Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs and Iran war

Published

on

Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs and Iran war

WAHOO, Neb. (AP) — Strong winds whipped around Doug Bartek, a fifth-generation farmer, as he headed into a grain bin to shovel soybeans onto a conveyor chute. The 60-year-old was anxious at the onset of the spring planting season, rattling off the long list of issues affecting his family’s livelihood at their 2,000-acre farm near Wahoo, Nebraska.

The high cost of fuel, equipment, and fertilizer — compounded by the Iran war — and also tariffs, perceived “price gouging” by suppliers, and low soybean prices driven by a global supply glut. All of it weighs on Bartek, who is chairman of the Nebraska Soybean Association.

“Our biggest struggles are our inputs, be it fertilizer, seed, chemical, parts,” Bartek said. “There has been so much drastic markup in all of these. And I just kind of feel like the farmer’s kind of painted in the corner.”

Soybeans from last year's harvest are loaded into a truck at Doug Bartek's farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Soybeans from last year’s harvest are loaded into a truck at Doug Bartek’s farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Bartek’s concerns are shared by many Midwest soybean producers. Costs, such as equipment, have crept up over time while soybean prices have stayed low. Tariffs levied by the Trump administration last year and the resulting monthslong trade war with China only made things worse, they say. Then the Iran war bottled up shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, restricting global fertilizer supplies and sending fertilizer prices sky high. A ceasefire deal announced April 7 raised hope that bottlenecks in the strait would abate, but the future of the agreement was uncertain.

AP AUDIO: Already under financial pressure, Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs, Iran war

AP correspondent Julie Walker reports already under financial pressure, Midwest soybean farmers are squeezed further by tariffs, Iran war.

“A lot of producers are pretty nervous going into this year,” said Justin Sherlock, a soybean farmer and president of the North Dakota Soybean Growers Association. “It looks like we’re going to have another year of negative returns.”

Years of rising costs, low soybean prices

Soybeans, which are used for livestock feed, food and biofuels, are among the top U.S. agricultural exports. That hasn’t always been the case. Before the 1960s soybeans weren’t a major crop in the U.S, according to Chad Hart, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University. It wasn’t until the 1990s that soybean production accelerated due to international demand — primarily from China — and soybeans and corn are now dominant in U.S. agriculture.

But U.S. soybean farmers, who typically also grow corn, have been facing financial issues for years even before the onset of the Iran war. Soybean prices have been persistently low in recent years. The global market has been awash in soybeans, driven in part by Brazil, which surpassed the U.S. as the world’s largest soybean producer years ago.

“If we look at global soybean production over the past several years, it continues to set record, after record, after record,” Hart said. “There’s been just large supplies globally, and that has led to depressed prices.”

Dalton Bartek works a field to prepare for planting soybeans on his family's farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Dalton Bartek works a field to prepare for planting soybeans on his family’s farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Meanwhile, Midwest soybean farmers’ costs have risen. Overall farm production expenses, including seed and pesticide, have increased over time, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Operating costs for soybean production have stayed elevated since 2020 and are projected to increase again in 2026, according to the agency.

The cost of land also is a major issue for farmers, experts say. Midwest crop land values have increased. And most regional farmers rent some of their land, according to Joana Colussi, research assistant professor in the department of agricultural economics at Purdue University.

Bartek, who rents three-quarters of his land, said landowners are increasing rents, causing further financial strain.

“There’s a lot of what I call absentee landowners that have absolutely no idea what goes on on the farm,” he said. “All they know is their taxes went up and you get to make up the difference, some way, somehow.”

“They’re very concerned about negative margins driven by low prices and high cost,” said Paul Mitchell, a professor of agricultural and applied economics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, of farmers. “There’s just a liquidity cash crunch for a lot of them and they’re just trying to figure out how to deal with everything.”

The number of farms in the U.S. has shrunk over time and consolidation in farming is a long-term trend, though farmers’ financial pressures wrought by high input costs and low commodity prices have contributed, Hart said. Larger farms tend to be more competitive and depend on large, expensive machinery.

“The financial reserves need(ed) on a farm are much greater than they used to be,” Hart said. “We’re a bit more sensitive to the financial conditions these days because so much capital is being utilized within the farm business.”

Tariffs, trade war have lasting impacts

Market forces aren’t the only issue weighing on farmers. Sweeping tariffs levied by President Donald Trump in April 2025 exacerbated a trade war with China, the top buyer of U.S. soybeans. China responded with retaliatory tariffs and effectively boycotted U.S. soybeans, cutting off a major export market for Midwest farmers and driving the price of soybeans even lower.

“When that was announced and soybean prices basically collapsed, if you could afford to hold on to your beans and wait for better times, you were OK,” said Mike Cerny, a soybean, and winter wheat corn farmer in Sharon, Wisconsin. “If you had a mortgage due or payments due or cash flow needs and you had to sell at that point, you were taking it pretty rough.”

Doug Bartek shovels soybeans in a bin on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Doug Bartek shovels soybeans in a bin on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

The U.S. and China eventually reached a deal in late 2025. Beijing committed to buying 12 million metric tons of soybeans by January and at least 25 million metric tons annually for the next three years. China has since met its initial soybean purchase goal and the Trump administration also rolled out a $12 billion temporary aid package in December to boost farmers affected by the trade war.

But the damage is already done, experts and farmers say. While China’s renewed purchases and the federal payments are helping, it’s not enough to recover farmers’ losses. Even after federal assistance, farmers still lost almost $75 per harvested acre of soybeans in the 2025 crop, according to the American Soybean Association. And the trade war further pushed China toward competing soybean e xporters, such as Brazil — accelerating a trend of declining U.S. soybean exports to China.

“When China decided to stop purchasing, we couldn’t find enough other markets to replace those sales,” Hart said. “We’re still feeling the impacts today. When you look at where soybean exports are today versus where we would normally expect them to be, we’re still running anywhere from 15% to 20% behind normal.”

Joseph Glauber, former chief economist at the Department of Agriculture between 2008 and 2014, said global competitors to U.S. soybean farmers gained from the trade war.

“When China has put on tariffs against the U.S. they’ve tended to buy then from Brazil or Argentina, largely Brazil,” Glauber added. “We’re not nearly as dominant in the world as we used to be in terms of the global export market for soybeans.”

Iran war drove up fuel, fertilizer costs

After the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, a severe slowdown in shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz sent the price of oil soaring. The shipping disruption also largely stopped the export of nitrogen fertilizers manufactured in the Persian Gulf and limited access to key fertilizer ingredients. The price of urea, the most widely traded nitrogen fertilizer, skyrocketed.

Soybeans don’t require nitrogen fertilizer, but it’s vital for corn and most soybean farmers also grow corn. About half the global supply of urea comes from the Middle East, and Qatar and Saudi Arabia are two of the top sources of U.S. fertilizer imports, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation.

The U.S. and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire last week that included reopening the strait of Hormuz, but traffic remained slowed amid disagreements over Israeli attacks in Lebanon, and the price of urea remains elevated.

Many Midwest farmers bought their fertilizer well in advance of the spring planting season. But some farmers who didn’t buy early face elevated prices. Dave Walton, a corn, soybean, and hay farmer in Iowa and vice president of the American Soybean Association, said in March that some of his neighbors didn’t have cash on hand last fall to buy fertilizer and were struggling to budget for fertilizer due to high prices.

Doug Bartek transfers soybeans from a storage bin to a truck on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Doug Bartek transfers soybeans from a storage bin to a truck on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

The war also caused gasoline and diesel prices to surgecausing further headaches for farmers. Oil prices dropped following the ceasefire announcement, but the war and the closure of the strait will have lasting impacts on farmers, said Seth Goldstein, a senior equity analyst at Morningstar, an investment research company. Facilities in the Middle East that are critical for exporting chemicals, oil and other commodities were damaged or destroyed during the war and it will take time for supply chains to recover, he said.

“Facilities have been hit, like liquid natural gas plants,” Goldstein added. “You are also looking at a big supply crunch in commodity chemicals, which are the inputs for crop chemicals.”

“We burn a lot of diesel fuel,” said Chris Gould, a corn and soybean farmer in Maple Park, Illinois. “It’s hard to say if I’m gonna come out ahead or behind on this whole deal. But I suspect I’m gonna come out behind.”

Concerns about the future

Farmers’ financial problems are showing up in some measures. Farm bankruptcies, while still relatively low, continued to climb in 2025, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. In a survey of 400 farmers conducted by researchers at the Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture in late March, almost half said their farm operation is financially worse off than it was a year ago.

Goldstein, the Morningstar analyst, said farmers’ high costs and low revenues contributed to the spike in bankruptcies between 2024 and 2025. If costs rise faster than crop prices going forward, he added, that “would strain farmers again and likely lead to more bankruptcies.”

Doug Bartek talks about high production costs and tough market conditions for the soybeans he grows on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Doug Bartek talks about high production costs and tough market conditions for the soybeans he grows on his farm near Wahoo, Neb., on Monday, April 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

After 43 years of farming, Bartek said the smell of fresh dirt still gets him excited for spring planting. But he’s also heard of farmer suicides, bankruptcies and “retirement sales” where farmers are forced to auction off their operations due to financial problems. Bartek compares farmers to gamblers who put “millions of dollars in the dirt” hoping for returns.

At times, Bartek doubts his own decision to go into farming. He’s also worried about his son, who purchased a farm a few years ago.

Bartek wonders: “Did I do the right thing helping him get into farming?”

___

Kelety reported from Phoenix.

___

This story is a collaboration between Lee Enterprises and The Associated Press.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Trump says not to rush as details emerge of a potential Iran deal

Published

on

Trump says not to rush as details emerge of a potential Iran deal

CAIRO (AP) — The United States is close to reaching a deal with Iran that would end the warreopen the Strait of Hormuz and see Iran give up its stockpile of highly enriched uraniumregional officials told The Associated Press on Sunday, though U.S. President Donald Trump said he told representatives “not to rush into a deal.”

Trump said negotiations were “proceeding in an orderly and constructive manner,” and the relationship with Iran was becoming “much more professional and productive.” He pushed back against criticism by some fellow Republicans seeking a tougher approach.

The agreement would not be signed Sunday, according to a person familiar with the status of negotiations who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. The sides have previously seemed close to a deal in recent weeks, only to falter.

The strait’s reopening would ease a worldwide energy crisis sparked by the U.S. and Israeli bombardment of Iran on Feb. 28, which led Tehran to effectively close the waterway. Prices have spiked for oil, gas and related products. Experts say it would take several weeks or even months for shipping and prices to recover once the strait reopens.

The U.S. has blockaded Iranian ports for over a month, and Trump said it “will remain in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed.”

The emerging deal would include Iran giving up uranium

Under the potential deal, Tehran would agree to give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, according to the two regional officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive negotiations.

One official, with direct knowledge of the negotiations, said how Iran would give up the uranium would be subject to further talks during a 60-day period. Some would likely be diluted, while the rest would be transferred to a third country, the official said. Russia has offered to take it.

A U.S. official confirmed the 60-day period and said if Iran doesn’t give up its stockpile there will be no sanctions relief. The official spoke on condition of anonymity about the emerging deal because it has not been made public.

Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Iran has not publicly committed to giving up its uranium, a key Trump demand. President Masoud Pezeshkian told state TV they were ready “to assure the world that we are not after a nuclear weapon.”

Iran has always insisted its program is peaceful while enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels, and asserts its right to nuclear technology.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, on a visit to Indiasaid that “significant progress, although not final progress, has been made” in negotiations, and the world would no longer need to fear Iran getting a nuclear weapon.

Rubio told India Today that the “first stage” ahead would be the full reopening of the strait. “The second is that Iran needs to enter into serious negotiations on three topics: their pledge never to have nuclear weapons, restrictions long-term on their enrichment capabilities, and what do you do with the highly enriched uranium?”

Trump has sought greater concessions from Iran than those required under a 2015 Obama-era agreement that the U.S. later withdrew from under Trump.

On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told the state-run news agency there are “narrowing differences” between the Iranian and U.S. positions, but Iran is cautious after being attacked twice in the past year during nuclear negotiations.

The strait would reopen and Iran would be able to sell oil

Under the emerging agreement, the Strait of Hormuz would gradually reopen in parallel with the U.S. ending its blockade, the two regional officials and the U.S. official said. The U.S. official said the strait would be demined, though a U.S. official on Friday said the military has not found any mines there.

The U.S. would allow Iran to sell its oil through sanctions waivers, said the second official, who has been briefed on the negotiations. Sanctions relief and the release of Iran’s frozen funds would be negotiated during the 60-day period, the official said.

Both officials said the draft deal includes an end to the war between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militant group in Lebanon that began two days after the Iran war started.

Twelve weeks have passed since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran, killing its supreme leader and other top officials. A ceasefire has held since April 7, though the sides have exchanged fire on occasion.

Israel remains concerned over Hezbollah

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a social media post said he and Trump agreed that “any final agreement with Iran must eliminate the nuclear danger,” and that Trump had reaffirmed Israel’s right to defend itself “on every front, including Lebanon.”

The U.S. official said the deal would guarantee Israel’s right to act against imminent threats in self-defense.

Israeli officials are concerned that Hezbollah remains a serious threat to Israel and that Lebanon is ill-equipped to disarm it.

A fragile, U.S.-brokered ceasefire took effect in Lebanon on April 17, but fighting has continued, mainly in the south. Hezbollah has launched daily drone and rocket attacks on Israeli forces and northern Israel, and Israel has struck targets across Lebanon while its troops remain in large swaths of the south.

More than 3,000 people have been killed in the latest fighting, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry. Additionally, 22 Israeli soldiers and a defense contractor have been killed in or near southern Lebanon, and two civilians have been killed in northern Israel, according to Netanyahu’s office.

___

Superville reported from Washington and Lidman from Tel Aviv, Israel. Associated Press writers Aamer Madhani in Washington, Sheikh Saaliq in New Delhi and Munir Ahmed in Islamabad contributed to this report.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

I’m not voting for Spencer Pratt — but I’m still glad he’s running for L.A. mayor

Published

on

ByHelaine R. I am

No one should be surprised that a reality show star-turned-social media influencer can do well in a political race. We just need to look to the White House to know that. They have a knack for speaking uncomfortable truths in a way that gets maximum attention.

What is forever the shock at who is doing that. So, let me get this out of the way at the outset: No, I don’t support Spencer Pratt’s quest for mayor of Los Angeles. I have even donated to one of his opponents, Los Angeles City Council member Nithya Raman. But I am surprised to discover that I owe Pratt – yes, the same Spencer Pratt best known as the villainous, troublemaking cad on the MTV’s The Hills – a debt of gratitude for interjecting a much-needed dose of reality into the city’s mayoral race.

Think of it as the electoral equivalent of saying “the emperor has no clothes,” updated for the social media age.

A registered Republican in a largely Democratic city, Pratt is shaking up what looked to be a sleepy mayoral election. He has jumped to second place in the polls by using social media (including supporter-generated AI content) to channel voter rage at not just the city’s striking deterioration, but the political establishment’s seemingly complacent attitude toward it. He’s particularly highlighted the failures that led to the devastating Pacific Palisades wildfire – in which Pratt, his family, and thousands of other city residents lost their homes – and the city’s intractable issues with homelessness and tent encampments. Think of it as the electoral equivalent of saying “the emperor has no clothes,” updated for the social media age.

He’s far from alone in his fury. Many residents believe the City of Angels has become a hellishly difficult place to live. Housing prices – both to buy or rent — are high. The streaming bubble has burstand Hollywood is in a protracted recession. Shoots increasingly likely to take place in locales offering more generous tax credits and easier, cheaper permitting. The roads are increasingly dotted with potholesas the cash-strapped city has ceased most repaving projects. Even the city’s animal shelters are mired in crises and scandal. Corruption and incompetence are endemic, with $2.4 billion in homeless funds simply unaccounted for. No surprise, a large majority of voters say the city is headed in the wrong direction.

Yes, it’s quite likely Pratt’s not up for the job. When asked, he said he would rely on an unnamed expert “team” to advise him. TMZ scooped that though Pratt cut a campaign ad claiming he is residing in a trailer, he’s actually been living in a swanky Bel Air hotel. And according to TMZ and Deadline, production on a reality show about his campaign is underway, with Pratt’s full participation. A “reality show” mayor is not the solution to the city’s problems.

But the performance of the city’s political class hardly inspires confidence. Incumbent Karen Bass infamously skipped town before the outbreak of the Pacific Palisades wildfire on a less-than-necessary diplomatic mission to Ghana, and failed to return early even after Hurricane Katrina-like wind warnings were issued. Bass says that film and TV productions are up from their lows and homelessness is down from the highs. But these very incremental gains are clearly thin gruel to many voters.

The other main challenger, DSA-affiliated Raman, often speaks eloquently on the need to tackle the city’s housing and business bureaucratic bottlenecks, And her assessment of Pratt as a “mini Trump” is hyperbolic but understandable, given the thinness of some of his suggested fixes and the nastiness undergirding many of his attacks. Yet her suggestion that the city should up its outreach and better coax people living on the streets to accept help sounds more like a doubling down on the unpopular and largely ineffective status quo.

As of now, few analysts believe Pratt – currently polling in second place – can prevail in a general election.

Pratt is calling much of this out: “Business as usual is a death sentence for Los Angeles,” he says, and promises he will make the city “camera-ready again.” Instead of rationalizing the city’s homeless crisis, he calls for “no more encampments” and says he will have “zero tolerance” for public drug use.  As for Raman’s plan?  “These people don’t want a bed. They want fentanyl or super-meth.” (He also suggested if she actually approached a homeless addict, she could “get stabbed in the neck.” Charming.)  At a mayoral debate earlier this month, Pratt made mincemeat of Raman, forcing many pundits to reckon more seriously with his campaign.

The jungle primary is in less than two weeks, with the top two finishers competing in November. Polls have Bass in the lead — but with only about 30 percent of the vote. This, you probably don’t need me to tell you, is a dreadful showing for an incumbent – and one that bespeaks problems in November.

As of now, few analysts believe Pratt – currently polling in second place – can prevail in a general election. Los Angeles is always a Democratic stronghold,  ICE raids weigh heavily in voters’ minds, and Trump is so unpopular here that his recent support for Pratt are more likely to hurt the reality star than help him. Yet while Raman currently stands a better chance in a one-on-one against Bass, polls put her in third place, behind Pratt.

But, in the meantime, Pratt’s done Los Angeles a favor. The Hills was, in its own way, a love letter to Los Angeles. Forcing the city’s political establishment to acknowledge voter concerns and at least begin to address them is also an act of love. Even when it’s done by an operator like Spencer Pratt.

Helaine R. I am

Helaine R. Olen is the author of “Pound Foolish: Exposing the Dark Side of the Personal Finance Industry” and a co-author of “The Index Card: Why Personal Finance Doesn’t Have to Be Complicated.” She has been a columnist for The Washington Post and Slate, and her work has also appeared in numerous other publications, including The New York Times and The Atlantic.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Pope Leo XIV apologizes for Vatican’s role in legitimizing slavery

Published

on

Pope Leo XIV apologizes for Vatican’s role in legitimizing slavery

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Leo XIVmade a historic apology on Monday for the role the Holy See played in legitimizing slavery and for having failed to condemn it for centuries, calling the Vatican’s record a “wound in Christian memory.”

Past popes have apologized for Christians’ involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. But no pope had ever publicly acknowledged, much less apologized for, the role that past popes played in giving European sovereigns explicit authority to subjugate and enslave “infidels.”

History’s first U.S.-born pope, whose family historyincludes both enslaved people and slave owners, delivered the apology in his first encyclical, “Magnifica Humanitas,” (Magnificent Humanity), which was released Monday.

The sweeping manifesto is about safeguarding humanity in an era of increasing reliance on artificial intelligence. Leo raised the trans-Atlantic slave trade in relation to what he called the new forms of slavery and colonialism that the digital revolution is fueling, such as the unregulated labor practices in procuring rare minerals needed for AI chips.

Anthea Butler, senior fellow at the Koch History Center, Oxford University, said Leo needed to acknowledge and atone for the Catholic Church’s complicity in historic slavery if he wanted to credibly “speak to the current issues of technological enslavement.”

“For descendants of enslaved persons, this is once again a much needed apology from the pope,” said Butler, who is Black.

Black American Catholics, activists and scholars have long called for the Holy See to atone for its role in the colonial-era trade in human beings, beyond more generic apologies for the involvement of individual Christians.

“It is impossible not to feel deep sorrow when contemplating the immense suffering and humiliation endured by so many in stark contrast to their immeasurable dignity as persons infinitely loved by the Lord,” Leo wrote. “For this, in the name of the church, I sincerely ask for pardon.”

Centuries of legitimizing slavery for European colonizers

The Vatican has insisted that it always upheld the dignity of all human beings as children of God. But a series of 15th-century directives from the Vaticanauthorized Portuguese sovereigns to conquer Africa and the Americas and enslave non-Christians.

In 1452, for example, Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas, which gave the Portuguese king and his successors the right “to invade, conquer, fight and subjugate” and take all possessions — including land — of “Saracens, and pagans, and other infidels, and enemies of the name of Christ” anywhere.

The bull also gave the Portuguese permission “to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery.”

That bull and another issued three years later, Romanus Pontifex, formed the basis of the Doctrine of Discoverythe theory that legitimized the colonial-era seizure of land in Africa and the Americas.

Nicholas V’s permissions to the Portuguese were confirmed or renewed by Pope Callixtus III in 1456, Pope Sixtus IV in 1481 and Pope Leo X in 1514, according to the Rev. Christopher J. Kellerman, a Jesuit priest and author of “All Oppression Shall Cease: A History of Slavery, Abolitionism, and the Catholic Church.”

Spanish kings received the rights for the Americas.

In 2023, the Vatican formally repudiated the Doctrine of Discoverybut it never formally rescinded, abrogated or rejected the bulls themselves. The Vatican insists that a later bull, Sublimis Deus in 1537, reaffirmed that Indigenous peoples shouldn’t be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, and weren’t to be enslaved.

Holy See late to condemn slavery, Leo says

In his encyclical, Leo recalled that his namesake, Pope Leo XIII, was the first pope to explicitly condemn slavery in 1888, long after many countries had abolished it. Before that, in antiquity and the Middle Ages, even church institutions had slaves.

In acknowledging the Holy See’s role and the 15th-century papal bulls, Leo wrote in his encyclical: “Already in the early modern period, the Apostolic See of Rome, responding to the requests of sovereigns, intervened several times in order to regulate and legitimize forms of subjugation, and, in certain cases, including the enslavement of ‘infidels.’”

Leo said that it wasn’t possible to judge the morality of the decisions with today’s standards.

“Yet neither can we deny or diminish the delay with which both society and the church came to denounce the scourge of slavery,” he said.

The pope said that the church has long affirmed the dignity of every human being as the basis of its doctrine, “even if it took eighteen centuries for its full incompatibility with slavery to be explicitly recognized.”

“This constitutes a wound in Christian memory, one from which we cannot consider ourselves detached,” he said.

Leo said that the church must firmly condemn all forms of trafficking related to the digital technological revolution “if we want to avoid the need to ask for pardon again in the future for having failed to respect the treasure of human dignity that is required by our faith.”

Leo’s own family history and past apologies

Kellerman, the scholar, welcomed Leo’s apology but said more needs to be done to further acknowledge and atone for how the Catholic Church legitimized and expanded slavery.

“Pope Leo has strengthened the moral credibility of the church with this admission and apology today,” he told The Associated Press. “Hopefully a future document will explain in more detail the church’s involvement with slaveholding. As a scholar I have some quibbles with the wording, but this is a truly remarkable moment.”

During a 1985 visit to Cameroon, St. John Paul II asked forgiveness of Africans for the slave trade on behalf of Christians who participated in it. In a 1992 visit to Goree Island, Senegal, which was the largest slave-trading center in West Africa, he denounced the injustice of slavery and called it a “tragedy of a civilization that called itself Christian.”

According to genealogical research published by Henry Louis Gates Jr., 17 of Leo’s American ancestors were Black, listed in census records as mulatto, Black, Creole or a free person of color. His family tree includes slaveholders and enslaved people, Gates wrote in The New York Times.

During a visit to Angola last month, Leo prayed at a Catholic shrine at the site of an important hub of the African slave tradeduring Portugal’s colonial rule. While at the Sanctuary of Mama Muxima, Leo recalled the “sorrow and great suffering” Angolans endured for centuries, but he didn’t refer specifically to slavery.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending