JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, May 9, 2025

Vatican rejects doctrine that fuelled centuries of colonialism

by

770 days ago
20230330
FILE - Pope Francis arrives for a pilgrimage at the Lac Saint Anne, Canada, on July 26, 2022. The Vatican on Thursday, March 30, 2023, responded to Indigenous demands and formally repudiated the “Doctrine of Discovery,” the theories backed by 15th-century “papal bulls” that legitimized the colonial-era seizure of Native lands and form the basis of some property law today. (AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia, File)

FILE - Pope Francis arrives for a pilgrimage at the Lac Saint Anne, Canada, on July 26, 2022. The Vatican on Thursday, March 30, 2023, responded to Indigenous demands and formally repudiated the “Doctrine of Discovery,” the theories backed by 15th-century “papal bulls” that legitimized the colonial-era seizure of Native lands and form the basis of some property law today. (AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia, File)

The Vat­i­can on Thurs­day re­spond­ed to In­dige­nous de­mands and for­mal­ly re­pu­di­at­ed the “Doc­trine of Dis­cov­ery,” the the­o­ries backed by 15th-cen­tu­ry “pa­pal bulls” that le­git­imized the colo­nial-era seizure of Na­tive lands and form the ba­sis of some prop­er­ty laws to­day.

A Vat­i­can state­ment said the pa­pal bulls, or de­crees, “did not ad­e­quate­ly re­flect the equal dig­ni­ty and rights of In­dige­nous peo­ples” and have nev­er been con­sid­ered ex­pres­sions of the Catholic faith.

The state­ment, from the Vat­i­can’s de­vel­op­ment and ed­u­ca­tion of­fices, marked a his­toric recog­ni­tion of the Vat­i­can’s own com­plic­i­ty in colo­nial-era abus­es com­mit­ted by Eu­ro­pean pow­ers. It was is­sued un­der his­to­ry’s first Latin Amer­i­can pon­tiff, who was hos­pi­tal­ized Thurs­day with a res­pi­ra­to­ry in­fec­tion, ex­act­ly one year af­ter Fran­cis met at the Vat­i­can with In­dige­nous lead­ers from Cana­da who raised the is­sue.

On Thurs­day, these In­dige­nous lead­ers wel­comed the state­ment as a first good step, even though it didn’t ad­dress the re­scind­ing of the bulls them­selves and con­tin­ued to take dis­tance from ac­knowl­edg­ing ac­tu­al Vat­i­can cul­pa­bil­i­ty in abus­es. The state­ment said the pa­pal doc­u­ments had been “ma­nip­u­lat­ed” for po­lit­i­cal pur­pos­es by com­pet­ing colo­nial pow­ers “to jus­ti­fy im­moral acts against In­dige­nous peo­ples that were car­ried out, at times, with­out op­po­si­tion from ec­cle­sial au­thor­i­ties.”

It said it was right to “rec­og­nize these er­rors,” ac­knowl­edge the ter­ri­ble ef­fects of colo­nial-era as­sim­i­la­tion poli­cies on In­dige­nous peo­ples and ask for their for­give­ness.

The state­ment was a re­sponse to decades of In­dige­nous de­mands for the Vat­i­can to for­mal­ly re­scind the pa­pal bulls that pro­vid­ed the Por­tuguese and Span­ish king­doms the re­li­gious back­ing to ex­pand their ter­ri­to­ries in Africa and the Amer­i­c­as for the sake of spread­ing Chris­tian­i­ty.

Those de­crees un­der­pin the “Doc­trine of Dis­cov­ery,” a le­gal con­cept coined in a 1823 U.S. Supreme Court de­ci­sion that has come to be un­der­stood as mean­ing that own­er­ship and sov­er­eign­ty over land passed to Eu­ro­peans be­cause they “dis­cov­ered” it.

It was cit­ed as re­cent­ly as a 2005 Supreme Court de­ci­sion in­volv­ing the Onei­da In­di­an Na­tion writ­ten by the late Jus­tice Ruth Bad­er Gins­burg.

Dur­ing Pope Fran­cis’ 2022 vis­it to Cana­da, where he apol­o­gized to In­dige­nous peo­ples for the res­i­den­tial school sys­tem that forcibly re­moved Na­tive chil­dren from their homes, he was met with de­mands for a for­mal re­pu­di­a­tion of the pa­pal bulls.

Two In­dige­nous women un­furled a ban­ner at the al­tar of the Na­tion­al Shrine of Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré on Ju­ly 29 that read: “Re­scind the Doc­trine” in bright red and black let­ters.

Be­fore that, Michelle Schenan­doah of the Onei­da Na­tion had called for the Vat­i­can to re­scind the pa­pal bulls when she de­liv­ered the clos­ing re­marks of the First Na­tions del­e­ga­tion that met with Fran­cis dur­ing a week­long vis­it last year by Na­tive groups from Cana­da. On Thurs­day, she called the Vat­i­can state­ment “an­oth­er step in the right di­rec­tion,” but not­ed that it didn’t men­tion the re­scind­ing of the bulls them­selves.

