Pope Pius IX and the War of Northern Aggression.

HamletOrHecuba

"THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: One of the most overlooked facts of the American Civil War Era is the sympathy the South gained from Europe's most influential monarch - the pope of Rome.

Pope Pius IX never actually signed any kind of alliance or 'statement of support' with the Confederate States of America, but to those who understand the nuance of papal protocol, what he did do was quite astonishing. He acknowledged President Jefferson Davis as the "Honorable President of the Confederate States of America."....

Pope Pius IX was a revered figure in the post war South. General Robert E. Lee kept a portrait of him in his house, and referred to him as the South's only true friend during her time of need."

http://catholicknight.blogspot.ie/2009/02/pope-pius-ix-and-confederacy.html

How different would history have been if the South had won. The Military-Industrial-Media complex that has come to dominate the world completely in the wake of World War II may well have been restrained.

HamletOrHecuba

Nicholas Motivolov the friend of St Seraphim of Sarov Russia's greatest saint of the 19 th century wrote to Tsar Alexander II;

“The Lord and the Mother of God not only do not like the terrible oppression, destruction and unrighteous humiliation that is being wrought everywhere with us in Russia by the Decembrists : the goodness of God is also thoroughly displeased by the offences caused by Lincoln and the North Americans to the slave-owners of the Southern States, and so Batiushka Father Seraphim has ordered that the image of the Mother of God the Joy of all who Sorrow should be sent to the President of the Southern – that is, precisely the slave-owning States. And he has ordered that the inscription be attached to it : TO THE COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF LINCOLN… ”

tommy2bad

So your saying that the 'good catholicks' should support slavery?
What are you thinking?
Pious ix was a muppet if he thought the souths victory would have been a good thing.
As to the value of a Russian opinion of the war of northern agression (nice southern euphemism:rolleyes:) Do you support their stance on Syria now too?

wolfsbane

Just shows how one corrupt organisation has natural sympathies for another. Even good men can be corrupted by power - and money.

Thankfully, the cries of the slaves were heard by God - and vengeance on the North & South was poured out.

Lincoln had it right:
The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether." From: Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address, Saturday, March 4, 1865

*******************************************************************
Philippians 2:9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

HamletOrHecuba

wolfsbane wrote: »

Thankfully, the cries of the slaves were heard by God - and vengeance on the North & South was poured out.

Do you have any idea how lucky slaves were in the Southern States compared to those working in far worse and more dangerous conditions for longer hours with their masters taking of course no responsibility for their moral welfare in British and North American factories? When you factor in that than Lincoln's huffing and puffing comes across as bit sick doesnt it?

HamletOrHecuba

tommy2bad wrote: »

So your saying that the 'good catholicks' should support slavery?
What are you thinking?
Pious ix was a muppet if he thought the souths victory would have been a good thing.
As to the value of a Russian opinion of the war of northern agression (nice southern euphemism:rolleyes:) Do you support their stance on Syria now too?

"Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything, not only while being watched in order to please them, but with a sincere heart, fearing the Lord."

Colossians 3:22.

Slavery, though the product of the fall just as the state is, is not essentially evil. Industrialism however is essentially evil.

The vast majority of Syrian Christians support their rightful President because they know that if the CIA backed fanatics triumph that it will be the end of their extremely ancient Christian cultures (it was in Syria that Christians were first called Christians). Russia is standing with them- though I wish she would take a stronger line; do you support the terrorists?

Corkfeen

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Do you have any idea how lucky slaves were in the Southern States compared to those working in far worse and more dangerous conditions for longer hours with their masters taking of course no responsibility for their moral welfare in British and North American factories? When you factor in that than Lincoln's huffing and puffing comes across as bit sick doesnt it?

So, you are basically saying that the slavery was fine as they were still getting spiritual guidance from their slave masters......... Each post that you make, makes you come across as a rather unsavory character.

HamletOrHecuba

Corkfeen wrote: »

So, you are basically saying that the slavery was fine as they were still getting spiritual guidance from their slave masters......... Each post that you make, makes you come across as a rather unsavory character.

They were a lot better off being slaves in Dixie than they would have been had they instead been factory workers in darkest England or the North or in still in Africa where the slavery practiced was considerably more brutal.

TheReverend

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Do you have any idea how lucky slaves were in the Southern States compared to those working in far worse and more dangerous conditions for longer hours with their masters taking of course no responsibility for their moral welfare in British and North American factories? When you factor in that than Lincoln's huffing and puffing comes across as bit sick doesnt it?

I honestly cannot believe you just wrote that, what the **** is wrong with you

HamletOrHecuba

TheReverend wrote: »

I honestly cannot believe you just wrote that, what the **** is wrong with you

Do you have any idea of what factory conditions were like in the 19 th century?

I would suggest you read up on them before you comment.

TheReverend

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Do you have any idea of what factory conditions were like in the 19 th century?

I would suggest you read up on them before you comment.

Yeah they sucked owning a human being was even worse

HamletOrHecuba

TheReverend wrote: »

Yeah they sucked owning a human being was even worse

For all intents and purposes the people suffering under them were "owned"; their so called freedom was just a cheap trick for their masters to avoid responsibility for them.

tommy2bad

Originally Posted by HamletOrHecuba
The vast majority of Syrian Christians support their rightful President because they know that if the CIA backed fanatics triumph that it will be the end of their extremely ancient Christian cultures (it was in Syria that Christians were first called Christians). Russia is standing with them- though I wish she would take a stronger line; do you support the terrorists?

Er it's the USA that has kept the rightful president in place for the last however long.
Do you know any Syrians? I do and Muslim or Christian they hate the regime they endure.
Do I suport the terrorists? No but you do. I hope the people triumph and get something better than a gang of thugs that terrorize and brutalize the population as the Assad regime has done.

Syria is principally a destination country for women and children subjected to forced labor or sex trafficking; women from Indonesia, the Philippines, Somalia, and Ethiopia are recruited by employment agencies to work in Syria as domestic servants, but are subsequently subjected to conditions of forced labor; some economically desperate Syrian children are subjected to conditions of forced labor within the country, particularly by organized street begging rings; some Syrian women in Lebanon may be forced to engage in street prostitution and small numbers of Syrian girls are reportedly brought to Lebanon for the purpose of prostitution

The above from the CIA fact book should give you pause for thought about the regime you pro port to support.
Mans exploiatation of man has a long and tortured history, I don't expect it to stop anytime soon but to defend slavery as some kind of least worst option is just...mind boggeling.
Agree about industrialization btw, I sometimes think the death camps of the Third Reich were the true face of industrialization and part of the reason we moved our factories out of sight, eastwards. (just as mad as you in my own way )

HamletOrHecuba

tommy2bad wrote: »

Er it's the USA that has kept the rightful president in place for the last however long.
Do you know any Syrians? I do and Muslim or Christian they hate the regime they endure.
Do I suport the terrorists? No but you do. I hope the people triumph and get something better than a gang of thugs that terrorize and brutalize the population as the Assad regime has done.

The above from the CIA fact book should give you pause for thought about the regime you pro port to support.

Agree about industrialization btw, I sometimes think the death camps of the Third Reich were the true face of industrialization and part of the reason we moved our factories out of sight, eastwards. (just as mad as you in my own way )

Actually unlike the Baathist regime in Iraq the one in Syria has always strove towards as much independence as possible and so has been considered a thorn in the side of both the USA and Israel. Yes Assad is and has been far from perfect, but that doesnt take away from his real achievements and the fact that he is currently restraining far greater evils.

Strange also that all the Christian Syrians you know support the terrorists given that even the American media admits (albeit trying to qualify it) that the vast majority of Christians in Syria support the Baathists. http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/08/syrias-christian-conundrum/?hpt=wo_t2 Iraq and Libya show us what will happen if satanic alliance between Whabais and the CIA succeeds and it isnt pretty.

"Then we walk across to the Metropolia, where Metr Vladimir awaits us for dinner. 81 years old and born in Kazakhstan, he asks Archbishop Theodosius, the only Arab bishop of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, who is accompanying us, about the situation in Syria. (They speak in English, though the Metropolitan needs a little translation help). Years ago Metr Vladimir spent nearly two years in Damascus as a priest. Archbishop Theodosius confirms that if President Assad falls, Christians will be forced to leave completely, for many have already been massacred there by the American-armed Muslim fanatics. It will be the end of the Patriarchate of Antioch in Syria. Already forced out of Antioch (which is in Turkey), instead of being the Patriarchate of Damascus, as it actually has been for decades, it will be the Patriarchate of somewhere else – although still retaining the historic title ‘of Antioch’."

http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/withrocor2.htm

Also I would take with a pinch of salt anything that the CIA (its drug running and mind control experiments are not a matter for debate at this as both are clearly public knowledge) says; Weapons of Mass Destruction anyone?

