1. Religion & Spirituality

Discuss in my forum

Austin Cline

Pope Benedict XVI: Native Americans Longed for Christianity, Genocide, Slavery

By May 23, 2007

Follow me on:

It was once a common assumption among European Christians that physical pain could have spiritual, emotional, physical, and psychological benefits for the person experiencing it. This assumption formed an important part of the theological foundation justifying the use of torture in both criminal and religious contexts. For the most part, European Christians have abandoned the notion that pain, suffering, and torture are useful means for spiritual purification.

Unfortunately, not all have abandoned that assumption — some still believe that the physical suffering of humans can be explained, defended, and justified on the grounds of purification. Very occasionally this principle is applied to oneself, but far more often it is conveniently applied to others. Pope Benedict XVI appears to be a good example because he recently tried to defend the mass slaughter and forced conversion of indigenous tribes in America by European governments because it purified them.

In a speech to Latin American and Caribbean bishops at the end of a visit to Brazil, the Pope said the Church had not imposed itself on the indigenous peoples of the Americas.

They had welcomed the arrival of European priests at the time of the conquest as they were "silently longing" for Christianity, he said.

Source: Reuters

To claim that there was no imposition of Christianity on people in the Americas is a blatant falsification of history. We might be tempted to wonder if Pope Benedict XVI is totally ignorant of his own church's deplorable history, but that's just not plausible — and it frankly wouldn’t paint him in a much better light. He has to be aware of the crimes of his own church and how, for examples, Catholic priests blessed the conquistadors waging war on indigenous tribes.

This is rather like — and perhaps much worse than — attempts to justify or dismiss rape by claiming that the victim was actually "asking for it" all along. Here, Pope Benedict XVI is dismissing complaints about genocide and forced conversion by saying that the people were really "longing for it." Even worse, Benedict claims that the baptisms that were part of the forced conversions and genocide helped "purify" the indigenous populations.

Thus we have a modern European religious leader claiming quite openly and unashamedly that violence committed in the name of religion can "purify" people. This was an argument once used to justify mass torture slaughter in Europe itself whenever people got the funny idea that maybe they should be allowed to have religious beliefs different from those in charge. Pope Benedict XVI, once Cardinal Josef Ratzinger and head of the Inquisition, is therefore echoing argument formerly used to justify the behavior which gave the Inquisition its bad reputation. Coincidence? Unlikely.

Just how extreme and out-of-touch were Benedict's comments? One way to look at them is to compare them with comments made by others with similar stature and power: Pope John Paul II admitted that "mistakes" were made in the conversion of Native Americans and President George W. Bush openly acknowledged that European colonization was achieved through a terrible cost imposed on indigenous tribes.

Catholics who actually live and work with native Americans have barely hesitated to distance themselves from Benedict: Cimi, an Indian advocacy group within the Brazilian Catholic Church, won't support him for example. Cimi advisor Father Paulo Suess is quoted as saying: "The Pope doesn't understand the reality of the Indians here, his statement was wrong and indefensible. I too was upset."

Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez wants Pope Benedict XVI to apologize:

"How can the Pope say that the evangelization was not imposed," said Chavez. "Then why did our indigenous people have to flee to the jungles and the mountains?" he asked. ..."What happened here was much worse than the holocaust in the Second World War, and no one can deny us that reality," said Chavez. "Not even his Holiness can come here to our land and deny the holocaust of the indigenous people."

Chavez referred to the work of the Spanish Dominican priest Bartolome de Las Casas, who denounced the genocide of the indigenous people in the 16th Century. "Christ came to America much later. He didn't arrive with Columbus, the anti-Christ came with Columbus," stated Chavez, who went on to ask the Pope to apologize for his error. "Just like the Catholic Church has recognized errors, as a descendant of those martyr Indians that died by the millions, I ask, with all respect, your Holiness, apologize, because here there was a real genocide," Chavez pleaded.

Source: Venezuela Analysis

I don't know if the slaughter of indigenous tribes in America really was "much worse than" the Holocaust in Europe, but it's quite reasonable for the people today to regard their history as being at least as horrible. Benedict's remarks are thus reasonably interpreted as being not too different from an attempt to deny that the Nazis really did commit try to exterminate the Jews and Judaism.

Such denials of great crimes are significant because they make it easier to commit the same crimes again. First, denial ensures that the beliefs and ideology behind the original genocide are able to survive and continue informing people's actions. Second, denial makes it easier to pretend that what was done in the past wasn't really criminal at all. The actions were, instead, justified as self-defense, as something that the victims really wanted, etc.

