Still about point (1) of Ramana.
But before christian slavery of Africans, there was christian slavery of Europeans after the christian takeover-and-destruction of the Roman Empire. It too was different from Roman slavery and the evolution thereof, because the christian kind was motivated by the babble.
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B3c.htm#AncientSlavery
I'm pasting some select bits from here, can't be bothered plunking it all down
Even the bits not in <quote> tags are from the page)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->...it is quite a mistake to suppose that all the work in Greece and Rome was done by slaves. ...To the Greeks and Romans it seemed that enslaving a man was a humane improvement upon the older practice of killing him when he was taken captive: whereas the Christian nations raided Africa for the express purpose of enslaving men. Finally, it is a sheer myth that the Christian Church abolished slavery, or made any protest whatever against it for many centuries; yet I have already quoted a Greek moralist, Alcidamas, condemning slavery in the fourth century B.C., and one Stoic moralist after another condemned it.
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe, historian and former Franciscan monk<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There can be no doubt that, <b>if the Roman Empire had continued and developed normally, slavery would have been abolished.</b>
...the entire empire rested to a great extent upon slave-labor. The immense privileges even of the Roman working men were based upon the labor of slaves in the provinces.
<b>Yet public feeling was profoundly affected by the Stoic principle, and the "manumission" of slaves -- the grant or sale of freedom to them -- was a daily occurrence.</b> Even before Christ this liberation proceeded on so large a scale that the Emperor Augustus checked it for a time, on political grounds. The Stoics urged it and facilitated it, and the final term of the movement was certain.
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Now Compare:</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It is an historical fact, supported by the most positive of evidence that slavery in the Roman Empire was mitigated by the noble philosophy of the Stoics and not by the teachings of the church fathers, who never thought of recommending the abolition of slavery.
-- History of Civilization, by historian Emil Reich<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>The first Christian Roman Emperor, Constantine (c274-337) actually undid most of the humane laws to alleviate the position of slaves laid down by his pagan predecessors.</b> He permitted parents to sell their children into slavery and allowed finders of abandoned children to bring them up as slaves. He also issued a decree which stipulates the death penalty for any Christian woman who had sexual intercourse with a slave; that the slave would also be put to death is a foregone conclusion. [The Social Record of Christianity, Joseph McCabe]
Link<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Constantine decreed that slaves owned by Jews were to be freed if they embraced Christianity, but that a free woman who gave herself to a pagan slave was to be burned, and the slave executed.
-- Faiths of Man Encyclopedia of Religions, J.G.R. Forlong<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Here is another historical truth to underline: For eight hundred years no Christian leader condemned slavery. And here is one for the Roman Catholic: No Pope ever condemned slavery. In Rome the Pope saw more slavery than in any other city in the world.
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Bible</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Throughout the Bible slavery is as cheerfully and leniently assumed as are war, poverty, and royalty. In the English Bible there is frequent mention, especially in the parables, of "servants." The Greek word is generally "slaves."</b>
Jesus talks about them as coolly as we talk about our housemaids or nurses. Naturally, he would say that we must love them: we must love all men (unless they reject our ideas). But there is not a syllable of condemnation of the institution of slavery. Fornication is a shuddering thing; but the slavery of fifty or sixty million human beings is not a matter for strong language. Paul approves the institution of slavery in just the same way. -- He is, in fact, worse than Jesus. He saw slaves all over the Greco-Roman world and he never said a word of protest.
As to the customary quibble, that these reforms were "implied" in the teaching of Jesus... It reminds me also of the great achievement of Pope Leo XIII, who at last (in the eighteenth century of Papal power) found the courage to declare that the worker was entitled to "a living wage." But when the clergy found that working men of the nineteenth century were not so easily duped by phrases, and wanted to know what was a living wage, the Pope refused to answer the questions privately submitted to him. <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->See more: The Bible on Slavery
<b>History of Church and slavery</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Only in 867 did the Church concern itself with slaves' marriages; for the pious [5th century Christian Roman Emperor] Theodosius held that "slaves were too vile to be worthy of legal notice."
...
- Christian slaves were not permitted to partake of the Eucharist without their master's consent, as decided by the [4th century] Council of Laodicea; and
in 541 A.C. the Council of Orleans required that the descendants of slaves should be re-enslaved.
- The Council of Toledo in 633 A.C. forbade bishops to set free church slaves, or to sell Christian slaves to any but Christians, and
- other Councils made laws about slaves down to 1179 A.C.
- The Abbey of St Germain des Prés owned 80,000 slaves, and that of St. Martin de Tours 20,000.
-- Faiths of Man Encyclopedia of Religions, J.G.R. Forlong<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Its conscience was only shocked when a Jewish or Heathen master owned Christian slaves. <b>Nay, the Church not only held slaves itself, not only protected others who held slaves, but it thundered against all who should despoil its property by selling or liberating slaves belonging to the Church.</b>
- The Council of Agatho, 506, considered it unfair to enfranchise the slaves of monasteries, seeing that the monks themselves laboured.
- The Council of Toledo, 597, stigmatised as robbers those who set free the slaves of the Church without giving an equivalent.
- The Council of Epaona, 517, prohibited abbots from emancipating the slaves of their monasteries.
<b>Slaves were bequeathed to the Church by will, or given as an act of piety, and never was the gift refused.</b> The Church, too, held its slaves to the end. In France, in his day, Voltaire [18th century] estimated that the Church held between 50,000 and 60,000 slaves.
-- Christianity, Slavery and Labour, by Chapman Cohen<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
---- excerpting is over. I can't be bothered pasting anymore. Too much copy and paste, too tiring... Read the page http://freetruth.50webs.org/B3c.htm#AncientSlavery if you want more shocks.
