Canada’s coat of arms, adopted in 1921, stands upon the Latin phrase “A Mari Usque Ad Mare,” which when translated means “from sea to sea” a reference to Psalms 72:8. The present design of the arms of Canada was drawn by Mrs. Cathy Bursey-Sabourin, Fraser Herald at the Canadian Heraldic Authority, office of the Governor General of Canada, and faithfully depicts the arms described in the words of the Royal Proclamation dated November 21, 1921. The present design was approved in 1994 and shows a ribbon behind the shield with the motto of the Order of Canada, “Desiderantes meliorem patriam” which translates “They desire a better country” which stems from Hebrews 11:16. This version replaces a former design drawn by Mr. Alan Beddoe.
Canada’s official motto “A Mari usque ad Mare” meaning “From sea to sea” is based on Psalms 72:8, “He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.” The first official use of this motto came in 1906 when it was engraved on the head of the mace of the Legislative Assembly of the new Province of Saskatchewan. The wording of the motto came to the attention of Sir Joseph Pope, then Under Secretary of State, who was impressed with its meaning. He later proposed it as motto for the new design of the coat of arms, which was approved by Order in Council on April 21, 1921 and by Royal Proclamation on November 21, 1921.
|In Numbers 2:2-34,
God commanded the tribes of ancient Israel on their way
to the Promised Land to divide into four brigades of
three tribes each when they set up camp—with each
brigade arranged on one side of the square camp. Each
brigade would assemble behind the "standard" of the
leading tribe on its side. The four leading tribes were
Judah, Reuben, Ephraim and Dan. The Jewish Encyclopedia
("Flag") and many other sources attest that the ancient
heraldic symbol on the standard of Ephraim was a bull or
The origin of these symbols can be traced to the prophecies God gave regarding particular tribes (Gen. 49; Deut. 33). Remember what God had said of Ephraim and Manasseh: "His glory is like a firstborn BULL, and his horns [weapons] are like the horns of a wild OX ["UNICORNS" KJV]" (Deut. 33:17). Notice that the New King James replaced the King James word "unicorns" with "a wild ox." This is certainly correct since the medieval unicorn idea is thought to have originated from the bovine oryx of the Sinai Peninsula and not from any horse-related animals!
In Genesis 49:9, God said, “Judah is a lion's whelp." The lion became the national symbol of Judah—and was later tied to the House of David. Jesus Christ, the Messiah who sprang from that line, is called "the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David" (Rev. 5:5). But we have also seen the lion used as a symbol of Joseph's military power (Mic. 5:8-9) along with the bull and wild ox (or unicorn).
Of course, we see these symbols elsewhere in Scripture
too. For instance, Israel became associated with THE
LION AND THE UNICORN (or wild ox) in Numbers 24:8-9 (KJV)—representing
the scepter and birthright tribes of Judah and Joseph
respectively. Incredibly, both these symbols appear on
the British Coat of Arms, their Great Seal.
The Beginnings of Canada
In 1497, when Italian seafarer John Cabot explored Canada's Atlantic coast for England. Then Basque and Portuguese mariners established seasonal whaling and fishing outposts along the Atlantic coast in the early 16th century. In 1534, French explorer Jacques Cartier explored the St. Lawrence River, where, on July 24, he planted a 10-metre (33 ft) cross bearing the words "Long Live the King of France" and took possession of the territory in the name of King Francis I. To commemorate the founding of Montréal, Cartier wrote in his diary “…we all kneeled down in the company of the Indians and with our hands raised toward heaven yielded our thanks to God.”
In 1583, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, by the royal prerogative of Queen Elizabeth I, founded St. John's, Newfoundland, as the first North American English colony. French explorer Samuel de Champlain arrived in 1603 and established the first permanent European settlements at Port Royal (in 1605) and Quebec City (in 1608). The “Father of New France, [Quebec]” Samuel de Champlain, wrote in his diary about the natives, “…(the aborigines are) living without God and without religion…I thereupon concluded in my private judgment that I should be committing a great sin if I did not make it my business to devise some means of bringing them to the knowledge of God.”
The English established additional colonies in Cupids and Ferryland, Newfoundland, beginning in 1610. The Thirteen Colonies to the south were founded soon after. A series of four wars erupted in colonial North America between 1689 and 1763; the later wars of the period constituted the North American theatre of the Seven Years' War. Mainland Nova Scotia came under British rule with the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht and the 1763 Treaty of Paris ceded Canada and most of New France to Britain after the Seven Years' War.
"John Cabot's voyage of
1497". Memorial University of Newfoundland. 2000. Retrieved August
Hornsby, Stephen J (2005). British Atlantic, American frontier: spaces of power in early modern British America. University Press of New England. pp. 14, 18–19, 22–23.
Cartier, Jacques; Biggar, Henry Percival; Cook, Ramsay (1993). The Voyages of Jacques Cartier. University of Toronto Press. p. 26.
Rose, George A (October 1, 2007). Cod: The Ecological History of the North Atlantic Fisheries. Breakwater Books. p. 209.
Ninette Kelley; Michael J. Trebilcock (September 30, 2010). The Making of the Mosaic: A History of Canadian Immigration Policy. University of Toronto Press. p. 27.
Howard Roberts LaMar (1977). The Reader's Encyclopedia of the American West. University of Michigan. p. 355.
Tucker, Spencer C; Arnold, James; Wiener, Roberta (September 30, 2011). The Encyclopedia of North American Indian Wars, 1607–1890: A Political, Social, and Military History. ABC-CLIO. p. 394.
Phillip Alfred Buckner; John G. Reid (1994). The Atlantic Region to Confederation: A History. University of Toronto Press. pp. 55–56
Nolan, Cathal J (2008). Wars of the age of Louis XIV, 1650–1715: an encyclopedia of global warfare and civilization. ABC-CLIO. p. 160.
Allaire, Gratien (May 2007). "From "Nouvelle-France" to "Francophonie canadienne": a historical survey". International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2007 (185):
The difference between a colony and Immigrants
One of the major lies being perpetuated today by the left wing politicians and the media is that Canada is a "nation of immigrants." They keep saying the nation was founded by immigrants, but the country was founded by COLONISTS. The colonists (English) who founded Canada were not immigrants. The founding colonists were quintessential Canadians. They created the nation that Immigrants decided to come to. "Colonists bring their own culture, their own language, their own ways to the new land and attempt to adapt it to the new area. In our specific example, the earliest Americans saw themselves as British and tried to expand the British way of life in the New World." (A Nation of Immigrants? Jay Tea).
Colonists created the nation of Canada, and instituted their British culture, religion, government etc...They were not immigrants. These were "Pioneers" and "Settlers" there is a difference! The New Oxford English Dictionary is very clear. An Immigrant is a "person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country." A Settler however is a " person who settles in an area, typically with no or few previous inhabitants." Pioneer is described as, " a person who is among the first inhabitants to explore or settle a new country or area" Pioneering means, "to be the first to use or apply a new method, area of knowledge, or activity open up a terrain as a pioneer."
Samuel Huntington makes this clear distinction in his book Who are We? He writes, "Settlers and immigrants differ fundamentally. Settlers leave and existing society, usually in a group in order to create a new community...Immigrants, in contrast, do not create a new society. They move from one society to a different society" (p.39)
Immigrants are different. They are not looking to expand their home culture, but become a part of a new one. They might keep some of their old ways, but for the most part they have chosen to set it aside in favor of a new way of life.
The colonies were created by English settlers mainly by the Empire loyalists. These colonized the United States, then losing everything due to the war of Independence deciding to stay loyal to the Mother country left all and settled in Canada. Do immigrants set up government institutions in the new country that they settle? No! They adopt to the institutions that are already there. The Canadian Empire Loyalists did no such thing. Today historians try to make history politically correct, and make it out that the Loyalist were "multi-cultural" etc...But the fact is, they established British Culture, and wanted to live under the British institutions. The minorities that were with them wanted the same thing. The Majority of these people were British, and wanted British culture to rule and reign, not multi-culturalism. In fact, "The Loyalists, as their name already implies, wished to remain faithful subjects of the Crown and under the legal and legislative institutions that derived from the Crown. They came to Canada so they could continue to live under those same institutions...In Upper Canada, it established a system of land tenure as well as a court system modeled on British Common Law that continues in Ontario to this day." (The Significance of June 19th the Loyalist Day, article by By Alexander Roman Ph.D., emphasis added). Does this sound like multi-culturalism? Sir John A. MacDonald Canada's first Prime Minister said, "As for myself, my course is clear. A British subject I was born — a British subject I will die"
In fact Canada's immigration experience has been overwhelmingly British since the sixteenth century, [not to mention the high birth rates among the colonists as well] and for the first 100 years since Confederation in 1867 until 1967 the colonial policies were ethnically oriented. Everyone in society, the media, schools, political parties, took it for granted that "Canada was a British nation", or "an English-French nation" or simply "a White nation". No one challenged Prime Minister McKenzie King when he said in Parliament in 1947 that Canada should remain a white man's country. Not that he was racists, or that Canadians were racists, "but merely ethnocentric, that is a people with a natural and normal preference for their own ethnic traditions" (Canada in Decay, p.82, emphasis added).Canada was part of the British empire, and the British that were coming into Canada was not immigration, but a British person moving from one place in the empire to another like one moving from Ontario to Alberta; not an immigrant moving from one country to a completely different country altogether with different laws, culture, government etc..."the arrival of immigrants [as today's establishment calls them-the author makes that point] from the British Isles (with the exception of some whites from Germany) should also be identified as movement of internal migrants from the British Isles to other British lands...[the footnote, p.42 'the Oxford Dictionary of Sociology definition of 'internal migrant' as movement between regions [British lands and colonies] as opposed to 'external migration' (between countries)" (ibid, p.40, emphasis added).
