Professor Glen Pettigrove, Theological Forum. And given how bad we have been at those moments – and how imperfect we remain even at our best – they quite reasonably have something against us. They think of our worst qualities at our worst moments. The paper goes on to present a persuasive argument about reconciliation and neighbourliness.įor many within our community, when think of the church they think of an organisation with a history of bad behaviour: they think of racism, sexism, homophobia, greed, hypocrisy, inquisitions, witch-hunts, crusades, religious bigotry, sectarianism, social exclusion, child abuse cover-ups, complicity with imperialism, siding with the powerful against the vulnerable, and the like. In the eyes of many Scots, including myself, the contemporary church is tainted by the terrible injustices in its larger history, regardless of the specifics of the organisation. Scripture used to kill thousands is still part of the sacred text used in worship. Yet church services are conducted in buildings that still have jougs, or iron neck rings, attached, ‘witches rings’ used to chain the accused to the church wall or steeples where women were imprisoned while being interrogated. It is product of schisms and mergers and is a different organisation than the historical Church that conducted witch hunts. The current church is not the same entity as the Church of Scotland in the 16th-18th centuries. “Surely it is unfair to blame them for piety, patriotic loyalty, or benevolent concern for public welfare.” I would argue that many at the time did not see the actions of the church as pious or benevolent, and even when modern scepticism entered the dialogue in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, witch hunting continued in Scotland. It argues that an apology could impose modern ideas on the history of the witch hunts, and witch hunters were doing their best despite their mistaken ideas. The paper, “Apologising for Historic Wrongs,” begins by focusing on Jesus’ teachings of about anger and reconciliation and then summarises opposing arguments by putting forth a series of hypothetical objections that perhaps reflect the intellectual resistance those in favour of an apology have met-for instance, a historical, group apology does not accept personal responsibility for past wrongs but instead stands in solidarity with the victims. The motion was put forward by Rev Prof Susan Hardman Moore in conjunction with a paper written by Professor Glen Pettigrove for the theological forum in response to a request from Remembering the Accused Witches of Scotland. The Church intends to apologise, and this comes on the back of the First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’s historic apology to the accused on International Women’s Day this year.Īt the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly at the end of May, the elders voted unanimously in favour of a motion for a formal apology to those accused of witchcraft. The work for a pardon hadn’t yet begun, and the idea of a national monument had been discussed and abandoned several years earlier before being picked up again. Very few people were openly discussing this history, save academics and ghost hunters. When I began writing about this history over four years ago, an apology from the church seemed an impossibility. On the Church of Scotland Apology to those Accused of Witchcraft Photo by Alex Gorham on Unsplash
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |