Guo Kang believes that for the church, there is a key issue: are the various doctrines and rules in the church goals or means.
In the past, when the Catholic church faced this problem, its thinking was very clear, and it knew that these specific measures were for a higher purpose. However, later on, they seemed to have a collective problem.
If it were just a party struggle, it would be easier to explain, but the church's performance in East Asia for hundreds of years has always been in a state of intellectual failure.
If the priests are arrogant towards different civilizations, it cannot explain their behavior in other places. Back then in South America, the church was not like this.
Spanish priests have long been committed to opposing the persecution of Native Americans, demanding a ban on massacres and abuses, and even opposing forced conversions of Native Americans. Driven by the Dominican monks, the Pope issued an encyclical in 1537, officially recognizing the Indians as "rational people" and declaring that they had the right to freedom and property, as well as the right to convert to the Church, and that they should be preached to them in a peaceful manner.
On this basis, the clergy continued to operate within the secular regime, trying to prevent the colonists from exploiting and enslaving the locals. Driven by them, in 1550, Charles V ordered a halt to further Spanish military expansion in the Americas, and at the same time organized priests and scholars to debate the legality of the conquest. The debate was held at the University of Valladolid, hence its name.
The Valladolid debate was the first discussion on the rights and treatment of indigenous people in European history, and it was also a rare theoretical discussion at the national level.
Some priests believe that although the Indians have some barbaric customs, it is because their societies are at a different stage of civilization. These people are still free people in the natural order. Their legal status should not be lower than that of European colonists, and there is no reason to be subject to them. conquest and strict control. These theories were supported by monarchists and gained many adherents.
But at that time, a group of emerging humanists opposed this. They believed that the Indians committed a large number of unnatural crimes that were unacceptable and should be stopped by any possible means, including war. At the same time, the actions of these people also proved that they were unable to govern themselves, so they needed colonists to rule. The views of this group were supported by the colonists and were diametrically opposed to the former.
In the end, neither party convinced the other, but the church's tendency was very obvious and had an impact on society. Beginning in 1556, the king issued an edict to strictly control the publication of works about the Americas and prohibit domestic discussions on the justice of the conquest. Some priests' notebooks were specifically ordered to be sealed, and they were also prohibited from compiling new books, causing ideological turmoil in society.
In addition, the king even thought of a way and issued a new decree, announcing that the word "conquer" would no longer be used in the future, and both parties would have to use "reconciliation" instead. But this act of changing sensitive words still failed to control the surge of public opinion in society.
Finally, in 1573, the king simply issued an order prohibiting further conquests. Although this kind of order cannot control the other side of the Atlantic, the fact that it has caused such a stir shows how outrageous things are. In fact, even the most notorious conqueror leaders in America corresponded with scholars who supported colonization in the rear, hoping to gain their theoretical support to strengthen their confidence.
Murder and robbery of money actually triggered moral condemnation, and even made the colonists themselves confused. They began to reflect on whether there was something wrong that needed to be sorted out through debate. This may seem incredible to some later colonial powers.
The Jesuits, who arose later, were even more radical than them in this regard. After finding that lobbying the superiors would not help solve the problem, some priests even ran into the woods and began to lead the indigenous people and colonists to fight. Finally, some colonies simply declared all Jesuits persona non grata to prevent them from causing trouble all day long.
However, in East Asia, this situation has never occurred. For hundreds of years, the church was in a state of being unable to find any examples of his participation in the anti-colonial movement.
Even if you have to say that the Qing Dynasty is a pagan country and is not worthy of help, then you can participate in the anti-Qing Dynasty - but in the end, you can't find anything in this regard.
Moreover, this situation does not only occur in the Central Plains, but also in other countries in East Asia, and it is even more straightforward. When France and Vietnam were at full war, Vietnamese Catholics clearly sided with France. Catholics in the south responded directly to the French army, "many took advantage of the situation to intimidate civilians, or formed groups to serve as foreign defenders and spies." In the north, French missionaries and military officers also supported local Catholic rebellions.
This whole process is tantamount to telling all East Asians that those who believe in foreign religions are on the side of the foreigners and cannot be trusted. This style will undoubtedly lead to rejection.
What really pushed the situation to the forefront was a series of bizarre behaviors. For example, in the late Qing Dynasty, the people of Seris never understood what the foreign-educated infant care centers were doing. The place adopted a large number of babies, but the infant mortality rate was alarmingly high. There are frequent speculations about this among the people, but there is no doubt that everyone thinks this is too evil and not something a serious religious would do. Therefore, it became the trigger for the subsequent revenge vendetta.
And what are these priests doing?
According to doctrine, if a person is guided to worship the Heavenly Father, then the priest who preaches can also gain the approval of the Heavenly Father. When a new soul joins the church through the baptism ceremony, the baptizing priest will also receive a merit.
However, preaching is a hard and dangerous job; and existing believers do allow their newborn children to be baptized directly, but these people belong clearly and have long been divided up by various dioceses.
In this case, how can we achieve performance quickly and easily? Some priests came up with the idea of adoption.
Adopted babies have no clear religious affiliation and no expression of rejection. But the souls of babies are also souls, and bringing them into the church is a merit of equal weight.
Therefore, by constantly adopting babies and then quickly baptizing them, you can accumulate merit quickly and easily.
However, there are too many adopted babies and their living conditions are very poor. In addition, priests only want to gain the merit of joining the religion, and often do not take care of them seriously, resulting in a very outrageous death rate.
In later generations, some people said that this was the priests doing good deeds with all their heart, while others said that they were deliberately killing people, but in fact they are not accurate - this was the priests playing a bug and taking the opportunity to gain the merits of the Heavenly Father...
Of course, in the eyes of those around who do not believe in religion and do not know these principles, this kind of behavior is both evil and unclear. It is obviously no different from the obscene worship of a cult.
But in this environment, the priests still don't know it. They are unwilling to improve their methods, look down upon the locals, and are too lazy to appease them. Even when public opinion is already boiling, they still rely on their status as foreigners and do not take the local people's ideas seriously.
To put it bluntly, he was so arrogant, ignorant and greedy that even Heavenly Father and Heavenly Brother might not want to spare him.
(End of chapter)
