SPECIAL INVESTIGATING UNITS AND SPECIAL TRIBUNALS ACT 74 OF 1996
Commencement Date of Act: 20 November 1996
Date Modified by Sabinet: 20060111
Category: Procedures - Courts
Note: Act amended by Judicial Matters Amendment Act 22 of 2005 with effect from 11 January 2006
Description: To provide for the establishment of Special Investigating Units for the purpose of investigating serious malpractices or maladministration in connection with the administration of State institutions, State assets and public money as well as any conduct which may seriously harm the interests of the public, and for the establishment of Special Tribunals so as to adjudicate upon civil matters emanating from investigations by Special Investigating Units; and to provide for matters incidental thereto.
Database: Netlaw: SA Legislation
A copy of the legislation can be found here, on the SIU website, but this excludes amendments after 28 April 2004. The copy on the SIU website has been amended by the Judicial Matters Amendment Act 22 of 2005, with effect from 11 January 2006.
Source: Sabinet, SIU, www.info.gov.za
Wednesday, November 20, 1996
Tuesday, October 29, 1996
DE KOCK TRIAL TO CONCLUDE ON WEDNESDAY
The 19-month trial of former Vlakplaas security police base commander Colonel Eugene de Kock will draw to a conclusion on Wednesday when sentence will finally be passed. De Kock has been convicted on 89 charges, including six of murder, two of conspiracy to commit murder and several of fraud and the illegal possession of arms and ammunition
The murder charges relate to the deaths of five would-be robbers in an ambush outside Nelspruit in 1992 and the murder of askari Goodwill Sikhakhane, who was killed near Greytown in 1991 on de Kock's orders to prevent him from revealing police involvement in the disappearance of ANC members who were part of Operation Vula.
De Kock was also convicted of conspiring to murder Vlakplaas colleague Brian Ngqulunga and Krugersdorp security guard Japie Maponya, as well as attempting to murder self-confessed police hitsquad leader Dirk Coetzee and the culpable homicide of ANC attorney Bheki Mhlangeni, who was killed by a parcel bomb meant for Coetzee.
De Kock, who has said he will ask the Truth and Reconciliation Commission for amnesty after the conclusion of his trial, in mitigating evidence named several high-ranking politicians and policemen as the men who gave him orders to kill. He also said police spy Craig Williamson was involved in the assassination of Swedish prime minister Olof Palme, and that former president P W Botha knew about the bombing of Cosatu House as well as 1985 cross-border raids into Lesotho and Botswana.
The State asked Mr Justice Willie van der Merwe to send de Kock to jail for longer than 100 years, saying he had no remorse and that even if he suffered from post traumatic stress, it played no role whatsoever in his crimes. The State also argued that politics had nothing to do with the trial, which it said was all about common criminal deeds.
De Kock's defence attempted to place his actions against a background of an all-out fight against what he believed were his enemies, namely the SACP, ANC and PAC. It was argued that the impression could easily be created that de Kock was being used as an example, and that the State was making a scapegoat of him while other former security policemen, "who were just as guilty as him", were going free, and were even being given high posts with huge salaries within the police service.
Source: SAPA
The murder charges relate to the deaths of five would-be robbers in an ambush outside Nelspruit in 1992 and the murder of askari Goodwill Sikhakhane, who was killed near Greytown in 1991 on de Kock's orders to prevent him from revealing police involvement in the disappearance of ANC members who were part of Operation Vula.
De Kock was also convicted of conspiring to murder Vlakplaas colleague Brian Ngqulunga and Krugersdorp security guard Japie Maponya, as well as attempting to murder self-confessed police hitsquad leader Dirk Coetzee and the culpable homicide of ANC attorney Bheki Mhlangeni, who was killed by a parcel bomb meant for Coetzee.
De Kock, who has said he will ask the Truth and Reconciliation Commission for amnesty after the conclusion of his trial, in mitigating evidence named several high-ranking politicians and policemen as the men who gave him orders to kill. He also said police spy Craig Williamson was involved in the assassination of Swedish prime minister Olof Palme, and that former president P W Botha knew about the bombing of Cosatu House as well as 1985 cross-border raids into Lesotho and Botswana.
The State asked Mr Justice Willie van der Merwe to send de Kock to jail for longer than 100 years, saying he had no remorse and that even if he suffered from post traumatic stress, it played no role whatsoever in his crimes. The State also argued that politics had nothing to do with the trial, which it said was all about common criminal deeds.
De Kock's defence attempted to place his actions against a background of an all-out fight against what he believed were his enemies, namely the SACP, ANC and PAC. It was argued that the impression could easily be created that de Kock was being used as an example, and that the State was making a scapegoat of him while other former security policemen, "who were just as guilty as him", were going free, and were even being given high posts with huge salaries within the police service.
Source: SAPA
Sunday, October 13, 1996
Jerusalem: a symbol of peace: a point of light
Jerusalem, the old holy city, is above sovereignty. It belongs to all the descendants of the Children of Abraham — Muslims, Jews and Christians. It must become a symbol of peace, the essence of peace, between all of us. A point of light for the whole world. This does not make it possible for any one side to unilaterally disturb the status quo until there is agreement all around.
Hussein bin Talal
Source: The Royal Hashemite Court
Thursday, September 12, 1996
Islamic Rebels Capture A Strategic Afghan City
Islamic rebels known as the Taliban captured the eastern city of Jalalabad today, gaining virtual control of nearly two-thirds of Afghanistan and sending Government troops retreating to Kabul, the capital.
At least 70 people were reported killed in the attack, but that figure could not be confirmed.
The capture of Jalalabad gives the Taliban control over a major ground route for supplies to Kabul from Pakistan and puts increased pressure on the ruling coalition of President Burhanuddin Rabbani, who has accused Pakistan of aiding the rebels.
The Taliban are the most conservative of the Islamic factions that have fought for control here since the communists lost power in 1992, and they have imposed strict religious rule in areas they control.
Source: New York Times
At least 70 people were reported killed in the attack, but that figure could not be confirmed.
The capture of Jalalabad gives the Taliban control over a major ground route for supplies to Kabul from Pakistan and puts increased pressure on the ruling coalition of President Burhanuddin Rabbani, who has accused Pakistan of aiding the rebels.
The Taliban are the most conservative of the Islamic factions that have fought for control here since the communists lost power in 1992, and they have imposed strict religious rule in areas they control.
Source: New York Times
Thursday, June 20, 1996
Forced labour in Myanmar (Burma)
By a letter dated 20 June 1996 addressed to the Director-General of the ILO, 25 Workers' delegates to the 83rd Session of the International Labour Conference (June 1996) presented a complaint under article 26 of the Constitution against the Government of Myanmar for non-observance of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), which it ratified on 4 March 1955 and which came into force for Myanmar on 4 March 1956. The complaint stated, in particular, that:
Myanmar's gross violations of the Convention [No. 29] have been criticized by the ILO's supervisory bodies for 30 years. In 1995, and again in 1996, they have been the subject of special paragraphs in the reports of the Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, and this year, the Government has also been singled out by the Committee for its "continued failure to implement" the Convention.
In addition, in November 1994, the Governing Body adopted the report of the Committee it had established to examine the representation made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions [ICFTU] against the Government of Myanmar for its failure to ensure effective observance of Convention No. 29.
The Government has demonstrated its unwillingness to act upon the repeated calls addressed to it by the ILO's supervisory bodies to abolish and cancel legislation which allows for the use of forced labour and to ensure that forced labour is eliminated in practice. In these circumstances, the Committee on Applications has again expressed deep concern at the systematic recourse to forced labour in Myanmar.
Despite its protestations that the powers available under the offending legislation, the Village Act (1908) and the Towns Act (1907), have fallen into disuse since 1967 and that these laws are currently under review with a view to their repeal, the Government has failed conspicuously to provide the information requested of it concerning concrete action for legislative change.
Indeed, it is clear that the practice of forced labour is becoming more widespread and that the authorities in Myanmar are directly responsible for its increasing use, and actively involved in its exploitation.
The ICFTU representation presented under article 24 of the Constitution in January 1993 addressed the particular case of the forced recruitment and abuse of porters by the military which was, at that time, the primary cause of concern.
Since then, however, forced labour is being used systematically, on an ever larger scale, and in an increasing number of areas of activity. Large numbers of forced labourers are now working on railway, road, construction, and other infrastructure projects, many of which are related to the Government's efforts to promote tourism in Myanmar. In addition the military is engaged in the confiscation of land from villagers who are then forced to cultivate it to the benefit of the military appropriators.
The current situation is that the Government of Myanmar, far from acting to end the practice of forced labour, is engaged actively in its promotion, so that it is today an endemic abuse affecting hundreds of thousands of workers who are subjected to the most extreme forms of exploitation, which all too frequently leads to loss of life.
Source: International Labour Organisation (ILO)
Myanmar's gross violations of the Convention [No. 29] have been criticized by the ILO's supervisory bodies for 30 years. In 1995, and again in 1996, they have been the subject of special paragraphs in the reports of the Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, and this year, the Government has also been singled out by the Committee for its "continued failure to implement" the Convention.
In addition, in November 1994, the Governing Body adopted the report of the Committee it had established to examine the representation made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions [ICFTU] against the Government of Myanmar for its failure to ensure effective observance of Convention No. 29.
The Government has demonstrated its unwillingness to act upon the repeated calls addressed to it by the ILO's supervisory bodies to abolish and cancel legislation which allows for the use of forced labour and to ensure that forced labour is eliminated in practice. In these circumstances, the Committee on Applications has again expressed deep concern at the systematic recourse to forced labour in Myanmar.
Despite its protestations that the powers available under the offending legislation, the Village Act (1908) and the Towns Act (1907), have fallen into disuse since 1967 and that these laws are currently under review with a view to their repeal, the Government has failed conspicuously to provide the information requested of it concerning concrete action for legislative change.
Indeed, it is clear that the practice of forced labour is becoming more widespread and that the authorities in Myanmar are directly responsible for its increasing use, and actively involved in its exploitation.
The ICFTU representation presented under article 24 of the Constitution in January 1993 addressed the particular case of the forced recruitment and abuse of porters by the military which was, at that time, the primary cause of concern.
Since then, however, forced labour is being used systematically, on an ever larger scale, and in an increasing number of areas of activity. Large numbers of forced labourers are now working on railway, road, construction, and other infrastructure projects, many of which are related to the Government's efforts to promote tourism in Myanmar. In addition the military is engaged in the confiscation of land from villagers who are then forced to cultivate it to the benefit of the military appropriators.
The current situation is that the Government of Myanmar, far from acting to end the practice of forced labour, is engaged actively in its promotion, so that it is today an endemic abuse affecting hundreds of thousands of workers who are subjected to the most extreme forms of exploitation, which all too frequently leads to loss of life.
Source: International Labour Organisation (ILO)
Saturday, May 11, 1996
Ivory Coast Bars Ship With 4,000 Liberians
Ivory Coast officials ordered a ship carrying 4,000 Liberian refugees back to open waters today despite concerns that the ship might not be seaworthy, a spokeswoman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said.
She added that Ivory Coast officials forced most of the women and children who had been taken from the ship for medical care and food to get back on board. Government officials in the Ivory Coast, which officials of aid organizations say has been flooded with 350,000 Liberian refugees, have repeatedly declined to comment on the decision regarding the ship.
On Sunday panicky Liberians fleeing a month of fighting in their capital, Monrovia, packed the ship, the Bulk Challenge, a Ghana-bound freighter. Port officials said no more than 1,000 people should have been on board, although the ship's owner, who was aboard, has not been reached to confirm that assessment. The Bulk Challenge limped into San Pedro in western Ivory Coast on Monday. Some repairs were made on Thursday, but it was unclear whether the vessel was seaworthy when it set sail later that day.
Source: New York Times
She added that Ivory Coast officials forced most of the women and children who had been taken from the ship for medical care and food to get back on board. Government officials in the Ivory Coast, which officials of aid organizations say has been flooded with 350,000 Liberian refugees, have repeatedly declined to comment on the decision regarding the ship.
On Sunday panicky Liberians fleeing a month of fighting in their capital, Monrovia, packed the ship, the Bulk Challenge, a Ghana-bound freighter. Port officials said no more than 1,000 people should have been on board, although the ship's owner, who was aboard, has not been reached to confirm that assessment. The Bulk Challenge limped into San Pedro in western Ivory Coast on Monday. Some repairs were made on Thursday, but it was unclear whether the vessel was seaworthy when it set sail later that day.
Source: New York Times
Friday, May 3, 1996
Militia Leader Leaves Liberia Under Siege
The leader of a powerful militia was airlifted out of Monrovia today to attend peace talks next week in Ghana aimed at ending Liberia's six-year civil war, diplomatic and military officials said. A United States diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the militia leader, Roosevelt Johnson, left Monrovia today.
A high-ranking official with the West African peacekeepers here said the troops had slipped Mr. Johnson out of a besieged army barracks, the Barclay Training Center, in a convoy of tanks and armored vehicles and put him on a helicopter to Freetown, Sierra Leone, en route to Ghana.
The United States bolstered its forces at the Embassy to 290 marines, from 230, and three United States warships carrying 2,000 more marines moved within three miles of the coast for the third straight day. The United States Ambassador, William Milam; a United Nations envoy, Anthony Nyakyi, and leaders of the West African peacekeepers said Mr. Johnson had agreed to a cease-fire late Thursday. But by this morning, negotiators had not been able to reach his rival, Charles Taylor, who had insisted that Mr. Johnson surrender before fighting stops.
The standoff between Mr. Taylor and Mr. Johnson ignited the latest fighting, which began April 6.
Source: New York Times
A high-ranking official with the West African peacekeepers here said the troops had slipped Mr. Johnson out of a besieged army barracks, the Barclay Training Center, in a convoy of tanks and armored vehicles and put him on a helicopter to Freetown, Sierra Leone, en route to Ghana.
The United States bolstered its forces at the Embassy to 290 marines, from 230, and three United States warships carrying 2,000 more marines moved within three miles of the coast for the third straight day. The United States Ambassador, William Milam; a United Nations envoy, Anthony Nyakyi, and leaders of the West African peacekeepers said Mr. Johnson had agreed to a cease-fire late Thursday. But by this morning, negotiators had not been able to reach his rival, Charles Taylor, who had insisted that Mr. Johnson surrender before fighting stops.
The standoff between Mr. Taylor and Mr. Johnson ignited the latest fighting, which began April 6.
Source: New York Times
Wednesday, May 1, 1996
RAGS OF MORTALITY: ORIGINAL SIN AND HUMAN NATURE
by Archpriest Alexander Golubov, Ph.D.
Our annual spiritual journey into Great Lent, and especially into Passion Week, when we commemorate the betrayal, crucifixion, death and burial of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, followed by the celebration of His glorious Resurrection on the third day, offers us, again and again, the opportunity to ponder the mysteries of the Incarnation of the Son of God and His Redemption of the fallen human race. Inextricably tied in with this, of course, is the mystery of human life lived in the context of the terrible realities of sin, suffering and death, which none of us are capable of escaping except for what the Lord has accomplished for us, through His Cross and Resurrection.
It was St. Paul who first connected the events surrounding the temptation and fall of Adam in Paradise, as recounted in Genesis 3, to the events surrounding the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ in Jerusalem, and established between them a logical and direct inner relationship. To his mind, Adam's transgression in Paradise became the doorway through which sin and death entered into the world: "sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men for all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12).
Commenting on this and related passages, St. John Chrysostom explains: "But what does it mean, 'for all have sinned' (Rom. 5.12) This: he having once fallen, yet they that had not eaten of the tree inherited mortality ... From this it is clear that it was not Adam's sin, his transgression — that is of the Law — but by the virtue of his disobedience that all have been marred. What is the proof of this? The fact that even before the Law all died: 'for death reigned,' St. Paul says, 'from Adam to Moses, even over them who had not sinned' (Rom 5:14). How did it 'reign'? After the manner of Adam's transgression, he who is 'the type of Him that was to come.' Thus, when the Jews ask, how was it possible for one Person to have saved the world? you will be able to reply, in the same way that the disobedience of one person, Adam, brought its condemnation" (Commentary on Romans, X).
Explaining Christ's redemptive role, St. Paul recapitulated this thought in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, where he proclaimed: "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection from the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:21-22).
Following St. Paul, the Holy Fathers teach that the state of general sinfulness and death is not man's original state of being, that man was not created by God to naturally live like this. Rather, this miserable condition in which we now find ourselves is the natural result of the moral disaster that occurred in Paradise with our ancient forefathers, Adam and Eve. The human race, writes St. Justin Martyr, "from the time of Adam had been subject to death and deceit of the serpent, each of us having committed sins of our own" (Dialogue with Trypho, 88). "When [Adam] transgressed the Commandment of God," teaches St. Methodius of Olympus, "he suffered the terrible and destructive fall. He was reduced to a state of death" (Banquet of the Virgins, III).
Before their fall in Paradise, however, writes St. Athanasius of Alexandria, our forefathers "did not die and did not decay, escaped death and corruption. The presence of the Word with them shielded them from natural corruption, as also the Book of Wisdom says, God created man for incorruption and as an image of His own eternity; but by the envy of the devil death entered into the world (Wis. 2:23f.) When this happened, men began to die, and corruption spread unchecked among them and held sway over men to more than a natural degree, because it was the penalty concerning which God had forewarned would be the reward of transgressing the commandment" (On the Incarnation of the Word).
Thus, according to the Fathers, our present condition is the result of a freely-willed choice, the natural consequences of the disobedience of Adam and Eve, the penalty for failure to heed God's warning that death, indeed, will be the catastrophic outcome of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It might occur to some, however, that it is exceedingly cruel of God to condemn the entire human race for the sin of two individuals. Why, indeed, should we, who were not around at the time of Adam's transgression, have to pay the rather stiff penalty for something that we did not, of ourselves, do? Isn't this guilt by association?
The source of this moral problem is not God, of course, as the author of evil and death, for God is not such. "We must understand," writes St. Gregory Palamas, "that God 'did not make death' (Wisdom 1:13), whether of the body or of the soul. For when He first gave the command, He did not say, 'On the day you eat of it, die,' but 'In the day you eat of it, you will surely die' (Gen. 2:17). He did not say afterwards, 'return now to the earth,' but 'you shall return' (Gen. 3:19), foretelling in this way what would come to pass" (One Hundred Fifty Chapters). Neither is the source, explains St. Theophilos of Antioch, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For it is not, he writes, "as if any evil existed in the tree of knowledge, but from the fact of his disobedience did man draw, as from a fountain, labor, grief and, at last, fell prey to death" (To Autolycus, II, 25).
The problem, rather, has to do with the nature of Divinely-mandated freedom and the autonomous functioning of the natural law of creation, directly pertaining to issues of heredity and genetics, being analogous to something which contemporary medicine would define as "fetal addiction syndrome" or "fetal AIDS syndrome." In such a case, a mother who carries a gene for hemophilia, for instance, will transmit it to her offspring by the biological laws of heredity, though the processes of meiosis and mitosis, by means of which cell division naturally occurs. Or, in a similar way, a mother addicted to either drugs or alcohol, or who is HIV-positive, by virtue of the fact that from the moment of conception she shares with the child in her womb both blood and other bodily fluids, will naturally transmit to her child what she herself carries in her own blood. We easily understand that in this case, the child that is in the womb of the mother, will, of course, without any movement of the will, without agreement or disagreement with the particular moral choices of the mother, and, importantly, without any guilt on his part, participate in the affliction of the mother ("Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me," Ps. 50[51].5). It is in this vein, indeed, that the Fathers explain the concept of what has become known in theology as "original sin."
St. Cyril of Alexandria, for instance, observes: "Since [Adam] produced children after falling into this state, we, his descendants, are corruptible as the issue of a corruptible source. It is in this sense that we are heirs of Adam's curse. Not that we are punished for having disobeyed God's commandment along with him, but that he became mortal and the curse of mortality was transmitted to his seed after him, offspring born of a mortal source ... So corruption and death are the universal inheritance of Adam's transgression" (Doctrinal questions and answers, 6). Elsewhere, commenting on St. Paul's teaching, he explains: "Human nature became sick with sin. Because of the disobedience of one (that is, of Adam), the many became sinners; not because they transgressed together with Adam (for they were not there) but because they are of his nature, which entered under the dominion of sin ... Human nature became ill and subject to corruption through the transgression of Adam, thus penetrating man's very passions" (On Romans 5.18).
Summarizing this patristic teaching, the Greek theologian John Karmiris writes that "the sin of the first man, together with all of its consequences and penalties, is transferred by means of natural heredity to the entire human race. Since every human being is a descendant of the first man, 'no one of us is free from the spot of sin, even if he should manage to live a completely sinless day.' ... Original Sin not only constitutes 'an accident' of the soul; but its results, together with its penalties, are transplanted by natural heredity to the generations to come ... And thus, from the one historical event of the first sin of the first-born man, came the present situation of sin being imparted, together with all of the consequences thereof, to all natural descendants of Adam."[1]
Held, in general, as Orthodox teaching by both Eastern and Western Fathers, the theological concept, or doctrine, of "original sin," as the Russian theologian Fr. Michael Pomazansky points out, "has great significance in the Christian world-view, because upon it rests a whole series of other dogmas."[2] As a distinct concept of Christian theology, however, it was first defined and introduced in the fifth century by Blessed Augustine, Bishop of Hippo Regius in Northern Africa.
Blessed Augustine developed his doctrine in the context of a rather hot polemical confrontation with the heretic Pelagius, who, fleeing Rome after its sack in 410 by Alaric, chieftain of the Western Goths, had the misfortune, together with some of his followers, to settle in Africa, where his preaching came under the intense scrutiny of the bishop of Hippo. Pelagius, who was not a theologian, but essentially an itinerant ascetic preacher and moralist, whose chief interest was in correcting the moral laxity of contemporary Christians, had the further misfortune of permitting a local lawyer named Coelestius, who was seeking ordination to the priesthood, to become his disciple and interpreter of his views. In the view of the Pelagians, the low level of morality and rampant moral laxity had its source not only in what they saw as the denial of individual moral responsibility in the teaching about the consequences of Adam's sin, but also in the definition of the clergy as an elite group in the church, which in their eyes permitted the laity to abjure their moral responsibilities and adopt unacceptably low standards of Christian living. Some time later, after Pelagius had already left for Palestine (where he had yet the further misfortune of running afoul of the hot-tempered Blessed Jerome, translator of the Bible into Latin), Coelestius and his followers began preaching and explicating the views of their teacher, and in the process questioned the practice of infant baptism, the efficacy of the Incarnation and redemptive death of Christ on the cross, and denied the inheritance of Adam's sin. While man does indeed follow Adam into death, they taught, man sins only by example, through imitation of Adam, not through an endemic, hereditary defect of his nature. Despite the facts of sin and death, man's nature nonetheless remains as he was originally created, innocent and pure, as was first-created Adam himself. Disease and death are thus not consequences of original sin, but are characteristic of human nature from creation.
Blessed Augustine very correctly noted the dangerous implications of this argument for Orthodox theology. The total dismissal of the concept of an original, systemic sin inherited from Adam and present in human nature by virtue of genetic heritage results not only in an overly high valuation of man's physical and spiritual capabilities apart from God, but more importantly, perhaps, places in doubt the entire economy of our salvation by Christ, by obviating such essential Christian doctrines as the Incarnation and Redemption.
It should be remembered that the Pelagian controversy, which originally sparked the theological debate, was essentially a Western, more specifically, a Northern African controversy, which only incidentally involved Palestine and the East.[3] While Pelagius himself died in obscurity some years after his condemnation by the Council of Carthage in 416 and the Local African Council of 418, and before the Council of Ephesus in 431, the theological controversy to which he involuntarily lent his name was to involve quite a few Latin Fathers, and was to have far-reaching effects on the formulation of doctrines of sin and grace, free will and predestination. Thus, the theological debate that arose out of these issues eventually was to involve, directly or indirectly, not only Blessed Augustine and Blessed Jerome, but also Augustine's disciples Caesarius of Arles and Prosper of Aquitaine, as well as John Cassian, Vincent of Lerins, Gennadius of Marseilles, Faustus of Riez, and Arnobius the Younger, not to mention the later "augustinians"[4] and scholastics, and eventually the Protestant Reformers as well.
Technically speaking, in their writings the Eastern Fathers and Orthodox theologians do not use the Latin term introduced by Blessed Augustine in his treatise "De Peccato originali," but instead translate this concept by means of two cognate terms in both Greek and Russian, namely, progoniki amartia (= pervorodnyi grekh in Russian) and to propatorikon amartima (= praroditel'skii grekh), which is properly translated "ancestral sin." These terms allow for a more careful nuancing of the various implications contained in the one Latin term.
In the East, then, the concept of original sin has come to mean, as Fr. Michael Pomazansky very succinctly defines it, "the sin of Adam, which was transmitted to his descendants and weighs upon them."[5] Or, as John Karmiris puts it in an expanded definition, original sin is "'sin-sickness,' the sinful situation of human nature which deprived man of Divine Grace, and subjected him to death, to departure from the Divine life, [and] has been transmitted by means of natural heredity to all of the descendants of the first-born, along with the stigma, the consequences, the fruits of that Original Sin."[6] Indeed, Karmiris reminds us, "it was for this reason that the ancient Church instituted the Baptism of infants, specifically that they might be freed from the stigma of sin of their ancestors, although the infants possessed no guilt of 'actual sin.'"[7]
In the West, however, the concept of original sin is tied up with and all too often even confused with an equally Western concept of "original guilt." The misconceptions resulting from this Western theological ambivalence are daunting, obscuring, as they do, the divine potential in man. It is, in fact, the particular assumptions about guilt and punishment, about human nature in general, as well as the specific mode of transmission of original sin from generation to generation[8] that constitute the historical and theological differences in interpretations of the doctrine of original sin. We can see two different, perhaps even opposing, trends develop with respect to these assumptions.
St. Anastasius of Sinai, for example, argues: "you must examine how the first-born, our father, transposed upon us his transgression. He heard that 'dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return'; and his incorruption was changed into corruption, he became subject to the bondage of death. Since Adam fathered children only after his Fall, we become heirs of his corruption. We are not punished for his disobedience to the Divine Law. Rather, Adam being mortal, sin entered into his very seed. We receive mortality from him ... The general punishment of Adam for his transgression is corruption and death" (Questions and Answers on Various Chapters, 143). Likewise, defending the issue of infant baptisms, St. Cyprian of Carthage also maintains that since "no one is precluded from baptism and grace, ... [so] ought not an infant be forbidden, who, being newly born, has in no way sinned, but only having contracted the contagion of death" (Letter to Fidus, LVIII, 2). Blessed Augustine, on the other hand, writing of those predestined by God, as he believed, to eternal death, holds that "they are punished not on account of the sins which they add by the indulgence of their own will, but on account of the original sin, even if, as in the case of infants, they had added nothing to that original sin" (On the Soul and its Origin, IV, 16).
The Western temptation to define the doctrine of original sin too precisely has historically led to overstatements and exaggerations on both sides of the issue, of both definition and reaction. Because they framed their arguments in the context of and in response to the Pelagian position, Blessed Augustine and his disciples tended to exaggerate the sinfulness and depravity of human nature, and their teaching thus tends to emphasize the "punitive aspect" of the consequences of the fall, leading also to exaggeration and overstatement on the question of free will. Interestingly enough, both extreme tendencies in Western interpretation can be seen to be rooted in the writings of Bl. Augustine: first, that man suffers death because he is guilty for the sin of Adam, and second, that the nature of man is so corrupt as to render man incapable of exercising free will in the work of salvation (the doctrine of predestination).
Historically, these two extreme Western tendencies have themselves developed in two variants: Roman Catholic and Protestant. The Roman Catholic position, as defined by augustinian scholastics, sees original sin essentially in terms of the wrath of God directed at man for his guilt in disobedient submission of the spiritual principle to the fleshly principle. This is an offense against God which results in the loss of "supernatural" grace and demands expiation, or "satisfaction," by the shedding of blood, in accordance with the medieval chivalry code of feudal knights. This position tends to reject the efficacy of free will on the part of man in choosing and working for his own salvation, and obscures the fact that within original sin are contained also sins of the spiritual order, not only those of the flesh.[9]
The Protestant reformation, in reaction to the extremes of Roman Catholic interpretation, has itself engendered two opposing views. On the one hand, in varying degrees, it amplifies the teaching of Bl. Augustine on predestination, postulating a complete perversion of human nature and corruption to its very foundations (Calvin is more severe in this regard, Luther less so). On the other hand, in certain contemporary Protestant sects we see, once again, a complete denial of original, inherited sin, that is to say, a return to Pelagianism.
In juxtaposition with the view that is prevalent in the Western Christian tradition, Orthodox fathers and theologians are perhaps more circumspect in not "dotting the i's," as it were, in relation to things that we cannot possibly know about the specific nature of Adam's sin. Thus, instead of discussing or stressing the many possible secondary and fleshly aspects of original sin, the Orthodox prefer to see it primarily in spiritual terms, as being rooted in spiritual pride and disobedience. "The Original Sin," writes Karmiris, "was a free transgression of our First Parents which grew out of egoism and boasting. Thus, through the envy and influence of Satan, directed against our First Parents, 'the sin and transgression entered,' and our First Parents transgressed the Law of God, motivated by a desire to be equal with God, or, as Chrysostom says, the 'anticipation to become God'; man wanted to become independent from God, finding, by means of sin, divine knowledge, blessedness, and perfection."[10]
In a similar vein, Fr. Michael Pomazansky observes:
The eating of the fruit was only the beginning of moral deviation, the first push; but it was so poisonous and ruinous that it was already impossible to return to the previous sanctity and righteousness; on the contrary, there was revealed an inclination to travel farther on the path of apostasy from God. Blessed Augustine says: 'Here was pride, because man desired to be more under his own authority than under God's; and a mockery of what is holy, because he did not believe God; and murder, because he subjected himself to death; and spiritual adultery, because the immaculateness of the human soul was defiled through the persuasion of the serpent; and theft, because they made use of the forbidden tree; and the love of acquisition, because he desired more than was necessary to satisfy himself.' Thus, with the first transgression of the commandment, the principle of sin immediately entered into man — 'the law of sin' (monos tis amartias). It struck the very nature of man and quickly began to root itself in him and develop. ... The sinful inclinations in man have taken the reigning position; man has become the servant of sin (Rom. 6:7) ... With sin, death entered into the human race. Man was created immortal in his soul, and he could have remained immortal also in body if he had not fallen away from God. ... Man's body, as was well expressed by Blessed Augustine, does not possess 'the impossibility of dying,' but it did possess 'the possibility of not dying,' which it has now lost.[11]
It can be said that while we have not inherited the guilt of Adam's personal sin, because his sin is also of a generic nature, and because the entire human race is possessed of an essential, ontological unity,[12] we participate in it by virtue of our participation in the human race. "The imparting of Original Sin by means of natural heredity should be understood in terms of the unity of the entire human nature, and of the homoousiotitos [13] of all men, who, connected by nature, constitute one mystic whole. Inasmuch as human nature is indeed unique and unbreakable, the imparting of sin from the first-born to the entire human race descended from him is rendered explicable: 'Explicitly, as from the root, the sickness proceeded to the rest of the tree, Adam being the root who had suffered corruption'" [St. Cyril of Alexandria].[14]
The Orthodox view of fallen human nature is remarkably sober and balanced, gravitating neither to the unwarranted optimism of the Pelagian view, which sees human nature as having remained essentially in its pristine innocence and goodness, nor to the equally unwarranted pessimism of the predestinatarian view, which sees human nature as hopelessly perverted and corrupt. "Man fell unconsciously, unintentionally; he was deceived and seduced," writes the 19th-century Russian bishop and ascete, St. Ignatius Brianchaninov. "For this reason his natural goodness was not destroyed, but was mixed with the evil of the fallen angels. But this natural goodness, being mixed with evil, poisoned with evil, became worthless, inadequate, unworthy of God who is perfect, purest goodness. Man for the most part does evil, meaning to do good, not seeing the evil wrapped in a mask of goodness on account of the darkening of his mind and conscience."[15]
The Orthodox view of original sin is profoundly related to the Orthodox concept of theosis, deification, which is almost totally lost in the Western understanding. Thus, Pomazansky observes, while the physical, mental, and emotional faculties have become corrupted in man, the greatest loss to man was deprivation of the blessedness of Paradise and life eternal. "Both the mind and the feelings have become darkened in him, and therefore his moral freedom often does not incline towards the good, but towards evil ... The physical consequences of the fall are diseases, hard labor and death. These were the natural result of the moral fall, the falling away from communion with God, man's departure from God. Man became subject to the corrupt elements of the world, in which dissolution and death are active. Nourishment from the Source of Life and from the constant renewal of all of one's powers became weak in men ... However, the final and most important consequence of sin was not illness and physical death, but the loss of Paradise ... In Adam all mankind was deprived of the future blessedness which stood before it, the blessedness which Adam and Eve had partially tasted in Paradise. In place of the prospect of life eternal, mankind beheld death, and behind it hell, darkness, rejection by God."[16].
