COLUMN: On Parliament Hill – No prayer allowed

A relatively quiet government directive affecting the Canadian Armed Forces was issued in July 2026. Despite receiving little public fanfare, it deserves our attention.

The prime minister and the Liberal government are attacking faith—especially the Christian faith.

The policy directive intends to, “define the boundaries of appropriate language, actions, and symbols during military ceremonies and gatherings.” What that means in plain language is that in the name of inclusivity, “religious specific language” is excluded. An example of what language is now excluded is the word God.

The directive offers exceptions. Some liturgical references can be used for instruction and education. But that’s only for the purpose of understanding those traditions. The other exception is with Indigenous spiritual practices being inserted into public services for cultural and reconciliation purposes.

Some of you have written to me about your concerns, and I share them. This directive represents more than a policy change. It marks a departure from the longstanding role of religious expression within the Canadian Armed Forces and raises serious questions about the future of faith and chaplaincy in our military.

Conservative Shadow Minister James Bezan described the changes as, “yet another attack by the Liberals on freedom of religion and expression, which are guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” He also argued that the Canadian Armed Forces should not become a testing ground for woke Liberal ideologies.

The concern is not simply about changing terminology. It is about what happens when religious expression is permitted in principle but increasingly constrained in practice.

And this did not come out of nowhere.

A few years ago, Conservatives saw this direction coming with the release of the military’s advisory panel report. At the time, we sounded the alarm.

In January 2022, the Minister of National Defense Advisory Panel on Systemic Racism and Discrimination, proposed significant changes to the culture of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.

One section, entitled “Redefining Chaplaincy” concluded mainstream religions, currently represented in the armed forces, had “misogyny, sexism and discrimination” woven into their beliefs, according to the report. Chaplaincy applicants affiliated with mainstream religious groups would be at risk unless they were ready to challenge their own beliefs. Representatives from other forms of spirituality with alternative pathways for educational equivalency to a master’s degree would be considered, such as Indigenous Knowledge Keepers.

Consequential to the report, the July 2026 directive puts into practice a broader redefinition of what spiritual support and chaplaincy should look like within the Canadian Armed Forces.

But prohibiting the use of the name of God and what is defined as religious language or symbol, raises an obvious question: Who determines what constitutes religious-specific language?

Consider what that means.

A chaplain may speak about hope, meaning, purpose and spiritual well-being. But when does speaking about spirituality become too explicitly religious? And what happens when the very word that gives a chaplain’s faith its meaning—God—is treated as language that should be avoided?

For a soldier preparing to serve, knowing that their service may ultimately require the greatest sacrifice, this is not an abstract question.

For generations, military chaplains have provided comfort, courage, hope and strength by drawing upon faith and a belief in something greater than us. They have stood beside members of the Canadian Armed Forces in moments of fear, grief, loss and uncertainty.

Faith is not simply a vocabulary. For a Christian, hope is not merely an abstract concept. It has a source. For many people of faith, meaning is not merely an exercise. It is grounded in a relationship with God.

A chaplain’s ministry is not simply private. It exists to provide spiritual care to members of the Armed Forces, including during some of the most difficult moments imaginable.

Is it still religious freedom without the freedom to address God by name? Here’s the rub. For Christians, prayer is not simply another form of reflection. For Christians, prayer is communication with God. Scripture is not simply an historical document. It is foundational to the Christian faith.

We should all be paying attention.

Those who serve our country deserve access to chaplains who can provide counsel, spiritual hope, strength and encouragement using the resources of their faith—not simply a government-approved vocabulary for spirituality.

I am concerned about this Liberal government’s continued interference in traditions, values and personal freedoms. We all should be.

Clearly, we should be providing counsel, spiritual hope, strength, and encouragement through timeless resources to people who have given of themselves in service to our country. The Canadian Armed Forces is not a social experience for ideologies of the day.