The Beginning…
‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth….’ So starts the Judeo/Christian narrative describing the creation of existence.
The complex processes which govern the physics of universal existence have been around since the foundation of the universe; they are the physical laws of this universe and definitely pre-date the earth! The earth is about four and a half billion years old and Homo sapiens [1] (that’s us), well we are a recent addition to the evolutionary scene. We have been around for only the last 12 000 years or so, as is evidenced by the appellation attached to our species – ‘of the Holocene Epoch’ [2] The evolution of human ‘thought and cognisance’ has taken this long to reach its current sophisticated level of insight, in addition we also know that time and the evolutionary process (amongst many other factors) were prime movers behind our present state of existence – this is science fact.
Taking a literal view of Genesis has, up until fairly recently in human history (Judeo/Christian history in particular), been the cornerstone of Western understanding; with the evolution of enlightened thought do we hold our heads in our hands and proclaim the end of human spiritual reality as we know it or do we re-look at the meaning to be taken from these ancient narratives and contextualise the thought processes of the past, bringing contemporary meaning to them? I certainly think so!
The Christian idea of the world is that it originated in a very complicated process of evolution but that it nevertheless still comes in its depths from the Logos. It thus bears reason in itself.
Joseph Ratzinger – Pope Benedict XVI [3]
There are certainly those who would discard such contextualisation out of hand, in ‘their’ certain knowledge that there is nothing else – nothing but pointless, nihilistic existence, a sea of unanswered questions! One can say with certainty that the provision of empirically proven answers to the metaphysical questions – who are we, what are we and why are we here, which would satisfy theistic detractors, is unlikely? Where do we ultimately come from and to where and what are we finally destined are heady questions indeed. However if, as some would have us believe, we are just the by-products of chance and star matter, what unique by-products we are! All logical thought determines that we shouldn’t be here, but here we are nevertheless!
Probabilities Chance!
How does one calculate the odds or rather the probability of this universe coming into existence? Well you do need a foundation in the known to relate to, which in the case of the universe we don’t have – we can only hypothesize based on current theoretical knowledge. It is said that probability is the measure of how likely an event is to occur out of the number of possible outcomes.[4] Well logic and intellect say that the number of possible outcomes for our universe must have been infinite; thus the probability of this specific universe coming into existence must, for all practical purposes, be zero. Yet it did!
Cardinal Schönborn clarifies chance well when he quotes Professor Walter Thirring[5]:
It is so far “beyond human capacity to conceive” the degree of precision in this event,[6] which occurred in microscopic fractions of the very first seconds, so Professor Thirring says, that he exclaims, “And that is supposed to have happened by chance – what an absurd notion!”
Schönborn was discussing the exacting conditions required for the universe to come into existence.[7]
Analogous to this is the question – ‘what are the odds of YOU coming into existence – not just your physical substance but your metaphysical being as well; that which makes you, you’.
Author Ali Binazir sums it up succinctly:[8]
The probability of your existing at all is 1 in 102,685,000
To put some perspective on this, the number of atoms in the body of an average male (80kg, 175lb) is 1027. The number of known atoms making up the earth is about 1050. The number of atoms in the known universe is estimated at 1080!
So what’s the probability of your existing? It’s the probability of 2 million people getting together – about the population of San Diego (USA) – each to play a game of dice with trillion-sided dice. They each roll the dice, and they all come up the exact same number – say, 550,343,279,001.
Absolutely improbable…you say and I would agree – the chances that you would be here are basically non-existent – yet you are here, you must be because you’re reading this! With such odds against your chanced existence, why would you not believe in a creative power such as that described in the Book of Genesis? This is not a punt for the cause of literal creationism as posited by fundamentalist factions of Christianity, nor must it be construed as support for the antithesis, but rather a voice seeking reason and understanding; a voice seeking contemporary meaning behind the reading of the Book of Genesis’ creation story.
Genesis – A society making sense of the unknown
The authors of Genesis did not possess the knowledge and understanding of present-day society; in fact I would risk stating the obvious by saying that their worldview was very different from ours given that a worldview is based in part on perspective or how you as an individual see the world around you – Nor did they care, says Boadt [9] I concur with his proposition that the benchmark opening timestamp for Israelite history (and consequently the Christian story) is the Exodus and that all preceding events were an attempt by the writers of Genesis to show God’s purpose with the Israelite people by a gathering together of tribal traditions on ancient ancestors stemming from pre-history.[10] Boadt suggests that as a people, the Israelites needed to understand “how they came to be a people and a nation”[11]
It has been put forward that, while the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) in its final form stems from a period later than that of the ‘United Kingdom’[12], ‘…it preserves the literature that had its origin in the United Kingdom’[13]. Indeed, Boshoff, Scheffler, & Spangenberg indicate that the bible actually developed around that literature.[14] This would infer that early traditions were mainly verbalised, passed down from generation to generation. At the same time this would exclude Moses from being the physical author of the Pentateuch, though he may very well have been instrumental in the initiation of the tradition of the exodus etc.; this would concur with Boadt’s assertion that Israelite history started with the Exodus.
In the later exilic period when the Israelites were held bondage in Babylon, Babylonian literature contained various accounts which seem to parallel Genesis accounts: [15]
1. The Enuma elish (Akkadian) – A Babylonian creation epic.
2. Enki and Nihursag – A Sumerian paradise myth
3. The Ziusudra flood – a Sumerian myth
4. The Gilgamesh epic – An Akkadian flood myth.
5. The Atrahasis epic – An Akkadian flood myth.
It is not entirely beyond reason that enculturation of the Israelites while in Babylonian exile would have enriched their traditional knowledge base and that they consequently incorporated aspects of these into their own traditions.
Matthews and Moyer put forward that the Israelites wanted to show God’s sovereign role in their creation as a people[16]; while Boadt postulates that Genesis can be seen as a pre-cursor, a preface to the beginning of the Israelite peoples.[17] They describe Genesis as an etiology of the founding of the Israelite nation and the human race in general, a search for an understanding of their origins.[18] Understandably, these writings are based on a worldview of the authors within their own time frame – the coalescence of this worldview with contemporary knowledge will invariably produce strange and confusing inconsistencies and consequently the contemporary fundamentalist clash!
This does not mean that valuable truths cannot be had from these very early writings; indeed, as I was reminded recently – all scripture is divinely inspired. As such is it a stretch to believe that Genesis illustrates the ancients need to describe the transcendence and all powerful nature of their God; it initiates the covenantal relationship which became prevalent in Israelite and subsequently Christian belief. It describes most clearly to me what they and indirectly Christianity are as a people.
Bibliography
1. Binazir, A. (2011, November 9). What are the odds? Retrieved November 17, 2014, from visual ly: http://visual.ly/what-are-odds
2. Boshoff, W., Scheffler, E., & Spangenberg, I. (2011). Ancient Israelite Literature in Context (Third ed.). Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa: Protea Book House.
3. Christoph Cardinal Schonborn. (2007). Chance or Purpose – Creation, Evolution & A Rational Faith (English ed.). (H. P. Weber, Ed., & H. Taylor, Trans.) San Francisco, California, USA: Igantius Press. Retrieved November 18, 2014
4. Collins Online English Dictionary. (2014). Holocene. Retrieved December 03, 2014, from Collins Online Dictionary: http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/holocene?showCookiePolicy=true
5. Fr. James V. Schall, SJ. (2007). The Order of Things (First ed.). San Francisco, California, USA: Ignatius Press. Retrieved November 19, 2014
6. Fr. Lawrence Boadt, CSP. (2012). Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction (Second ed.). (Fr. Richard Clifford, SJ, & Fr. Daniel Harrington, SJ, Eds.) Mahwah, N.J., New York, USA: Paulist Press. Retrieved November 28, 2014
7. Horn, S. O., & Wiedenhofer, S. (2008). Creation and Evolution – A Conference with Pope Benedict XVI in Castel Gandolfo (First ed.). (M. J. Miller, Trans.) San Francisco, California, USA: Ignatius Press. Retrieved November 19, 2014
8. Matthews, V. H., & Moyer, J. C. (2012). The Old Testament: Text & Context (Third ed.). Grand Rapids, MI, USA: Baker Academic. Retrieved November 28, 2014
9. Prof. Pheme Perkins, Ph.D. (2012). Reading the New Testament – An Introduction (Third ed.). Mahwah, N.J., New York, USA: Paulist Press. Retrieved November 28, 2014
10. Walter Thirring. (2014, October 29). Retrieved November 30, 2014, from Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Walter_Thirring&oldid=631679337
11. wikiHow. (2014, October 28). How to Calculate Probability. Retrieved November 17, 2014, from wikiHow: http://www.wikihow.com/Calculate-Probability
[1] Homo sapiens (Latin: “wise man”) is the binomial nomenclature (also known as the scientific name) for the human species: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens
[2] “Recent Period” – Collins Online English Dictionary. (2014). Holocene. Retrieved December 03, 2014, from Collins Online Dictionary: http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/holocene?showCookiePolicy=true
[3] (Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, 2007, p. Opening Page)
[4] (wikiHow, 2014)
[5] Austrian Physicist (Walter Thirring, 2014)
[6] The Big Bang theory
[7] (Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, 2007, pp. 39-41)
[8] (Binazir, 2011)
[9] (Fr. Lawrence Boadt, CSP, 2012, p. Pos. 1973 (Kindle))
[10] (Fr. Lawrence Boadt, CSP, 2012, p. Pos. 1980 (Kindle))
[11] (Fr. Lawrence Boadt, CSP, 2012, p. Pos. 1967 (Kindle))
[12] United Kingdom of the Israelites – c.1050 B.C. – c.930 B.C., the reigns of David and Solomon.
[13] (Boshoff, Scheffler, & Spangenberg, 2011, pp. 95-96)
[14] Ibid.
[15] (Boshoff, Scheffler, & Spangenberg, 2011, p. 53)
[16] (Matthews & Moyer, 2012, p. Pos. 1251 (Kindle))
[17] (Fr. Lawrence Boadt, CSP, 2012, p. pos 1967 (Kindle))
[18] (Matthews & Moyer, 2012, p. Pos. 1940 (Kindle))
On the Misfortune of Being White
PREMISE
I have been considering the contents of an article written recently by Father Russell Pollitt of the Jesuit Institute in Johannesburg titled ‘Understanding White Privilege’. In it he puts forward the opinion that white folk are inherently privileged, whether they believe it to be so or not – it is, he implies, a fact of life. This is the flipside of racial injustice, Fr. Russell says, an odious practice which we here in South Africa are all too familiar with. It would seem that the nefarious side of European history has a rather unpleasant and long lasting side effect – it’s mephitic odour just will not go away, in fact it is, to all intents and purposes, permanent!
Yet, in the spirit of ‘audi alteram partem’, it is only fair, nay a moral imperative to listen to a balancing point of view. A view which attempts to bring this very real and very valid point into some form of contemporary context.
ADMISSION
Firstly, though the general premise can be applied to the global ‘Black v White’ tensions, I am writing from a South African perspective and so examples tend to reflect the South African dynamic.
That apartheid happened is an unassailable fact which bears no denying and for which there needs to be redress; superficially, this has supposed to have been happening for the last twenty-three years through such vehicles as affirmative action, BEE, land reform etc., or so the official line is communicated.
And to set the record straight on my part, regarding my own perspective, slavery, colonisation and any other condescending racial practices are not figments of some ancient mythical legend. No, they were very real, very hurtful and DID benefit those who conquered; but then that was the lot of any conquered nation, whether conquered by the Roman Empire, the Vikings, the British, the Boers – even I venture to say the Zulu’s under King Shaka. As white South African folk, we cannot deny that we were recipients of such privilege – a privilege denied to the black populous of the time. We had access to good education – they did not, a superior health care system – they did not and were beneficiaries of lob-sided infrastructural improvement – which they were not, amongst probably many others.
One could also perhaps argue that South African children born post 1994 also benefited in an offhanded sort of way, from the ‘privilege’ afforded their parents; though this should reduce significantly as time moves forward.
So in writing this piece, I personally am impelled to acknowledge that simply through my ancestry I have benefitted from oppression, I am a recipient of privilege and always will be.
RESPONSE
Anyway, it is what it is and no amount of wishful thinking on my part is going to take the effects of apartheid away. I am not some form of liberal apologist, but contemporary observation alone would tell one that from a general black perspective, white privilege appears as real as ever, to what degree of reality is debateable. That perception though, I would venture to say, is not created so much by white privilege as it is exacerbated through the machinations of professional opinion makers with a very different agenda. A very poignant example is the hollow aphorism, ‘White Monopoly Capital’, which seems bound to be repeated ad nauseam within the public space.
It seems that this racial epithet, ‘White Privilege’, is one that is permanently pinned to anyone unlucky enough to be born white, whether they deserve it or not – it seems to be some sort of perverse and ancient curse, something akin to the ‘original sin of Adam’!
But why? Why am I doomed to carry this Albatross around my neck, even unto to my dying day, causing me to stoop low with some intangible and anonymous form of guilt? What unspeakable thing is it that I have done to deserve such infamy? Well the truth of it is, nothing that heinous really! I have not knowingly instigated racial tension, however (and this is what Fr. Russell is getting at, I think) because of my racial classification (White, Caucasian, European – whatever) I have been the recipient of some form of privilege stemming from the oppression or subjugation of others and in the South African context, this would refer to the Black population. I’m fine with that statement, rather embarrassed, but fine. After all, one cannot deny the truth albeit that varying forms of this epithet are all the rage in contemporary political South Africa!
I speak and position myself here also from a global perspective – that is from a stance which covers the entire grouping racially defined as being ‘white’ but also not confined to any specific country or community. Obviously however, given my domicile, much of what I say is referenced to the South African environment.
So why would this dreaded millstone be the lot of any fair skinned person yesterday, today and probably tomorrow? Is there any specific timescale for its removal or is it something as permanent as the air we breathe? Was it always like this, or is this a fairly recent phenomenon? If the rhetoric in South Africa is to be believed, then it started the moment Jan van Riebeeck set foot on Cape soil, though I think it is bigger than that!
Massingale[1] defines whites as being an agglomeration of various labels. He mentions that it is important to note how the term ‘white’ is a fluid category which, over the years, has evolved to include groupings from other parts of the world – encompassing peoples of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa (presumably peoples of Arabic descent). Wikipedia[2] also groups Asians into that same ‘white’ category. Massingale further clarifies that, rather than being a racially distinct grouping in terms representing skin colour such as white or black, this term refers more to a socio-political grouping; this makes sense to me as it then explains the grouping of different ethnic groups into the category ‘white’.
However, at the foundation of it all is the archetypal concept of ‘black’ vs. ‘white’; again Massingale points this out[3] when he says that this concept remains the critical reference benchmark for measuring a social group’s position in public life. He quotes renowned American sociologist, Joe Feagin[4] describing the relationship between black and white peoples as ‘archetypal’, the foundation upon which whites’ treatment of other non-European groups has been centred.
In a way I find this characterisation of me as a ‘white’ person quite demeaning. It seems to imply, if you will excuse the hyperbole, that white people are the source of all that is evil and bigoted in the world and that is simply not true! Fr. Russell terms this state of affairs a ‘disease’ and the only way to treat it is to understand its anatomy and thereby eradicate it by attacking the very source of the ‘disease’!
But what is the source? It is, according to Massingale, white attitudes; their [whites] false sense of superiority over other groupings which contributes to the aura of privilege and which pervades every white individual. He says that “a change in attitudes, the loving acceptance of individuals and groups.” is what is needed[5];this is a very broad description of the ideal that white attitudes must embrace.
And yet, who defines the content of these attitudes, who says when this change has actually occurred. Also who would actually make the decision to drop the racial epithet – ‘white privilege’? There is no worldwide governing or ruling body, no worldwide committee on racism – would it come down to a United Nations directorate initiating the racial emancipation of the white grouping? It just seems so unreal!
CONCLUSION
Given the fickle nature of humanity, it is unlikely that there would ever be consensus in this regard, thus perpetuating the label ad infinitum. To me the secret here is the simple analogy, asking are you forever looking backwards, or are you looking forwards but not forgetting where you have come from.
Paul Kivel in his book Uprooting Racism, says “Racism is not going to end tomorrow or next year. … How do we nurture and sustain ourselves for what may well be a lifetime struggle?”[6] Indeed, this makes my point, the whole premise of white privilege (benefiting from racist actions) is open ended and thus it appears that this epithet is one I will just have to live with.
Changing is a personal choice really and measuring an individual is feasible, but measuring the entire white grouping to determine whether attitudes have changed in the desired manner is utopic at best and is definitely not measurable!
I’m reminded of a quote by Machiavelli – “Everyone sees what you appear to be, few experience what you really are.”[7]
Bibliography
[1] (Massingale, 2010, p. 2)
[2] (Wikipedia contributors, 2017, p. Asian Americans)
[3] (Massingale, 2010, p. Loc 104/4064)
[4] (Wikipedia contributors, 2017, p. ‘Feagin’)
[5] (Massingale, 2010, p. 175)
[6] (Kivel, 2011, p. 336)
[7] https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/16201.Niccol_Machiavelli