1452 Pope Nicholas V Authorizes Slavery

Gladiator · 06-23-07, 01:46 AM

Search Dum Diversas

In 1452 Pope Nicholas V authorized the King of Portugal to enslave any and all non-believers in perpetuity. Like Forever.

Some coastal towns of Portugal had expereinced mass kidnappings in about 1410 by Barbary Pirates who sold slaves to Baghdad. Returning home after a fish8ing trip, teh portugese fisherman found their town inhabitants all kidnapped. Increasing their sea power and navigation expertise, from 1400, Portugal became aware of the established practice in Aftrica of trading for slaves. The Barbary Pirates had been trading for African Slaves since maybe 700 AD.

So Portugal began trading in African Slaves. The Portugese discovered some nearby previously uninhabited Islands that were excellent for growning Sugar Cane, which was more productive with more Aftrican Slaves. Eventually the Portugese reached Brazil, forming many plantations with Slave labor. Only 4% of the African Slaves were brought to the United States.

The 1452 Papal order has never been reversed.

bhkad · 06-23-07, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Pope Paul not only condemned the slavery of Indians but also "all other peoples." In his phrase "unheard of before now", he seems to see a difference between this new form of slavery (i.e. racial slavery) and the ancient forms of just-title slavery. A few days before, he also issued a Brief, entitled Pastorale Officium to Cardinal Juan de Tavera of Toledo, which warned the Catholic faithful of excommunication for participating in slavery.

Unfortunately Pope Paul made reference to the King of Castile and Aragon in this Brief. Under political pressure, the Pope later retracted this Brief but did not annul the Bull. It is interesting to note that even though he retracted his Brief, Popes Gregory XIV, Urban VIII and Benedict XIV still recognized and confirmed its authority against slavery and the slave trade.

Popes Gregory XIV (Cum Sicuti, 1591), Urban VIII (Commissum Nobis, 1639) and Benedict XIV (Immensa Pastorum, 1741) also condemned slavery and the slave trade. Unlike the earlier papal letters, these excommunications were more directed towards the clergy than the laity. In 1839, Pope Gregory XVI issued a Bull, entitled In Supremo. Its main focus was against slave trading, but it also clearly condemned racial slavery:

We, by apostolic authority, warn and strongly exhort in the Lord faithful Christians of every condition that no one in the future dare bother unjustly, despoil of their possessions, or reduce to slavery Indians, Blacks or other such peoples. [Ibid., pp.101]

Unfortunately a few American bishops misinterpreted this Bull as condemning only the slave trade and not slavery itself. Bishop John England of Charleston actually wrote several letters to the Secretary of State under President Van Buren explaining that the Pope, in In Supremo, did not condemn slavery but only the slave trade (Ibid., pp. 67-68).

With all these formal condemnations, it is a shame that the Popes were largely ignored by the Catholic laity and clergy. Two Catholic nations were largely involved with slave trafficking. Many Catholics at that time owned or sold slaves. Even some Catholic bishops during the 19th-century appeared to support slavery. The Popes were so ignored that some people today claim that they were silent. These sins brought great scandal to Christ’s Church.

No one today cites any Christian authority supporting slavery.

It is wrong and the practice should be abolished.

Felicity · 06-23-07, 09:26 AM

you do recognize this is a Sedevacantist group that is publishing this rot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedevacantism

Your source is a bunch of schismatics.

The silenced majority · 06-23-07, 09:56 AM

Can I buy a slave from Portugal?

My grass is getting kinda high.

bhkad · 06-23-07, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Felicity

you do recognize this is a Sedevacantist group that is publishing this rot.

Sedevacantism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your source is a bunch of schismatics.

Who are you addressing?

Felicity · 06-23-07, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

Who are you addressing?

Sorry...I meant the OP...The first site after Wiki on such the search he suggests is Popes For Slavery - Romanus Pontifex by Pope Nicholas V --and it has the gist of the "information" he presents. That group is schismatic.

Thanks.

Lachean · 06-23-07, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Felicity

Sorry...I meant the OP...The first site after Wiki on such the search he suggests is Popes For Slavery - Romanus Pontifex by Pope Nicholas V --and it has the gist of the "information" he presents. That group is schismatic.

Thanks.

Is "schismatic" another way for you to say "not REAL Christians, like us Catholics"?

Gladiator · 06-23-07, 04:51 PM

Slavery is currently still Legal in Sudan and I believe Darfur. Real estate prices may be cheap, given the political unrest.

Felicity · 06-23-07, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lachean

Is "schismatic" another way for you to say "not REAL Christians, like us Catholics"?

No...schismatics are Christians too--just not in union with the the Church.

...why the unnecessary nasty statement?

Gladiator · 06-23-07, 05:03 PM

Dear Felicity,

So you agree that the 1452 Papal authorization of Slavery of un-believers, forever is accurate. The Catholic Church does not deny the authenticity of the English Translation.

You seem to say that the people who publish the 1452 Papal Bull are the ones who are wrong.

Is there any way a Pope today, could write another Papal Bull stating that "The 18 June 1452 Papal Writing authorizing Slavery is Hereby Revoked?"

What are your feelings about the role ot the Catholic church in the origins of hte trans-Atlantic slave trade? If the Pop had used his moral authority to protect Human Rights, might history have been different?

What about the Islamic Barbary Pirates. Is there a realtionship of the Barbary Pirates to Islamic Terroism Today? What are the lessons we could learn?