"Nuns Blast Catholic Church's 'Doctrine Of Discovery' That Justified Indigenous Oppression"
- Status
J
Jack007
Guest
which was what i meant.It would have been quite a feat to be canonized BEFORE she was dead!
E
estesbob
Guest
I know-as you pointed out I doubt if he did!
G
glendab
Guest
Hello Lost.
Glenda
I’ll repeat this for you so you get it right: I do not worship anything but GOD! Your phraseology is catchy, but inaccurate.Look to your signature.
I’m not even going to bring up the fracas raised by our current Pope!
You are deliberately butchering my post beyond context. I don’t know how many times I keep repeating this: Stop condemning the present while worshiping the past.
Glenda
G
glendab
Guest
And another thing Lost, I don’t condemn the present either.
Glenda
Glenda
T
Tomdstone
Guest
I don’t see why “the Turks” would have any legal claim to property stolen from a Greek Orthodox Church. It makes more sense to return items stolen from the Greek Orthodox Churches back to the Greek Orthodox.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I suspect the Turks would have a different view of entitlement, particularly as to “secular treasures” like the horses atop St. Mark’s.
How much was stolen out of churches and what churches were they, and who has the stuff now? How much is in state museums or private hands versus in the hands of some Catholic church?
And which Eastern Orthodox churches would one give the stuff to? The Patriarchate of Constantinople that has to do Turkish bidding, including being always required to have a Turk as the Patriarch? Maybe the Eastern Orthodox in Bulgaria? After all, a lot of the treasure would have come from Bulgaria to start with? Perhaps Romania? Moscow, which claims to be the “Third Rome” and the “true” seat of Eastern Orthodoxy?
And can we really be sure what came out of an E.O. church versus an Oriental Orthodox church? Which items came out of a church and which came out of some rich guy’s house? Which items were toted off from, say, Aleppo when the Arabs were at the gates, and taken to Constantinople? What all was looted from, say, the Maronites by the Byzantines, and re-looted by Crusaders? What all did the Byzantines carry away from Egypt or, for that matter, Ravenna or Rome?
And, of course, since many items were incorporated into other things, which things are to be pried loose and which left where they are, like some of the pieces in mosaics in Venice?
And depending on one’s point of view, which items actually belonged to the Catholic Church to begin with but were appropriated by the Orthodox during the Schism?
How many were in the Latin churches or homes when the Byzantines drove the Italians out prior to the Fourth Crusade?
Maybe an army of scholars could determine the origin of perhaps a fraction of items now in the west and agree on the proper disposition, but I have my doubts.
Nevertheless, you are free to begin assembling the group.
P
Paul_Yunker
Guest
The Drama of the Doctrine of Discovery
by
Paul Yunker
July, 15th, 2015
PART 1 of 3 (See Following Posts)
A family member sent me a fascinating article entitled; Forgiveness and Doctrine of Discovery, by Sister Joan Brown, (Interchange, fall, 2014.) The article seeks forgiveness and reconciliation with Hopi Indian tribes in New Mexico and Arizona for alleged mistreatment from Catholics, Mennonites, and numerous faith communities. Sister Brown claims the doctrine “used religion to justify political and personal violence against indigenous nations, peoples, cultures, religions and territories.” No dates or documents were referenced other than a vague series of Catholic decrees called Papal bulls. They allegedly impose “unrestricted sovereignty over the lands and peoples they discover.” I’m assuming she is referring to; Sicut Dudum - (1435), Dum Diversas - (1452), Romanus Pontifex - (1455), Inter Caetera - (1493), and Sublimus Dei - (1537).
Additional alleged atrocities are claimed to be the result of a mix of U.S. Common Law, Christianity, and Catholic proclamation. Noticeably excluded were the influences of “numerous faith communities.” The alleged atrocities include enslavement of native women to build stone Churches, the selling of children to purchase Church bells, and forced conversions - to name a few.
I contacted Joan Brown by telephone. She stated that she had not read any related Papal documents or the nebulous “Doctrines of Discovery” promulgated under U.S. law. Nor could she refer me to any scholarly works validating specific atrocities that she believed to be committed in the late 1800s. She claimed them to be common knowledge and possibly available in text at the University of New Mexico (UNM).