“I think what this does is it re­al­ly puts the re­spon­si­bil­i­ty on na­tion states such as the Unit­ed States, to look at its use of the Doc­trine of Dis­cov­ery,” she said in a in­ter­view from Syra­cuse, New York, where she is a pro­fes­sor of In­dige­nous law at Syra­cuse Uni­ver­si­ty’s Col­lege of Law. “This goes be­yond land. It re­al­ly has cre­at­ed gen­er­a­tion up­on gen­er­a­tion of geno­ci­dal poli­cies di­rect­ed to­wards In­dige­nous peo­ples. And I think that it’s time for these gov­ern­ments to take full ac­count­abil­i­ty for their ac­tions.”

In the state­ment, the Vat­i­can said: “The Catholic Church there­fore re­pu­di­ates those con­cepts that fail to rec­og­nize the in­her­ent hu­man rights of In­dige­nous peo­ples, in­clud­ing what has be­come known as the le­gal and po­lit­i­cal ‘doc­trine of dis­cov­ery.’”

Phil Fontaine, a for­mer na­tion­al chief of the As­sem­bly of First Na­tions in Cana­da who was al­so part of the First Na­tions del­e­ga­tion that met with Fran­cis at the Vat­i­can, said the state­ment was “won­der­ful,” re­solved an out­stand­ing is­sue and now puts the mat­ter to civ­il au­thor­i­ties to re­vise prop­er­ty laws that cite the doc­trine.

“The church has done one thing, as it said it would do, for the Holy Fa­ther. Now the ball is in the court of gov­ern­ments, the Unit­ed States and in Cana­da, but par­tic­u­lar­ly in the Unit­ed States where the doc­trine is em­bed­ded in the law,” he told The As­so­ci­at­ed Press.

The Vat­i­can of­fered no ev­i­dence that the three pa­pal bulls (Dum Di­ver­sas in 1452, Ro­manus Pon­tif­ex in 1455 and In­ter Caetera in 1493) had them­selves been for­mal­ly ab­ro­gat­ed, re­scind­ed or re­ject­ed, as Vat­i­can of­fi­cials have of­ten said. But it cit­ed a sub­se­quent bull, Sub­lim­is Deus in 1537, that reaf­firmed that In­dige­nous peo­ples shouldn’t be de­prived of their lib­er­ty or the pos­ses­sion of their prop­er­ty, and were not to be en­slaved.

Car­di­nal Michael Cz­erny, the Cana­di­an Je­suit whose of­fice co-au­thored the state­ment, stressed that the orig­i­nal bulls had long ago been ab­ro­gat­ed and that the use of the term “doc­trine” — which in this case is a le­gal term, not a re­li­gious one — had led to cen­turies of con­fu­sion about the church’s role.

The orig­i­nal bulls, he said, “are be­ing treat­ed as if they were teach­ing, mag­is­te­r­i­al or doc­tri­nal doc­u­ments, and they are an ad hoc po­lit­i­cal move. And I think to solemn­ly re­pu­di­ate an ad hoc po­lit­i­cal move is to gen­er­ate more con­fu­sion than clar­i­ty.”

He stressed that the state­ment wasn’t just about set­ting the his­tor­i­cal record straight, but “to dis­cov­er, iden­ti­fy, analyse and try to over­come what we can on­ly call the en­dur­ing ef­fects of colo­nial­ism to­day.”

It was sig­nif­i­cant that the re­pu­di­a­tion of the “Doc­trine of Dis­cov­ery” came dur­ing the pon­tif­i­cate of his­to­ry’s first Latin Amer­i­can pope. Even be­fore the Cana­di­an trip, the Ar­gen­tine pope had apol­o­gized to Na­tive peo­ples in Bo­livia in 2015 for the crimes of the colo­nial-era con­quest of the Amer­i­c­as.

Fe­lix Hoehn, a prop­er­ty and ad­min­is­tra­tive law pro­fes­sor at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Saskatchewan, said the Vat­i­can state­ment would have no le­gal bear­ing on land claims in Cana­da to­day, but would have sym­bol­ic val­ue.

“The most that any pa­pal re­pu­di­a­tion of the doc­trine (or the bulls, for that mat­ter) can do in re­la­tion to Cana­di­an law is to ap­ply pres­sure on the Supreme Court of Cana­da to re­nounce the doc­trine as part of Cana­di­an law,” he said.

Be­yond that, though, is the hope that the state­ment could show that the Catholic Church wants to be an al­ly with In­dige­nous peo­ples as they fight for their hu­man rights and their land, and to pro­tect it, said the Rev. David Mc­Cal­lum, an Amer­i­can Je­suit who has worked with In­dige­nous peo­ples in the Syra­cuse area and was con­sult­ed dur­ing the draft­ing of the state­ment.

“So now for the church to not on­ly ac­knowl­edge the dam­age, but al­so to re­pu­di­ate the whole mind­set of cul­tur­al su­pe­ri­or­i­ty, of racial su­pe­ri­or­i­ty to, in a sense, re­nounce that whole way of think­ing and say that for­ev­er for­ward the church wants to be an ac­tive al­ly in pro­tect­ing In­dige­nous hu­man rights along with all hu­man rights, I think it’s a big state­ment,” he said. —VAT­I­CAN CITY (AP)

___

Sto­ry by NICOLE WIN­FIELD | As­so­ci­at­ed Press.  Rob Gillies con­tributed to this re­port from Toron­to.

Pope FrancisInstagramIndigenous PeoplesVatican


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored