Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
There are two sets of FAQs below. The first set are in response to feedback from the Legacies of Slavery Consultation received before December 2021, and the second set are in response to subsequent feedback.
These FAQs will be amended and updated as we receive further comments and queries in response to our work.
Here are some FAQs relating to the work of the URC’s Legacies of Slavery Task Group based on feedback received before December 2021:
Slavery was not just a European or British practice. It was a thriving business across Africa.
Yes, but our concern is with the transatlantic slave trade – in which millions of Africans were transported to the Caribbean and the American colonies in British-owned ships as forced labour for the immensely profitable crops of sugar, tobacco and cotton. And when slavery was abolished in Britain in 1833, the compensation paid to former slave-owners helped fuel Britain’s industrial revolution, especially the railway boom of the 1840s.
The slave trade was abolished in 1807. Slavery was banned from the British Empire in 1833. So, none of this is anything to do with us in the twenty-first century.
The concern of the Task Group is with the legacies of slavery, right up to our own day and age: the stigma suffered by those whose ancestors were slaves, and the enduring effect of racist attitudes on our present society. That’s why we call for Confession as well as Apology.
What about those of our Church forebears who were pro-abolition – where is their story reflected in the URC’s Legacies work?
The LoS task group affirms the efforts of those in the Church who worked towards the dismantling of transatlantic slavery and the liberation of enslaved people – yet, despite their efforts, transatlantic slavery continued for a very long time. And whilst transatlantic slavery was eventually brought to an end, the legacies of racial hierarchy, inequality, and persistently racist structures continue. The focus of the task group’s papers has been to throw light on the issues which still need to be addressed. We regard this work as continuing in the footsteps of those in our Church heritage who were also concerned with justice for the enslaved Black people.
There’s all this talk about ‘white privilege’. Many white people are poor, jobless, ill, and badly housed. They certainly don’t feel privileged.
Many of the problems you mention are indeed the experience of white people. Yet Black and ethnic minority people also experience prejudice, abuse and discrimination every day simply because they aren’t white – not least URC ministers, in the street and even among their congregations. That was the specific issue our task group was asked to address.
But the final point in our proposed confession commits us to ‘continue working to promote racial justice as part of our Christian commitment to justice for all.’
Why is there a focus on ‘Black Lives Matter’ rather than upholding the position that ‘All Lives Matter?’
The LoS task group absolutely believes that ‘All Lives Matter’. That said, we recognise we live in a world, a society and a Church which do not reflect this truth. There is no level playing field. Opportunities for Black and ethnic minority people are not the same as those afforded to white people. The struggles faced by Black and ethnic minority people aren’t equally faced by their white counterparts. Only when these inequalities have been addressed – when our day-to-day living demonstrates that Black lives really do matter, and matter equally as much as white lives – only then will it become meaningful to say that ‘All Lives Matter’.
Why are Black people being asked to apologise for what has been done to them?
What’s proposed is an apology and confession by the URC as an institution, committing itself to some form of restorative justice as part of becoming an anti-racist church, in which white members need to learn and understand more of the experience of our Black and ethnic minority members.
In legal terms, does apology entail culpability?
The rationale for offering an apology is laid out in the task groups’ original report – Healing: Hope in Action (2019) and in the Consultation Overview Document (2021). We do not believe the issue of culpability should deter the URC from doing what we believe to be right. That said, the task group will look further into the question of culpability.
What is envisaged as ‘reparations’ or ‘compensation’?
Tentatively, we are using the phrase ‘repairing justice’ because that suggests some kind of attempt to make amends for past injustice, without implying a direct payback (which is impossible). As to the content of this repairing justice, that is ‘work in progress’.
We’re encouraging communities in the UK to identify projects that address racism in their localities. We’re also exploring the issue with partner churches in Africa and the Caribbean still scarred by the legacies of the transatlantic slave trade. Where we go in the future is part of the ‘journey’ that we are calling on the URC to begin now – a journey towards becoming an anti-racist church.
Is any work being done to address the underrepresentation of Black and ethnic minority people in senior positions in the URC?
A resolution passed in November 2020 committed the URC to a journey from ‘not racist’ to actively ‘anti-racist’, including a remit to examine and address issues in every aspect of the Church’s life. In July 2021, General Assembly adopted a further resolution asking the Equalities Committee to carry out work exploring the relative absence of Black and ethnic minority people from Assembly Appointed positions, and to suggest strategies of ‘Affirmative Action’ to intentionally redress the balance. Proposals will be brought to General Assembly 2022.
What are other denominations saying and doing about these questions?
The Baptist Union of Great Britain (BUGB) offered an apology in 2007; we have drawn heavily on this to help shape the wording of the proposed URC apology.
The BUGB always intended that the apology would be the start of an intentional journey towards racial justice across the Baptist Union family. Progress has been slow, but the commitment and the work continue.
The Methodist Church in Britain is just embarking on its own journey to engage specifically with the legacies of transatlantic slavery. They are very keen to learn from and draw on our work to date.