A more notable article in the Huff Post entitled; “Nuns Blast Catholic Church’s ‘Doctrine of Discovery’ That Justified Indigenous Oppression,” By Renee K. Gadoua, (Religion News Service; Sept, 2014). Highlighting Sister Maureen Fiedler, a member of the Loretto Community and the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. They combined efforts, along with numerous faith communities, requesting Pope Francis renounce and apologize for wrong doings and acknowledge the continued effects these documents have had on subsequent generations of native peoples.
Ms. Gadoua’s article claims, “15th - century church documents that justify the colonization and oppression of indigenous peoples.” Or the more colloquial - Doctrine of Discovery, “gave Christian explorers the right to lay claim to any land that was not inhabited by Christians and was available to be “discovered.” If its inhabitants could be converted, they might be spared. If not, they could be killed.” Again, No specific documents were referenced. Interestingly, each article has one direct copy & paste quotation from the other. Even more disconcerting and potentially plagiaristic are word for word copies. Complete paragraphs linking each article to many quasi “scholarly” internet sites.
What about these Papal documents? Dum Diversas - (1452), States; “We… granted…King Alfonso…to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors… Well that can’t get much clearer can it? Well, not exactly.
After reviewing this and other Papal bulls they do not appear to refer to indigenous peoples of the Americas. They reference the latter end of the Crusades regarding Saracens - Muslim invaders of North Africa. Nevertheless, this appears to be shrouded in much misunderstanding, over generalization, or lack of due diligence.
Unfortunately, the allegations here outlined by Sister Brown and Ms. Gadoua, as to the principle cause of these atrocities suffered by the Hopi, as I will show, are unfounded allegations against the Catholic Church. Especially in light of earlier Papal repudiations against the enslavement of blacks and native peoples of the Canary Islands. See; Sicut Dudum - (1435), and latter repudiations of enslavement and theft of land and property of indigenous peoples. See; Sublimus Dei - (1537).
“We order and command…that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex…and been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free, and are to be let go…If this is not done…they incur the sentence of excommunication…by one and all who attempt to capture, sell, or subject to slavery, baptized residents of the Canary Islands,” Sicut Dudum - (1435)
"notwithstanding whatever may have been or may be said to the contrary, the said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the faith of Jesus Christ; and that they may and should, freely and legitimately, enjoy their liberty and the possession of their property; nor should they be in any way enslaved;” Sublimus Dei - (1537).
Moreover, these Papal bulls make no mention of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, the colonization of the New World, or the suppression of indigenous rights as these two writers have asserted. Unless these Papal bulls were grossly misinterpreted by nations, kings, and slavers, or altogether disregarding and misused - I hold much suspicion.
Even the primary purpose of, Inter Caetera - (1493), was to grant King Ferdinand the duty of evangelizing native peoples into the Catholic faith. Additionally, the Catholic Church made no claim as to who ought to be the rightful discoverer/owner of newly discovered lands. Only that, once claimed, there would be no further disputes, thus preventing disagreements and war among nations.
by
Paul Yunker
July, 15th, 2015
PART 1 of 3 (See Following Posts)
A family member sent me a fascinating article entitled; Forgiveness and Doctrine of Discovery, by Sister Joan Brown, (Interchange, fall, 2014.) The article seeks forgiveness and reconciliation with Hopi Indian tribes in New Mexico and Arizona for alleged mistreatment from Catholics, Mennonites, and numerous faith communities. Sister Brown claims the doctrine “used religion to justify political and personal violence against indigenous nations, peoples, cultures, religions and territories.” No dates or documents were referenced other than a vague series of Catholic decrees called Papal bulls. They allegedly impose “unrestricted sovereignty over the lands and peoples they discover.” I’m assuming she is referring to; Sicut Dudum - (1435), Dum Diversas - (1452), Romanus Pontifex - (1455), Inter Caetera - (1493), and Sublimus Dei - (1537).
Additional alleged atrocities are claimed to be the result of a mix of U.S. Common Law, Christianity, and Catholic proclamation. Noticeably excluded were the influences of “numerous faith communities.” The alleged atrocities include enslavement of native women to build stone Churches, the selling of children to purchase Church bells, and forced conversions - to name a few.