Remember, though, that it's atheists who are arrogant, intolerant, and unreasonable for presuming to think that perhaps no gods and exist and, even worse, for say aloud that believing in gods is irrational. Such positions are presumptuous, rude, and uncivil. When the most powerful Christian leader in the world, however, insists that victims of forced conversion and genocide were silently "longing" for the Church to come and do what it did, well that's just another example of how reasonable, rational, and socially useful Christianity continues to be.

Pope Benedict XVI isn't some fringe lunatic whose views and statements don't matter; he's the epitome of "reasonable" religion. He can say and do such things with impunity — the press in America barely even mentioned his comments. For an atheist to speak out, though, would be an atrocity of the highest magnitude. Atheists who speak out are militants and no different from bomb-throwing fundamentalists.

Comments
May 23, 2007 at 7:14 pm
(1) Eric says:

The impression I got from the pope’s quote there wasn’t that he was justifying violence in the church’s history in the Americas, but rather that he was pretending it didn’t happen when he obviously knows better.

I think we have something of a papal trilemma here: the pope 1) is ignorant and doesn’t know the history of the church in the Americas 2) believes that violence is an acceptable means of spreading Catholicism and that the indigenous peoples of the Americas really were “asking for it” or 3) is a liar (my guess).

May 23, 2007 at 7:58 pm
(2) beepbeepitsme says:

Pain and suffering as purification is still seen as a strongly held religious belief in our so called modern cultures.

One of the major objections to euthanasia from a religious point of view, is that the suffering and pain is part of god’s will – and that to pre-empt this through deliberate death, is to deny god’s will.

May 25, 2007 at 5:02 am
(3) Patrick Quigley says:

Notice to all militant Muslims:

When you invade Europe and start to forcibly convert Catholics to Islam, be sure to claim that they were “silently longing” for the truth of the Quran. The vatican will graciously concede that your actions are moral and really aren’t an imposition at all.

May 25, 2007 at 5:32 pm
(4) GrandmaVickie says:

My Native American grandmother was forcibly taken from her family when she was 9 years old and placed with a “nice Christian family”. She resented it until the day she died. She never embraced Christianity and neither did my father.

May 26, 2007 at 1:46 am
(5) Baltazar says:

To me they have no morale. For me religious promoters (as is the pope) tend to ignore their brutalities against anyone that differs in believes. And in the Americas during the conquistadors there truly was a holocaust… More than 15 million natives died in South America alone!

I am from Puerto Rico, and am a Taino descendant. I know that my people became slave to the conquistadors… and the poor Africans of the era. And this pope thinks we were asking for it? Bastard fool of a pope! Damn you and your views of ignorance…

I think I respect Chavez more now…

It is sad to think so many people ignore that the Americas were rape and its people murdered and deprived of their history… and now there only a mere shadow of it…

My past and heritage are lost to these fools fallacies and hypocrisies.

May 26, 2007 at 4:33 pm
(6) God Isn't says:

Great article, Austin. Thanks.

May 28, 2007 at 1:36 am
(7) PercyFerry says:

This idiot pope digs himself an ever deepening hole. I sincerely hope it caves in over his head.

May 29, 2007 at 12:02 am
(8) John Hanks says:

This is why organized religion is so bad. Sooner or later it becomes arrogant and bullying. There is nothing real in this man. He is totally bogus.

May 29, 2007 at 11:00 am
(9) John Hanks says:

Religions and War are almost always a racket to keep the peasants busy. This religious “leader” is obviously bogus

November 25, 2007 at 10:39 pm
(10) Mark Christensen says:

Pretty good Catholic bashing. However… Genocide, forced conversions, etc. have never been a part of the official teachings of the Catholic Church – period. Some Catholics, like myself, don’t always follow the teachings very well. We all make mistakes, even popes and priests. Your article did not make the important distinction between the Church and the conquistadors. The Church was NOT in charge. Besides, I’d say the Europeans and the natives were both very “primitive” in their social ineractions unlike the “civilized” and cultured people we are now – ha ha. If you want to hear the Catholic side of these stories, which would only be fair, you might check out Catholic.com. I am disappointed that you did not provide more quotations from the pope than you did. Your approach, I’m afraid, makes it too easy to spin the story to fit your own agenda. Are you tolerant enough to give the Church a chance to speak for itself?

