In itself, there’s actually nothing wrong with the idea of revising history to suit modern audiences. Too often, history is told from the perspective of the winners, silencing so many voices on the margins. Thus, it follows that recovering these voices will give a fuller view of history, making it more inclusive and shared.
In practice, however, most historical revisionism does the opposite. Instead of adding perspectives and forging a shared identity, most revisionist historians reduce history to a narrative that caters to anti-Western intellectuals. This work inevitably involves a fair amount of exaggeration and fabrication. For unsuspecting students exposed to this pseudo-scholarship, they will know far less about their history, and what little they do know will be factually inaccurate and politically skewed.
This is especially the case with the subject of slavery. Although slavery has touched all known civilizations in humanity’s history, most Americans today believe that this institution has only existed in the United States from 1619 to 1865. And despite Christians being at the forefront of the American abolitionist movement, many Americans are often taught that most forms of Christianity condoned and legitimized slavery. This is partly why slavery is called America’s “original sin” as though it was a unique struggle for Americans failing to uphold freedom for its people, not a universal problem afflicting all nations in the process of mass industrialization and liberalization.
To set the record straight, Paul Kengor has written The Worst of Indignities: The Catholic Church on Slavery. Half of the
