It was only in the nineteenth
century that a formal, absolute and universal condemnation of slavery was
clearly articulated, notably under Pope Leo XIII. (Leo XIV, “Encyclical
Letter Magnifica Humanitas of His Holiness Pope Leo XIV on Safeguarding
the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence,” May 15, 2026)
Note (no. 175) for the above:
Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical
Letter In
Plurimis (5 May 1888), Acta Leonis XIII, VIII, Rome,
1889, 169-192. Consider that, as late as 1866, the Holy Office distinguished
between the immoral and moral aspects of slavery, without fully condemning
it: Instruction of the Holy Office on various doubts of Monsignor
Massaia, Vicar Apostolic in the country of the Galla, April 1866, response
to question no. 15.
“Instruction of the Holy Office, June 20, 1866”:
15. Whether Christians and even
missionaries can licitly be present as witnesses or agents or other such name
at contracts, judgments or other types of public acts which deal with slaves
according to the laws of those peoples.
[Response] Although the Roman
Pontiffs have left nothing untried by which servitude be everywhere abolished
among the nations, and although it is especially due to them that already for
many ages no slaves are held among very many Christian peoples, nevertheless,
servitude itself, considered in itself and all alone (per se et absolute),
is by no means repugnant to the natural and divine law, and there can be
present very many just titles for servitude, as can be seen by consulting the
approved theologians and interpreters of the canons. For the dominion which
belongs to a master in respect to a slave is not to be understood as any other
than the perpetual right of disposing, to one’s own advantage, of servile work,
which dominion it is legitimate for a person to offer to another person. From
this it follows that it is not repugnant to the natural and divine law that a
slave be sold, bought, exchanged, or given, as long as in this sale, or buying,
or exchange or giving, the due conditions which those same approved authors
widely follow and explain, are properly observed. Among these conditions those
which are to be especially looked at are whether the slave who is put up for
sale has been justly or unjustly deprived of his liberty, and that the seller
does nothing by which the slave to be transferred to another possessor suffer
any detriment to life, morals or the Catholic faith. Therefore, Christians,
about whom one is speaking in the first question, can licitly buy slaves or, to
resolve a debt, receive them as a gift, as long as they are morally certain
that those slaves were not taken from their legitimate master or reduced to
slavery unjustly. For if the slaves who are offered for sale have been taken
from their legitimate master, it is not permitted to buy them, because it is a
crime to buy what belongs to another and has been taken, the master being
unwilling, by theft. If, however, they have been unjustly reduced to slavery,
then one must determine whether they are unwilling to be sold or given to Christians
or whether they consent to it. If they are unwilling, they can by no means be
bought or received, since the captives themselves are masters of their own
liberty, although it has been unjustly taken from them. If indeed, after they
have been fully taught that freedom belongs to them by right and which they
lose only by injury to others, they spontaneously and by their own free will,
as masters of themselves, present themselves to Christians to be received by
them and held in servitude, by a prudent plan in order to be freed from the
harsh present servitude, from which they have in no way the ability to free
themselves, and choose a milder servitude in the hands of Christian buyers and
with whom they are easily able to persuade themselves that they can come to a
knowledge of worshipping the true God, and of confessing Him to the inestimable
advantage of their souls; in such circumstances it is permissible for the
Christians, especially when they act in favor of the Faith, to purchase such
captives for a just price, and to take and retain them in their own servitude,
as long as they are of the mind to treat them according to the precepts of
Christian charity, and take care to imbue them with the rudiments of the Faith
so that, if it is possible, they may be freely and happily led, this being done
by no compulsion, but only by opportune persuasion and encouragement, through
their conversion to the True Faith into the liberty of the sons of God which is
found only in the Catholic Church. On this matter one should look at the
instruction of His Holiness Pius VI (Sept. 12, 1776), which is attached.
Indeed, just as slaves can be
licitly bought, so they can licitly also be sold, but it is altogether
necessary that the seller is the legitimate possessor of the slave, and does
nothing in the sale by which the life, morals or Catholic faith of the slave to
be sold would be harmed. Therefore it is illicit to sell a slave or in any
manner give the slave into the ownership of any master who by a certain or
probable judgment can be foreseen to be going to treat that slave inhumanely,
or lead him to sin or abuse him for the sake of that most evil trade which has
been condemned and strictly prohibited by the constitutions of the Roman
Pontiffs, especially by Pope Gregory XVI. Likewise it is illicit to sell a
slave, taking no account of the marriage rights and duties of that same slave.
Much more illicit is it so sell a Christian slave to a faithless master, or
even, where the danger of falling away is prudently to be feared, to an
heretical or schismatic master. If he keeps these things properly in mind, the
Vicar Apostolic will clearly see what response is to be given to questions 13,
14, and 15. For nothing impedes any Christian family — as mentioned in question
13 — from selling their slaves in good conscience, if they possess them
legitimately and, in the sale, observe the cautions described above. So also
the seller mentioned in question 14 can be admitted to the sacraments if it is
a fact that the slaves who have come into his possession as pay, have not been
taken from their rightful master by theft nor been unjustly reduced to slavery,
and if he furthermore solemnly promises that he will sell them in such moral
conditions that none of the rights and duties which belong to them as men —
and, if they have it embraced the Christian faith, as Christians — will be
harmed or endangered by the sale. Finally in respect to question 15 it is
determined that the Christians themselves, even missionaries, can be present as
witnesses and as agents — or any other name not prohibited by the sacred canons
— in contracts, judgments and other public acts of this types done in respect
to slaves as long as the acts are licit in themselves and are vitiated by no
evil circumstance.
