The PCA has been beating its breast for several years now on the subject of racial reconciliation.
The 30th GA, which I believe was in 2002, adopted Overture #20 from Nashville, which declared in part:
“We therefore confess our involvement in these sins. As a people, both we and our fathers, have failed to keep the commandments, the statutes, and the laws God has commanded.”
I hope to some day deconstruct the entire overture and its backwash. Right now, I’m just stuck on the phrase “both we and our fathers.”
By their “fathers” they obviously mean their great-great-grandfathers who may have owned slaves and/or defended the practice.
They are repenting, in other words, for something their “fathers” did not see the need to repent of; or at any rate, did not repent of.
When someone repents of his fathers’ sins, which his fathers did not even believe were sins, is this a sign of being humbled under conviction of sin, or is it more likely a noisy bit of self-righteous posturing?
Moreover, since the statement defines the fathers’ sins very broadly (“failed to keep the commandments, the statutes, and the laws God has commanded”) I presume that everyone could justly follow in the footsteps of the PCA and repent of the sins of his fathers (if the PCA can justly do so).
I’m just wondering why they didn’t, while they were at it, go all the way back to their “father” Adam and repent of original sin.