Canada was almost totally European (British and French) from the beginning through to the 1970s, when it was still 96% white.
Ricardo Duchense sums it up perfectly, "...the constantly repeated claim that 'Canada is a nation of immigrants' is actually not supported by the historical demographic evidence, but is simply one of the many deceptions our elites have been employing to generate support for what can only be described as 'an experiment of major proportions' to create a Canada of diverse immigrants that never existed in the past. Students are being deceived by our major historians when they are taught that 'from the very beginning, the land that became Canada was a multiracial place, the destination of a constant flow of new immigrants of varying ethnicities.' The facts are amply clear: Canada's immigration experience was not only overwhelmingly European from the beginning until the 1960s/70s, but the Canadians who founded this nation were actually indigenous pioneers and settlers newly born in the hard cold soils of this nation. The Quebecois and the Acadians were a people created through the fecundity of the women, not immigration. The Loyalists, too, were not immigrants but settlers native to the soils of British North America. Before Confederation in 1867...there were only 'two quite limited periods' of substantial arrivals of 'immigrants' and these 'immigrants' were 'overwhelmingly of British origin.'
"...the word "immigrant" has been deviously extended to include actual settlers. Almost all the men and women who came to Canada from the British Isles and elsewhere in Europe before 1914 were settlers seeking survival in a land sparsely populated and devoid of modern development. Equating the indigenous Canadians who pioneered and settled Canada with the immigrants who came to a ready-made nation after 1921/1945 is part and parcel of the ideological effort of our elites on both the right and the left to destroy the national identities and heritages of European peoples in order to create a new global order dominated by corporations and human rights concepts concocted by well-off academics and 'experts' out of touch with their own people. While Amerindians were native to the soils that came to constitute the nation of Canada, they were not the 'first nations' of Canada since they were living in tribal units when Europeans arrived, and once Europeans took over they were gradually marginalized and relegated to reserves. The very act of creating a nation-state is a modern European phenomenon." (Canada in Decay, pp.2-3, emphasis added).
One can say the same for the United States, "It's not helping to have liberals patronizing immigrants with manifest nonsense about America being 'a nation of immigrants.'! Is US schools still taught US history [Canada as well], this would not come as an exciting surprise, but America IS NOT A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS. It's a nation of British and Dutch settlers...America is not a 'nation of immigrants,' its not an 'idea' it was never ;diverse,' and 'diversity' is a catastrophe...There was no America until the British and Dutch Arrived. They were not 'immigrants' because there was no established society for them to move to [hence the creation of colonies]..." (Adios America by Ann Coulter, pp.28, 51 emphasis added).
The Empire Loyalists
The Loyalist, were loyal to the crown in England and Empire. These, “Loyalists…emigrated northwards to the British colonies in Canada, which had all remained loyal [to the empire]…[and secured Canada for the empire, thanks to the flood of English speaking loyalist immigrants…” (Empire, p.101).
The Beginnings of Canada as a potential nation had its birth in the primeval forests of Upper Canada in the year1784. The Older English Provinces of Newfoundland and the Maritimes had their own governments. New France or Quebec remained culturally French under British Sovereignty and both building towards confederation which took place in 1867.
The Founding of Upper English Canada as a Royal British Province, in 1783 named later Ontario, can be regarded rightly as one of the momentous epochs in the drama of the Israelitish destiny.