To a greater or lesser extent, all the mainstream churches have been addressing the issue of racial justice over many years. Since early 2021 – in the wake of COVID and the murder of George Floyd – this work has resumed greater focus. Two new ecumenical bodies have been formed (Racial Justice Advocacy Forum; Racial Justice Working Group) seeking to further the collective work towards racial justice, and to support the member churches in their respective journeys. The Racial Justice Advocacy Forum has a specific remit to advocate on the issue of reparations.
The Legacies of Slavery Task Group - December 2021
Additional FAQs in light of the continuing consultation.
Who are we apologising to?
We ‘offer our apology to God and to our sisters and brothers in Africa, the Caribbean, and their descendants, for all that has created and still perpetuates such deep hurt, which originated from the horror of slavery’. (Text taken from the final draft of the Confession and Apology being considered by General Assembly 2022.)
If adopted by General Assembly, the Apology and Confession will be shared widely, including with our partner churches and organisations in Africa and the Caribbean.
You can’t apologise for the past / Apology can’t change anything
Any meaningful apology is always for something that has already happened – if it hadn’t already happened, there would be nothing to apologise for, or there would still be time to turn away from the impending hurtful action. That said, the proposed Confession and Apology are essentially focussed on the continuing legacies of transatlantic slavery rather than on the historical event.
Apology can never change the past, yet we still apologise, all the time. Saying sorry expresses remorse/regret/sorrow for the hurt experienced, and for any part we have played in the circumstance. Saying sorry also offers healing to the person(s) hurt and opens the door to restored relationships for all.
Apologising for the transatlantic slavery and its legacies is meaningless
Is that our call? We stand in the geographical footprints of those who were enslavers. We stand in a place of benefit and privilege accrued through the profits of transatlantic slavery. Who are we to say apology is meaningless? What’s more, the descendants of enslaved people are demanding an apology – so apology clearly has meaning for them.
We should issue ‘a statement of regret’ rather than an apology
The task group has considered this point seriously. We have noted that expressions of ‘regret’ are impersonal, whereas ‘I’m sorry’ comes from the heart. We are also mindful that those who have been hurt and continue to be hurt are asking for an apology. When will their voices count?
The consultation paperwork assumes that the URC is completely white. We can’t ask Black people to apologise for what was done to them/is still being done.
When Caribbean/African partners demand apology from the UK, they do not assume the whole of the UK is white. Equally, the consultation paperwork does not assume the URC is completely white. In fact, the task group itself has included equal numbers of Black and white members. We are recommending that the URC, as a body, should offer an apology, because the URC as a body continues to benefit from the profits of slavery. We know there are Black and ethnic minority people within that body – and many of them are all too painfully aware that the body to which they belong includes racist attitudes and systems. Whilst we cannot speak for all, we know that many Black URC members would welcome acknowledgment of this reality, welcome an apology, and welcome a commitment by our Church to move forward positively.
The consultation paperwork does not tell the whole story / misses the nuances of the issues
The consultation document was never attempting to tell the full history of Transatlantic Slavery, but to provide an overview of the issues and the context of the Task Group’s work.
When people today experience racism, try to negotiate racist structures, or find themselves disempowered, they are not pondering the nuances of the issues – they are negotiating the day-in, day-out realities of life. This is what the overview sought to capture.
The URC should seek to address modern day slavery instead of focussing on the past
This piece of work specifically focuses on the legacies of transatlantic slavery, having grown out of the URC’s engagement with CWM’s Legacies of Slavery project. The work highlights that transatlantic slavery may be in the past, but its impacts continue into the present day.
Responding to the legacies of transatlantic slavery does not deny or preclude work on other areas of injustice, including modern day slavery.
We have not had long enough to engage / We don’t yet fully understand the issues
The task group has tried its best to give opportunity for engaging and responding. We were given a time frame in which to consult and feedback. We chose to consult as widely as possible via the Synod Meetings and through the Synod Offices. We have distributed consultation materials to Synod Offices 3 times – October 2021, December 2021, February 2022 – and asked for them to be circulated widely. We have followed up with synods where we became aware that the papers had not been circulated. We have extended response dates to encourage engagement.
We have offered ourselves, Racial Justice Advocates and Cascades of Grace as a resource to facilitate conversations. We have produced FAQs as a further resource.
None of us is ever going to fully understand all the issues – but we can understand enough to get a sense of whether there is an injustice to be addressed. There is nothing stopping us from continuing to engage - but how long is long enough? And are we really saying that no action should be taken for however long we feel we need to take?
There was slavery between Africans too.
Yes, but is ‘they did it too’ really an acceptable response from our Church to the issues being addressed about Britain, past and present? And we highlight again, that the task group’s work addresses the continuing legacies of transatlantic slavery today.
We can’t judge the past by modern standards.
No, but we can judge the past by the standards of the past. Several respondents to the consultation have highlighted that many of our forebears were abolitionists. Many people clearly knew that transatlantic slavery was wrong. That was also a value of the day, and one we are trying to take forward through this work to address the continuing legacies in the 21st Century.
The Legacies of Slavery Task Group - July 2022