Papal Bull

[Cartoonist]

http://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/imperial-rivalries/resources/doctrine-discovery-1493

The Papal Bull “Inter Caetera,” issued by Pope Alexander VI on May 4, 1493, played a central role in the Spanish conquest of the New World. The document supported Spain’s strategy to ensure its exclusive right to the lands discovered by Columbus the previous year. It established a demarcation line one hundred leagues west of the Azores and Cape Verde Islands and assigned Spain the exclusive right to acquire territorial possessions and to trade in all lands west of that line. All others were forbidden to approach the lands west of the line without special license from the rulers of Spain. This effectively gave Spain a monopoly on the lands in the New World.

The Bull stated that any land not inhabited by Christians was available to be “discovered,” claimed, and exploited by Christian rulers and declared that “the Catholic faith and the Christian religion be exalted and be everywhere increased and spread, that the health of souls be cared for and that barbarous nations be overthrown and brought to the faith itself.” This “Doctrine of Discovery” became the basis of all European claims in the Americas as well as the foundation for the United States’ western expansion. In the US Supreme Court in the 1823 case Johnson v. McIntosh, Chief Justice John Marshall’s opinion in the unanimous decision held “that the principle of discovery gave European nations an absolute right to New World lands.” In essence, American Indians had only a right of occupancy, which could be abolished.
-

I wanted to repost this because it got no response in the other thread. I consider this act by the Roman Catholic church to be the most reprehensible horror ever visited on humanity. This is why I am an atheist. This is why I say that religion is the most vile thing ever invented. This is why religion deserves no respect or tolerance.

While religious apologists try pointing to Stalin, Hitler, or anyone else as an example of atheist evil, they never mention this. This act by one man led to the extermination of native peoples on two continents. The genocide was carried out by followers of this man and followers of various offshoots of this hideous cult that to this day continues to persecute certain groups that they claim violates the tenets of their faith.

I guess I shouldn't expect any response by the apologists who frequent this group, because what could they say? That this is old news? Or, gee, we serve soup to poor people now, doesn't that make things right? Hey, our savior is all about forgiveness, get with the program. I might be forgiving, but like I said in the last paragraph, the atrocites of religion continue to be committed today with no letting up. When a gay man can be tied to a fence, beaten, and left to die, or a woman can be beheaded, all in the name of God, NO, I cannot forgive.

Perhaps someone read the title of my post and thought this would be about Pope Francis. It is. He gives lip service to change, but the policies remain the same. It is still a patriarchy of pedophiles and misogynists. They are as opposed to science today as they were when they threw Galileo in a dungeon.

[NeoGreen]

1. But...but...

...Native people exterminated and committed genocide too, so it is ok.

The Iroquois eliminated the Erie, Polynesian's eliminated native islanders in their expansion, South American natives eliminated multitudes, and cut their hearts out.



So how could we ever condemn the pope, christianity, religion or (gasp) faith itself?


DISCLAIMER
For those future jury members who are unaware....

The previous text falls under the label of 'Sarcasm'.

[rug]

2. The imperial aims of spain and Portugal had nothing to do with it.

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

[Cartoonist]

4. Thanks for the confirmation

From the link provided by rug:

The lands to the east would belong to Portugal and the lands to the west to Spain.

The treaty rug refers to was in 1494. One tear after the Papal Bull. The Pope had much more power in those days. The Treaty of Tordesillas wouldn't even been written had not the Pope already written his bull. The genocide began immediately with the conquistadors in Central America. Missions sprang up along the coast of California with the edict of "convert or die". The rest is history.

[rug]

9. The goal was souls, not gold, land or slave labor.

[Cartoonist]

10. Goooooooooooal!

And if the souls couldn't be saved, they were killed. Religion at work.

[rug]

11. And they wanted all the land to build enormous monasteries

to be tilled endlessly by slave labor, all for the greater glory of God!

Your shtick is way too easy.

[Cartoonist]

12. Again, thanks for your confirmation

And they wanted all the land to build enormous monasteries to be tilled endlessly by slave labor, all for the greater glory of God!
-
If they were concerned for their souls, they would have built schools that respected their beliefs and would have helped them till their land for their benefit and not the missionaries.

[rug]

13. So, it was not to gather souls.

Make up your mind.

[Cartoonist]

15. What do you mean by gather souls?

The aim of the church was to seek and destroy all the heathens and rob their land. At no time was the aim of the church to promote peace and love and save the souls that didn't need saving in the first place.

I wonder. I may be wrong, but I got the impression that you are an attorney or some such. Do you think the Aztecs or the Native North Americans would have a case against the church for the blatant theft of their lands? And if not in the legal sense, how about in the moral sense?

[Leontius]

17. The main goal was to assure Spain continued to be a counterweight to France in Italy.

Keep the Spanish happy and soldiers and gold would continue to flow and be used to keep the French from controlling Naples and add to the strength of the defense of the Papal States and other Borgia territories. souls were secondary.

[cbayer]

19. And that is just like nazism. No, hold on, it's worse than nazism!

[cbayer]

3. Can't access this article without a subscription.

[Cartoonist]

5. I excerted the relevant part

While there is an annoying block in front, one can still read the article by scrolling around it. You can also do a serch for "papal bull 1493". The information is not secret, but is almost never mentioned by religious apologists, or is deflected by legal blowhards.

[cbayer]

6. So, I did my own research and I might have wanted to discuss this with you

but your editorial comments in the OP are meant to attack and dismiss others before they even get the chance to respond.

So I will fulfill your self-fulfilling prophecy.

