounted for his apparent lapse in not making the proposed amendments known to the public, stating, "The amendment
does not seem to have ken heard outside the House, for the Archbishop of Rupert's Land, who intensely disliked the allusion to the University of London [in the preamble], would have rejoiced at it if he had known of it [king removed]."21 This, however, does not imply that Machray opposed the idea of the university gaining professorships. As we established in Chapter 1, he embraced a classical view of the importance of secular learning and was in favor of the U of M offering in the liberal arts and sciences what the
20 Letter from Royal to Taché. Nov. 30. 1889. Mintees of University Coimal. 1.329.
Zr wilmot, 79. religious colleges were unable to provide. Machray was pleased with the new univenity.
"It has a constitution about as satisfactory as could be devised in the immediate condition of things .... 1 feel very much gratified with the result. A11 is gained that 1 desired."22 In his account of the intentions of the three pioneer colleges, Reverend Bryce stated in an article published in the Free Press in 1900, that the act was "framed with the plan of, for a time, having the universi ty a mere examining and not a teaching body, and of affiliating the colleges, so that they might have a large share in the direction of the affairs of the univenity.'23 Not oniy does this strengthen the claim that the role of teaching significantly affects the development of the ideals of the University, but it serves as evidence that Reverend Bryce was not about to contradict his public statements that exclusively supported the notion that the powers of professonal chairs would eventuaily be extended to the U of M.
The year 1900 also witnessed the second contmvenial event which marked this era of the U of M. The amendment controversy was revisited as chairs in numerous subjects were considered. As part of this process the University Council felt the need to reexarnine the intentions of the original University Act of lm. Astoundingly, they concluded that simply because " it was contemplated that chairs and professorships rnighl be established" [italics mine], they should uphold the constitutional amendment. In effect, that very amendment nullified the pervasive spirit of unity upon which the three religious colleges agreed to become the University of Manitoba. Their argument was frorn silence, based on a mere probability that acnially contradicted the preamble of the unmodified constitution which stated that the university was not to hold professorships. While the decision by the Council to uphold the amendrnents of 1877 was ethically questionable, it was politically expedient. The University was entering a period
22 Machray. 275.
23 Manitoba Free Ras,November 17.1900.9. of relatively explosive growth and divergent interests in its govemance were becoming increasingly evident Many of the University's enthusiasts began to contest the philosophical course upon which the University had ken commissioned. Those dissatisfied with denominationai control withheld their demand for directional alterations in the early years because of apparent stability arnong the three colleges. Now, clear philosophical dilineations were king made that would threaten the longevit. of the moderate evangelical nature of the U of M.
The three broad differences of opinion conceming the future of the University did not exclusively fall within denominational boundaries. Influentid rnembers of the same college sometimes disagreed, finding common ground instead wi thin a perspective shared by others of a different college. Nonetheless, those that shaped the development of the religious ethos of the U of M did so as rnembers of their colleges, and to that extent acted as representatives of those who would not have lent them their individual support. This was especiall y tme of Reverend George Bryce and Manitoba College. The three bodies of thought that would compte for control over the direction of the University have been termed " tmditionaiist," nevolutionist," and usecularist."~~The traditionalists were best exemplified by St. Boniface College and their leader, Archbishop Taché. They defended the original agreement of the three founding colleges as outlined in the initiatory University Act of 1877. This Act, before its alteration, gave perfect autonomy to the colleges and protected them from the potential of unwanted professorhl chairs that would undermine the faith of the college's students. The attainment of this provision was made alrnost solely through the efforts of Tache. He was detennined to protect the cultural and religious traditions of the French-Catholic in Manitoba, but his motivating concem was for the preservation and growth of the personal faith of his students.
24 Morton, 65-66. W. L. Morton argued that the tiaditionalists were in favor of governmental assistance for a " teaching faculty limited to the naturai sciences." 25 This could not be said of Taché, whose only known outburst of anger conceming the U of M was over the loss of perfct autonomy for the colleges. However, Tache's infiuence waned with his heaith, dieing in 1894. His successor, Father Chemer, may have been an advocate of chairs in the sciences, but by this time the evolution of the ide& of the Univeaity was accelerati ng rapidl y. The next group, who sympathized with Taché, were the evolutionists. Their views were embodied in the most influential of the founding fathers, Archbishop Machray. He and severai others in St. John's and Manitoba College favored the gradua1 process of enabling the University the right to teach. Of grave concem to Machray in particular was wheîher the U of M would eventually faIl under the control of the secular state. Machray firmly believed that this would lead to the disintegration of the University. So, as an advocate of the integration of faith and education, he was reluctant to submit the future of the liberal arts to secular influences. Canon J. O. Murray of St. John's College was among the most outspoken advocates of the evolutionist position. At a banquet in 1906 he argued that the " true line of development for the univeni ty was to form a system of colleges, denominational and secuiar, and to settle on a common site."26 Perhaps the concem for a common facili ty was foremost on the agenda of many of the evolutionists. The prospect of continueci growth for the U of M would not be possible without adequate space. This, they concurred, would be beyond the financial capabilities of the three colleges, and necessitated the support of the provincial govemment. The third point of view was characterized by an independent, progressive mentaiity. These secularists opposed the traditionalists and were impatient with the
25 Ibid.. 65.
26 Ibid., 72. gradua1 changes recommended by the evolutionists. Cognizant of the professionalism manifested in the universi ties of eastem Canada and the American mid-west, this group was concemed not with the preservation of traditional ideals, but with scientific and technological advancernent In radical fashion, they sought a sharp break with the past and the establishment of a secular, state-supprted and state-controlled institution.. .. The secularis ts were the most outspoken, aggressive and public1y infiuential of the three schools of thought.27 To say that they were publicly influential is not to suggest that they represented popular opinion. On the contrary, the views illustrateci by Mac hray and Tache apparently reflected the conservative, moderate evangelical composition of the residents of Manitoba. Power was garnered for the seculansts as hoiders of influential positions on University Council, the Medical College, Manitoba College, and the provincial govemmen t.28 A semblance of the cooperative spin t that had characterized the Red River settlement was still evident among the colleges of the University until 1889; however, divergent interests in the shaping of the University were quickly becoming apparent. To di ffering degrees, the evolutionists and secularists desired the implementation of professorships within the University. Again, Archbishop Tach6 would have to be persuaded to join the ranks of the more progressive Protestants. As a traditionalist, Taché defended the ideal of teaching autonomy for the colleges. In addition to mounting pressure from the University community, Taché and the tradi tionalist St Boniface College were acutely aware of a similar debate which raged throughout the province of Manitoba.
More and more English and Protestant Manitobans were becoming impatient with the officiai use of French in a province in wbch the French had becorne a minority. and with the denominationai school system in which the Protestant schmls had in effect becorne "public"while the Catholic
27 Ibid.. 66.
28 Ibid.. 66. remaineci demmiaationai. In fact by 1889 the province was on the verge of a political explosion which abdished both the ofiduse of French and the denominational school system. The same trends of pubiic opinion which were to establish a secular system of public schools in Manitoba in 1890 had becoming increasingly aitical of the coatrol of the university by the denominational colleges, and dso of the teaching of the colleges of a largely ciassical curriculum. They wished to replace it by a university under a greater measure of state control and offering a Iarger degree of instruction in îhe natural science. In brief, the old order of education by the Church, spgfrom the missionary days of Red River, was beginning to be chaüenged by the advaam of secuiar educaiim dircaed by appoiniees of the state. 29 The tide of popular opinion broke into the political sphere of the U of M through F. C. Wade, a representative of Convocation and an advocate of the secularization of teaching.30 Wade, dong with the Protestant college heads, was aware of the disparity that existed between them and St. Boniface on the issue of professorshi ps. If the University undertook teaching, the autonomous status of the denominational colleges would be in question. To safeguard the freedom of the colleges to continue teaching subjects of their choice, Wade proposeci an intennediary pmcess of evolution. Speaking to the University Council, he moved "that in the opinion of the Council of the University the time has corne when teaching should be undertaken by the University and that a committee be appointed to ascertain the best method of accomplishing this object...." As pointed out earlier, the issue was characterized by heated debate. The proponents of university professorships made allowances for those in the colleges who were gravely concerned for the future of education, both in the colleges and in the Univsrsity at large. They also assumed that granting more power to the University must not to be made to the detriment of the religious colleges and their curricula In an article published in the Manitoba Free Press, Reverend George B ryce of Manitoba College recounts the provisions which were to serve as a safeguard for the colleges: "Some little anxiety had ken shown by the different religious bodies concemed, as to their liberty of
30 University of Manitoba Historicai Notes. 23.
Minutes of University Cod.1,262-263. conscience and action in the working out of the universi ty. I t was provided that each affiliated college should have "the entire management of its intemal affairs, studies. worship, and religious teaching. " 32
The series of events that Iead to the amending of the University Act to provide for professorships in the U of M were very sigtrjficant in the development of its religious ethos. An observation can be made to support this assertion. Reverend Bryce accurately recounted the provisions made for the religious coileges subsequent to the University's gaining official status as a teaching institution but he failed to discuss the looming philosophical implications of the ameiidnient. III lfis own words, "The act [of 18771 was framed with the plan of, for a time, haviag the university a mere examining and not a teaching body, and of affiliating the colleges, so that they might have a large shore in the directiun of the universi ty " [i ta1 ics mine] -33 To summarize, as Taché and the traditionaiists üriderstood the Act, it made absolutely no provision for the University to teach. 1t was onl y upon the discovery of alterations to the Act, which were made outside the course of due process, that the issue was revisited. And as we have seen, the amendment secured by University Council opened the way for the University to instnict students affiliated with the religious colleges. A sharp redirection in the course of the University had begun. Con- to the intentions of the Council, power was secured for the University at the expense of the religious colleges. It was erroneous for Council to assume that the influentid role of teaching granted to the University would ~iotweaken the colleges. In effect, the broad authority of the colleges had ken rescinded. Once having "a large share in the direction of the universi ty," they were now restricted to manage on1 y their "interna1 affairs." Conversely, the U of M, formerly a mere examining body, could now establish
32 Manitch Free Press. November 17.1900.9.
33 Ibid.. 9. professorial chairs and develop its ~umculain conjunction with the increasingly secular agenda of University Council and the provincial governent The volatile issue of provisions for teaching would not disappear quickly. It would be encountered again in 19û6-1907. While permission was granted to the
University to provide for teachers in 1900, it would be some time before they were hired.
As the events that transpired between 1û76-1900 are considered, it would seem probable that a key figure should emerge to explain more fully the subsequent developrnents to the religious nature of the U of M. Was there an individual who played a monumental role in the delicate diplornatic processes that lead to the secularization of the U of M? To address this question the intentions of Reverend George Bryce must be considered.
1876- 1904: The Btyce Factor
In her thesis entitled "George Bryce, Manitoba Scientist, Clergyman, and Historian, 1844- 193 1," Catherine Logan Macdonald analyzes Bryce's "attitudes, mores and convictions in an attempt to reconstruct his worldview."34 Her reconstruction is a well-documented, if not complimentary, discussion of Brycefs inability to integrate his faith with public and academic trends that affected education. From the onset of his religious and public life in Manitoba, Bryce was involved in the evolution of the public school system. He advocated the provision for mediation in pst-secondas, education and was an integral player in the cooperation ktween the Church and Province of Manitoba as the first inspecter of Winnipeg.> schools, starting in 18'7'7.35
34 ~atberineLogan Micdonalà, "Gectrge Bryce, Manitoba Scientist, Ciagyman. and Historian. 1844-193 1," M. A. thesis, Dept of History, University of Manitoba, 1983, ii. These matters of religion and education in which Bryce was deeply involved were so controversial that he and the Minister of Education, Hon. Clifford Sifton, communicated by telegram in cipher. He also acted as a "vimial secret agentwfor Sifton and Sir Wilfrid Laurier, idorming them of the ongoings in the French-Catholic schmls. He thought that "the Catholic schools had no standards for teacher education, were poorly inspected, used questionable textbooks and devoted time to religious instruction that would have been better used for secular leaming."36 As a professor of science and a supporter of progressive education, Bryce questioned the merits of sectananism. His
attitude was not su much an expression of traditional anti-Catholicism of the day, but of a
growing secularism that was to mark his dealings with the clergy and state for the rest of his professional career. Published in 1859, the Origin of Species was hotly contended during this era. Bryce wrote and spoke much of Danvin's theory of evolution, finnly embracing it As a scientist, he seemed to be consumed with the ramifications of such a theory. This was no insignificant cornmitment for a member of the Presbyterian clergy. Y et he "satisfied himself that these theories did not affect the bais of his religious faitl1."3~Thisin itself is unusual, as Darwin's theory cast into doubt most tenets of Christianity: Gd's special plan for humankind, his lordshp over nature, his initiative and supremacy over humankind, and his provision of spiritual awareness.38 In short, two vitai Christiui doctrines were attacked: Divine creation and the uniqueness of the human soul.39 Bryce's world view enabled him to defend vigorousl y both Daminian evolution and a zealous spiiitual life. A superficial analysis of Bryce's life would confim that he
36 Ibid.. 15-16.
37 Ibid.. 23.
38 Ibid-. 37.
39 cm. 4. was an active member of the Presbyterian church and college and played an integral role in establishing the University of Manitoba His title of Reverend, particularly during this era, would imply a deeply religious man devoted to the affairs of his faith. His sermons, delivered within the confines of the church, give the impression that his faith was the pervading force of his Me. Addressing the Geneml Assembl y of the Res byterian Church in 1903, Bryce declared that, like Cnrist, they were to "seek and save the lost. The church's mission is to bring the gospel to a worid sunk in sin and misery."a He was adamant that the church should not compromise its message to attract the cul tured: " .. . if what is wanted is culture with the supematural eliminated, then perish this suggestion of the Sanballats and Tobiahs, for Christianity with the supematural left out will die, as it deserves to do.... We have tu preach the gospel [and] ... win souls to Christ"41 Y et, upon close observation, Bryce's life was driven by an incoherent philosophy of life that was chamcterized by an increasing orientation toward subjectivistic empincism. Even his preaching reflected the compartmentalization of his beliefs, which enabled him to embrace full y both religious and secular causes. Full investigation and an intelligible explanation of the facts was "for the college... not for the pulpit... what we need in the pulpit and the Sunday school class is the kemal, the tmth as it is in Christ Jesus. That only can save a soul."4* This distinction did not infer that the colleges were somehow void of spiritual authority. In fact, Bryce was convinced that they were the direct result of divine initiative: "God has given Our people means ... He has put it into the hart of Our church to found and equip in the greater centres of population five colleges, rnanned by men of learning and spintual p~wer."~~
Rev. George Bryce, The All-Dominating Wok' Openhg Semon of the General Assembly of the hbyterian Church in Canada, Preached at Vaucouver, B. C., June 9, 19û3.2.