Theosis, or, as St. Seraphim of Sarov defines it, "the acquisition of the Holy Spirit," is both the possibility and the reality, the goal and the gift, of overcoming the stain of original sin and repossession of what has been lost through it, the sole dominant purpose of Christian life. Despite the "rags of mortality" in which the human race has clothed itself through the fall of the first Adam in Paradise, Christians live in the hope of once again "ascending to their former beauty" by virtue of their redemption by the suffering, death, and resurrection on the third day of the second Adam. Walking between hope and despair, repenting of our sins, and living a life of Christian struggle, we await the fulfillment of the promise of St. Paul, so that together with redeemed first Adam we can sing the song of victory: "So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" (1 Cor. 15: 55-56).
Notes
1. John Karmiris, A Synopsis of the Dogmatic Theology of the Orthodox Catholic Church, trans. from the Greek by the Reverend George Dimopoulos (Scranton, Pa.: Christian Orthodox Edition, 1973), pp. 35-36.
2. Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: A Concise Exposition, trans. Hieromonk Seraphim Rose (Platina, Calif.: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1994).
3. The East was at this time itself embroiled in a theological controversy surrounding the teachings of Appolinarius and Nestorius concerning the divine and human natures of Christ. Blessed Augustine had been invited by Emperor Theodosius the Younger to the Council which was to assemble at Ephesus, but died approximately a year before. The Third Ecumenical Council in 431 ruled on both controversies, condemning not only Nestorianism, but also Pelagianism. In this context it should be noted that despite the lately-fashionable "bashing" of certain writings of Blessed Augustine by certain "ultra-correct" "neo-Orthodox" writers, both he and his writings remain uncondemned by any Ecumenical or Local Council, thus relegating his more controversial theological opinions to the status of theologoumena of a Western Father of the Orthodox Church.
4. As it sometimes happens when the writings of a teacher are interpreted by several generations of disciples and commentators, the end product may not be something that was originally intended by the teacher himself. So with Moses and the Talmudists, so with Cyril of Alexandria and the monophysites, so with Bl. Augustine and the augustinians.
5. Pomazansky, p. 160.
6. Karmiris, p. 38.
7. Ibid.
8. In particular, the peculiarly Western tendency to see and define original sin almost exclusively in terms of human sexuality, replete with Freudian interpretation of the metaphors of religious language. On this, especially see: Elaine Pagels, Adam, Eve, and the Serpent (New York: Random House, 1988).
9. And dismisses as "semi-pelagianism" the balanced Orthodox position, formulated by St. John Cassian, which postulates the cooperation, or "synergy," of Divine grace and free will of man in working out the task of human salvation.
10. Karmiris, p. 33.
11. Pomazansky, pp. 156-159.
12. See, for instance, John 15:1-9 and 17:11-23; 1 Cor. 12:12-13; Ephes. 2:15 and 4:13-16. Also St. Gregory of Nyssa to Aulalius that there are not three gods but one God, etc., and St. Basil the Great, in the 18th chapter of his monastic regulations.
13. = "same-essence-ness," i.e. coessentiality or consubstantiality.
14. Karmiris, p. 36.
15. The Arena: An Offering to Contemporary Monasticism, trans. Archimandrite Lazarus (Jordanville: Holy Trinity Monastery, 1991), p. 186.
16. Pomazansky, pp. 158-159.
From Alive in Christ
1996:1 (Spring 1996)
Behold, I am now captive to death because of unlawful counsel.
And I who was for a time robed with the glory of immortality
have become like one dead, wrapped pitifully in the rags of mortality
--Matins of Meatfare Sunday, Einos, Tone 5
Our annual spiritual journey into Great Lent, and especially into Passion Week, when we commemorate the betrayal, crucifixion, death and burial of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, followed by the celebration of His glorious Resurrection on the third day, offers us, again and again, the opportunity to ponder the mysteries of the Incarnation of the Son of God and His Redemption of the fallen human race. Inextricably tied in with this, of course, is the mystery of human life lived in the context of the terrible realities of sin, suffering and death, which none of us are capable of escaping except for what the Lord has accomplished for us, through His Cross and Resurrection.
It was St. Paul who first connected the events surrounding the temptation and fall of Adam in Paradise, as recounted in Genesis 3, to the events surrounding the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ in Jerusalem, and established between them a logical and direct inner relationship. To his mind, Adam's transgression in Paradise became the doorway through which sin and death entered into the world: "sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men for all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12).
Commenting on this and related passages, St. John Chrysostom explains: "But what does it mean, 'for all have sinned' (Rom. 5.12) This: he having once fallen, yet they that had not eaten of the tree inherited mortality ... From this it is clear that it was not Adam's sin, his transgression — that is of the Law — but by the virtue of his disobedience that all have been marred. What is the proof of this? The fact that even before the Law all died: 'for death reigned,' St. Paul says, 'from Adam to Moses, even over them who had not sinned' (Rom 5:14). How did it 'reign'? After the manner of Adam's transgression, he who is 'the type of Him that was to come.' Thus, when the Jews ask, how was it possible for one Person to have saved the world? you will be able to reply, in the same way that the disobedience of one person, Adam, brought its condemnation" (Commentary on Romans, X).
Explaining Christ's redemptive role, St. Paul recapitulated this thought in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, where he proclaimed: "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection from the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:21-22).
Following St. Paul, the Holy Fathers teach that the state of general sinfulness and death is not man's original state of being, that man was not created by God to naturally live like this. Rather, this miserable condition in which we now find ourselves is the natural result of the moral disaster that occurred in Paradise with our ancient forefathers, Adam and Eve. The human race, writes St. Justin Martyr, "from the time of Adam had been subject to death and deceit of the serpent, each of us having committed sins of our own" (Dialogue with Trypho, 88). "When [Adam] transgressed the Commandment of God," teaches St. Methodius of Olympus, "he suffered the terrible and destructive fall. He was reduced to a state of death" (Banquet of the Virgins, III).
Before their fall in Paradise, however, writes St. Athanasius of Alexandria, our forefathers "did not die and did not decay, escaped death and corruption. The presence of the Word with them shielded them from natural corruption, as also the Book of Wisdom says, God created man for incorruption and as an image of His own eternity; but by the envy of the devil death entered into the world (Wis. 2:23f.) When this happened, men began to die, and corruption spread unchecked among them and held sway over men to more than a natural degree, because it was the penalty concerning which God had forewarned would be the reward of transgressing the commandment" (On the Incarnation of the Word).
Thus, according to the Fathers, our present condition is the result of a freely-willed choice, the natural consequences of the disobedience of Adam and Eve, the penalty for failure to heed God's warning that death, indeed, will be the catastrophic outcome of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It might occur to some, however, that it is exceedingly cruel of God to condemn the entire human race for the sin of two individuals. Why, indeed, should we, who were not around at the time of Adam's transgression, have to pay the rather stiff penalty for something that we did not, of ourselves, do? Isn't this guilt by association?
The source of this moral problem is not God, of course, as the author of evil and death, for God is not such. "We must understand," writes St. Gregory Palamas, "that God 'did not make death' (Wisdom 1:13), whether of the body or of the soul. For when He first gave the command, He did not say, 'On the day you eat of it, die,' but 'In the day you eat of it, you will surely die' (Gen. 2:17). He did not say afterwards, 'return now to the earth,' but 'you shall return' (Gen. 3:19), foretelling in this way what would come to pass" (One Hundred Fifty Chapters). Neither is the source, explains St. Theophilos of Antioch, the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For it is not, he writes, "as if any evil existed in the tree of knowledge, but from the fact of his disobedience did man draw, as from a fountain, labor, grief and, at last, fell prey to death" (To Autolycus, II, 25).
The problem, rather, has to do with the nature of Divinely-mandated freedom and the autonomous functioning of the natural law of creation, directly pertaining to issues of heredity and genetics, being analogous to something which contemporary medicine would define as "fetal addiction syndrome" or "fetal AIDS syndrome." In such a case, a mother who carries a gene for hemophilia, for instance, will transmit it to her offspring by the biological laws of heredity, though the processes of meiosis and mitosis, by means of which cell division naturally occurs. Or, in a similar way, a mother addicted to either drugs or alcohol, or who is HIV-positive, by virtue of the fact that from the moment of conception she shares with the child in her womb both blood and other bodily fluids, will naturally transmit to her child what she herself carries in her own blood. We easily understand that in this case, the child that is in the womb of the mother, will, of course, without any movement of the will, without agreement or disagreement with the particular moral choices of the mother, and, importantly, without any guilt on his part, participate in the affliction of the mother ("Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me," Ps. 50[51].5). It is in this vein, indeed, that the Fathers explain the concept of what has become known in theology as "original sin."
