The Historical Complicity Of The Church: A Legacy Of Resistance To Moral Progress
The Mt Kenya Times 
By: Midmark Onsongo
Worth Noting:
- The claim that the Church resisted the abolition of slavery is similarly backed by undeniable historical evidence. The transatlantic slave trade, which forcibly transported over 12 million Africans to the Americas, was sanctioned by religious institutions, including the Catholic Church. For centuries, the Church either remained silent on or explicitly supported the institution of slavery, embedding it within European Christian doctrine.
- Pope Nicholas V’s Dum Diversas in 1452 and Romanus Pontifex in 1455 laid the groundwork for the enslavement of non-Christians by European powers. These papal decrees provided theological justification for the capture, trade, and enslavement of Africans, fueling the transatlantic slave trade for centuries.
Did you know that nearly every significant advancement in morality, from ending native genocide, to abolishing slavery, to granting women the right to vote, was opposed by the Church and Christian organizations. This critique brings into focus the historically conservative role that religious institutions, particularly the Catholic Church, have played in resisting social justice movements. To fully understand the depth of these claims, it is essential to dive into specific instances of moral progress, and the Church’s documented resistance to them.
The Church’s Role in Native Genocide (15th Century Onwards)
The claim that the Church resisted the end of native genocide is grounded in historical reality. When Christopher Columbus arrived in the Americas in 1492, the Catholic Church, alongside European colonial powers, supported the Christianization and conquest of indigenous populations. Colonization in the Americas led to the systematic extermination of native peoples through violence, forced labor, and disease. This era marked one of the darkest chapters in human history, where the Church not only condoned but actively participated in the destruction of entire civilizations. For example, Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas in 1452, granting Christian nations the authority to subjugate non-Christian peoples and seize their lands. This decree effectively sanctioned the genocide of native populations under the guise of spreading Christianity. Although some voices within the Church, such as Bartolomé de las Casas, spoke out against the brutality inflicted on native peoples, the overarching power of the Church facilitated the continuation of these atrocities for centuries.
Despite later attempts by some members of the Church to advocate for indigenous rights, it was undeniable that the Catholic Church, as an institution, endorsed colonization, and only when these genocidal practices had reached irreparable damage did the Church begin to take a softer stance. By the time any form of recognition of the native populations’ plight came into view, millions had already been wiped out. The Church’s resistance to acknowledging the full humanity of native peoples was evident throughout this period.
Slavery: Church Support and Delayed Opposition (15th to 19th Century)
The claim that the Church resisted the abolition of slavery is similarly backed by undeniable historical evidence. The transatlantic slave trade, which forcibly transported over 12 million Africans to the Americas, was sanctioned by religious institutions, including the Catholic Church. For centuries, the Church either remained silent on or explicitly supported the institution of slavery, embedding it within European Christian doctrine.
Pope Nicholas V’s Dum Diversas in 1452 and Romanus Pontifex in 1455 laid the groundwork for the enslavement of non-Christians by European powers. These papal decrees provided theological justification for the capture, trade, and enslavement of Africans, fueling the transatlantic slave trade for centuries. The Church’s role in this system cannot be understated, as its moral endorsement allowed European nations to engage in the exploitation of African labor on an industrial scale. It wasn’t until the 19th century, long after the economic engine of slavery had begun to lose its viability, that the Church began to speak out against the practice. Pope Gregory XVI’s papal bull In Supremo Apostolatus of 1839 condemned the slave trade, but it was too little, too late. By this time, countless lives had been destroyed, and the institution of slavery had embedded itself in global economies, particularly in the Americas.
The Church’s opposition to abolitionist movements during the 18th and 19th centuries stands as a stark reminder of its historical complicity. While some clergy members supported abolition, the Church as a whole lagged behind moral progress. Slavery persisted long after abolitionist movements gained momentum, with the Church’s resistance contributing to the delayed emancipation of millions.
Women’s Rights and Suffrage: A Reluctant Acceptance (19th to 20th Century)
The image’s claim regarding the Church’s resistance to women’s rights and suffrage is equally supported by historical fact. Throughout much of its history, the Catholic Church, alongside many Christian denominations, upheld a deeply patriarchal view of society. Women were considered inferior to men, with their primary roles confined to domestic duties and childbearing. The idea that women could hold positions of power or participate in political life was seen as contrary to divine will. The women’s suffrage movement, which emerged in the mid-19th century, faced considerable opposition from religious institutions, including the Catholic Church. Leading suffragists such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton often found themselves at odds with the Church, which viewed the demand for women’s political participation as a threat to the natural order. Christian teachings were frequently cited as justification for denying women the right to vote, with biblical passages interpreted to reinforce male dominance in both the home and the public sphere. It was not until after the suffrage movement had achieved significant victories, such as the passage of the 19th Amendment in the United States in 1920, that the Church began to soften its stance on women’s political participation. However, this shift did not signal a broader embrace of gender equality. To this day, the Catholic Church maintains strict gender roles, barring women from holding positions of authority within the clergy and perpetuating the notion that women are inherently subordinate to men.
While some individual members of the Church have advocated for women’s rights, the institution itself has been a consistent force of resistance to gender equality. The Church’s opposition to women’s suffrage and broader feminist movements is well documented, with its influence slowing the progress of gender equality well into the 20th century.
Why the Church Resisted Moral Progress
The Church’s resistance to these major advancements in human rights and social justice is deeply rooted in its historical role as a conservative institution. For much of its existence, the Catholic Church, alongside many other Christian organizations, held immense power over both spiritual and temporal matters. This power was often used to preserve the status quo, which included systems of oppression such as colonization, slavery, and patriarchy.
The Church’s doctrinal teachings, based on centuries-old interpretations of scripture, provided a framework that justified the subjugation of marginalized groups. In many cases, the Church acted as a moral gatekeeper, using its influence to maintain hierarchies that benefited the ruling classes while suppressing movements for equality and justice. It was only when these movements became too powerful to ignore that the Church began to change its stance, often long after the majority of society had moved forward.
This is a stark reminder of the Church’s long history of opposition to moral progress. Whether in its complicity in the genocide of native peoples, its sanctioning of slavery, or its resistance to women’s rights, the Church has frequently been on the wrong side of history. While there have always been individuals within the Church who fought for justice, the institution itself has often acted as a bulwark against change.
As society continues to grapple with issues of human rights and social justice, it is important to remember the lessons of history. The Church, like many powerful institutions, has often resisted the forces of progress, only to later accept and even embrace the very changes it once opposed. The moral advancements we celebrate today—freedom from oppression, equality, and justice—were hard-won, often in spite of, rather than because of, the Church’s influence.
In recognizing this history, we can better understand the ongoing struggles for justice and equality in the present. Moral progress requires courage, persistence, and a willingness to challenge even the most powerful institutions when they stand in the way of a more just and equitable world.
This article was scripted by;
MIDMARK ONSONGO
(Sustainable economist, Geopolitics strategizer
Similar Posts by The Mt Kenya Times:
- Mt Kenya Times ePAPER August 20, 2026
- Wheelbarrows all round: Mt Kenya’s opposition war within a war
- Maraga’s ultimatum to Ruto: release the police report — or I will
- NCIC summons Gachagua to answer for his words — or face arrest
- Meru nurses hold firm as nationwide strike enters 22nd day
About the Author
