Popes Opposed Slavery Against Dissenters
We often think that dissent from the Holy See and the teaching Church is a new phenomenon. However, just as the land of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" silences any reference to God in her schools and promotes the mass murder of the unborn in the womb, so too did our land, and even her Catholic citizens, dissent from Papal admonitions against slavery. Catholic churchmen held large parcels of land and like their Protestant fellows, maintained the institution of slavery. The Maryland coloney first founded as a haven for Catholics would later maintain in Baltimore Harbor a central commercial trade in slaves. People were bartered as nothing more than animals or property. Personhood was denied. Human rights were denied. The rights of landowners and the "choice" of European stock immigrants was made preferential over the needs and wants of people kidnapped from the African shores.
Ancient Greek or Roman slavery did not compare to it. Slaves were taken from conquered peoples and indentured servants would be used well into the colonial period of America. After a period of service, and even restitution, such slaves were freed. However, we are the ones (European colonialism) who invented perpetual racial slavery-- a foul business that could be passed on from generation to generation. Families could be separated. Torture and death could be implemented without any care or worry about censure. Great Britain would renounce slavery many years prior to the Civil War (ended 1865) when the issue would be forced in the United States. Here is the irony. If the Revolutionary War had gone the other way, blacks would have known freedom many generations earlier.
1778 - Slavery outlawed in Scotland.
1807 - British slave trade outlawed.
1833 - All British slaves freed.
Reserving ourselves to the Catholic community, it must be admitted that Catholics often catechized and had their slaves baptized. However, the churches would be segregated and later their schools. It is interesting that Cardinal O'Boyle in Washington, DC would order the desegregation of parochial schools in the 1950's prior to similar efforts by the federal government. But, past injustice must not be excused because of later enlightenment.
Today many of our people and liberal Catholic theologians and bishops argue for abortion, artificial contraception and active homosexuality. They are the spiritual heirs to the Catholic dissenters on the matter of slavery.
Pope Eugene IV ordered that black slaves be freed in the Canary Islands back in 1435. Columbus was not even born yet! He demanded that "these peoples are to be totally and perpetually free." Slaveholders who refused the order were excommunicated.
Indians from the New World would be brought to the Pope with the absurd question as to whether or not they were human beings. It was hoped that if the Holf Father deemed them subhuman or animals, that this would legitimate the slave trade and the confiscation of their lands. Pope Paul III (1537) condemned slavery in the New World, saying, "the Indians and all other peoples ... who shall hereafter come to the attention of Christians ... are not to be deprived of their liberty and their possessions." While in regard to the mistreatment of Native Americans, this condemnation of slavery was absolute. The later popes spoke with one voice. Pope Gregory XVI (1839) stipulated that no one should "dare to bother unjustly, despoil of their possessions, or enslave Indians, Blacks, or other such peoples." He decried the traders for their "sordid gain" and the slave trade as an "inhuman traffic."
Nevertheless, the Catholic bishops met in Baltimore in 1840 an contended that the Pope was only condemning the slave trade, not domestic slavery in the U.S.
Is there a similarity between the position of the bishops (for which Bishop John England was a major spokesman) in 1840 and the position of the majority of U.S. bishops today on abortion?
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas argues from natural law that the situation of slavery in America and abortion today are analogous-- both strip human beings of personhood, liberty and life.
Where is the prophetic voice? What will future generations, if a culture of life should supplant one of death, think of this generation and her leaders-- civil and religious?
Ancient Greek or Roman slavery did not compare to it. Slaves were taken from conquered peoples and indentured servants would be used well into the colonial period of America. After a period of service, and even restitution, such slaves were freed. However, we are the ones (European colonialism) who invented perpetual racial slavery-- a foul business that could be passed on from generation to generation. Families could be separated. Torture and death could be implemented without any care or worry about censure. Great Britain would renounce slavery many years prior to the Civil War (ended 1865) when the issue would be forced in the United States. Here is the irony. If the Revolutionary War had gone the other way, blacks would have known freedom many generations earlier.
1778 - Slavery outlawed in Scotland.
1807 - British slave trade outlawed.
1833 - All British slaves freed.
Reserving ourselves to the Catholic community, it must be admitted that Catholics often catechized and had their slaves baptized. However, the churches would be segregated and later their schools. It is interesting that Cardinal O'Boyle in Washington, DC would order the desegregation of parochial schools in the 1950's prior to similar efforts by the federal government. But, past injustice must not be excused because of later enlightenment.
Today many of our people and liberal Catholic theologians and bishops argue for abortion, artificial contraception and active homosexuality. They are the spiritual heirs to the Catholic dissenters on the matter of slavery.
Pope Eugene IV ordered that black slaves be freed in the Canary Islands back in 1435. Columbus was not even born yet! He demanded that "these peoples are to be totally and perpetually free." Slaveholders who refused the order were excommunicated.
Indians from the New World would be brought to the Pope with the absurd question as to whether or not they were human beings. It was hoped that if the Holf Father deemed them subhuman or animals, that this would legitimate the slave trade and the confiscation of their lands. Pope Paul III (1537) condemned slavery in the New World, saying, "the Indians and all other peoples ... who shall hereafter come to the attention of Christians ... are not to be deprived of their liberty and their possessions." While in regard to the mistreatment of Native Americans, this condemnation of slavery was absolute. The later popes spoke with one voice. Pope Gregory XVI (1839) stipulated that no one should "dare to bother unjustly, despoil of their possessions, or enslave Indians, Blacks, or other such peoples." He decried the traders for their "sordid gain" and the slave trade as an "inhuman traffic."
Nevertheless, the Catholic bishops met in Baltimore in 1840 an contended that the Pope was only condemning the slave trade, not domestic slavery in the U.S.
Is there a similarity between the position of the bishops (for which Bishop John England was a major spokesman) in 1840 and the position of the majority of U.S. bishops today on abortion?
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas argues from natural law that the situation of slavery in America and abortion today are analogous-- both strip human beings of personhood, liberty and life.
Where is the prophetic voice? What will future generations, if a culture of life should supplant one of death, think of this generation and her leaders-- civil and religious?
posted by Father Joe Jenkins at 1:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home