When I was growing up, it was a "that's obvious" commonplace that "Western Civilisation" is real, that we here in the Caribbean are a part of it, that it is on the whole a great benefit to humanity -- "warts and all" notwithstanding, and that it is rooted in the Christian synthesis of our inheritance from the famous triad of cities, Jerusalem, Athens and Rome; with of course the earlier Fertile Crescent Civilisations -- especially those of the Nile and Mesopotamia river valleys at the deeper level.
But now, everything just summarised is hotly contested or even taken offence over.
Civilisation itself is now often seen as a dubious notion, little more than an excuse for oppressive domination and racist supremacism. In Christian circles, echoing this in key part, many would now deny that our Faith is pro-civilisational, choosing instead to emphasise that we are called to be a counter-culture -- to which I must first say, such as by being “ . . . the light of the world. A city [Latin, CIVITAS] set on a hill cannot be hidden"[Matt 5:14]?
Something has gone wrong, and is trending worse. So, pardon but in absence of someone more suitable, pardon an attempt here at a "first, rough draft "Fair Havens steering word.
To begin, as Jesus hinted at in his opening remarks for his epochal (indeed, civilisation-foundational) Sermon on the Mount, a city on a hill that shines out in a darkened world is a point of hope, refuge, rescue, restoration, renewal, even resurgence. Where, even the seemingly simple word, "city," is loaded with meaning, as:
DEFINITION: A Civilisation is a city-based culture. That is, a civilisation is a level of culture for a society or cluster of societies that has advanced enough to have urban clusters of people, an economy with high specialisation of production of goods and services; with ability to sustain itself from one generation to the next. So, too, it has need for significant agricultural surplus (often, based on hinterlands or trade), adequate water supply, administration, education and training or apprenticeship, facilitation of trade, government, defence and hosting of arts and culture, with a predominant vision of itself in the world, hope for the future and memory or record of the past (typically, religiously rooted). Writing and written calculation systems are strong enablers, but are not strictly necessary. These factors allow a large population to thrive, and for people to live with some dignity, sense of belonging and hope for their posterity; though, of course there will be many challenges including poverty, family breakdown, public health, economic recessions, war, disease, natural disasters and more. Where, too, Old Kingdom Egypt and the Andean and Meso American Civilisations show that such does not strictly need a mass base of tool grade metalworking technologies using copper, bronze (tin or arsenic -- yes, arsenic), or iron; sophisticated stone technology is adequate.
Already, this grounds the basic legitimacy of any civilisation, however imperfect it is; and, even if significantly resistant to proposed reformation: long-term, multigenerational survival means that what is proposed must pass a stiff test for it to be prudent to take the risk of step-change. Yes, radicals, conservativism, amelioration, compromise and patient prudence (such as the apostle Paul exercised at Fair Havens) are a needed survival mechanism for a civilisation not addicted to voyages of dubious merit whenever a sweet little south wind blows. Where, too, despite risks of corruption, abuse, injustice, incompetence or profligacy, government is a necessary function for a viable city. Thus already, we see a distinction between prudent reform and radical demands.
Civilisations, in short, however imperfect, share a common basic legitimacy. Including that common civilisation we inhabit: rooted in the legacy of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome; formerly termed "Christendom"; but now usually styled "Western Civilisation. Need for reform, progress, amelioration, sustainability, curbing corruption, strengthening justice and general welfare etc. indeed point to room for improvement; but -- on pain of mass chaos and disruption predictably causing mass death and decline -- such inevitable struggles do not delegitimise and stigmatise our civilisation or require its immediate dismantling and instant replacement or hurried "fundamental transformation" by whatever radical new utopian order is fashionable in a given day. The track record of many such attempts (as "predictably" implies) has not been good. Radicals of all stripes, kindly take due note.
This sets a calmer, more balanced atmosphere for reflections.
xxxx WORK IN PROGRESS, LIKELY FOR A FULL DAY, KINDLY COME BACK XXXXX
