George Orwell's book "1984" describes the use of language by a totalitarian society, achieving total control of its citizens, not only of their behaviour, but of their thought processes and the way they view each other. In that world, "Newspeak" is the accepted language of use. Words that are considered subversive by the government are reassigned Newspeak meanings, and the old meanings are purged, not only from the vocabulary, but from the minds of all citizens. If no word exists for an idea, then that idea cannot be thought of, and no danger from the idea can come to the society.
"1984" is not so much a prediction as it is a (somewhat exaggerated) demonstration of how language is used in our society, and how its use can harm us. The Newspeak phenomenon is all around us, most notably in politics (almost any use of the words "freedom" or "liberty") and advertising (stand out from the crowd by buying a Ford is the message of a current TV commercial).
In spite of what "1984" says most language change, acquisition and loss of meanings, is a natural phenomenon. As our lives and experiences change, so does the language we use to describe it and to communicate. Language change isn't necessarily harmful. Often it enriches the language and adds new meanings and shades of meaning. But at the same time, no matter what its source, some language changes lose us important meanings. And that's the sad fate of the word "charity".
Like many words in the English language, the word "charity" has acquired different meanings since it first entered the language, and its most commonly used meaning has changed greatly. Charity came into English from Latin and Old French, meaning love and care for our neighbours, benevolence for all. It has the same roots as "care" and "caress". In the traditions of Christianity, Islam and Judaism, charity is how we best express our love of God, by bestowing that love on our fellows, God's creations. As Abraham Lincoln said: "With malice towards none, with charity for all." Charity is not just a religious concept -- it forms the basis for belief in democracy: whether one believes in God or not, one believes in the intrinsic value of all one's fellows, and bases one's life and behaviour on that belief.
Charity in this meaning was common in the English language well into the 19th century. Most famously, the early 16th century King James Version of the Christian Bible (First Corinthians, 13:13) demonstrates its meaning and emphasizes its importance: "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
In the 19th century, "charity" took on a new primary meaning, the one we now use: giving goods and money to non-profit, tax-exempt institutions, some of which aid the poor, but many of which provide services to the well off, and provide little or no aid to the poor. This new meaning reflects the attitude of Victorian factory owners towards their society: society is best served by exploiting the poor, and giving alms demonstrates one's own wealth. This is directly in contrast to the word's older meaning, for it makes the words of the King James Bible meaningless: "And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing." (First Corinthians, 13:3)
Modern editions of the Bible use the word "love" where the King James Version uses "charity". The world "love" in our language, although rich in its complex of meanings, is not a good substitute for "charity". Charity is universal love of our fellows, not directed to a specific person, group or object. Love in contrast is commonly used with reference to some specific object: the object of love. Charity is both more general and more specific than what most of us would associate with "love", and use of "love" in its place has the effect of losing the meaning of charity.
No matter what ones beliefs might be, the old meaning of charity is an important concept. Without knowing what charity is, there are key concepts of religion, social organization and international politics that are meaningless and hard to discuss. And there are important commonalities of belief (especially in the current conflict between Western powers and Islamic societies) to which we are blind. For those who believe in and who practice charity, no matter what their religion or political belief, there is no "us and them". For many of us, without charity there is no Christianity, no Islam, no Judaism, nor is there democracy. Even for those who don't agree, it's important to understand why this is so.
As an example: shortly prior to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, I was with friends and acquaintances drinking coffee and eating donuts, and discussing what seemed to be happening internationally. The general sentiment was that an invasion would be a mistake. After the group broke up, an American witness and fellow coffee drinker commented that one's attitude was just a matter of who one considered the good guys and who one considered the bad guys. I was taken aback. I found myself without the words to say that for most people in the discussion it wasn't about good guys and bad guys. The discussion was about what actions would result in the least harm and most good, with malice towards none, with charity for all.
How we can retrieve this valuable word I have no idea. Words come into existence through common use. There is no originating authority for English words. Words often have an identifiable first use, but it is their general use that makes them part of the language, not the originator's use.
We as individuals and we as communities can make words and ideas part of our own language. We each have our own language and our own thoughts, as do communities. We do not live in the society of "1984". Our society's language informs our personal and our community's language, but society's language use doesn't necessarily control our language and our thoughts. So the best I can suggest for the moment is to add "Charity" to your language, insist on its older, better meaning, and understand the process that has deprived us of its value.
© copyright 2004 by Sam Wilmott, All Rights Reserved
Thu Jul 22 09:57:16 2004