41 Ibid.. 2-3.
42 Ibid.. 4.
43 Ibid., 5. Manitoba College of the U of M was one of the five that Bryce referred to in his sermon. Despite his obvious difficulty integrating the spheres of the religious and the
secular, Bryce asserted that the church and the university were to be complimentaq
expressions of Gd's work in the wodd: "1 have heard in the Gened Assembly an anti thesis made between the pastor and the professor. This is wrong. They are dl needed.
The hand cannot say to the foot, 1 have no need of thee. Al1 are on the same level, except
th,that when we make our distorted human distinctions, the Lord may Say some day,
The first shall be Iast, and the last shall be first.'"4~Bryce stated publicly that the role of the Christian, including that within the university, was not to be taken lightly: "This God- given oppominity brings with it a heavy responsibility. The ascending Lord said, Go ye into al1 the world and preach the gospel to every creature' .... Will the gospel reach the corners of Our land? Two instruments are in Our hands -- the ... school and the church. The fields are white for the harvest! "45 Despite this clear affirmation of biblical evangelism, Bryce cannot be found mentioning his faith within the Minutes of University Council,*at meetings pertaining to the U of M, or in his "Inner History of the University of Manitoba," published in the Manitoba Free Press.
As a cleric and professor in an evangelical college, Bryce would succumb to dichotomistic thinking in order to accommodate his growing ailegiance to secular endeavors. Surprisingly, Bryce did not seem to be bothered by the contradictions that marked his mode of thought. In some cases it appears as though he was aware of the contradiction but had relegated the conflicting elements into two separate categones, the sacred and the secular, in order to proceed. As has been seen, Danuinian evolu tion
* Whiie this aione is not grounds for concIuding that Bryce was content to relegate his faith to the reiigious reaim, it is noteworthy that during his tenure on Council many of his cdleagues were rnembers of the clergy and some did discuss matters of faith during Council meetings. apparently had no affect upon his religious faiih. The natural result of this simplistic reasoning was an inability to integrate complex issues at the core of the secularist ideal.
This can be seen in Bryce's educational policy concerning religion. As Macdonald explains,
There was a definite distinction in his mind between religious exercises and religious instdm. The latter, he believed, was the responsibility of the church and should have no place in the public schod. Religious exercises, as sanctioned by the Schds Advisory Board of which he was a member in 1890, coasisted of a iist of approved scriptural passages, a short fonn of prayer, and the Lord's Prayer. To Bryce, these exercises were admiraMy non-sectarian in charactw and provide the right tone for public schds: non- denominational but not "Godless." They were, moreover, held entirely at the option of the trustees md no pupii was compeiied to attend th-* Bryce's policy reveals much about his understanding of the role of religion in
society. To him, the contexi of the situation warrantai certain attention. However, inconsistencies rernained. Public religious exercises were acceptable, while religious instruction was not. 1t appedas though Bryce was trying to avoid potential conflict between those of differing religious persuasions. In effect, the lowest common denominator, religious f~nnc,were to be employed. Bryce was content with the nebulous ideals that rested somewhere between the beliefs of the participating denominations and virtual godlessness. This uncanny ability to compartrnentaiize his beliefs characterized Bryce as an educator as well as a ciergyman. Even from the pulpit, the result was a propensity to affirm the values he considered to be good wi thout analyzing them. These cherished values could only be maintained through difficult rationalizations.47 Among hem was Bryce's contention that scientific knowledge was the result of rigomus intellectml exercise, while the intellectuality of theology was insufficient. Bryce avoided the label of anti-intellectualism but restncted i nquiry to spheres of his own determination. He was consumed with the promotion of science in Manitoba College, the University of
46Macdonald. 17.
47 Ibid.. 3 1. Manitoba, and even in his pulpit, but was proud to declare in 1903 that he "never preached a sectarian sermon; he never had the time."48 Ironically, Darwin found a home in his study, church, and college w hile thoughtful Christian life and doctrine was often treated as a welcomed guest.
Bryce was so affected by dichotomized thinking that it seemed to be an
unconscious part of his existence. He was plagued by an inability to address serious contradictions on rnatters pertaining to his faith and work Perhaps a parhal explanahon on be found in his pragmatic outlook on life.
Bryce's books, pamphlets, semons, and comspondence... does not reveai a rigorously systematic woridview characterized by the weii delineated arguments.... His life was too active and his pmonality too impatient for that W of intelied apprmch to the worid At the same tirne, certain strongiy macked personality traits gave form and direction to bis way of thinlcing as weii as his behaviour. These traits were as evident in his writing as they were in bis teaching and political activity. His character - optimistic, restless, stubborn, romantic, self-important -- dictated the way in which he ratiouaüzed his behanour and put iîs stamp on the inteiiectuai underpnniog of bis worldview~ Pragmatism, rather than Christian principles, was often his source of direction. When conflict threatened the im plemen tation of his educational agenda, a strong, determined personality would secure his success. Unlike Tache, who was the embodiment of Red River cooperation, Bryce was often perceived to be self-serving. James Robertson, a clerical peer and enthusiast of the
U of M, was known to have said that "Bryce's strident expression of his opinions often made hirn difficul t to deal wi th." 50 His aioofness, brashness, lack of warmth and kindness, and "his well-developed sense of his own importance made him a great many enemies during his life."51 Among hem was the Principal of Manitoba College, John Mark King, who crushed Bryce's hopes of ascending to that position. "His deep
48 ~ryce,3.
49 Macdonald, 32.
Ibid.. 24.
Ibid.. 25. resentment of King causeci him to take every opportunity to undermine the Principal's authority and to make his own initiatives without King's approval. On at least one occasion these tactics were considered serious enough to warrant disciplinary action by the Senate of the College." 52 To his credit, Bryce's secular vision for the U of M eventually led to its inclusion of non-religious curricula He introduced sciences to the U of M through determineci efforts in Council and the subsequent procurernent of a large endowment for professonal chairs. A University bound by the traditions of parochial schools would never have made such advancernents. In sumrnary, though, it can be concluded that Reverend Bryce was often characterized by personal ambition and an incongruous understanding of the role of religion in education. Unable to adequately and reasonably integrate the claims of science and Christianity, he was left with a hollow rationalization for subjective beliefs. He was enamoreci by the appeal of scientific inquiry and the potential for personal recognition in its expansion to the West The U of M would be the home of that endeavor, overshadowing his allegiance to his clerid role as part of Manitoba College. The divergence of Bryce's loyalty from the centrality of personal and community faith to the Danvinian ethic is perplexing at best. To explain it to some degree. it must be remembered that "Bryce's king was rooted in the secular."s
The edy years in the development of the religious ethos at the U of M can largely be attributed to the influence of Reverend Bryce. Severai factors cm be identifiai to support this claim. Specificali y, it will be of vitai importance to discuss Bryce's involvement in the confemng of professonal chairs to the U of M and the subsequent loss of autonomy for the three religious colleges. This rnarked the initial identifiable opportunity for the seed of secularization, which was the mot of Bryce's life, to become the mot of the University of Manitoba in subsequent years.
19044917: The Secularist Factor
It has already been established that the original constiation of the University of Manitoba did not inciude provisions for teaching outside of the three religious colleges.
As TacM had hoped, perfect autonomy was afforded the colleges to preserve and protect the religious beliefs of their students. Clearly, a failure to establish this, not as a mere provision, but as a central and functional part of the University, would have negated the possibili ty of i ts establishment. While heated debate trailed the question of whether the
University should ever have been given the right to teach, it canot be denied that the religious colleges original1y held virtuall y dl authori ty to determine the course of the institution. That institution, as we have seen, was a cooperative of three rnoderately evangelical rnissionary denominations. Of first importance was the vitai role of the Christian faith as expressed in the participating colleges. The traditional. conservative St Boniface College was not particularly interested in the benefits of secular education. Archbishop Machray and others in St. John's and Manitoba College favored the graduai incorporation of teaching chairs in the sciences in order to provide students with a recognized, comprehensive education. Coupled with this moderate position, these insti tutional "evolutionistsn were commi tted to due process and faimess with respect to al1 colleges. The more radical "secularists" were epitomized by Reverend Bryce. He gave to this body of opinion the religious experience and Presbyterian respectabili ty that had characterized his peers, most notably Reverend James Robertson, pastor of Knox Church. Tkse qualities alone would have been insufficient in swaying divergent parties to adopt a course of action for the young University. However, years of council experience with the Presbyterian church and college, as well as with the provincial and fedeml govements, gamered Bryce the political savvy necessary to shape the U of M in an unprecedented manner. As a rnember of University Council, Reverend Bryce was in a position of great influence as teaching chairs were considered. Contrary to the wishes of St Boniface
College, Bryce helped to lead the thrust to arnend the constitution, convincing members of St. John's and Manitoba College, as well as the provincial govemment, to support the vote in favor of professorships. In addition to his role on Council, his visi bility arnong Presbyterians, as well as with the School Board and signi ficant govemment officiais, enabled him to sway the opinions of a those who would eventually endorse constitutional change. Bryce's shrewdness was aIso exerted in his private, and sometimes questionable dealings, with Attorney-General Royal, who would introduce the bill to amend the University Act of 1877.
By 1900 legal provisions had been made to set up teaching chairs at the U of M. Bryce's drearn was becoming a reali ty. Now finances had to be raised to crder to implement the proposeci chairs. This was a seemingly insurmountable task, as the colleges and the provincial govemment were financially strained. Despite the passing of the amendment, rigorous debate still raged over the ramifications of secular chairs. Not wanting the momenhirn to revert in favor of the traditionalists, further delaying professorships, one of the secularists look action. "Largely through the offices of Rev. Dr.
B ryce, a subscription to the funds of the University of $20,000.0 was secured from the late Lord Strathcona, payable in four installments of $5,000.00 each .... In view of this contribution and the prospective increase in the annual revenue it was decided to launch upon the establishment of five chairs... physics, botony, chemistry, physiology, and mathematics. " 3 This monumental contribution from the estate of the great rail way magnate had enabled the U of M at last to becorne a teaching university with a self- standing Facutly of Science. B ryce's action virtuali y ended the philosophical battle that had raged for twenty-seven years. Reflecting on the provincial government's $250 gmnt that had been given the
University of Manitoba in 1877, Bryce refiected; "1t was ludicrous tc, think of beginning a
University thus, but the majestic elm or oak was once a mere tiny seed.'" Similarly, the seed of secularism that had been planted by Bryce would continue to grow. As one of the fint three professors hired by the University, Bryce would continue to exert pressure and influence upon the University cornmunity. According to Macdonald, "Bryce was far from satisfied. Through the pressure of various exigencies, the science taught at the University of Manitoba was a rather conservative and limited science. Lack of money was a perennial problem. The other limited problem was the necessity of making compromises in curriculum planning and examination standards between the various shades of opinion on scientific matters found in the affiliateci colleges."56 Despite the tension, Bryce would continue to promote his "secular faith."57 The seed of secularism would indeed grow, as evidenced in the official recognition of Darwinian theory after 1915.58
By 1904 the U of M had experienced a noticeable philosophical shift. While the colleges continued to provide Christian instruction, the emphasis was clearly placed on secular education. The three original chairs, furnished from the religious colleges, were now replaced with six new professors who had not ken associateci with the U of M in its inaugural years. "... When the new men began to teach in October of 1904, a new spirit
54 University of Manitoba Histoxical Notes. 24.
55 Manitoba Free Ress, November 17.1900.9.
56 Macdodd, 46.
"Ibid.. 56.
Ibid.. 45. entered the University of Manitoba It was the spirit of professional scholarship, of men comrnitîed to the widening of their fields of knowledge, keen to teach and devoted to research. The classes in science began to grow even more rapidly, and the expansion of the University after 1904 was in great part the result of the eager new professional spint " 59
The end of an era was confirmeci that sarne year with the death of Archbishop
Robert Machray. As one of the founding fathers, Machray had led St. John's College into the University with the understanding that "religion and education were not to be divorced, but to go hand in hand in happy accord. Acknowledging fully the necessity of a wide and efficient secular education, he strenuously opposed the complete secularisation (sic) of the schools on public as well as religious grounds."m It was said that "No one exercised so great an influence on the University's development as did the Archbishop, and its flourishing condition is largely due to his bmd and liberal views on education, his knowledge at first hand of University work, and the wisdom and tact he showed in reconciling differing and sometimes sharply opposed opinions. It was in recognition of his great services to education that at his death the Govemment of Manitoba decreed that he should be given a State Funeral."61 While the honor was befitting of his achievements, Machray never aspired to be the recipient of secular tribute. The years of deadlock that reflected Machray's cautious approach to secular education were about to give way to the unrestrained spirit of the secularists who followed Bryce.
The evolution of the religious ethos of the U of M would continue to be influenced by secularists. As early as 1906 the teaching debate was again revisited. On Febmry 22, Reverend Bryce suggested that rk "University undertake teaching in
59 Morton. 67.
60 Machray. vii.
61 Ibid.. xiii. History and Political Science [and] that as smn as fun& permit, professors be appointed in modem language, engineering, mining, ... and law."2 Later that year, Canon Murray, W. A. McInîyre, and others strongiy urged in council that the University be empowered to teach al1 subjects. This was met favorably by the Provincial Govemment, as Premier Roblin declared: "The desirability of an enlarged and betterequipped University is as manifest and as fully recognized by the members of the Govemment as it is by the members of your ~ouncil."63At this junction Archbishop Machray of St John's wamed Council that placing the U of M into the hands of the govemment would lead to its disinkgration, while Father Lewis Drummond of St. Boniface College invited them to consider that the abandonment of an integrated education of faith and Iearning would resuit in materialism.6" This admonishrnent echoed that of Archbishop Tache, given with even greater fervency twenty-ni ne years earlier. Waning, the tradi tional ist voice could still faintly be heard.
The theconflicting bodies of opinion ~wuldcontinue to vie for power.
Disagreements arose over govemance, curricula, and Council representation. The secularists were gaining a larger balance of control wi th each successive round of negotiations. With respect to the original blueprint for the U of M, their plan seerned radical; "[they] wished to cut al1 formal ties with the [religious] colleges and would have excluded them from the Senate as well as from the board."6sIn effect, they disregarded the wishes of Machray and Drummond and pursued their own agenda, recommending that the U of M embrace al1 branches of secular instruction. This would remove from the
62 Minutes of University Council ,IV, 179.
63 Ibid., 256.26û-269.
64 Morton. 72.
65 Ibid.. îû-79. colleges the right to teach secular subjects from a Christian perspective, tinalizing the divorce of religion and education that Machray and Tachd had vehemently opposeci. With the rapid abandonment of Christian ideals came a debate on the value of classical education. In a speech of an hour's duration, a mernber of council had argued in favor of abolishing the requirement of two foreign languages for university entrance.
