Today’s matchup covers a lot of territory. From Spain to Haiti to Germany to New York to Hawaii, Bartolomé de Las Casas and Marianne Cope were collectively well traveled (remember travel?).
Yesterday, Euphrosyne left Evagrius the Solitary basically standing alone on a street corner for the rest of Lent 64% to 36%. Though, in fairness, that’s probably Evagrius’ happy place.
Oh, and if you missed yesterday’s rousing edition of Monday Madness with Tim and Scott, you can watch it here.
Bartolomé de las Casas
Bartolomé de las Casas was not impressed.
Dominican friar Antonio Montesinos had given an impassioned speech, which historian Justo L. González describes in the first volume of The Story of Christianity as the first open protest against the exploitation of the Indigenous peoples of the Americas. Montesinos had declared that colonizers were in mortal sin because of their “cruelty and oppression” of the people.
But Montesinos’s speech did not sway las Casas. Las Casas owned what was called an encomienda, which included both land and the Indigenous people who lived there. The people were forced to work for him in exchange for his “guidance,” which included “civilizing” them and teaching them Christian doctrine.
Las Casas was born in 1484 in Seville, Spain, and later settled on the island that now is Haiti and the Dominican Republic, where it’s possible he was the first priest ordained in the so-called New World. He’d been in Santo Domingo for nearly ten years when he heard Montesinos preach. It would be three more years before las Casas had a radical change of heart at Pentecost about the treatment of Indigenous peoples. He gave up his encomienda and preached that others should do the same.
It would be years yet before he’d realize the same rights extended to enslaved peoples from Africa. “All the peoples of the world are humans, and there is only one definition of all humans and of each one, that is that they are rational,” he said. “Thus, all the races of humankind are one.”
Las Casas spent the rest of his life advocating for Indigenous peoples, arguing that the way colonizers had exploited them was incompatible with Christian faith. This included lobbying for legislation protecting Indigenous people in Spain. He also wrote a number of books detailing the atrocities he’d witnessed, which led many people to question the morality of the whole colonial enterprise.
Las Casas died in 1566. Today, he is remembered as a predecessor of the liberation theology movement and an early advocate for human rights. He reminds us to keep learning, repenting, advocating, and doing better.
Collect for Bartolomé de las Casas
Eternal God, we give you thanks for the witness of Bartolomé de las Casas, whose deep love for your people caused him to refuse absolution to those who would not free their Indian slaves. Help us, inspired by his example, to work and pray for the freeing of all enslaved people of our world, for the sake of Jesus Christ our Redeemer, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Marianne Cope
Marianne Cope was an American nun who established hospitals throughout central New York and Hawaii.
Born Maria Anna in Germany in 1838, her family emigrated to Utica, New York before her first birthday. They took up residence within the parish of St. Joseph, and the children attended the local Catholic school. Because Maria Anna’s father was sickly and unable to work, she dropped out of school and went to work in a factory after the eighth grade. Once her younger siblings became old enough to support themselves, Maria Anne pursued her dream of a religious life. She entered a Third Order Franciscan community in Syracuse, New York in 1862, changing her name to Marianne.
Once an official nun, Marianne became a teacher and quickly advanced, becoming the principal and then the head of her religious congregation by 1870. She helped to found two hospitals in central New York—insisting each time that medical care be offered to all comers, regardless of religion or creed (unusual for the time.). She became the superior general of the first public hospital in Syracuse and helped relocate the Geneva Medical College of Hobart College, where it became the medical school of Syracuse University.
In 1883, the king of Hawaii asked her to come and work with the lepers in Hawaii. More than fifty other congregations had already said no, but Marianne jumped at the chance. She landed in Hawaii in 1883 and set up a triage hospital for treatment of leprosy. She intended to spend only a few years in Hawaii, but she ended up serving there for the rest of her life, building hospitals and schools in the islands. She built a women’s hospital in Maui (the first hospital on the island) and opened a home for the children of leprosy patients—children who had become homeless because of their association with such a dreaded disease. When Fr. Damien of Molokai, well-known for his work in the leper colony, developed the disease, she took care of him, and when he died, she took charge of his work in addition to the hospitals and schools she was already running.
Marianne died in 1918 and became one of only a few American women to be canonized by the Vatican.
Collect for Marianne Cope
Bind up the wounds of your children, O God, and help us to be bold and loving in service to all who are shunned for the diseases they suffer, following the example of your servant Marianne, that your grace may be poured forth upon all; through Jesus Christ our Lord; who with you and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Bartolomé de las Casas vs. Marianne Cope
- Marianne Cope (65%, 4,653 Votes)
- Bartolomé de las Casas (35%, 2,507 Votes)
Total Voters: 7,160
Loading ...