St. Cyril of Alexandria, for instance, observes: "Since [Adam] produced children after falling into this state, we, his descendants, are corruptible as the issue of a corruptible source. It is in this sense that we are heirs of Adam's curse. Not that we are punished for having disobeyed God's commandment along with him, but that he became mortal and the curse of mortality was transmitted to his seed after him, offspring born of a mortal source ... So corruption and death are the universal inheritance of Adam's transgression" (Doctrinal questions and answers, 6). Elsewhere, commenting on St. Paul's teaching, he explains: "Human nature became sick with sin. Because of the disobedience of one (that is, of Adam), the many became sinners; not because they transgressed together with Adam (for they were not there) but because they are of his nature, which entered under the dominion of sin ... Human nature became ill and subject to corruption through the transgression of Adam, thus penetrating man's very passions" (On Romans 5.18).
Summarizing this patristic teaching, the Greek theologian John Karmiris writes that "the sin of the first man, together with all of its consequences and penalties, is transferred by means of natural heredity to the entire human race. Since every human being is a descendant of the first man, 'no one of us is free from the spot of sin, even if he should manage to live a completely sinless day.' ... Original Sin not only constitutes 'an accident' of the soul; but its results, together with its penalties, are transplanted by natural heredity to the generations to come ... And thus, from the one historical event of the first sin of the first-born man, came the present situation of sin being imparted, together with all of the consequences thereof, to all natural descendants of Adam."[1]
Held, in general, as Orthodox teaching by both Eastern and Western Fathers, the theological concept, or doctrine, of "original sin," as the Russian theologian Fr. Michael Pomazansky points out, "has great significance in the Christian world-view, because upon it rests a whole series of other dogmas."[2] As a distinct concept of Christian theology, however, it was first defined and introduced in the fifth century by Blessed Augustine, Bishop of Hippo Regius in Northern Africa.
Blessed Augustine developed his doctrine in the context of a rather hot polemical confrontation with the heretic Pelagius, who, fleeing Rome after its sack in 410 by Alaric, chieftain of the Western Goths, had the misfortune, together with some of his followers, to settle in Africa, where his preaching came under the intense scrutiny of the bishop of Hippo. Pelagius, who was not a theologian, but essentially an itinerant ascetic preacher and moralist, whose chief interest was in correcting the moral laxity of contemporary Christians, had the further misfortune of permitting a local lawyer named Coelestius, who was seeking ordination to the priesthood, to become his disciple and interpreter of his views. In the view of the Pelagians, the low level of morality and rampant moral laxity had its source not only in what they saw as the denial of individual moral responsibility in the teaching about the consequences of Adam's sin, but also in the definition of the clergy as an elite group in the church, which in their eyes permitted the laity to abjure their moral responsibilities and adopt unacceptably low standards of Christian living. Some time later, after Pelagius had already left for Palestine (where he had yet the further misfortune of running afoul of the hot-tempered Blessed Jerome, translator of the Bible into Latin), Coelestius and his followers began preaching and explicating the views of their teacher, and in the process questioned the practice of infant baptism, the efficacy of the Incarnation and redemptive death of Christ on the cross, and denied the inheritance of Adam's sin. While man does indeed follow Adam into death, they taught, man sins only by example, through imitation of Adam, not through an endemic, hereditary defect of his nature. Despite the facts of sin and death, man's nature nonetheless remains as he was originally created, innocent and pure, as was first-created Adam himself. Disease and death are thus not consequences of original sin, but are characteristic of human nature from creation.
Blessed Augustine very correctly noted the dangerous implications of this argument for Orthodox theology. The total dismissal of the concept of an original, systemic sin inherited from Adam and present in human nature by virtue of genetic heritage results not only in an overly high valuation of man's physical and spiritual capabilities apart from God, but more importantly, perhaps, places in doubt the entire economy of our salvation by Christ, by obviating such essential Christian doctrines as the Incarnation and Redemption.
It should be remembered that the Pelagian controversy, which originally sparked the theological debate, was essentially a Western, more specifically, a Northern African controversy, which only incidentally involved Palestine and the East.[3] While Pelagius himself died in obscurity some years after his condemnation by the Council of Carthage in 416 and the Local African Council of 418, and before the Council of Ephesus in 431, the theological controversy to which he involuntarily lent his name was to involve quite a few Latin Fathers, and was to have far-reaching effects on the formulation of doctrines of sin and grace, free will and predestination. Thus, the theological debate that arose out of these issues eventually was to involve, directly or indirectly, not only Blessed Augustine and Blessed Jerome, but also Augustine's disciples Caesarius of Arles and Prosper of Aquitaine, as well as John Cassian, Vincent of Lerins, Gennadius of Marseilles, Faustus of Riez, and Arnobius the Younger, not to mention the later "augustinians"[4] and scholastics, and eventually the Protestant Reformers as well.
Technically speaking, in their writings the Eastern Fathers and Orthodox theologians do not use the Latin term introduced by Blessed Augustine in his treatise "De Peccato originali," but instead translate this concept by means of two cognate terms in both Greek and Russian, namely, progoniki amartia (= pervorodnyi grekh in Russian) and to propatorikon amartima (= praroditel'skii grekh), which is properly translated "ancestral sin." These terms allow for a more careful nuancing of the various implications contained in the one Latin term.
In the East, then, the concept of original sin has come to mean, as Fr. Michael Pomazansky very succinctly defines it, "the sin of Adam, which was transmitted to his descendants and weighs upon them."[5] Or, as John Karmiris puts it in an expanded definition, original sin is "'sin-sickness,' the sinful situation of human nature which deprived man of Divine Grace, and subjected him to death, to departure from the Divine life, [and] has been transmitted by means of natural heredity to all of the descendants of the first-born, along with the stigma, the consequences, the fruits of that Original Sin."[6] Indeed, Karmiris reminds us, "it was for this reason that the ancient Church instituted the Baptism of infants, specifically that they might be freed from the stigma of sin of their ancestors, although the infants possessed no guilt of 'actual sin.'"[7]
In the West, however, the concept of original sin is tied up with and all too often even confused with an equally Western concept of "original guilt." The misconceptions resulting from this Western theological ambivalence are daunting, obscuring, as they do, the divine potential in man. It is, in fact, the particular assumptions about guilt and punishment, about human nature in general, as well as the specific mode of transmission of original sin from generation to generation[8] that constitute the historical and theological differences in interpretations of the doctrine of original sin. We can see two different, perhaps even opposing, trends develop with respect to these assumptions.
St. Anastasius of Sinai, for example, argues: "you must examine how the first-born, our father, transposed upon us his transgression. He heard that 'dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return'; and his incorruption was changed into corruption, he became subject to the bondage of death. Since Adam fathered children only after his Fall, we become heirs of his corruption. We are not punished for his disobedience to the Divine Law. Rather, Adam being mortal, sin entered into his very seed. We receive mortality from him ... The general punishment of Adam for his transgression is corruption and death" (Questions and Answers on Various Chapters, 143). Likewise, defending the issue of infant baptisms, St. Cyprian of Carthage also maintains that since "no one is precluded from baptism and grace, ... [so] ought not an infant be forbidden, who, being newly born, has in no way sinned, but only having contracted the contagion of death" (Letter to Fidus, LVIII, 2). Blessed Augustine, on the other hand, writing of those predestined by God, as he believed, to eternal death, holds that "they are punished not on account of the sins which they add by the indulgence of their own will, but on account of the original sin, even if, as in the case of infants, they had added nothing to that original sin" (On the Soul and its Origin, IV, 16).
The Western temptation to define the doctrine of original sin too precisely has historically led to overstatements and exaggerations on both sides of the issue, of both definition and reaction. Because they framed their arguments in the context of and in response to the Pelagian position, Blessed Augustine and his disciples tended to exaggerate the sinfulness and depravity of human nature, and their teaching thus tends to emphasize the "punitive aspect" of the consequences of the fall, leading also to exaggeration and overstatement on the question of free will. Interestingly enough, both extreme tendencies in Western interpretation can be seen to be rooted in the writings of Bl. Augustine: first, that man suffers death because he is guilty for the sin of Adam, and second, that the nature of man is so corrupt as to render man incapable of exercising free will in the work of salvation (the doctrine of predestination).
Historically, these two extreme Western tendencies have themselves developed in two variants: Roman Catholic and Protestant. The Roman Catholic position, as defined by augustinian scholastics, sees original sin essentially in terms of the wrath of God directed at man for his guilt in disobedient submission of the spiritual principle to the fleshly principle. This is an offense against God which results in the loss of "supernatural" grace and demands expiation, or "satisfaction," by the shedding of blood, in accordance with the medieval chivalry code of feudal knights. This position tends to reject the efficacy of free will on the part of man in choosing and working for his own salvation, and obscures the fact that within original sin are contained also sins of the spiritual order, not only those of the flesh.[9]
The Protestant reformation, in reaction to the extremes of Roman Catholic interpretation, has itself engendered two opposing views. On the one hand, in varying degrees, it amplifies the teaching of Bl. Augustine on predestination, postulating a complete perversion of human nature and corruption to its very foundations (Calvin is more severe in this regard, Luther less so). On the other hand, in certain contemporary Protestant sects we see, once again, a complete denial of original, inherited sin, that is to say, a return to Pelagianism.