May 4, 2011 at 2:34 am
(11) Chrys says:

I was baptised catholic but am Blackfeet. I am dissmayed at the ignorance of the catholic church. You need only to pick up a history book to see the rap sheet of the Organized Catholic church. It starts with the crusades..hmm they weren’t very nice then…mabey if we fast foward to the American history…hmmm …lets see…rape, kidnapping, child abuse . On my fathers property in Browning Mt. is a large unmarked grave of some 50 innocent children that died in custody of a mission school from neglect.In those Catholic schools they beat our language out of us cut off our hair and destroyed a large amount of our culture ..and now the Pope is still telling us to abandon our culture! …This WAS NOT WHAT JESUS SAID TO DO AND IS NOT HOW HE TOLD US TO TREAT ONE ANOTHER. I am not a Catholic basher…but hey as a baptised catholic…Is it not true that we are to admit and confess our sins? ….it is wrong to deny what wrongs have been committed in Gods name …

November 26, 2007 at 5:48 am
(12) Austin Cline says:

Pretty good Catholic bashing.

Feel free to demonstrate how any of my criticisms were “bashing” rather than legtimate.

I am disappointed that you did not provide more quotations from the pope than you did.

Do you agree with what I quoted?

Are you tolerant enough to give the Church a chance to speak for itself?

The pope has plenty of opportunities to speak for himself, and I quoted him.

February 29, 2008 at 4:53 pm
(13) Seamus Breathnach says:

Of course you are correct and anyone who claims that the Papacy has anything but the blood of millions on its aweful hands is either a clever self-deluded liar or an absolute idiot. Here is an article which , I believe, gives the lie to so many Papal lies.

WHAT IS IT THAT THE IRISH ARE AFRAID TO ADMIT EVEN TO THEMSELVES!

PROOF OF HOW THE PAPACY STOLE IRELAND FROM THE NATIVES.
WHAT ARE ITS PLANS FOR EAST TIMOR?

IS THE POPE PLANNING TO STEAL YOUR COUNTRY?

There are many people — educated English and Irish men among them — who could not believe that the Pope of Rome would be so treacherous as to start and support an unjust war for over almost a thousand years. ‘No way’, they claim, ‘ could the Catholic Chruch start a war and then hide its misdeeds.’ This denial is partially due to the relentless efforts made by the Irish Church members, powerful men in all forms of Irish education, to keep the truth from an unquestioning public. As far as corporate propaganda is concerned the Roman Chruch has no peers.

The documents demonstrating these matters are many and scattered over several centuries and languages. But the main documents which demonstrate without doubt the treachery of the Papacy are now a matter of public record. And five of these documents from the mouths of those most closely associated with the the sale of Ireland can be found on the following WebPage.

http://irishcriminology.com/02b-The-Criminological-History-of-Ireland.html


Directly because of the Papal Bull ‘Laudabiliter’, the native Gaelic people were pitted against the Norman Christians and then against the transplanted Christian English. The struggle continued until the native Gaelic pagans were obliterated — since when, to the present day, not a thousand families in Ireland can speak Gaelic, contempt for the language being universally shown in the Jesuit-owned third level schools, colleges and universities, where hardly a fluent lecturer can be found.


After the Reformation, of course, the thousand year war instigated by the Papacy continued as between English Protestant and ‘Irish’ Catholic.


Anyone who has a sense of humour should read how Fianna Fail — the Church’s party in Ireland — keeps going all the way to East Timor. No one quite knows why. The Vatican take is that these Irish people, who have been fighting for so long for Catholic conquest and Emancipation , have something important to tell the East Timorese. The smart money is on the notion that the Irish are doing what they know best; they are doing the work of the Pope , and are really in East Timor to steal it, just as Ireland was stolen.


If anyone doubts the documents relating to Ireland, which was, perhaps, one of the first countries to fall to the blackguard Church of Rome, let him read the history of Ireland and refresh himself as to the intermittent risings and skirmishes, endless burnings and hangings, and thousands — maybe milliions of Irish people — torn from their roots and sent as felons to American, Australia, New Zealand and througout the world. Irish Catholicism is living proof of the fact that ‘crime does pay’. For a shilling a houshold, Pope Adrian IV sold Ireland into slavery to his fellow countryman, Henry 11, and the enormity of the bloodshed that was to follow from generation to generation, until from each county the native pagan people were uprooted, demoraliosed, demonised and destroyed.

