Look back for a new direction

The Diocese of Toronto has redistributed more than $100,000 in the past year to Indigenous communities from the sale of land, with another round of funding scheduled this spring. In 2021, Bishop Andrew Asbil published a letter to Synod about Motion 12, which called for the establishment of a Reconciliation Land Tithe: “This motion is born out of what many feel is a stirring of the Holy Spirit in our Church: a call to tithe to Indigenous communities 10 per cent of funds from the sale of diocesan real estate.”

Other dioceses have also committed to a 10 per cent tithe, while the Province of the Northern Lights (formerly the Province of Rupert’s Land) passed a motion in 2024 pledging 50 per cent of revenue from land sales to Indigenous communities. A spirit of repentance, renewal and return is indeed blowing across the land.

In his support of Motion 12, Bishop Asbil emphasized our need to examine the concept of property theologically and historically: how did the Diocese of Toronto acquire land?

In 1763, King George III’s royal proclamation asserted English dominion and sovereignty over the Great Lakes basin and much of Turtle Island (North America). Indigenous nations were under his “dominion” and only the Crown was to sell Indigenous lands. The Independent Special Interlocutor’s Executive Summary: Final Report on the Missing and Disappeared Indigenous Children and Unmarked Burials in Canada, states that:

“The majority of lands in Canada are owned and managed by government. The concept of ‘Crown land’ comes from 11^th century British law that asserts that only the Crown could properly own lands. [In Canada,] less than 11 per cent of land is in private hands, 41 per cent is federal Crown land, and another 48 per cent is provincial Crown land. These Crown lands generate government income through surface and subsurface rights to the mineral, energy, forest and water resources leased to private enterprises… [Crown lands as a concept] upholds the Doctrine of Discovery, and currently there is no Canadian legal pathway to resume full jurisdiction and governance authority over Indigenous lands.”

Under this framework, Indigenous nations were divided and confined to small reserve lands, which are ultimately controlled by the Crown. The Crown justified ongoing colonization and land theft on Turtle Island through an emphasis on Christianization. This was expressed in the 1791 Constitutional Act, which privileged the Church of England over other denominations and granted it one-seventh of all Crown lands, known as the Clergy Reserves. The Clergy Reserves were used to build parishes and rectories, while others were leased and sold to settlers, with profits held by the Church of England in Upper Canada. Settlers were encouraged to clear-cut the lands, once teeming with biodiversity. Profits from the sale of Clergy Reserves continue to generate profits that fund parishes in the Diocese of Toronto. The Clergy Reserve system demonstrates the economic privilege of the Diocese of Toronto built on the displacement of Indigenous nations.

Indigenous nations, including the Anishinabek nations that signed treaties with settlers (the Williams treaties and the treaties of Toronto), did not consider this a land “surrender” but a sacred commitment to sharing and hospitality. This came up against English ideas of private property and racism. For example, in 1796 a group of soldiers of the Queen’s York Rangers attempted to rape family members of Chief Wabakinine who were camped near St. Lawrence Market, where they sold salmon. Chief Wabakinine was a signatory of the first of the Toronto treaties. The settlers beat Chief Wabakinine and his wife to death. Despite the lobbying and outrage of the Mississaugas and Anishinabek nations, settlers in power, who were overwhelmingly members of the Church of England, would not prosecute the offenders. As Reclaiming Power and Place, the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls and Two-Spirit People demonstrated in 2019, gender-based violence, denial of Indigenous sovereignty, the breaking of treaties and land dispossession continue to be interconnected forces.

As Indigenous peoples were violently displaced from their territories, the Anglican Church expanded and participated in the denial of Indigenous sovereignty and genocide of Indigenous nations. Our wealth and land holdings are rooted in a history and ongoing presence of occupation that seeks to place Indigenous sovereignty as a struggle somewhere far away – not under our very feet. Anglicans across the diocese are committed to meaningfully addressing this imbalance of power and wealth, taking steps to reckon with our historic privilege.

Repentance means a turning around or a change of direction: how can our examination of our past inform a new path forward? In this Season of Spiritual Renewal, what fruits worthy of repentance might be born from our recognition of our spiritual obligations and responsibilities on this land? As we examine our relationship to property and the future of the Reconciliation Land Tithe, the Anishinabek nation has called for Land Back; how might the Church respond?