After refemng to those insisting on the preservation of the prerequisite as "ante- diluvians," Father Blaine of St Boniface College rose to protest: "For 1 belong to those who think it a cornmendable and useful thing to have command of two or more languages in addition to one's mother tongue, and it is well known, Reverend Chancellor and members of the Council, that the Ho1 y Scripnires tell us that the ante-diluvians were 'of one language and one speech.' And thereat there was a great din of laughter... when order was restored. the council voted 18 to 16 to retain two languages .... This was the last stand of the old order. .. the substitution of popular for academic standards in the university [had taken place]. "66 In 1917 a bill was introduced which legaiized defacto control of the University of Manitoba by the secularists. The University of Manitoba Amendment Act vimially nuIli fied and reversed the original constitution of 1877.1t stated that "the following resolution was passed by forty-four votes in favor and none against, four members refraining from voting: That as a Council we approve of the principle of the draft Bill whereby the goverment, conduct, management and control of the University are vested in a Board of Govemors appointeci by the Lieutenant-Govemor-in-Council.'It will thus be seen that while the Govemment is recommending to the Legislature the reorganization of the University, the corporation of the University has itself asked for and endorsed the principle of the present proposal."67 1s there a feasible explanation of how the
67 Univkty of Manitoba Historical Notes, 53. Govenunent of Manitoba could undertake such drastic measures? In effect, autonomy and goveming powers that once lay in the hands of the religious colleges were stripped away and given to the provincial govemment. The acting University Council and Legislative Assembly jointly assumed that since an act of provincial legislation birthed the
University of Manitoba forty years earlier, it retained the power to rescind or rewrite the constitution. The wishes of the secularists to completely sever ties with the religious colleges were not granted, but the Amendment officially ended Christian control of the University of Manitoikt APATHY OR PROACTIVITY?: RELIGION AND CULTURE AT THE THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA
1917-1945 - The Earïy Years: The Marginaluation of the CoUeges
The amendment of 1917 officially marked the beginning of a new era for the University of Manitoba Once controlled by the religious colleges, the University was now completely in the hands of the secularists. Their painstaking cornmitment to
transfonn the University was finaily king realized. It had been an arduous task, considering the structure of the ruling body. The University Act of 1877 had provided for a Council of twenty-six members, twenty-one of which were selected by and from the
three religious colleges. Three of the remaining five seats were representatives of Convocation, which were also rnembers of the colleges. Statisticaily, 92% of the govemance of the University of Manitoba was under the control of the religious colleges.
The remaining two seats were furnished by the Board of Education. 1 Now, forty years later, the Amendment of 1917 had eliminated religious control of the U of M. A Board of Govemors, consisting of nine mem bers, was created to direct ail affairs of the University. Section nine of the amended constitution made no provision
University of Manitoba Historical Notes. 50.
70 for college influence in the govemance of the university.2 "No person shail be a member of the Board who is at the same time a member of ... any affiliated college or the goveming board of any such affïliated college. Instead, governrnent-appointed mernbers
of the Board were given exclusive authority to "regulate its own proceedings, to make al1 appointments and fix al1 salaries in connection with the University, to have charge of the
trust fund, manage the land grant, to take care of the property. to provide for buildings, to determine fees, to establish chairs and courses of instruction, correspondence and extension courses, and to decide finally on al1 matters of University policy."3 The perfect autonomy that had ken desired by the religious colleges was now the sole possession of the goveming University. Administrative accountability, that had once tempered the actions of the colleges and ensured that secular and governrnental voices were heard, had now disappeared. The Board of Govemon had vimial dictatorial powers over the affairs of the U of M. It was accountable only to itself and had sweeping jurisdiction over teaching, cumcula, finances, and every other conceivabie matter pertaining to the direction of the University. In political Lems, the changes that befell the U of M were revolutionary in nature. The secularist agenda was now firmly in place, leaving the religious colleges to identify their own role in the new order of the U of M. Both the govemment of Manitoba and the Chancellor of the University heartily affirmeci the new order. Honorable R. S. Thomton, the Minister of Education, stated in his address to move the second reading of the University Amendment Act that
Times change and conditions change with them. New views of education are beginning to prevail. Less stress is king laid on the merely academic. and more stress on those subjects which have practicai as weii as educational value. Just as there has been going on an evolution which in frfteen yem has changed the University fmm an examinhg and degree conferring body to a faidy comprehensive teaching institution, so in the coming years further changes and developments will occur. Ail of these can be more adequately dealt with by having a Board of Governors in cantrol. We submit tbis proposed
Ibid.. 54.
Ibid.. 54. amendment to meet our present conditions and provide for future development of the umvcrsity-4 The Most Reverend Archbishop Matheson, Chancellor of the U of M, concurred: "As a member of the outgoing University Council throughout well nigh the entire period of its history, and as its presiding officer for a goodly number of years, 1 am convinced that the change made is a wise one and will be of great advantage to the University. "5 From the perspective of the secular governing Board, the University would undoubtedly be at an advantage. However, it must be questioned whether the rapid change in govemance of the U of M affected its religious ethos. Greater understanding of that evolutionary process will help to determine the judiciousness of the University Act that marked its beginning. Before andyzing the processes of change that occurred within the U of M, the role of education in a broader context should be considered. To a large degree, North American universities had been established within a Christian theological and moral universe. They intended io educate an emerging generation of laity and clergy that would help to shape the course of the new worlda6Despite their smail size, "their educational philosophy was clear and unequivocal: to propagate knowledge and to prepare upright leadership within a Christian society. "7 Burgeoning population growth and westward expansion caused a rapid influx in the num ber of students enrolling in pst-secondary education. This caused a demand for larger, improved facilities and equiprnent that the denominational colleges could not afford. Sensing the pressure to compete with schools in the east, colleges accepteci a supplementation of resources from pnvate, corponte, and govemment interests. "A change in the financial backing of these institutions eventually
Ibid., 58.
Ibid.. 60.
Hunier. James Davidsm. Evmgelicalism: Ine Coming Generation. (Chicago: The University d Chicago hs,19û7),165.
Ibid.. 166. resul ted in a change in their control and administration. Prominent businessman replaced ministers and denominational bureaucrats as trustees, and educationally credentialed laymen replaced clergymen as college presidents and high-level administrators."s As has been demonstrated, these changes and others have transpirecl at the
U of M. The growing Red River Settlement was in dire need of a university, and the three existing religious colleges appeared to have a head start in that direction. They were already providing quality education for members of their respective denominations. The subsequent federation of colleges around the U of M would soon require financial assistance. The government, as well as the charter donation for professonal chairs by a railway magnate, provided the capital necessary for development. Not unlike the macrocosmic scenario evident in North America at the time, the U of M succumbed to the philosophical revolution that, in effect, usurped its original purpose. As secular interests began to control North Arnerica's universities, a deepening chasm developed between religion and theology and other academic disciplines. Moral philosophy, which contributeci to the integration of faith and leaming, became obsolete. Naturalistic science as exemplifieci by Darwin not only lead to the entrenchment of the scientific method in the university, but it implied the redundancy of Christian theology. "Science, once the handmaiden of morality, [was now] an ally of agnosticism. "9This abrupt shift, both ideological and pragmatic, constituted the secularization of the university. Relegated to their respective jurisdictions, religious colleges preserved their traditional distinctions, but their mandate to influence the institutions they once founded was severely weakened. As committed evangelicals and clergymen, many now faced the challenge of propagating their faith from an insular, collegiate environment. This aptly characterizes the three founding religious colleges of the U of M in 1917. The second distinguishable phase in the development of the religious ethos of the
U of M is somewhat unwieldy. Between 1917-1945 signifiant changes took place arnong
two of the founding colleges. The Presbyterian contingent, housed in Manitoba College, had cwperated with the Methodists' Wesley College since 1928. After ten years of negotiations, Manitoba College and Wesley College amalgamated to become United
College. Earlier, Manitoba College had withdrawn from the teaching of arts, engaging in the exclusive study of theology. In 1937, partial1y due to the strained relations hip between English and French-speaking Catholics, St. Paul's becarne affiliated with the
U of M. Meanwhile, the relationship between St. Boniface College and the U of M was tenuous at best I t had decided to remain in affiliation wi th the University on the grounds that it could offer Latin Philosophy and conduct examinations in French. 10 To compound
rnatters further, Brandon College, affiliated with the Baptists, was made an affiliate of the
University of Manitoba in 1938.11 The common denominator in the development of the affiliate religious coileges was the tendency to retreai from the mainstream of university life. Residential schools, the abandonment of the teaching of liberal arts, and an emphasis on sectarian theology chancterized both Manitoba and St. Boniface College. The secularists' proposed resolutions of 1910 were coming to fruition; the religious element was king minimized. Manitoba College had favored the abandonment of the liberal arts for some time. Oniy their union with Wesley College, which offered liberal arts courses, comected them to the academic life of the University. St. Boniface College, on the other hand, was simply trying to maintain its distinctives since losing its autonomy as a result of the 1917 amendment. Its French-Catholic perspective, made more conspicuous w i th the affiliation of St. Paul's College, further alienated it from the heart of the University. Taché had
IoMinutes of University Cornal, VI.. 297.510.
History of the University of Manitoba [l] http:llwww.imianitoùa.ca [Accessed 2û Jan 19961. onginally declared that he would not adjoin St Boniface to the University of Manitoba if
religious protection was not guaranteed. Now, their French-Catholic faith could flourish, but only in segregatioa To explore the religious nature of the U of M during this complex pend in its developrnent, it would be helpfui to isolate an example of the enduring, moderately
evangelical motif. With St. Boniface College and Manitoba College having retreated to an insular existence, whether by politicai sabotage or by choice, only one of the founding
colleges remained -- St. John's Coilege. In addition to king a representation of the moderate evangelical position taken by the three founding colleges, St John's
exemplified the optimistic conservatism that em bodied the evolutionist stance on the development of the U of M. For these two important reasons St. John's College will serve
as a ose study in our exploration of the evolving religious ethos of the U of M from 1917-1945. In his thesis entitled "A History of St. John's College, Winnipeg," William John Fraser chronicles the development of the college and gives special attention to the relationship between the College and the University of Manitoba. Of particular relevance to this chapter is Fraser's handling of observable change within the College. As a precursor to what may be concluded, it can be cleari y seen that St. John's was at the
forefront of Christian education as a college of the U of M. Prior to the venerable Archbishop Machray's death, he reported that "In 1897 there were 48 of the [Anglican diocesan] clergy from the College, including 11 of the Indian missionaries; there were other graduates of the College in eight of the western and north-western Dioceses. Indeed, if clergymen had not been attracted from time to tirne to the American Church, the College would for years have amply supplied the wants of the Diocese. There are
clergy from the College in ten of the American Dioceses." l2 Machray's death signified
l2 Fraser, William John. "A Histary of St John's Cdlege. Winnipeg." (MA. Tbesis. U of M Dept. of History, 1%6), 8 1. the end of an era as it coincided with the shift in the role of the University from an examining and degree-confemng body to a governing and teaching institution. The following year, Matheson succeeded Machray as Archbishop of Rupertsland and as
Warden of St. John's College. 13 Samuel Pritchard Matheson was the son of a Selkirk settler in the parish of Kildonan and the grandson of the founder of St Paul's parish school. He later became one of Archbishop Machray's first students, enrolling in St. John's College in 1866. By 1874 Matheson's scholastic aptitude was rewarded and he was given teaching responsibilities. He went on to complete his Bachelor of Divinity degree, followed by his installation as
Canon in 1881. The next year Matheson was appointed as St. John's Chair in Exegetical
Theology. 14 His accomplishments were not limited to the sphere of his college for in 1908 he was made the Chancellor of the U of M, a position he would hold until his retirement in 1934. l5 It would be largely up to Matheson to determine the place of St. John's, and its embodiment of moderate evangelicalism, in the new era of the teaching university. 16
As an advocate of an intermediary voice between the traditionalists and the secularists, St. John's opted to embrace liberal arts courses while maintaining its distinctive as a theological college. Up to one-third of St. John's College students enrolled with the desire to enter into Christian ministry. Many of these had been sent with the financial support of participating missionary societies. Some studied only theology, while others supplemented their educatioii with liberal arts courses. 17 In addition to the rigorous
l3 From Rural Pmkiand r~ UrhCenrer . 135.
l4 Ibid.. 135.
l5 Ibid.. 135136.
l6 ~raser.81.
l7 Ibid.. 86. academic demands of college life, students could voluntarily involve themselves in one of the emerging religious societies. The religious ethos of St John's, and perhaps the University as a whole, "was heightened and its evangelical work stimulated, by the formation of [these] societies [italics mine]." l8 The Brotherhood of St. Andrew was one society that reflected the life of its predecessor. As the biblical zccount explains, Andrew " heard what John had said and.. . followed Jesus. The fint thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him,
'We have found the Messiah,' .... And he brought him to Jesus.' 19 This evangelistic propensity in Andrew was endorsed and soiidifïed by Jesus, who spoke these memorable words to Andrew and his brother, "Come, follow me, and 1 will make you fishen of men.' 20 So two mles were established to preserve and expand the ministq of St. Andrew: "To pray each day for the spread of Christ's Kingdom, and to endeavor to bring one soul each week to ~hnst."*lIt is not clear if this evangelism was done at the University of Manitoba; however, a society was fomed to support Christian mission in the Northwest and internationally. Graduates served the dioceses of Brandon, Edmonton, Calgary and Moosonee. To prepare students for indigenous missions, St. John's even offered the Cree language. "One student who was active in the Society, A. J. Williams, after graduation... left Canada to engage in missionary work in the Diocese of Honan,
China. " 22 One certain mission field for the evangelistic among St. John's students was that of the new churches of the diocese. In fact, this work was so urgent that a request to
l8 Ibid.. W.
l9 John 1: 4042 (NIV).
Matîhew 4: 19 (NW).
21 Fraser. 87.
22 Ibid.. W.102. provide services on altemate, instead of consecutive weekends, was denied The demiind for theological s tudents was perpetuall y felt. " FOr the nineteen qualified students there were seventeen mission churches, each requiring a studentnBReligious groups were reported to have flourished during this new era of the U of M. St. John's College Magazine drew attention to the importance of personal developrnent stating that "St John's has ever stood for the meidea of education - the development of the bodily, the intellectual, and the spiritual sides of our complex nature -- having as its goal the character üf the Christian gentleman."24 This emphasis on the preerninence of Christian character was in stark contrast to the pursuit of scientific and technological advancement as advocated by the secularists of the U of M, both in the goveming and student bodies. By the end of the First World War the U of M was prepared to assume full responsibility for the education of Mani tobans. Until that time the exclusive teaching of philosophy was conducted by the colleges. This was the oniy remaining evidence that the University was dependent upon the religious colleges. In 1920 that also changed as the
University established its first Chair of Philosophy. From that point on, it was apparent that Wesley and St. John's Colleges were competing against the University for enrollment in the liberal arts.25 While the Anglican college did not have to cornpete with any other of its denomination, incentives were still welcome to encourage enrollment. Walter Burman, the Acting Headmaster of the college, raised funds for scholarships and bursuries. Among them were "four Society for Propagation of the Gospel Bursuries, three Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge Studentships, adthe Diocesan Fund for the Training of Theology Students."*6 These scholarships continued to serve as a philosophical
23 Ibid.. 88.
24 Ibid., 89.
25 Ibid., 95.
26 Ibid.. 97. demarcation between the motivating principles for recniitment of an evangelical college and a secular university. Des pi te these di fferences, St John's College was detemined to act as an agent of
change for the pater University community. It was known for its missionary interests, but it was also concemed about influencing students in the U of M. In 1923 permission was granted for St. John's to conduct a two year course in religious education. Compulsory for theology students, it would also include units on the history and philosophy of education as well as educational psychology. It was designed to attract those preparing to be teachen; however, the coune proved to be unpopular with both theology and education students, and was eventually dropped from the cumc~lum.2~It should be noted that of the three founding colleges, St. John's was indisputably the most willing to engage the University in Christian thought and action; "they were not isolationists, for they [held] the view ... that St. John's should be an integral part of the university."28To this end, one "Johnian"becarne the editor of the University's student paper, the Manitoban, in 1930, and was elected as the President of the University of Manitoba Studen t's ~nion.29 The defalcations* of the Bursar of the College, which cost the University of Manitoba $971,086.95and St. John's its entire endowment fund, caused great disgrace
and hardship to an already irnpoverished community.30 Teachers salaries were reduced and financial restrictions were required throughout the college's operations budget.
