Archives for November 2024

“The Lord confused the language of all the earth.”

(Here are the first and second parts of the scholion on this verse.)

The confusion of languages is also displayed in an ironic and ominous way in the modern academy. The effort of the various disciplines to delve more and more deeply into narrower subjects results in a situation in which inter-disciplinary discussion is simply impossible. Who can discuss the fineries of theology and the mechanics of cellular evolution at the same time? Who in each discipline can even begin to understand the vocabulary and significance of the work of the other? We see how even our well-intended human quests, tinted perhaps by a certain pride, end in the scattering of knowledge.

This is most dangerous where, for example, ethicists and biological researchers cannot comprehend one another. What results will this have for human beings? It seems to me that many of the more frightening advances in medicine will either not benefit the poor, who cannot afford highly specialized procedures, or will actively harm them (witness the incentives involved in finding live or recently-deceased research subjects). And yet, rather than slow down and take the time to listen for what will benefit all, we instead let our desire to ‘make a name for ourselves’ [Gen. 11: 4] continue to drive us on down who knows what bitter road.

“The Lord confused the language of all the earth.”

(Here are the first part of the scholion on this verse.)

We cannot understand the full meaning of the confusion of languages without reference to its remedy in the story of Pentecost morning. The presence of the Holy Spirit made it possible for the Jews on pilgrimage from every land to understand the Apostles’ teaching in their own native language. From this we see that the solution to the confusion of tongues is not ‘Esperanto’ or some kind of universal code. Any such attempts are bound to the limitations of any single human language, and will force all persons into an artificial discourse, presided over by the humanly powerful. Rather, God preserves the uniqueness of each language, and by extension each individual voice. But in the power of the Holy Spirit individuals can now understand one another and rejoice to discover how diversity enriches. Understanding the Other no longer entails the danger of losing myself.

We also see that ‘purity’ is not achieved by destroying all differences, but by eliminating sin and violence. As soon as bricks and mortar are mentioned in the story of the Tower of Babel, every listening Israelite, mindful of his Egyptian slavery, would be asking, “Whose backs were broken to construct this ridiculous tower?” All this to ‘make a name’ for some anonymous ‘ourselves’ [Gen. 11:4]—undoubtedly, the materially wealthy and powerful.

The outcome of the Babel project was liberation for the voice of the oppressed and the exposure of the ‘impurity’ at the project’s heart. Restoring purity is not, therefore, to be seen as reimposing one language (English?) on all peoples, but by all people coming to an understanding of one another, thereby purifying hearts and uniting the members of the body in one mutually-beneficial working order.

“The Lord confused the language of all the earth.”

The confusion of language keeps us from building towers of ideological abstraction. In this, we can agree with the ‘deconstructionist’ philosophers who warn us away from discourse that gives no room to the ‘Other’.

‘Mixing’ the language (Hebrew: balal) moves in the opposite direction of purity, which is what God is seeking in our hearts. In this way, we can see that the confusion of languages and cultures is a gift from God to help us see the impurity, confusion and mixed motives of our own hearts. When we are unable to see this, we are overly confident in our ability to conceive grand schemes to unite peoples. But our impure hearts neglect to consider the violence required to do this ‘uniting’ without God.

The fact that others speak unintelligible tongues is an invitation for us to see them precisely as ‘Other’, to recognize that other persons are not projections of my own will. Making others intelligible to me is an invitation to go out of myself, to learn the patient ways of attentiveness. When in public debate all are saying the same thing, this frequently conceals some kind of violence, usually happening ‘offstage’.