I contacted Joan Brown by telephone. She stated that she had not read any related Papal documents or the nebulous “Doctrines of Discovery” promulgated under U.S. law. Nor could she refer me to any scholarly works validating specific atrocities that she believed to be committed in the late 1800s. She claimed them to be common knowledge and possibly available in text at the University of New Mexico (UNM).
A more notable article in the Huff Post entitled; “Nuns Blast Catholic Church’s ‘Doctrine of Discovery’ That Justified Indigenous Oppression,” By Renee K. Gadoua, (Religion News Service; Sept, 2014). Highlighting Sister Maureen Fiedler, a member of the Loretto Community and the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. They combined efforts, along with numerous faith communities, requesting Pope Francis renounce and apologize for wrong doings and acknowledge the continued effects these documents have had on subsequent generations of native peoples.
Ms. Gadoua’s article claims, “15th - century church documents that justify the colonization and oppression of indigenous peoples.” Or the more colloquial - Doctrine of Discovery, “gave Christian explorers the right to lay claim to any land that was not inhabited by Christians and was available to be “discovered.” If its inhabitants could be converted, they might be spared. If not, they could be killed.” Again, No specific documents were referenced. Interestingly, each article has one direct copy & paste quotation from the other. Even more disconcerting and potentially plagiaristic are word for word copies. Complete paragraphs linking each article to many quasi “scholarly” internet sites.
What about these Papal documents? Dum Diversas - (1452), States; “We… granted…King Alfonso…to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors… Well that can’t get much clearer can it? Well, not exactly.
After reviewing this and other Papal bulls they do not appear to refer to indigenous peoples of the Americas. They reference the latter end of the Crusades regarding Saracens - Muslim invaders of North Africa. Nevertheless, this appears to be shrouded in much misunderstanding, over generalization, or lack of due diligence.
Unfortunately, the allegations here outlined by Sister Brown and Ms. Gadoua, as to the principle cause of these atrocities suffered by the Hopi, as I will show, are unfounded allegations against the Catholic Church. Especially in light of earlier Papal repudiations against the enslavement of blacks and native peoples of the Canary Islands. See; Sicut Dudum - (1435), and latter repudiations of enslavement and theft of land and property of indigenous peoples. See; Sublimus Dei - (1537).
“We order and command…that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex…and been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free, and are to be let go…If this is not done…they incur the sentence of excommunication…by one and all who attempt to capture, sell, or subject to slavery, baptized residents of the Canary Islands,” Sicut Dudum - (1435)
"notwithstanding whatever may have been or may be said to the contrary, the said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the faith of Jesus Christ; and that they may and should, freely and legitimately, enjoy their liberty and the possession of their property; nor should they be in any way enslaved;” Sublimus Dei - (1537).
Moreover, these Papal bulls make no mention of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, the colonization of the New World, or the suppression of indigenous rights as these two writers have asserted. Unless these Papal bulls were grossly misinterpreted by nations, kings, and slavers, or altogether disregarding and misused - I hold much suspicion.
Even the primary purpose of, Inter Caetera - (1493), was to grant King Ferdinand the duty of evangelizing native peoples into the Catholic faith. Additionally, the Catholic Church made no claim as to who ought to be the rightful discoverer/owner of newly discovered lands. Only that, once claimed, there would be no further disputes, thus preventing disagreements and war among nations.
P
Paul_Yunker
Guest
PART 2 of 3
But Perpetual Slavery? How is this just doctrine for Muslim invaders? What’s important here is historical context. During the medieval era and into the age of discovery, the practice of warfare was Total Conquest. Victorious armies had few options regarding captured enemies. First, they could be executed. Second, they could be released only to return. Third, they could be put into a form of “slavery” considered compassionate in these historical times. Since these were Muslim invaders, who were stealing lands and forcing conversions, imposing Dhimmitude under a forced Jizya tax (by the sword for All non-Muslims mind you) - perpetual slavery was appropriate restitution. See; (Not Peace But A Sword), Spencer, 2013). Not surprisingly, this sounds like today’s current events.
But what about the treatment of Southwest natives? Did Christians and Catholics sell children for Church bells? What about slave laborers? Searching the (UNM) library lead me to the Tri-State Rock Mountain Collaborative Online Archive. Unfortunately, No key word searches were successful. But this does not prove conclusive, since many archives are oral recordings from the 1960’s and might contain personal statements of tragedies. Also, many written tragedies are not yet digitized and available to internet searches and thus preclude modern tech savvy generations from researching personal diaries and accounts of past transgressions. Just as now and in the past, research requires immense in-depth study or otherwise reliance upon the interpretation of great historical scholars. Unfortunately, today’s society is so politically divided that any scholarly perspectives are deeply rejected further obscuring truth.
I did find a more substantiated article in (Dailymail.com) alleging that Spanish Catholic Nuns sold children. “A macabre business involving public and private hospitals, doctors, nurses, midwives and even nuns who wanted to make money.” Then there is my personal story. My birth mother conveys feeling shamed by Catholic Nuns with her unmarried pregnancy. She gifted me in adoption because she wanted me to have a Father and Mother. Was it unreasonable for my adoptive parents to pay $200.00, to help pay for associated administrative costs? If this money was used to pay for Church bells - Then Good! A far better use of money than paying Planned Parenthood for my destruction.
In all fairness, I acknowledge Christian and Catholic transgressions. This is predictable when one considers Christianity’s age and size. Evils like Bishop Pierre Cauchon, who wretchedly persecuted fellow Catholic Joan of Arc. The Vatican financial disgrace, or the hidden conspiracy of the priest sex-abuse scandal. While lamenting over individual Catholic sins in the Crusades and Inquisition. Also consider the Peter Popoff faith healer fraud of the 1980’s. All humans are susceptible to sinful influences. A consequence of the stain of original sin and a fallen human nature. To claim otherwise is ignorance of apostolic tradition and scripture. “Woe to the shepherds who mislead and scatter the flock of my pasture, says the Lord.” (JER 23:1-6)
Times were very different then and for us today, to judge these past generations, can lead to the error of historical anachronism. I’m not condoning past wrongs, but we do need to be careful of how they are portrayed. How do we know that these so called “female slaves” we not laboring voluntarily out of temporal penance? Uncommon practice for today, but very common to Catholicism in that historical age.
Whatever atrocities happened latter at the hands of Christians, Governments, Nations, Kings or Colonialists - it’s certainly not established in said articles - especially from evidence that these atrocities originated directly from Catholic doctrine. Above all, the burden of proof rests upon these writers to accurately describe and substantiate their claims. Guilty until proven innocent is a legal and personal corruption. The Catholic Church is not obligate to prove innocence. It does not follow that Conquistadors acting ignoble impugns Catholic doctrine on faith and morals. It only shows that these individuals were grossly sinful and acted contrary to Church teachings.
Regardless of the above discrepancies, these faith communities are genuine and sincere in seeking pardon and forgiveness for the failings of Christianity - whatever those might be - collectively or individually. I too am deeply sorry and saddened if these accusations are true. But the sins and failures of fellow Catholics and Christians don’t necessarily implicate the Vatican or the Papacy and they certainly will never impugn Jesus Christ and his Church. As for the assertion that the results of the Doctrine of Discovery, are the influences and sins of the Catholic Church, are with this evidence, reasonably flawed.
But Perpetual Slavery? How is this just doctrine for Muslim invaders? What’s important here is historical context. During the medieval era and into the age of discovery, the practice of warfare was Total Conquest. Victorious armies had few options regarding captured enemies. First, they could be executed. Second, they could be released only to return. Third, they could be put into a form of “slavery” considered compassionate in these historical times. Since these were Muslim invaders, who were stealing lands and forcing conversions, imposing Dhimmitude under a forced Jizya tax (by the sword for All non-Muslims mind you) - perpetual slavery was appropriate restitution. See; (Not Peace But A Sword), Spencer, 2013). Not surprisingly, this sounds like today’s current events.
