Do modern Catholic church teachings trump those from the past?

[Mike_from_NJ]

So you say. Why was it not condemned then?

It was not condemned then because those who made the rules wielded slaves which wielded power. Luckily, the Church changed its position on the matter. That’s a very good thing, but at the same time it destroys the notion that the Church doesn’t change its teachings.

 

[Magnanimity]

If it was, I would really like to know that. That would be a problem.

Your point that not all slaveries are created equal (and not all slaves treated equally) is true enough. And yet, I believe that St Gregory of Nyssa is the earliest Christian voice we have record of who opposed slavery. There is no denying that the church was very slow to open up on this matter. Besides the history of many popes having slaves, even as late as Leo XIII in the 19th century, we see that a conflicted position within the church still persisted. Leo XIII endorsed the raising of money to support abolitionist groups, and yet, at the same time, he stated that Christians who held slaves were
more generous and gentle with their slaves because they recognized the fundamental human dignity of the slave (unlike the unbeliever). So we see the conflict within the church even not so long ago. The pope was willing to raise money to support abolitionist groups on the one hand but couldn’t quite bring himself to condemn slavery outright on the other hand.

And I take your point on student loans. It’s a good one. It’s fundamentally immoral to lend massive amounts of money to someone who has no realistic means of paying it back (the Duke graduate with her BA in history). It’s atrocious and can be likened to a contemporary form of servitude (since we can’t chapter 7 student loans).

You can even argue that military service is a form of “slavery”, sacrifice of one’s preferences and liberty for the good of one’s country.

I 100% agree with this. The mandatory selective service for only-males is, not just sexual discrimination, but also a form of slavery—“You, go die for your country! Now! Don’t believe in war?! Who cares? Uncle Sam says you’re going…”

 

[po18guy]

But Christ is THE Lawgiver!

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

But Christ is THE Lawgiver!

And what if the laws are bad? God’s instructions regarding slavery were wrong. For the longest time the Church agreed, and then in the 20th century, thankfully, that changed.

 

[po18guy]

Slavery had to do with debt. Remember Saint Paul speaking of “there is neither slave nor free”?

Slavery to debt = banks, credit cards, mortgages, reverse mortgages, home equity loans, payday loans, loans loans loans etc. etc.

Because of this slavery to debt, or so I have read, one of the Saints established the concept of pawning goods at low or no interest so that the financially struggling could get by.

Having thus expressed my obviously criminally faulty opinion, I depart.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Slavery had to do with debt. Remember Saint Paul speaking of “there is neither slave nor free”?

Slavery to debt = banks, credit cards, mortgages, reverse mortgages, home equity loans, payday loans, loans loans loans etc. etc.

Because of this slavery to debt, or so I have read, one of the Saints established the concept of pawning goods at low or no interest so that the financially struggling could get by.

Having thus expressed my obviously criminally faulty opinion, I depart.

Before departing, could you read what I actually wrote? I gave two examples where the Church endorsed the taking of slaves that owed no debt and the breeding of slaves (who would be born into slavery and not owing debts).

Bringing it back to the topic at hand, do you believe the Church changed its position on slavery?