Sexist woke corporate hypocrisy on display

Karissa and Kristina Shannon, Hefner, and Crystal Harris

The horrendous treatment of women by Hugh Hefner is being made fully public with a streaming documentary series The Secrets of Playboy. His reputation as a sleazeball is being confirmed not only by that investigation but also by women who are taking Hefner's organisation to court for abuse of employees.

The Sexual Revolution and the licentiousness that Hefner and his ilk appealed to in covering up their abuse of women for their own pleasure, and in making money from them, are certainly being identified one more time as a disease that wracked all who were overtaken by the corruptive power of the mis-identification of freedom. This applied during the late 20th Century, and it laid the foundation for today's promiscuous attitude toward sex, even though the extent of such behaviour seems to have ebbed somewhat. 

The reduction of sexual activity among young people recently may be the harbinger of an awareness that shedding a morality that has stood the test of time is stupidity in the extreme. The damage done to individuals and to society by doing so is made clear through the experience I relate now.

At the weekend the UK's Sunday Mirror reported this from twins who lived at the Playboy mansion:

Karissa and Kristina Shannon allege they were first lured to sleep with Hefner on their 19th birthday, then pushed into unprotected group sex and plied with alcohol and drugs. They say the magazine and TV tycoon “had a black soul” and the experience left them suffering from [post trauma syndrome disorder], depression and needing counselling.

When Hefner died in 2017, at 91, the twins were glad – so no other girls could suffer.

Karissa says she fell pregnant at 19 to Hefner when he was 83 – and “if felt like carrying the devil’s child”. She had an abortion without the tycoon ever knowing. 

Kristina tells the Sunday Mirror: “Hef acted like he owned you. If we broke his rules, six guards would drag us to our room and not let us leave. Hef called it ‘HMF arrest’, after his initials. He preyed on vulnerable young girls like us. He would offer you the world, then keep you trapped in his house, which was like a golden prison.

“We were Playmates, employed, and everything happened at the mansion, so we want to go after them. We are speaking out because we want people to know who he truly was and what was going on behind closed doors.”

The newspaper says the TV documentary "will raise more questions about how rich, powerful men could get away with abusing women in full sight". It cites the case of financier Jeffrey Epstein who was able to abuse young women despite previously being convicted of sex trafficking, and who died in jail while facing further charges. 

Film producer Harvey Weinstein is another who combined the belief that women should be made to appreciate the "benefits" of the Sexual Revolution. He was jailed for 23 years in 2020 for rape and sex attacks.

But this exercise of power in the name of freedom and human rights continues with the Playboy organisation, only now it is giving a woke twist to the abuse of women for the pursuit of profit.

Previously it had entered into a bit of virtue-signalling by making a move to not use photographs of naked women in its magazine, not saying so, but in fact bowing to the new dominance of internet pornography. However, it reversed its decision within two years as it shed "readership" at an increasing pace.

Now we see Playboy going with the latest bandwagon:

In an open letter last week [January 22], the organization variously declared itself to be “a brand with sex positivity at its core,” a workforce that is 80 percent female, and a company that continues to “fight harassment and discrimination in all its forms, support healing and education, redefine tired and sexist definitions of beauty and advocate for inclusivity across gender, sexuality, race, age, ability and zip codes.” 

On this basis Playboy should release its women employees, held to titillate the male population, and close the shutters on the whole sordid organisation: "Perhaps more than any other media outlet, it is responsible for the paradoxical equation of 'sex positivity' with a trivialized notion of sex and indeed what it means to be a woman." Amen to that last point, given the the kind of photos young women put on Instagram.

That quoted statement comes from author and academic Carl E Truman who offers further insights into the game Playboy is now playing:

Emily Hill offers a devastating critique of Playboy’s new stance in the Spectator that is blunt and compelling. As she indicates, its executives are merely doing what the executives of so many other companies are doing today, albeit Playboy is having to do so with singularly unpromising raw material: It is reciting the Liturgy of the Woke in a bid to retain its customer base and its profit margins. It remains to be seen, however, to what extent those who buy Playboy do so out of a deep desire to “redefine tired and sexist definitions of beauty and advocate for inclusivity across gender, sexuality, race, age, ability and zip codes”. 

[...] When Hef was cool, his perversions were ignored (even indulged), invitations to his mansion were coveted, and his commercial imprimatur was keenly sought. And of course, conservative critics who dared to point out who he was and what he stood for could expect to be decried as puritanical killjoys, lacking, as they did, “sex positivity”.

This brings us to the true significance of corporate wokeism: It is a sign of the morally vacuous nature of our times. In modern America, morality is nothing more than the sum total of the tastes of the moment. When free love and throwing off the sexual restraints of earlier generations was hip, Hef was a godlike figure who was the public face of a family restaurant chain. Now that the human cost of this revolution has become clear, Hef is a demon, denounced even by those who owe their livelihoods to him and to the capital acquired by his peddling of sleaze.

The fate of Hefner’s reputation, like the success of his career, speaks eloquently about the state of America and perhaps the West as a whole. Self-indulgent to a tee, the only morality it knows is that which chimes with whatever the tastes of the moment happen to be, whatever works, whatever makes money. Promiscuity yesterday, wokeness and inclusivity today.

And the tragedy is that such amoral morality, always driven by market forces rather than a true understanding of what it means to be human, must inevitably come with a hefty price tag, as the documentary on Hefner will no doubt reveal in graphic and painful detail. Still, at least the new woke Playboy will now make sure that its profit margins are built on moral chaos that is inclusive of all, regardless of gender, sexuality, race, age, ability, or zip code. 

💢 Hefner's widow vows to dress with modesty:

Crystal Harris had built a big social media following by putting up nude poses and the like. She said this made her suffer "internally in the process". ⁣

"In short, sex sells. I don’t know whether I felt empowered by dressing scantily clad, showing cleavage,  …or if I just felt it was expected of me or what… but now I can confidently and 100% proudly say, modesty is what empowers me these days, and because it feels so much better internally, it will probably be this way for the rest of my life."

Ω If you like this blog, go to my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published. 

How gays can build up self-respect

Everyone can do with company on their way.  Photo: Bas Masseus

People who label themselves with "I'm a lesbian", "I'm bisexual", "I'm gay", "I'm transgender", or with the myriad of other terms that are being tossed about now, are doing themselves a disservice. Such labels define the person only by their sexual tendencies, whereas there are more important features of the human person that truly express self-identity.  

My previous post considered the situation of those sexually attracted to the same sex, making reference to the Catholic tradition concerning human anthropology, which notes both the reality of our general experience, and also the revelation from God, as to the binary and complementarity of the sexes, leading to the generation of children, and to the natural family as the basic unit of society, 

This post again uses as a resource a draft document of the bishops of the United States, this time to examine the language factor in this difficult matter. The document warns of the harm that can be done by using labels in personal descriptions that reduce the person to their sexual tendencies. 

The bishops see a role for Church members in such cases - "to accompany persons in coming to recognize that they are more than just their sexual inclinations".

It's suggested that the befriender refer to the other as someone who has a "homosexual inclination" or "same-sex attraction", as someone who self-identifies as..., so modelling "a way of speaking that makes clear that the person is not defined by his or her sexual attractions or conflict about sexual identity". The document states:

The practice of the [bishops] over the last several years has been to use the terms "homosexual inclination" or "same-sex attraction" to denote the experience of a man or woman who is sexually attracted to persons of the same sex. Referring (first) to a person who (second) experiences something distinguishes the inclination or attraction from the person. The term "sexual orientation" has generally been avoided by the [bishops] given its ambiguity; for example, the use of the term in public policy and law has not distinguished between inclination and conduct.

The terms "gender identity" and "transgender" are also problematical "because they include the false assumption that one's gender is fluid or disconnected from one's (natural) sex as male or female. The document goes on:

Avoiding the use of "homosexual" or the like as a noun or as an adjective descriptive of the person can help foster a pastoral [...] precision and sensitivity fully reflective of the truth of the human person. It is best to avoid the pairing of "heterosexual and homosexual" and the use of "heterosexual" (or the newer term "cisgender") in reference to persons. since these terms belie a false anthropology or understanding of the human person.

The current legal and cultural environment has made the use of the term LGBT (with other categories usually added) a cause for pause because in public policies there is often no distinction made between sexual inclination and conduct. In addition, the use of the term LGBT often assumes that the underlying sexual inclination is either a good to be affirmed or celebrated—or neutral, neither of which the Church can accept.

In the gospels, a rich young man came to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?" He was told to give his wealth to the poor and then follow Jesus as he went about healing and teaching of the ways of the kingdom of God. This is relevant to those who have a homosexual tendency.

All Christ's followers give up something as they commit themselves to following a God who loves them enough to come among us as Jesus, both man and God, the Way, the Truth and the Life. It's hard for everyone to give up a lifestyle or to abide by a new set of moral guidelines. Of course, this morality is in accord with the way God made us, so it becomes easier the longer we practise that way of life: "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. [...] For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

God, speaking through his Church, asks those with a same-sex inclination to live in a new way. Let's take a look at what the bishops say about what might be expected of someone seeking God: 

[...] an individual who is in a same-sex sexual relationship (or likewise in any sexual relationship outside of marriage between man and woman) will necessarily have to confront the implications of the Gospel for his or her everyday life and, in particular, for the sexual relationship with the other person. The minister [...] should make clear to the [person] the Church's teachings, including the call to holiness and the call to chastity." 

The Church's minister may suggest changes that the person can make to amend his or her life, as a proper response to the generous call of the Lord. For example, a person might need to change residence or adjust social habits. Persons cannot receive Baptism, be admitted to the other sacraments of Christian initiation, or be received into the full communion of the Catholic Church until they have brought their sexual relationship into accord with the moral law. Further preparation and pastoral accompaniment would be required for those who are not disposed — or who refuse — to make such an amendment of life.

Similarly, there is the Church's sensitivity to the person who self-identifies as transgender:

The experience of incongruence or discomfort about one's sexual identity, when it does not arise from one's free will, is not sinful, nor is it an obstacle to Christian initiation; however, the deliberately chosen, persistent, and manifest expression and associated behaviors of such would constitute an obstacle to Christian discipleship which would need to be addressed during the formation process. Pastorally, as there is a range of experiences and behaviors related to sexual identity incongruence and "transgender" self-identification, a person's particular circumstances and openness toward an amendment of life would need to be examined and understood. 

As noted above, the Church's minister may suggest changes for conforming one's life to Christ and particularly to the reality of his or her sexual identity as male or female as the proper response to the generous call of the Lord. Here, supportive spiritual direction and professional counseling grounded in or congruent with Catholic teaching, in addition to other specialized assistance where necessary, may be helpful.

Despite the risk of overloading this post with detail on the Church's teaching practice with regards those who have a same-sex attraction, or who self-identify as transgender, I want to provide two more excerpts from the bishops' document, which is titled, In the Image of God. 

First:

God's creation of the person as male or female cannot be undone. For example, although the state allows individuals to change their birth certificate, for a Catholic institution to acquiesce knowingly to the changed birth certificate would be contrary to Christian anthropology. In those rare cases of atypical physical development, the fundamental question is whether the child is male or female. In such cases, we need to rely on those aspects of natural science that can help determine the natural, biological sex of the child, such as DNA testing, where possible. 

The parents should then raise the child as belonging to that sex, with the assistance of medical professionals to help the child live a full life. Particularly rare chromosomal abnormalities can make the identification of the person's natural sex difficult at times and call for continued assistance by the medical community and pastoral accompaniment by the Church, with the understanding that what is sometimes described as an "intersexed" condition cannot be equated with the fundamental sexual difference of male and female.

Second:

Persons who seek or undergo "sex-reassignment surgery" are in particular need of pastoral care. There is recent evidence that people who "transition" from male to appearing female or vice versa through hormones or surgery often do not benefit long-term from these measures. "Mortality from suicide was strikingly high among sex-reassigned persons, also after adjustment for prior psychiatric morbidity" (Cecilia Dhejne et al., "Long-Term  Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden," PLoS ONE, 6 [2011]: 1-8). See also Annette Kuhn et al., "Quality of Life 15 Years After Sex Reassignment Surgery for Transsexualism," Fertility and Sterility 92, no. 5 [2009]: 1685-89; Glenn Stanton, "Boys, Girls, Other: Making Sense of the Confusing New World of Gender Identity," Report to Family First New Zealand (2015), 69. 

There are differing approaches by those who cite this data, with some emphasizing more support for those who have undergone such surgeries and others emphasizing that such surgeries should not be carried out. For a recent review of various studies and findings on matters pertaining to sexual identity, see Lawrence Mayer and Paul McHugh, "Sexuality and Gender," The New Atlantis 50 (Fall 2016). See also Paul McHugh, "Transgender Surgery Isn't the  Solution," Wall Street Journal, May 13, 2016; "Transgenderism: A Pathogenic Meme," Public Discourse, June 10, 2015; and American College of Pediatricians, "Gender Ideology Harms Children," updated with clarifications on April 6, 2016. 

To close, I want to offer links to valuable resources in the face of the massive amount of material published uncritically in the mainstream news media on the "rights" and behaviour of those who are pushing the licence gained from the Sexual Revolution to the limits of public welfare. See these:

 Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters, by the journalist Abigail Shrier, who explores what she calls an “epidemic” of young girls coming out as trans. See here.

When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment, by Ryan T. Anderson. This book is not sold through Amazon. See the author's rebuttal of the corporate giant's claims about the book and here on the implications of its censorship.

 Keira Bell: My Story. As a teen, Keira transitioned to male but came to regret it. Her experience has led to court proceedings in Britain.

Ω If you like this blog, go to my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Gays & Church are both pilgrims carrying a cross

Tough love in Catholic teaching is the long term gift for society  

A Muslim football player in Australia has to sit out a series of games because they are tagged as the "Pride Round", highlighting homosexuality as much as the need for inclusivity for homosexuals; a PhD candidate is suing the UK's Bristol University, pointing to how it failed to protect her from bullying and harassment from transgender activists over her feminist views.