These Loyalists accomplished a feat that probably many people would not do today. Start over! From scratch! One such family, was the family of Sir John Johnson. “He claimed to have been the richest man in the 13 colonies and the largest land owner. He lost it all! His loss is considered to be the largest sacrifice made by anyone person in British history, to remain loyal to the crown” (Jowett, Dominion, p.13). Would anyone in Canada today actually do that to be loyal TO the Throne of David, and the Empire? Would people sacrifice for the greater good the way these people did? Is there that kind of British or American patriotism today?
Now these Loyalists of Upper Canada after arriving in Canada in 1784, “within eight years performed the greatest achievement in political history. At Kingston Ontario, November 1791, they formed, under LT Gov. John Graves Simcoe, by Royal Decree, the first official assembly…in 1792…[in] Neward Niagara, they founded our first constitutional Parliamentary Government…these exiled Loyalists secured more for Great Britain…[and] Canada was the first country to abolish slavery, resolved at the first parliamentary meeting” (ibid, pp.13-14, emphasis added). Getting rid of slavery was unheard of in any part of the world back in those days, yet the British and Americans were the ones, because of the Christian influence, to rid the world of slavery. Another sovereign nation, the nation of Canada, was secured for the throne of Britain, i.e. the throne of David. Reigning under the union flag of Britain, which at confederation consolidated the North American Anglo Saxon people from coast to coast in 1867. Canadians, if you were wondering which year Canada was born.
It is significant, when confederation was founded, Sir John A. MacDonald, the first Prime Minister of Canada, proclaimed Canada, “THE DOMINION” The Dominion of Canada. He dedicated it in the name of the Ephraimite birthright, “To Judah his Sanctuary and Israel His Dominion” (Psalm 114:2). In the time of Confederation, the loyalists were scattered all over the Maritimes, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario. Confederation was to unite all the empire loyalist into one country.
Settlers in Canada
Let's look at the census of Canada during the time of these great settlements, and let's see if it follows the diversity and the pattern that we see today:
1. In 1871, according to the first census after Confederation, of the total population of 3.2 million, 32 percent were of French ancestry, 24 percent Irish, 20 percent English, 16 percent Scottish, and 6 percent German. Notice, therefore, that we should acknowledge the immense importance of the Irish and Scots in the first centuries of "English Canada". The Irish percentage of total immigration was 68.5 percent in 1825-9, 64.2 percent in 1830-9, 64.2 percent in 1840-9, 41.1 percent in 1850-9, and 22.4 percent in 1860-9. There were only 21,500 blacks and 23,000 natives in 1871; by contrast, there were 202,991 persons of German origin.
2.Canada cannot "accurately be portrayed at Confederation as a nation of immigrants". In 1867, 79 percent had been born in Canada. Over the 400 years before Confederation, there were only "two quite limited periods" of substantial arrivals of immigrants: from 1783 to 1812, and from 1830 to 1850. In these two periods, the immigrants were "overwhelmingly of British origin".
3. From 1608 to 1760, immigration to New France consisted of only 10,000 settlers, and thereafter it was "almost non-existent". The French-speaking population numbered about 70,000 in the 1760s, and thereafter, until the late 1800s, the population expanded rapidly with women having 5.6 surviving children on average. By 1950, the Quebec population was almost 4 million. This increase was not a result of immigration but of continuing high fertility rates. It was only in the 1970s that Montreal saw an increasing inflow of non-European immigrants.
4. Between 1896 and 1914, Canada experienced high immigration levels with more than 3 million arriving within this period. However, the ethnic composition of the nation remained 84 percent of British and French origin, while the European component rose to 9 percent. Between 1900 and 1915, the high mark in "Asian immigration" before the 1960s, 50,000 immigrants of Japanese, East Indian and Chinese descent arrived, but this number comprised less than 2 percent of the total immigration flow. In contrast, in 1914, there were nearly 400,000 Germans in Canada, the largest ethnic group apart from the British (which includes the Irish and Scots) and French.
5. The total intake of immigrants between 1946 and 1962 was 2,151,505. Between 1941 and 1962, during more or less the same period, the population of Canada increased from 11.5 million to 18.5 million, "largely accounted" by Canada's "extremely high domestic birth rates". Ninety percent of all immigrants who came to Canada before 1961 were from Britain.
(source Article: "Canada Is a Nation Created by Diverse Immigrants" — A False Meme by
British North America Act
The law passed by the British Parliament in 1867 provided for the unification of the Canadian provinces into the dominion of Canada. Basically this act says, “WHEREAS the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have expressed their Desire to be federally united into One Dominion under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with a Constitution similar in Principle to that of the United Kingdom:
“And whereas such a Union would conduce to the Welfare of the Provinces and promote the Interests of the British Empire:” The union was to promote the interests of the British Empire. To influence and benefit all in the Canadas under the banner of the British flag.
In 1866 representatives of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and the Canadas came together in London for final discussions with the Colonial Office. Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island for the moment had withdrawn from the confederation talks. The London Conference led directly to the most important statute in Canadian constitutional history, the British North America Act of 1867. This act, with its subsequent amendments, embodied the written constitution of Canada for more than a century. It was proclaimed on July 1, now celebrated as Canada Day.
The British North America Act provided that there should be four provinces in the new Dominion at the outset—Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia—and that others could join later.
Each province was to have its own seat of government, its own lawmaking body, and its own lieutenant governor to represent the Crown. In addition, the act established a federal government at Ottawa, composed of a House of Commons (elected), a Senate (appointed for life), and a governor general as the Crown’s representative. It set forth the matters on which the provinces could make laws and listed those that were the special concern of the government at Ottawa. Any powers not listed were to belong to the federal government. (The act remained in force until the Constitution Act of 1982.). In 1982, when the Liberals took over government with Pierre Trudeau as its head, began to change the constitution, to make it more “Canadian,” according to the Liberals.
Robert Martin is professor of Law at the University of Western Ontario, in his essay called, “A Lament for British North America” he writes that the change from the British North America Act to the Constitution Act was, “no longer fulfils an essential - perhaps the most essential - function of a constitution. It no longer sets out a unifying national idea.” He argues in his essay, that, “British North America once provided coherence for the Canadian state...[and that] we are a country without a recognized and accepted national idea and with little prospect of creating a fresh one.” That day, in April 1982 he says, “Canada ceased to be British North America.” Even the act of its name change is in the words of Peter Hogg, “rewriting history” (Constitutional Law of Canada, p.8). Truly it is denying the British Origin of Canada and rewriting the history and origins of our nation.
“The sense of being British North America once gave coherence to the Canadian state. It gave Canadians an understanding of why Canada existed.” (R. Martin). To forget and deny ones history is sounding the death knell for its country. The end of British North America was a step closer to that. “British North America was a narrow expression of our colonial, settler origins” (ibid). It shows the sacrifice many of the settlers made and accomplished to make our nation unique in North America. Distinguished from the Americans. To establish the British Empire in the west. “Our democracy was also rooted in the notion of British North America…In the Canadian conception the source of democratic government was the Crown. The Crown in British North America was to function as the instrument of the people which ensured the working of their democratic institutions. The Crown was also the guarantor of the French language and the distinctive culture of Quebec. Democracy was for us an organic expression of our unity” (ibid).
Robert Martin concludes in his essay of our state today in Canada, Nationally, that, “The idea of British North America once provided a purpose and a justification for the Canadian state. That idea has now disappeared. A fresh idea which could take its place has not appeared. And with no such unifying idea it is hard to imagine a future for the Canadian state, or at least for a multi- ethnic, democratic Canadian state.
Confederation and expansion
Following several constitutional conferences, the 1867 Constitution Act officially proclaimed Canadian Confederation on July 1, 1867, initially with four provinces: Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. Canada assumed control of Rupert's Land and the North-Western Territory to form the Northwest Territories, where the Métis' grievances ignited the Red River Rebellion and the creation of the province of Manitoba in July 1870. British Columbia and Vancouver Island (which had been united in 1866) joined the confederation in 1871, while Prince Edward Island joined in 1873.
The Canadian parliament passed a bill introduced by the Conservative Cabinet that established a National Policy of tariffs to protect the nascent Canadian manufacturing industries. To open the West, parliament also approved sponsoring the construction of three transcontinental railways (including the Canadian Pacific Railway), opening the prairies to settlement with the Dominion Lands Act, and establishing the North-West Mounted Police to assert its authority over this territory. In 1898, during the Klondike Gold Rush in the Northwest Territories, parliament created the Yukon Territory. The Cabinet of Liberal Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier fostered continental European immigrants settling the prairies and Alberta and Saskatchewan became provinces in 1905.