Catholic Church historical colonies persecution of Native Americans


He has a history degree and the public education system here requires an education degree, so he would not be able to teach for the public system. It was actually during a religion class that he expressed this. I understand thorolfr’s reasoning that history should be based on facts, not religious spin. Unfortunately, too much of history is spun in one way or another, and yes, even in academia. The current trend within college campuses seems to be postmodern anti-fact, anti-Catholic motivated.


There’s a saying about how “the victors write history” which is why until the last few decades, American history was usually spun in such a way that the European settlers were the heroes and the “savage” Native Americans were the villains. As General Sheridan supposedly said in 1869, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian.” I think it’s a good thing that we’ve been reevaluating our history to show a more balanced view. I can’t even imagine a book being written 40 years ago like the one I mentioned above about a nearly mythical person like George Washington and his active role in all the land speculation which dispossessed Native Americans of their land. And history was also spun so that men played a disproportionately large role. A lot of history writing in the last few decades has also tried to pay more attention to women in our history, also a good thing, in my opinion.


Didn’t la Virgen de Guadalupe have a lot to do with that?


Hi Tad, I’d like to respond to post 55. I have a little bit of reading to do on this, though.


In the interest of reconciling with Indigenous communities, as Pope Francis would like us to do, I think we do have a special obligation to acknowledge the sins of those who came before us and work to right the wrongs for those still negatively affected by their legacy.


No problem. There’s lots of information out there.

What I find interesting is that Padre Kino established a number of missions in southern Arizona and northern Mexico at about the same time as the California missions without any of the controversy.


I have heard of this, and it makes me grieve. :sob:


Of course, but that wasn’t my point. My point is that the Church created Dioceses and Archdioceses in Latin America. One was the Archdiocese of Lima, Peru only 13 years after the Incan Empire ended there. And they founded a University there too.

The Spanish wouldn’t have built a University in Lima (which is on the Pacific) if all the wanted to do was distroy the natives.


A very timely definition of the Church on the day we remember St. Pope John XX111 is

The Church is the People of God in service to the Mission of God.


We’ll have to agree to disagree on that then.
It’s possible that if someone felt called to pray for a particular group of sinners, let’s say conquistadors or mission friars, and make special atonement for their sins, they could. As I said, I don’t feel called to do that. In a prayer I say every day, I pray “for reparation for my and all of humanity’s sins”, not “for my and a particular group of humans’ sins” or “for my and my fellow Catholics’ sins”. Sin is universal and includes everybody.

I am generally not a big fan of people today making apologies or having to bear guilt for what people loosely joined to them by some association - for example, fellow whites or fellow Catholics - dozens or hundreds of years ago did regarding some other group of people now regarded as oppressed. By that standard, I would be apologizing to dozens of groups, perhaps as far back as the Biblical tribes wiped out by the Jewish people in the OT, where I personally had nothing to do with the entire situation (I wasn’t born yet, my ancestors were probably in some other part of the globe even). It’s possible to acknowledge abuses happened, be sensitive to those who suffered from them in the relatively recent past, and make atonement under the “atone for the sins of all mankind” umbrella without putting oneself in the position of constantly making apologies for the Church in history, especially for areas where the Church’s action was a mixed bag - converting St. Juan Diego and stopping mass human sacrifice were clearly good things for example, even if some other aspects weren’t.

There are so many people these days who see the Church in a generally negative light and think Catholics should not even support the institution because it has constantly oppressed everyone throughout history, including women, indigenous people, Jewish people, gay people. I don’t wish to play into that mindset.


There are always two sides to a story. For example, my 6th great-grandfather came from a community of Quaker pacifists who settled in Virginia. One day while walking home he and his two friends were attacked by a party of Indians and one of his friends was killed. My 5th great-grandfather, his son, became a colonial scout and Indian hunter. I don’t think that was a coincidence.
We often think of American Indians as innocent victims, but a little history will show that was often not the case. I’m sure there were innocent Indians who suffered just as innocent whites suffered. A big picture look at the history often has a way of diminishing bias.


Such stories are prevalent in many states. It’s pretty clear that Native Americans dished out their share of violence, and some of it was gory. One might argue that it was a normal response to a foreign invader, but it’s also not a case of people just peacefully sitting around being oppressed.
For much of US history, the focus was on the violence that Native Americans committed, in part to justify European settlers’ response towards them. Now the pendulum has swung the other way and we emphasize more the violence committed by white Europeans.

I am sure the story of St. Jean de Brebeuf is not told anymore. I recently bought an old holy card of the North American Martyrs with scenes of their actual martyrdom, which in this day and age would never appear on a holy card. When I was in Catholic school I was taught, via a reader, a greatly expurgated story of St. Isaac Jogues that left out most of the torture and gore, and just had him quickly killed with a hatchet at the end. I didn’t read the whole story of what happened to him for many years.

Overall, the whole business was a clash of two economic systems that was bound to have some bad consequences for both sides.


In the Catholic school I work they removed Columbus day as a holiday, they also put in place a new way for students to change their name to whatever they wish and they have ssa valentine day dances. I’m not sure what to make of it.


TERRIBLE. 100% terrible.

Is your Catholic school a diocesan one? Or is it ran by some religious order?


It is run by the Congregation of the Mission order of the Roman Catholic church. They opened up an inclusivity center a short time ago.
Forgive me for not understanding the difference in from where they are run?


I’m trying to wrap my mind around a church sponsored SSA Valentine Dance. Is it a strictly plutonic dance? No couples allowed? No slow dances?


Hi, there is a pride group that the college allows and they are allowed, with permission from the college, to create events. They created their own Valentines dance (I saw the flyers in the hallway) I also saw the College (literal) stamp of approval on the flyers. It took place in one of the campus buildings (not the church on campus). I don’t know the details about the music but their instagram page shows men wearing women’s clothing and makeup.


What kind of “pride group”? Courage?


No it’s not a Courage group, of that I’m sure.



And this is an institution that is still directly affiliated with the church? Does the church have administrative control of this institution?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit