By Matt Friedeman, PhD
June 16, 2005

(AgapePress) - This year's Senate apology casts a vote of regret for Senate inaction on lynchings.

All in favor, say "Aye!"

And for those who didn't sign up as co-sponsors (only 15 of 100 senators didn't), get ready for reporters' phone calls.

Apparently, Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran -- not a co-sponsor -- actually answered one of those calls. "I don't feel that I should apologize for the passage or the failure to pass any legislation by the U.S. Senate." He declined, he said, because he felt he could not say sorry for "something I did not do."

Cochran's words were followed carefully because, of the states in which lynchings occurred, his was the worst offender. Mississippi could claim 581 of the 4,700 lynchings that took place between 1882 and 1968. Eyebrows were raised when Mississippi's statewide daily newspaper noted that Cochran had co-sponsored other apology bills, most notably the one in 1988 that apologized to Americans of Japanese descent who were rounded up in World War II and called for $20,000 to go to each of the survivors of the Japanese internment camps. And this year, he was a co-sponsor of a resolution to acknowledge sorry dealings with Indian tribes and "Native Peoples on behalf of the United States."

Let's give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe what Cochran was questioning this time around were all the corporate apologies being made these days, by Congress and congregations and denominations, wherein we all say "Aye!" then move quickly on. Such apologies cost little and assuage guilt poorly.

Since Senators George Allen (R-VA) and Mary Landrieu (D-LA) co-sponsored the lynching resolution, let's talk about what might have happened had they wished to show real leadership on this issue of lynching and, more to the point, racism.

Allen might have held a press conference and invited several black clergy to participate. He could have started by saying that, when all is said and done, congressional resolutions and apologies are rather cheap. "So, I am here today to confess my personal sins regarding this issue of racism. Indeed, I have sinned in my past, and here is how."

His statement would rivet the nation's attention if he detailed precisely the sins of his life concerning people of color. He could tell what he has both done and not done. Show remorse. Plead forgiveness. Ask for mercy. If his apology was delivered well, most white Americans could probably relate.

But then, he could have further stunned the crowd by saying, "And, not only have I sinned, but my family has sinned." Then, again, he could have detailed precisely how his forbears fell short on the sins of lynchings and racism and segregation and slavery and ... well, fill in the blanks.

That said, he could further detail how he personally intended to seek restitution and personal growth in regard to racial issues and personal reconciliation.

Having said all this, if he were still able to continue, he might have wanted to talk about the sins of the community where he grew up and of his state and of his nation, and how we (with Mr. Allen leading the way in personal restitution) could really make gains in this area instead of just preparing to hand out restitution money, accomplishing precious little genuine reconciliation and healing.

From the launching pad of his personal and familial story and the promise of change, an apology would actually sound genuine instead of a pack of "Ayes!"

Real apologies cost something. All in favor, say ...