Slavery sucks

[thessalonian]

Les,

I have better things to do with my time than to go around in circles with someone who is smarter than all the Catholic writers and theologians, including popes. My assessment is you will forever deny anything I say until the day a bolt of grace hits you between the eyes. Therefore I'll not cast any more pearls. I'll pray though.

God bless

[LittleLes]

Thessalonian claimed that:

It is no longer considered allowable to enslave those captured in just wars because of the ability to imprison them. In the days of old there were two possibilities since you couldn't just let them loose. Kill them or put a ball and chain around their ankles and put them to work for their keep. The later was allowed. What would you propose, just kill them or let them loose to kill women and children. Should we let the 600 go at guantanomo bay?

RESPONSE:

It never should have been allowable, since slavery is intrinsically disordered, and religious belief is not a proper justification to invade and enslave. Still, note the appeal to scripture and reason(or natural law) here:

"It is certainly a matter of faith that this sort of slavery in which a man serves his master as his slave, is altogether lawful. This is proved from Holy Scripture. It is also proved from reason for it is not unreasonable that just as things which are captured in a just war pass into the power and ownership of the victors, so persons captured in war pass into the ownership of the captors. All theologians are unanimous on this."

[Leander: Quaestiones Morales Theologicae, Lyons 1668 - 1692,
Tome VIII, De Quarto Decalogi Praecepto, Tract. IV, Disp. I, Q. 3.]



Romanus Pontifex , Pope Nicholas V 1455

"We [therefore] weighing all and singular the premises with due meditation, and noting that since we had formerly by other letters of ours granted among other things free and ample faculty to the aforesaid 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 the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit –"

You probably won't find that on a Catholic website on in Catholic Answers publications! :

In short, searching out, perpetually enslaving, and seizing the property of any nonChristians was not a "just war" and hence grants no such thing as a "just title of slavery" to anyone!

[ironmonk]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 27 2005, 12:13 PM']The traditional Catholic teaching that slave ownership was morally justified as being in accordance with scripture ( the divine law) and the natural law - as attested to both by the 1866 Instruction of the Holy Office and the article on the Ethical Aspects of Slavery found in the 1912  (on-line) edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia, has changed since the early 1900's.

Current Catholic teaching is that all forms of slavery are considered a sin against the 7th Commandment (see CCC#2414) and contrary to the natural law (see Veritatis splendor #80, and Vatican II's Gaudium et Spes).

To support the claims that popes have always condemned slavery, Catholic apologists usually cite papal statement made after 1500 which deal with condemnation of the slave trade but not slave ownership itself.

But earlier papal statements (which don't make it onto Catholic websites understandably) supported the institution of slavery and even encouraged it.

Two, Pope Martin V's  "Dum diversas" and "Romanus Pontifex," encouraged the invasion of nonChristian (esp infidel) lands, their confiscation, and the perpetual enslavement of their people.

Since some poster seems to want complete documents, perhaps someone more computer knowledgable than myself can find a complete "Dum diversas" for us. I can only find the pertainent sections. However, Romanus Pontifex is easily found. 
[right][snapback]660841[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The Catholic meaning of servitude... One who expresses submission, recognizance, or debt to another. For example, if you wanted to move to Europe and could not afford it, you could offer to be in servitude of someone for a year to pay them back for paying your way to Europe and you would have to work a year for them . That is totally OK because you would have agreed to it.

Slavery as in someone not agreeing to do the work in return for something is never justified.


Why is your hate for the Church greater than your love for Christ? Christ loves the truth and you ignore the clear facts in the matter. You have listened to people who have taken things out of context and twisted their meaning... Now, you have the opportunity to win by learning the true meaning yet you ignore it.

Do you want to make Christ happy? If so, embrace the truth not the lie.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[thessalonian]

I've read the document lester the catholic theology molester. It was in Fr. Panzer's book. Do you know who Saracens were? You probably don't care.

Bye

Edited July 27, 2005 by thessalonian

[LittleLes]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Jul 27 2005, 01:14 PM']
Why is your hate for the Church greater than your love for Christ? Christ loves the truth and you ignore the clear facts in the matter. You have listened to people who have taken things out of context and twisted their meaning... Now, you have the opportunity to win by learning the true meaning yet you ignore it.

Do you want to make Christ happy? If so, embrace the truth not the lie.
God Bless,
ironmonk
[right][snapback]661171[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

Never confuse the Kingdom of God and the hierarchial Catholic Church.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jul 27 2005, 01:16 PM']I've read the document lester the catholic theology molester.  It was in Fr. Panzer's book.  Do you know who Saracens were?  You probably don't care. 

Bye
[right][snapback]661175[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

Yes, I certainly know who the Saracens, pagans, and other "enemies of Christ " were. A short single term would be nonCatholics.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 27 2005, 01:55 PM']RESPONSE:

Yes, I certainly know  who the Saracens, pagans, and other "enemies of Christ " were. A short single term would be nonCatholics.
[right][snapback]661297[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No, because not all non-catholics murder, rape, pillage, and plunder.

