October 13, 2025: Columbus Day? Indigenous People’s Day?
Yesterday at Mass, Fr. Taste hit another homer in his homily based on Luke 17:11-19, the one where the Samaritan Leper is among 1hose who are healed, but is the only one who goes back to say Thank You…. Father T is in my neighborhood age wise, and he started his sermon with a quotation from one of Garrison Keillor’s books – where a couple had a little party on their 50th anniversary, and it wasn’t until afterwards that the Mr. got around to telling the Mrs. he loved her. I interpreted the message he had for all of us: be grateful to ourselves and to others. There are infinite ways, the best, small. In these days, gratitude is something to practice.
*
For the last several weeks I have been watching the fascinating Nova series, “Human”, on PBS. The final local showing (Episode 5) is on TPT Channel 2 on Wednesday October 15, 8 p.m. Central Time. For the entire series, check in with Nova. If you can watch at home, the entire series is well worth your time. Narrator and host Ella Al-Shamahi brings the story of homo sapiens to life. This weeks episode, the final one, apparently explores the most recent historical period of humankind – most likely the pre- and post-Christopher Columbus periods. Check out the series: it’s okay to see the last episode first!
Heather Cox Richardson discusses the history of Columbus Day in her October 12 column here.
In my state, Minnesota, today is recognized as Indigenous People’s Day, in concert with the annual United Nations event. Minnesota is one of 17 U.S. states recognizing and celebrating the day.
*
Yesterdays Basilica of St. Mary newsletter commentary by Janice Andersen was very relevant to the current days, I felt. Here it is: Janice Andersen Oct 12 20250001
*
The big news on Sunday, and of course today, the pending peace in Israel/Gaza. I am not inclined to go overboard on optimism. Today is a single day in a very long and troubled history in the region and is are no magic long term solutions. Stay tuned. Last news I saw or heard – on purpose – was yesterday afternoon.
COMMENTS (more below)
from Jeff: [Columbus Day] is a “Democrat” holiday…hahaha…trump must not have known…
from Joann: Thank you, Dick. Your messages are insightful and helpful.
from Brian: I work a lot with Native Americans. I’m on the board of one of their credit unions, in Montana, that I helped them start. Thanks so much for your great post!
from Norm: I want to offer the following comments regarding the agreement in Gaza:
Let’s clear something once and for ALL!!
PLEASE SHARE!
Tell your children, grandchildren, great-grands, and so on…
CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS DID NOT “DISCOVER” AMERICA!
AMERICA WAS NOT LOST!
THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE WERE ALREADY HERE, HAD BEEN FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS!
The Doctrine of Discovery is a set of legal and religious principles that emerged in the 15th century from papal decrees to justify European colonization of non-Christian lands. It asserts that European powers could claim sovereignty and “discover” and seize lands that were not inhabited by Christians.
This concept ignored the rights and presence of indigenous peoples.Although formally repudiated by the Vatican in 2023, the doctrine’s legacy continues to influence legal and political systems, such as those in the United States and Canada.
IN 2023!
How it worked
Papal decrees: The doctrine originated in a series of papal bulls (official decrees) that granted Christian monarchs the authority to claim and conquer lands and peoples outside of Christian Europe. Christian superiority: It was based on the belief that European culture and religion were superior to all others.
“Terra nullius”: It gave rise to the concept of terra nullius (Latin for “nobody’s land”), which was used to legitimize the seizure of land from indigenous populations, even when they had lived on it for generations.
Legal precedent: The doctrine was incorporated into the legal systems of colonizing nations, including the United States, where it was established as a legal precedent in cases like Johnson v. McIntosh (1823).
Legacy and current status
Ongoing impacts: Despite being a 15th-century concept, the doctrine’s legacy continues to affect indigenous rights and land claims today.
Vatican repudiation: In 2023, the Vatican formally repudiated the Doctrine of Discovery, stating that it is not part of the Catholic faith and that it was used to justify injustices against indigenous peoples. ( Generated by AL.)
Legal reform: Some countries, like Canada, have taken steps to reject the doctrine, such as passing laws to harmonize their legal system with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
The Doctrine of Discovery, 1493
The Gilder Lehman Institute.
American History. History
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/doctrine-discovery-1493
Dick, Since you brought up Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples’ Day, this is as good a time as any for me to get up on my soap box and point out what has been so misguided about many actions of our Democratic/DFL left wing. In this case, it’s really REALLY simple. Indigenous Peoples’ Day is a great idea. I 100% support it and think others should too. But it didn’t have to be on the same day that was designated some decades ago to be “Columbus Day”. And, OMG, is sure didn’t HAVE to be presented as a full-on replacement for, and repudiation of, Columbus Day. All that was purely gratuitous. I do NOT understand why “we” (everyone left of center, generally) feel as though it’s a good idea to DO this. And we DO do this, over and over, on issue after issue. It’s gotten to the point where, when considering whether or not to support some liberal/progressive cause, one of my very FIRST questions is “If we do this, what kind(s) of ‘rubbing our opponents’ noses in it’ will follow?” And, to then consider whether my eventual revulsion over that will outweigh the good (potentially) being done. It’s no way to “do change”…
No, I personally feel that turning Columbus Day into indigenous day is perfectly fine. What Columbus did to the indigenous people, especially on the islands was an absolute disgrace. He came with the Bible in one hand and a sword in the other.
However,,I don’t believe that we should be pulling down statues. I think we should leave those statues up and change the wording on the signs. We need to tell the truth about the sons of a bitches that’ are being represented with those statues. And we need to have people who know the oral history of those statues, and are willing to tell the world who those people were and what they did.
And that includes Columbus, who discovered nothing. He just stumbled onto some land after he got lost.
Carlo – Well… yes and no. Let me respond “in parts”.
Your middle paragraph first: You are spot-on here. Never mind pulling down statues – I think it’s important to address peacefully removing them by consensus, too, so that we can just bypass the whole complicating matter of “actions by mobs”. The big problem with removing statues, or renaming places, etc., is that you can only do it once per statue. Those who say one is “erasing history” are fundamentally correct. One is not actually making it such that the “history” did not happen, as critics of this stance like to point out, but one IS making it such that the “conversation” we have for a short time prior to removal will be very unlikely to happen again, ever. As such, it just makes it LESS likely that our yet-unborn descendants will understand what happened, why it happened, etc. The important part of “history” is NOT that “Joe Schmoe” existed, it is WHY we named a Federal Building after him many years ago, or erected a statue of him in the town park – and whether we would still think that is a good idea today. Absent the building’s plaque or the statue, any lessons our progeny might gain from knowing about “Joe” largely disappear. Not good.
As to your opening and closing: You are making two classical analytical mistakes, which I do not mean as an indictment of you. We all make them. Still, it’s important to try not to.
First, you are judging Columbus’ activities in the late 15th and early 16th centuries by the standards of today, rather than the standards of his time. The latter are all he can be fairly judged by. It is important when reading revisionist history to ALSO read critiques of the revisionists. As applied to the “sword and Bible” trope, it is important to also understand that the Indigenous people of the western hemisphere also had spiritual beliefs, also had weapons of war, and also periodically killed each other with the latter, in service to the former. Not to mention that every ethnic and cultural group in the eastern hemisphere had been doing so to each other since before the western hemisphere had even been inhabited. Columbus did not invent “sword and Bible”. Like everyone – everywhere, up to that time – he engaged in a known practice.
Second, the “bumbling Columbus” argument is an example of the paired assumptions that, if the “bumbling” or the “lucky” hadn’t done something, no one would have, AND, that the bumbler should get no credit. Some European mariner was going to achieve landfall somewhere on the western edge of the Atlantic, sometime. And, given other activities of the era, that sometime was going to be relatively soon. What Columbus did… was… he DID it. First. That’s not negligible. In fact, it’s a really big deal. And to say he “discovered nothing” is absurd. True “discovery” is ALWAYS, at least in part, accidental or unintentional. I am retired from a career in intellectual property law. Both US and International (U.N. sponsored) Patent Law recognize that if a “development” can be totally predicted, it is not “inventive”. The legalistic phrase used (in US law) is “non-obvious”. That Columbus would hit land that was NOT Asian, and encounter previously unknown PEOPLE, was non-obvious to Europeans of his time. He most definitely discovered SOMETHING. But like the late inventor of the adhesive on Post-It Notes (who was a friend of mine!), he discovered something he was not exactly looking for. It happens! And Thank Goodness it does.