Richard A. Snyder
New Era
September 19, 1990
 
 
             "Council of Churches condemns Columbus"
 
     Christopher Columbus tried for years to get funds from
France, Portugal and England before he hit it lucky in Spain.
     King Ferdinand of Aragon and his wife and co-ruler, Queen
Isabella of Castile, sponsored his venture.  The king was grumpy
about it but Isabella furnished three ships.
     As every pupil knows (or should know) Columbus sailed west
thinking he would land in Asia.
     A happy sailor sighted a West Indian island and on October
12, in the name of his sponsors, Columbus claimed the real estate
for Spain.  It turned out to be a small island, but no matter.
     Columbus made four trips in all, amid storms, threatened
mutinies, and, on the third trip, envious palace hangers-on had
him put in chains.
     After his fourth voyage, on which he explored the coast of
Central America, he returned to Spain.  It was his ill fortune
that the queen died before Ferdinand, and this left him without a
friend at court.  He died in 1504, in poverty and neglect.
     Ironically, he never knew that he had discovered a new
continent, later to be called America.
     Other explorers followed, settlers came, towns grew, a new
form of government was devised, and trade, industry and
agriculture  flourished.  The part of America called the United
States had been not only a haven for the oppressed but an example
to the world.
     So one would expect Columbus to be honored next month, on or
about October 12, the date of his discovery, and that two years
hence, on the 500th anniversary, the nation would honor the
bravery, vision and leadership of the Genoese Admiral.
     Well, not quite everyone.
     The governing board of the National Council of Churches,
meeting in New York (it fits) passed a resolution condemning
Columbus for "invading" America.  The NCC warned it will have no
part of the quincentennial celebration.
     You read that correctly.  Columbus should have stayed home,
in the view of the churchmen who pretend to speak for millions of
Protestants.
     Why?  The resolution goes on to say that since he was the
first white man to land on the western continent he can be blamed
for inflicting upon Indians "slavery, genocide, theft and
exploitation."
     In the National Review's account of this 1,500-word
resolution, it reports that an Episcopal bishop from Kentucky
moved to amend by citing a few good things which flowed from
Columbus' discovery.  No go.  The critics of the explorer would
not concede anything to be good.
     Names of the denominations belonging to the NCC will not be
named here, to save embarrassment.  The worshipers in the pews
had nothing to do with the gesture.
     Who did?  It was the leftish core of the NCC and its use of
"network," as usual.
     When a cause which speaks for a minority (presumably
Indians, in this case) feels frustrated and seeks to express
itself publicly, it enlists other advocates.  "Help us, and we'll
help you when you want us."
     By thus multiplying their strength, they can be influential,
as in the defeat of Judge Bork.
     The NCC has boxed itself into absurd situations by playing
along with such appeals.
     American Indians have a just gripe in some respects, as the
Wall Street Journal set forth in a recent article ("Welfare, not
Cowboys, Kills Indians").  Its solution:  Close the reservations,
let the Indians have a share, and go free.
     But don't dim the lustre of Columbus on his 500th
anniversary.  He earned whatever belated glory we can accord him. 
Millions of Americans of Italian descent will be joined by many
of us to see that it happens, notwithstanding ingrates who pass
resolutions.