Anglican Church of Canada: the “I’m so sorry” celebration

It’s an odd thing for an organisation to celebrate apologising for abusing children but, then, the Anglican Church of Canada is an odd thing.

Here they are celebrating a 20 year old apology for sexually, physically and emotionally abusing children. It’s a nauseatingly self-congratulatory statement, awash with revolting faux-humility, lamenting the supposed attempt to remake the children in a white man’s image.

That was never the problem: the problem was that those who abused the children were not Christians; they couldn’t have been. The Anglican Church of Canada’s fault was – as it is today – allowing those who believed and peddled a false gospel to remain within its leadership ranks.

As if to compensate, the ACoC in its sacred circles and smudging ceremonies has, for some time, been attempting to remake itself in an aboriginal image.

Anglican Church in Canada celebrates the twentieth year since the apology to American Indians in Canada

Twenty years ago, on August 6 1993, the Anglican Church in Canada apologized to the Canadian-American Indians, who attended Anglican residential school in Canada.

Like the United States, Canada also did their share to destroy various nations and people, using both genocide and their own brand of Carlisle Schools, but Canada’s government and Anglican Church gave a formal public apology.

Today, the Anglican Church in Canada celebrates the twentieth anniversary of the Church’s apology.

Archbishop Michael Peers listened the stories of the Natives and felt moved to make amends. During the National Native Convocation in Minaki, Ontario on August 6 1993 Peers, devoted to healing, gave an apology for how the Church treated the Natives in Anglican residential schools.

He made a series of “I’m sorry” statements, which included an apology for the Church’s sexual, physical, and emotional abuses, attempting to remake them into the White man’s image, taking away their identities, and then stated that he understood words are meaningless and action means more.

9 thoughts on “Anglican Church of Canada: the “I’m so sorry” celebration

  1. I feel bad about what happened to the native children of yesteryear. The church of 1993 was not responsible for the wrongdoings. Those who abused the children should be punished. Those who made the wrong policy were dead. It was unnecessary for the church to make an apology twenty years ago. To celebrate an anniversary of an apology means self-congratulation to me. Forget about the apology. Go on with the good work to serve the needy. Personally I cannot make apologies for the sins of my forefathers.

  2. Sadly the ACoC, in issuing the apology and paying out huge amounts of money in a legal settlement, practiced guilt by association. The leadership of the ACoC, in some twisted pseudo-logic, “reasoned” that all its members in the 90’s should literally pay for the crimes committed by other people decades earlier, including those of us who were not yet born at the time of the crimes. And this in what is supposed to be a Christian Church that listens to God in all things, including that part about the son not be punished for the crimes of his father.

    And now they have the stupidity to “celebrate” this. This is not something to be celebrated, as though any of this is a good thing. I could understand “remembering” it, so that we are on guard to prevent such crimes from occurring ever again. But not “celebrate”.

  3. The Anglican Church is not “paying out huge amounts of money” you must have been listening to Hiltz’ b/s. The original assessment which was nearly halved by the Amending Agreement leaving them to cough-up some $15million for which pittance the Canadian Taxpayer assumed the bulk of the financial liability for their crimes. This allowed the AC0C to avoid bankruptcy, pure and simple!

    In truth I would like to know EXACTLY how much they have actually paid out of the $15.6 million, but I do not have the accounting skills to unravel their accounts, although I have a hunch that there are big bucks earning interest somewhere and that interest is probably siphoned of by the GS.

    The great man himself [Hiltz] when bishop of NS & PEI raised over $3million from the gullible faithful of those two provinces. That scam was called the Leap of Faith Capital Campaign; that’s another one for the forensic accountants!

    The needy are not being served either: the bulk of the ACoC’s money goes on salaries and maintenance and Hiltz’ GLBT agenda.

    It is a travesty! Better that they went broke in 2004! Dead church talking….

  4. How the original inhabitants of the Americas were treated by the European newcomers is not a nice story to tell our grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Thanks be to God; there will be a Final Judgment.

  5. The “original” inhabitants weren’t native to this country or this continent to begin with. They came from Siberia over the land bridge connecting at the Bering Sea. People need to remember that. Just because someone was “here” first, doesn’t mean we should acquiesce to their every demand.

    And David’s comment about the ACoC becoming more aboriginal is pretty damn true. I guess that’s why there was an inukshuk as the focal point during General Synod’s opening and closing ceremonies instead of a cross.

    Pretty soon we’ll be able to re-name the church the Aboriginal Church of Canada. How sad. Promoting one culture over every other in a guilt-trip kind of way.

    • Abuse of aboriginal children should never have happened and had to be addressed. However, perhaps all those who did not abuse those children, who cared for them, taught them, introduced them to Christ, prepared them to live in modern society, and supported them in other ways, should be praised and rewarded. Except that I don’t think they were looking for that sort of praise and reward.

      Does anyone seriously think that if the our forefathers had just left the First Nations people alone, without modern education, health care, social assistance, metallurgy, technology, and much more, that governments now would not be sued for what would be called callous, criminal neglect, or even genocide?

      As far as being “original” inhabitants, you are correct. The First Nations are not native to this land any more than anyone whose family has been here for generations. Other Canadians who were born here are as indigenous to this land as any member of a First Nations band.

      • To Anonymuse: the Great White Colonial Thinker Award of 2013.

        Your post contains so much utter excrement that I cannot be bothered to reply beyond the above statement.

Leave a Reply