May 26, 2003

• Forgiveness and Restoration-

  
  

  Grioghair left this comment earlier:  If there is a way to forgive people like this [abusers/killers of children], then I would like to hear your advice - because in all of my 48 years on Earth, I have never felt it in my heart to forgive people who destroy the light in others.

  
  

  I've been pondering it this afternoon and decided I'd take the somewhat unusual step of posting a second blog in the same day because I felt this topic deserves more than a quick answer in the comments section.  I have a short answer and a long answer for this one.  The short answer is that forgiveness does not originate with the offender and therefore is not dependent upon or even related to the degree of offense. 

  
  

  When I speak of forgiveness I'm talking about a very specific action that *I* take.  Forgiveness is not excusing the offender for wrongdoing.  Forgiveness is not forgetting that I have been wronged.  Forgiveness is not license.  Forgiveness is not restoration.

  
  

  Forgiveness is nothing more or less than release of my hostility toward an offender.  That's all.  It's saying that I refuse to allow another person's wrong act to control me by imprisoning me in hate and anger.  When I choose to forgive a person, I'm saying that I know full well that a wrong has been committed but I am not going to compound the wrong by harboring rage or pain, nursing it until it warps my perspective.  That may seem an extreme characterization but I fully believe that unless I forgive, I suffer spiritual consequences, a wounding contortion far beyond and far greater than the wound dealt me by the offender.  Unless I forgive, I become bent.

  
  

  If I choose to offer forgiveness to one who has offended, it may or may not be appropriate to communicate that to the person.  I believe that while I may genuinely forgive, unless that person is receptive and desiring forgiveness, it is of no value to offer it.  In fact the offer of forgiveness to one who does not acknowledge his wrongdoing gets ahead of a relationship process that must be followed even if unconsciously, in order to move forward in the relationship.  I can forgive an offender and move on with my life even if the relationship is never restored. 

  
  

  I'd like to switch perspective now and retell the process from the view of the offender.  In all relationships there are hurts and pains that are inflicted whether by intent or lack of awareness.  When I make a mistake that hurts another person, I say "I'm sorry."  I'm acknowledging that what I did caused harm and I'm saying that though it was untintentional, I am responsible for my action. 

  
  

  When I deliberately set out to harm another person through an act of anger, malice, or cold-hearted evil (oh, yeah, I can do that), it's not enough to say, "I'm sorry."  At that point I have opened a chasm in the relationship that cannot be bridged by my effort.  I may feel genuine sorrow for my action, and sincerely regret it.  (Not merely regret that it had negative consequences for me, that's not sorrow, it's rebellion against authority, resentment of the relationship, or denial of responsibility.)  My genuine sorrow for my wrongdoing does not restore my relationship with the person I've harmed.  The extent of my ability to reach across the chasm is that I may with humility ASK for forgiveness. 

  
  

  From the moment that I broke trust in the relationship, I have to understand that I am entirely at the mercy of the other person in terms of my desire to see that relationship restored.  No matter how great my sorrow, the person I've offended is never under any obligation to offer me forgiveness.  Forgiveness is objective - there is no middle ground, either it is offered or it is not. 

  
  

  Some wrongs require restitution.  The principle of restitution was very much a part of American culture 30 years ago.  When I was a child, if I through a rock and broke my neighbor's window, my dad replaced it.  Whenever financial loss occurs as a result of either mistake or unintentional wrongdoing, restitution should be part of the process.  Restitution is the outward sign of genuine acceptance of responsibility for wrongdoing.  Restitution is part of the legal codes of the Bible.  When the wrong was unintentional, the person wronged is compensated for his loss.  When the wrong is intentional, (my cow didn't accidentally trample your garden, I herded him there and helped him), restitution isn't one to one, it's either 2, 3, or 4 times the value of your loss.  This compensates you for your loss, plus acknowledges the wrong of my heart in causing it. 

  
  

  At this point in the process there has been

  
  

  a wrong act
  genuine sorrow on my part - coupled with a confession if needed
  compensation for your loss if appropriate

  
  

  Now, you must decide whether to offer forgiveness.  There are some people who cannot bring themselves to take this step.  No matter how much I regret my action, no matter how fairly I've made restitution, they simply cannot let go of their anger over having been wronged.  At that point, I've done what I can to make it right, and I have to accept that there is nothing more I can do.  If I have done my part, and you choose to offer me forgiveness, then the relationship can be restored. 

  
  

  Grioghair's question pertained to vile and horrible crimes.  What role does forgiveness play in the lives of those touched by such evil?  Some actions are of a nature that there is no amount of restitution that can ever compensate the loss.  Wrongful death, rape, kidnapping, and the abuse of a child come to mind as examples of such acts.  When a person has committed one of these, it's no longer a matter confined to interpersonal relationships.  At this point the action is so grave that it constitutes an offense against the larger community. 

  
  

  As an individual who may have been harmed in this way, (my personal experience with violent crime is from having been raped when I was in my early 20's), I still have the choice to forgive or to be wounded again and again in my spirit by the weight of anger and rage.  However, there is no chance that I'm ever going to have a restored relationship with my rapist.  I long ago lost track of him, I don't know where he lives or anything about his present circumstances.  I don't want to know.  I can never be that man's neighbor again, because what he did to me can never be undone, there is no restitution. 

  
  

  Hear me very carefully for the next couple of lines.  In Principle, I believe in the death penalty.  I believe that there are some crimes so horrible that the perpetrator has renounced any right or expectation of mercy and that in fairness his life is forfeit.  In Practice, I oppose the death penalty because I know of no way it can be fairly and blindly (impartially) imposed.  There are too many cases where evidence is handled improperly or is simply unavailable.  Eyewitnesses become confused and have been known to id the wrong person.  Minorities receive death penalty sentences in disproportionate degree.  These and many other imperfections in the judicial system cause me to oppose the death penalty in practice.  But I strongly support the life sentence as the only viable alternative.  Some people can never be restored to society.

  
  

  I made a statement in the comments section of my earlier blog that anger and fear prevent forgiveness and that it takes perfect love to cast out fear.  Perfect love can and will do this for you.  Perfect love cannot change another person into a harmless one, a loving one, a compassionate, merciful, or just one.  Perfect love enables *me* to let go of crippling emotion.

  • 8:03 am
  • 17 Comments