Disenchanted with colonization,
De las Casas gave up his plantation;
Then with faith and with thought
Against slavery he fought:
So let’s echo his determination.
The Franciscan Marianne Cope,
Was sainted and blessed by the Pope;
She worked for a while
On the Moloka’i isle
to give its inhabitants hope.
I have been to Moloka’i working to destroy invasive plants with the local Sierra Club.
This was a tough one. Both incredibly deserving of votes. Have to go with Bartolome in light of supporting the rights of indigenous peoples around the world. So many more hearts and minds need to be enlightened as his was!
Absolutely!
That was my reasoning as well as showing the change of heat. When we know better, we do better.
I meant change of heart. Sorry.
Bartolome’s story is a good one to share with our Sacred Ground group.
Marianne is no slouch, either.
The choices seem to be getting more difficult.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Well said!
Nice, but „against slavery he fought“ is a Verschoenung. He first persuaded the Spanish authorities that the enslavement of Indios could be made possible by enslaving Africans instead. If he later had a change of heart, it was ‚way too late for the Africans, and I don‘t know that he did anything tangible to right the wrong.
I agree with you. He did repent, but perhaps too late. My vote is for Marianne Cope.
Wish. Could vote for both.
Yes!
my thoughts exactly
Yes!
So agreed!!!
totally agree. This was a hard choice.
These two both deserve to go on! (Bad seeding, having them meet this early)
Grateful for both of them!
This one is tough. Their stories are both inspiring. Although, before I read their stories, I thought I would vote for Bartolomé de las Casas because I knew something about him, I had to go for Marianne both because of her devotion to the underserved and because I had not known of her before. However, I am still a de las Casas fan.
Agree with you that it is hard choice. I still think that Bartholome had a greater worldwide impact, and so I voted for him.
I agree that this was a tough choice—the hardest yet for me. I finally voted for de Las Cases because I think his story, of sin followed by profound repentance, followed in turn by a life spent serving those he had once oppressed, is a story that needs a wider hearing today. We might benefit if the church’s understanding of repentance and forgiveness had greater cultural salience in this moment. Bartolomeo is recognized as a saint not because he was pure but because he was changed, a change visible to all because he lived it. At the beginning of the story: a guy you really don’t want to like. At the end: a saint whose name you want to sing. Wonderful!
Having said all of that: Marianne, also a wonder.
well said, Kelli –
I agree with Emily. It was a tough choice. I went with Marianne because of her history of helping her siblings while putting her dream on hold then finishing her life serving the underserved.
Decided to go with de las casas. The story of his change of heart reminds me of the story of John Newton, former slave trader who underwent conversion and gave us the hymn everyone loves, even people who don’t consider themselves perticularly religious, Amazing Grace. And who became a friend of William Wilberforce, who led the crusade to abolish the British slave trade as a member of Parliament..
Wonderful movie about him, also titled AmazingGrace.
Taking on the institutional racism which de las Cases opposed was a bit like trying to melt a glacier with a book of matches (without benefit of global warming). But the light from his “matches” still reaches us today.
I read this comment without looking at the name come and said to myself, “That sounds like my friend Frank!” Your gift for simile and metaphor is, if you’ll forgive the pun, unmatched. I’m in for las Casas, also.
Amen! Thank you, Frank! I have been struggling with this vote as well. I was leaning towards las Casas but this convinced me.
I’ve been to Hawaii many times and hope some day that I will be able to visit Molokai.
Not everyone loves “Amazing Grace”. I have advised my sister that if I die before her and they play it at my service, I shall come back and haunt her. Vengefully.
particularly if it is with bagpipes!
Although Hawai’i Pono’i on bagpipes is wonderful. (In honor of Father Damien and Sister Marianne Cope, of course.)
Sometimes these choices can be tough to make!
As several have already said, both were inspiring. However, when I’m faced with two equally-inspiring people, I’ll default to the woman. Lent Madness notwithstanding, women are far under-represented in our histories, and so if a woman manages to actually get her name known and remembered, I figured the least I can do is give her my vote.
My feelings exactly!
Sarah, I agree with your sentiment. Women of all races have been so unreported and
under-represented in every field, every topic, every discussion that I will always vote for the woman whenever the vote is a close tie. Las Casas deserves the vote, all the more for having repented his prior acts and making some amends. However Maria Anna Cope gets my vote for her lifelong commitment of putting others first.
I have been to Kaluapapa and seen the work of Mother Marianne and her sisters. It was life changing.
Las Casas had the great truth that all races are one. We should heed his advice today and stop asking what race people are and basing our idea ties on that. We could make much more progress toward peaceful existence.