Brer Fox

Some of the slaves didn't have it so bad if you look at the Uncle Remus stories. Seems right homely - nice black woman looking after the family. Of course, I wasn't there, so I don't know if it was generally representative of reality. Perhaps it wasn't.

Interestingly, today a friend was telling me that around the time slavery was abolished, the white supremacists looked for another way to deal with the black people. Enter the eugenicists with their forced sterilization and abortions for black people. It is of interest that most abortion clinics in the USA are in poor black neighbourhoods...

Doc Farrell

Brer do yourself a big favour and read up on the conditions of black slaves in America. This is the 21st century. Only a deeply disturbed individual considers slavery to be in any way acceptable. I'm being polite to you, it's time for you to read up on history rather than accepting the views of anonymous posters online.

HamletOrHecuba

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Brer do yourself a big favour and read up on the conditions of black slaves in America. This is the 21st century. Only a deeply disturbed individual considers slavery to be in any way acceptable. I'm being polite to you, it's time for you to read up on history rather than accepting the views of anonymous posters online.

Was St Paul deeply disturbed?

http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/slavery/southern_slavery_as_it_was.htm

You should do a bit of reading yourself on the subject.

Robert Owen who was hardly a raving reactionary had this to say;

“Bad and unwise as American slavery is and must continue to be, the white slavery in the manufactories of England was at this unrestricted period far worse than the house slaves which I afterwards saw in the West Indies and in the United States, and in many respects, especially as regards health, food and clothing, the latter were much better provided for than were those oppressed and degraded children and work-people in the home manufactories of Great Britain.”

Remember that your way of looking at the world is based on the overly soft life of present day western Europe which can only exist through similar misery that he describes in 19 th century Britain in the so-called Third World. Also given your previous support for the Dalai Lama your pontificating on this subject is rather strange; if you think he is a cool guy surely you must have no problems with the much worse form of slavery that he wants to bring back to Tibet?

tommy2bad

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Was St Paul deeply disturbed?

http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/slavery/southern_slavery_as_it_was.htm

Was St Paul deeply disturbed? , thats a rhetorical question, right?

Where in the name of all thats holy did you get that link, some google whack of 'slavery/good times on mammys lap' ?
Or more disturbing, are their, outside of right wing Aryan supremacist nut jobs, still apologists for slavery?
Dear Lord deliver us from temptation, mine being to slap you up side the head.
Would you ever cop on.

Just to add the pamphlet linked by HorH was co authored by this guy Duglas Wilson. http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/WilsonEmpire.htm

Benny_Cake

Anyone looking at slavery in southern states through rose-tinted spectacles should read the writings of Frederick Douglass, a friend of Daniel O'Connell who was himself an escaped slave:

Were I to be again reduced to the chains of slavery, next to that enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders whom whom I have ever met, religious slaveholders were the worst. I have ever found the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly, of all others. It was my unhappy lot not only to belong to a religious slaveholder, but to live in a community of such religionists.

It is perfectly possible to also disgusted by the exploitation of workers during the industrial revolution, and in much of the world today. It is pretty low to use that to detract from the evil of the ownership of human beings though.

Manach

As someone with a history background, I'd mention there were good and bad points to each side in that particular conflict. From an Irish perspective, most of our emigrants were found on the Northern side, however the prevalence of the distribution of where the Irish landed on the shores of the US. Where Irish units met in conflict with Irish units of the opposing side, that was the tragedy.

HamletOrHecuba

Benny_Cake wrote: »

ation of workers during the industrial revolution, and in much of the world today. It is pretty low to use that to detract from the evil of the ownership of human beings though.