Ibid.. 98.
28 Ibid.. 101.
29 Ibid.. 102.
* John Machray, (3hairmanof the Board of the U of M aiid Bmar of St John's College. dong with bis accountant, embezzied money by utilizbg a cornplex system of transfening securities that auditors failed to detect for several years.
30 Minutes of the Board of Govemrs of the University of Manitoba. April. 1935.298. However, by the end of the Depression St. John's remained committed to its mandate, "emphasizing its importance to the Church and community at large, as both a supplier of clergy for western dioceses and a center of lay education, where 'Religion is assumed as the basis of moraîity, and as the solution of social and political problems.'"31
The onset of the Second Worid War threatened to diminish the role of St. John's
College. Many of its students enlisted to serve overseas and the question of the Church's role in higher education was again tabled. Although economic hardship had plagued the college throughout the previous decade, i t had maintained its curriculum in both arts and theology. When the discontinuation of teaching liberal arts was considered, the College decided to maintain the pairing of arts and theology. The College Council reaffirrned its traditional position that education should be under the domain of the Church, particularly during the formative leaming years of univenity life. The pend from 1917 to 1945 was one of adjustrnent for the U of M and its affiliate colleges. The Act to amend the constitution had officidly ended Christian control of the University and the three founding colleges were forced to reevaluate their role in higher education in Manitoba From a logistical perspective, the task of maintaining their intemal programs was arduous enough. The economic challenges of the war years and the interim depression of the 1930s intensified the colleges' resolve to survive and grow. Yet, the ideal of the three founding fathers to integrate faith and education in one university for the province of Manitoba was scarcely visible. The religious colleges and the Christian heritage they espoused had ken thoroughly marginalized. No single factor in the evolution of their ideal had threatened its complete demise, but without renewed vision and effort the Christian contribution to the life of the University of Manitoba would continue t~ dissipate.
Fraser. 117. 1945-1996 - The Latter Years: The Worid at Our Doorstep
The last half of the twentieth century was characterized by rapid social, technological, and cultural change. The years following the Second World War marked the beginnings of a new socio-political order. Globalization of the economy, politics, and even religion have made an impact on Our society. Canadian higher education, and the U of M in particular, were not exempt from these forces of change. One significant feature of this era is the effect of demographic change upon the religious constitution of society and of the smaller communities reflected on university campuses. From 1946-
1966, over lZ,Oûû immigrants to Canada were " tradi tiond immigrants;" those from Europe, South Africa, the United States, New Zealand and Ausualia During that sarne pend, less than eght percent, or approximateiy 9900 immigrants were from the non-
Western world. By 1987, the trend had reversed; just over 40,000 people hailed from traditional nations, while over 100,000 newcorners representing nearly 70% of total immigrants onginated from non-Western countries.32 Changes in the religious affiliation among Canadians reflects this global demographic transference. In 1951 Catholics and Protestants accounted for 95.646 of the total population. Forty years later, they constituted 82.28, while 16.4% of the population was affiiiated with nonChristian religions. More specifically, the ihree denominations that founded the University of Manitoba -- Presbyterian, Anglican, and Roman Catholic,
32 William Gairdner, nie Trouble With Cd(Toro11to: Stoddart, 1994). 410. Note: Al1 figures from 19461966 are from the Department of Immigration Statistics; those from 1981 are fmm Canadian Ress Figures, Feb, 26, 19233. Gairdner's treatment of the immigration issue, as weU as his use of data, is somewhat poiitically and idmlogically motivated. However, his populist appeal does wanant some consideration. made up 65% of Canada's population in 19% ;in 1991 they had diminished to 5628.33 In 1% 1, this same denominational trilogy cons tituted 59.4% of the student body at the University of Manitoba while 17.9% associateci themselves with non-Christian religions
(6.9% stated no alfiliation).34 As will be seen later in this chapter, the relative contraction
of the global community after 1945 contributed to the changing religious nature of the U of M. Simultaneously, St. John's College continued to exert its modest evangeiical influence upon the University comrnunity.
In 1945 St John's College was given an opportunity to further integrate wi th the U of M, reversing a trend of the previous em After the war the University began to offer building sites at the Fort Gany campus to the affiliate colleges. St John's responded most favorably. but a lack of financial resources delayed further action. Although it was the smallest of the affiliate colleges, St. John's experienced further growth under the leadership of Canon Wilmot, who was installed in 1950. Finally, in 1955, St. John's sold its Broadway Avenue property and accepted a site on Dysart ~oad.35This decision brought the college physically closer to the heart of the U of M, and illustrated St. John's intent to play a vital role in the life of the University community. "When the doors of the new buildings opened in 1958, isolation, which had handicapped StJohn's for over half a century, was at an end, and a new era of academic growth in cooperation with the
University beg an.... Students from St. John's were henceforth able to take courses at the University ... while University [students] tmk some undergraduate and graduate courses at St John's in religious studies, philosophy, history, sociology and English."36
33 "Canada at a Glance." Statistics Canada. 1995.3.
34 W. S. F. Pickering. "Retigion and the Undergraduate: A Study of Chauges in the Religous Faith and Practice of Stuclents in the University of Manitoba" (Winnipeg: St. John's Cdlege, 1%5), 2.
35 Fraser . 128. Concwrently, the other founding colleges were increasingly isolationistic in their relationship with the U of M. St Boniface College was content to maintain its French- Catholic culture and religious distinctives in an insular environment, located next to the Cathedra1 at 20Avedela Cathedrale, east of the Red River. Manitoba College. originally housed near the Old Kildonan church, moved nearer the original University buildings to
Ellice Avenue in 1882. Its union with Wesley College to fom United College in 1938 evennially led to the construction of one university for United, known as the University of Winnipeg.
In the face of increased marginalkation for the religious colleges, St. John's attempted to reestablish itself as a vehicle of conciliation. Mile many of the secularis ts had vehemently opposed the Christian presence in the infant U of M, there appeared to be a resurgence of endorsement in their favor. This was seen rnost vividly in the role of the President of the University of Manitoba, H. H. Saunderson. In his book The Saunderson Years, he recounts the events which led to the potential reinstatement of Chnstians as a vi ta1 force on the campus:
The discussions 1 had with the representatives of St. Paul's and St John's gave me considerabie pleasirre, as 1 felt that having them on campus would emphasize not ody our history, originating as we did from the coiieges, but ais0 provide a religious emphasis not available in a lay university. The Board of Govemors was equally pleased with the proposal. As the title for our Campus stood in the name of the Province, we talked to the Goveniment, and after much discussion, we gave each of these CoUeges a renewabIe ninety-nine year lease for a five acre plot on our Campus so that they could operate a teacbing unit w Campus. Each coiiege paid the University one dollar for the lea~e..."~~ This development must be considered in its historical context. In 1917 the Board of Governors replaced the Council as a result of a 16-0 vote in favor of arnending the University Act to rescind Christian control of the U of M. It became illegai for a representative of any of the three religious colleges to be appointed to the Board of Govemors. Members were appointed by the provincial govemment, which was influenced by secularists, both from the University and the Legislature, who wanted to
37 Hugh. H Saunderson. The Sauderson Yenrs (Wipeg: Univesity of Manitoba Rioting Services, 1981). 37-38. minimize al1 signs of a Christian presence in higher education. Now, al1 bodies who had opposed the influence of Christians in 1917 were inviting them back indefinitely. For the first time in nearly forty years apathy toward the Christian Colleges was king addressed. The U of M was not entirely responsible for this entrenched indifference. As we have seen, several influential members of the religious colleges, most notably Reverend George Bryce, were attracted to the secular, nahualistic scientism that was growing in populari ty toward the end of the nineteenth century. As poli tical alliances were made, it became evident that those identifying with evangelical causes were either swayed to endorse the radical position of the secularists, or segregate themselves as advocates of unbending tradi tionalism. The minonty who held the intemediary stance of the evolutionists were outmaneuvered and subsequentl y subjected to marginalization wi thin the University. Perhaps i t was fitting that the rnoderate evangelicals in St. John's College, as earlier advocates of a graduai evolutionary acceptance of the liberal arts and sciences, were those invited to becorne active contributors to the life of the U of M. The long delay served as a catalyst for change, as authorities within the goveming body of the University, noticed the absence of a Christian perspective on education. As President
Saunderson declared, " Intellectual growth and physical development are not enough. Our third area of responsibility is the development of character and the encouragement of things of the spirit It is here that I sense our greatest lack as a univeisity."3* This admission by the Resident of the University of Manitoba reflected the religious vacuum created by the secular policies and amendrnents which had buffeted the University since its inception. Despite the threat of criticism, Saunderson publicly and enthusiastically welcomed the colleges of St. John's and St Paul's to help brighten the
38 Fraser, 129. vacuous spiritual climate of the secular institution. Later, Saunderson reflected on that time in the University's history:
The presence of St. Joha's and St Paul's on the campus gave a new dimension to our work. There are some people who feei tbat a iraiversity should be concerned only with matiers of the intellect, but my idea about higher education embodied some encouragement for sports, and for spiritual matters . If the young people passing through our universities are to becorne the type of citizen labwe need, they need clear minds, healthy bodies and a high regard for things of the spirit Fatber Ryan at St. Paul's and the Reverend Lawrie Wilmot at St JoWs were both men of fie mind and spirif and they started the new and close association of church cdeges with a state university on a very good footiog.39 This renewed cooperation between the religious colleges and the University was arguably the strongest since the infant years of the late 1a10s. It may have ken possible because clear lines of authority were already established. Although it remained a complex relationship, the secular university wielded virtually al1 power and was not threatened by the religious colleges' attempt to re-engage the University community as one of their
President Saunderson's interest in the welfare of religion on the University was not simply a political pawn to be used to his advantage. He seemed to support genuinely their intent to establish an indefinite, credible Christian presence at the Fort Garry campus. Until his installation as Resident of the University of Manitoba, the religious colleges were responsible to garner their own fiscal resources. This had been the case during the pre-university years of the Red River senlement, and had continueci until 1966. The coileges managed to operate within the limits of their resources, which were provided from tuition fees and supporting parochial churches. Although St. John's and St. Paul's colleges were growing in numbers and in educational diversity, they had for concern in 1966, Saunderson could have easily, and rightfully, warned the colleges of the impending consequences of their plight. However, he was fully aware that university education was heavily subsidized in every other sector. The religious colleges, on the other hand, suffered the burden of increased financial responsibility with each new enrollment In the years between 1877-1917, the religious colleges were reminded many times of their inability to compete with advanced academic institutions if they did not secure adequate financing. They had formed a federation based on their inability to finance separate, self-sustaining universities. The arnendments to the University Act of 1917, which removed the religious colleges from a position of control, were realized in part by the perception of the secularists that without wealth a credibie university was unattainable. Instead of placing further demands on the religious colleges to compromise wre values in order to assimilate with the secular university, Saunderson empathized with their concem. Meanwhile, a cornmittee of the Council of Higher Learning had concluded that despite St Boniface's isolation from the Fort Garry campus, it should be encouraged to remain an affîliate with the U of M and expand its academic programs. Further, the cornmittee agreed that financial assistance should be allocated to St. Boniface. The other religious colleges could only hope that their situation would similarly be rectified. Saunderson recounts the developments in these words:
The Heads of both Colieges were seriously wonied and those of us on the UMversity faculties shared that worry. So did the people of the Universities Grants Commission, as it was obvious to us aU that the colleges couIdn't continue to operate if they had increasing deficits. Weof the University were deiighted when in 1968 the U. G. C. agreed on a new pattern of operation. The teaching staffs in both cdleges became mernbers of the appropxiate departments within the University, and their salaries and other benefits were included in the departmentai budgets. Sabbatical Ieaves, hoiiday leaves, sichas leaves and pension arrangements for them were made identical with those of other faculty mernbers. The University agmd that each of the Colleges would be given support to develop areas of speciaiizatioa. Appohtments to the staff of the CoUeges wouid be made in the same way as other appointments except that a penon king appointed to one of the CoiIeges had to be acceptable to the Coüege. Also, the U. G. C agreed to pay off the accumulateci deficiis- The oniy financial respoasibilîty left with the Colleges was that pertaining to the operations of their chapels and the theological training provided in St. John's Cdlege. These wsts were weli within their finandal cornpetence, and at the same time avoided the probiem of state fun& king used for the support of confessionai institutions.41 Undoubtedly, St John's and St. ~aul's*must have considered this unprecedented act of
generosity as a supernaturai phenornenon. Indeed, the payrnent of salaries and benefits, grants for specialized developments, the appointment of qualifiai, agreeable faculty, and the amortization of the deficit, were al1 monumental provisions. In complete disregard for previously established customs in dealing wi th the religious colleges, the U of M sent a strong message to its clerical associates: they were to
be considered as equals with other faculty and their colleges would be treated impartially.
In this case, it is undeniable that they were the recipients of tremendous good will. Despite his personal contributions toward this unprecedented resolution, President Saunderson deferred any recognition:
nie significant change in the working relationship and ïicial basis of St. John's and St. Paul's College would not have ken possible wiihwt the strong support of the H& of both Colieges and of some of my senior cdleagues.... The new arrangements worked very weU .... The only problem 1 could fotesee at that time was actions by people in the University commlmity that gave the Govenunent a feeIing that the Miversities wem't using their money wiseIy, and that they didn't deserve more support Such a feeling wodd, of course, strike at the heart of Government support, and would undo the public recognition that aü of us in the University had spent so much effort in trying CO achieveP2 Forty years of religious college marginalkation had resulted from an increased alignment of the U of M with secular academic pursuits. By the mid- lWtsthe resultant spiritual void was noticed by the University President and several influential members of
the goveming body. This apparent re-evaluation and subsequent action taken by the
41Ibid.. 132-153.
