Special Feature:
Special Feature:
A Humanism for the Catholic University
of Eastern Africa
(Paper
presented during CUEA'S Jubilee Year Celebrations 3rd February 2000)
Dr Cornelius Kuipers*
Introduction
Believe me or not,
I've never yet been to a psychiatrist. However, I once dreamt that I had enough
money for the professional fee and that I introduced myself as the person
who had made the appointment then settled down to have my inferiority complex
analysed. When the fee was nearly used up (though it was I who had done almost
all the talking), the learned doctor told me that he had both good news and
bad news for me. "The good news," he said, "is that you have no inferiority
complex. The bad news is that you are
inferior".
The task to make
a presentation on humanism makes
me acutely aware of the "bad news". Under the circumstances, the best I can
do is draw from the psychiatrist in my dreams and relate what I say to concrete
facts.
The word 'humanism'
is used in a variety of senses. I think I can somewhat simplify the situation
as follows:
(a) 'Humanism'
is used to refer to a belief system
about the dignity of human persons and their ability to achieve their goals
by appropriate means. This afternoon, I am not primarily interested in such
philosophical kinds of Humanism. Let me state explicitly that I disagree with
the variety of it that attributes to human beings the ability to achieve all
their goals without the need for God or religion.
(b) 'Humanism'
is also used to refer to an attitude
of respect for anything that is of genuinely human value. I'll try to concentrate
on this, because it enables me to speak about Humanism with only minimal jargon,
and because in general it seems much easier.
It is this attitude
of respect for the human person that we can see clear traces of at CUEA and
that the university can further aim at as a programme for the new century.
I hope, however, that you don't expect me to give a comprehensive picture
of it. It is, in fact, something I've never myself seen in its totality. I'll
try to mention a number of characteristic features of it that a programme
of university education should be interested in. In Part Two of this presentation,
I should then be able to add some more general reflections.
Part One
One feature of
Humanism is that exemplified in the members and sympathisers of FOGEE, who
emphasize respect for the female as an equal to the male person in education.
As a male head in a Department with a majority of female students, I've often
wondered how long the absence of an acceptable gender balance can continue.
To put it differently, it seems obvious to me that the 21st century will witness notable changes in
this area of gender balance, and that FOGEE is reminding us at the outset
of the century of a necessary element of Humanism that should increasingly
characterize a university like CUEA.
I also see an element
of Humanism in the thoughtfulness of the Marketing Students Association (MSA),
who have put up garbage cans all over the campus. A similar respect for the
CUEA community is shown by the many students who use those garbage cans –
just as its absence is glaring in the carelessness of some students who leave
paper plates with soggy remains of potato chips and banana peelings in lecture
rooms (of all places!). The ecology should become a common concern among intellectuals,
and that should be visible here at CUEA. If, after leaving the university,
our graduates are to contribute in significant ways to the welfare of their
cities and nations, the example of MSA should be emulated by all before graduation
as a CUEA tradition.
Respect for the
human person must of necessity reveal itself as respect for the handicapped
and suffering. I find it difficult to gauge how much of this there is among
us at CUEA. From time to time however, I hear or read about collections followed
by visits to Nyumbani or other places where the International Movement of
Catholic Students (IMCS) and other groups show their sensitivity to suffering.
I find this very heartening. I look upon it as something that should stand
out in a university's culture, particularly a Christian one such as ours.
Allow me to quote here the beautiful opening sentence of the Second Vatican
Council's Pastoral Constitution "On the Church in the Modern World".
The joy and hope,
the grief and anguish of the people of our time, especially of those who are
poor or afflicted in any way, are the joy and hope, the grief and anguish
of the followers of Christ as well. Nothing that is genuinely human fails
to find an echo in their hearts (G&S, No. 1).
Subsequently, the
text refers to the growing "sense of autonomy and responsibility" everywhere,
with a great potential for "the spiritual and moral maturity of mankind".
In that context, the Council says that we "are witnessing the birth of a new
humanism, where human beings are defined before all else by their responsibility
to their fellow human beings and at the court of history". (No. 55)
This perspective
of a worldwide humanism may raise the question whether instances of behaviour
in our CUEA campus are more than mere trivialities that belong to the world
of the petty-minded. I would like to answer that thoughtful behaviour deriving
from respect for one another can never be merely trivial. Lecturers who, out
of respect for a colleague waiting outside, always make it a point to clean
the blackboard before leaving the lecture room, or students who enjoy an all-night
disco in this hall without mounting amplifiers outside my bedroom, must be
assumed to be generally thoughtful and humanists all in macro-contexts. Similarly,
people who are careless and lack punctuality in college can be expected to
be equally unconcerned and inconsiderate when they are let loose upon the
world. Things become worse, of course, if an educational institution allows
dishonest and corrupt habits to develop unchecked.