Anyone who cares to read these documents will find in them a paradigm for colonial Christianity everywhere and its racial hatred of the simple native peoples who have dared to think differently to that of Rome.


Moreover, it appears from these documents that the Pope and his minions have occupied Ireland illegally and unconstitutionally for some fifteen hundred years, since when they engineered Irish fertility to extend their empire through the Irish diaspara. Even to the present day Irish ‘vocations’ have extended throughout the world, the current craze being that of East Timor, where the Minister for Foreign Affairs imagines he has a mandate from the people (but has it actually from the Pope) to interfere in matters he knows nothing of, save to do the same in East Timor as was done in Ireland. The Irish are out in East Timor to steal it and to set up antagonisms on behalf of Catholicism that will last forever. The Christian conquest is a recipe for disaster in the world and while the Popes have hardly ever visited Ireland (or are they likely to visit East Timor), they have drained the country of its people, its wealth and its peace in the most inhuman and relentless manner.

One can only hope that by making these documents available some Irish men will reconsider what their country did and still does in this world. They may even question the entire use of government on behalf of the Vatican.

(AND IF YOU ARE STILL ASKING WHY THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT APPEAR ON INDYMEDIA IRELAND, THEN, PERHAPS, YOU SHOULD NOT BE READING THIS ARTICLE!)


Seamus Breathnach
http://www.irish-criminology.com


March 5, 2008 at 2:38 am
(14) Martha Gonzales says:

While I greatly appreciate your article and the information you provide in it, particularly Chavez’s response to Pope Benedict, it never ceases to disturb me how individuals can say “I don’t know if the slaughter of indigenous tribes in America really was “much worse”than the Holocaust in Europe, but it’s quite reasonable for the people today to regard their history as being at least as horrible”. It is horrific to continue to perpetuate the notion that the holocaust of world war II in Europe is the most devastating event to have happened to a people. History, and the legacy of the experiment of colonization, has taught us that the indigenous peoples of the Americas suffered a depopulation in the first 50 years of contact in the millions, well over 7million. But the conversation should not be about numbers, but about the savagery with which blood thirsty men came to this continent. Feeding infants and women to armored dogs was not an act of accident. For further information and an excellent analysis by a German scholar on the subject read the Seabury Press edition of The Devastation of the Indies printer in 1973 or 4.

Just for clarification, mrg

March 6, 2008 at 5:01 pm
(15) Seamus Breathnach says:

Catholics always use that phrase, that it was never the ‘official teaching’ of the Church, as if they knew what the official teaching was.

For those who keep saying that the RC Church has not been the source of violence, I invite them to consider the following. It costs nothing and can be proved as they please.

WHAT IS IT THAT THE IRISH ARE AFRAID TO ADMIT EVEN TO THEMSELVES!

PROOF OF HOW THE PAPACY STOLE IRELAND FROM THE NATIVES.
WHAT ARE ITS PLANS FOR EAST TIMOR?

IS THE POPE PLANNING TO STEAL YOUR COUNTRY?

http://irishcriminology.com/02b-The-Criminological-History-of-Ireland.html

There are many people — educated English and Irish men among them — who could not believe that the Pope of Rome would be so treacherous as to start and support an unjust war for over almost a thousand years. ‘No way’, they claim, ‘ could the Catholic Church start a war and then hide its misdeeds.’ This denial is partially due to the relentless efforts made by the Irish Church members, powerful men in all forms of Irish education, to keep the truth from an unquestioning public. As far as corporate propaganda is concerned the Roman Church has no peers.

The documents demonstrating these matters are many and scattered over several centuries and languages. But the main documents which demonstrate without doubt the treachery of the Papacy are now a matter of public record. And five of these documents from the mouths of those most closely associated with the the sale of Ireland can be found on the following WebPage.


http://irishcriminology.com/02b-The-Criminological-History-of-Ireland.html


Directly because of the Papal Bull ‘Laudabiliter’, the native Gaelic people were pitted against the Norman Christians and then against the transplanted Christian English. The struggle continued until the native Gaelic pagans were obliterated — since when, to the present day, not a thousand families in Ireland can speak Gaelic, contempt for the language being universally shown in the Jesuit-owned third level schools, colleges and universities, where hardly a fluent lecturer can be found.


After the Reformation, of course, the thousand year war instigated by the Papacy continued as between English Protestant and ‘Irish’ Catholic.