[Cartoonist]

7. Weak nt

[cbayer]

8. Agree.

[okasha]

14. I just love whites

who get all puffed up and indignant about injustices to Native Americans while disparaging our culture out the other side of their mouths.

[cbayer]

16. There is a whole lot of that shit going on around here.

Any reason to attack, any reason at all. You could say the sky is blue today and someone would find a reason why you have just insulted all people with blue eyes, which would be a significant portion of the insulters I would guess.

[Lordquinton]

20. Please backup this atrocious accusation immedately

[rug]

22. Oh, do you look approvingly on Native American religion?

[Warren Stupidity]

21. Since this was directed at the OP please provide some links to exactly when the OP has

disparaged Native American culture.

[rug]

23. Please provide some links to exactly when you have approved Native American beliefs.

Evidence for which you would be the first to point out is absent.

Or do you believe religion is not part of one's culture and heritage?

Privileged hypocrisy.

[struggle4progress]

18. Here is a link to the text of Johnson and Graham's Lessee v. William M`Intosh (1823)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3104237999990733260&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

The decision barely mentions the Pope, and it entirely distinguishes "right of discovery" from any Papal issue: the theory underlying the decision is that land-titles in the US are determined by US law, which inherited ancient English conceptions of land title by inheriting English common law

... As the right of society, to prescribe those rules by which property may be acquired and preserved is not, and cannot be drawn into question; as the title to lands, especially, is and must be admitted to depend entirely on the law of the nation in which they lie; it will be necessary, in pursuing this inquiry, to examine, not singly those principles of abstract justice, which the Creator of all things has impressed on the mind of his creature man, and which are admitted to regulate, in a great degree, the rights of civilized nations, whose perfect independence is acknowledged; but those principles also which our own government has adopted in the particular case, and given us as the rule for our decision.

On the discovery of this immense continent, the great nations of Europe were eager to appropriate to themselves so much of it as they could respectively acquire. Its vast extent offered an ample field to the ambition and enterprise of all; and the character and religion of its inhabitants afforded an apology for considering them as a people over whom the superior genius of Europe might claim an ascendency. The potentates of the old world found no difficulty in convincing themselves that they made ample compensation to the inhabitants of the new, by bestowing on them civilization and Christianity, in exchange for unlimited independence. But, 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, which they all asserted, should be regulated as between themselves. This principle was, that discovery gave title to the government by whose subjects, or by whose authority, it was made, against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession.

The exclusion of all other Europeans, necessarily gave to the nation making the discovery the sole right of acquiring the soil from the natives, and establishing settlements upon it. It was a right with which no Europeans could interfere. It was a right which all asserted for themselves, and to the assertion of which, by others, all assented ...

In the establishment of these relations, the rights of the original inhabitants were, in no instance, entirely disregarded; but were necessarily, to a considerable extent, impaired. They were admitted to be the rightful occupants of the soil, with a legal as well as just claim to retain possession of it, and to use it according to their own discretion; but their rights to complete sovereignty, as independent nations, were necessarily diminished, and their power to dispose of the soil at their own will, to whomsoever they pleased, was denied by the original fundamental principle, that discovery gave exclusive title to those who made it ...

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. Portugal sustained her claim to the Brazils by the same title.

France, also, founded her title to the vast territories she claimed in America on discovery. However conciliatory her conduct to the natives may have been, she still asserted her right of dominion over a great extent of country not actually settled by Frenchmen, and her exclusive right to acquire and dispose of the soil which remained in the occupation of Indians. Her monarch claimed all Canada and Acadie, as colonies of France, at a time when the French population was very inconsiderable, and the Indians occupied almost the whole country. He also claimed Louisiana, comprehending the immense territories watered by the Mississippi, and the rivers which empty into it, by the title of discovery. The letters patent granted to the Sieur Demonts, in 1603, constitute him Lieutenant General, and the representative of the King in Acadie, which is described as stretching from the 40th to the 46th degree of north latitude; with authority to extend the power of the French over that country, and its inhabitants, to give laws to the people, to treat with the natives, and enforce the observance of treaties, and to parcel out, and give title to lands, according to his own judgment.

The States of Holland also made acquisitions in America, and sustained their right on the common principle adopted by all Europe. They allege, as we are told by Smith, in his History of New-York, that Henry Hudson, who sailed, as they say, under the orders of their East India Company, discovered the country from the Delaware to the Hudson, up which he sailed to the 43d degree of north latitude; and this country they claimed under the title acquired by this voyage. Their first object was commercial, as appears by a grant made to a company of merchants in 1614; but in 1621, the States General made, as we are told by Mr. Smith, a grant of the country to the West India Company, by the name of New Netherlands.

The claim of the Dutch was always contested by the English; not because they questioned the title given by discovery, but because they insisted on being themselves the rightful claimants under that title. Their pretensions were finally decided by the sword ...

Thus has our whole country been granted by the crown while in the occupation of the Indians. These grants purport to convey the soil as well as the right of dominion to the grantees. In those governments which were denominated royal, where the right to the soil was not vested in individuals, but remained in the crown, or was vested in the colonial government, the king claimed and exercised the right of granting lands, and of dismembering the government at his will. The grants made out of the two original colonies, after the resumption of their charters by the crown, are examples of this. The governments of New-England, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and a part of Carolina, were thus created. In all of them, the soil, at the time the grants were made, was occupied by the Indians. Yet almost every title within those governments is dependent on these grants. In some instances, the soil was conveyed by the crown unaccompanied by the powers of government, as in the case of the northern neck of Virginia. It has never been objected to this, or to any other similar grant, that the title as well as possession was in the Indians when it was made, and that it passed nothing on that account ...