This brings me
to two other prominent features of Humanism, namely respect for self and concern
for freedom. I take it for granted that education always implies some kind
of tension between the legitimate guidance that is offered (commonly in a
context of large numbers when some adjustment to the group is required on
the part of the individual) and the equally legitimate concern for the free
development of the individual. True self-respect is basically justified by
the fact that I know myself to be a person like others around me (irrespective
of bank account, academic titles, skin pigmentation or other superficial differences).
My own freedom, like that of others, is sacred and needs to be treasured.
Yet how can I claim to respect myself as a person if I am not prepared to
listen to advice about developing my talents through hard work? Or how can
I claim to be free if I allow myself to become the slave of money-making activities,
of pleasure, of power? Can I have true self-respect as a student if I am interested
in easy results and cheap degrees as substitutes for serious study? I know,
of course, that many of our present generation students at CUEA can't afford
to be too idealistic and want to get a degree as soon as possible. However,
they should not forget that a degree obtained without self-respect will never
give them the satisfaction and inspiration that they look forward to with
even greater eagerness than the degree by itself. More generally, an attitude
of Humanism, steadily cultivated during one's education, will bring its own
precious reward.
A very basic feature
of a humanistic attitude is that of an openness to truth which goes together
with tolerance of views different from your own. The more you think about
that in the modern world (with its incidences of racial, ethnic, tribal and
religious intolerance here in Africa, for instance), the more you realize
how important it is that a programme of education includes education in tolerance
and full acceptance of others. What a wonderful thing it would be if all the
CUEA graduates would stand out as promoters of inter-tribal harmony and cooperation!
Even if it is true that education is largely a matter of self-education, the
development of one's insights and attitudes needs to be stimulated by a congenial
atmosphere. A good educational institution will provide this, but it can't
become an effective educational tool unless students (individually and as
a body) are interested in it and prepared to collaborate.
I know that my
attitude of Humanism leaves very much to be desired. However, it is very clear
to me that religion must form an essential element in it. I respect the view
of people who say that they don't need God or religion, but in my own life
that is unthinkable. I am convinced that God respects my neighbour and me
- though I am not always consciously aware of it. This belief does in fact
motivate my respect for the human person. Again, Jesus Christ is the model
human being, the Second Adam according to the New Testament. Therefore, I
can't be concerned about the welfare of human family merely on the basis of
reason and accepted human values. My Christian faith is not only a fact I
must take into account, but also a reality I highly value. Whatever it may
be for others, a humanism without reference to Jesus Christ would clash with
self-respect.
Part Two
It would be foolish
to think of a humanistic attitude as the prerogative of Christians or of a
Catholic institution. It isn't merely some kind of Christian ethics. Daily
experiences show that I have learned and must continue to do so from non-Catholics
and non-Christians. I'll always remain very grateful, for instance, for my
15 years in India, which provided the opportunity to become acquainted with
the Hindu tradition(s) and its values. Among other things, it forced me to
reflect on the enrichment that I experienced from my contact with Hinduism,
and therefore to reflect on my own academic and spiritual duty to seek such
enrichment. More particularly, I often recall an interesting allegorical interpretation
of a Bible passage that I had come across in my earlier studies of Christian
literature.
The interpretation
goes back to a 3rd century north-African scholar, Origen of
Alexandria, and it can be looked upon as an early form of what today is often
referred to as religious inculturation, that is, being aware of the goodness
inherent in non-Christian culture(s) and making it an integral part of one's
Christian life. Origen saw this exemplified in a passage from the Book of
Exodus.
The Egyptians urged
the people on, to hasten their departure from the land; they thought that
otherwise they would all die … The Israelites did as Moses had commanded:
they asked the Egyptians for articles of silver and gold and for clothing.
The Lord indeed had made the Egyptians so well-disposed towards the people
that they let them have whatever they asked for. Thus did they despoil the
Egyptians. (Ex 12:33-36)
It was this despoliation
of the Egyptians, says Origen, which later enabled the Israelites to construct
the sanctuary with all its golden and silver vessels as described towards
the end of the Book of Exodus. The wealth of the pagans was used to enrich
the worship of the true God. This leads Origen to the following conclusion:
Now, Holy Scripture
is wont to represent as an evil the descent of the Israelites into Egypt,
indicating that certain persons suffer harm from sojourning among the Egyptians,
that is to say, from meddling with the knowledge of this world … And I may
tell you from my own experience that not many take from Egypt only the useful
and go away and use for the service of God (Letter to St. Gregory Thaumaturgus)
The gold and silver
the Egyptians, therefore, become symbols for their secular knowledge and cultural
achievements, and these are in turn seen to represent the secular knowledge
and achievements of the Gentile world in general, which are all meant to become
integrated elements in a believer's world view and attitude.
Over a century
after Origen's death, St Gregory of Nyssa repeated this in slightly different
words in his Life of Moses. He
added explicitly that "it is possible to see this happening even now. For
many bring to the Church of God their profane learning as a kind of gift."
(Bk II, No. 116)
More than a thousand
years later (1501 to be precise) Erasmus of Rotterdam used the same reasoning
in his Manual of the Christian Soldier.
As one of the chief advocates of religious reform through solid education,
he too defended a positive (though by no means indiscriminate) evaluation
of secular learning. He looked upon it as one of the neutral means (together
with health, beauty, strength and such like things) to a better life – neutral
in the sense that, depending on how it is made use of, it may have a positive
effect on the Christian. In his own words:
If you seek erudition
that, aided by it, you may more clearly perceive Christ shining forth in sound
literature …, then prepare yourself for the study of literature … If you can
confidently look forward to great profit in Christ, (then) like an adventurous
merchant boldly proceed further to learning of the Gentiles, and use the riches
or treasures of the Egyptians for the adornment of the temple of God. (Ch.
8, Rule 4)
Though secular
university studies (or any secular studies, for that matter) can of course
be justified in other ways, I have always liked this image of "the treasures
of the Egyptians" because it is suggestive of the contribution those studies
can make to the Christian life of intellectuals.
Erasmus represented
a movement in European history that took from the old classical Greek and
Latin writers an image of the human person as both learned and morally responsible.
The characteristics of the movements have always remained somewhat vague,
and so has the name which was given to it, that is, 'Humanism'. Speaking very
generally, we can say that a humanist was considered to be a person of wide
culture and erudition, tolerant, and with a positive belief in the dignity
and potentiality of the human person.
For many contemporaries
of Erasmus, the belief in the importance of the human person came under attack
from the teaching of the Polish cleric Copernicus, whose heliocentric astronomy
implied that human life wasn't after all the center of the universe. We could
say that the attack was intensified through the teaching of the 19th century naturalist Charles Darwin that the
human species doesn't have a privileged origin, and further in the 20th century through the psychology of Freud,
in whose system the primacy of human reason and consciousness (with implied
accountability) seemed to be replaced by the primary of the unconscious.
In any case, by
the time of the Second Vatican Council some 35 years ago, Humanism had had
for some time bad press coverage. Its idealistic image of the human person
might indeed look utterly unrealistic in times of repeated genocide. Human
self-respect inevitably suffers from widespread unemployment and a painful
struggle for life. The tolerance of the humanist may easily look like a lack
of principle and rootedness. The erudite culture of the humanist may well
see meaningless as specialization in the various branches of knowledge continues
to increase and to preclude an accessible synthesis that puts everything neatly
in its place.
The Vatican Council's
reference to a "new" Humanism must be interpreted against this background.
It implies that, in spite of everything, the Catholic Church believes in the
future of our race, and it invites the whole human race to share that belief
and to look at things through Christian eyes. Especially since the 19th century, Humanism has often been presented
as anti-religious, as a view which held that human beings can't achieve their
full potential unless they free themselves from religion. In this respect,
the Humanism proposed by the Council was something new. It wanted to re-emphasize
the dignity of the human person but now on the basis of Christian faith. It
repeated the positive appreciation of the non-theological sciences as constantly
found in the older tradition of Humanism. It updated the social challenges
of Humanism by reminding us that human beings have increasingly become each
other's neighbours. It would seem to suggest that a synthesis of all the sciences
should be sought, not so much in detailed familiarity with the research findings
of each branch of knowledge, but rather in the shared attitude of a Christian
Humanism.
In the earlier
part of this presentation, I have tried to give some simple examples which
enable us to cultivate a humanistic attitude in our everyday campus life.
In the second part, I have looked at Humanism from a wider perspective, keeping
in mind that our university aims to make the 'new' Humanism its general educational
goal.
| 
