2 of 2

Elsewhere in Australia, the Synod of the Anglican Church issued a statement of apology to victims of sexual abuse: "We apologise and ask forgiveness for the church's failure at many levels to listen to, and acknowledge the plight of, those who have been abused, to take adequate steps to assist them, and to prevent abuse from happening or recurring."

Lately, religious leaders have been apologizing even when their culpability is not apparent. The nonprofit advocacy group FaithfulAmerica.org raised money over its website to air an ad on Arab television that apologized for Abu Ghraib. The ad said that "Americans of faith … express our deep sorrow" and "condemn the sinful and systemic abuses committed in our name." Meanwhile, Pope John Paul II re-apologized on the occasion of the recent publication of The Inquisition, a 700-plus-page report that found that executions were not as common in the trials of heretics from the 13th to 19th centuries as previously thought. (The conclusion prompted the pope to qualify his apology: "Before asking pardon it is necessary to have an exact knowledge of the facts and to place the failings with respect to the evangelical needs there where they really are found.") The Rev. Clay Ford was involved in last month's apology by the mayor of Eureka, California, to the local Wiyot Tribe for an 1860 massacre at the hands of white men.

This gets into ethical gray area: Can someone apologize on a wrongdoer's behalf? Can someone accept that apology on a victim's behalf? Is there such a thing as vicarious responsibility?

While the ethics of all these apologies are unclear, they do affirm the importance of responsibility in a world strewn with wrongs left unaccounted for. As the Rev. John Buchanan preached last month at Fourth Presbyterian Church in Chicago, unlike ancient mythology and the social sciences, which see humans as corks tossed about by the gods or abstract forces, responsibility affirms the belief that God delegates stewardship of the world to human beings. "The Bible makes the stunning assertion, on the very first page, that … we're the managers of the place," Buchanan said. Apologies can be a way of taking this charge seriously.

Nathan Bierma, editorial assistant for Christianity Today sister publication Books & Culture, writes the "On Language" column for the Chicago Tribune.

Copyright © 2004 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

Last month, Bierma wrote "Ethnic Cleansing, Genocide, and Plain Old Murder" | What Tony Campolo and the State Department meant in recent comments about Palestine and Sudan.

Bierma also writes the Content & Context weblog for Books & Culture.

More of Bierma's work is available at his website.

Earlier Christianity Today articles on this subject include:

So I'm Sorry Already | What do you say after you say "I'm sorry"? By Frederica Mathewes-Green (April 6, 1998)

Me? Apologize for Slavery? | I may not have owned slaves, but I've benefited from their having been used. By Gordon Marino (October 5, 1998)

Christian History Corner: Forgive and Remember | Pope John Paul II's apology was unprecedented, but not entirely unique (Mar. 17, 2000)

Christianity Today sister publication Marriage Partnership has frequently discussed apologies on an interpersonal level.

Those interested in church apologies will want to read Mary Ann Glendon's "Contrition in the Age of Spin Control," which appeared in the November 1997 issue of First Things, and Avery Dulles's "Should the Church Repent?" which appeared in the December 1998 issue.

first page |  2 of 2

share this page

July (Web-only) 2004, Vol. 48