[LittleLes]

And some more scriptural support the Church used to justify slavery:

Genesis 9:25-27: "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers. He also said, 'Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem. May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japeth live in the tents of Shem and may Canaan be his slave.' "

Exodus 20: 20-21"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.

[Sirklawd]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 27 2005, 01:52 PM']RESPONSE:

Never confuse the Kingdom of God and the hierarchial Catholic Church.
[right][snapback]661292[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

and whats wrong with hierachy? Without the knowledge and wisdom of history that the church possesses - and passes down through the hierarchy of the pope to the priests to the families we would all be left to interpret the bible and teachings of Jesus ourselves - and no one would have any clue as to how the events of Jesus's time brought us to this day and age.

*gasp* that sounds suspisciously like protestantism. youre right, clearly a billion people having there own views of the truth/Jesus/Salvation/Love is MUCH better than a single, ageless, truth. that everyone can look to and be sure of.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jul 27 2005, 01:57 PM']No, because not all non-catholics murder, rape, pillage, and plunder.
[right][snapback]661304[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


RESPONSE:

It didn't mater what the nonCatholics did or didn't do. The pope authorized and encouraged the invasion of their lands, the confiscation of their property, and their perpetual enslavement. And it was a "just war" to boot! :

[thessalonian]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 27 2005, 02:05 PM']RESPONSE:

It didn't mater what the nonCatholics did or didn't do. The pope authorized and encouraged the invasion of their lands, the confiscation of their property, and their perpetual enslavement. And it was a "just war" to boot! :
[right][snapback]661313[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[Carnanc]

I think servitude has often been an ok thing. It has allowed many to come to America and work to pay off the debt of the trip. that is not slavery, and that is probably what the popes had in mind.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Jul 27 2005, 01:14 PM']
Why is your hate for the Church greater than your love for Christ? Christ loves the truth and you ignore the clear facts in the matter. You have listened to people who have taken things out of context and twisted their meaning... Now, you have the opportunity to win by learning the true meaning yet you ignore it.


ironmonk

[/quote]

RESPONSE:

If a teacher corrects a student who is seriously in error, does that mean the teacher "hates" the student?

I'm sorry that I can't tell you what you want to be told.

[Sirklawd]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jul 27 2005, 02:46 PM'] 
[right][snapback]661394[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

lol truuuuuuue that.
some nearly the oldest arguement against the church ever.

plz.

[Carnanc]

this seems like an old argument I suppose, but i've been asksed this a number of times, and i'm still not sure of all the facts on it.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='slywakka250' date='Jul 27 2005, 02:57 PM']I think servitude has often been an ok thing. It has allowed many to come to America and work to pay off the debt of the trip. that is not slavery, and that is probably what the popes had in mind.
[right][snapback]661427[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

A little Catholic "lets pretend" here.

"It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or given. "

One doesn't sell, buy, exchange, or give indentured servants. The Pope said "slave" and meant slave.

[thessalonian]

Slywakka,

The comment of the above person's post in context.

[QUOTE]...[b]servitude [/b](protestants generally insert slavery here but that is not a proper tanslation) itself, consider in itself and all alone, is by no means repugnant to the natural and divine law, (they of course stop here) and there can be present very many JUST TITLES for servitud, as can be seen by consulting the approved theologians and interpreters of the canons. For the dominion which belongs to a master in respect to a slave is not to be understood as any other than the perpetual right of disposing, to one's own advantage, servile work, which dominion it is legitamte for a person to OFFER to another person. From this then it follows that it is not repgnant to the natural and divine law that a slave be sold, bought, excahnged, or given.[QUOTE]


Some types of servitued/slavery were allowed by the Church. Those of indentured servitude, mutually agreed upon, and slavery from just wars or crimes (just title). Thus the broader words in the last sentence, slavery. And historically, yes, the labor that the indentured servant represented was in fact sold. The guy just pulls history out of his hat.

Edited July 27, 2005 by thessalonian

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Jul 27 2005, 04:11 PM']RESPONSE:

A little Catholic "lets pretend" here. 

"It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or given. "

One doesn't sell, buy, exchange, or give indentured servants. The Pope said "slave" and meant slave.
[right][snapback]661467[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
What keeps you calling yourself a Catholic when you don't agree with the Church at all and have no problem belittling it's leaders, past and present?

[thessalonian]

[quote name='slywakka250' date='Jul 27 2005, 03:09 PM']this seems like an old argument I suppose, but i've been asksed this a number of times, and i'm still not sure of all the facts on it.
[right][snapback]661464[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


I highly recommend you read Fr. Panzer's book, "The Popes and Slavery". It irons the whole thing out pretty well. The good and the bad. In the end it may make our 21st century sensibilities a little quesy but the Catholic Church was very consistent with regard to different forms of slavery/servitude.

Edited July 27, 2005 by thessalonian

[LittleLes]

[quote name='thedude' date='Jul 27 2005, 03:37 PM']What keeps you calling yourself a Catholic when you don't agree with the Church at all and have no problem belittling it's leaders, past and present?
[right][snapback]661528[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Response:

"at all"? Evidence please!