THE EDITOR, Sir:ON ITS 8 a.m. newscast of Friday, January 17, 2003, Pacifica Radio Station WPFW (Washin-gton DC) reported that Queen Elizabeth and her legal counsel had denied a request by Jamaican Rastafarians that reparations be paid to the descendants of slaves in Jamaica.
The reported rationale is that the British cannot be held responsible for what was done by another generation. This is the Christian manifestation of truth, justice and morality.
The greatest gift that Europe in general, and England in particular, gave to the world was and is Christianity, and all other gifts are given through Christianity. That rationale is therefore about as modern as changing one's mind; because slavery was legitimised by English Law, and given the stamp of approval by the Church on the rationale of the Africans' need to be Christianised. Indeed Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq can all testify to their own Christianisation, but no other people suffered what the Africans suffered to be Christianised.
Christian history is embellished with untold examples of men and women who sacrificed wealth and comforts to bring the gospel to "the lost." What is not told is the truth of the millions who were sacrificed with their culture so that Christianity could hold the place it holds today. It is not generally known that before the Christians rampaged through Palestine (which Britain later renamed "The Middle East") and in the name of Jesus reddened the earth with the blood of the Palestinians through The Crusades, Rome had declared Christianity the official religion of the empire (never forget that Britain was a part of the Roman Empire) and then had employed the barbarian Clovis and his armies to facilitate the conversion of the reluctant and the recalcitrant.
Later on in the life of the empire, Julian's historian recorded how he (Julian) had decided that "judicious persecution" was a great aid toward conversion. This is true Christianity divested of its modern-day trappings of silk, satin and lace and the queen and her advisors have showed that they are true Christians.
True to Christian form and logic, the denial of the request for reparations includes the usual frothy platitudes about the barbarity of slavery and the rejection today of all such methods. In other words, the Christian morals behind the denial and the platitudes is as follows: 'We are beneficiaries of the wealth and power generated by the selling, carving, burning, drowning and sweating of African flesh; we take responsibility for that wealth and power, but we cannot be responsible for how that wealth and that power were acquired. and how could you ask for reparations when hadn't it been for us you never would have known Christianity? That is nothing less than asking us to pay you for Christianising you.'
If I, a descendant of African slaves, born and bred in Jamaica under British colonialism, were privileged to adjudicate the matter, I would do just what the Christian slave-owners and their Christian descendants have done. I would take a portion of Scripture and literally apply it, for no other reason than the fact that it suits my purpose to do so.
My Scripture of choice would be Exodus 21:16. "And he that stealeth a man; and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death." I ask all Christians who claim that the Bible is the unerring word of God; what should justly be done to all slave takers and slaveholders? Or do we compromise and take reparations? What does the word say?
I am, etc.,
CHARLES R. ANDERSON
1405 Varnum Street NW
Washington DC 20011