It matters little that, as in these cases, people who are sympathetic to those discriminated against are forced to suffer the consequences of the disorientation that has arisen in society where the homosexual and transgender communities exploit the Christian concept of the innate dignity of every human to oppress those who hold views that they object to, namely moral behaviour witnessed in most cultures and reinforced in the revelation provided through the Judaeo-Christian legacy.  

The foundational principle of that legacy is this:

God created humanity in his image; in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. — Genesis 1:27

The United States Catholic bishops' conference has said in a draft document: 

The Church's doctrine on the human person, created in the image of God and called to communion with him, has remained constant throughout the ages. Today, unprecedented social and legal changes pertaining to sexual identity, marriage, and family undermine this teaching and present a distorted understanding of the human person. These changes have introduced profound pain and brokenness into people's lives, and have given rise to new concerns [...] that demand attention.

The Church is aware that confusion reigns in the public mind about human sexuality and is not looking to crush those who, in response to the zeitgeist of self-creation, of the pursuit of personal pleasure, both physical and emotional, and of the rejection of community restraints on private impulses, are taking a path that is leading to human misery, so that statistics relating to suicide and gender confusion among the young are unprecedented.  

The attitudes that are being promoted generally in Western societies are leaving young people unlinked to reality and adrift from solid comprehension of the behaviour that makes for happiness. Evidence of this is the statistic that only 54 per cent of Generation Z Britons believe they are attracted to only one sex. Generation Z accounts for those born in the mid-to-late 1990s up to the early 2010s. In fact, it has become fashionable to state that one is sexually fluid!

An essential matter to grasp is that the Church does not follow the dictats of any metaphysical innovations introduced by elites or the general social mores of any era, but has as its reference marker the way we are made. That marker also signals the route to our thriving in society.

Therefore, the bishops are conscientious about their responsibilities to all people, wish to be shepherds to all, and are acting in solidarity with all in the community, not limiting their insights to Catholics alone, but seeking the common good in promoting a true understanding of the human person:

In these times, when sexuality, marriage and the family are being redefined, the truth of the human person and his or her high calling needs to be proclaimed all the more. The Church's teaching on the human person reveals the truth about our relationship with our merciful and all-powerful God, as well as the profound role he has in mind for each of us in his wonderful plan. 

The Church's message about the beauty of who we are in Christ, as beloved sons and daughters, affects how we respect our own bodies, recognize our sexual identities as male and female, and live out the virtue of chastity according to our states in life [whether single, married or committed as a servant of God].

What the Church desires for everyone is expressed in this way - referring to priests' ministry, but signifying the approach of all Catholics to those they encounter: They "must treat all with exceptional kindness in imitation of the Lord". 

[They] ... owe it to everybody to share with them the truth of the Gospel (cf. Gal 2:5) in which they rejoice in the Lord.... [I]n every case their role is to teach not their own wisdom but the Word of God and to issue a pressing invitation to all people to conversion and to holiness.

"Every human person, male and female, is created in the image of God and has intrinsic dignity", the bishops say. "The inviolable dignity of the human person must always be respected." They then delve into the nature of the human person, using insights expressed in Church documents. (Use the link to go to the citations in the bishops' document):

• "When the first man exclaims at the sight of the woman, 'she is flesh from my flesh and bone from my bones' (Gn 2:23), he simply affirms the human identity of both." In essence, Adam says, "Look, a body that expresses the 'person '!"

• "The human body shares in the dignity of 'the image of God,'" and the human person is a unity of body and soul — "spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature." "For this reason a person may not despise their bodily life. Rather each is obliged to regard their body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day."

• "The acceptance of our bodies as God's gift is vital. Learning to accept our body, to care for it and to respect its fullest meaning, is an essential element of any genuine human ecology. Also, valuing one's own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary. ..."

The obvious sexual difference within the animal world and the complementarity of the sexes leads to a discussion concerning the human family:

• "By creating the human being man and woman, God gives personal dignity equally to the one and the other. Each of them, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity." "[The] importance and the meaning of sexual difference, as a reality deeply inscribed in man and woman, needs to be noted. 'Sexuality characterizes man and woman not only on the physical level, but also on the psychological and spiritual, making its mark on each of their expressions' .... From the first moment of their creation, man and woman are distinct, and will remain so for all eternity."

• "Male and female are thus revealed as belonging ontologically to creation and destined therefore to outlast the present time, evidently in a transfigured form." [The last element refers to our life in heaven as a male or female, our bodies reunited with our souls, for all eternity].

• Marriage is the permanent, faithful, and fruitful union of one man and one woman. God is the author of marriage, which was "willed by God in the very act of creation." No person or institution has the authority to change what God has ordained and what has been inscribed into the fabric of creation. "[Jesus] said in reply, 'Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator "made them male and female" and said, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh"?" (Mt 19:4-5).

• "The family—based on marriage between a man and a woman—is the first and fundamental unit of society and is a sanctuary for the creation and nurturing of children. It should be defended and strengthened, not redefined, undermined, or further distorted." 

• Every child is a gift with inviolable dignity. "Every child has a right to receive love from a mother and a father; both are necessary for a child's integral and harmonious development."

•     "Thus the couple, while giving themselves to one another, give not just themselves but also the reality of children, who are a living reflection of their love, a permanent sign of conjugal unity and a living and inseparable synthesis of their being a father and a mother."

The document heaps praise on those single parents, who out of necessity carry the burden of raising children alone, while pointing out the problematic situation where children are raised by same-sex couples. Adoption is spoken of here, but of course same sex couples often turn to a third party to have a child of at least one of them: 

•     "[T]he Church does not support the adoption of children by same-sex couples since homosexual unions are contrary to the divine plan."  "As experience has shown, the absence of sexual complementarity in these unions creates obstacles in the normal development of children who would be placed in the care of such persons. They would be deprived of the experience of either fatherhood or motherhood." It is important to remember that "[t]he best interests of the child should always underlie any decision in adoption and foster care."

But to come to the central elements of the Church's teaching on same-sex attraction: 

• "The Church does not teach that the experience of homosexual attraction is in itself sinful." "While the Church teaches that homosexual acts are immoral, she does distinguish between engaging in homosexual acts and having a homosexual inclination. While the former is always objectively sinful, the latter is not. To the extent that a homosexual tendency or inclination is not subject to one's free will, one is not morally culpable for that tendency. Although one would be morally culpable if one were voluntarily to entertain homosexual temptations or to choose to act on them, simply having the tendency is not a sin."

• The homosexual inclination, because it "predisposes one toward what is truly not good for the human person," is technically understood by the philosophical term "objectively disordered". This term is often misunderstood today. "It is crucially important to understand that saying a person has a particular inclination that is disordered is not to say that the person as a whole is disordered... [T]he person retains his or her intrinsic human dignity and value." Same-sex attraction might best be characterized as a "cross," inasmuch as it is a burden which hinders a person's ability to fulfill the meaning and purpose of his or her sexuality, but which can be united to Christ's Cross and become a means of sanctification.

The document frequently states the importance of recognising that each person's goal in life should be to know and love God, to grow in holiness, which is the state of closeness to God. Our life on earth is always in a secondary condition and so, as with all other natural elements of our life, our sexuality should not be held as being of the great importance to us as we identify what gives us meaning and purpose. We are more than what we feel. 

The document continues:

• "Because of both Original Sin and personal sin, moral disorder is all too common in our world. There are a variety of acts, such as adultery, fornication, masturbation, and contraception, that violate the proper ends of human sexuality. Homosexual acts also violate the true purpose of sexuality. They are sexual acts that cannot be open to life. Nor do they reflect the complementarity of man and woman that is an integral part of God's design for human sexuality. Consequently, the Catholic Church has consistently taught that homosexual acts 'are contrary to the natural law... Under no circumstances can they be approved'."

• Moral choices consistent with human dignity and the Gospel lead to the fulfillment of the human person and his or her ultimate happiness. "Immoral actions, actions that are not in accord with the natural order of things, are incapable of contributing to true human fulfillment and happiness. In fact, immoral actions are destructive of the human person because they degrade and undermine the human dignity given us by God."

While the Church is concerned to uphold "God's plan for marriage and the meaning of human sexuality", it also strives to support those of a homosexual orientation in a way of life that recognises "the full truth of the human person". 

The Church is called to accompany those who feel marginalised: "Sad to say, there are many persons with a homosexual inclination who feel alienated from the Church. The accompaniment called for will enable "each person to recognise and bear this cross in union with Christ".

Therefore, the homosexual is not alone in facing the predicament that life has thrust upon him or her. All people walk the same path in one way or another.

• The call to holiness is a call to the perfection of love. God wants us to say yes to his invitation freely and lovingly. Such a response often takes time; we have to overcome tendencies toward selfishness and self-centeredness: we have to learn how to love truly and authentically. "The  Christian life ... is a life in which one gets out of oneself in order to give oneself to others. It is a gift, it is love – and love does not turn in on itself, it is not selfish, but self-giving." We are all, therefore, people constantly on the journey towards holiness, a pilgrim people.

This overview of the rationale of the Catholic teaching on the homosexual orientation has pointed out  that the Church makes a definite distinction made between, one the one hand, a person having such an orientation, and on the other hand, a person with such an orientation deliberately carrying out sexual activity with a person of the same sex. The first is not immoral, the second is an offense against God.

An associated matter is that all adults, in the normal course of life, struggle with temptations and urges arising from habits or physical inclinations, some slight, others powerful. We know that God has given us the free will, and his grace, to resist. He forgives when we give in. In this way, the homosexual and the straight have to answer the same call. 

CRT rife with cult-like violations

It pays to keep exploring the powerful ideas that are shaping society in many parts of the world. There are the dominant ideas of globalism rather than supporting what is local, capitalism rather than cooperative economic activity (which is different from socialism), consumption, pleasure, self-absorption, and, appearing on the scene very rapidly in recent years, the weird cocktail of what is called wokeism.  

To be woke is to be aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues, especially issues of race and social justice. But this concept has gained power because of its academic underpinning in the form of the fashionable critical race theory, and its which displaces reality with what is deemed politically correct. 

However, the behavioural characteristics of wokeism, in giving expression to critical race theory, bear a remarkable resemblance to the practice and belief structure of religion. As practised over the centuries and in a myriad of beliefs, religion contains common elements that are now observed in the lives of the wokeist elite in many societies.

Associate professor of linguistics at New York’s Columbia University John McWhorter is one of those who have identified how the behaviours of critical race theory stalwarts go beyond followers of religion in that it makes specific cult demands not only on believers but on the whole society. In contrast, while Christianity has shed the pursuit of a theocracy, CRT's true believers drive hard for the submission of all. Late last year,  McWhorter’s  Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America was published, and it continues to get attention in response to its relevancy in explaining the “catalogue of contradictions” exposed by practitioners’ responses to current issues.

McWhorter says that white people are proud of themselves for taking on board since the 1970s the social precept we should not only get rid of racial segregation but we should not be prejudiced, be a bigot. This has become a form of self-righteousness.

[That pride has] “slowly transmogrified into a kind of replacement for Protestantism where your grace is that you are not a racist. So you have white people who are ready to demonstrate this at the same time as you have black people who, after the civil rights revolution, are still haunted by insecurity because of how black America was treated for almost 400 years.

If you are a human being seeking a sense of purpose and security and well-being and comfort, you might choose the victimization complex. Any human being can do this but if you're a black person a particular way to do it is to exaggerate about racism and to found your sense of significance on being a victim of something now referred to abstractly as systemic racism.

So there are many black people who enjoy the condescension that comes from a lot of whites in treating us as these delicate creatures… .

We're not allowed to admit how much better things have gotten. There's a certain kind of person - and they are of all colors - where if you point to the good news, they don't want to accept it. It's unpleasant for them to hear how much better things have gotten and they're thinking that their job as moral actors is to find evidence to go against it. 

That's a weird thing. It's probably unprecedented in human history for a group of people to not want to admit that things are better. We live in strange times, but that's what happened in the late 20th century in the United States.

Referring to the Calvinistic doctrine of certain people being predestined by God to be saved – the Elect  – and others to be damned, McWhorter expands on why CRT, expressed as wokeism, has become a religion: 

“The Elect” is my term for not just woke people … it's woke people who are mean; it's the nasty woke people; it's the nastiness that we've seen especially since last summer, during our so-called racial reckoning.

What I mean by the elect is they're people who seem to think of their purpose as being to demonstrate that they're not racist and to police the rest of us for racism and to defenestrate and shun people who they deem to be not anti-racist enough.

Which leads us to “virtue-signalling”:

Prof. John McWhorter Source

So their idea is that they're doing something that's maximally good for humankind. To battle power differentials and especially ones about race is the paramount goal of the concerned human being. Everything is supposed to be centered on that and this is important. All people won't understand it but this is so important that it's okay to hurt people - and it's okay to do things that you wouldn't urge your own children to do - in the name of this larger good.

Although the people don't think about it, all of this is very, very Cultural Revolution, very Stalin, frankly metaphorically it's Hitler in many ways, but as with all of those people the elect today, the woke people who are okay with being mean in the name of wokeness, think of themselves as having come to the ultimate answer.

The parallels with religion, especially evangelical religion, are almost uncanny, especially given that most of these people look askance at Christianity in its more extreme forms.

But white privilege is Original Sin. The idea is that if you're white you're privileged and that will never change. Even if you're poor, no matter what you do, that's Original Sin.

The idea that we're waiting for America to come to terms with racism has no meaning. What are the terms? To come to terms with race doesn't mean anything. What it is, is the Rapture. It's that business of the End of Days and Judgment Day.

The reason that if a person says something that isn't sufficiently anti-racist they have to be chased out of the room or their job is because it's about heresy.

The parallels just go on and on, and so you have a clergy, you have writers who are looked to say things over and over again, many of which are very hard to square with reality.

