Here's the second in a series of blogs relating to the Papal Apology and my reflections on it as presented in my Doctoral Dissertation. As before I hope those taking the time to read it do so in the spirit of reconciliation it was originally written in and it sparks discussion among people interested in Indigenous topics and my personal approach to the challenges and rewards of reconciliation.
The Headdress Presentation
At the conclusion of his apology Pope Francis was presented with a headdress. It is a great honour to be gifted a headdress by an Indigenous Elder. It is a greater distinction when you consider that Pope Francis was presented with a headdress by Dr. Wilton Littlechild. As I wrote about in the previous section, actions speak volumes. Do I think that the headdress was presented as an honouring gift? Yes, but not fully. I believe that the presenting of the headdress is more meaningful in the act of reconciliation. The presentation itself contributes to the act of reconciliation. As I watched the process I waited to see if the gift would be accepted as it was presented. I admit, I was shocked in witnessing Pope Francis allowing the headdress to be placed upon his head, but also on top of his zucchetto. If Pope Francis was not sincere in his actions of meeting Indigenous residential school survivors and asking forgiveness, I think that this was the one thing which showed his true intentions. Pope Francis wears his papal robes in a similar manner to the Indigenous Peoples’ regalia. He could have easily said a feather headdress is simply not allowed, but he did not.
This act along with others during the process will be divided in how it is viewed and accepted or not. There is an argument to be made that sacred symbols such as a headdress should not be gifted to someone who is the true representation of those that caused the harm in residential schools. But the presentation of the headdress was done by a well-respected Elder in the community, who was formerly a commissioner in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, as well as former Grand Chief of Treaty Six Nations. This is worth acknowledging. It leads to questioning whether there are Elders who are further along in the process of reconciliation than others. I often think this may be true when I listen to how my own Auntie talks about her residential school experience.
I have concluded for myself that the apology from Pope Francis was a good thing. It was needed by many for reconciliation and healing to move forward. He needed to come to Canada to show by his actions that he is sincere in his apology. It would not have held the same meaning or had the same effect had he just issued an apology via the internet. He stated that the purpose of his trip was a penitential pilgrimage meant to contribute to healing and reconciliation. He talked about how he was gifted two pairs of moccasins by the Indigenous People who met with him in Rome months before his visit to Canada. He made the promise to return those moccasins to Canada when he came, in memory of the children lost at residential schools. He fulfilled that promise.
Returning the moccasins came to symbolize the walking together that must occur for reconciliation to be manifest. He acted on good faith that the Indigenous People in Canada
would accept him and acknowledge his actions. He honoured the Elders who are the residential school survivors and memorialized the children who were lost to residential schools. He did so as an act of reconciliation.Research/Reconciliation/Relationship
My research was created on a foundation of reconciliation. The act of contributing to reconciliation changed meaning for me, and my research as the process moved forward. It gained deeper meaning after I conducted the data gathering with my research partners. What began as ‘reconciliation as an action’ developed into ‘reconciliation as relationship building’ and then further became defined as ‘reconciliation as relationship changing’. What was witnessed by the world in Maskwacis, AB was a historic event which contributed to changing relationships for reconciliation.
The question can and should be asked “How does the Pope coming to Canada contribute to reconciliation”? Does the Papal visit change relationships? Again, I answer, yes. Some will be changed for the good. Some will be changed in a negative way. There are those who are either not wanting, not willing, or not able to walk the path of reconciliation currently. These few will stagnate on social media, spewing vitriol regarding the visit to Canada by Pope Francis, andcondemning Indigenous individuals who do not agree with their stance. Every Indigenous and non-Indigenous person has a different relationship with reconciliation. Every individual defines reconciliation in a different way. This is the way that it should be. Walking the path of reconciliation is personal and is something that is completed at various stages, within different timeframes, for everyone. If the trip from the Vatican City in Rome to Alberta, Canada by the head of the Catholic church, and all that he represents cannot be accepted as a step towards reconciliation, then what will it take? The Truth and Reconciliation Calls to Action (TRCC,2015) required that the Pope of the Catholic church deliver an apology for their role in residential schools. Pope Francis fulfilled the requirements of call to action #58 (TRCC, 2015) by making this trip and issuing the apology on Treaty Six territory. Recognizing that this is a step for the good in the reconciliation journey does not mean that all is forgiven, and all pasts are erased.
Reflection II
As it happened to work out the week in which Pope Francis landed in Canada and began his week travelling through the country, I had a meeting set with my supervisor, Dr. Mairi McDermott. We had scheduled in to discuss my discussion chapter related to the findings of my data gathering. I sent her a change of topic request and the previously written piece of what I am calling my ‘immediate response and reflection’ on the Pope’s visit and apology. As it turned out it was only the first apology he would make during his time in Canada. Pope Francis would continue his trip and make another apology later in the week during his time in Quebec and Nunavut. I watched the remainder of the trip and the events surrounding his travels with a more distanced observance.
I continued to watch the social media reactions to the apologies and events. As I began the observance of the initial apology I continued to evaluate and relate what was occurring to my research and the impacts that it was having on me personally as I reflected from day to day. There were a few things that directly related to me and my research which influenced this second part of this writing for my dissertation.
The first thing that occurred was hearing the reaction of my husband after he read the first section of this writing. As usually happens with him, he will read anything I have written late in the day, and long after I have finished working on it. My husband is not only my life partner, but he has also taken on his own role as a research partner in the way that he has read and provided feedback to me at every stage of this degree. On this occasion he stood in our kitchen reading, late at night after he arrived home from work. He finished reading what is presented in the previous section of this writing. This time he expressed an immediate reaction. He described his reaction as being visceral. This was something he had never expressed before. He told me that he has previously had similar reactions to reading my writing. His comments were touching and made me realize that he is as influenced by my work as much as anyone. He shows his support for me and my work in many ways and I am always appreciative when he expresses a deep meaningful reaction. It gives me hope that my work may touch others similarly. This reaction and description also influenced my decision on keeping the initial reflection as it was written and not change it into an academically written piece, other than adding in a reference to the transcript of the Pope’s apology.
The second thing that occurred was the meeting that I had with my supervisor and discussing my initial reaction/writing. Dr. McDermott’s first thoughts on what I had written was that it could be the introduction to my dissertation, as a prologue to the work. As I thought about how my reaction and reflection would fit into my writing, I decided that if I were to be truly an honest reaction it should be left as true to the initial writing as it could be. What is presented above has very little editing done to it for this reason. Staying true to my research means that I need to accept that my emotional reaction and how I write it into my work is not a negative. I too often think that everything must be presented academically written, which can mean that emotions and reflections are removed, regulated, and controlled.
The third event that inspired this piece will be addressed in the next blog
Comments