Anyone who has a sense of humour should read how Fianna Fail — the Church’s party in Ireland — keeps going all the way to East Timor. No one quite knows why. The Vatican take is that these Irish people, who have been fighting for so long for Catholic conquest and Emancipation , have something important to tell the East Timorese. The smart money is on the notion that the Irish are doing what they know best; they are doing the work of the Pope , and are really in East Timor to steal it, just as Ireland was stolen.


If anyone doubts the documents relating to Ireland, which was, perhaps, one of the first countries to fall to the blackguard Church of Rome, let him read the history of Ireland and refresh himself as to the intermittent risings and skirmishes, endless burnings and hangings, and thousands — maybe millions of Irish people — torn from their roots and sent as felons to American, Australia, New Zealand and throughout the world. Irish Catholicism is living proof of the fact that ‘crime does pay’. For a shilling a household, Pope Adrian IV sold Ireland into slavery to his fellow countryman, Henry 11, and the enormity of the bloodshed that was to follow from generation to generation, until from each county the native pagan people were uprooted, demoralized, demonized and destroyed.

Anyone who cares to read these documents will find in them a paradigm for colonial Christianity everywhere and its racial hatred of the simple native peoples who have dared to think differently to that of Rome.


Moreover, it appears from these documents that the Pope and his minions have occupied Ireland illegally and unconstitutionally for some fifteen hundred years, since when they engineered Irish fertility to extend their empire through the Irish Diaspora. Even to the present day Irish ‘vocations’ have extended throughout the world, the current craze being that of East Timor, where the Minister for Foreign Affairs imagines he has a mandate from the people (but has it actually from the Pope) to interfere in matters he knows nothing of, save to do the same in East Timor as was done in Ireland. The Irish are out in East Timor to steal it and to set up antagonisms on behalf of Catholicism that will last forever. The Christian conquest is a recipe for disaster in the world and while the Popes have hardly ever visited Ireland (or are they likely to visit East Timor), they have drained the country of its people, its wealth and its peace in the most inhuman and relentless manner.

One can only hope that by making these documents available some Irish men will reconsider what their country did and still does in this world. They may even question the entire use of government on behalf of the Vatican.

(AND IF YOU ARE STILL ASKING WHY THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT APPEAR ON INDYMEDIA IRELAND, THEN, PERHAPS, YOU SHOULD NOT BE READING THIS ARTICLE!)


Seamus Breathnach

http://www.irish-criminology.com


March 7, 2008 at 2:05 pm
(16) suseela bhoopalam says:

If Pope says that Native Americans longed for Christians torture, genocide, means one can understand what is this christianity/bible is teaching. He is standing to destroy the other native cultures in India and Asia he calls without shame “Harvesting the souls”. Jewish holocaust, stolen generations of native religions in Canada and Australia these are their success stories. These stealings are not ordinary. If you visit “www.protectreligions.org” and watch the videos you will understand. All of us should join this great parade and demonstration during his visit to US. for more details on this visit the above website. Canadian natives call these people white deamons. what else a person can call other than this??

July 14, 2008 at 3:23 am
(17) ThunderBear says:

I belive that my ancestors were indeed force fed Christianity. I am of First American Religion and every time I tell someone that they automatically think I am a devil worshipper. A pastor here at a local church who is televised regionally actually told his congregation that Native Americans fought with the devil on Mt. Siani in the Bible. And that they used their dream cachers and black majik potions with the chants and rituals to summon the devil to fight the Lord’s soldiers. To think that there are people out there who think that Native Americans are God hating devil worshippers make me sick. We love Great Spirit. And it’s abou time that Christians get over their hatred and arrogance toward other religions

August 15, 2008 at 6:26 pm
(18) Seamus Breathnach says:

First, let me congratulate you on your forthright response to Pope Benedict XVI’s extraordinary statements.

AS you right say : ‘To claim that there was no imposition of Christianity on people in the Americas is a blatant falsification of history.’ But, as you say again : ‘Thus we have a modern European religious leader claiming quite openly and unashamedly that violence committed in the name of religion can “purify” people.’

Between the first and the second statement lies a depressing firewall of ignorance that can only be described as horrific. It suggests that the Pope has taken seriously leave of his senses, if, indeed, he ever had them assembled together in a healthy way. And one can only sympathise with Hugo Chavez ,and all the other unfortunate peoples who have to put up with this stupendous imperialist nonsense.

Such attitudes used to be used when accompanied by ‘Jesus said’ or ‘God’s law is…’ What makes the RCC so intolerant and intolerable is the current state of biblical studies , which rather progressiely and cumulative demonstrate that the Bishop of Rome’s moral authority (and authenticity) ranks with that of Batman, Harry Potter and Humpty Dumpty. But it hasn’t , by all appearances , penetrated the shell of armoured intelligence surrounding the Vatican that it is a spent and immoral force, much to much allied with very worldly accumulations of wealth and cultures of lesse majeste.

Which brings me to the utter effrontery of the Pope’s statements and the progressive messianic lebensraum afflicted on the world under the name of the Christian conquest. In the twelfth century , despite the reputed widespread achievements of the native Irish church, Ireland the Island of Ireland was unilaterally delivered over to Henry 11 for christianisation. The consequences , as we all know, resulted in a 1,000 years war between Catholic Norman settlers and native pagans. The pagans burnt every church they could lay their hands on ,but the Popes Knights Templars, coupled with the allied Royalists, suppressed the natives , as they say, ‘le laimh laidir’ (‘with a heavy hand’).

Anyone interested in the part played by the Papacy might refer to 2.b. irish-criminology dot com. The Chiefs, when they wrote to Pope John XX11 envisaged their entire genocide and blamed the Papacy directly for their destruciton — all to no avail. Only recently , after centuries of denial, has the Vatican made available a copy of a painting depicting the betrayal of the Irish church.

The significant thing about the Gaelic repression (a culture now removed from reality with the Mamoth) is that Ireland never had a Roman presence before it had a Holy Roman presence. And , according to modern scholars, there never was a Christ, so why was it at all necessary to christianise Ireland? In other words, since when did truth (as opposed to ‘fanatical faith’ ever figure in the Vatican’s universal strategy for domination?

Seamus Breathnach
http://www.irish-criminology.com

January 16, 2009 at 9:58 am
(19) juan says:

Actually, as Mark Christensen has said before, it’s just Catholic bashing. You do not make the distinction between the church and the conquistadores.

A few things: There was no holocaust caused by men, most of the native americans died due to diseases.

The pope is talking of the conversion of the native americans. He does not mention they longed for the attrocities commited by the conquistadores in their search of gold. “wich caused most of the crimes comitted by the europeans”.

Get your facts right, the first people who oppossed the bad treatment of native americans were actally priests

January 16, 2009 at 10:39 am
(20) Austin Cline says:

Actually, as Mark Christensen has said before, it’s just Catholic bashing. You do not make the distinction between the church and the conquistadores.

Should I? Did the church oppose the actions of the conquistadores, or sanction their actions?

A few things: There was no holocaust caused by men, most of the native americans died due to diseases.

Do you have any statistics for this?

The pope is talking of the conversion of the native americans. He does not mention they longed for the attrocities commited by the conquistadores in their search of gold.

So you’re asserting that there were no atrocities committed in the name of religion and that the conquistadores never acted in the name of religion?

Get your facts right

Feel free to point to any errors in the above article.

the first people who oppossed the bad treatment of native americans were actally priests

Uh…. the native Americans themselves never opposed their mistreatment?

January 16, 2009 at 12:42 pm
(21) juan says:

“Should I? Did the church oppose the actions of the conquistadores, or sanction their actions?”

Yes you should, since it wasn’t the church who was giving the orders, and it was some priest who did opposse their actions

“Do you have any statistics for this?”

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

“So you’re asserting that there were no atrocities committed in the name of religion and that the conquistadores never acted in the name of religion?”

I haven’t said that, but they were the exception. Most of the crimes were commited by the search of gold and richies

“Feel free to point to any errors in the above article.”

Haven’t I done so?

“Uh…. the native Americans themselves never opposed their mistreatment?”

Oh please

January 16, 2009 at 4:40 pm
(22) Austin Cline says:

Yes you should, since it wasn’t the church who was giving the orders, and it was some priest who did opposse their actions

As I asked: did the church oppose or sanction the actions of the conquistadores?

Furthermore: why does the fact that disease was the leading cause of death mean that there was no “holocaust” committed by the conquistadores?

I haven’t said that, but they were the exception. Most of the crimes were commited by the search of gold and richies

And that search wasn’t sanctioned by the church?

Haven’t I done so?

No. To do that, you would have to quote something I wrote and show that it is factually incorrect.