Frankly people like Ta-Nehisi Coates, and now Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X Kendi, are priests of this religion. They don't think of themselves that way, they're certainly not saying it, but the way their writings are received is not as informational tracts but as scriptural counsel. 

So it's a rather alarming movement because you can't reason with people who are working from religion rather than logic. That's not to say that religion is idiocy in itself, but a part of religion is that you sequester a part of your brain away from logic that goes from a to b to c.

You have to suspend your disbelief and the new wokeness - Electivism - is religious in that way and the people in question can't be reached, and that's scary given how much power they're beginning to amass.

McWhorter spoke about Andrew Sullivan losing his staff position as a writer for New York magazine because other staff reckoned him not woke enough, and Don McNeil being forced to resign from the New York Times because he used the forbidden “N….” word when speaking to a bunch of teenagers.

These Don McNeil kind of stories are now legion and the idea that he deserved to lose this job is not something that a critical mass of people would agree with.  It's the Elect who think that he should lose his job.

What's going on is that the Elect get their way because we're all so deeply afraid of being called racist. It's a reign of terror. The reason that a person can get fired for some minor transgression like that, that nobody would ever have blinked at or would have given him a smack on the hand about just 10 minutes ago is because nobody wants to be called a racist on social media by these people.

If there was no Twitter there'd be no Elect - part of this is technology - you don't want to be called racist on Twitter. So the problem is that this fear means that people lose their jobs for no moral reason.

It means that educational institutions are being turned upside down, into these anti-racism academies that don't give people a real education and excommunicate anybody who questions it. 

That's a serious problem right there. It's vastly transforming our whole intellectual, moral and even artistic culture, and what bothers me so much about it is that it's mendacious.

It's all about fear. It's not that these people are convincing most of society of these very narrow extremist and self-indulgent views that this hyper wokeism has. It's that everybody's just afraid of them and I think it's time that we stop being so afraid. 

What's driving all of this are whites who have found their sense of purpose on showing that they're not racist and teaching other people not to, and […] a kind of black person who loves to paint white people as the enemy because, therefore, you are a noble victim – the noble victim complex.

Those together, when you have black people with that problem, and white people with their problem, [are] the Elect, and can that be powerful because those people like to call other people racists and once there's social media [in the mix] that can be really, really scary unless you're somebody who has the [peace] of not minding being despised. That's not most people.

All this is affecting the broader world culture, and while there is benefit in exposing racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination against parts of the human family, we must beware the nature of the reform movement so that the cultural winds nudge the manner of change in the direction of truth, moderation, patience and a sense of common cause rather than toward the nastiness, hypocrisy and posturing that spring from the true Original Sin that contends for control of our heart.

💢 Watch McWhorter interview here 

Ω If you like this blog, go to my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

CST not CRT: understanding true values

Public policy needs to be built on values-based principles   Photo: Kelly L 

Catholic Social Teaching arises from close involvement with nations and institutions over the two thousand years of the Church's existence. In a very practical way it speaks from what it has experienced, but its social teaching has come into its own as a valuable resource for humanity since its withdrawal from the government of extensive territory under its own jurisdiction and its transformation into a partner of all those throughout the world dedicated to enabling the human family to thrive.

As well as reaping the fruit of its own experience, what the Church brings to human affairs today is what is written in each person's conscience, the natural law expressed by the Medes and ancient Greeks, and performed within cultures all around the world. The Church also learns from observing and, most importantly, by applying the guidance of God in identifying what is true, good, and just.

Therefore, even though the Church is vexed by the sins of its members and the metaphysically opposed forces at play in the world, as are other institutions, like them it encapsulates a set of basic values that can guide decision-making in the public arena.

How this can play out in the real world is the subject of a book by constitutional lawyer and former vice chancellor of the Australian Catholic University, Greg Craven. The author makes his point this way: 

Our own challenge is that we live in a world, particularly in the context of government, that literally is starving for basic values to guide policy choices. 

[...] It becomes soulless game-playing. I have been told to achieve a particular policy outcome, and you are trying to stop me. My objective is to beat you, regardless of the consequences. Usually, this tendency is accompanied by name-calling, and false characterizations: You are a leftie... fascist... lunatic.

Craven identifies four social values that the Catholic Church offers the world. These are the dignity of the human being; the common good; solidarity; and subsidiarity. 

Take the common good. It is not mere utilitarianism, the greatest good for the greatest number. Of course, people should be fed, educated, have proper health care and be allowed to vote. Yet the common dignity of human beings is at the heart of Catholic social teaching, not in operative applications, however worthy.

All humans — however vulnerable or socially useless — remain human, and are to be valued as such. This applies to the elderly, the dying, the unborn, the sick, the poor and even criminals. As Catholics we are called to defend them. We cannot plead inconvenience or calumny as an excuse.

The notion of the common good is closely related to the value of human beings. In one sense, it is the generalization of the individual proposition, but the Catholic notion of the common good goes beyond the incidental adequacy of a society. It is moral, as well as a material proposal. People should live in a ‘good society’. 

From a Catholic perspective, a society acting in the common good cannot support abortion or euthanasia, however popular these causes may be. By debasing the moral quality of that society and its respect for life, these cannot be for the common good. 

Craven talks next of the importance of solidarity as a public value, a matter highlighted by the heat generated among some over Covid-19 public health regulations. Solidarity would put the needs of the community over one's own preferences, all things being equal with regards the rules being legitimately put in place. Craven says:

Ultimately, [solidarity] is about connectedness. The actions of every person affects, at whatever degree of remoteness, every other person. Therefore, we should act with the interests of other people firmly in mind.

The connection with the dignity of the human person and the common good are obvious, but solidarity goes further. It demands that we be with the poor, the sick and the dying, not merely around them. It requires an intimacy with suffering that many of us find emotionally very difficult. 

Subsidiarity is the final value considered in the book:

Subsidiarity demands that decisions be taken at the lowest possible effective level of governance. This reflects the inherent value of the human being, but also the common good, as decisions made at a local level are most likely to reflect local needs and values.

Subsidiarity as a principle is rather popular these days, as it is thought to encourage local experimentation and independence. But one needs to understand its inherent limitation: decisions should be taken at the lowest effective level. 

These values need to be at the forefront of public policy, but cannot be used just for good "optics". Each must be the foundation for comprehensive action. Subsidiarity, for example, can be abused by central government handing over to a lower authority an essential task such as housing or health, without giving the necessary resources to fulfil the responsibility.

Catholic Social Teaching is a body of work that is directed toward integral human development in solidarity, that lifts the individual and family to a protected status not possible under the morally handicapped market economy. 

Finally, just as only love can completely transform the human person, the Church holds love as the greatest social value because it respects others and their rights, requires the practice of justice and it alone makes us capable of charity to all in the sense of self-giving. Our relationship with God propels love's full effectiveness in human relationships and social relations, including public policy.*

*See Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church para 383

See also CRT values are an absolute fizzle* without love 

              CRT: The Church's teaching on how to reform society 

Ω If you like this blog, go to my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can   subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Kanye West: surmounting the pain

"This is not about me, God is still alive, so I'm free" ... rising above the turmoil

In August last year Kanye West released Donda, an album named after his late mother, Donda West. Culture and arts commentator Nathaniel Hunter wrote at the time:

It (mostly) successfully merges Kanye’s own musical history, his newfound identity in Christ, and the state of hip-hop at large to create a record worth listening to (and a few songs that might be some of the best Kanye has ever written). As far as I can tell, Donda is a model of what conversion ought to look like: messy, but also a process that draws one out of isolation into the larger body of Christ.

