Another link between the two themes is explained by Fr Linus Clovis in an article in Faith Magazine, Slavery, the Gospel of Life and the Magisterium. He explains that although the Popes consistently and repeatedly condemned modern slavery from its very beginning in the 15th century. Slavery was also very clearly condemned by the Holy Office of the Inquisition in 1686 and the captors, buyers and possessors of slaves were ordered to make compensation to them. This teaching did not have the effect that it should have had because of the lack of co-operation among some Bishops and priests. He says:
Hence the durability of the scandalous impression of official Church collaboration, support and participation in that most heinous institution of rapine, murder, exploitation and greed. The Papal Magisterium’s clear and unequivocal condemnation of slavery was not echoed, supported, preached on or translated into action by the generality of local hierarchies, clergy and laity. It is similar today with abortion and especially with that other aspect of the Gospel of Life, condemnation of contraception, which teaching is, in at least partial consequence, ignored by many Catholics today.Another article which gives some more details of the various papal documents is The Popes and Slavery.
Of course, people whose information comes from today's BBC get a very different picture. The BBC website has a page on Christianity and slavery which is entirely devoted to the justification of slavery by Christians. Papal condemnation of slavery? Not a word. Instead, we get:
The emergence of colonies in the Americas and the need to find labourers saw Europeans turn their attention to Africa with some arguing that the Transatlantic Slave Trade would enable Africans, especially the 'Mohammedans', to come into contact with Christianity and 'civilisation' in the Americas, albeit as slaves. It was even argued that the favourable trade winds from Africa to the Americas were evidence of this providential design.So there you have it - Christianity wholly reprehensible: no other side to the story at all. The next article, discussing the role of Christians in the abolition of slavery does, of course, go for "balance" putting both sides to the story -
Religion was also a driving force during slavery in the Americas. Once they arrived at their new locales the enslaved Africans were subjected to various processes to make them more compliant, and Christianity formed part of this. Ironically, although the assertion of evangelisation was one of the justifications for enslaving Africans, very little missionary work actually took place during the early years. In short, religion got in the way of a moneymaking venture by taking Africans away from their work. It also taught them potentially subversive ideas and made it hard to justify the cruel mistreatment of fellow Christians.
However, some clergy tried to push the idea that it was possible to be a 'good slave and Christian' and pointed to St Paul's epistles, which called for slaves to 'obey their masters', and St Peter's letters (1 Peter 2: 18-25), which appeared to suggest that it was wholly commendable for Christian slaves to suffer at the hands of cruel masters.
"... some have argued that they never showed the same commitment to ending slavery as they did to ending the slave trade. Their attitude towards Africans appear condescending by today's standards..."The article does not, of course, mention the teaching of the Catholic Church's magisterium.
21 comments:
Papal condemnation of slavery? Not a word...
...from the Beeb? Now come on, Father, be serious... they might actually have to admit the Church is reasonable and rational... and that would never do!!
;-)
And what about wealthy muslims who still own slaves and mistreat them - even in this country.
Not a word about slavery and islam from the BBC. I wonder why????
Try here for more analysis:
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2007/03/biting-hand-at-one-time-desire-to.html
This blog couldn't have been more timely. St John's College, Cambridge, are making much of the abolition of the slave trade, as Clarkson and Wilbeforce were both Johnians. Just last night M was saying that he would like to draw attention to the contribution of the Catholic Church. I heard Fr Clovis talk on the subject a while back, and we thought we would have to do a search for the relevant 16th and 17th century encyclicals. But instead we have it laid out before us - and the Dean of Chapel now has a copy of Fr Clovis' article. Thank you, Father.
Very glad to be of help, Clare.
'Black Rednecks and White Liberals' by Thomas Sowell gives a good background of slavery. He totally neglects the Church intervention though.
If anyone wants to learn more about slavery and Islam in North Africa, I would recommend Giles Milton's book 'White Gold'.
I wrote a complaint to the BBC's Religious Affairs Unit on the same topic. No answer so far and if I get one I don't expect to be satisfied.
We should complain en masse
BBC Complaints
At the risk of sounding like a cab driver, it's the only language the BBC understands.
And they charge every British Tom, Dick and Harriett for the privelage of being lied to and held in contempt day in and day out!
Scrap the BBC, never mind the TV licence!
Whilst it is a good idea to complain just to make the BBC aware that there is serious dissatisfaction with their biased reporting, don't expect an apology. If you get a response at all it will be a patronising assurance that they are committed to balanced reporting, their journalists are marvellous and they make lots of programmes celebrating the Catholic faith.
Well, that explains it. I was doing some cyber tourism in the UK, dreaming of living there, surfing the local webpages concerning Coventry. Then my eyes cam across this big splash about slavery, it seemed odd to me.
I was expecting to see a major piece about the practice of slavery by recent British immigrants or something. In fact, today's Guradian had a story splashed all over the place about women sold into slavery. But no, we seem to get those ole athiest chestnuts.
The BBC has valid point about slavery and religion but their point should center on slavery and Protestantism. The USA is, was and probably always will be a Protestant country and, naturally, took to slavery with enthusiasm.