But what about the treatment of Southwest natives? Did Christians and Catholics sell children for Church bells? What about slave laborers? Searching the (UNM) library lead me to the Tri-State Rock Mountain Collaborative Online Archive. Unfortunately, No key word searches were successful. But this does not prove conclusive, since many archives are oral recordings from the 1960’s and might contain personal statements of tragedies. Also, many written tragedies are not yet digitized and available to internet searches and thus preclude modern tech savvy generations from researching personal diaries and accounts of past transgressions. Just as now and in the past, research requires immense in-depth study or otherwise reliance upon the interpretation of great historical scholars. Unfortunately, today’s society is so politically divided that any scholarly perspectives are deeply rejected further obscuring truth.
I did find a more substantiated article in (Dailymail.com) alleging that Spanish Catholic Nuns sold children. “A macabre business involving public and private hospitals, doctors, nurses, midwives and even nuns who wanted to make money.” Then there is my personal story. My birth mother conveys feeling shamed by Catholic Nuns with her unmarried pregnancy. She gifted me in adoption because she wanted me to have a Father and Mother. Was it unreasonable for my adoptive parents to pay $200.00, to help pay for associated administrative costs? If this money was used to pay for Church bells - Then Good! A far better use of money than paying Planned Parenthood for my destruction.
In all fairness, I acknowledge Christian and Catholic transgressions. This is predictable when one considers Christianity’s age and size. Evils like Bishop Pierre Cauchon, who wretchedly persecuted fellow Catholic Joan of Arc. The Vatican financial disgrace, or the hidden conspiracy of the priest sex-abuse scandal. While lamenting over individual Catholic sins in the Crusades and Inquisition. Also consider the Peter Popoff faith healer fraud of the 1980’s. All humans are susceptible to sinful influences. A consequence of the stain of original sin and a fallen human nature. To claim otherwise is ignorance of apostolic tradition and scripture. “Woe to the shepherds who mislead and scatter the flock of my pasture, says the Lord.” (JER 23:1-6)
Times were very different then and for us today, to judge these past generations, can lead to the error of historical anachronism. I’m not condoning past wrongs, but we do need to be careful of how they are portrayed. How do we know that these so called “female slaves” we not laboring voluntarily out of temporal penance? Uncommon practice for today, but very common to Catholicism in that historical age.
Whatever atrocities happened latter at the hands of Christians, Governments, Nations, Kings or Colonialists - it’s certainly not established in said articles - especially from evidence that these atrocities originated directly from Catholic doctrine. Above all, the burden of proof rests upon these writers to accurately describe and substantiate their claims. Guilty until proven innocent is a legal and personal corruption. The Catholic Church is not obligate to prove innocence. It does not follow that Conquistadors acting ignoble impugns Catholic doctrine on faith and morals. It only shows that these individuals were grossly sinful and acted contrary to Church teachings.
Regardless of the above discrepancies, these faith communities are genuine and sincere in seeking pardon and forgiveness for the failings of Christianity - whatever those might be - collectively or individually. I too am deeply sorry and saddened if these accusations are true. But the sins and failures of fellow Catholics and Christians don’t necessarily implicate the Vatican or the Papacy and they certainly will never impugn Jesus Christ and his Church. As for the assertion that the results of the Doctrine of Discovery, are the influences and sins of the Catholic Church, are with this evidence, reasonably flawed.
P
Paul_Yunker
Guest
PART 3 of 3
One common misunderstanding of the Great Jubilee Year 2000, is the belief that Pope John Paul II apologized for past Church sins. This does not support the facts. He did request “forgiveness from God for the faults and failings of our brothers and sisters who have gone before us in the faith…but also called the Church to forgive those who trespassed against it.” Apologizing for the motives and actions of the crusades is unnecessary. Modern historical scholarship has revealed that the Crusades were just wars, even though many individual warrior groups acted unethically. See; (The Glory of the Crusades, Weidenkope, 2014.) The Pope did express regret for the “sorrowful memories” that divided Christians and many “historical events in which the Church or individual groups of Christians, were implicated.” An occasion to purify “the Church from all forms of counter witness and scandal” by “an act of courage and humility in recognizing the wrongs done by those who have borne or bear the name of Christian.”