You miss the point that most people today are basically slaves, the fact of formal freedom merely allows their masters to avoid responsibility. Some being in charge of others is just a fact of fallen life and inescapable once you get beyond very small social units- just look at the huge figures of drug addiction and imprisonment today among the descendents of former slaves and than tell me that slavery back in Dixie was really worse than the informal type of the present?

tommy2bad

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

You miss the point that most people today are basically slaves, the fact of formal freedom merely allows their masters to avoid responsibility. Some being in charge of others is just a fact of fallen life and inescapable once you get beyond very small social units- just look at the huge figures of drug addiction and imprisonment today among the descendents of former slaves and than tell me that slavery back in Dixie was really worse than the informal type of the present?

Masters? realy ? supioris or bosses maybe but masters? That implys owenrship.
No it dosn't alow them to avoid responcibility it makes the worker responcibil for his fate. Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights.

The difference in slavery and some being in charge is one not of degree but distint diference. One is an arangement by one person and the other is an arangement between two people.
Slavery is wrong or are you saying that if God gave some direction to the drug pushers as to how to fairly enslave the adicts then it would be ok?
"I say unto you let no junkie die from your product but get high only"

Corkfeen

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

You miss the point that most people today are basically slaves, the fact of formal freedom merely allows their masters to avoid responsibility. Some being in charge of others is just a fact of fallen life and inescapable once you get beyond very small social units- just look at the huge figures of drug addiction and imprisonment today among the descendents of former slaves and than tell me that slavery back in Dixie was really worse than the informal type of the present?

Most people aren't 'basically slaves' in the western world, this is highly insulting to the history of slavery. Drug addiction of one variety or another has been around since the beginning of civilisation so that's hardly an example of a new psychological form of slavery. While it is tragic, it is far more possible to treat it, in the present age.
The overall standard of living for the vast majority of the people in the west including those who have descendants that were slaves has improved. There's 7 billion people in the world, the amount of people in prison is always going to seem disproportionately high. Although admittedly, I would say that in America, you would have people targeted by smalltown polices because of their race. But slowly such injustices are being stamped out.

So yes, Slavery in the likes of Dixie was infinitely worse. People do have bosses but they can also quit. They don't have to buy their way out of their jobs and can't be treated as lesser beings because of their race. What's far more worrying is that you think there's a contrast....

Doc Farrell

Hamletorhecuba for the final time I am respectfully and clearly saying that I am not getting dragged into a discussion with you on political positions that most people consider unacceptable for a Christian to hold. When you attempted to argue that the holocaust denying excommunicated bishop was worthy of being included in a thread of Christian saints I realized that I was dealing with a super special type of poster.
I recommend that you step away from the internet and get involved with helping others on a practical level. I hope that you find some peace in your life and help to share that peace with others.
May God and all the saints in heaven help you out.

HamletOrHecuba

Doc Farrell wrote: »

.
I recommend that you step away from the internet and get involved with helping others on a practical level. I hope that you find some peace in your life and help to share that peace with others.
May God and all the saints in heaven help you out.

Are you so sure that I am not involved in helping others? What has given you this certainty? Remember what the Lord said about judging? I do take my duties towards others seriously however.

Also thanks to God I do enjoy peace despite everything and I can only experience this peace as a very special miracle for which I am very grateful for. Real, genuine, deep peace can only be found through the truth, through seeking and accepting the truth in all areas of existence. In this age truth is not handed to us on a plate.

Benny_Cake

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Benny_Cake wrote: »

ation of workers during the industrial revolution, and in much of the world today. It is pretty low to use that to detract from the evil of the ownership of human beings though.

You miss the point that most people today are basically slaves, the fact of formal freedom merely allows their masters to avoid responsibility. Some being in charge of others is just a fact of fallen life and inescapable once you get beyond very small social units- just look at the huge figures of drug addiction and imprisonment today among the descendents of former slaves and than tell me that slavery back in Dixie was really worse than the informal type of the present?

The choices for African-Americans aren't drug addiction or slavery - and in any case a drug addiction could be reformed easier than a slave in the ante-bellum South could be freed. By all means argue this with the descendant of a slave, if you feel like it.

Some people today do live very hard lives and we have many problems in this world. Again, one can be against the social evils in the world today without denying the evil that was slavery. I have no idea why you seek to make light of slavery, but it does seem to tie in with your championing of revisionist history and your disdain for democratic values.

HamletOrHecuba

Corkfeen wrote: »

The overall standard of living for the vast majority of the people in the west including those who have descendants that were slaves has improved.

