The Church of Scotland has apologised for its historical involvement in slavery and committed to working with communities affected by that legacy
The Church of Scotland has formally recognised its part in the history of slavery, issuing an apology that was adopted by its General Assembly in Edinburgh. The statement acknowledges that, prior to the abolition of slavery in the British Empire in the 1830s, some within the church defended the practice on theological grounds and that others profited from systems that treated people as property.
The Assembly also accepted responsibility for harm caused both by deliberate actions and by failures to act.
This public admission is accompanied by a pledge to move beyond words. The Kirk said it would form a new working group to propose concrete next steps and emphasised that any future work would be carried out in active partnership with communities and churches most affected by these historical injustices.
The apology frames this as a beginning of a long process of truth-telling, accountability and practical change.
What the apology acknowledges
In its formal statement the church makes clear that historical attitudes and policies continue to shape modern inequalities and relationships.
It notes that theological arguments once advanced by some members were used to justify chattel slavery — a system in which people were treated as legal property. The Assembly recognised that church members and institutions benefited both directly and indirectly from the transatlantic slave economy, and described the moral and social consequences as deep and enduring.
The leadership described the admission as an act of sobriety rather than blame, presenting truth-telling as the necessary foundation for healing. The Kirk expressed sorrow for the suffering inflicted through both action and omission, spoke of repentance, and committed to changes that would make its repentance meaningful. The new working group is tasked with recommending measures that respond to legacy issues, including education, reparative actions and sustained collaboration with partner churches and communities.
Responses from overseas church leaders
Delegates from Africa and the Caribbean attended the Assembly and responded to the apology. Mrs Rose Wedderburn, General Secretary of the United Church in Jamaica and the Cayman Islands, welcomed the step and praised the courage involved in facing painful chapters of history. She described the report and the Assembly’s willingness to listen as an opportunity to deepen mutual understanding and to begin processes of healing that must lead to justice and reconciliation.
His Eminence Dr Ekpenyong Akpanika, Prelate and Moderator of the Presbyterian Church of Nigeria, said he was encouraged by the direction of the debate but urged the church to convert acknowledgement into substantive repair. He stressed that reconciliation requires more than statements: it needs a reset of relationships between churches in different regions. In his view, northern and southern churches must abandon historic patterns of control and build a partnership of respect marked by shared leadership, fairness and tangible steps toward equality.
Calls for repair beyond apology
Speakers at the Assembly and visiting delegates repeatedly emphasised that genuine restoration involves specific commitments. That includes listening to descendants of enslaved people, co-designing educational and commemorative programmes, and exploring forms of redress where appropriate. The Kirk’s stated intention is for the proposed working group to consult widely and craft recommendations that go beyond symbolism to practical action.
Context and wider moves in Scotland
This apology follows a trend among Scottish institutions to confront connections to the slave trade. Several organisations have previously issued statements about historic links; for example, Edinburgh council published an apology in 2026 for its past involvement. The Church of Scotland’s acknowledgement adds a major religious body to that list and signals an evolving public conversation about how institutions should respond to difficult legacies.
Next steps and expectations
The Assembly’s decision to establish a dedicated working group sets a timetable for follow-up, though precise measures and timelines will depend on consultation outcomes. Observers and delegates have urged the church to keep the process transparent and community-led, and to ensure that any reparative initiatives address both spiritual and material harms. The hope expressed by many is that this will mark the start of sustained, cooperative work toward justice rather than a single symbolic gesture.