Amen! Las Casas gets my vote today.
I agree we are human. Race was invented to ease the minds about slavery etc.
As someone who was born and raised in Hawaii and attended parochial school, I am thrilled to see Marianne Cope here this morning! Now more will know of her grace and her sacrifices that continue to touch lives in Hawaii today.
Hear! Hear! I, too, am a Lisa who was born and raised in Hawaii!
Marianne’s life of sacrifice and service is a shining example of what Christian values should be. She got my vote.
Voting for de las Casas because I have to have hope that anyone is capable of having a change of heart. Marianne is a good and saintly person worthy of emulation but right now we need the example of de las Casas. He is a saint for our times.
Amen. We’ve been spending a lot of quarantine time learning about systemic racism, the depth of the evil and wrong, and that the very idea of ‘races’ is political, not biological. Sénor De las Casas it is, though I suspect the strong Hawaiian Lent Madness constituency will give Marianne the win.
Both are people to be admired, but I’ve got to vote for de la Casas. Not because he is a male, but because the cause he fought for is still being fought in Haiti and by indigenous peoples around the world. At least our world woke enough to leprosy to find a cure.
Tough choice. I went with de las Casas because in addition to his good works, he had a major change of heart.
Went with Marianne Cope; she was overshadowed by Damian the Leper for too long.
“Marianne helped to found two hospitals in central New York—insisting each time that medical care be offered to all comers, regardless of religion or creed (unusual for the time.)…(when) the king of Hawaii asked (for help) with the lepers in Hawaii..nore than fifty other congregations had already said no, but Marianne jumped at the chance.”
“Bartolomé de las Casas was not impressed by Dominican friar Antonio Montesinos’…impassioned speech,…the first open protest against the exploitation of the Indigenous peoples of the Americas…(but Bartolomé de las Casas) reminds us to keep learning, repenting, advocating, and doing better”
I strive to keep doing better, but in honour of my daughter, born at the Birthing Center of St. Joseph’s (hospital founded by Sr. Marianne), and my Hawai’ian born grandmother, my votes goes to Marianne. Marianne was one of the few who respected the spiritual traditions of the kānaka maoli while keeping the faith.
aloha nui loa
I used to live less than a block from the hospital she founded in Syracuse and have had surgery there. For me the choice was a nobrainer. I had to go for the home town girl.
This is a hard one.
de las Casa not only had a change of heart, his writings about what he saw opened some eyes to the atrocities in the Americas.
The story of Sister Marianne makes me think about the way the poor in NYC were punished for their poverty during the cholera outbreaks of the 1830s and 1840s, which makes her willingness to care for all even more important.
I’m going to have to sit with this one for a while.
I really wanted to vote for Antonio Montesinos (the guy who put a liberation theology bug in Las Casas’s ear), but still went for anti-colonialism . . . though typically anything having to do with healing would get my vote . . . right now, the step to view everyone as human needs to come to fruition so that everyone is seen as being deserving of those healing hands . . .
What a difficult choice today! Mother Marianne’s willingness, indeed eagerness, to go to a place where suffering was great reminds me of Sister Constance and her companions, the Martyrs of Memphis. But given the timeliness of reflecting on a saint who repented of his privilege of wealth and race and spent the remainder of his life seeking to convince others to do the same, asserting the truth of our common humanity, I had to vote for Bartolomé de las Casas.
Having such a tough choice is a reminder of the incredible depth of Christian presence in the world, across the generations. This is why I take the time each day to read these choices. And we know that we are all the winners as we advance the stories of all these individuals in this little Lenten observance we are working through.
Well said
I love both these choices, but am voting for de Las Cases because it is extremely difficult for someone to see the sin that is an integral part of the fabric of the society, and to realize that what you have been doing all those years is wrong. It is truly a saintly person who can see that and take the radical steps to correct it.
I second that!
I see Marianne Cope facing harder life. She kept her faith without looking back. She provided a positive vision of a forward looking religious life.
Had to vote for las Casas – his views on the universality of human dignity (rights) is so important and a key inspiration to me in our baptismal covenant. Alas, I feel like this year the “winners” are very predictable, and my choices are not in the majority.
Bartolome de las Casas had a major conversion, gave up riches and became steadfast in advocacy. Very different from my mundane mainline church life, but inspiring.
honoring health care workers in this time of COVID, went with Marianne
This was a tough vote. I had to go with Bartolome de las Casas because of “Sacred Ground” a ten week program of the Episcopal Church of America which deals with racism and biasses including those sins directed at indigenous peoples.
Wow finaly two names I can pronounce. I had to vote for the lady from Utica (my hometown) and that church is still there I believe. Both where very interesting. John.