* in the late 1960's rneasures were taken by the U of M and the colleges to "preserve their corporate structure and distinctive ethos." In 1970 a new agrewient was signecf to confi a simplified relationship between St. Paul's and St John's and the U of M,which weakened college autonomy but provided needed capital. Shortly after the agreement was signed, hidentSaunderson was repiaced by Ernest Siriuck, who, dong with other new parties, was not as sympathetic to mllege concems. The result was that "the Cdeges remaineci as poweriess relics of the founding coiieges of the University of M.tokn("ïhe Jesuit University: St Paul's Coiiege and UM Centraiizahon," a papa presented by Terence J. Fay, SJ, the the 61st Canadian Cathdic Historical Association Meeting, University of Calgary, June 15, 1994.33.48). leaders of the University was seen as a retrogressive concession by some members of the academic comrnunity. Regardless of the opinion of divergent parties, renewed interest in the condition of the Christian colleges would affect the religious ethos of the University community. The character and degree of that interest would serve as an indication of its
W. S. F. Pickering has provided an invaluable resource to ascertain the religious nature of the students of the U of M dunng this period. In conjunction with the Student
Christian Movement, the Chaplains. the University of Manitoba Student's Union, and the
Department of Actuarial Mathematics and Statistics, Pickering conducted an extensive survey in the attempt to study the changes in the religious faith and practice of the students in the U of M. He operates under the reasonable assurnption that
the vast majority of irniversity students undergo changes in their retigious ideals and devotions while they are students. The common testimony of those who have been to mlïege is chat the yean students spend ihere are the most formative of kirLives. Their religious convictions and practices can hardly rernain iuialtered or unchallengeci, especially when it is rec-edthat univeisity education is now reckoned to be thoroughl y secuiar. But given the fact of the virtual certainty of religious change during the period of uaiversity training, two important questions emerge -- How extensive is the change and in what direction is it? And. what are the factors... which untribute to rhe change* To begin, Pickering rnakes some insightful observations about the religious ethos of the U of M in 1%5. While most students who enrolled in the University had some religious faith, it was usually considered to be a private matter over which the teaching body exerted littie control. Religious groups and Chaplaincies were looked upon as extra- cumcuiar activities and were therefore optional. While they are attending a secular institution, they represent fiourishing churches, both Catholic and Protestant, and marvel at the religious indifference reporteci to be endemic in Europe. Within the context of a secular environment, Pickering argues, change pertaining to religious faith and practice was inevitable.4
43 Pickering. 2.
44 Ibid., 34. This assumption can be examined in two measurable ways. Firsc it appeared that religious practice was associated with the academic discipline or college under which students enrolled. For example, only 8%of students studying arts and sciences attended church on a weekly bais, while 27% percent of students registered with the affiliate religious colleges attended weekly services.45 Perhaps rnerely identifying with a religious group by virtue of registration fostered greater opexmess to participate in its functions.
The contrax-y seemed to apply to those who were not affiliated with a religious college, particulariy since the majority of U of M students during this period were affiliated with the three founding denominations. *
Second, and most revealing, concems the secularization of practicing Christians during their undergraduate experience. After four yem at the U of M, students who had entered as affiliates of a specific religious group no longer maintained ties wi th the same group. Of nine religious groups identified, eight suffered numerical losses as indicated by the abovementioned undergraduates. The average reduction in membenhip was 7%. Oniy one of the nine religious groups experienced an influx of student rnembers; this was a moderate increase of 3% enjoyed by the "sectanans churches." The significant change was measured in the percentage of students who left university with "no religion." Seventy-two of 1,044 students surveyed had entered the University of Manitoba with no religious allegiance. Four years later, 104 students professed their religious indifference, indicating a 69% increase in the shift toward secularization.~According to Pickering,
"only 6 students who entered the university as students with 'no religion' became members of one of the denominations, while the ranks of those of 'no religion' swelled
45 Ibid.. Table 14.
* Note: founding coiieges now include "United Collegen and "United Chur&," the official union of Manitoba Coilege (Presbyterian) and Wesley Cdlege (Methodist).
46 Ibid, Table 22. with as many as 80 'converts' from various denominations."47 These statistics reflect the relative marginaiization of the three founding religious colleges. It must be remembered that al1 U of M students were members of participating religious denominations in lm.
As the Univeisity evolved into a state-mn institution, the secularization of its students became increasingly pronounced. By 1965,7996 of those who indicated their loss of faith entered the university as members of the three founding denorninations.48 Related to this phenornenon is the spintual vacuum that was apparentl y evident during the Residency of
H. H. Saunderson (19541970).As two of the three founding religious colleges became increasingly detached from the Fort Gany campus, numerous religious societies emerged. B y 1%5 17%of those surveyed indicated membership with one of at least nine recognizable societies.49
Perhaps the best measurement of a person's religious convictions pertains to those things that are done apart, or at least supplementary to, those of the corporate life of a church or college. The cultivation of a devotionai life consisting of prayer and Bible reading may or may not reflect the public ideds of the University community as a whole, but it would point to its relevance in personal religious practice. A survey asking questions about the frequency of prayer and Bible reading revealed that 66.5% of Roman
Catholics prayed on a daily bais upon entrance to the University of Manitoba. Forty-two percent of Anglicans, 3646 percent of United Church students, and 64% percent of other
Rotestan ts (Mennoni tes, Baptists, Lutherans and Pres byterians) also prayed dai 1y. Upon graduation, an average of 8%of the same students revealed that they did not pray on a daily basis.3
47 Ibid., 43.
48 Ibid.. 43.
49 Iad,Table 42.
Ibid.. Tables 43-49. The frequency of Bible reading was also reduced as students approached
graduation, but by a lesser margin (496). No statistics were provided from Catholic students, but the breakdown of those from other foundi ng denominations specified that 6% of Anglicans read the Bible daily while 3.5% of United Church students did the same. In stark conûast, 40% of the other Protestant students rdthe Bible each da~.~lTo sumrnarize* this part of his extensive study, Pickering concluded that "Students as a whole display a decline in such habits over the years they are at the university. Except for... practices among Roman Catholics almost every habit in every denomination becornes weakened .... The United Church suffers the most change, followed by the Presbyterian Church and the Anglican Church."S* This is consistent with the historical record of the three founding colleges: the traditionalist Catholics have consistentiy ken most resilient to change, while the secularists of Manitoba (United) College promoted it at al1 costs; the Anglican evolutionists being marked once again by a gradual shift in religious belief and practice.
Three general observations can be made about the religious ethos dunng the era leading up to 1965. First, it would appear that secularization had occurred as students confessed that their religious faith and practice had been enfeebled during their years at the U of M. Some would assert that the godlessness alluded to by Reverend Bryce as an unwanted cornpanion of secular education was now entrenched in the U of M. Second, it is evident that some, having accepted the parameters of a secular university, would decry the work of the affiliate colleges and evangelical societies as attempts at revivalism. And third, advocates of the secularization of the University would question the efficacy of their philosophical position. To them, it is perplexing that "while the student undergoes
51 Ibid. Table 56. * Reduced prayer and BiMe reading over the course of a students' university career may also correspond to indstudy demands. supposedl y great emotional and intellectual development in the university his religious outlook and practice remain unchanged. There is neither growth nor abandonment. In other words, religion is treated with complete indifference by the students or else it is kept secure in some water-tight cornpartment "9 The religious sub-culture of the U of M during the nid-196û1s was not dissimilar from that of previous eras. A more vocal, critical tone emerged that had not ken seen
before. This was likely encouraged by the open questioning of authority that prefaced the student protests that were soon to follow. The comrnon thread that ran throughout the life of the U of M was an uneasy relationship between the sacred and the secular. The religious colleges had regained a measure of respect that had ken guaranteed in eadier
times. Even leaders in the University were providing encouragement for the colleges, both to rectify financial woes and to speak as a clear Christian voice for the benefit of the University commuaity. Yet, only one in ten students was cornfortable with the prospect of contacting a Chaplain, the bulk of whom would rather discuss matters of faith off campus? And, according to standards of the day, "reiigious societies as a whole attract precious few students -- little more than the odd 15 percent [sic]."55 From the vantage point of the founding faihers, the University of Manitoba had clearly become a secularized institution. In the classic sense, Archbishop Machray and other moderates vehemently opposed the abandonment of core Christian values. For
them, a balanced life inciuded the rigorous integration of faith and reason. Their concems were frequently voiced, only to be allayed by promises of a gradual, calculated evolution of their educational principles. What they feared during the inaugural years had transpired in 19 17 - the official abandonment of Christian control of the University. Fifty years
53 Ibid.. 74.
54 Ibid., 86.
55 Ibid.. û7. later the sarne tensions between the sacred and the secular, religion and culture, were manifested among leaders of the University community. Again, Christians were hopefui that the threat of f'ersecularization would be averted: "There is a line of argument, not uncomrnon among church leaders, that the [current] position from their point of view is not as serious as the statistics would make out They base their optimism on the fact that many students... at the university are agnostic and abandon the habit of church attendance. When, however, they leave, marry and begin to have children, they tend to corne back to church, reaffirm their membership, and join the worshipping body.
Evidence for this position is slender.... And if such has ken the pattern in the past, are we sure it will continue in the future?"56 The answer to that question will now be explored.
The pend from the late 196ûrsuntil 1996 was characterized by an acceleration of the globalization process. Mere qualitative statistics cannot full y illustrate the affects of immigration upon Canadian society, but they do imply a significant social transformation of university culture. To contextualize this assetion, Canadian attitudes towards immigration and multiculturalism must be considered. According to former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, " 1t doesn't maiter w here the immigrants corne from. This would imply that Canadians are not threatened by newcomers, regardless of their economic, political, or religious persuasions. Also in favor of increased immigration is joumalist Richard Gwyn, who States that "There is a deegrooted conviction that as a country of immigrants we should continue to king in as many newcomers as possible; a humanitarian urge to keep the doors open to those in need."58 While these voices remind us of our heritage, some signal a harsh warning to reconsider the ramifications of a liberal policy on immigration. Former Olympic athlete, scholar and author William Gairdner addresses this concem: "A govemment that imposes
56 Iad.. 62.
57 Piem EUiot Trudeau. March 15. lW9, in Vancouver (cited by Gairdner. 405).
58 Richard Gwynn. Norionalism Wifhod WaUs (Toronto: McCieUand and Stewart, 1995). 2 17. multiculturalism, bilingdism and nontraditional immigration in a calculated attempt to bury Canada's traditional culture is guilty of subverting the ethos of the nation. These three prograrns are a veneer disguising cynical vote-grabbing from Quebec as well as from ethmc groups. They have had the effect of transforming Canada, in the space of two decades, into a collectivist nation designed to encourage a bureaucratie culture and
eradicate Our traditional hentage. Unless we leam the lessons of history, this can end ody
in intra-ethnic strife and mili tancy on Our own soil. " 59 The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms tries to reconcile the conflicting opinions, promoting an intermediary position; "Every individual is equal before an under the law and has the nght to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law, without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion. .. ."* While govemment policy reflects a relative openness to others and a tolerance of diversity, which are hallmarks of a democratic society, it fails to encapsulate more pervasive values that are distinctly Canadian. Allusions to rights and equal treatment are more commonl y displaceci wi th the notion of peacefulness and responsi bili ty. Justice and social order are frequently preferred over the Amencan ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The resul t is an exaltation of those values which can easil y be held in common, and a willingness to forfeit previously held convictions for the sake of the common good. In effect, it is social egalitarianism, affecting every area of life, including the reli gious. The maturation of this Canadian ideal is expressed on university campuses. For example, The Office of Institutional Analysis published a report in 19% disclosing what they consider to be the essential facts about the University of Manitoba Of the total 1996 enrollment of 22,497 students, 825 were from other countries. Of these, û2.7% are from
59 Gairdner, 420.
60 Muitiailturaiism: What is it Really About?", Multicuiruralism and Citizenship Canada. 22. non-Western nations. Asian students constitute the majority of these students with a representation of 63-26-61While the proportion of International students is relatively low
(3.7%), they contri bute to extra-cumcular activities in remarkable ways. That
notwithstanding, according to the Office of International Analysis, as well as the International Center for Students, it is prohibited for them to publish the religious
background of visa students at the U of M. Since names would not nomaily accompany statisticai information regarding the religious background of students, it would appear to be a rather sûingent precaution against discrimination. * So, while official govemment and university policy promotes immigration and
muli tculturalism, certain elements remain in obscuri ty. Public monies are spent in order to promote virtually every pmtected nght Iisted in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, with the exception of religious expression. That, it is assumed, is more properly handled in the safety of personal jurisdiction. From l98& 19% there have been numerous events, sponsored by the University of Manitoba Student's Union and funded by public dollars, that have promoted the finer points of Section 15.1 of the Charter. For example, Anita Hill was paid $18,5ûû to give a lecture on sexual and racial discrimination. Multicultural Days, an annual event, is funded in part by the University to promote diverse ethnic traditions. Even psychics and Tarot-card readers have enjoyed generous stipends from the Student's Union, while virtually al1 attempts to introduce religious lecturers are met with skepticism and a reluctance to offer even partial financial recompensation. Events that have ken sponsored by religious student groups have generally been poorly attended, dthough there have been exceptions. Since 1991 three of the most
61 "Institutional StatisaesW.Oîfïce of Institutional Amiysis. University of Manitoba, Augusk 1996.37. * As the U of M continues to welcume Intematicmai students, it must be noted that these students do not collective1y represent a non-Christian or anti-Christian bias. According to David J. Hesselgrave there has been a "transfmce trend." The center of gravity in world Christidty has shifted from West to East and from the Northem to the Southm Hemisphere. The two-&ds worid wiU comprise 75% of the worid's evangelical Christians. with the West accounting for 25910. (fmm "Su~cessStory of the Cenhuy," GMU,Winnipeg. Feb., 1996. 13.) popular events have been debates. Dr. Henry Morgentaler was challenged by Dr. William Craig on the topic. "Christianity Versus Secular Humanism: Which is the Superior World
View. " The event attracted approximately 800 people, many of whom came from outside the University community. In 1992 Michael Green of Regent College debated a philosophy professor from the University of Manitoba; approximately 500 were in attendance. Then. in 1994 Kirk Dursion debated Dr. Quentin Smith on "Does the Origin of the Universe Point to the Existence of God?" and "Evil and Suffenng: 1s There an Explanation?, with near capacity crowds at both venues."6* Many other presentations, lectures, debates, films, and panel discussions have ken conducted by various groups on campus. Generally, the response has been weak. A student descri bed the religious ethos of the U of M of Manitoba in 1965 in these tems: "Apathy -- campus atmosphere encourages only 'creeping rneatballism', the vegetable rind." Another declared that "The religious life at the U of M is like a girl preparing for her fint date. "63 While these descriptions are vague, they do imply what another has made explicit: "The following of the religious clubs and societies is insignificantly small and the inevitable conclusion is that their impact judged by numbers, is negligible. A mere 16 percent of the students... claimed membership at one time.... 64 Transposed to 19% would mean a student body involvement in religious groups of 3,600 students. Estimates render 1996 rnembership in the religious groups to be less than 500 students. Further evidence reveals that apathy, and not proac tivi ty, has characterized the religious ethos at the U of M in its latter years. Questionnaires conducted since 1988 at the U of M indicate that while up to 85% of students believe in God, few are willing to publicly acknowledge that claim. If national trends
62 "LandSIide Victory for Chnstianity," CoMdan Challenge magazine. AM. 1991,lO-1 1 and "Atheism on Trial," March, 1994, 11.
