‽istis ponders doctrines from Discovery to Recovery‽ (weekending April
8th 2023)
This weekending ‽istis has been digesting the Guardian newspaper’s
special edition: ‘Cotton Capital - how slavery shaped the Guardian, Britain
& the World’[i] and has been preoccupied
with pondering the ‘Doctrine of Discovery’ which, at the end of last week, on
March 30th 2023, Pope Francis repudiated fully:
‘The Catholic Church therefore repudiates those concepts that fail
to recognise the inherent human rights of indigenous peoples, including what
has been known as the legal and political ‘doctrine of discovery’.’[ii]
Articles read, internet searches started and threads followed
(down or, some may say, up out of rabbit holes) books purchased and started,
including: ‘Discovering Indigenous Lands: the doctrine of discovery in the
English colonies’ (by Robert J. Miller, Jacinta Ruru, Larissa Behrendt and
Tracy Lindberg) and ‘Unsettling Truths – The Ongoing, Dehumanizing Legacy of
the Doctrine of Discovery’ (by Mark Charles and Soong–chan Rah)…
And here are some key points that stand out early on in the
ponderance[iii]:
·
Basic idea: a nation ‘discovering’ territory previously
unknown to Europeans, for example from the mid-15th century onward, had
entitlement to that territory against all other nations.[iv]
·
‘The Doctrine of Discovery is a legal and religious
concept that has been used for centuries to justify Christian colonial
conquest. It advanced the idea that European peoples, culture and religion were
superior to all others.’ Travis Tomchuck for the Canadiam Museum for Human Rights.[v]
·
Three Papal ‘bulls’ (a type of decree): two by Pope
Nicholas V: ‘Dum Diversas’ 1452, ‘Romanus Pontifex’ (1455); one by Pope
Alexander VI: ‘Inter Caetera’ (1493).
o
‘Dum Diversas’:
‘to capture, vanquish, and subdue the Saracens, pagans and other enemies of
Christ and put them into perpetual slavery and to take all their possession and
their property.’ Permitting or after the event rationalising of Spain and
Portugal seizing lands and subjugating people in Africa and the New World as
long as people on those lands were not Christians.[vi]
·
Did the papal bulls of the 15th century
create a mindset and worldview - or reflect a mindset and worldview? ‘It is not
that… the papal bulls were being manipulated and co-opted by political
entities, they were being written for political entities to justify these
actions’ (colonising) Mark Charles[vii].
·
The concept ‘spilled over in to the political, the social,
the cultural, economic aspects of Indigenous life of people all around the
world.’ Cora Voyageur[viii]
·
The apparent enduring legacy of the ‘doctrine of
discovery’, despite the 15th century Papal bulls apparently being
considered invalid c. 30/40 years after their issue, despite being abrogated
legally and nullified by the Vatican by the late 1530s[ix]:
o
European expansion fuelled by a ‘sort of missionary
sense that the Western monarchies had a right to go to these new lands and to
take from them their resources and if necessary to put down people, including
enslaving them.’[x]
o
The basis for a legal concept in the United States not
least it seems with a ruling of the US Supreme Court in 1823 that indigenous
people had only rights of ‘occupancy’ not ownership over the land, which
therefore could be taken.[xi]
o
Robert J. Miller and colleagues’ book: ‘Discovering
Indigenous Lands’, aims to shine ‘new light on the most ignored historical and
legal evidence of the use of the Doctrine of Discovery in Australia, Canada,
New Zealand and the Unites States. In these countries, Christian Europeans, assumed
that they held sovereign, property, and commercial rights over the indigenous
people under the ‘legal authority’ of the Doctrine.’
o
Apparently cited in 2005 in a ruling that denied the
Oneida Indian Nation the right to tribal sovereignty in repurchased ancestral
lands.[xii]
o
During Pope Francis’ visit to Canada in 2022, an
apology was issued for the Catholic Church’s role in the residential school
system in Canada and calls were made for the Pope to repudiate the ‘doctrine of
discovery’. As Kate Gunn (a Canadian lawyer) suggested: this would be an
‘important way of beginning to acknowledge the way that the Doctrine has been
used as a tool to justify the dispossession of Indigenous people from their
lands for centuries, and beyond that as a tool for enabling cultural genocide
in the form of residential schools.’
o
‘Never again can the Christian community allow itself
to be infected by the idea that one culture is superior to others, or that it
is legitimate to employ ways of coercing others.’ Pope Francis in Canada 2022[xiii]
·
The Pope’s statement last week perhaps ‘repudiates the
very mindsets and worldview that gave rise to the original papal bulls.’ ‘It
renounces the mindset of cultural or racial superiority which allowed for that
objectification or subjectification of people, and strongly condemns any
attitudes or actions that threaten or damage the dignity of the human person.’[xiv]
So, where have ‽istis’ wonderings and ponderings (that started
with the Pope’s recent statement on the ‘doctrine of discovery’ and have passed
by some of the ideas and references above) got to at the end of this week?
Well, one writer, Steven Newcomb[xv]
has suggested that ‘domination’ rather than discovery is the problem with the
series of papal bulls that underpinned the ‘Doctrine of Discovery’ and their
long-lasting influence, asking: ‘How is it and why is it that the claim of a
right of domination has been made into the organising principle of the planet?’
Do we argue that it was ever thus; that this is the way of things:
‘ordained’ or created or necessary-due-to-evolutionary-imperatives-principles-and-processes;
Empires coming and going, invasion and subjugation and imposition and competition
until the rise of the next ‘power’; surely it is what it is …‽
Or just perhaps, possibly, maybe we could wonder if there might be
a different way‽
Just perhaps, possibly, maybe we might ponder what that could look
like and sound like across a range of dimensions:
·
for ourselves; for our relations and interactions with
each other - and with all that lives and has being;
·
for our institutions and arrangements - what policies,
procedures and processes might potentially promote a different organising
principle of the planet if we think and feel that something different is needed‽
·
what might change and what might stay the same: personally
and individually, ‘familialy’, socially, culturally, religiously, politically,
economically, legally, morally, nationally, internationally, etc…‽
·
What might a new Papal ‘bull’ decree?
Can we imagine?
What might be the consequences if
we do not or cannot; or can, but do nothing?
Perhaps the danger is that if we
keep on doing what we are doing, we should possibly not be surprised if we keep
on getting what we currently get‽
…and maybe that is just not good
enough for so many right now‽
…or for all of us, sooner or later…‽
So, linking to previous blogs, both
recent and some while ago:
·
where ‽istis pondered a ‘colonial mindset’ but suggested
that we might wonder what a ‘de-colonial mindset’ might look and sound like (https://pistisrec.blogspot.com/2023/03/pistis-ponder-de-colonising-weekending.html)
March 2023;
·
where ‽istis pondered climate matters and the ‘Synthesis
Report of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) including the idea that, crisis
notwithstanding, ‘there is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a
liveable and sustainable future for all’ (C.1 in the ‘Headline Statements’;
there is still a window… (https://pistisrec.blogspot.com/2023/03/pistis-ponders-whether-there-is.html)
March 2023
·
where ‽istis wondered about ‘taking the double-knee’ (https://pistisrec.blogspot.com/2021/07/pistis-wonders-taking-double-knee.html)
July 2021
·
where ‽istis pondered many ‘Rs’ including reappraisal,
repentance, reparation, restoration, recompense and restitution (https://pistisrec.blogspot.com/2021/08/pistis-ponders-many-rs-weekending.html)
August 2021
…‽istis has started to ponder a new ‘doctrine’. The current
working title so far is: the ‘Doctrine of Recovery’. In the beginning
there was at least an attempt to articulate something (though much further
wondering and pondering is no doubt required):
·
Recovery of what‽
o
land
o
wealth
o
rights
o
opportunities
o
artefacts
o
power
o
traditions
o
beliefs
o
ways of seeing and being
o
values – including perhaps in relation to an early
Christian heritage but, wider than that: shared humanity, shared and interdependent
life
o
possibly our very lives
·
Recovery for whom and for what‽
o
those who have been and are exploited, ‘shafted’,
stolen from, enslaved, murdered, eradicated, denied, excluded, threatened, minoritised,
betrayed, separated, voiceless, ignored, impoverished, banished, ejected and
rejected…
o
…and perhaps also even for the perpetrators, even for those who
have benefited, even for those who have a direct or indirect stake in things staying
pretty much the same
o
even humanity
o
even all that has being
o
even the planet
As the week (and a lengthy blog) ends, ‽istis continues to read and
ponder on, and wonder whether this is all just naïve delusional idealism, (another
type of ‘bull’!) – or - whether we need a new doctrine that will also ‘spill…
over in to the political, the social, the cultural, economic aspects of… people
all around the world’ (after quotation by Cora Voyageur, see above and
references); whether again we might dare to hope that things could be different
- just perhaps, possibly, maybe‽
What do you think, and feel and what might you do‽
© ‽istis
NB: further reflections and comments linked to this week’s theme and
past blog entries to be found on Twitter: replies, retweets (which don’t
necessarily indicate approval, sometimes the very opposite!) and ‘likes’:
@Pistis_wonders. ‘Follows’ and respectful comment and dialogue welcome...
[i]
With thanks especially to David Olusoga, Cassandra Gooptar, Gay Younge,
Olivette Otele and all the other contributors, researchers, commissioners and
publishers.
[ii]
Ref: NPR article by Bill Chappell: https://www.npr.org/2023/03/30/1167056438/vatican-doctrine-of-discovery-colonialism-indigenous
[iii]
References include: as above: https://www.npr.org/2023/03/30/1167056438/vatican-doctrine-of-discovery-colonialism-indigenous
article by Bill Chappell; https://www.ncronline.org/news/indigenous-call-vaticans-repudiation-doctrine-discovery-only-step
article by Aleja Hertzler-McCain
(6.4.2023)
[iv]
See Wikipedia ‘Doctrine of Discovery’ for a starting point… including
references and links.
[vi]
Again: https://www.ncronline.org/news/indigenous-call-vaticans-repudiation-doctrine-discovery-only-step
And ‽istis re-watched the film ‘The Mission’ this week… https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091530/
[vii]
Mark Charles, a Navajo theologian, in ‘Unsettling Truths: The On-going
Dehumanizing Legacy of the Doctrine of Discovery.’ (2019)
[viii]
In https://www.ncronline.org/news/indigenous-call-vaticans-repudiation-doctrine-discovery-only-step
[ix]
In article by Bill Chapell (op cit)
[x]
David McCallum again (op cit)
[xi]
In https://www.ncronline.org/news/indigenous-call-vaticans-repudiation-doctrine-discovery-only-step
[xii]
Justice Ruth Baden Ginsberg. Cited in: https://www.ncronline.org/news/indigenous-call-vaticans-repudiation-doctrine-discovery-only-step
[xiii]
Cited in https://www.npr.org/2023/03/30/1167056438/vatican-doctrine-of-discovery-colonialism-indigenous
[xiv] David
McCallum in: https://www.npr.org/2023/03/30/1167056438/vatican-doctrine-of-discovery-colonialism-indigenous
[xv]
Steven Newcomb. See SN’s book: ‘Pagans in the Promised Land: Decoding the Doctrine of Christian Discovery’
(2008)
