Anglicans repent for slavery

24 March 2007

At the moment London is playing host to a march to apologise for the anglican church’s role in the slave trade, which was abolished in the UK two hundred years ago on Sunday. The march is being led by Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury, and John Sentamu, the archbishop of York.

Last year, the church issued an apology for its part in enabling and perpetuating slavery in its plantations in the West Indies and elsewhere. Williams is quoted as saying that it was a way in which anglicans could try to heal historic injustices inflicted in the name of the Church. Although, it wasn’t in the name of the church, it was by the church: a subtly worded but very distinct difference.

I find it astonishing that, not only has the church taken 200 years to make this apology after having been a major contributor to slavery for a period of around 100 years, but that it feels that it has to apologise when it is written within the pages of its own scripture that slavery is justified.

1) the bible says slavery is ok
2) christians say the bible is true
3) christians say the bible is moral
4) christians say slavery is immoral

I find this whole contradiction and how they can rationalise it completely baffling. And I also find the church’s publicity stunt of wearing their heart on their sleeves quite nauseating.

BBC news article and history, The Church: Enslaver or Liberator?

Possibly related posts:

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Tags: BBC News

Comments

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

1333 ResponsesAnglicans+repent+for+slavery2007-03-24+14%3A12%3A35nullifidian to “Anglicans repent for slavery”

TW on March 24th, 2007 4:34 pm

It is funny we have both written blogs on a similar topic today (albeit from different angles). Are you a Saturday Guardian reader? :-)

You wrote:

And I also find the churchâ€™s publicity stunt of wearing their heart on their sleeves quite nauseating.

Well said, only it is not just the Church. I was grasping for a phrase like this when I wrote my post (as the phrase eluded me, I ended up writing tons of pointlessness..)
nullifidian on March 24th, 2007 4:43 pm

Not usually, although I usually pick up The Grauniad during the week; I’m more of a The Independent and The Times reader (I have access to subsidised newspapers, so it costs as much to buy three as it does one normally).

This concept had been rattling around unformed in my brain all morning while watching BBC News 24’s coverage of the march, and just came to me as a coherent statement earlier this afternoon.

The hypocrisy I see and hear from the interviewed preachers and bishops just turns my stomach: they all, to a man (and to a woman), have claimed that christianity was primarily (or solely) responsible for the ending of the slave trade. And the BBC is giving these people access to the airwaves (or the cable equivalent) to perpetuate this self-serving bullshit.
TW on March 24th, 2007 6:35 pm

I can only bring myself to buy the paper on Saturday (Jobs, Bad Science and Screen Burn). Pretty much use internet and News24 for anything else :-)