63 Pickering. 150.
64 Ibid.. 142-143. are applicable to the higher ducation, there should be a minimum of 1700 evangelical students
at the University of Manitoba; yet, it is not even remotel y apparent that this is the case.6S The
same questionnaires that indicate a unifonn belief in God also note that 71% of respondents would like to have a personal relationship with God, if that were possible."66 This alleged
interest in what former President of the University of Manitoba referred to as "things of the
spirit" is confirmed by the Christian apologist and debater, Kirk Durston: "1 have personally
talked with a few thousand students over the last 12 years and have found that (conservatively) at least 50 percent of them would be interesteci in discussing spirihial things if someone took the
initiative to raise the topic."67
Despite the desire to pursue spiritual rnatters among Christians and non-Chnstians,
relatively few act upon their intentions. Much of what Pickering unearthed on this matter in 1965
is relevant of the student body at the U of M dunng recent times. A strong case is made for the inhospitable structure of university life. "The vast rnajority of the students -- about 9 out of 10 -- live in accommodation off the campus, two, three, or more miles away. About 1 out of every 2 students lives at home. These sorts of facts, plus the way in which the time-table is anangeci, means that in practice university life on the campus quietens [sic] down about 3 or 4 p.m., and becornes completely dead alter 5 p.m..... It is hardly surpnsing that Manitoba is nicknarned a 'car-pool ' university where the student's lives are centered on transportation.. .. 1t is little wonder that ... student clubs and societies... receive minimal supportn68 The pervasiveness of apathy arnong students should not be minirnized. As early as the 196ûis,it was seen as a significant demoralizing factor in religious life on campus. "To join a
65 Paûick Johnstone. Operation WM.(Grand Rapids: Zotidervan. 1993). 150.
66 "Canadian Undergraduate Student Questio0nairrn.Campus Crusade for Christ, Surrey. Cana&. 19l3û. Note: A total of 7100 students participated from 11 Canadian universities; 608 respondents were from the University of Manith, where 1 was personally involved in conducting the questionnaire. The project was conducted by a marketing task force made up of David Walker, Randy Pom (B. Cornm.). George Feledichuk (B. Comrn.). and Blair Cook (Ph. D.).
67 "A Powaful Innuence Through Positive Faiih." Christian Wee4 November 14. 1995.7.
68 Pickering, 139. society is not looked upon by the vast majority of Christian students as an act of witness, nor are the societies taken to be organizations which have much interest to the student. Whatever is offered is not wanted. Nevertheless, the apathy of students towards religious societies cannot be
assessed without calling to mind the allegiance which university societies as a whole daim from students. In the University of Manitoba this is more than likely minimal."69 It seems that while
the source of apathy rnay have its mots in sacred and secular causes. it is felt throughout the life
of the University. In a 1995 edition of the Manitoban, each letter of the alphabet was used to illustrate a dominant trend on the campus: "A- A pathy ;Ahh ...university, where the brightest corne to revel in the bastion of educational glory for the sake of personal satisfaction and unemployment. Yeah, right! If you thought your high school had no spirit, well the U of M can put it to shame. Check out dl the prlyattended sports events, council meetings and night
functions. Wai t, there are no night functions. There are more people in most bus shacks in Winnipeg at night than there are people on carnpus."7o Disinterest in spiritual things among the majority of students is reflective of the entire life of the University community. At a 1995 weekly meeting of an evangelical student group, a member of Peer Advisors conducted a swey in order to evaluate services provided by their office. Seeing the group of 25 students, she commented that of al1 the groups she had visited,
both secular and religious, this was the largest.71 Other characteristics of apathy as an integral part of the religious ethos of the U of M were present during virtually al1 stages of its development; poor visibility among Christians and their respective groups, a lack of evangelism, virtually no opposition from atheists, subliminal agnosticism among the religious, the acceptance of liberal theology, and a floundering personal devotion to God and the disciplines of the Christian life. The archetypai religious specimen of the University of Manitoba has been less
69 Ibid, 143.
70 Markian Saray and Jeff Oliver, Features Editors. "Apathy.". ManitOban. Sept. 7, 1995.14.
Arme Bridge, Peer Advisor. University of Manitoba. Oct. 13.1995. 99 than flattering: "What goes on in bsmind] might well be called 'groping' -- groping towards what we might cal1 tmth."72
1997-201 - The Future Years: The Idea Of A University: 2001
The parents and educators of the 19ms and 60's must have bad some fumin mind when they decided how to educate t&yts aàults. But let's imagine that we can rent Michae.1 J. Fox's tirne-trading DeLorean and drive into Vancouver or Toronto for a meeting of local schd trustees and teachers, in, say, 1960. Theyke waiting to hear what the 1980's and 'Ws wiü dybe like. so they can design the appropriate schd system and dculum. Suppose we tell th= to prepare th& children to face environmental disasters like the thin* of the ozone layer, toxic chemicals, epidernic drug use, aud the coiiapse of the nuclear famil y. Suppose we tak about the importance of Japanese tourism and Hong Kong Immigration to the Canadian economy, about the vital importance of personal cornputers, and about the imempIoyment rates of the 1990's. Suppose we tell them our wodd popilaiion is almat double of the lWs,and will be over triple by 2025. Wouid the last threc decades of ducation have beni sharply different? Robably Having considered the historical development of the religious ethos of the
University of Manitoba over the pst 120 years, attention should be given to its future. The religious environment will obviously change, but whether it will become increasingly secular remains to be seen. One maxim has ken repeatedly observed; the role of religion at U of M has never been thoroughly rooted into its sumunding subculture. This is both surprising and understandable. 1t is surprising because religion was the foundational premise upon which the University was built. It is understandable because unseen spirinial principles are often at odds with the temporal arnbi tions of a growing university. However, the idea of a university that will bridge the centuries holds promise for the ide& of both its traditional Christian heritage and the future challenges of a technologicai society.
72 Pickering, 156.
73 Crawford Kiiian, 2020 Vicionc The Futures of Canadian Education (Vancouver Arsenal Rùp Press. 1995). 46. It is difficult to access accuiately the condition of a university. It is more than an institution; it is a complex entity, changing rapidly and embracing diverse bodies of thought. As Edward Shils has put it,
A uaivasity is more than its stock and capital, its buiidings, books, machines and kitruments.... It is a capitaI of institutional traditions as weii as of inteilectual traditiom.... A university... is a culture which is maintained by the traditions of many men and women of learaing, Living and working in each otheis presence, susiaining each other. keeping inteilectual wits and sasiities alert and sharpened. The culture is the product of pst achievements and it is sustained by CO-presenceof many individuah of different generations who keep the tradition alive and active. If the tradition is not alive and active. the perfmceof cach individuai dm.sane more than other~.~~ Arnold Naimark, the former President of the University of Manitoba affirms this
perspective: "A university is a living organism which has represented in al1 of its parts a generative code of the whole institution - the cornmitment to the creation, preservation, and communication of knowledge. One need not apologize for the complexity and diversity of universities for these are characteristics of free institutions in pursuit of multiple worthy g0als."~5Coupled with the exploding information age, the future of the university can only be speculated. Several centuries ago, a wise philosopher named Anstotle attempted to contextualize the problem facing higher education:
But consideration must be given to the question. what constitutes education and what is the proper way to be educated. At mentthere are ciifferences of opinion as to the proper mks to be set; for al1 peoples do not agree as to the things that the young ought to lem, either wiih a view to virtue or with a view to the best Me, nor is it clear whether their studies should be regulated more with regard to intellect or with regard to character. And confusing questions arise out of the education that actuall y prevails, and i t is not aii clear whether the puptls shodd practice pursuits that are practicdiy useful, or moraily edifying, or hi* acmmplishrnents.76 These questions have ken discussed throughout the history of the U of M. Consider this letter to the editor of the Manitoba Free Press in 1898:
Are there too many young men a~endingthe coiieges in Manitoba? if going to coUege means going to prepare for living by one's wits and not by productive industry, then no
74 ~iiiiamA. W. Neilson, Universities in Crisis: A Medaeval Institution in the Tweniy-First Centtq (Montreai: The htitute for Research on PuMic Pdicy, 1986)- 254 75 'The Passionate Intellect: The Idea of a University: 201". (University of Manitoba lecture series, Winnipeg, 1996), 7. doubt there should be a thinning of tbe ranks of students. But the end may be reached in another way. Instead of senclhg a propatio11 of the students home, refonn the coilege, so that its work wiU no Ionget be to send out young people to detheir Living by their wits only. If the degesare not ûaining young men who will be îhe bat fmers, as weii as those who will stand at the head of the leamed professions. then the courses of snidy and the methods of teaching should be chaqed so thai the bfitsof college attendance may be shared by aii. By the the a young man is ~~cientlyadvanced in years and in studies to enter upon a lmiversity course, he should have a definite life oôjecî before him. and shouid make everything bend towards its accomplishment. It is altogethes a mistake, but udortumtely a coramon one, for yormg men to ga through their University course without deciding what their life occupation is going to be. Six years spent in quiring an aimless education can hardly be other than in a great rneasure Iost tirne. The miIege auihorities would be doing th& students a kindness if they would pIace in their registers a column in which to record after every name the dhgfor which the student intends to fit himself; and wouid insist pnthe entry being duly made in every case. Possessing the information thus supplied, the faculty muid wuire the generai courses to be supplemented by readhg. Iec[ure~,and practical work, suited to the wants of the different classes; and those intending to be farmers, mechania, machinists. etc., codd be given assistance quite as valuable as that afforded to coming Iawyers, doctors. and clergymen, Students who do not know why they are at degehad better be sent home und they maLe up ih~rmin&." These perennid questions are signifiant because they address the underlying purpose of the university, and in doing so, invite us to contemplate the ultimate questions of life. To address the future of education without giving due attention to its past can only result in a fragmented understanding of the role of the university in the twenty-fint century. And, with the new miilennia approaching, much speculation has ken made about the university. In fact, a senes of public lectures and discussions was CO-sponsored by the faculties of Arts, Science, and the Institute for the Humanities at the University of
Manitoba in April of 19%. The first lecture was entitled, " What Does the Public Get for Its Money?: Elitist Institutions in a Democmtic Society," and was delivered by President Naimark. He too recognized the enigmatic nature of the university, but did not divorce it from history; "From its inception in the 1870's, the University was faced with the need ... 'to blend different traditions and to reconcile conflicting purposes ... to encompass secular knowledge wi th the religious fai th of i ts founding denominational colleges ; to reconcile, even then, the pnnciple of institutional autonomy with the need to seek financial support
7 Manitoba hre Press, The Yelis Resumed: Fa the Romotion of the Cause of Higha Education." Oct 11,1û9$, 6. from the provincial govemment. As we shall see, the reconciliation of conflicting aims and purposes has remained a central challenge... to this day."78 Nairnark outlines the parameters for the role of the University of Manitoba in the next century. He suggests that
a univmity, at least a secular uuiversity. is a place where there is no prevailing dogma, where people are fnx to profess kirown views of the mth. and where conflicting schools of thought are tolerated and even muraged, In a liberal democracy there is an inherent social good in having mûes separate from the state, whose essential purpcise is to search for and apply objective Iniowledge without regard to considerations of political or religious doctrine.,.. The public gels inestimate value from an institution that is free to chaiienge current concepts, beliefs, values or behaviour. Where such institutions are absent, authoritariauisrn and repressim almost inevitably pre~ai1.~~ 1t is apparent that the tenacious dichotomy of the sacred and the secular prevail in the thinking of the former President, as it does in many of the U of M's former leaders. A cursory review of the history of this polarized thinking as expressed in the U of M would discourage hopes of conciliation. Yet, as Nairnark suggests, the university should welcome and encourage al1 challenges to currently held thinking. This would place secularism at the center of the debate, as it, and not religion, appears to occupy the central ideological position of the U of M. As western society continues to revel in the accomplishments of the technological age, some are beginning to question the exclusiveness of scientific naturalism as the pinnacle of culture advancement Dr. Jasper McKee, professor of Physics at the U of M, suggests that while science is ubiquitous, it must not stand alone. "The evolution of a scientific culture in Canada is becoming essential to the generation of a highly skilled work force and a vibrant economy. The traditional idea that there exist two separate cultures within society -- a scientific culture and a humanistic culture - is becoming passé. If a culture is indeed the sum total of the beliefs and experiences of a society, then the interaction between science and the society it serves has to be ongoing and develop to
78 'The Passiouate Intellezt," lecture by Res. Naimark, ""WbatDOg che Public Get for Its Money?: Eiitist Institutions in a Democratic Society," 1.
79 Ibid., 5. the benefit of all."m That interaction. in a university community, should not stop at generalizations. The soul, as well as the mind, should be addressed. James T. Lancy, President of Emory University. predicted that " Without virtue, without the education of the heart, expertise and ambition easil y becorne demonic. How can society survive if
education does not attend to those qualities it req~iresfor its perpetuation?"81 This
question must dso be asked of the future of the U of M. In his lecture entided "The Historical Imagination and Its Future: Why Do People Need Universities?", John Stackhouse of the Department of Religion at the U of M proposed four different scenarios for the future of education. He digressed from the historical debate over "secular versus religious or undergraduate verses comprehensive"
modes of instruction.= Instead, he advoated that the university be a place of understanding. Contrasting the provincial govemment's penchant for a "training school in which students are given skills for today's job market," Stackhouse cited an holistic approach advocated by a "venerable sage," Jesus Christ: "1s not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?"~The implication is that while different kinds of universities are necessary, we cannot ignore ultimate questions such as those asked by that venerable Teacher of old, The willingness to re-think the role of the U of M has been embodied in the new President, Ernoke Szathmary. In her absence from the lecture series on "The Passionate Intellect: The Idea of a University: 2001" her predecessor Arnold Naimark, quipped: "Perhaps she is mindful of the story told about Machiavelli on his death bed attended by a
Ibid. lecture by Prof. Jasper McKee. The! Ida of Rogrrss: Knowledge. Power, and Values." 2
* l Robert and Jon Solomon* Up Ine University. (Reading, Massachussetts: Addisoa-Wesk y Publishing Co., 1993). 21.
