Starting this thread:
Church of England votes to apologize for its role in the global slave trade
Canadian Press
February 08, 2006
....only so I can include this interesting thought:
Church of England Synod confused about blame for slavery
Telegraph Letters
10 February 2006
Sir - There is a serious moral and logical problem with the apology the Church of England Synod has offered to those descended from the slaves owned by bishops and the Church in the 18th century. If the religion of Christianity and Anglican institutions owe a moral apology for actions done centuries before by other individuals, then we have a theory of doctrinal and institutional guilt.
But when suicide bombings occur, we are assured by all authorities that these things are done by a "tiny minority" of Muslim extremists and have nothing to do with Islam. If the Synod is right, then all Muslims ought to share the blame for suicide bombings. Conversely, if the Muslim community has nothing to do with suicide bombing (since nearly all of them reject such actions) then the Anglican Church is merely confused in its understanding of moral issues.
1 comment:
I don't think this is the same thing at all. I might have misunderstood the link here, but as far as I understand it the church of England is acknowledging their complicity as an institution not as a religion (the teachings of Christianity aren't being blamed here). The apology is for the recorded ownership of slave holding plantations in Barbados by the Church of England. The comparison with Islam would be valid if an Islamic institution was found to have been directly responsible for a crime (for funding terrorism for example) there may very well be such institutions but then I think people would expect them to be held to account and acknowledge their complicity and guilt.
Post a Comment