The Church of England:

In February, 2006, the Church of England apologized for its involvement in the slave trade and benefits derived from it. Said the Guardian: "The Church of England last night said sorry for the role it played in the 18th century in benefiting from slave labour in the Caribbean. ... Speakers in the synod debate acknowledged that the church had played its part in justifying slavery during the long campaign by William Wilberforce and others ..." The Rt Rev Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark, told the synod: "We know that bishops in the House of Lords with biblical authority voted against the abolition of the slave trade. We know that the church owned sugar plantations on the Codrington estates [where they also owned slaves. Codrington estates is in Barbados]." The Guardian also noted that "A recent book, Bury the Chains (51), by the American author Adam Hochschild, clearly influenced the debate. It says the church's missionary organisation, the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, branded its slaves on the chest with the word SOCIETY to show who they belonged to."

The Catholic Church:

As reported by the Evangelist in 2000, official publication of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, "... Pope John Paul II has called on the Church to recognize and apologize for its failures during the first 2000 years of Christianity. Foremost among those failures, according to a panel of scholars, is repression of others in general and anti-Semitism in particular." The scholars were asked: "What is the worst mistake the Church has committed over the past two millennia -- and how can the Church make up for it?" Among the responses was this one regarding slavery: "The Church's silence on or even implicit approval of slavery for almost 2000 years" was its worst mistake, said Rev. Robert Scully, SJ, assistant professor of history at Le Moyne College in Syracuse. "From the New Testament period on, the Church generally accepted slavery as a 'natural' part of socio-economic reality, or spoke of it as a necessary evil," he explained. "As a Jesuit, I am morally embarrassed by the fact that certain Jesuit provinces owned slaves into the 18th and even the 19th centuries. It is a classic -- and particularly chilling -- example of the fact that the Church has often not been at the forefront of moral crusades to end unjust social realities that were too often taken for granted, or not deeply questioned and challenged."
+

As reported in msn Encarta, "In 2000, a Holy Year in which the church reflected on its 2000-year history, John Paul asked forgiveness for sins committed by Roman Catholics. Although he mentioned no specific errors, several cardinals acknowledged past injustice and intolerance toward non-Catholics. These acknowledgements were understood to include the Crusades and the Inquisition and inaction during the Holocaust. The apology preceded a papal pilgrimage to the Holy Land and a visit to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial in Israel."

According to the guardian When parliament voted compensation in 1833 - to former slave owners rather than the slaves themselves - the church received £8,823 8s 9d, about £500,000 in today's money, for the loss of slave labour on its Codrington plantation in Barbados. The contemporary Bishop of Exeter and his business associates received even more, nearly £13,000.)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/feb/09/religion.world


We all know that the church and its missionary arms were responsible for the education of the masses under the colonial governments. If the church also owned slaves and benefited financially from the trade, wouldn't you say that the basis for introduction of religion into Africa was flawed It wasn't for salvation but rather it was for the easy manipulation of the populace - If so, Should we follow this religion blindly without questioning the validity of the information?

you only have to open your bible and read what it says about OWNING A SLAVE to understand that the bible never saw anything wrong in the act. so they may not have had a direct impact, but they sure didnt speak against the act either.

i could get myself a few slaves today, pick up a bible and show you passages where it says it is perfectly fine and "allowed".

O Yes it was....

Well, unfortunately they were involved in the trade as proven by the church-owned plantations in the carribbean where slave labour was employed, as well as the receipt of monies by the church as compensation for the loss of slave labour after it was abolished.

The answer is "YES"!

Christianity supports slavery.

"And if a man smite his servant or his maid with a rod, and he die under his hand, shall be punished: But if it shall last for a day or two, will not be punished because his money is. (2)" - Exodus 21 :20-21.

"So your servant and your maid to have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you: of them shall ye buy slaves and siervas.También you will buy for the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, and that the lineage of them are born in your land, who are with you, which shall be a possession. "Leviticus 25:44-45-

We all agree that Christianity accepted slavery and even played a part in encouraging the trade.

Now the big question is --- Why do Africans follow this faith without questioning its introduction and motive? especially after our exposure to its barbaric influence on our continent. If a man gives me the bible in the morning and swears by it yet he comes to my home the next day to steal my child to be used as a slave in a far away place. Shouldn't i question the validity of the bible he offered just a day before?

Wouldn't it be fair to say that the contents of the bible are man-made and serves a human purpose namely profiteering?

I dare to say that the bible and its contents are fabricated by men to serve men and there is nothing holy about it.

naijaFrank: We all agree that Christianity accepted slavery and even played a part in encouraging the trade.

Now the big question is --- Why do Africans follow this faith without questioning its introduction and motive? especially after our exposure to its barbaric influence on our continent. If a man gives me the bible in the morning and swears by it yet he comes to my home the next day to steal my child to be used as a slave in a far away place. Shouldn't i question the validity of the bible he offered just a day before?

Wouldn't it be fair to say that the contents of the bible are man-made and serves a human purpose namely profiteering?

I dare to say that the bible and its contents are fabricated by men to serve men and there is nothing holy about it.

Excellent exposure.
I totally agree with you ...
I sense a certain inferiority complex unfounded; contempt for the very roots, overvaluation of Europe ... '
With these premises, and without self generated contradictions like that.
Some interesting facts can be found here.
https://www.nairaland.com/941433/greatest-genocide-human-history

My greetings!

Get out my friend! I am too busy chasing crumbs under Oyibo's table to think about such things. I am using the bible to rob more than Oyibo ever dreamed.

naijaFrank: We all agree that Christianity accepted slavery and even played a part in encouraging the trade.

Now the big question is --- Why do Africans follow this faith without questioning its introduction and motive? especially after our exposure to its barbaric influence on our continent. If a man gives me the bible in the morning and swears by it yet he comes to my home the next day to steal my child to be used as a slave in a far away place. Shouldn't i question the validity of the bible he offered just a day before?

Wouldn't it be fair to say that the contents of the bible are man-made and serves a human purpose namely profiteering?

I dare to say that the bible and its contents are fabricated by men to serve men and there is nothing holy about it.

Unfortunately, many Africans are daft when it comes to questioning religion. Even educated black people are no better than illiterate when it comes to religious issues

The fact that this topic has been ignored is testament to the mental slavery of many of my fellow Nigerians who are not ready to question their religion

Does anyone here honestly believe that dropping religion would make Nigeria a better place?

The fear of hell may have kept some Christians from attacking Muslims.Compel them to believe that that which they believe is false and all HELL could be let lose.

For those who claim to be aware, it behooves to ensure that we fight the right battle: not loss or destruction of religion(for the sad truth is some ppl are too dependent on the system to let go even in the face of stark evidence), but promotion of right and critical thinking, in essence REASON and LOGIC..

I think with this, religion would retreat to its proper place in society: in the old dusty books and the bedrooms of believers..

musKeeto: Does anyone here honestly believe that dropping religion would make Nigeria a better place?

The fear of hell may have kept some Christians from attacking Muslims.Compel them to believe that that which they believe is false and all HELL could be let lose.

For those who claim to be aware, it behooves to ensure that we fight the right battle: not loss or destruction of religion(for the sad truth is some ppl are too dependent on the system to let go even in the face of stark evidence), but promotion of right and critical thinking, in essence REASON and LOGIC..

I think with this, religion would retreat to its proper place in society: in the old dusty books and the bedrooms of believers..

No humanist will tell you that he wants to eradicate religion. The point is that people should be educated on the limits of their religion. They can keep their religion but not force it on on others. They should also understand the moral limits of their religion

I don't think it was just a propaganda tool. I think it accidentally became a propaganda tool. Take for instance, >aryy Slessor's presence in Calabar. She had no initial support from the goverment and was supported by missionary societies which were themselves funded by donations& tithes from churches. It was later on as she became 'localized' that the British government began to see the role that she & by extension other missionaries could play in better effectuating the colonial government. The missionaries being dutiful citizens of their country worked with their government. This is how the British government slowly began supporting missionary works because it saw Christianity as a means of creating loyal subjects to the Empire.

Uyi Iredia: I don't think it was just a propaganda tool. I think it accidentally became a propaganda tool. Take for instance, >aryy Slessor's presence in Calabar. She had no initial support from the goverment and was supported by missionary societies which were themselves funded by donations& tithes from churches. It was later on as she became 'localized' that the British government began to see the role that she & by extension other missionaries could play in better effectuating the colonial government. The missionaries being dutiful citizens of their country worked with their government. This is how the British government slowly began supporting missionary works because it saw Christianity as a means of creating loyal subjects to the Empire.

Why did you just add salt and pepper to Mary Slessor's story?


Not all tribes were killing twins, by the way. Furthermore, your christains took slaves from Nigeria. Christians wer in Nigeria since the 16th century, tet the first school was in 19th century, when slavery ended. Apparently, Nigerian slaves/monkeys didnt need schools from the view of christians

Did the christian institution perpetrate slavery? of course yes!, Question is: is it a crime of christianity or a crime of "christians"?

okeyxyz: Did the christian institution perpetrate slavery? of course yes!, Question is: is it a crime of christianity or a crime of "christians"?

crime of christianity.Tribal christians are mainly brainwashed "minions". they are jsut like tools.

Logicbwoy:


Why did you just add salt and pepper to Mary Slessor's story?


Not all tribes were killing twins, by the way. Furthermore, your christains took slaves from Nigeria. Christians wer in Nigeria since the 16th century, tet the first school was in 19th century, when slavery ended. Apparently, Nigerian slaves/monkeys didnt need schools from the view of christians

THE BIG QUESTION IS, WHICH TRIBE IN NIGERIA ACTUALLY KILLED TWINS>>>? YOU FELLOWS ARE JUST SAYING WHAT THE MISSIONARIES HAVE INPUTED INTO YOUR BRAINS!!!!!

The Yorubas are ruled out. they highle rever twins to the extent they have made Ibeji idols of them symbolizing the dual Force. one colonial explorer noted that the Yoruabas pampered twins so much that there every wish was treated as command. also considering the Yorubas have the highest twin ration in the world. killing twins is out of the questions unless they plan to end their race. .

PAGAN 9JA:


THE BIG QUESTION IS, WHICH TRIBE IN NIGERIA ACTUALLY KILLED TWINS>>>? YOU FELLOWS ARE JUST SAYING WHAT THE MISSIONARIES HAVE INPUTED INTO YOUR BRAINS!!!!!

The Yorubas are ruled out. they highle rever twins to the extent they have made Ibeji idols of them symbolizing the dual Force. one colonial explorer noted that the Yoruabas pampered twins so much that there every wish was treated as command. also considering the Yorubas have the highest twin ration in the world. killing twins is out of the questions unless they plan to end their race. .

I also want to know if there really was an African tribe that killed a lso twins. My friend PAGAN says correctly, that the Yoruba worship Ibeiji (twins) at Orisa. The birth of twins in a Yoruba family, is synonymous with bliss!
Please ... do not talk about things that nobody knows where they come!

What nobody can deny, are the mass murders that made ​​the Christians and Arabs, in the name of Jesus Christ and Allah!
My respects to all!

PAGAN 9JA:

crime of christianity.Tribal christians are mainly brainwashed "minions". they are jsut like tools.

Really?, then we can follow from your reasons that every gun crime & all wars are crimes of science, instead of crimes of the persons/rulers perpetrating them. Please do yourselves a favour by reviewing your logic. To say christianity is the criminal is a very nonsensical way of thinking. Yes, blame "christians", i don't have any argument against that, But christianity? definitley NO!!.

Who are christians??

Followers of Christ right??

Oya did christ own slaves or did he engage in any form of profit making through slave trade??

Did early christians buy and sell slaves??

If Jesus didn't,if his apostles didn't then I can boldly tell every hater of true christianity that the churches who engaged in the slave trade saga were all false.....

They are and were pseudo-christians who never followed Jesus foot steps but became un-evenly yoked with d world.......

Those were d same set of false christians who engaged in wars and are still engaging in them till date.......

They are nothing like my master Jesus........

Jesus wuld deny them all when d end comes.....

ijawkid: Who are christians??

Followers of Christ right??

Oya did christ own slaves or did he engage in any form of profit making through slave trade??

Did early christians buy and sell slaves??

If Jesus didn't,if his apostles didn't then I can boldly tell every hater of true christianity that the churches who engaged in the slave trade saga were all false.....

They are and were pseudo-christians who never followed Jesus foot steps but became un-evenly yoked with d world.......

Those were d same set of false christians who engaged in wars and are still engaging in them till date.......

They are nothing like my master Jesus........

Jesus wuld deny them all when d end comes.....

1) Jesus's apostles supported slavery
2) Jesus never complained about slavery. He never talked about it when it was common place around him.
3) Most churches supported slavery. The catholic church supported slavery when there were no protestants. This means that at least 95% of churches you see today were supporters of slavery because the were catholic in origin. Most churches came from catholcism.
4) The bible supports slavery and Jesus did not correct that.

okeyxyz:
Really?, then we can follow from your reasons that every gun crime & all wars are crimes of science, instead of crimes of the persons/rulers perpetrating them. Please do yourselves a favour by reviewing your logic. To say christianity is the criminal is a very nonsensical way of thinking. Yes, blame "christians", i don't have any argument against that, But christianity? definitley NO!!.

Ignoramus, your bible supports slavery and genocide.


#fail so hard