Niigaan Sinclair is correct that "Pope’s statement remarkable but means little," but for reasons he is unwilling to recognize

Excerpts from the following piece written by University of Manitoba Department of Native Studies professor and Winnipeg Free Press staff editorial writer Niigaan Sinclair first appear in the WFP on March 31, 2023, one day after the Vatican, responding to years of indigenous demands, formally repudiated the "Doctrine of Discovery," the political ideology said to be backed by 15th-century "Papal Bulls," decrees that have been interpreted as legitimizing the colonial-era seizure of aboriginal lands and still forming the basis of property law in some jurisdictions.

A short joint statement by two Vatican administrative departments charged with reporting on the historical contemporary application of the “doctrine of discovery”, claimed it “ is not part of the teaching of the Catholic Church. Historical research clearly demonstrates that the papal documents in question [Papal Bulls], written in a specific historical period and linked to political questions, have never been considered expressions of the Catholic faith…. The Catholic Church therefore repudiates those concepts that fail to recognize the inherent human rights of indigenous peoples, including what has become known as the legal and political “doctrine of discovery”.

The joint statement also said “Numerous and repeated statements by the Church and the Popes uphold the rights of indigenous peoples. For example, in the 1537 Bull Sublimis Deus, Pope Paul III wrote, “We define and declare [ ... ] that [, .. ] the said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the Christian faith; and that they may and should, freely and legitimately, enjoy their liberty and possession of their property; nor should they be in any way enslaved; should the contrary happen, it shall be null and have no effect”.

In short, the Vatican argued if any institution or group enslaved, disenfranchised, or took land or other property from the indigenous people of the world, this was contrary to the teachings and policies of the Roman Catholic Church.

More particularly, it also means that neither the establishment nor repudiation of the doctrine of discovery has anything to do with the Holy See, thereby rendering its renunciation symbolic virtue-signalling at most.

On this point, Sinclair and I agree … sort of … though his polemical rendering of the background to this informal announcement leaves much to be desired, as my bracketed boldface italics critique of portions of his opinion piece on the other side of the paywall suggest.