For further study of the doctrine of discovery see; Johnson v. M’Intosh. “On the discovery of this immense continent, the great nations of Europe … as they were all in pursuit of nearly the same object, it was necessary, in order to avoid conflicting settlements, and consequent war with each other, to establish a principle which all should acknowledge as the law by which the right of acquisition.“ And regarding Papal involvement…"Spain did not rest her title solely on the grant of the Pope. Her discussions respecting boundary, with France, with Great Britain, and with the United States, all show that she placed it on the rights given by discovery.”
What is tragic about the above (Wikipedia.com) excerpt is that, not only did the U.S. Supreme Court make the wrong decision in failing to recognize that indigenous native Americans were the sole discoverers of this continent, but All the major European powers, during the age of discovery, failed to respect this fact as well. Interestingly, prior to the Spanish or the colonialists’ ever setting foot in the Americas, Native American tribes themselves were continually waring - conquering and re-conquering previously inhabited lands for generations. Total conquest was common place. (See: America, Imagine the World without Her, D’Souza, 2014). The consequences of war, despicable as they are, were considered by many as the oldest form of (undesirable) population control. Unlike todays more “civilized” form of hidden and polite population control - Abortion! History is quite tidy when we turn the page, isn’t it?
Although many Christians and Catholics have behaved shamefully, Christ’s teachings on faith and morals still stands gloriously today, just as they have throughout the ages. For Jesus promised; “the gates of hades (untruth) will never prevail against My Church.” (Mt 16:18). Remember, Jesus choose very flawed apostles in order to keep us all humble examples before Him alone.
What’s remarkable about this statement is that when Christians act immorally they act contrary to, or even hypocritical to their world view. Values they believe are universally binding by God upon all humans. Atheists and Secularists, on the other hand, when acting immorally, live consistent with their world view. They only have to live up to the modern values that they collectively agree upon. Not surprisingly then, a “relativistic limit” can be placed wherever chosen. This is due to the belief that humans are only material beings. If humans are only spontaneous material things (no soul) then there is no ultimate moral arbitrator imposing moral principles. Hence, No ultimate moral principles!
Interestingly, it’s through the lens of Christianity that “morally wrong” is clear and compelling. This is precisely why there are abundant numbers of good and moral Atheists and Secularists. They practice Cut Flower Ethics. Their human nature, created ultimately by God and molded by Christianity, compels them to intuitively act morally even though they hold an intellectually contrary world view - that is slowly, almost imperceptibly, withering away. Atheism, as a world view, cannot account for moral principles. This lead to the moral bankruptcy of the 20th century. The paltry spill-over of intellectual decay from enlightenment materialist reductionism, which still poisons science today with its (type specific) limited evolutionary theory of “Darwinism.” See; (The Darwin Myth), Wiker, 2009.
As a former Catholic school student my past hurts were mostly due to mistreatments by individuals and not the doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic and apostolic teachings on faith and morals. I excoriated the Church and the moral values imparted from the authority of Jesus Christ, (Mt 16:13). I rebelled against the Church searching for easy excuses. I blindly followed in the footsteps of modern culture. While side-stepping the footsteps of Jesus Christ because of difficulty. Selectively choosing evidence within the faith where I could say, Ha See, those Catholics are contradictory - hypocritical! Meanwhile, ignoring the endless historical charity and love Catholicism has freely given humanity.
After thirty years of my miserable sins, I finally realized that I was the one suffering! I thank God for His grace to appreciate this. I adore His sacrament of confession, (John 20:21). I love my Catholic faith in spite of human failures - especially my own! Which Church, in this universe, ceaselessly protects apostolic tradition and scripture, especially the virtue of humility - the opposite of pride, so as to discover its own egregious failures and confess them before God and Humanity? (Mt 18:15).
One common misunderstanding of the Great Jubilee Year 2000, is the belief that Pope John Paul II apologized for past Church sins. This does not support the facts. He did request “forgiveness from God for the faults and failings of our brothers and sisters who have gone before us in the faith…but also called the Church to forgive those who trespassed against it.” Apologizing for the motives and actions of the crusades is unnecessary. Modern historical scholarship has revealed that the Crusades were just wars, even though many individual warrior groups acted unethically. See; (The Glory of the Crusades, Weidenkope, 2014.) The Pope did express regret for the “sorrowful memories” that divided Christians and many “historical events in which the Church or individual groups of Christians, were implicated.” An occasion to purify “the Church from all forms of counter witness and scandal” by “an act of courage and humility in recognizing the wrongs done by those who have borne or bear the name of Christian.”