Oh please

That was my reaction to your initial claim because it represented a classic dismissal of the perspective of native Americans as if they didn’t count. The only opposition that counted for you was that of unnamed priests.

January 16, 2009 at 5:32 pm
(23) JUAN says:

“did the church oppose or sanction the actions of the conquistadores?”

As an official letter from the vatican, no, why should it? since they were not under the vatican’s control but the crown of spain. But the representatives of the church “many priests” did opposse them.

“Furthermore: why does the fact that disease was the leading cause of death mean that there was no “holocaust” committed by the conquistadores?”

And what does this have anything to do with the church. And I ask you, does the black plague is labeled as “holocaust” that should be blamed on asia?

“And that search wasn’t sanctioned by the church?”

And who were their leaders? the church or the crown of spain? did the church proclaim a crusade against native americans?

“No. To do that, you would have to quote something I wrote and show that it is factually incorrect.”

Not necesarily. The central idea of your tesis is to put blame on the church for a genocide and that the indians welcomed the idea of dying. Why don’t you be honest and put the complete text of what the pope actually said in his speech

January 16, 2009 at 5:42 pm
(24) JUAN says:

“That was my reaction to your initial claim because it represented a classic dismissal of the perspective of native Americans as if they didn’t count. The only opposition that counted for you was that of unnamed priests.”

Oh, am I not taking into account the reaction of native americans?? of course they would be the first to react, since they are being invaded. But the first people who tried to do something for those that were being abused were members of the church.

January 16, 2009 at 6:00 pm
(25) Austin Cline says:

As an official letter from the vatican, no, why should it?

I didn’t ask for that, but an official policy of “no atrocities” would have been nice, don’t you think?

since they were not under the vatican’s control but the crown of spain.

Yet they had control of that region because the Vatican authorized it.

But the representatives of the church “many priests” did opposse them.

As many as those who supported them? How many? What did they do?

And what does this have anything to do with the church.

A lot, if they sanctioned conditions which helped spread the disease, and a lot more if they sanctioned the non-disease atrocities.

And I ask you, does the black plague is labeled as “holocaust” that should be blamed on asia?

No, but enough deaths from disease in POW camps can be blamed on the captors.

And who were their leaders? the church or the crown of spain? did the church proclaim a crusade against native americans?

You mean, the church didn’t sanction armed suppression of native religious beliefs?

Not necesarily. The central idea of your tesis is to put blame on the church for a genocide and that the indians welcomed the idea of dying.

I don’t blame the church alone, and I don’t say that the natives welcomed dying.

Why don’t you be honest and put the complete text of what the pope actually said in his speech

Why don’t you be honest and accurately represent my words above?

Oh, am I not taking into account the reaction of native americans??

No, you didn’t.

But the first people who tried to do something for those that were being abused were members of the church.

And who were the first to abuse them? Members of the church.

January 16, 2009 at 7:11 pm
(26) juan says:

“I didn’t ask for that, but an official policy of “no atrocities” would have been nice, don’t you think?”

an officila policy? read “sublimis deus” by pope paul III in 1537

“Yet they had control of that region because the Vatican authorized it.”

Because the spanish crown supported them you mean

“As many as those who supported them? How many? What did they do?”

Ever heard of Bartolome de las Casas and the works done by the jesuits?

“A lot, if they sanctioned conditions which helped spread the disease, and a lot more if they sanctioned the non-disease atrocities.”

And what were those conditions santioned by the church I wonder? “Even if they didn’t have the autority to order how the conquistadores should organize the conquered lands

“No, but enough deaths from disease in POW camps can be blamed on the captors”

And what were those POW camps in the americas?? where were they located? wanna learn about genocide?

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

“You mean, the church didn’t sanction armed suppression of native religious beliefs?”

the church wanted evangelization, not forced conversion

“I don’t blame the church alone, and I don’t say that the natives welcomed dying.”

the church is not to blame in the first place. no but you said ratzinger believes the indians wanted their destruction.

“Why don’t you be honest and accurately represent my words above?”

And how have I used your words in a bad way?

“No, you didn’t.”

Yes I did, I talked of the first people who tried to do something for those under attack.

“And who were the first to abuse them? Members of the church”

Is that so? were the conquistadores members of the church?

February 20, 2011 at 7:43 pm
(27) nuu says:

Shocking! I knew the pope was evil, but never have I ever been so disgusted! I personally believe the Conquistador genocide of Latin Americans was the worst crime commited ever in history of humanity.

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.