MIND YOUR LANGUAGE!
Peter Tylor on the foul-mouthed youth of today. B*$%&^@s!
DISCLAIMER: I have occasionally seen fit to quote instances of the use of strong language; however, I by no means condone their use by doing so. I may quote Daniel Defoe (An Essay Upon Projects, London, 1697, pp. xiii-xiv): “Why should Words repeated only to expose the Vice, taint the Reader… the Morality of every action lies in the End; and if the Reader by ill use renders himself guilty of the Fact in Reading, which I design’d to expose by Writing, the Fault is his, not mine.”
Shun evil companions; bad language disdain; God’s Name hold in reverence, nor take it in vain.
(Horatio R Palmer, 1868)
The above quotation is taken from an American hymn, ‘Yield Not To Temptation’, which became popular in this country, and appeared in many children’s and evangelistic hymnals from the 1870s up to the 1960s. The emphasis of the hymn upon a ‘personal’ morality, emphasising the need to overcome one’s own ‘dark passions’ in order to gain a crown in Heaven, seems somewhat at odds with the emphasis of much modern Christian teaching upon a ‘social’ morality, promoting justice and peace in this world, and thereby seeking to make it a better place for all. However, whilst all this is absolutely necessary, considering the depths of war and injustice into which the modern world is plunged, we should at the same time remember that smaller matters, frequently on our own doorsteps, affect people’s lives for better or for worse. These smaller matters include matters of ‘personal’ morality, as dealt with in the above hymn, for their significance so often extends beyond the person. Many Christians nowadays take a liberal view as regards heterosexual sex outside marriage, arguing that it does no harm to others, and that it is thus okay in the sight of God. However, we should remember that many children in this country suffer from a disadvantaged upbringing as children of single parents, and therefore we should be concerned about the liberal social and sexual mores which contribute to this state of affairs. Likewise, as another small matter which nevertheless affects people’s enjoyment of life, we should be concerned about the widespread use of strong and offensive language, which is often a symptom of greater social ills.
Before discussing this issue, it would be helpful to divide offensive language into three categories, thus providing the basis of why each is considered offensive:
- The blasphemous: the taking of God’s Name, or that of Christ, in vain; light and irreverent reference to matters concerned with religion, eg ‘bloody’ in reference to the Passion, ‘damn’ and ‘blast’ in relation to the Last Judgment; light reference to the serious matters of the Devil and Hell.
- The obscene: relating to subjects traditionally considered taboo — vulgar references to the sexual and excretory bodily functions, or to the private parts.
- The denigrating and demeaning: terms of abuse applied to racial and other minorities, etc.
The emphases upon these categories have changed over time. Respectable Victorians, living in an age in which piety was fashionable and often a key to social standing, frowned upon expressions such as ‘God damn’ used by members of the lower orders, whilst the subjects of the words in the second of the above categories were unmentionable, let alone the words themselves. The decline of religious influence in society might well account for the increased acceptance of words in the first group, to the extent that few now bat a blinking eyelid at ‘bloody’ (sorry!) Likewise, an underlying cause of the increased use and acceptance of the f-word may be the fact that the subject of its meaning is no longer as taboo as it once was. On the other hand, with the increased emphasis upon the rights of minority groups, words once used to describe such innocuous matters as the colour of paintwork, such as ‘nigger,’ have become highly offensive — unless you actually belong to a group to which such a word refers, in which case it may become a badge of pride!
This development is thus understandable. However, there still exist many people who find words in the first two groups, particularly the second, offensive. Thus there is a certain hypocrisy in the attitudes of some people, particularly those of a ‘social liberal’ persuasion, who object to anything that offends a recognised minority group, but who are all too willing to countenance something that offends an unrecognised minority such as elderly churchgoers, in the name of freedom of expression. The case of Ron Atkinson, the deposed football commentator, provides an excellent illustration. In unintentionally calling Marcel Desailly a “fucking lazy nigger” Atkinson used two words which are equally offensive to different groups; however, all the fuss was about the second of those words.
So, why is ‘bad language’ so bad? The following reasons occur to me:
- It makes life less pleasant for those whom it offends who are subjected to it in so many places. For example, I was present last year at a meeting of the Friends of St Laurence, a social group attached to my church, and largely attended by the elderly. The speaker was highly entertaining, but the enjoyment of much of the audience was diminished by the intrusion of a foul-mouthed individual (probably high on drugs) who said many things that amounted to blasphemy.
- It demeans and trivialises the things to which its real meanings refer. Blasphemous language trivialises God and religion. The fword trivialises one of God’s most sacred gifts — this being reflected in the fact that, when used in its proper sense, it tends to refer to a sexual act in which true love and commitment are lacking. Words which offensively describe a particular minority, used by those who dislike its presence, demean that minority, and therefore people made by God in His own image.
- It tends to come to the fore in situations in which God’s will is not being done — for example, it tends to be used in the course of fights, arguments and attacks.
- It is neither useful nor ornamental — it is not necessary, and its use by a person does not tend to inspire trust in that person.
Paul advised the Ephesians not to use “language which is obscene, profane, or vulgar” (Ephesians 5:4, Good News Version). “Do not use harmful words, but only helpful words, the kind that build up and provide what is needed, so that what you say will do good to those who hear you.” (Ephesians 4:29) This advice seems, considering the above remarks, to be in accordance with other aspects of Christ’s teaching. We must, however, take care that we do not become obsessed with this issue, or any other, to the exclusion of matters more important. Such is the mentality which Tony Cambolo criticises in his comment about Christians not giving a shit about the death of multitudes who are starving, but being more worried about the way in which that fact is expressed (as referred to in David Jones’ article, ‘Plagiarised Grace’, in Christis, issue 88). We must not become so involved with tithing the herbs to the extent that we “neglect to obey the really important teachings of the Law, such as justice and mercy and honesty” (Matthew 23:23). However, avoiding the unnecessary use of offensive language may help us to obey those precepts.