In juxtaposition with the view that is prevalent in the Western Christian tradition, Orthodox fathers and theologians are perhaps more circumspect in not "dotting the i's," as it were, in relation to things that we cannot possibly know about the specific nature of Adam's sin. Thus, instead of discussing or stressing the many possible secondary and fleshly aspects of original sin, the Orthodox prefer to see it primarily in spiritual terms, as being rooted in spiritual pride and disobedience. "The Original Sin," writes Karmiris, "was a free transgression of our First Parents which grew out of egoism and boasting. Thus, through the envy and influence of Satan, directed against our First Parents, 'the sin and transgression entered,' and our First Parents transgressed the Law of God, motivated by a desire to be equal with God, or, as Chrysostom says, the 'anticipation to become God'; man wanted to become independent from God, finding, by means of sin, divine knowledge, blessedness, and perfection."[10]
In a similar vein, Fr. Michael Pomazansky observes:
The eating of the fruit was only the beginning of moral deviation, the first push; but it was so poisonous and ruinous that it was already impossible to return to the previous sanctity and righteousness; on the contrary, there was revealed an inclination to travel farther on the path of apostasy from God. Blessed Augustine says: 'Here was pride, because man desired to be more under his own authority than under God's; and a mockery of what is holy, because he did not believe God; and murder, because he subjected himself to death; and spiritual adultery, because the immaculateness of the human soul was defiled through the persuasion of the serpent; and theft, because they made use of the forbidden tree; and the love of acquisition, because he desired more than was necessary to satisfy himself.' Thus, with the first transgression of the commandment, the principle of sin immediately entered into man — 'the law of sin' (monos tis amartias). It struck the very nature of man and quickly began to root itself in him and develop. ... The sinful inclinations in man have taken the reigning position; man has become the servant of sin (Rom. 6:7) ... With sin, death entered into the human race. Man was created immortal in his soul, and he could have remained immortal also in body if he had not fallen away from God. ... Man's body, as was well expressed by Blessed Augustine, does not possess 'the impossibility of dying,' but it did possess 'the possibility of not dying,' which it has now lost.[11]
It can be said that while we have not inherited the guilt of Adam's personal sin, because his sin is also of a generic nature, and because the entire human race is possessed of an essential, ontological unity,[12] we participate in it by virtue of our participation in the human race. "The imparting of Original Sin by means of natural heredity should be understood in terms of the unity of the entire human nature, and of the homoousiotitos [13] of all men, who, connected by nature, constitute one mystic whole. Inasmuch as human nature is indeed unique and unbreakable, the imparting of sin from the first-born to the entire human race descended from him is rendered explicable: 'Explicitly, as from the root, the sickness proceeded to the rest of the tree, Adam being the root who had suffered corruption'" [St. Cyril of Alexandria].[14]
The Orthodox view of fallen human nature is remarkably sober and balanced, gravitating neither to the unwarranted optimism of the Pelagian view, which sees human nature as having remained essentially in its pristine innocence and goodness, nor to the equally unwarranted pessimism of the predestinatarian view, which sees human nature as hopelessly perverted and corrupt. "Man fell unconsciously, unintentionally; he was deceived and seduced," writes the 19th-century Russian bishop and ascete, St. Ignatius Brianchaninov. "For this reason his natural goodness was not destroyed, but was mixed with the evil of the fallen angels. But this natural goodness, being mixed with evil, poisoned with evil, became worthless, inadequate, unworthy of God who is perfect, purest goodness. Man for the most part does evil, meaning to do good, not seeing the evil wrapped in a mask of goodness on account of the darkening of his mind and conscience."[15]
The Orthodox view of original sin is profoundly related to the Orthodox concept of theosis, deification, which is almost totally lost in the Western understanding. Thus, Pomazansky observes, while the physical, mental, and emotional faculties have become corrupted in man, the greatest loss to man was deprivation of the blessedness of Paradise and life eternal. "Both the mind and the feelings have become darkened in him, and therefore his moral freedom often does not incline towards the good, but towards evil ... The physical consequences of the fall are diseases, hard labor and death. These were the natural result of the moral fall, the falling away from communion with God, man's departure from God. Man became subject to the corrupt elements of the world, in which dissolution and death are active. Nourishment from the Source of Life and from the constant renewal of all of one's powers became weak in men ... However, the final and most important consequence of sin was not illness and physical death, but the loss of Paradise ... In Adam all mankind was deprived of the future blessedness which stood before it, the blessedness which Adam and Eve had partially tasted in Paradise. In place of the prospect of life eternal, mankind beheld death, and behind it hell, darkness, rejection by God."[16].
Theosis, or, as St. Seraphim of Sarov defines it, "the acquisition of the Holy Spirit," is both the possibility and the reality, the goal and the gift, of overcoming the stain of original sin and repossession of what has been lost through it, the sole dominant purpose of Christian life. Despite the "rags of mortality" in which the human race has clothed itself through the fall of the first Adam in Paradise, Christians live in the hope of once again "ascending to their former beauty" by virtue of their redemption by the suffering, death, and resurrection on the third day of the second Adam. Walking between hope and despair, repenting of our sins, and living a life of Christian struggle, we await the fulfillment of the promise of St. Paul, so that together with redeemed first Adam we can sing the song of victory: "So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" (1 Cor. 15: 55-56).
Notes
1. John Karmiris, A Synopsis of the Dogmatic Theology of the Orthodox Catholic Church, trans. from the Greek by the Reverend George Dimopoulos (Scranton, Pa.: Christian Orthodox Edition, 1973), pp. 35-36.
2. Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: A Concise Exposition, trans. Hieromonk Seraphim Rose (Platina, Calif.: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1994).
3. The East was at this time itself embroiled in a theological controversy surrounding the teachings of Appolinarius and Nestorius concerning the divine and human natures of Christ. Blessed Augustine had been invited by Emperor Theodosius the Younger to the Council which was to assemble at Ephesus, but died approximately a year before. The Third Ecumenical Council in 431 ruled on both controversies, condemning not only Nestorianism, but also Pelagianism. In this context it should be noted that despite the lately-fashionable "bashing" of certain writings of Blessed Augustine by certain "ultra-correct" "neo-Orthodox" writers, both he and his writings remain uncondemned by any Ecumenical or Local Council, thus relegating his more controversial theological opinions to the status of theologoumena of a Western Father of the Orthodox Church.
4. As it sometimes happens when the writings of a teacher are interpreted by several generations of disciples and commentators, the end product may not be something that was originally intended by the teacher himself. So with Moses and the Talmudists, so with Cyril of Alexandria and the monophysites, so with Bl. Augustine and the augustinians.
5. Pomazansky, p. 160.
6. Karmiris, p. 38.
7. Ibid.
8. In particular, the peculiarly Western tendency to see and define original sin almost exclusively in terms of human sexuality, replete with Freudian interpretation of the metaphors of religious language. On this, especially see: Elaine Pagels, Adam, Eve, and the Serpent (New York: Random House, 1988).
9. And dismisses as "semi-pelagianism" the balanced Orthodox position, formulated by St. John Cassian, which postulates the cooperation, or "synergy," of Divine grace and free will of man in working out the task of human salvation.
10. Karmiris, p. 33.
11. Pomazansky, pp. 156-159.
12. See, for instance, John 15:1-9 and 17:11-23; 1 Cor. 12:12-13; Ephes. 2:15 and 4:13-16. Also St. Gregory of Nyssa to Aulalius that there are not three gods but one God, etc., and St. Basil the Great, in the 18th chapter of his monastic regulations.
13. = "same-essence-ness," i.e. coessentiality or consubstantiality.
14. Karmiris, p. 36.
15. The Arena: An Offering to Contemporary Monasticism, trans. Archimandrite Lazarus (Jordanville: Holy Trinity Monastery, 1991), p. 186.
16. Pomazansky, pp. 158-159.
From Alive in Christ
1996:1 (Spring 1996)
Sunday, April 28, 1996
West African Surprise: Suddenly, Peace Takes Root in Sierra Leone
Six months ago, while neighboring Liberia seemed well on its way to ending its catastrophic civil war, Sierra Leone stood out in the minds of many in this region as the most hopeless case in West Africa. Army officers who had seized power ruled over the capital, Freetown, enriching themselves in the clandestine diamond trade.
South African mercenaries bloodily prosecuted a seemingly unwinnable bush war against one of the continent's most vicious guerrilla movements. With the rebels burning villages and hacking peasants to death without any apparent provocation or explanation, talk of holding democratic elections this year was greeted with deep skepticism by foreign donors and, for a time, indifference by the country's war-weary people. But in one of the most remarkable changes of fortune this continent has seen since the dawn of independence from European colonialism nearly 40 years ago, Sierra Leone carried out its most peaceful and democratic national elections ever in March, replacing its young military dictators with a civilian Government.
In recent weeks, the new Government has concluded a cease-fire with the rebels, and the country now seems well on its way to peace. The turnabout can be atributed to many factors, foremost among them war fatigue among the rebels and a growing sense of isolation as neighboring countries have declined to give them a sympathetic hearing. And when Sierra Leone's military leaders repeatedly sought to back out of the elections, Western donors sent sharp warnings of consequences ranging from a cutoff of badly needed aid to diplomatic isolation.
Now Freetown, a city with a dilapidated charm, is suddenly abuzz with development consultants, aid donor delegations and relief experts. No one predicts that the road ahead will be easy, or that a country that has been as unstable as this one is immune from setbacks. But where foreign diplomats and aid officials only recently saw hopelessness for what is by some measures the world's poorest country, many now see a tremendous opportunity for a mineral-rich and sparsely populated land to have another crack at building a modern state. "Africa never runs out of surprises," said Berhanu Dinka, the United Nations special representative to Sierra Leone, who played a key role in holding the military to its election schedule and helped draw the rebels into peace talks. "The lesson here is that things can always change for the better, and it is never too late to save a situation."
The story of how Sierra Leone was able to hold its improbably successful elections and advance toward peace is a story of personal and collective heroism. It is a striking example of what can happen when a devastated country's international partners pull determinedly, if only briefly, in the same direction.
At the center of this story stands the unshakable will of one man, James Jonah, 62, a former senior United Nations official from Sierra Leone. He returned home at the military's invitation to head an electoral commission, and surprised the army by taking its promises of holding honest elections seriously. By all accounts, Mr. Jonah then proceeded to deftly outmaneuver the military leadership each time it tried to slip out of its commitments. More than once, Mr. Jonah's determination nearly cost him his life. When he refused a request to lower the minimum age required for presidential candidates so that the 30-year-old military ruler, Capt. Valentine Strasser, could run, Mr. Jonah's home and office were bombed.
When Captain Strasser was overthrown in January by his deputy, Brig. Julius Maada Bio, Mr. Jonah pressed ahead with his election plans as if nothing had changed. The military responded by stepping up its peace feelers toward the rebels, and urged that with peace within reach it would be irresponsible to rush into elections. Unmoved by those arguments, and initially backed by few, Mr. Jonah pressed ahead. "Those of us who have had the privilege of living in open societies as I have for 40 years have a special obligation to promote the idea of democracy to our brothers and sisters," Mr. Jonah said. "A lot of people told me I was crazy, or that I was importing European ideas that didn't apply here. But I was convinced that if the people got a chance to have a say in how their country was being run for once, they would seize it." Seize it they did. Turnout in the first round of voting, on Feb. 26, was 65 percent. In the final round, which produced a new President, Ahmad Tejan Kabbah, turnout rose to 75 percent despite threats by the rebels to disrupt the vote and maneuvers by the army to panic voters.