Probably their standards of living are materially better I will give you that, though given the massive prison population of Afro-Americans in the USA and the state of US prisons I would not hold that true across the board; however is their quality of life which at the end of the day is the really important thing really better? And even more importantly are chances of Eternal Salvation better? I would say no.

Doc Farrell

I'm delighted for you! Now you share that peace here. Chill out with the political extreme stuff.

HamletOrHecuba

Doc Farrell wrote: »

I'm delighted for you! Now you share that peace here. Chill out with the political extreme stuff.

What extreme political stuff?

How do you define extreme?

To participate in Christ is to participate in eternity; in terms of the Church which is not bound by time or space my views are not extreme. There is no real peace to be found through allowing yourself to be tossed and thrown around by the shifting opinions and deceptions of this world.

wolfsbane

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Do you have any idea how lucky slaves were in the Southern States compared to those working in far worse and more dangerous conditions for longer hours with their masters taking of course no responsibility for their moral welfare in British and North American factories? When you factor in that than Lincoln's huffing and puffing comes across as bit sick doesnt it?

The oppression of the workers in England and elsewhere was a crime indeed. But to the best of my knowledge they were not abducted from their homeland and forced to work for free. Their wives were not sold off to other factory owners and their families broken up. Nor were whipping and manacling used as punishments for alleged poor performance. Nor did quitting the job result in execution.

*********************************************************************
Ecclesiastes 3:6 Moreover I saw under the sun:

In the place of judgment,
Wickedness was there;
And in the place of righteousness,
Iniquity was there.
17 I said in my heart,

“God shall judge the righteous and the wicked,
For there is a time there for every purpose and for every work.”

Sonics2k

It's not often that I'd agree with Wolfsbane on various theological matters, but in this case I very much do.

HorH, what exactly is wrong with you?

Yes, the treatment of people during the industrial ages were terrible, but to say that Slaves didn't have it that bad is just plain ignorant, nonsensical and honestly, kinda sick.

Pick up an actual history book and educate yourself please.

Slav

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

Nicholas Motivolov the friend of St Seraphim of Sarov Russia's greatest saint of the 19 th century wrote to Tsar Alexander II;

“The Lord and the Mother of God not only do not like the terrible oppression, destruction and unrighteous humiliation that is being wrought everywhere with us in Russia by the Decembrists : the goodness of God is also thoroughly displeased by the offences caused by Lincoln and the North Americans to the slave-owners of the Southern States, and so Batiushka Father Seraphim has ordered that the image of the Mother of God the Joy of all who Sorrow should be sent to the President of the Southern – that is, precisely the slave-owning States. And he has ordered that the inscription be attached to it : TO THE COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF LINCOLN… ”

There is one slight problem with this. Seraphim of Sarov died some 30 years before the American Civil War...

georgieporgy

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Anyone looking at slavery in southern states through rose-tinted spectacles should read the writings of Frederick Douglass, a friend of Daniel O'Connell who was himself an escaped slave:

.

Not all slaves were so bitter towards their religious masters. Perhaps there were good and bad religious folk then too?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704896104575139691810314722.html

Mr. Toussaint was born in 1766 in what was then St. Dominigue, a French-run Haitian slave colony. In 1787, his masters brought him to New York, where he was apprenticed to a hairdresser. In 1806, despite his official status as a slave, he took over his boss's business. He came to develop a wealthy Protestant clientele keen on the elaborate hairdos that were popular with aristocratic women of western Europe.

Benny_Cake

georgieporgy wrote: »

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Anyone looking at slavery in southern states through rose-tinted spectacles should read the writings of Frederick Douglass, a friend of Daniel O'Connell who was himself an escaped slave:

.

Not all slaves were so bitter towards their religious masters. Perhaps there were good and bad religious folk then too?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704896104575139691810314722.html

Mr. Toussaint was born in 1766 in what was then St. Dominigue, a French-run Haitian slave colony. In 1787, his masters brought him to New York, where he was apprenticed to a hairdresser. In 1806, despite his official status as a slave, he took over his boss's business. He came to develop a wealthy Protestant clientele keen on the elaborate hairdos that were popular with aristocratic women of western Europe.

