Uncle Di's multiculti mea culpa

So the idea of collective punishment on a nation is to be taken seriously, but the idea of asking forgiveness for the sins of our fathers is the stuff of humorous fun poking at multiculturalism, neighborhood integration and environmentalism?

That's actually a good point. To be clear, I thought Uncle Di's mea culpa was funny, but I didn't think it such a bad idea that John Paul apologized to various groups the church had offended in ages past (even as I'm sure some future pope will do what JP never did, and apologize to the victims of clergy sex abusers). According to Christian theology, we are all part of the same body of believers, around the world and across time. We have a spiritual bond to our ancestors, and I believe in that sense some sort of responsibility for the sins of our fathers. I'm not clear what, precisely, that is, but I don't think it automatically a bad thing to own up to it (though I don't believe it's necessarily morally required for every generation to apologize for all the sins of the past).

I think it's important that we be self-aware enough not to get on our high horse execrating the sins of our ancestors; we should always keep in front of us that our descendants will similarly execrate us, probably for things we hardly recognize as sins today.

I dunno, Jeremy, but I doubt it. John Paul, remember, was a trailblazer for this sort of thing, and his acts were by no means uncontroversial within the Catholic church.

It really becomes an question of institutionalization. If we believe in a continuity of organizations, beyond the lives of their constituents, there is absolutely no dilemma as to whether or not the church (or government) should apologize for previous bad acts. If the US government is the same government now as it was during the trail of tears, it (as a body) should absolutely apologize. If the Church is the same church today as it was during the Spanish Inquisition, it should absolutely apologize. The representative in question may not have been there at the time, but that's not the point: an institution committed an evil act. AS an institution, it should atone in some way.
I think what many people today fail to understand is that if you benefit from an institution's wealth or power, you are more or less directly benefitting from prior bad acts undertaken to procure said wealth and power. We may not like it, but there it is.