You know the story. Somebody you know hurts you. Maybe, you get a half-hearted ‘I’m sorry’; and you’re told (or expected) to let it go—’to forgive and forget’. It happens over and over again. There’s something wrong with that picture, isn’t there!? You’re the injured person, yet you’re repeatedly expected to shoulder the burden of keeping the relationship going by ‘forgiving and forgetting’. Why doesn’t the other person take a part of the burden, and stop being careless and hurtful. Besides being woefully one-sided, the statement ‘forgive and forget’ includes a part that is patently against our human nature, and totally unhealthy and unwise—we’re called on to forget; to erase our memory; to deny, or attempt to deny, a key capability that makes us human—the ability to remember, to learn from the past. If we think of injuries strictly in terms of the physical kind and their effect on the body, we can understand that some are minor and some are major. The minor ones heal fairly completely, though sometimes they can leave behind some residual signs, such as a little, almost imperceptible, scar. The major injuries oftentimes leave behind significant residual damage that permanently affects a person's life whether it be a large and noticeable scar; a limp; an amputated body part; etc. Emotional injuries (which often accompany the physical ones) are much the same. The brain records a permanent record of the event in the form of a memory—that memory is a sort of scarring. Just as it is impossible (barring extraordinary measures) to completely erase physical scarring, it is likewise impossible to erase ‘mental scarring’. Mental scarring is, in essence, the basis of learning which gives us the tools to make informed decisions about how to deal with a future that we must move on to. So then, as confirmed by Sara Moores Campbell in “Into the Wilderness”, I think forgiveness cannot be and is not about forgetting.
According to “Into the Wilderness”, apology & forgiveness also have nothing at all to do with fairness and justice but with self respect and community/relationship—i.e., reconciliation; and reconciliation is all about restoring trust. BOTH parties to an injury are responsible to each other to reconcile their relationship; and the ultimate goal of apologizing and forgiving is, or should be, reconciliation—anything else would be entirely self-serving. BOTH apology & forgiveness must be present in order for people to be reconciled to each other. According to Charles Griswold in “Forgiveness”, for an APOLOGY to be fully effective, it must be specific, heartfelt, and restorative. It must embody a reliable promise of future action to correct the behavior that gave rise to the injury being apologized for. Deborah Lipstadt in “Sunflower” adds an important element to this process when she states
“First, one must ask forgiveness of the aggrieved party. This personal encounter is a sine qua non when it comes to sins between two human beings. ... Judaism believes that it is only through human interaction that the victim can best be healed and the wrongdoer most profoundly changed.”Charles Griswold also states that for FORGIVENESS to be fully effective, it must entail setting aside all anger, resentment, and desire for justice or revenge. It must carry with it a change of attitude toward oneself such that you do not view yourself as the victim and you do not view the other person as the wrongdoer.
Admittedly, this all is a statement of the ideal; and in the real world we can only reliably look to the ideal as a guide—that should be what we strive for. However, we must always bear in mind that in the real world ideals are seldom, if ever, met. Where imperfection is the rule, apology & forgiveness will often be less than fully effective; trust will not have been fully restored (if for no other reason than our memories); and reconciliation will be less than complete. In light of all this imperfection, I think it’s important to set some minimums. At a minimum, both parties to the injury should willingly ‘come to the table’; and at a minimum, their expectations should be reasonable and their participation should be open, honest, and active—this process is about apology, forgiveness, and reconciliation; NOT negotiation or coercion. An important part of this process is restoring trust, and I think it’s important to have reasonable expectations regarding this. Since restoring trust is based on a ‘reliable promise of future action’, just what is reliable? Well, I think that Joseph’s Telushkin’s statement in “Sunflower” can give us some guidance in this matter.
“Moses Maimonides teaches that we can only know the truth of a person’s repentance if the penitent encounters the same situation in which he first sinned, and then refrains from sinning.”Since we can’t see into the future to answer this, we must look to the next best thing. We must use our intellect together with our memories and experiences from the past to evaluate the reliability of the promise and the likely value of the apology. If the apology involves an often repeated injury, it’s quite reasonable to expect that the reliability of the promise is very low. If the person making the promise has a history of lying or of breaking promises, again, it’s quite reasonable to expect that the reliability of the promise is very low. If the person making the promise does not appear open, involved, or serious, yet again, it’s quite reasonable to expect that the reliability of the promise is quite low. The value of the apology is severely in doubt. Barring these kinds of circumstances, I think it’s reasonable, and in the spirit of forgiveness, to give the person the benefit of the doubt, and trust them at their word.
What does the injured party do when the offending party refuses to acknowledge the injury, refuses to even discuss the events involved, and/or refuses to apologize? Is the injured party doomed to be stuck in the unhealthy place of interminably feeling hurt, sadness, anger, hatred, and resentment along with a desire, possibly, for revenge and retribution? Thankfully NO. Let’s face it, those feelings, which have their roots in a sense of frustration arising from the realization that hopes, dreams, or opportunities that might have been, won’t/can’t be, involve strong emotions that give rise to internal tensions that can lead to physical and emotional sickness as well as more injury. Those feelings need to be dealt with as quickly as possible. Some would say that the injured party should forgive the offending party unilaterally—that is, without the apology. That’s a possibility, I guess; but everything I’ve read seems to indicate that’s not a realistic option.
My approach would be to take the unilateral action of simply ACCEPTING the state of affairs as they actually in fact are. The injury has occurred. The relationship remains unreconciled, and may have in fact come to an end (though, not necessarily). The hopes, dreams, or opportunities that might have been, won’t be. In short, accept (simply accept) that ... what is, IS.