My family is from Utica. Yes, St. Joseph is still there. My family were Irish immigrants and went to St. Patrick’s across the street. St. Patrick’s is gone now, but the parish of St. Joseph and St. Patrick remains. The Irish Cultural Center is on the spot where St. Patrick was. My grandparents’ generation worked in the mills; the next generation worked in the hospitals.
Had to vote for her too. I grew up in Rome and went to Utica College.
The toughest match of 2021!
It’s true – This one is hard – And, again, I’m grateful to Lent Madness for introducing me to saints
I never knew before – people who shared God’s love in ways that were beyond their times and
circumstances – I picked Marianne because that’s the name of my godmother, but each is a
part of our American heritage –
What inspiring people and what a difficult decision to make when I would happily vote for both. In the end I opt for Bartolome de las Casas who underwent such a radical change and campaigned tirelessly for the recognition of our shared humanity, in a time when it must have felt that he laboured in vain. I also voted for Bartolome de las Casas because past experience of Lent Madness suggests a strong late pattern of voting from Hawaii will support Marianne, and I would like it to be a close vote that separates two such worthy people.
This is a hard one : a Dominican who sinned gravely and repeatedly before undergoing not one but two profound changes of heart and acting boldly on them, and a Franciscan whose life seems to have been one of selfless service and unconditional care for the sick.
After further reflection, I decided to go with Bartolome.
I feel we’re struggling as a society with whether & how people who have done vile things can atone, and I find hope in his story. It took him a long time, but he eventually did renounce and denounce the evils perpetrated against Indigenous and African people, at a non-negligible cost to himself. He worked against both individual and structural sin. Bartolome, pray for us!
Two amazing people who made a difference, in very different ways —
today’s vote is a very hard call!
I have been to Kalaupapa, and in fact was born on Moloka’i, on the other side of the mountains. Marianne’s ministry made a huge difference to people made outcasts by leprosy, and to their families; people in great need of respect and care.
But Bartolomé’s repentance and advocacy began a more seismic shift throughout the world: the growing understanding that all humans of every skin tone, creed and and culture are of equal value and worth to God, and should be for all of us as well. Sadly, the learning curve for this truth keeps stretching out, and white supremacy has spiked frighteningly in our country and other nations in recent years.
Of course, Marianne modeled and advocated for deep respect and care for all people as well…
I am really torn. Maybe I’ll just scroll back up and cast my vote for whichever one is behind. And maybe neither Bartolomé nor Marianne would mind me advocating for the underdog.
Our writer, Emily, captured my vote for Bartholome at “liberation theology” though they are both very admirable people.
Both are worthy. I had to go with the Bartolomé de las Casas for a number of reasons. First, we are in Lent and are called to repent. A man outside of his time and convicted by the Holy Spirit, he gave up his sin and repented. Moreover, he saw that human bondage was a grave crime against his fellow humans and God at a time when many in the faith were using the bible to justify this crime. And finally, I am convicted that it is my duty to fight slavery throughout the world, but also systematic racism in my own community.
I agree that this was a tough choice. I voted for Las Casas because he saw the errors in his beliefs and practices and gave up his encomienda, then wrote about the cruel treatment of Indigenous peoples. His “radical change of heart” gives me hope that similarly today others will experience such a change in beliefs and work to end racism.
There was an earlier bracket where I found it difficult to vote because I wasn’t impressed with either candidate, this one is difficult because both are deserving.
I ended up voting for Bartolome because he went against all the pressures of society at that time and was one of the early abolitionists.
De las Casas in hope that those who exploit others or do not accept that systematic racism exists may have similar conversions. But a hard choice today.
Easiest vote so far. Marianne by a mile. Amazing life overflowing with love and help for others.
Really tough choice but I always loved the stories of Fr Damien and his work with the leper colony so my vote is for Marianne. I’m glad both their stories have been heard.
Both are truly worthy. But what swayed me toward De las Casas was the timing. In the sixteenth century he truly was ‘the voice of one crying in the wilderness.’
I have not gotten one right, yet, by vote.
This one is dear to my heart because my mother dropped out of school in the eighth grade to work in a factory at war time, to help her family. For my beloved mother, my vote goes to Marianne.
I thought both as worthy Saints. But I see Marianne as the easier to love, De las Casas as needing the love.
I voted for Marianne, for her ministry to others and her focus on healing and caring for the least from the beginning (at 32 she was leader of her religious congregation). While I appreciate a good ‘change of heart’ story, it took Bartolome 13 years before he agreed with Friar Antonio that indigenous people are people. And an unmentioned (in this post) number of years before his eyes were opened to the fact that enslaved Africans we were also people and children of God. Yes he had to give up his wealth and go against society. But how many indigenous and enslaved peoples suffered and died while he was ‘seeing the light’? How long Lord, how long?
I’ll vote for Marianne in thanks for what she did for Utica, and for the scant few American women saints. (And who wouldn’t leap at the chance to move to Hawaii from upstate New York?) But I hope de las Casa wins. Very tough choice, only reassured by the fact that they’re both enjoying their rewards.
I’m ripped in two. Bartolomé de las Casas was a trailblazer, but my dear mother-in-law received excellent care at St. Joe’s in Syracuse, one of Saint Marianne Cope’s hospitals.
While Bartolome applies to the systemic racism issues I had to vote for the lady Marianne who is overshadowed by Fr. Damien’s reputation. Given the choices of Haiti, New York or Hawaii to go to Maui & Molokai win by a mile.
Finally a truly tough choice – two people who advocated for “the least of these” in different and
radical ways. If “both” was an option, I’d choose it gladly. However I’ll go with Marianne, perhaps
out of my history as a hospital chaplain.
I thought I was going to vote for Marianne, but after reading the comments and rereading the bios I am going to vote for Bartolomé. What won me in the end was the very graduality of his conversion. He remained open to the gentle but insistent promptings of the Spirit and, when the message finally sank in, sacrificed his wealth and social standing in order to proclaim it. But the Spirit was not finished with him, in time bringing him to recognize the fundamental unity of all races and the fundamental evil of all forms of slavery. The last fifty years of his life were a repudiation of the first thirty and an atonement for the evil in which he had participated as a young man.
That speaks to me when I consider things I once believed and said. As we enter a new stage in our understanding of the evil of institutional racism, Bartolomé’s long journey shows us that hearts and institutions can change and we are not doomed to repeat the past.
Well put, Davis! Thank you for your insight.
Bravo, Davis. May your next fifty years bring you into your full powers as a saint.
Both worthy, naturally, but Las Casas gets my vote for his belief in the universality of human dignity (and therefore rights) and his invaluable recorded witness to the atrocities against Indigenous peoples during his time.
A difficult decision. The importance of both people and their leadership! I did vote for Marianne Cope because my mother and children were born at a hospital founded by the Third Order Franciscans.
I’m voting for de las Casas because it’s his time, because the Church is still reckoning with issues of racism, slavery, colonialism, and genocide and we need to be more aware of this history of dissent against religion-supported imperialism and hold people like him up as exemplars.
I too voted for las Casas because of “Sacred Ground”. Am currently participating
In the incredible class. We just explored and had heart felt discussion
Last night around Indigenous People. With my heart breaking, voted for the good snd loving work of Las Casas.
This is the most difficult vote yet! Wishing I could cast my vote for both.
This was a really hard choice for me today! Ultimately I had to go with Marianne Cope because of my nursing background.
This is the hardest decision of the Madness so far this year. But I think I’m going to vote for Bartolome’ because his story reminds me that we are not stuck where we are and I must keep growing and learning and be ready to change my mind and my actions.
Bartolome had me at “All the races of humankind are one.” My mantra has long been “Therevis only one race and its human.” MAlso weighing heavily in favour of Barolome de la Casas is the fact that Canadian Anglicans like me are coming to grips with our colonial/settler past and our involvement in the Canadian government’s plan to force integration of Canada’s indigenous peoples through the despicable system of residential schools. (For those who haven’t had the opportunity to see it I strongly recommend the Anglican Church of Canada’s award-winning film ‘The Doctrine of Discovery: Stolen Land, Stolen Hearts’) Bartolome would no doubt rejoice with me that the Canadian government has adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP) and is moving toward revision of the Indian Act, passed in 1876 and surely one of the most paternalistic and oppressive pieces of legislation ever devised. Sorry, Sister Marianne, had you been up against anyone else, you might have had a chance. As it is, my vote goes to Bartolome.
Unfortunately, Canada”endorsed/adopted” in 2016 but has NOT yet passed UNDRIP Federally. It was introduced again Dec. 3 2020 as Bill C-15. http://www.justice.gc.ca about-apropos Backgrounder:Bill C-15-United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People
How difficult! Marianne Cope was clearly an incredible woman and well deserves to go through, but in the end I had to vote for Bartolomé de las Casas because of his incredible change of heart. A true sign of Spirit at work and an inspiration in times when we believe that nothing will ever really change.
Sorry for the typos…arthritis in the hands makes two-finger typing difficult.
I have been to the town of San Cristóbal de los Casas in the very indigenous state of Chiapas, Mexico, which is named in honor of his defense and support of native peoples.
My grand mother belonged to the Third order of St. Frances. Also for two half years I ministered the the lepers in Cameroon. My heart is still with them.
My vote is for Marianne Cope
Will you strive for justice and peace among all
people, and respect the dignity of every human
being?
I will, with God’s help.
I LOVE the story of Las Casas! He showed an important change of heart which put him far ahead of his time. I recently watched “The Black Church” with Henry Louis Gates, Jr., and learned that some slaveholders were loathe to teach Christianity to their enslaved peoples for fear that would give them ideas about equality, but missionaries told them, “No, it’s not Christianity which defines whether people should be free, it’s race.” There is a lot wrong with that statement – even to suggest that not being Christian reduces one’s humanity, but especially to find another justification for enslaving people even if they become fellow Christians. To think that Las Casas advocated against enslavement in the 1500’s is amazing to me.
Marianne Cope also acted for the dignity of every human being in caring for those ill with leprosy. But Las Casas gets my vote.
Ditto, ditto, to everyone else’s comments. I would have voted for de las Casas because I agree with those who point to his repentance and the potential reach of his vision of humanity, which is still in need of being taught today. But like some others I voted for Marianne because I’d never heard of her and because of personal ties to Hawai’i.
I find it hard to vote for Las Casas, knowing that one of the ways he hoped to relieve the suffering of the native peoples was the importation of slaves from Africa. I’m aware that his position may have had more subtlety than that short sentence, and that it may have evolved. But it’s a big hurdle to get over.
Do you mean the sentence about it taking him years longer to extend human rights to enslaved persons from Africa? I understand being uncomfortable with that, but I gave him props for his repentance from his earlier views. Most slaveholders never did repent from enslaving African Americans.
Marianne for me.
I am so glad that voting for one doesn’t mean the negation of the other. I thought I would of course vote for Las Casas, but was moved by Cope’s tenderness and care for women and children. So often women and children are seen as “less than” and so not as important. Although both had a profound impact on those considered as less than, I felt most drawn to Cope. I learned a lot from today’s saints and am glad for that introduction.
I am voting for Mother Marianne – why you might ask? Well I graduated from Maria Regina College which was located in the same Motherhouse where Mother Marianne was superior. My dorm room was right next door to Sister Mary Lawrence’s who often travelled to Rome to promote Mother Marianne’s cause for Sainthood. Another result of Mother’s work in Hawaii, was that the Franciscan Order in Syracuse was fortunate to have many Sisters join the order who were native Hawaiians. I am so very proud to vote for Mother Marianne!!!
Today’s match up is not fair! They both deserve to move forward. They should be matched up against some of the wacky ones instead.
I agree it would have been much easier if the March 1 and March 2 candidates had been switched up so both Las Casas and Cope could move forward, however all those who advance will meet up sometime in the next 4 weeks. So it’s choose now or choose later.
Having ohana (family) on Maui, my initial instinct is vote for Marianne Cope. However, that personal connection ultimately could not overcome the importance of de las Casas’ work. As we debate renaming schools for early American leaders who also owned slaves, it is important to study de las Casas. We must allow for people to grow from sin into redemption. Bartolome’s story is a reminder of that, and he gets my vote.
I voted for de las Casas, as someone who repented of the evils of slavery, colonialism, human bondage, exploitation, and (I’m extrapolating) imperialism and capitalism. Cue “Amazing Grace.” I wonder about the theological justification for “refusing absolution,” as Emily Miller specifically praises it in the collect. I think that’s a profoundly interesting theological dilemma. Such interdictions including excommunication have been used as blackmail to force entire regions to conform to the doctrines of the power structure itself, as notably with Jan Hus. As a doctrine it’s a two-edged sword, as with the notion of a “just war.” When and how can one use such a doctrine righteously and with, as it were, “saving grace”? As for Marianne Cope, we have had many service-oriented nuns in Lent Madness, and they are popular. I note with interest that Hansen’s disease still exists. I would have thought that if it was a bacterium, antibiotics would have wiped this pernicious disease out. And yet, to my surprise, it persists. Given that racists continue to try to generate whatever culture war they can foment by calling COVID the “China virus,” perhaps we could attract funding for leprosy research by renaming leprosy the “Texas bacterium.” Drat those armadillos. While I admire Sister Marianne’s work in Hawaii (aka Kenya), I have to go with de las Casas if only because one of the major debates that has inhered in Lent Madness for years has been the question of how much credence we place in these conversion stories. From Paul to Moses the Black to de las Casas, we have stories central to Christianity about utter conversion of heart. They challenge our notions of criminalization, judgement, condemnation, and rejection of those “undeserving” of our societal attention and care. They require a leap of faith the way a saintly nun does not. The Mother Teresas are always going to be vote magnets. But it requires a slow assaying of one’s heart to decide to cast a vote for the black sheep turned washed lambs. I’m going to take that risk today and support de las Casas on behalf of indigenous peoples in the western hemisphere and through them all the world’s dispossessed. Roll down, justice, like mighty waters, and wash this human world clean.
I think the justification for refusing absolution must be that a person who persists in grave sin, knowing it to be sin, cannot be absolved. The problem of course, is that, like Bartolomé in his earlier life and like slaveowners in our own history, the encomienderos (?) didn’t recognize their own sin. As Susan C. Aptly put it at 9:01 a.m., “It is extremely difficult for someone to see the sin that is an integral part of the fabric of the society, and to realize that what you have been doing all those years is wrong.” The best most of us can do is to confess our sins known and unknown and pray for enlightenment.
Racism is so much on my mind these days, I had to vote for Bartolomé. With Black History Month just finishing up, and having watched a number of disturbing and thought-provoking Black movies that are out now (I especially recommend “Judas and the Black Messiah”), I am primed for conversations about racism and my part in it. I’m currently reading “White Fragility: Why It’s so Hard for awhile People to Talk About Racism” by Robin Diangelo, and husband is reading “Caste” by Isabel Wilkerson. I admire Marianne Cope tremendously, but my heart right now is with Bartolomé’s struggle. It’s really hard to see the forest when there are so many damn trees in the way!
Hansen’s disease is indeed treatable with antibiotics, and another immigrant to Hawaii, Dr. Robert Worth, did the research to show that after treatment isolation is no longer necessary. Before antibiotics, isolation we the only solution. The reason the children of patients
were orphaned is that their parents were taken away, for life, too an inaccessible island.
Would that a few of our founding fathers had studied De Las Casas.
Or on their own come to the same conclusions AND
had the courage and faith to execute on those convictions.
What a different world we might have.
For many years I have celebrated Bartolomé Day instead of Columbus Day! Not only are his teachings and efforts with indigenous and enslaved peoples important to learn about, but it is also super fun to say…BARTOLOMÉ DAY!!!
….I even sing it to myself to the tune of Beethoven Day from “You’re A Good Man, Charlie Brown!”
I have lived in San Cristobal las Casas. And I have lived in Geneva, home of Geneva Medical College (where Elizabeth Blackwell attended!). A tough choice, but my vote goes to Marianne in this year where selfless dedication to the sick and dying has been demonstrated by so many. Marianne for the Golden Halo!
My fifth grade son broke his arm a couple days ago, so I was helping him type his Social Studies homework before reading today’s match-up. His homework was about the Slave Trade, but he has also recently learned about the exploitation of the Mayans and Incas. He was telling me how outraged he was about all of it! Our vote today goes to Bartoleme, as he came to the same realization and did everything he could to bring others to the same mindset.
TOUGH DECISION! I struggled more with this deserving duo than any before, ever. Dang it LM for forcing me to think! I think the deciding factor was Bartolomei conversion. It gives me hope for our world that blessed change is possible.
What a tough choice today. Each is deserving of our vote. What a dilemma this morning!!!
I am not sure de las Casas had so much a change of heart as a change of focus. He moved from exploiting indigenous people (a good thing) to exploiting landowners with threats to their salvation. And it did not stop him from seeing African slaves as OK for quite a while. My studies of Spanish and Latin American history, not to mention Caribbean history, showed that William Wilberforce and the English probably had a bigger impact on ending slavery in the region than de las Casas ever did. This convinced the slaves that there was a better life as freemen. This definitely predated the 13th amendment to the Constitution.
Continuing my string of voting for the non-winners (certainly cannot call them losers), I went for Las Casa today. I think he may have had a greater impact on the whole world.
It’s Women’s History Month!
Making us chose between Bartolome and Marianne was NOT fair. Usually I can choose easily.
Not today. 🙁
I keep wondering how many enslaved people died in the years before Bartolomeo’s conversion.
I wonder the same thing about John Newton (Amazing Grace) who continued his slave shipping business for a while after he got religion.
Guess who my vote goes to.
For the remaining rounds I will cast my vote AFTER reading the comments especially since the choices are likely to get even more difficult and splitting one’s vote is not sanctioned.