Mr. Jonah plays down suggestions of his own heroism, preferring to talk of that of the citizens, led in many instances by women's groups, who withstood weeks of intimidation. When Mr. Jonah told Brigadier Bio that he would hold the vote as scheduled, regardless of the results of the peace talks, the military leader challenged Mr. Jonah to prove that the people really wanted elections. So two weeks before the vote, Mr. Jonah convened a meeting of civic groups, from religious organizations to student and labor unions, in which each was invited to express its view on the subject.
To discourage turnout, the army lined the route to the meeting place with the most impressive display of weapons ever seen in the capital. Those taking part had to walk the final mile to the conclave under the hostile gaze of soldiers. Still, hundreds showed up, and their verdict -- elections now -- was so overwhelming that the military walked out of the conference center. Once-skeptical diplomats began to throw their full weight behind the elections, warning the army at every turn of the consequences -- from international isolation and arms embargoes to trade sanctions -- should the military interfere with the vote.
On the day of the second round of voting, March 15, with citizens waiting to vote in long lines, diplomats say the military engineered a series of loud explosions in the capital to create the impression of a rebel attack. But instead of fleeing for shelter, people defiantly held their ground, chanting: "We must vote! We must vote! Jonah, Jonah, we must vote!"
Rather than fight, the country's military leadership, including Brigadier Bio, finally took its cue and has begun taking up foreign offers of assistance in arranging scholarships abroad. "This was an extraordinary moment for the forces of democracy in Sierra Leone and an extraordinary moment for the forces of democracy in Africa," said John L. Hirsch, the United States Ambassador.
Responsibility for fulfilling this opportunity now rests largely on the shoulders of the new President, Mr. Kabbah, 64, a lawyer and former United Nations Development Program official, who took office last month. "We have decided to embark on fully open government," Mr. Kabbah said in an interview at his home in Juba Hills, a mountainside suburb overlooking a broad azure bay. "Everything that this Government does will be fully explained to the people, and public accountability will become the rule, not the exception."
Mr. Kabbah's first order of business was to consolidate a tentative peace agreement with the rebels. He traveled almost immediately to the neighboring Ivory Coast to meet with the rebel leader, Foday Sankoh, hitting it off well enough to get Mr. Sankoh to agree to an "indefinite" truce. Mr. Kabbah said that when Mr. Sankoh, an enigmatic former army photographer and corporal who has spent the last five years in the bush, expressed wonder over the gleaming high-rises and smoothly paved roads of the Ivory Coast, he told him, "Yes, there are many nice things here, and with peace there is no reason we shouldn't have all this and more."
Source: New York Times
South African mercenaries bloodily prosecuted a seemingly unwinnable bush war against one of the continent's most vicious guerrilla movements. With the rebels burning villages and hacking peasants to death without any apparent provocation or explanation, talk of holding democratic elections this year was greeted with deep skepticism by foreign donors and, for a time, indifference by the country's war-weary people. But in one of the most remarkable changes of fortune this continent has seen since the dawn of independence from European colonialism nearly 40 years ago, Sierra Leone carried out its most peaceful and democratic national elections ever in March, replacing its young military dictators with a civilian Government.
In recent weeks, the new Government has concluded a cease-fire with the rebels, and the country now seems well on its way to peace. The turnabout can be atributed to many factors, foremost among them war fatigue among the rebels and a growing sense of isolation as neighboring countries have declined to give them a sympathetic hearing. And when Sierra Leone's military leaders repeatedly sought to back out of the elections, Western donors sent sharp warnings of consequences ranging from a cutoff of badly needed aid to diplomatic isolation.
Now Freetown, a city with a dilapidated charm, is suddenly abuzz with development consultants, aid donor delegations and relief experts. No one predicts that the road ahead will be easy, or that a country that has been as unstable as this one is immune from setbacks. But where foreign diplomats and aid officials only recently saw hopelessness for what is by some measures the world's poorest country, many now see a tremendous opportunity for a mineral-rich and sparsely populated land to have another crack at building a modern state. "Africa never runs out of surprises," said Berhanu Dinka, the United Nations special representative to Sierra Leone, who played a key role in holding the military to its election schedule and helped draw the rebels into peace talks. "The lesson here is that things can always change for the better, and it is never too late to save a situation."
The story of how Sierra Leone was able to hold its improbably successful elections and advance toward peace is a story of personal and collective heroism. It is a striking example of what can happen when a devastated country's international partners pull determinedly, if only briefly, in the same direction.
At the center of this story stands the unshakable will of one man, James Jonah, 62, a former senior United Nations official from Sierra Leone. He returned home at the military's invitation to head an electoral commission, and surprised the army by taking its promises of holding honest elections seriously. By all accounts, Mr. Jonah then proceeded to deftly outmaneuver the military leadership each time it tried to slip out of its commitments. More than once, Mr. Jonah's determination nearly cost him his life. When he refused a request to lower the minimum age required for presidential candidates so that the 30-year-old military ruler, Capt. Valentine Strasser, could run, Mr. Jonah's home and office were bombed.
When Captain Strasser was overthrown in January by his deputy, Brig. Julius Maada Bio, Mr. Jonah pressed ahead with his election plans as if nothing had changed. The military responded by stepping up its peace feelers toward the rebels, and urged that with peace within reach it would be irresponsible to rush into elections. Unmoved by those arguments, and initially backed by few, Mr. Jonah pressed ahead. "Those of us who have had the privilege of living in open societies as I have for 40 years have a special obligation to promote the idea of democracy to our brothers and sisters," Mr. Jonah said. "A lot of people told me I was crazy, or that I was importing European ideas that didn't apply here. But I was convinced that if the people got a chance to have a say in how their country was being run for once, they would seize it." Seize it they did. Turnout in the first round of voting, on Feb. 26, was 65 percent. In the final round, which produced a new President, Ahmad Tejan Kabbah, turnout rose to 75 percent despite threats by the rebels to disrupt the vote and maneuvers by the army to panic voters.
Mr. Jonah plays down suggestions of his own heroism, preferring to talk of that of the citizens, led in many instances by women's groups, who withstood weeks of intimidation. When Mr. Jonah told Brigadier Bio that he would hold the vote as scheduled, regardless of the results of the peace talks, the military leader challenged Mr. Jonah to prove that the people really wanted elections. So two weeks before the vote, Mr. Jonah convened a meeting of civic groups, from religious organizations to student and labor unions, in which each was invited to express its view on the subject.
To discourage turnout, the army lined the route to the meeting place with the most impressive display of weapons ever seen in the capital. Those taking part had to walk the final mile to the conclave under the hostile gaze of soldiers. Still, hundreds showed up, and their verdict -- elections now -- was so overwhelming that the military walked out of the conference center. Once-skeptical diplomats began to throw their full weight behind the elections, warning the army at every turn of the consequences -- from international isolation and arms embargoes to trade sanctions -- should the military interfere with the vote.
On the day of the second round of voting, March 15, with citizens waiting to vote in long lines, diplomats say the military engineered a series of loud explosions in the capital to create the impression of a rebel attack. But instead of fleeing for shelter, people defiantly held their ground, chanting: "We must vote! We must vote! Jonah, Jonah, we must vote!"
Rather than fight, the country's military leadership, including Brigadier Bio, finally took its cue and has begun taking up foreign offers of assistance in arranging scholarships abroad. "This was an extraordinary moment for the forces of democracy in Sierra Leone and an extraordinary moment for the forces of democracy in Africa," said John L. Hirsch, the United States Ambassador.
Responsibility for fulfilling this opportunity now rests largely on the shoulders of the new President, Mr. Kabbah, 64, a lawyer and former United Nations Development Program official, who took office last month. "We have decided to embark on fully open government," Mr. Kabbah said in an interview at his home in Juba Hills, a mountainside suburb overlooking a broad azure bay. "Everything that this Government does will be fully explained to the people, and public accountability will become the rule, not the exception."
Mr. Kabbah's first order of business was to consolidate a tentative peace agreement with the rebels. He traveled almost immediately to the neighboring Ivory Coast to meet with the rebel leader, Foday Sankoh, hitting it off well enough to get Mr. Sankoh to agree to an "indefinite" truce. Mr. Kabbah said that when Mr. Sankoh, an enigmatic former army photographer and corporal who has spent the last five years in the bush, expressed wonder over the gleaming high-rises and smoothly paved roads of the Ivory Coast, he told him, "Yes, there are many nice things here, and with peace there is no reason we shouldn't have all this and more."
Source: New York Times
Sunday, February 4, 1996
Not Quite Democracy; Africans Look East for a New Model
ACROSS the continent of Africa, for many of the countries that can still dream of economic progress instead of simply hoping to ward off disaster, the most seductive development model lies not in the ripe old West, but rather in the fermenting economies of the Far East.
Hoping to copy blueprints that allowed some Asian countries to leap from poverty to relative prosperity in little more than a generation, more and more African leaders are heading off these days on tours of countries like Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Korea. And along with their economic recipes, these leaders are returning home with authoritarian political notions. These may clash sharply with the Western ideal of democracy, but they have the merit, the leaders say, of being more in tune with traditional African values.
Having flirted in this decade with democracy, one country after another is now seeking to implement a form of government that meets some technical requirements of democracy but in reality is the most formalized kind of pluralism possible: one in which only the most marginal questions of national interest are subject to open debate, and leaders rig their electoral systems, minimizing to virtually nil the chances that they will be voted out of office. In doing so, governments in countries from Ivory Coast to Uganda are invoking the model of the tightly controlled Asian society, with its Confucian notions of sacrifice and obedience.
The pro-Government Ivorian newspaper, Fraternite Matin, carried the strongest recent articulation of this philosophy earlier this month, in a lead editorial that said that the strength of Japan came from a caste system in which "the samurai does not seek to replace the emperor, or to speak in his place." Pursuing this line to its chilling conclusion, the editorialist proposed a formula that would enable this country to develop: "The party member needs to stick to the line and not impose his point of view on superiors; the manager will not exceed his prerogatives and divert the funds of the enterprise for which he has responsibility; the expatriate should not violate any of the rules governing his stay; the cleric, rather than giving political speeches to support one camp or another, should stick to what he can contribute to the spirituality of his flock."
For many experts on Africa, there are many problems with these nose-to-the-grindstone nostrums. Not the least is the fact that they leave unanswered a question that this continent has managed more disastrously than any other: Who will keep an eye on the leaders? "The success of authoritarian governments elsewhere is based on things that African leaders have not paid sufficient attention to," said Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a Liberian who is the deputy administrator for Africa of the United Nations Development Program. "First there was an emphasis on human resource development. Just look at the high literacy levels in most Asian societies. "Then, Asian governments built strong partnerships with the private sector, which ultimately served as counterweights to authoritarian power. Finally you have a system of ethics: In the Korean example, former heads of state were ultimately arrested because they offended some commonly held values."
Although it may sound new, today's Asian-inspired ideology is far from the continent's first experiment with paternalism, which was in part a legacy of colonialism. Africa's early leaders, from Kenya's Jomo Kenyatta and Zambia's Kenneth Kaunda to Ivory Coast's Felix Houphouet-Boigny, all demanded the virtually unquestioned obedience of the population under one-party states, which they justified by talk of Africa's traditional socialist values and its emphasis on consensus.
Rather than help build thriving new nations, however, the lack of accountability built into these political creations favored the emergence of corrupt elites who quickly discovered that controlling the state offered unparalleled opportunities for stealing from it. "What we are seeing today is an exact replay of what happened in the 1960's in the move toward one-party states: Maintaining the formalism of democracy while gutting it of its substance," said Thomas Callaghy, a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania. "What you end up with is 'crony capitalism,' an extension of the patron-client form of free enterprise, which, in the African case, has always placed the emphasis on the welfare of the patron."
With few checks on this sort of power, Africa will be hard pressed to develop under any economic model. Instead of seeing the kind of accumulation of savings necessary for an industrial takeoff -- the kind of capital accumulation that took place in Asia -- the continent has witnessed an unparalleled flight of capital, as elites bank their earnings in safe havens elsewhere.
According to one United Nations estimate, $200 billion or 90 percent of the sub-Saharan part of the continent's gross domestic product (much of it illicitly earned), was shipped to foreign banks in 1991 alone. In each country, the formula for enrichment differs. In Senegal, World Bank officials have said that Government imports of rice, the staple food, have constituted a major source of unaccounted-for revenue for ruling party leaders for years. In Congo, top officials and their relatives sign deals that mortgage the heavily indebted country's oil earnings years in advance, in exchange for quick cash.
In Kenya, the Government plows ahead with plans to build a major international airport in the President's home town. In military-controlled Nigeria, the Government awards so-called "lifting contracts" to its political friends that amount to little more than gifts of handsome commissions on oil contracts.
Based on realities like these, a confidential report prepared last year by the French Foreign Ministry warned of the "criminalization of sub-Saharan Africa" by its elites. While the ideologues of present-day Africa wish to draw out cultural parallels between the supposedly deferential masses of Asia and hordes of Africans whose salvation, they say, lies in a sort of unquestioning acceptance of a new work ethnic, for many the recent news out of South Korea may inspire other observations.
Reports that two past presidents of that country amassed huge slush funds have led to dramatic confessions of corruption and the arrest of these leaders, along with those of several captains of Korean industry. This can be seen as a consequence of the lack of democracy that prevailed through much of that country's modern history. As much as some proponents of an African resurrection would like to follow Asian models, at least two elements in the recent Korean scandal stick out as inconceivable on this continent.
In the primary capitalism that still prevails in these parts, heads of industry frequently don't have any need to pay bribes to African leaders. As often as not, they are buddies, cousins and sons. Then again, in an environment where courts are subject to political control, Parliaments act as rubber stamps, and presidents stay in power as long as they like, who could get caught?
Source: New Yrk Times
Hoping to copy blueprints that allowed some Asian countries to leap from poverty to relative prosperity in little more than a generation, more and more African leaders are heading off these days on tours of countries like Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Korea. And along with their economic recipes, these leaders are returning home with authoritarian political notions. These may clash sharply with the Western ideal of democracy, but they have the merit, the leaders say, of being more in tune with traditional African values.
Having flirted in this decade with democracy, one country after another is now seeking to implement a form of government that meets some technical requirements of democracy but in reality is the most formalized kind of pluralism possible: one in which only the most marginal questions of national interest are subject to open debate, and leaders rig their electoral systems, minimizing to virtually nil the chances that they will be voted out of office. In doing so, governments in countries from Ivory Coast to Uganda are invoking the model of the tightly controlled Asian society, with its Confucian notions of sacrifice and obedience.
The pro-Government Ivorian newspaper, Fraternite Matin, carried the strongest recent articulation of this philosophy earlier this month, in a lead editorial that said that the strength of Japan came from a caste system in which "the samurai does not seek to replace the emperor, or to speak in his place." Pursuing this line to its chilling conclusion, the editorialist proposed a formula that would enable this country to develop: "The party member needs to stick to the line and not impose his point of view on superiors; the manager will not exceed his prerogatives and divert the funds of the enterprise for which he has responsibility; the expatriate should not violate any of the rules governing his stay; the cleric, rather than giving political speeches to support one camp or another, should stick to what he can contribute to the spirituality of his flock."
For many experts on Africa, there are many problems with these nose-to-the-grindstone nostrums. Not the least is the fact that they leave unanswered a question that this continent has managed more disastrously than any other: Who will keep an eye on the leaders? "The success of authoritarian governments elsewhere is based on things that African leaders have not paid sufficient attention to," said Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a Liberian who is the deputy administrator for Africa of the United Nations Development Program. "First there was an emphasis on human resource development. Just look at the high literacy levels in most Asian societies. "Then, Asian governments built strong partnerships with the private sector, which ultimately served as counterweights to authoritarian power. Finally you have a system of ethics: In the Korean example, former heads of state were ultimately arrested because they offended some commonly held values."
Although it may sound new, today's Asian-inspired ideology is far from the continent's first experiment with paternalism, which was in part a legacy of colonialism. Africa's early leaders, from Kenya's Jomo Kenyatta and Zambia's Kenneth Kaunda to Ivory Coast's Felix Houphouet-Boigny, all demanded the virtually unquestioned obedience of the population under one-party states, which they justified by talk of Africa's traditional socialist values and its emphasis on consensus.
Rather than help build thriving new nations, however, the lack of accountability built into these political creations favored the emergence of corrupt elites who quickly discovered that controlling the state offered unparalleled opportunities for stealing from it. "What we are seeing today is an exact replay of what happened in the 1960's in the move toward one-party states: Maintaining the formalism of democracy while gutting it of its substance," said Thomas Callaghy, a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania. "What you end up with is 'crony capitalism,' an extension of the patron-client form of free enterprise, which, in the African case, has always placed the emphasis on the welfare of the patron."
With few checks on this sort of power, Africa will be hard pressed to develop under any economic model. Instead of seeing the kind of accumulation of savings necessary for an industrial takeoff -- the kind of capital accumulation that took place in Asia -- the continent has witnessed an unparalleled flight of capital, as elites bank their earnings in safe havens elsewhere.
According to one United Nations estimate, $200 billion or 90 percent of the sub-Saharan part of the continent's gross domestic product (much of it illicitly earned), was shipped to foreign banks in 1991 alone. In each country, the formula for enrichment differs. In Senegal, World Bank officials have said that Government imports of rice, the staple food, have constituted a major source of unaccounted-for revenue for ruling party leaders for years. In Congo, top officials and their relatives sign deals that mortgage the heavily indebted country's oil earnings years in advance, in exchange for quick cash.
In Kenya, the Government plows ahead with plans to build a major international airport in the President's home town. In military-controlled Nigeria, the Government awards so-called "lifting contracts" to its political friends that amount to little more than gifts of handsome commissions on oil contracts.
Based on realities like these, a confidential report prepared last year by the French Foreign Ministry warned of the "criminalization of sub-Saharan Africa" by its elites. While the ideologues of present-day Africa wish to draw out cultural parallels between the supposedly deferential masses of Asia and hordes of Africans whose salvation, they say, lies in a sort of unquestioning acceptance of a new work ethnic, for many the recent news out of South Korea may inspire other observations.
Reports that two past presidents of that country amassed huge slush funds have led to dramatic confessions of corruption and the arrest of these leaders, along with those of several captains of Korean industry. This can be seen as a consequence of the lack of democracy that prevailed through much of that country's modern history. As much as some proponents of an African resurrection would like to follow Asian models, at least two elements in the recent Korean scandal stick out as inconceivable on this continent.
In the primary capitalism that still prevails in these parts, heads of industry frequently don't have any need to pay bribes to African leaders. As often as not, they are buddies, cousins and sons. Then again, in an environment where courts are subject to political control, Parliaments act as rubber stamps, and presidents stay in power as long as they like, who could get caught?
Source: New Yrk Times
Wednesday, January 17, 1996
New Leader Pledges Vote in Sierra Leone
Sierra Leone's new leader, who took over in a bloodless coup on Tuesday, is committed to holding multi-party elections on Feb. 26, as planned, a Government spokesman said today. Addressing the nation a day after overthrowing Capt. Valentine Strasser, Brig. Julius Maada Bio called on rebels of the Revolutionary Unite Front, who have been fighting since 1991, to come to peace talks with his Government. "The democratization process, which started in June 1995 with the lifting of the ban on party political activities, continues unabated and is still on track toward the holding of presidential and parliamentary elections on Feb. 26 this year," Brigadier Bio said.
In neighboring Guinea, Captain Strasser said that he had agreed to hand over power and that his departure should not be called a coup. Freetown residents said the city was back to normal. Airports and land borders were open.
Source: New York Times
In neighboring Guinea, Captain Strasser said that he had agreed to hand over power and that his departure should not be called a coup. Freetown residents said the city was back to normal. Airports and land borders were open.
Source: New York Times
Military Ruler Ousted By Army in Sierra Leone
Army officers ousted Sierra Leone's military leader in a coup today, six weeks before elections to restore civilian rule. There were no reports of bloodshed, and the ousted leader, Capt. Valentine Strasser, was said to have been given safe passage to Guinea.
A statement by the officers said Captain Strasser, 30, had been replaced by Brig. Julius Maada Bio, 33, formerly his closest associate in the military junta. Foreign diplomats in the capital confirmed the coup. Captain Strasser had promised to hold elections for a civilian government on Feb. 26, despite an ongoing civil war.
Aides to Brigadier Bio, about whom little is known, said that he opposes holding the election until the war has ended, or at least abated, and that some officers in Captain Strasser's military junta had decided a coup was necessary to insure a safe transition to civilian rule.
Source: New York Times
A statement by the officers said Captain Strasser, 30, had been replaced by Brig. Julius Maada Bio, 33, formerly his closest associate in the military junta. Foreign diplomats in the capital confirmed the coup. Captain Strasser had promised to hold elections for a civilian government on Feb. 26, despite an ongoing civil war.
Aides to Brigadier Bio, about whom little is known, said that he opposes holding the election until the war has ended, or at least abated, and that some officers in Captain Strasser's military junta had decided a coup was necessary to insure a safe transition to civilian rule.
Source: New York Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)