In addressing his own difficulties, and political and social issues like gang violence, Kanye seems to surmount the pain with a call to God - "one struggles to find a verse on the album that doesn’t explicitly mention God", Hunter states.

The lyrics of Come to Life, from Donda, give the measure of the man in a maelstrom:  

Intro

My soul cries out Hallelujah and I thank God for saving me

I thank God for...

Chorus

Here go all your problems again (I thank God)

Three, two, one, you're pinned (I thank God)

Uncle now he back in the pen' (Hallelujah)

Auntie shut down again

Did she finally come to life? (Thank you, Jesus)

Ever wish you had another life?

Ever wish you had another life?

Ever wish you had another life?

Verse 1

Don't you wish the night would go numb?

I've been feelin' low for so long

I ain't had a high in so long

I been in the dark for so long

Night is always darkest 'fore the dawn

Gotta make my mark 'fore I'm gone

I don't wanna die alone

I don't wanna die alone

I get mad when she gone

Mad when she home

Sad when she gone

Mad when she home

Sad when she gone (Loosen right now, the spirit that wants to run)

Floatin' on a silver lining (In the name of Jesus)

Yeah, you know where to find me, ridin' on a silver lining

And my God won't deny me, tell the Devil, "Get behind me"

And all the stars are aligned, lift me up every time

You know exactly where to find me

Interlude

Hallelujah (Thank you, Jesus)

Hallelujah (Yes)

Hallelujah...

Pre-Chorus

Did those ideas ever really come to life?

Make it all come to life

Make it all come to life

Prayin' for a change in your life

Well, maybe it's gon' come tonight

Chorus

Sadness settin' in again

Three, two, one, you're pinned

Uncle right back in the pen'

Tell me how auntie been

Took your thoughts and penciled 'em in

Should've wrote 'em down in pen

And maybe they'll come to life

And maybe they'll come to life

Sadness settin' in again

Three, two, one, you're pinned

Uncle right back to the pen'

Tell me how auntie been

Thoughts, you had penciled 'em in

Probably should've wrote 'em in pen

And maybe they'll come to life

They could finally come to life

They could finally come to life

Verse 2

You know where to find me, they cannot define me

So they crucify me, how so fazed when I leave?

Come and purify me, come and sanctify me

You the air that I breathe, the ultra-ultralight beam

Brought a gift to Northie, all she want was Nikes

This is not about me, God is still alive, so I'm free

Floatin' on a silver lining, floatin' on a silver lining

So when I'm free, I'm free

Notes from the Genius lyric site offer these thoughts about this song:

On Come to Life, Kanye sings about his desire for another life, wishing he had listened more to his ex-wife Kim Kardashian’s thoughts, dreams, problems, and aspirations. He shares his mixed emotions about her presence and absence, expressing how he does not want to die alone without her at his side. He sings about the silver-lining, which he latches on to during his darkest nights, which are his children. He treats his children as one of the most important things in his life and the one thing holding him together amid the divorce.

This song was debuted during the finale of the third and final Donda Listening Party, held in Kanye’s hometown of Chicago, in which he was set on fire inside of a replica of his childhood home. He then reenacted his wedding to Kardashian, which could be interpreted as Kanye burning his past and bringing forth the life he has always wanted with Kardashian.

With Kanye's mental health problems, and the distress that divorce tends to bring with it, we should pray for him, Kim and their children. 

 Ω If you like this blog, go to my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Joyful energy over Amazing Grace

Good news to dance about

Hyper Fenton is a rap singer among other things. His song on the theme of Amazing Grace certainly got the young video group moving. The Genius lyrics resource has this note on the song:

Amazing Grace is an upbeat electronic song showing off Hyper Fenton’s energetic side. He sings about life and the uncertainty of death, with the chorus headlining that God is the only one who is certain, saving us through His “amazing grace”.

The song was originally released as a single before being added to the Remembering Me tracklist. Spotify picked the single for their Top Christian playlist in the spring and summer of 2018, introducing Hyper Fenton to the playlist’s 1,000,000+ followers. As of August 2019, it’s both his and Moflo Music’s most popular song thus far, boasting over 450,000 plays on Spotify.

Rap songs in particular are saying something. Check out Fenton's message:

Verse 1

Okay, look, I'd never forget that day

In the 1990s, you know where to find me

Bein' born, I'm a millennial

Run for cover before he put you on Vimeo

Or the Twitter

C'mon y'all, get a grip

I don't give a flip, I just wanna live but

Better yet, I don't wanna die livin' a lie

Does anyone even realize I'm alive?

Chorus

Like stop, wait, hold up the club

I found somebody that I love

Like stop, aye, hold up the grave

I found somebody that can save

Like stop, dance, come get your mans

Bring 'em to the Man who atones for your sins

Like stop, aye, hold up your praise

Get a little taste of amazing grace like

Breakdown

Get a little taste of amazing grace like

Verse 2

Daddy, Daddy

I'm inadequate to battle

With the sadness

Saddled with depression

Misdirection of an addict

I've been wishin' as a mission

I would have somebody listen

And be born again a Christian

Maybe then they go the distance

As a disciple

Go and get your rifles

Bang bang you're dead, and I lay in bed

Wonderin' if you knew about Him

And let Him inside for eternal life

Last night woke up in a cold sweat

With the same nightmare that I had an old friend

Guess I should've told him that you never know when

God is gonna blow in, hopin' y'all told him

Chorus

I said stop, wait, hold up the club

I found somebody that I love

Like stop, ayy, hold up the grave

I found somebody that can save

Like stop, dance, come get your mans

Bring 'em to the Man who atones for your sins

Like stop, ayy, hold up your praise

Get a little taste of amazing grace like

Breakdown

Get a little taste of amazing grace like

Chorus

I said stop, wait, hold up the club

I found somebody that I love

Like stop, ayy, hold up the grave

I found somebody that can save

Like stop, dance, come get your mans

Bring 'em to the Man who atones for your sins

Like stop, ayy, hold up your praise

Get a little taste of amazing grace like

God's sense of humour shows through

Made in God's image. Photo by Mary Taylor

Does God have a sense of humour? asks Denis O'Hagan.

Some say “yes”. Some say “no”. Some say “I don’t know”. In a spoof he did about hell, comic Rowan Atkinson identified a group of inhabitants who were there because they laughed at the movie The Life of Brian. “No,” he admonished them, “God does not have a sense of humour”. On the other hand, a friend of mine had a large poster on her wall that proclaimed, “When God created man she was only joking”.

Those with insight may by now realise that I have a quirky humour that is not universally appreciated. From time to time, people have admonished me for laughing inappropriately. So, let’s get profound and theological - can theology be anything but profound? In an anthropomorphic sense, God must have a sense of humour because God made me in his image in likeness and I have a sense of humour. The fact that some may doubt that I have does not weaken the argument. Human beings laugh.

The gospels record that Jesus wept on three occasions. He was also familiar with laughter’s little sister, joy — there is no mention in the Gospels that he ever laughed. But I believe Jesus laughed every day. He could not have been the Son of God and the Son of Man if he did not laugh. Perhaps the evangelists just didn’t like his jokes.

The ability to laugh is a beautiful gift. No other sentient being known to humans is capable of it although I suspect my cat is capable of a sly grin from time to time. As with all God’s gifts, laughter can be used or misused. We are capable of cruel and cynical laughter. We can make fun of people and cause them to feel bad.

And, of course, there are times when mirth is inappropriate. There are seasons for weeping and seasons for laughing. But we don’t just laugh when we hear a joke. Reasonably frequently, we find ourselves laughing amid tears, not because something is funny, but because it brings relief. Tears and laughter are like identical twins; sometimes, we are not sure which is which.

There are times when, for example, we are confronted with a compelling truth, that makes laughter well up from a deep cavern in our soul, a refreshing spring gushing forth to bring us life in the shadow of death. Laughter is not a denial of the pain and suffering. It is an admission of helplessness and our willingness to accept sadness, pain and suffering as part of creation without giving into desolation. “Well, all you could do was laugh”.

Laughter can also be a form of prayer. A friend recently sent me an email attachment. “This short clip is for anyone who loves coloratura sopranos and parrots. Do watch to the end. It’s only 55 seconds”, she said. Well, a coloratura soprano is not my artist of choice; I prefer Queen and Pink Floyd. And divas, in general, are not funny; not intentionally so anyway. But to humour my friend I dutifully watched. The soprano lady was a bit scary, and to a philistine like me, somewhat unintentionally funny. But the parrot! The parrot! He or she performed the same piece of music and executed it to perfection. I was engulfed by a tsunami of delicious laughter.

The first and obvious lesson to draw from this experience is that when you pray, don’t give up too soon. Jesus often keeps the best wine until last. The second, perhaps debatable lesson, is that laughter is a form of contemplation. It is a moment of ecstasy. Your whole person, mind, body, emotions and soul are enveloped. You don’t think,  “Oh, I am laughing”. You don’t say to yourself, "Something must be funny because I am laughing”.

You have lost control of your body which heaves and shakes. Your mind is filled with light, and your heart is filled with joy. There is no self-analysis. The rest of the world is forgotten. You are lost in the moment, and that is contemplation; being utterly present to the present.

In an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times published in 1978, to celebrate his 75th birthday, Malcolm Muggeridge offered 25 propositions. The tenth one states: “Mystical ecstasy and laughter are the two great delights of living, and saints and clowns, their purveyors, the only two categories of human beings who can be relied on, to tell the truth. Hence, steeples and gargoyles side by side on the great cathedrals”.

Why do so many people find it necessary to wear their Sunday face to church? Like the divas as mentioned earlier, religiously minded people are not primarily remembered for their cracking sense of humour.

Pope Francis is a dazzling exception to the rule. It is not disrespectful to call him a clown –“one of only two categories of human beings who can be relied on, to tell the truth”. I have a photograph of the laughing Pope on the wall.

Laughter is a foretaste of what is to come. No need for harps to play and clouds to sit on. Heaven will be one long laugh.

💢 Denis O'Hagan is a Marist priest and lives in New Zealand. This column, and family-friendly jokes, can be found here.

💢 An afterthought: Variations on a theme:

Ω If you like this blog, go to my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Tips on how to achieve joy in life

Something for January to start us off in the new year with an idea of where we find that higher form of happiness, joy. As the makers of this video say, "Joy is what makes life beautiful. It's what gets us through challenges and allows light in to illuminate the shadows. Joy heals our wounds and fills our souls with goodness." They have created a series that offers many riches drawn from life experience. We are not on our own in life! The path is well worn. Therefore, we can benefit what others have found to be true.
 

Where evolution meets Christian life

Beeple continues the human trait of artistic exploration - NFT detail

Ruth Schuster is a senior writer on archaeology and science at the Haaretz newspaper in Israel. She had an interesting opening paragraph on a story this week about the news just out that a key set of human-like skull bone fossils is now reckoned to be thousands of years older than first thought. She begins:

When did modern humans begin to evolve? And from who? Once upon a time it was thought that, OK, we began from a monkey but then there was a linear progression to the wonder that is us, starting about 200,000 years ago. It is now abundantly clear that we are mongrels, admixing merrily with other human species until they all died out, and now an early modern human previously found in Ethiopia has been redated with the help of a volcano to 233,000 years ago. 

The previous date for the human ancestor referred to as Omo 1 was 197,000 years ago.

Schuster quotes one of the leaders of the study that produced the new dates as saying:

In my opinion, Omo 1 is the oldest unchallenged fully modern specimen, the oldest Homo sapiens as we morphologically define the species nowadays. This is why this new dates are important. They may not tell us much about how modern humans evolved, but they tell us that before 200,000-230,000 years ago, hominins that are by our current standard recognizable as Homo sapiens, were already present in Eastern Africa.

That leader is Professor Aurélien Mounier, a paleoanthropologist with the Museum of Mankind in Paris. His comment that there was still a lot unknown "about how modern humans evolved" underlines the still rudimentary state of knowledge concerning human prehistory. He goes on to discuss the doubts and debate arising because of  "the complexity of the evolutionary processes which gave birth to our species". 

Dark areas in this reconstruction show the Omo1 fossils found by Richard Leakey in Ethiopia over 50 years ago. The Natural History Museum, London

The main body of Christianity accepts evolution in general and of the human species. Pope John Paul II declared presentation to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in 1996 that evolution is more than a mere hypothesis or theory – it has significant arguments to commend its truth. However, as Pope Pius XII had noted in 1950 in his encyclical Humani Generis, physical evolution is not all there is to the story.

To explore the unique feature of human evolution, I pick up the examination of this issue by Robert Spitzer PhD, an American Jesuit priest who has written extensively on scientific matters.  I like reading his writings because he believes in giving proofs for his statements. In giving a Christian context to the study of human evolution, he states:

A pure physical, organic evolution is only part of the truth of human origins because God has given every human being an individual and unique transphysical soul  – something that is not reducible to physics or to a physical evolutionary process.

[But] there is considerable evidence from all these rational domains [science, medicine, anthropology] to corroborate the existence of our transcendental souls. 

Spitzer provides evidence that, added to the physical element of human evolution, which can leave fossils across the hundreds of thousands of years, is the spiritual element, which he refers to as "transphysical". Therefore, the only thing about evolution Christians cannot accept is "a pure reductionistic physical evolution which precludes the existence of a unique human soul".

At some stage of human evolution God intervened and endowed the human species, through our first parents, a spiritual capability. However, Spitzer points out that the woman geneticists call “Mitochondrial Eve” was probably not the first woman (biblical Eve) having a soul – a non-physical capability – necessary for free choice and moral decisions , and the man geneticists call “Y-Chromosome Adam” was probably not the first man (biblical Adam) having a soul capable of free choice and moral decisions. 