û2 'The Passionatc Intellect.' 1- by Rof. John Stackbouse. The Historical Imagination ami Its Futme: Why Do People Need Universities?". 1. Cardinal who whispers into the moribund figure's ear 'Machiavelli, do you renounce Satan and al1 his works?' To which Machiavelli replies: This is no time to make new enemies!'"84 Evidence indicates that Szathmary is detexminecl to mperate with the community in charting a new coune for the U of M; " When 1 accepted the invitation to provide leadership to the University of Manitoba as its Resident and Vice-Chancellor, 1 made a commitment to bring together al1 sectors of the University to work towards a cornmon purpose. " 8s What is that common purpose? It is "to create, preserve, and communicate knowledge and, thereby, contri bute to the cultural, social, and economic well- king of the people of Manitoba, Canada, and the world. " 86 The goals of the universi ty include the development of vimially every area of life -- intellectual, social, cultural, and athletic, to name a fewyConspicuously absent from this list is the development of the spiritcal or religious dimension of life. This is reflective of the pervasive forces of secularization which have virtuaily eliminated the Christian heritage from the U of M over the past 120 years. The results are disheartening for anyone interested in the health of the academy: "It's not that Our education system has failed. It's that it has succeeded beyond our wildest expectations. Having taught our luds to tuck in their wings, to narrow their range of vision and concems, to jettison moral encumbrances and seek self-fulfîllment in some nmwsphere of self-interest, we then want them to be inspired members of our work force and make the better and smaller cornputer chip."88
85 %ident5 Message Regardhg the Tank Face on Strategic Planning." [II hüp:llwww.imr;niitobaca [Accessed 15 Feb 19971.
86 Ibid.. 1.
û7 Ibid.. 2. Time has yet to unveil what will becorne of the idea of the University of
Manitoba, 2001. The wnrds of Dennis Gabor, written in 1964, serve as a reminder that the successors of Taché, Bryce, and Machray have authority, however limitai, to contribute to the development of the religious ethos of the U of M: "'... the future cannot be predicted, but futures on be inventeci." * The result may be that the U of M of the new rnillennium will show no signs of its Christian beginnings. It may even be fundamentally distinct from i ts present secular condition. Whatever may happen, these two provisos of secular and Christian education will undoubtedly remain in conflict. The
Christian ide& of the U of M, as expressed in lm, were subsequently replaceci by those of secularism. Despi te their irreconcilable di fferences, the universi ties of these two eras have one undeniable similarity: "By believing themselves to be what they are not, [they fell] short of what they could be."", CI-IAPTER 4
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
In a speech delivered at the University of Sheffield John Masefield stated:
Thete are few earthiy tbiogs more beautiful than a University. It is a place where those who hate ignorance may seive to know, where those who perceive ûuth may suive to make othm see; where seekers and lemers alike. banded together in the search for knowledge, will honotu thought in ail its fiways, will welcome thinkers in distress or in exile, will uphold ever the dignity of thought and learning and wiil exact standards in these chings. They give to the young in hirimpressionable years, the bond of a lofty purpose shared, of a great corporate Mewhose links wili not be loosed until they die. They give young people that close campaxtiotiship for which ywth longs, and that cbance of the endless discussion of the themes which are endless. without which youth would seem a waste of tirne. There are few &y ihings more splendid tban a University. In these days of broken frontiers and coliapsing values, when the dams are down and the fldare maEeng misery, when every future looks somewhat grim and every ancient foothold has becorne something of a quagmire. wherever a University stands, it stands and shines; wherever it exists, the free min& of men. urged on to full and fair inquiry. may stiii bring wisdom into human affairs-l
Spoken fifty years ago, his words still are relevant to the University of Manitoba. Like most western universities, it has undergone significant transformation. Like any social structure, it has been susceptible to the influences of people, plicies, and the trends that accompany cultural progression. Many of these changes were introduced to the U of M by intelligent, well-meaning citizens who demonstrated a deep concem for the quality of education in the province of Manitoba. Most were members of the clergy, desiring to unite
John Masefield. cover of Alumni Journal* Vol. 44, No.2. Winter, 1%. Aiumni Association, University of Manitoba their religious convictions with advancement in scientific theory and the liberal arts. Others were secular humanists, mernbers of the provincial govement and farniliar with the conflicts of the denorninational colleges of Eastern Canada This group of diverse people compromîsed their codicting philosophies of education in an atternpt to maintain higher education in Manitoba To that end. they have ken successful; but to some satisfaction with a weakened ideal is to admit defeat, something the pioneers of the University had never apparently done. The missionary spint which characterized the Red River Settlement was equally vibrant in the Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Pres byterian colleges. The visionaries w ho led these schods were determined to provide an holistic education to their constituents, and later, to al1 who aspired to higher learning. A virtue they shared was a willingness to help their fellow man. This cooperation, w hich characterized the fiedgling communi ty of Winnipeg, was necessary in the founding of a university. As plans were made and policies were written. it was obvious that concessions were required. The realist would conclude that the histoq of the university has been one of confiict arnong differing traditions; the optirnist would suggest a reconciliation of diverse purposes. Regardless of the perspective taken, the histoncal evidence points to a persistent erosion of the ideals of the founding fathers, which, until now, have not ken regained. Masefield's words reflect the common ground shared between people of divergent worldviews who united in purpose to establish the U of M. They also reflect the values of the time; an era of pst-war reconstruction and expansion. The religious colleges. already isolated from the inner-workings of government, were invited to once again play a more contributory role in the Fort Gany site of the revitalized University. But something was noticeably absent. The Christian character of the University as a whole had been displaced. The Amendments of 1917 had relinquished control of the University from the founding religious colleges and had placed it finnly in the hands of the provincial govement. Once founders and govemors of the University, the religious leaders and their colleges would have to function as rnarginalized affiliates of the institution. It has been demonstrated that a university could evolve from a modemtely evangelical
Christian university into a secular institution. The U of M was not on1y Christian by affiliation to religious colleges. If professors were not ordained clergymen. they were active members of the church. These men preached in Winnipeg's churches, established missionary work throughout the West7and practiced disciplines of the Christian faith. They were known to be people of prayer and good deeds, and taught that the Bible should be read and honored in daily life and leaniing. They tirelessly served the pansh and the University, willingly sacnficing for the good of the community under their care. These obvious expressions of faith are a reminder of an earlier proviso, shards of an era pst One-hundred and twenty years later, plans for a new strategy are king developed for the U of M. * As it appruaches a new miilennia, no provision is made for i ts religious or spintuai development. It is assumed that sectarian groups, thoroughly segregated, are sufficient. Some governing autonorny has been maintained for the colleges, but only at the expense of the integration of faith and learning for the remainder of the University community. Few would contest that this generation of students is troubled by the social and moral decay that surrounds thern. Equally few in academic circles would associate this demise with a growing spiritual discontent. Perhaps it is time to reconsider the mot causes of demomlization and secularization among students at the U of M. particularly as it relates to the future of the University.
What recommendations can be made conceming the religious development of the
* U of M Presideat Emoke SzathmAry has assembled a task force of 18 peopIe who will hold a series of heaRngs and tom hall meetings, as weii as accept written recommendations from aayone associated or interested in the future of ihe U of M. The rdtswill be published in a fdreport to be submitted to the Senate and Bdof Gove?nors for approvai. (Manitoban, Feb., 26, lm, 1). Szatbmary's pre- vision statement, which includes provisions for the developement of culturai, social and economic ateas, makes no mention of spiritual or religious caocems. (TheTask Fonx on Strategic PIhg",http:/lwww.umanitoba.calnews.preslet. htm). U of M? First, successive generations of influentid people associated wi th the U of M have proposed values of one kind or another. Most would concur with those outlined in John Masefield's speech at the University of Sheffield. However, virtudl y al1 advocates of higher education at the University, both religious and secular, have failed to mot their respective philosophies of education into anyihing substantial. The result is a clambering for control of the institution; it is secured by a majority vote or manipulative political maneuvering,* both of which have plagued the U of M throughout its history. Distinguished historian Gertrude Himmelfarb has attempted to account for the erosion of vaIues in modem cdture. In The De-Moralization of Society: Frorn Victorian
Virtues 10 Modern Values, she asserts that the most significant factor that sustained virtuousness was that Victorian culture was characterized by an "ethos that has its rmts in religion and tradition."* In his article "Can We Be Good Without Gd?", Glenn Tinder takes Himmelfarb's observation to its practical end. A person or institution wih [its] mots in religion must be active in the world around them:
We are so used to thinking of spintuality as withdrawn from the worid of human affairs that it is hard to think of it as pditical. Spirituaiity is personal and private, we assume, while pditics is pubiic. But such a dichotomy drastically dimiMshes spirituality, construing it as a relationship to Goci without impiications for we's relationship to the surrounding worid. The God of the Christian faith... created the worid and is deepIy engaged in the aîf'of the world. The notion that we can relate to God and not to the wodd - that we can practice a spirituality that is not political -- is in conflict with the Christian understanding of W....And if spirituality is pperly political, the converse is aiso true, however distant i t may be from prevailing agsumptions. Founded in the latter part of the Victorian era, the U of M was deeply rooted in religious traditions -- namely, those of Christianity. While authors such as Himmelfarb, Tinder and Allan Bloom promote "first causes", "moral absolutes", and the "Great Books", they do not make exclusive claims for the authority of Christianity within the university. Even the
* The author is wt condemning the dernomtic process but rather @ring to certain inevitable characteristics that have been evident in U of M politics.
Gertrude Hirnmelfarb, The De-Moralizailion of Society: FmVictotim Virtues to Modmn Values,(New York: Alfred A. Knopt. 1995). 257.
Gleon Ti."Cm We Be Oood Without God?", The AtIantic Monihly. Dec., 1589.69. world-renowned scholar Northrop Frye, who asserts that the Bible is the "Great Code" of art and literature, by which they can be understood and appreciated, stated: "To the question why it [the Bible] should exist at al1 1 have no direct answer. .. " 4
So the question at hand is not whether the U of M should be sectarian but whether ultimate questions should be addressed as part of its functiond role as a university rooted in Christian provisos. Considering that much debate has marked the evolution of the religious ethos of the U of M, withdrawal from those ultimate questions would seem enigmatic:
One of the many ironies in the cmtdebate about farnily values and Victorian values is that the word "valueswhas taken cm something of the connotation of the dder "virtues." In a thmughiy mlativistic climate such as own out, even "values"may corne to be seen as a retreat fmm rdativism and a reassertion of mord prînciples. Critics cornplain that the invocation of vaiues is an appeaî to moral absolutism, an attempt to restore an obsokte and coeruve morality. Othen, rebutting that charge. see it as a way of counteracting a moral relativism that threatens to degenerate into nihili,mn, an effort to recover a rndest degm of a wt so remok ethoss Again, the realignment of the U of M in a precise confessional direction is not the rernedy for current institutional aimlessness. As Professor Blmm stated, "The university's evident lack of wholeness is an enterprise that cleady demands i t cannot hel p troubling some of i ts members. The questions are ail there. They only need to be addressed continuously and seriously for liberal education to exist; for it does not consist so much in answers as in the permanent dialogue. I t is in such perplexeci professon that at least the idea might persevere and help to guide some of the needy young persons at our doorstep. The matter is still present in the university; it is the form that has vanished. One cannot and should not hope for a general refonn. The hope is that the embers do not die out."6 In addition to substantiating iis values, the University must continue to re- examine its deeply held philosophy of secularism. Despite embracing it officially in
~onhm~Frye. Ihe Grea~Code. (Markham. Ontario: Penguin. 1990). xi.
Himmelfàrb. 16.
6 Bloom. 380. 1917, the U of M has never adequately defended its decision. Since then, there has been a lack of influence from the religious colleges and Christian groups among members of the "secular", "de-religionizedwor "pst-Christianw campus culture. Few attempts have been
made to demonstrate the nature of secularization to the university community. Nor has a visible, ongoing, relevant Christian witness been offered to its multiple spheres. Part of this problem stems from the effects of secularization within the religious community itself.
Those who agree wi th the integration of faith and learning, as did the founders of the University, must seek to define and measure factors contx-ibuting to an increase in the growth of secularism, and subsequent secularization. The scope and practices of secularists in diverse culturai, philosophic, and economic environrnents should be considered. The foundationd shift which exemplifies secularization in any society, however, is characterized by a process in which "religious thinking, practice, and institutions lose their social significance. It is the transition from the beliefs, activities, and institutions presupposing convictions of a traditionally Christian kind to beliefs, activities, and institutions of an agnostic ancilor atheistic kind [itaiics mine]."7 Often those from a religious perspective fail to recognize the distinction between theoretical and practical secularism in contemporary societies. For example, over 80% of Canadians believe in God and the afterlife.8 Granted, the majority do not attend church or daim anything more than a cursory acquaintance with the teachings of Christiani ty. While this category of Canadians, clearly a majority of the population, is secular in orthopraxy, they do not qualify as secularist by virtue of orthodoxy. It should be a cause of concem that secularization has taken root on campuses with a strong religious heritage such as the U of M. Further, is it unreasonable to question the sincerity of over 70% of
7 Lausiume Occasional Papers. No. 8. ThaiidReport - Christian Witness to Secuiarited People. Wheaton: Lausanne Cornmittee for Wodd Evangelization, l98O., 6. U of M's students who daim belief in Gd,but demonstrate little evidence that he is involved in their lives?g Secularization contri butes to the subliminal agnosticism and incongmous behavior that mark their lives: "Secular people may still look 'religious' in much that they do... while al1 the while his fundamental allegiance to himself remains. By changing his symbls or revising his goals, he tries îo avoid confrontation with flife]... apart from Gd.l0 Without averting from the significance of this observation, it is shortsighted to provide ample commentary on the secularistfs behavior without understanding his rationale for supporting secul arism. An adequate response to this problem would go beyond mentioning the influence had upon society by the likes of Marx and Freud. It should also be noted that generalizations conceming the role of Chnstianity in the process of secularization are inadequate: "... such phenornena such as the Reformation contnbuted to the withdrawal of some areas of life from the church of Christendom, and thus to the secularization of these areas. '1 While maiemity, relativism, and pluralism are contributing factors, secularization has flourished, at least in part, because of the ineffectiveness of Christians to thoroughly influence the societies of which they are a part If this was not the case, Jesus would have had no reason to disclose his thoughts on the matter: "You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saitiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men. You are the light of the wodd. A city on a hi11 cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. lnstead they put i t on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. "12
"Canadian Undergraduate Studen t Questionnaire".38.
l0 Lausanne Occasional Papas. 5.
l1 R7id.7.