But before christian slavery of Africans, there was christian slavery of Europeans after the christian takeover-and-destruction of the Roman Empire. It too was different from Roman slavery and the evolution thereof, because the christian kind was motivated by the babble.
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B3c.htm#AncientSlavery
I'm pasting some select bits from here, can't be bothered plunking it all down
Even the bits not in <quote> tags are from the page)<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->...it is quite a mistake to suppose that all the work in Greece and Rome was done by slaves. ...To the Greeks and Romans it seemed that enslaving a man was a humane improvement upon the older practice of killing him when he was taken captive: whereas the Christian nations raided Africa for the express purpose of enslaving men. Finally, it is a sheer myth that the Christian Church abolished slavery, or made any protest whatever against it for many centuries; yet I have already quoted a Greek moralist, Alcidamas, condemning slavery in the fourth century B.C., and one Stoic moralist after another condemned it.
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe, historian and former Franciscan monk<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There can be no doubt that, <b>if the Roman Empire had continued and developed normally, slavery would have been abolished.</b>
...the entire empire rested to a great extent upon slave-labor. The immense privileges even of the Roman working men were based upon the labor of slaves in the provinces.
<b>Yet public feeling was profoundly affected by the Stoic principle, and the "manumission" of slaves -- the grant or sale of freedom to them -- was a daily occurrence.</b> Even before Christ this liberation proceeded on so large a scale that the Emperor Augustus checked it for a time, on political grounds. The Stoics urged it and facilitated it, and the final term of the movement was certain.
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Now Compare:</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It is an historical fact, supported by the most positive of evidence that slavery in the Roman Empire was mitigated by the noble philosophy of the Stoics and not by the teachings of the church fathers, who never thought of recommending the abolition of slavery.
-- History of Civilization, by historian Emil Reich<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>The first Christian Roman Emperor, Constantine (c274-337) actually undid most of the humane laws to alleviate the position of slaves laid down by his pagan predecessors.</b> He permitted parents to sell their children into slavery and allowed finders of abandoned children to bring them up as slaves. He also issued a decree which stipulates the death penalty for any Christian woman who had sexual intercourse with a slave; that the slave would also be put to death is a foregone conclusion. [The Social Record of Christianity, Joseph McCabe]
Link<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Constantine decreed that slaves owned by Jews were to be freed if they embraced Christianity, but that a free woman who gave herself to a pagan slave was to be burned, and the slave executed.
-- Faiths of Man Encyclopedia of Religions, J.G.R. Forlong<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Here is another historical truth to underline: For eight hundred years no Christian leader condemned slavery. And here is one for the Roman Catholic: No Pope ever condemned slavery. In Rome the Pope saw more slavery than in any other city in the world.
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Bible</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Throughout the Bible slavery is as cheerfully and leniently assumed as are war, poverty, and royalty. In the English Bible there is frequent mention, especially in the parables, of "servants." The Greek word is generally "slaves."</b>
Jesus talks about them as coolly as we talk about our housemaids or nurses. Naturally, he would say that we must love them: we must love all men (unless they reject our ideas). But there is not a syllable of condemnation of the institution of slavery. Fornication is a shuddering thing; but the slavery of fifty or sixty million human beings is not a matter for strong language. Paul approves the institution of slavery in just the same way. -- He is, in fact, worse than Jesus. He saw slaves all over the Greco-Roman world and he never said a word of protest.
As to the customary quibble, that these reforms were "implied" in the teaching of Jesus... It reminds me also of the great achievement of Pope Leo XIII, who at last (in the eighteenth century of Papal power) found the courage to declare that the worker was entitled to "a living wage." But when the clergy found that working men of the nineteenth century were not so easily duped by phrases, and wanted to know what was a living wage, the Pope refused to answer the questions privately submitted to him. <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
-- The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->See more: The Bible on Slavery
<b>History of Church and slavery</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Only in 867 did the Church concern itself with slaves' marriages; for the pious [5th century Christian Roman Emperor] Theodosius held that "slaves were too vile to be worthy of legal notice."
...
- Christian slaves were not permitted to partake of the Eucharist without their master's consent, as decided by the [4th century] Council of Laodicea; and
in 541 A.C. the Council of Orleans required that the descendants of slaves should be re-enslaved.
- The Council of Toledo in 633 A.C. forbade bishops to set free church slaves, or to sell Christian slaves to any but Christians, and
- other Councils made laws about slaves down to 1179 A.C.
- The Abbey of St Germain des Prés owned 80,000 slaves, and that of St. Martin de Tours 20,000.
-- Faiths of Man Encyclopedia of Religions, J.G.R. Forlong<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Its conscience was only shocked when a Jewish or Heathen master owned Christian slaves. <b>Nay, the Church not only held slaves itself, not only protected others who held slaves, but it thundered against all who should despoil its property by selling or liberating slaves belonging to the Church.</b>
- The Council of Agatho, 506, considered it unfair to enfranchise the slaves of monasteries, seeing that the monks themselves laboured.
- The Council of Toledo, 597, stigmatised as robbers those who set free the slaves of the Church without giving an equivalent.
- The Council of Epaona, 517, prohibited abbots from emancipating the slaves of their monasteries.
<b>Slaves were bequeathed to the Church by will, or given as an act of piety, and never was the gift refused.</b> The Church, too, held its slaves to the end. In France, in his day, Voltaire [18th century] estimated that the Church held between 50,000 and 60,000 slaves.
-- Christianity, Slavery and Labour, by Chapman Cohen<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
---- excerpting is over. I can't be bothered pasting anymore. Too much copy and paste, too tiring... Read the page http://freetruth.50webs.org/B3c.htm#AncientSlavery if you want more shocks.