Evidence of the spiritual ability in the human person comes from a scholarly work: 

There is a new book from the foremost linguistic theorist in the country, Noam Chomsky, and an MIT professor of computational linguistics and computer science and engineering named Robert Berwick, entitled, Why Only Us (published by MIT Press in 2016).

Without delving into the complexities of their analysis, I will give their main point – that between 60,000 to 70,000 years ago, human beings developed a capacity for abstract, syntactical, and universal communication that no other species – not even our most proximate ancestors – developed.

First, there is no known or probative biological or genetic explanation for this unique development in human beings, [which provokes] the questions, “What caused it?”, and “Was this cause physical or transphysical?”

Second, it seems that the progeny between mitochondrial Eve/Y chromosome Adam (200,000 years ago) and their progeny who were invested with this abstract and syntactical linguistic ability (70,000 years ago) did not seem to do anything more significant than use stone tools, live in community, and hunt in tandem – and then suddenly, after 130,000 years, an explosion of language, discovery, religion, symbolism, art, and geographical exploration. What happened? And what caused it?

It seems that our genetic ancestors did convey a genetic-biological-physical profile to us, but they did not give everything to us that makes us human.

Something else was added 130,000 years after them (70,000 years ago) that gave rise to the explosion of universal syntactical language, religion, art, mathematics, and the precursors to complex civilization.

I would submit that this “something” is a transcendent soul, and that such a soul is the condition necessary for all of the above powers and characteristics – syntactical language, abstract mathematics, religion, symbolic art, and the free choice and moral awareness necessary for law and civilization.

First, Spitzer looks at what Noam Chomsky and Robert Berwick have to say about "the sudden and unique occurrence – explosion – of universal syntactical language".

Thus, very small children can understand the difference between “dog bites man” and “man bites dog” – and even see the humor in it.

But no chimpanzee – which can learn 200 individual signs in American Sign Language – can make this distinction.

They simply do not have the capacity for abstraction (necessary to relate distinct objects to one another in various categories) required to differentiate between subjects (in general) and objects (in general).

Chomsky and Berwick believe that there might be a physical explanation linked to a special genetic switch affecting the brain, but they are far from showing how such a genetic switch or a patterning of brain modalities could give rise to the power of abstraction (necessary for relating objects to one another in various categories).

The ability to distinguish that some things are in a relationship with each other and to apply the questions why, how, how many, what, where, and when show the power of our (spiritual) intellect.

These big general ideas could not have been abstracted from experience or from wiring or patterns in the brain, and this is what has caused philosophers like Bernard Lonergan, or the Nobel Prize winning physiologist, Sir John Eccles, to declare that they must have a transphysical status and origin – a soul.

The universality of the uniquely human capacity to pass the syntax test comes next:

What is remarkable about human beings is that we could take a child from an African culture which has a rather unique way of expressing syntax and grammar, and place him, say, in a Chinese culture which has a totally different way of expressing syntax and grammar, and that child will be able to learn the syntax and grammar of that completely different language almost immediately – as if there were a universal syntax underlying every particular expression of it which young children understand from birth!

No other primate, no matter how sophisticated, has ever crossed the syntax threshold according to the studies of not only Chomsky and Berwick, but also Herbert Terrace and a variety of others.

Along with this capacity for universal syntactical abstraction (and universal abstract language), humans received five other capacities/tendencies as well. The first was the spirit of discovery:

What explains this radical transition from a rather sedentary human community on the border of Namibia and Angola, to world exploration? Was it simply a lack of food? Simply a desire to escape tribal enemies?

Though this may have been part of the reason, it does not explain the rapid and world-wide expansion of the human population even on the oceans to Indonesia and even Australia.

I would submit that there is something more than simple need – there was a “spirit” of curiosity and adventure – something absent in our most proximate ancestors – that engendered the spirit to discover and explore.

Burial of the dead is another feature of this period about 70,000 years ago:

Something else also happened in this period: human beings started burying their dead, treating the remains of their deceased with respect, and burying them with rituals and objects indicating a belief that they would survive their physical death (see, for example, a burial site with these objects from this period in the Skhul cave at Qafzeh, Israel).

If humans did not believe in their spiritual nature or life after death, we might ask, “Why did they bother to bury their dead with great respect – and with rituals and objects?”

And if they did have an awareness of their spiritual nature and life after death, we might ask the further question, “Where did they get this awareness from?”

After all, 130,000 years of ancestors did no such thing – and then suddenly, human beings seem to be doing it as a universal practice.

Did this spiritual awareness – this awareness of something beyond the physical world also come from our transphysical soul?

An additional quality that makes us human is the desire to express ourselves through what we call art, and symbolic representation:

There are cave drawings dating back to at least 35,000 years ago (see Jo Marchant in Smithsonian January 2016) that have been more recently dated at 44,000 years ago (see Ewen Callaway in Nature December 2019) on the island of Sulawesi in Indonesia.

Many scholars believe that the animal drawings have sacred and cultural symbolic significance (see Ghosh, Pallab, “Cave paintings change ideas about the origins of art”). 

We come to numbers, which play a big part in human life:

There is no evidence of abstract numeration in any other species except human beings. Did this originate from our heuristic notion of “how many?” – And can this innate heuristic notion (standing at the foundation of all quantitative relationships) be explained by programming of the brain?

It is quite unlikely. For it is one thing to program a brain (or computer) to count, but quite another thing to understand counting itself and its significance.

It is these abstract concepts that elude mere programming or patterning of the brain. As Gödel's theorem reveals, humans do mathematics very differently from computers.

The latter follow programs while the former invent them. The former have an abstract understanding of numeration itself in all of its permutations, while the latter lack all such understanding.

The development of advanced social norms is also on our list of attributes anthropologists have noticed in our human ancestors from about 70,000 years ago:

Human communities having durable structures, some specialization of labor and commerce, and a sense of social norms began to arise as a result of migrations, differentiated linguistic systems resulting from those migrations, and the ability to barter and exchange on the basis of counting and tallying.

It seems that as migration occurred, some groups stayed behind while others continued to migrate. Those who stayed behind used their linguistic and numeric capacities to specialize labor, and their religious instincts to solidify basic social norms and rules.

Evolution within the physical world is one thing, but as we have seen here, our human experience makes a compelling case that there is more to the human person than the blind outcome of various environmental stimuli.

However, there is harder evidence for God's intervention at a point in the development of human ancestors, a historical point in time that stands alongside the original spark of creation launching the universe on its way, and the overwhelming arrival of God in our midst in Jesus, God uniting with the human as a single person.

But, please, pursue these issues by either going to Robert Spitzer's text, The Soul’s Upward Yearning: Clues to Our Transcendent Nature from Experience and Reason (2016) or the article that gives a fuller  account than what is possible here of what science tells us about how modern humans are uniquely different from the rest of the natural world. Go here for Spitzer's article.

💢 See also: What about similarity to Chimpanzees?

Ω If you like this blog, go to my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.