For further study of the doctrine of discovery see; Johnson v. M’Intosh. “On the discovery of this immense continent, the great nations of Europe … as they were all in pursuit of nearly the same object, it was necessary, in order to avoid conflicting settlements, and consequent war with each other, to establish a principle which all should acknowledge as the law by which the right of acquisition.“ And regarding Papal involvement…"Spain did not rest her title solely on the grant of the Pope. Her discussions respecting boundary, with France, with Great Britain, and with the United States, all show that she placed it on the rights given by discovery.”
What is tragic about the above (Wikipedia.com) excerpt is that, not only did the U.S. Supreme Court make the wrong decision in failing to recognize that indigenous native Americans were the sole discoverers of this continent, but All the major European powers, during the age of discovery, failed to respect this fact as well. Interestingly, prior to the Spanish or the colonialists’ ever setting foot in the Americas, Native American tribes themselves were continually waring - conquering and re-conquering previously inhabited lands for generations. Total conquest was common place. (See: America, Imagine the World without Her, D’Souza, 2014). The consequences of war, despicable as they are, were considered by many as the oldest form of (undesirable) population control. Unlike todays more “civilized” form of hidden and polite population control - Abortion! History is quite tidy when we turn the page, isn’t it?
Although many Christians and Catholics have behaved shamefully, Christ’s teachings on faith and morals still stands gloriously today, just as they have throughout the ages. For Jesus promised; “the gates of hades (untruth) will never prevail against My Church.” (Mt 16:18). Remember, Jesus choose very flawed apostles in order to keep us all humble examples before Him alone.
What’s remarkable about this statement is that when Christians act immorally they act contrary to, or even hypocritical to their world view. Values they believe are universally binding by God upon all humans. Atheists and Secularists, on the other hand, when acting immorally, live consistent with their world view. They only have to live up to the modern values that they collectively agree upon. Not surprisingly then, a “relativistic limit” can be placed wherever chosen. This is due to the belief that humans are only material beings. If humans are only spontaneous material things (no soul) then there is no ultimate moral arbitrator imposing moral principles. Hence, No ultimate moral principles!
Interestingly, it’s through the lens of Christianity that “morally wrong” is clear and compelling. This is precisely why there are abundant numbers of good and moral Atheists and Secularists. They practice Cut Flower Ethics. Their human nature, created ultimately by God and molded by Christianity, compels them to intuitively act morally even though they hold an intellectually contrary world view - that is slowly, almost imperceptibly, withering away. Atheism, as a world view, cannot account for moral principles. This lead to the moral bankruptcy of the 20th century. The paltry spill-over of intellectual decay from enlightenment materialist reductionism, which still poisons science today with its (type specific) limited evolutionary theory of “Darwinism.” See; (The Darwin Myth), Wiker, 2009.
As a former Catholic school student my past hurts were mostly due to mistreatments by individuals and not the doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic and apostolic teachings on faith and morals. I excoriated the Church and the moral values imparted from the authority of Jesus Christ, (Mt 16:13). I rebelled against the Church searching for easy excuses. I blindly followed in the footsteps of modern culture. While side-stepping the footsteps of Jesus Christ because of difficulty. Selectively choosing evidence within the faith where I could say, Ha See, those Catholics are contradictory - hypocritical! Meanwhile, ignoring the endless historical charity and love Catholicism has freely given humanity.
After thirty years of my miserable sins, I finally realized that I was the one suffering! I thank God for His grace to appreciate this. I adore His sacrament of confession, (John 20:21). I love my Catholic faith in spite of human failures - especially my own! Which Church, in this universe, ceaselessly protects apostolic tradition and scripture, especially the virtue of humility - the opposite of pride, so as to discover its own egregious failures and confess them before God and Humanity? (Mt 18:15).
E
estesbob
Guest
Paul: welcome to CAF Please note that this thread is almost a year old. It is considered bad form and CAF to resurrect dead threads
- Status