Maybe so, but a gilded cage is still a cage. If, like Frederick Douglas, I was flogged until the blood ran down my back in streams by a "devout Christian", I might be understandably bitter. In any case Douglas was a Christian, what he was bitterly opposed to were those who presented themselves as devout Christians but cruelly enslaved their fellow human beings and sought to use Scripture to justify it. Religious hypocrisy in other words.

PDN

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

"THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: One of the most overlooked facts of the American Civil War Era is the sympathy the South gained from Europe's most influential monarch - the pope of Rome.

Pope Pius IX never actually signed any kind of alliance or 'statement of support' with the Confederate States of America, but to those who understand the nuance of papal protocol, what he did do was quite astonishing. He acknowledged President Jefferson Davis as the "Honorable President of the Confederate States of America."....

Pope Pius IX was a revered figure in the post war South. General Robert E. Lee kept a portrait of him in his house, and referred to him as the South's only true friend during her time of need."

http://catholicknight.blogspot.ie/2009/02/pope-pius-ix-and-confederacy.html

How different would history have been if the South had won. The Military-Industrial-Media complex that has come to dominate the world completely in the wake of World War II may well have been restrained.

So, what you're saying is that it was good for a Pope to support a regime based on slavery, but that another Pope who payed a goodwill visit to a synagogue should be excommunicated. Am I understanding you correctly?

georgieporgy

Benny_Cake wrote: »

Maybe so, but a gilded cage is still a cage. If, like Frederick Douglas, I was flogged until the blood ran down my back in streams by a "devout Christian", I might be understandably bitter. In any case Douglas was a Christian, what he was bitterly opposed to were those who presented themselves as devout Christians but cruelly enslaved their fellow human beings and sought to use Scripture to justify it. Religious hypocrisy in other words.

I agree with you Benny but lets call them hypocritical christians. (like IRA members for example)

Devout generally is understood as good and holy and sincere. Thanks for your post though. I hadn't heard of Frederick Douglas. I'll get his book.

HamletOrHecuba

PDN wrote: »

So, what you're saying is that it was good for a Pope to support a regime based on slavery, but that another Pope who payed a goodwill visit to a synagogue should be excommunicated. Am I understanding you correctly?

The Old South was not based on slavery.

However owning slaves is not objectively evil, while visting a synagogue is.

HamletOrHecuba

Slav wrote: »

There is one slight problem with this. Seraphim of Sarov died some 30 years before the American Civil War...

The quote refers to what his friend wrote to the Tsar not to him.

What was St Seraphim's attitude towards the Decemberists though? Lets remember that the majority of the Russian population were slaves, though serfs is a nicer word, at his time?

HamletOrHecuba

PDN wrote: »

So, what you're saying is that it was good for a Pope to support a regime based on slavery, but that another Pope who payed a goodwill visit to a synagogue should be excommunicated. Am I understanding you correctly?

Canons against saying that a Bishop of any sort should excommunicated for supporting a regime based on slavery? Scripture?

Sonics2k

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

However owning slaves is not objectively evil, while visting a synagogue is.

Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly what Jesus would of said.

Oh wait...

HamletOrHecuba

wolfsbane wrote: »

The oppression of the workers in England and elsewhere was a crime indeed. But to the best of my knowledge they were not abducted from their homeland and forced to work for free. Their wives were not sold off to other factory owners and their families broken up. Nor were whipping and manacling used as punishments for alleged poor performance. Nor did quitting the job result in execution.

No but it resulted in starvation. Remember people were hanged for stealing food, while stealing food if you were hungry was not considered a crime in Middle ages.

Remember that after the "Glorious Revolution" the majority of the British people were stripped of what remained of their ancient rights and forced off their land that had suddenly become the complete private property of the "lord" which it never was in the Christian centuries. Slave families being broken up in the Old South was rare, however look into the figures of prostitution in England from the start of the 19 th century to the destruction of the Old South. Look at how many people including children died as a result of working in dangerous conditions with people bullying them along.

Doc Farrell

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

The Old South was not based on slavery.

However owning slaves is not objectively evil, while visting a synagogue is.

When I was in Vilnius I was invited inside the last remaining synagogue. It had bullet holes on the walls. In 1939 there were 250,000 Jews living in Vilnius. Now there are a thousand.

Backseat modding removed

HamletOrHecuba

Sonics2k wrote: »

Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly what Jesus would of said.

