It would appear that Cristovao de Mendonca's charts and records of his 1521 expedition had been conveyed, perhaps as a consequence of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake, or perhaps with that event merely providing a good covering story, to Portugal's old ally, Britain, some time before 1766.

When Cook set out in 1768 on his south seas exploration, it is highly probable that he had Mendonca's charts and records. Interesting how an island just off the coast near where the state boundaries of NSW and Victoria meet the sea is known as Gabo Island. 'Gabo' being Portuguese for 'cape', and a very distinctive cape existing adjacent to that island.

Cook's landfall in 1770 being made significantly to the north of Gabo Island avoided any necessary implication that Britain had had Portuguese help in finding New Zealand and, subsequently, the east coast of Australia. That may have been diplomatically desirable, as otherwise Portugal could have been seen to have assisted her ally, Britain, in being able to claim land that, by the terms of the Treaty of Saragossa 'belonged' to Portugal's larger neighbour, Spain.

Ties of blood, and the Treaty of Windsor, with Britain proved stronger than ties of catholicism and loyalty to the papacy for Portugal. The suzerainty of the papacy with respect to this 'discovery' had been dismissively snubbed by Britain by what Cook did next. He only claimed the eastern part of Australia west to approximately the anti-meridional line of the Treaty of Saragossa! Doing so avoided any hint of a diplomatic slight to Portugal, Britains oldest ally, with respect to the western part of the Australian continent, still conceivably notionally Portugal's 'area of interest'.

Portugal had unobtrusively given away Spanish land to Britain, and perhaps worse, in the eyes of some, removed that land from the sphere of potential papal influence. Britain cared nothing for Rome.

Other things had also happened in 1521. Martin Luther had nailed 95 theses to a cathedral door. The Reformation once started was effectively secured by England's Henry VIII, "Rome's" Defender of the Faith!

haven't you noticed? you can talk all want, but you can do nothing.

citizens of democracy, talk, decide, and pass referenda establishing the laws and plans and policies of their society.

subjects of her majesty just talk. the talk is barren.

Demos,
Yes I agree, what we really need is Citizen Iniated Referenda but that won't happen because it means the politicians would loose some of their power.

Going to the war in Iraq would have been a good thing to vote on and I would love to have a vote on selling off the electricity system in NSW. It would be good to have a say on how much immigration and if we should reintroduce the death penalty for heinous crimes.

That would be true democracy.

As the author of a best-selling book attacking Martin Luther and supporting the Roman Catholic church, in 1521 Henry VIII had been given the title 'Defender of the Faith' by the Pope. The Papacy saw Henry as "its" man.

Henry VIII was very much his own man, with a lineage stretching back further than that which the Papacy could claim.

Then Henry turned.

Rome never forgave it.

The thing that was so unforgivable was that Henry had broken Rome's monopoly of, or perhaps more correctly suppresion of, the scriptures. Not that he had done much to encourage translation and printing, but he effectively created a market for bibles printed in English. His 'chained bible' edict required the provision of a copy in every church throughout the realm. The funding of this to be split 50/50 between the pastor and his congregation.

Worse than that, this was done on an island notoriously difficult to invade.

Henry had laid the foundation for mass literacy, relatively speaking, amongst the English populace. It was a very significant step toward the fulfilment of William Tyndale's solemn pledge "If God spare my life, ere many years I will cause a boy that driveth a plough to know more of the Scriptures than the Pope". So, by and large, in Britain it pretty much proved to be over the next three centuries.

By the latter half of the nineteenth century, Roman Catholicism, and the Papacy as its centre of power and influence, was pretty much on the skids. The world map of its nominal adherency was pretty much the map of world poverty and governmental corruption. The more widespread and genuine the adherency, the deeper the poverty, and the greater the civic corruption.

This was all Britain's fault, of course. Rome had come to truly hate the crown of St Edward!

By the 1880s, the Papacy had had an idea. Embracing freedom of access to the bible had worked for Henry VIII. If you can't lick 'em, join 'em! A Papal Encyclical, On the Study of Holy Scripture, soon followed.

SANCTUM PROFUMO ERRATUM

(Holy Smoke, an Error!)

Whereas We have formerly discoursed, in the 32nd post to this thread, upon the voyaging of our Portuguese adherent Cristovao de Mendonca in the Year of Grace 1521 to as then unknown lands, and said:

"..., mapped a then unknown coastline, and more than likely spent a season whaling in Pelorus Jack's old stamping ground."

what might, but for Our infallibility, be said to be an error has been promulgated.

Truly, it is a confusion of pelagic proportions. We have mixed our cetaceans! The cetacean in Our mind at the time of Our first writing was really 'Old Tom', an Orca (killer whale) that once lived in the sea near Eden, near to which place is another called Bitangabbie Bay, on the coast of Magnum Terra Australis Espiritum Sanctum.

'Pelorus Jack' having been a dolphin that formerly lived in Cook Strait, that body of water between the northern island of Novae Zealandiea and Shebangabang, that land on the other side of the said Strait, and being in no way meant as the proper subject of Our earlier discourse.

The doubly confusing thing being that Cristovao, or at least one of his three ships, did sail at that time upon the seas that surround Shebangabang, but took no whales there.

Forrest

These Encyclicals of old Leo XIII get to one, don't they?

The Papal Encyclical 'Providentissimus Deus' (On the Study of Holy Scripture) dated November 18, 1893 could be taken as an apparent indicator of a change in direction on the part of the Vatican. The change being in the direction of apparent agreement to co-exist with the outworkings of the Reformation, perhaps particularly those that had manifested throughout the dominion of the English-speaking peoples.

That encyclical could almost be taken as hinting at scripture being recognised as authoritative!

Given the slow speed of change within the institution of Roman Catholicism, it would have to be assumed that if there had been in fact any change, it would have to have been contemplated and examined over quite some time prior to the issue of such an encyclical, and have been tailored to be consistent with Vatican policy in other areas.

Perhaps a good cross check for evidence confirming real change would be to examine Vatican policy with respect to Church - State relationships.

The view of the Vatican, speaking with respect to the relationship of Church to State in Portugal in 1886, was expressed very clearly in the Papal Encyclical 'Pergrata' (On the Church in Portugal). It stated, inter alia, "The state must always be governed under the leadership and guidance of this same religion. If this is done wisely, then the government will conform to the genius, the character, and the will of the people. For the Catholic faith is the legitimate religion of Portugal. Therefore it is entirely fitting that it be defended by the protection of the law and the authority of the state officials, and that its safety, continuance, and honor be publicly assured. Let its freedom and action legitimately lie in the political as well as ecclesiastical Power."

And if that is not clear enough, this: "..... [Portuguese] ecclesiastical authorities should realize that the rulers of the state can and ought to trust them; nor should the ecclesiastical rulers accept a cause, such as retaining laws, which the interests of the Church do not want retained."

One would imagine this view applied to Portuguese (or Spanish) possessions.