Sins of our fathers

In Adam, all men sinned (Romans 5:12). In a sense, we share in all sin, for every sin is an affirmation of that original sin (cf Luke 11:47-51). I am not sure what you mean by the word "feel" here. If it has something to do with emotion, I do not know that I "feel" anything but a sadness that we might believe in the efficacy of an apology to men as a way to atone for the sins of our fathers. Perhaps the use of the word "feel" in this sense has something to do with remorse. Maybe people seek to mitigate the sense of guilt that they experience. Of course, the big problem here is that atonement has very little to do with other sinners, but has everything to do with our Holy God, our righteous Judge. Atonement is something that He has done on our behalf on the Cross (Hebrews 9:28), our only and solely sufficient atonement.

I do not intend to demean apologies or the intentions of those who offer them. However, I think that until the vertical issue is addressed, the horizontal issues will never be resolved.

 

Depending on the offense an apology may be a good thing, especially when the a church or denomination's history is inexorably linked with that offense. I know Southern Presbyterians who still do not believe the institution of slavery in the United States was a sin.

Of course these type of apologies can get out of hand. I think they should be reserved for egregious and systemic offenses towards others. The apology itself should suffice and not be accompanied by claims for reparations. What is done is done.

 

Salty's post calls attention to the precise wrong of this concept. Today, minorities of all walks are demanding reparation payments for wrongs done to their ancestors. For what do they deserve to be paid, given they have every opportunity to grow up in this country, get the best of educations, have the best of possible work choices, are able to engage in any and all leisurely activities available, simply because they are a citizen of this country?

Of course there are, in particular, two or three regulars on this board that will disparage that remark, saying "racism" is alive and well, but it is not. There are myriads of personal prejudice in this nation, as many of such as there are people. When those prejudices cross paths with those against whom they are held, then "reparations" must be made -- in other words, the prejudiced one needs to acknowledge the wrong-headed attitude, apologize and move on. No one deserves to become the subject of a new law, or a new domestic policy, because they might possibly encounter someone who has a personal opinion that, if reasoned out, would go unvoiced.

Government can't legislate against personal prejudice. That's thought control. But those holding prejudices can and should be held accountable for them, but only in a moral sense. No one deserves anything for being thought poorly of due to skin color, denomination, political party, or any other trait or cause that might result in rejection but some other person. Except, that is, to receive an apology from the one expressing the misbegotten prejudice. When one thinks one is entitled to more as the result of such an encounter, when one makes claims that such isolated personal opinions are indicative of a culturally or ethnically held bigotry, one is seeking preferential treatment. One is seeking entitlement. One does not deserve either.

Bigotry is ignorance. Ignorance will always be with us. It can't be legislated out of existence. It can only be held morally accountable, and it should be. But not with the pocketbook. Rather, with love, as Christ love the church, as He loved the world.