Oh wait...

Saints owned slaves, name me a Saint who visted a Synagogue once the split in the Old Testament Church between those who accepted Christ and those who rejected became final?

Name me one place where Jesus condemns slavery?

Brer Fox

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

The Old South was not based on slavery.

However owning slaves is not objectively evil, while visting a synagogue is.

I wouldn't mind being a slave in these present economic hard times. I'd make a good butler or chauffeur. And in return, all I ask for is respect, clothing, medical care, a bed, ensuite bathroom, and food. :pac:

HamletOrHecuba

Brer Fox wrote: »

I wouldn't mind being a slave in these present economic hard times. I'd make a good butler or chauffeur. And in return, all I ask for is respect, clothing, medical care, a bed, ensuite bathroom, and food. :pac:

We have to deal with all this media nonsense and "popular culture" that has been thrown at us from a very age. The Gospel talks about the primacy of spiritual freedom; how many of us have that even though Christ offers us this?

Brer Fox

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

We have to deal with all this media nonsense and "popular culture" that has been thrown at us from a very age. The Gospel talks about the primacy of spiritual freedom; how many of us have that even though Christ offers us this?

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Yes, the media and culture corrupts us from an early age and renders us enslaved. Do you mean that slaves can have spiritual freedom despite being slaves? I guess that's true. The trouble with slaves is they are not always treated right, and human nature being what it is, perhaps it is fair to say that most slaves are not treated right. That is unfortunate.

If working for no pay (and that's the key, right?) but getting the basic necessities of life (food, respect, etc...) is slavery, then that is not necessarily a bad deal in my book.

Slav

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

The quote refers to what his friend wrote to the Tsar not to him.

So by the fact that Motovilov was spamming the Russian Tsars decades after the death of the saint you make some connection between Seraphim and the American Civil War? I fail to see your logic to be honest.

Are you suggesting that by the end of his life Seraphim of Sarov somehow knew a poor Kentucky teenager Abraham and wished his "complete destruction"?

What was St Seraphim's attitude towards the Decemberists though?

Apart from not very believable rumours that some time before the take-over attempt he refused to give blessings to Sergey Volkonsky, one of the key figure of the movement, there is probably nothing we can say about it. What's the connection between the Russian Decemberists and the American Civil War anyway?

Lets remember that the majority of the Russian population were slaves, though serfs is a nicer word, at his time?

First, let's remember that the idea that the majority of Russian population was under serfdom is a common myth, even though I don't understand why it's important to remember it in the context of this thread. However, there are 3 other points that might be important to remember as they give some useful insight to the context of those Motovilov's letters:

1) Motovilov, the author of that letters, was a "pomeshchik" - landowner which de facto translated to "slave owner" in 17-19 century Russia,

2) A couple of months before the American Civil War (and so before that letter) Russia finally abolished the serfdom by the decree of the addressee of that letter, Tsar Alexander II,

3) During the American Civil War Russia undoubtfully supported the North, probably more than any other European high power, even to the extent of sending two fleets to New York and San Francisco. Arguably this was the key factor why France remained rather passive in its support of the South, Britain remained somehow neutral, and that it effectively prevented the intervention of Europe on the Confederation side.

A British caricature of the two bad guys at that time (President A.Lincoln and Tsar Alexander II):

Slav

tommy2bad wrote: »

As to the value of a Russian opinion of the war of northern agression (nice southern euphemism:rolleyes:) Do you support their stance on Syria now too?

I somehow managed to miss your post Tommy but by mentioning Syria here you are actually making an interesting point. Sorry HorH and mods for the total off-topic belonging to the politics forum, but there are funny parallels between the role of Russia in American and Syrian civil wars:

• Same as with the American Civil War, Russia insist that a settlement between the fighting parties is the only viable option in conflict resolution.

Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs Gorchakov, 1861:
"The struggle which unhappily has just arisen can neither be indefinitely prolonged, nor lead to the total destruction of one of the parties. Sooner or later it will be necessary to come to some settlement, which may enable the divergent interests now actually in conflict to coexist.",

Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs Lavrov, 2012:
"Moscow believes the UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan's plan is the indispensable foundation for settlement of Syria's protracted political crisis. [....] It is crucial to consolidate efforts of all key players thus providing fully-fledged implementation of Annan's proposals."

• Same as 150 years ago Russia did not have contacts with Confederation, it now only officially communicates with the Syrian government,

• Same as during the American Civil War, Russian Navy are nearby,

• Same as during with the American Civil War, Russian Navy are there not to fight on one of the sides of the conflict but to prevent the foreign military intervention.

One can argue whether it's good or bad foreign policy but they will probably admit that at very least it's rather consistent, which is quite amazing given all the turbulence that Russia went through during that 150 years.

wolfsbane

HamletOrHecuba said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfsbane
The oppression of the workers in England and elsewhere was a crime indeed. But to the best of my knowledge they were not abducted from their homeland and forced to work for free. Their wives were not sold off to other factory owners and their families broken up. Nor were whipping and manacling used as punishments for alleged poor performance. Nor did quitting the job result in execution.
No but it resulted in starvation. Remember people were hanged for stealing food, while stealing food if you were hungry was not considered a crime in Middle ages.

Remember that after the "Glorious Revolution" the majority of the British people were stripped of what remained of their ancient rights and forced off their land that had suddenly become the complete private property of the "lord" which it never was in the Christian centuries. Slave families being broken up in the Old South was rare, however look into the figures of prostitution in England from the start of the 19 th century to the destruction of the Old South. Look at how many people including children died as a result of working in dangerous conditions with people bullying them along.

The depravity of the aristocracy and capitalists in Britain had them well on the road to a French-style revolution. Deservedly so. But God's grace in sending the Great Revival turned the tide, and Christian influence began to moderate the excesses of the wicked elite. Christian leaders challenged the wickedness and reformed society to a significant extent. They did not condone the evils in the name of liberty of office.

Perhaps it came down to which direction both corrupt societies were moving - Britain away from abuses, the Old South maintaining them. Had the South shown a willingness to phase-out slavery, radical surgery would not have been required. But they were totally committed to it. Some no doubt reluctantly, tied to it for economic survival.

As to 'good' slavery, I'm sure there was some. Rather, some cases were better than others. But so much of Afro-American slavery was based on kidnapping rather than debt settlement, and as such was wicked to begin with. Kind treatment of such slaves did not remove the guilt of enabling the oppression to continue - and it was a massive business.

That's what brought God's judgement on America. And brings it on all nations from time to time. What a nation sows, it will reap.

*******************************************************************
Well you may throw your rock and hide your hand
Workin' in the dark against your fellow man
But as sure as God made black and white
What's done in the dark will be brought to the light

You can run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Sooner or later God'll cut you down
Sooner or later God'll cut you down

Go tell that long tongue liar
Go and tell that midnight rider
Tell the rambler, the gambler, the back biter
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut you down
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut you down
Tell 'em that God's gonna cut you down

Traditional; Johnny Cash.

Run_to_da_hills

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Brer do yourself a big favour and read up on the conditions of black slaves in America. This is the 21st century. Only a deeply disturbed individual considers slavery to be in any way acceptable. I'm being polite to you, it's time for you to read up on history rather than accepting the views of anonymous posters online.

Slavery is certainly live and well in the private run us prison system.

The majority of those serving lengthy sentences are of black decent, many of them for petty crimes under the three strikes law.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25376

Doc Farrell

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Doc Farrell wrote: »

Brer do yourself a big favour and read up on the conditions of black slaves in America. This is the 21st century. Only a deeply disturbed individual considers slavery to be in any way acceptable. I'm being polite to you, it's time for you to read up on history rather than accepting the views of anonymous posters online.

Slavery is certainly live and well in the private run us prison system.

The majority of those serving lengthy sentences are of black decent, many of them for petty crimes under the three strikes law.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25376

I'm not sure if you are addressing me but I tend to agree with your point although I haven't clicked on the link. There is certainly a disproportionate number of African Americans behind bars as many thousands of reports have shown.
However that definition of slavery is different to the older definition, to be facetious, the prisoners' children cannot be sold off.
The idea of a new world order by the way is not a conspiracy theory. All religions and political ideologies have built into them an ambitious system which can be called a new world order philosophy. Most of these philosophers be they politicians, priests or generals are fairly blatant in their intentions, making conspiracy theories pretty much unnecessary.
Take it handy.