Should the CofE Pay Slavery Reparations?

Article originally published in Evangelicals Now

In a recent trip to Ghana, Archbishop of Canterbury Sarah Mullally renewed her commitment to a £100 million reparation fund in light of the Church of England’s historic investments in companies involved in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. The fund was originally pledged by Mullally’s predecessor Justin Welby, who argued that the reparations would give a "better and fairer future for all, particularly for communities affected by historic slavery".

The topic of slavery reparations has been the subject of increasingly heated debate in recent years. Many social justice campaigners argue that the descendants of enslaved people are still bearing the social, economic and psychological consequences of the horrors of the Slave Trade. Therefore, justice requires Western countries, and to a lesser extent Western institutions such as the Church of England, to pay sums of money to people whose ancestors were enslaved.

What should Christians make of the idea of reparations, particularly now that the Church of England appears to be committed to them?

The Arguments for Reparations

There are many points put forward by those in favour of reparations that I have strong sympathy with.

Firstly, it is clearly right and important that we remember and reflect on the appalling evil and crimes against humanity that were perpetrated during the Slave Trade. This is particularly pertinent for institutions that had a role to play in the horrors of the Slave Trade and that still exist in some form today.

Secondly, I think a strong sociological case can be made that slavery has resulted in social, economic and psychological impacts that are still ongoing. Although difficult to prove definitively, I am persuaded by the idea that at least some of the economic disparities and structural inequalities experienced by black people find their roots in the evils perpetrated during the Slave Trade and the society that treated slaves as objects to be bought and sold.

Thirdly, reparations are not confined to slavery. After World War I, the Treaty of Versailles required Germany to pay reparations to the Allied Powers for war-related damages. Christian advocates in favour of reparations such as Duke Kwon, Gregory Thompson or Thabiti Anyabwile point to biblical examples of people paying compensation for historic sins. Such examples include King Cyrus allowing the Israelites to return to the Promised Land with gifts of gold, silver, goods and livestock (Ezra 1:2-4), or Zacchaeus returning four times what he had stolen (Luke 19:8). In general terms it is difficult to argue against the idea that amends may need to be made when wrongs are committed.

Fourthly, I do believe there is a role for institutional repentance. Throughout Scripture we see sin not just as an individual problem but also a corporate one. Groups of people, often cities, are defined in the Bible by their corporate sin, from Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis through to Babylon the Prostitute in Revelation. In the same way that sin can be both individual and corporate, repentance can also be both individual and corporate. Therefore, I think it is good and encouraging to see the Archbishop of Canterbury publicly apologising and repenting of the historic sins of the Church of England.

The Problems with Reparations

However, there are many who question the payment of slavery reparations for a range of legitimate reasons.

One common point of contention is assigning a numerical value to the proposed reparations. How would it be possible to quantify the economic impact of the Slave Trade on the innumerable descendants of enslaved people across the world and throughout history, never mind the social or psychological cost? Author and campaigner Marcus Ryder argues that slavery reparations could amount to $18.2 trillion, which is over five times the UK’s annual GDP!

Another related question is: to whom should reparations be paid? Unlike the beneficiaries of the Treaty of Versailles, all the direct victims of the slave trade died centuries ago. Should money simply be paid to the African countries from where slaves were taken, irrespective of their current economic, political or moral state? And by what measure can we assess if money is indeed helping those disadvantaged by historic slavery?

Then there is the question relating to statutes of limitation. Britain ended its involvement in the Slave Trade by Act of Parliament in 1807. Do states or institutions still need to pay compensation for wrongs committed over two centuries ago? Where would we draw the line? Would Western European countries need to compensate Middle Eastern nations for the Crusades? Would Mongolia need to pay the Asian countries that were conquered by Genghis Khan? Would Egypt have to pay reparations to Israel because of Pharaoh’s enslavement of the Israelites in Exodus 1?

However, I think there is a more fundamental issue with the idea of slavery reparations, and that is the underpinning philosophy. The modern campaigns for reparations appear to me to be rooted in Critical Race Theory - a school of thought that views society through the lens of a power struggle between white oppressors and black oppressed people. Reparations are seen as one of the ways through which the structural inequalities that oppress black people can begin to be deconstructed, so that black people can be redeemed and the balance of power can be redressed.

However, oppression does not neatly follow racial lines. I think we know this from our own experience, but we also know this from Scripture. Our sinful tendency to enthrone ourselves, even when it harms those below us, is a stain across the whole human race. As Paul writes: “There is no one righteous, not even one… Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of peace they do not know.” (Romans 3:9,15-17). Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who faced unimaginable horrors in the Soviet Gulags put it in these profound words: “The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either – but right through every human heart.”

This is the primary reason of my reservations about slavery reparations. Whilst I sympathise with the arguments of the Archbishop and others in favour, I think they are ultimately rooted in an inadequate anthropology. Racial inequality is real and the consequences of the Slave Trade still manifest today. However, we cannot neatly divide society into oppressors and oppressed. What we need is a universal, comprehensive and eternal solution to the problem of the sinful human heart.