Should Pope apologize for abuse at Canadian residential schools for Indigenous children?

[casslean]

We are settling with other victims based on principled analyses where it was determined the Church either took action or failed to take action that it ought to have taken and knew or ought to have known should be taken to protect those victims.

That’s my problem with all of this. People who think we should be happy to keep accepting fault and settling claims because it will make people feel better, not because there is actually a principled reason behind it.

Sometimes people have to choose whether or not they want to stop being angry.

 

[Dan_Defender]

In the 17th century the natives in Quebec killed most of the Jesuits including St Isaac Jogues and I have never heard anyone apologizing for that.

 

[KevinK]

That is a good Christian attitude; don’t apologize for horrific acts unless another party apologizes for their acts.

 

[stpurl]

I believe you misunderstood the poster. The point is, if horrific acts occur, some from group A against group B, and some from group B against group A, are you saying that only ONE group (A or B) needs to apologize, and the other does not?

Or are you saying that acts are horrific based on factors outside the action, and not the action itself?

For example, if you call for the Church to apologize for actions of some of its members against some inhabitants of Canada in the 20th century, are you saying that the actions that occurred TO some members of the Church BY the inhabitants of Canada in the 17 and 18th centuries, involving torture and death to those Church members, do not require an apology? If so, why would they not?

 

[KevinK]

Everyone and every institution should apologize for all wrongs committed, but the Church especially should not withhold apology unless it also gets an apology. This is not the moral high ground.

 

[Phemie]

Also, here is a link to Trudeau’s apology which was the second governmental apology. Harper first apologies in 2008, but many found it lacking. Trudeau exhibited great humility and genuine regret.

I really fail to see how such an apology from the Church would be harmful or a bad thing.

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/...residential-school-survivors-in-newfoundland/

When the N.L. residential schools were set up the province wasn’t part of Canada so when Prime Minister Harper issued the original apology he intentionally left out any of those survivors, insisting that Canada had not been involved in these schools. It should be noted that neither had the Catholic Church. But N.L. joined Canada in 1949 and those 5 schools continued to operate for years, the last 2 closing in 1979 and 1980. The schools were administered by the province and operated by the International Grenfell Association and the Moravian Mission. Canada’s role was in providing funding to the province to be used for the educational needs of Indigenous students in Labrador.

It’s a fact that when Newfoundland (the name of the province only changed to Newfoundland and Labrador in Dec. 2001) entered Confederation in 1949, Premier Joey Smallwood stated that there were no indigenous people in the province, completely discounting the presence of several thousand Inuit (Eskimos) and Innu (Indians) in the Labrador part of the province, peoples who had been on the territory longer than any Caucasians, and the presence of a few Mi’kmag communities on the Newfoundland part of the province.

P.M. Trudeau issued the country’s apology to the N.L. survivors last fall. Sincere and heartfelt? Well, he cried, but he cries at everything and he’s an actor. I was present for that apology. It was very moving hearing the sobs of those who had been forcibly removed from their homes and forced to attend these schools where many had been abused but I’ll admit that my cynical self rolled her eyes when he started wiping away tears early in his speech.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

P.M. Trudeau issued the country’s apology to the N.L. survivors last fall. Sincere and heartfelt? Well, he cried, but he cries at everything and he’s an actor. I was present for that apology. It was very moving hearing the sobs of those who had been forcibly removed from their homes and forced to attend these schools where many had been abused but I’ll admit that my cynical self rolled her eyes when he started wiping away tears early in his speech.

Well, cynicism aside (because we do not know what was in his heart), the survivors appreciated that moment of reconciliation. I can imagine that for some of them it offered a bit of closure. Whether or not Harper was correct in omitting them in the first apology, there is value in having a wrong acknowledged by the leader of the group you feel wronged you (in this instance the Canadian government).

 

[stpurl]

Nobody said that, so I don’t know why you’re repeating it. IOW, that’s a strawman you’re arguing.