Slavery in America didn’t end with either one of these saints or any other saints or all the saints. Slavery is alive and sick in America. It actually doesn’t look much different now than it did at any other time in history. Migrant worker camps are worse than slave quarters I’ve seen in the bowels of historic homes. Poultry workers are barely treated any better than chickens or hogs, before slaughter. I don’t want to be sued, but we have nothing to brag about with the conditions millions of Americans live in. Our slave wages are $7.25/hr. No benefits, no housing, no transportation, no pension, no health insurance, very little food. Even employees of our largest corporations are living in their cars or ghettos, on food stamps. Many of our slaves are called volunteers. We have migrants in cages. They walked here. Horrific things have happened in OUR cages. We need some saints. We can’t count on our elected people. They are just our present day plantation owners. My vote goes to Marianne in thanksgiving for Bon Secours, St. Mary’s Hospital, in Henrico, VA which saved my life when I had a lung failure and heart attack, simultaneously. And right there over the door of my ER room, was a wooden cross and noonday prayers were broadcast right into my room and I knew I would be ok. Also having been in the same places as St. Marianne, Hawaii–good choice.
I voted for Marianne. It was a difficult choice, but I lived in Utica and Syracuse so I had to go with the hometown girl.
Two tough choices. I have previously read about both of them . Marianne’s aloha tipped the scale for me.
Best Organ Recessional
How does one choose between liberation theology and service to lepers? This was a hard one. Anti-slavery or healthcare for all? I went with Marianne.
I grew up in Syracuse at the time local sisters still volunteered to go and work with those with leprosy. They were inspirational in their service. Saint Marianne Cope was a women of action and humility. Grateful she is part of Lent Madness.
As transplants to Hawaii almost 8 years ago, our vote went to Sr. Marianne. (single vote but my husband and I read and discuss our vote every morning!) De las Casas also an inspiring choice – definitely a tough matchup!
I minored in Human Rights at SMU, so I must vote for Bartolomé de las Casas.
Such a difficult choice- as many others have noted. I am a retired RN. I can’t tell you how terribly difficult it is to care for patients who have little or no insurance. They positively don’t get the same care as those of us more fortunate. Hansen’s disease has been a terrible scourge in the world. Transmission has not been understood and those who cared for these patients took great risk. How wonderful that Marianne took on such difficult work with patients and their children. She built hospitals that cared for ALL.
She may not win, but my vote goes to Marianne Cope
I VOTE FOR BARTOLOME DE LAS CASAS, ALTHOUGH SR. MARIANNE WAS NOT FAR BEHIND.
We have a place on the Big Island. While there we attend St. James Episcopal Church. During the service a prayer is included for Marianna and Father Damian. She gets my vote.
Bartholome de Las Casas
Two people who definitely deserve to go further than just one round! But in the end, I felt compelled to vote for the woman who founded St Joseph’s Hospital in Syracuse, NY, where both of my lovely sisters were birthed and where my wonderful Goddaughter spent many years working tirelessly as an ER nurse.
Just voted. It was tough, but I felt I had to vote for Marianne Cope.
We have the same first name. We both have some German ancestry. We both lived in Upstate NY. I went to a Catholic grammar school, named St. Joseph’s School. We both worked in hospitals. I’d love to retire in Hawaii (a beach girl). I’m not a nun, nor have I ever treated lepers, but the dissimilarities end there. Divine intercession?
Go Marianne go! (And thank you Bartolomé for your advocacy of indigenous peoples!)
I voted for de Las Casas based on a trip to Dominican Republic when I was in seminary, and where I learned he is very much admired. I voted on behalf of my siblings in Christ in the Episcopal Church there. He simply had more historical impact than Marianne Cope even though she is pretty amazing, too.
For my Aunt Mary Selina, a sister of the IHM, the oldest of 14 children of an Irish immigrant and an Irish orphan, a child of immigrants, I vote for Sr. Marianne Cope. Sr. Selina also delayed her vocation, working to help feed her younger siblings, until enough others were either working or married so that she could leave Brooklyn and go to Scranton to become a teacher. Although I was frightened of her as a child when I saw her in her habit, she cared for her extensive family and her extended family of students and fellow sisters for over 50 years. She had the same sense of purpose that I see in Sr. Marianne. For all the anonymous hard-working saints of God, I chooseSr. Marianne.
Both are worthy nominees, but having spent my college years near Utica, I have a special affection for anyone who endured the winters of Central New York. Sr. Marianne’s subsequent work with lepers is exemplary.
When you walk into the Hawaiʻi State Capitol building in Honolulu, the statue you see is not a monarch or other person of note. It is Father Damien. That is how important the help in establishing medical care on the Islands was and is to the people. (Queen Liliʻuokalani is standing at the back entrance, though.) For that matter, one of the works we remember the Holy Monarchs–Kamehameha IV and Emma–for is establishing the Queen’s Medical Center. Sister Marianne is a part of that legacy.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/p84qutx4FX5isAoz9