I bet BBC's treatment of slavery basically insinuates that the abolition movement popped out of thin air, or was pushed by enlightened athiests. But, I don't waste my time with trash like the BBC or their American counterpart CNN-NBC-ABC-CBS-NYT.
Long before Hawkins sailed the west African coast, English slaves were being shipped to the Viking settlements of Ireland from Bristol.
St Wulfstan, one of the few Saxon bishops to keep his job after 1066, preached against the practice in Bristol and succeeded in stopping the trade (for a while). Indeed one slaver had his eyes put out by an angry mob.
The lefties at Bristol Radical History Society actually held a St Wulfstan celebration on his feast day. Made a change from the usual self-flagellation.
http://www.brh.org.uk/articles/wulstan.htm
PS if only Worcester had a bishop like him now !
Indeed! Thanks v much Laban.
I have just received the following from the BBC.
Thank you for your email. Accuracy is of the utmost importance to us and
we are grateful for your feedback.
This article was written on our behalf by the author Richard Reddie.
Throughout the article he seeks to present, in a balanced and fair way,
the contradictions within Christianity as a whole in relation to
slavery. He does not discuss whether certain denominations within the
Church at the time 'officially' condoned or did not condone slavery but
instead shows how the Scriptures were interpreted and used to support
different stances on the issue by both Christians in favour of slavery
and those who stood against it.
You are entrely correct, of course, in stating that Papal bulls were
issued, and reissued, condemning slavery. On the other hand, however,
there were Popes who by their words or actions would seem to take a
different position, for example Nicholas V condemned Saracens and pagans
to perpetual slavery and Innocent VIII distributed slaves.
Perhaps this just goes to show that, as Richard says in the article, "It
would be wrong to suggest that there were Christian 'saints' and
'sinners' in regards to slavery. It can be argued that both
characteristics co-existed within denominations and individuals alike,
demonstrating the idiosyncrasies and inconsistencies of all human
beings."
We will, nonetheless, look at our coverage and see whether additional
material is needed.
Thank you for your helpful comments.
Religion Online team
Any idea how to respond?
Dear anonymous,
I suggest that you ask the BBC to re-read your letter carefully, and try to answer the question you asked them, rather than the one they wanted to answer.
I don't suppose you claimed that no pope has ever condoned slavery. Of course there are plenty of magisterial documents that permitted slavery as a punishment for people who had committed what were considered serious offences, like waging war on Christian countries. Although we can hardly equate prison with slavery, even today we recognise that some basic human freedoms can be taken away as a punishment for criminal behaviour. It is not the same as enslaving innocent people for economic gain, or justifying slavery of entire populations by supposed racial differences.
Many of the early papal documents that appear to condone slavery mention it only briefly and are more concerned with excommunicating wrongdoers. The first Christian opposition to slavery mentioned in the article isn't until 1696. But the article 'The Popes and Slavery' that Fr Tim cites quotes Eugene IV writing as early as 1435 against the Portuguese who enslaved Canary Islanders:
"They have deprived the natives of their property or turned it to their own use, and have subjected some of the inhabitants of said islands to perpetual slavery (subdiderunt perpetuae servituti), sold them to other persons and committed other various illicit and evil deeds against them.... Therefore We ... exhort, through the sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ shed for their sins, one and all, temporal princes, lords, captains, armed men, barons, soldiers, nobles, communities and all others of every kind among the Christian faithful of whatever state, grade or condition, that they themselves desist from the aforementioned deeds, cause those subject to them to desist from them, and restrain them rigorously. And no less do We order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex that, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their pristine liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands ... who have been made subject to slavery (servituti subicere). These people are to be totally and perpetually free and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of any money."
That is a pretty comprehensive abolitionist statement, probably the first of its kind from anyone in such high authority of any church, and written decades before the New World was even discovered. Regardless of what other popes may have written, it is a very important milestone in Christian attitudes to slavery. So why wasn't it mentioned? The BBC's reply explains:
”Throughout the article he seeks to present, in a balanced and fair way, the contradictions within Christianity as a whole”
'As a whole'? Then what about Catholic Christianity? Does the BBC really think that Christianity was invented by evangelical protestants? Or is writing something that might show the papacy in a favourable light against BBC doctrine?
Edmund - everyone knows that the BBC invented Christianity!
Good points in your comment that should be thrown back at the BBC Religious Affairs aparatchick (I can never spell that pesky word) OK, department (Yawn, ZZZZzzzzzz.......)
Edmund,
That's really helpful. Thanks. Basically, they're confusing racial servitude with penal servitude, I suppose. Pretty clueless altogether, really!
Thanks for that Edmund -- I'll use a bit for the front of our newsletter this w/e - which as usual can be seen at www.stmarymag.org.uk
Concerning analogies between some Bishops on slavery in the past and on all the pro-life issues in the present readers might want to note, in addition to Fr Clovis's FAITH magazine article mentioned above, William Oddie's current column in the current issue: http://www.faith.org.uk/Publications/Magazines/Mar07/Mar07CommentOnTheComments.html
Now the BBC say:
Once again thank you for your helpful comments. We are currently reviewing our overall coverage in light of your emails.
So let's wait and see!
Post a Comment