l2 Maühew 5 13-15. NIV. Excluding the triumphalistic political or social agenda as seen in some Christian groups, (Le. The Christian Coalition), i t does appear that moderate evangelicals, whose lives are onented to both God and society, can perenniall y influence culture in psitive measures. This does not ensure that the majority of society, or university communities, will choose to ally themselves with their cause. As has been seen with the U of M, secularization is inevitable; however, since its growth is contingent on identifiable factors, it can be countered. It could be contended that secularization murs not because it is a consequence of a superior wodd view. but because Christians becorne spirinially and socially impotent, failing to serve as a moral compass for society. Further evidence of this proclivity is found in the Old Testament After what had ken considered a golden era under the leadership of Joshua, Israel's proneness toward mediocri ty and moral decay becarne increasingl y apparent: "The people served the Lord throughout the lifetime of Joshua and of the elders who outlived him and who had seen al1 the great things the Lord had done for Israel ...After that whole generation had been gathered up to their fathers, another generation grew up, who knew neither the Lord nor what he had done for Israel. Then the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord and served the ~aals.l3
A much more subtle form of secularization affected the U of M as it moved from
Christian to state control in just forty y-. It was evident that an entire generation, or sector of society, infiuenced the aggregate society of which it was a part. When a generation of religious collegians failed to do so, secularism became alluring: the lifestyle that they desired was attainable without invoking God or religion. Philosophically, faith became virtually irrelevant. Since few distinguishing features
* The trend of secuiarization occurred throughout the Western world; the events which transpireci from 1877- 2917 at the U of M are a microcasmic example of a macrocosmic phenornenon. chamcterized people of laith, there was dirninishing support for the claim that Chnstianity would e~chtheir iives any more than secularization. In other words, once
they lost their saltiness, they were destined to be discarded and trampled by those around them. In effect, they becorne marginalized. It is recommended that members of the religious colleges, Chaplaincies, and Christian groups involve themselves in the culture of the University, engaging i t with relevance and sensitivity. It should be remembered that their calling is " to timely communication of that timeless message." l4 Finally, in spite of the pst-Christian inclination to doubt the possibility of a resurgence of spirituai vitality at the U of M, a re- orientation is recommended by some advocates of Christiani ty: " We are inclined to see the worid and the future from a purely human perspective. We assume that the development will go on and that the future is determined, secularization will increase, and
that people will increasingly tum away from God. That is the attitude of defeatism. It paralyzes our faith and curbs Our courage. The question should mther be: What can God do? What will he do? What is the goal of Our work? Do we see the opportunities which
the emergence of secularism has placed before us?" 15 These are the types of questions that the secularization of the University should elicit Failure to respond to them will on1y impel the conscious and subli mind forces of seculansm. rendering the probabili ty of further conciliation between the secular and the sacred more difficult than ever before. Third, religious students and faculty must reaiize that the Enlightenment has greatly influenceci the thinking and behavior of modem man. The challenge is to understand presuppositions of western thought, as well as to empathize with the secular individual -- that is, on conditions that reflect his own felt needs. Knowing the foundation upnwhich his core beliefs have ken erected will facilitate genuine
l4 Lausanne Occasionai Papers, 28.
l5 Ibid.. 31. encounters of intellectual and spiri tua1 proportions. Further, signifiant characteris tics of
modem Western culture must be challenged by Christianity. Wri ting without sectarian
interests. Northrop Frye argues in nie Great Code: nie Bible and fiterature, that the
Bible is the hailmark of Western culture. That assertion alone provides reason for
engaging secularism. Yet, it will not do to say, "The Bible telis me so,' if you cannot give reasons for choosing the Bible rather than the Qurfan, the Gita, or Das Capital.16
As part of Western culture, it must be realized that secular university students bomw vimies from Chnstianity. It is not difficult to trace the major trends that have led to this quandary. To enter the world of medievai scholarship, one had to achowledge the Divine in dl of nature. Scientism began to replace biblid expianations for our world during the Enlightenrnent An eighteenth century celebration of "the geometric spintu applied to al1 forms of human knowledge, replacing the role of Gdin the pursuit of truth, knowledge, and moral conduct Later Nietzsche declared, "'Gd is deadf; Nietzsche did not mean that a rdking 'Goci' died, but rather the concept of God which had ken the organizing principle of Western society was gone." 17 One would think that a conspiracy was waged against Christianity. However, the cumulative effects of factors already mentioned, along with the ideas of Darwin, Freud, Marx, and the aforementioned Nietzsche, wreaked hava on the Christian faith. The result was an undeniable marginalization of Christianity to the private sphere, which has been clearly seen on the University. And even this is in jeopardy. Tan mmreally be made for faith in the private world if it is banished from the public world as merel y a poor substitute for secure howledge?" 18 This is precisely what happened to the faith of the founding fathers of the U of M. In the words of a Christian scholar, the consequences of
-- - 16 Lesslie New bigin Foolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans Publishing CO., 1986), 11. refusing to respond to this banishment are obvious: "But for the modem church to accept this [private] status is to do exact1y w hat the early church refused to do and what the
Bible forbids us to do. It is, in effect, to deny the kingship of Christ over al1 of lire - public and private. It is to deny that Christ is, simply and finally, the truth by which ail other daims to tmth are to be tested. It is to abandon its calling."g These are not just the sentiments of a contemporary religious academic. 1ronicall y, George Bryce, the founding father who substantiall y influenced the secularization pmsat the U of M, stated in 1903: "The man who is strenuous in the gospel sense has something to Say and do. Nehemiah knew what he had to do. Men might cal1 him narrow minded, a zealot, but he had one object before him, and toward this he constantiy moved. Luther was more su~cessfulthan Erasmus because he saw the path and followed i t, when it was hazy and uncertain to his friend. And in doing the Al1 -
Dominating work the man must have a gospel of reality, of assertion, of confidence." 20 It has been demonstrated that, at least conceming the role of the Christian within the University, Bryce's vision may have ken a bit hazy. However, dong with his colleagues in St. John's and St. Boniface, he intended to be faithful to the cd1 of both a cleric and a professor.
As Bryce has illus trated, there can be neither toial identification of the church and the university, nor a total separation between them. Rather, there is much room for debate as to how these apparent1y paradoxical forces are ordered. Perhaps a balanced view is expressed here: "The church today cannot without guilt absolve itself from the responsibility, where it sees the possibility, of seeking to shape the public life of nations and the global ordering of industry and commerce in light of the Christian fai th. Even where the church is a tiny minority with no political power, it has the duty to address the
l9 Ibid.. 102.
20 Bryce. 3. goveming authority of the civil community with the word of God...How this is to be done is the question with which we must wrestle; but that it must be done is certain."21
The U of M is much different today îhan it was in 1877. It is now considered to be a secular university. Y et, according to U of M historian John Wortley, " govemment - intervention in higher education is something which was little known until the last century.... "22 The 1917 amendment to the University Act officially ended Christian control of the U of M. However, a contemporary of the three founding fathers reminds us of the certainty of their vision for and claim to the University: "For it is the business of an
University to gather into itself al1 the branches of learning, to adopt and interweave with the old and well-tried, what is new and modem;to assist in its measure, and according to its capability in the work of scientific discovery, but far more to sanctify scientific discovey... when the human mind thus stndes onwards, let it be the University's privilege to demonstrate that the exceIlency of al1 this, is not of man, but of God; that while man discovers, he discovers what God has made, what Gdgives him to understand.
Universities let us remember are Christian institutions."23 Seventy years ago the edi tors of the Yale Daily lamented that their beloved university had changed: "... without religion in the daily life, without Gd...in such a pagan and materiai atmsphere it is as unimaginable as it would be unworthy of her sons to allow such a complete revenion of the fundamental principals [sic] upon which the
University stands... Are we going to be heretics to the traditions and ideals of the ~niversity?"=Similarly, former Professor of the U of M, W. L. Morton. declared that
22 ThePassionate Intellect." lecture by Rof. John Wortley, The Historical Imagination and Its Future: The Changing Forms of Universities?". 2.
23 1. H. Nicolis. "An Address Delivered Before the Convocation of Bishop's Coiicge. cited by D.C. Mas ters, Protestant ChUrch Colleges in Canada: A Htrrory (ïoronto. 1966). 5.
24 George Marsden. nie SenrIaritatwn ofthe Aca&my (New York, NY: Oxford Uuiversity Ress, 1992). 155. there had been "a great and unintentional omission in the present life of the university ..., the omission of any symbol of religion and of any place of worship. Simply to blank out the historic faiths of die community, neither to practice nor deny but to ignore religion, is
to misrepresent the society which the universi ty serves. "25 Great changes would have to befall the U of M for its religious ethos to be
restored to its former Christian essence. To illustrate, the original coat of arms for the
University seal included an open Bible with the text of Daniel 1: 17, "To these four young
men God gave knowledge and understanding of ail kinds of literanire and leaniing. And Daniel could understand visions and dreams of al1 kinds."* While the coat of anns remains unchanged, adoming various memorabilia throughout the University, its significance has long since vanished. Yet, the voice of an erudite University President reminds us that "If wisdom prevails, leadership will be given a chance and the univenity may regain its former status. Othenvise the university will enter the new century a rather unexciting institution dominated by the professions and highly speciaiized graduate
programs but without much to say about the great human, ethical, and spiritual questions of the day."26 Those questions were welcomed and vigorously debated from the founding of the U of M into the twentieth century; three short years remain until a new rnillenium,
and the great questions that accompany it, continues to shape the religious ethos of the University of Manitoba.
- 25 Mortm. IO.
26 Murray G. Ross. The Way Mwt Be Tried: Memoirs of a University Mon (Toronto: Stoddan Pub., 1992). 218 WORKS CITED
"Apathy,"Manitoban, Sept 7, 1995.
Blmm, Allan. 1987. nie Closing of the Arnerican MM.New York: Simon & Schuster. Bryce, Rev. George. "The All-Dominating Work," Opening Sermon of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, Vancouver, 1903. " Canada at a Glance," Statistics Canada, 1995.
"Canadian Undergraduate Student Questionnaire" , Campus Crusade for Christ, Surrey, 1988. Cox, Harvey. "The Warring Visions of the Religious Right,"Ailmtic Monthly, November, 1995.
Cox, Paul. "The Issue is Perception," The Bridge, La Mirada, CA. Issue 6, Nov. 1995.
Durston, Kirk. "A Powerful Influence Through Positive Faith," Christian Week, November 14, 1995.
Fay, Terence J. "The Jesuit University: St Paul's College and UM Centralization." A paper presented at the the 61st Canadian Catholic Historical Association Meeting, University of Calgary, 1994.
Fraser, William John. "A History of St John's College, Winnipeg." M.A. Thesis, University of Manitoba, 1966. Fiye, Northrop. 1990. The Great Code. Markham: Penguin.
Gairdner, Wi lliarn. 1994. 27~Trouble With Canada. Toronto: Stoddart.
Glenn, A. L "A Astory of the University of Manitoba, February 20, 1877 to Februaty 28, 1927." M.A. thesis, University of Manitoba, 1927.
Guide to Celebration '95, "The Myth of Gen X: Defining a Generation," Jan. 1995, University of Manitoba. Gwynn, Richard. 1995. NutionulLsm WifhoutW&. Toronto: McCleIland and Stewart. Hauenvas, Stanley. 1988. Christian Existence Taday. Durham: The Labyrinth Press.
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. 1995. The De-Moralization of Society: From Victoriun Virtues to Modern Values. New York: Alfred A. Knopt
"History of the University of Manitoba." [1] http://www.umanitoba.ca [Accessed 20 Jan 19963. Hunier, James Davidson. 1987. Evnngelic~lkrn:The Coming Genmtion. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
'Institutional Statistics", Office of Institutionai Analysis, University of Manitoba, August, 19%.
Johnstone, Patrick 1993. Operation World. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Kilian, Crawford. 1995. 2020 Visions: The Futures of Canudîan Education. Vancouver: Arsenal Pulp Press.
Lausanne Occasional Papers, No. 8. niailand Report - Chrirtian Wibtess fo Secularized People, Wheaton: Lausanne Cornmittee for World Evangelization, 1980.
MacDonald, C. L. "George Bryce, Manitoba Scientist, Churchman and Histonan, 1844- 193 1." M.A. thesis, University of Manitoba, 1983.
Machray, Robert. 1909. Life of Rober? Machray. Toronto: MacMillan. Marsden, George. 1992. The Secuhrization of the Acodemy . New York: Oxford University Press. Masefield, John. "The University," cover of Alumni Journal, Vol. 44, No.2, Winter, 1984, Alumni Association, University of Manitoba.
Mas ters, D.C. 1966. Prolestant Church Colleges in Canada: A HLrtory. Toronto.
McKee, Jasper. "TheIdea of Progress: Knowledge, Power, and Values," 1996.
Minutes of the Board of Govemors of the University of Manitoba, Dafoe Library Archives, 1935. Minutes of University Council 1, IV, VI, Ddoe Library Archives.
Morton, W.L. 1957. One University. London: McClelland and Stewart.
Multiculturalism and Citizenship Canada "Multiculturalism: What is it Really About," 1995. "Mu1hcd~rahm: What is it Really About?" ~~dticulturalisrnand Citizenship Canada, 1991.
Naimark, Amodd. "What Does the Public Get for Its Money?: Elitist Institutions in a Democratic Society," 1996.
Neilson, William A. W. 1%. Universities in Crisis: A Mediaeval Insîiîution in the Twenîy-First Centuq. Montreal: The Institute for Research on Public Policy.
Newbigin, Lesslie. 1986. FoolLrhness to the Greeh: nie Gospel and Western Culture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Offereins, Tanya. "HersAlive and Well, Thank Y ou," CalMdian Challenge, Vancouver: Campus Crusade for Christ, Canada, December 1989.
Office of Institutionai Analysis, "Institutional Statistics,"ünivenity of Manitoba, August, 19%.
Pickering, W. S. F. "Religion and the Undergraduate: A Study of Changes in the Religious Faith and Practice of Shidents in the University of Manitoba. " Winnipeg: St. John's College, 1965.
Plato, 1954. The Lat Days ofSocrates. London: Penguin Books.
"PresidentrsMessage Regarding the Task Force on Strategic Planning," [l] http:llwww.umanitoba.ca [Accessed 15 Feb 19973. Ross, Murray G. 1992. The Way Mut Be Tried: Mernoirs of a University Man. Toronto: Stoddm. Saunderson, Hugh. H. 1981. nie Saunderson Years. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Printing Services. Solomon, Jon and Robert Solomon. 1993. Up 2% University. Reading: Addison-Wesley. Spence, W. J. 1918. HLrtorical Notes, 1877-1917. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba
Sproul. R. C. 1986. LiJéviews: Uriderstanding the Idem That Shape Society Today. New Jersey: Fieming H. Revell. 1993. Canudian Evangelicalkm in the Twentieth Century. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Stackhouse, John. "The Historical Imagination and Its Future: Why Do People Need Universi ties?," 1996. The University of Toronto and ID Colleges, 1827-1906. Toronto: The University Li brary, 1906. "The Y ells Resumed: For the Romotion of the Cause of Higher Education," Manitoba Free Press, Oct., 1898. Tinder, Glenn. "CmWe Be GdWithout God?"The Atlantic Monfhly, Dec., 1989.
Tolkien, J. R. R. 1%5. The Return of the King. New York: Ballantine Books.
University of Manitoba Centennial Project, From Rural Parkland to Urbun C'enter: One Hudred Years of Growth ai the University of Manitoba, 1877-1977.Winnipeg: Hyperion Press, 1978.
WiImot, L. F. "The Christian Churches of the Red River Settlement and the Foundation of the University of Manitoba: An Historical Analysis of the Process of Transition From Fmntier College to University." M.A. thesis, University of Manitoba, 1979.
Wortley, John. "The Historical Imagination and Its Future: The Changing Forms of Universities?," 1996. Appendix 1 TEST TARGET (QA-3)
APPLIED -& IMAGE. lnc -= 1653 East Main Street ----. - Rochester. NY 14609 USA ---- Phone: 71 6/482-0300 ------Fa: 716/288-5989
O 7993. Appiied Image. tnc.. Ail Rights RtSe~ed