Then leave what you just accepted where it belongs—in your past. MOVE ON! You’re in the present, moving rapidly into the future. Your job now is to make decisions and take actions that will improve your life as it is now; that will build new hopes, dreams, and opportunities for yourself in the present. That’s where all your energies should be, must be directed. To dwell on the past is a waste of time and energy; and amounts to nothing but self pity, which is both unhealthy and unwise.
I think it’s crucially important to note here that Acceptance, as I envision it, is not a panacea. It doesn’t make everything ok. It is not an easy, quick-fix replacement for apology, forgiveness, and reconciliation—it’s the next best, second place option available to you to deal with the negative emotions and losses you are experiencing, and get on with your life. It will require a fair amount of mental effort over some extended period of time, as you repeatedly and gently remind yourself that you have no control over the current state of affairs; that what is, IS—you can’t have what has been taken away; that the negative feelings are not having a good effect on your mind and your body—you must take care of yourself; and finally that you need to live in the present—to get on with the work that you must do now. Its goals are strictly self-directed. Lacking the crucial component of the other person, and the opportunity that component affords to truly set aside the grievance, it’s ‘forgiveness lite’. I think that, though she is speaking specifically about forgiveness, Sara Moores Campbell describes for us in “Into the Wilderness” what I envision we are doing when we Accept that what is, IS.
“No, we do not forgive and forget. But when we invite the power of forgiveness, we release ourselves from some of the destructive hold the past has on us. Our hatred, our anger, our need to feel wronged...”Harold Kushner’s thoughts from “The Sunflower” provides another great insight into the process, including how to deal with the person who hurt you.
“To forgive is not something we do for another person. It represents a letting go of the sense of grievance, and perhaps most importantly a letting go of the role of victim. ... {it says} I refuse to give you the power to define me as a victim. ... I don’t hate you; I reject you.”One final thought. What should you do if/when the offending party comes around and wants to apologize, to clear the air, to reconcile the relationship at some time in the future. First, it’s imperative that you ask yourself the very appropriate and healthy selfish questions
As you consider what may be a very difficult decision, it’s crucial to remember here that the offending party didn’t value you; they didn’t value the pre-existing relationship enough to make an effective apology and reconcile the relationship before. They broke trust; and I think it’s fair to also ask yourself why is this person suddenly wanting to make things right now.
- ‘Given my history with this person, do I really want them in my life today—am I really willing to deal with the problems and issues I know they have’? and
- ‘Do I really want this relationship—is it important to me for some reason’?
If you do decide that reconciling the relationship is what you really want to do, then do so within the context of your life and your relationships in the now future/present—not your life as it was in the past, before the injury had occurred. In my opinion, such a delayed reconciliation establishes a new relationship, which must compete on equal or not-so-equal terms with your other new relationships. Also, be sure to value your memories, and use them to establish whatever level of trust you can within the newly reconciled relationship—the past cannot be restored whole. Finally, be sure to communicate to the other person that you envision that the new relationship comes with (new) limits, and just what those limits are.
--------------------------------------------
SOME NOTABLE QUOTES
"Classic remorse, as all the moralists are agreed, is a most undesirable sentiment. If you have behaved badly, repent, make what amends you can and address yourself to the task of behaving."
-- Aldous Huxley
--------------------------------------------
"Remorse is impotence; it will sin again. Only repentance is strong; it can end everything."
-- Honoré De Balzac
--------------------------------------------
"Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future."
-- Paul Boese
--------------------------------------------
"If you are not already dead, forgive. Rancor is heavy, it is worldly; leave it on earth: die light."
-- Jean-Paul Sartre
--------------------------------------------
"Trust lies at the core of love; there can be no true love without trust."
-- M. K. Soni
--------------------------------------------
"Trust is always earned, never given."
-- R. Williams
--------------------------------------------
"Trust is the easiest thing in the world to loose, and the hardest thing in the world to get back."
-- R. Williams
--------------------------------------------
"The glory of friendship is not the outstretched hand, nor the kindly smile nor the joy of companionship; it is the spiritual inspiration that comes to one when he discovers that someone else believes in him and is willing to trust him."
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
--------------------------------------------
"Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer"
-- Michael Corleone in “The Godfather—Part II”
--------------------------------------------
"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names"
-- John F. Kennedy
--------------------------------------------
In his book “The Sunflower: On the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness”, Simon Wiesenthal describes an experience while he was a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp. A dying Nazi SS soldier asked Simon (as A—i.e., any—Jew) for his forgiveness for his cruel and inhuman actions. Simon’s reaction was silence only. The book contains the thoughts of a group of notable thinkers regarding the event. I found some thoughts rather instructive.
HANS HABE – God punishes and forgives, in that order. But God never hates. ... Exercised with love and justice, atonement and forgiveness serve the same end: life without hatred.--------------------------------------------
HAROLD S. KUSHNER – To be forgiven is a miracle. It comes from God, and it comes when God chooses to grant it, not when we order it up. ... God’s forgiveness is something that happens inside us, not inside God, freeing us from the shame of the past so that we can be different people, choosing and acting differently in the future.
To forgive is not something we do for another person. It represents a letting go of the sense of grievance, and perhaps most importantly a letting go of the role of victim. ... {it says} I refuse to give you the power to define me as a victim. ... I don’t hate you; I reject you.
PRIMO LEVI – When an act of violence or an offense has been committed it is forever irreparable: it is quite probable that public opinion will cry out for a sanction, a punishment, a ‘price’ for pain; it is also possible that the price paid be useful inasmuch as it makes amends or discourages a fresh offense, but the initial offense remains and the ‘price’ is always (even if it is ‘just’) a new offense and a new source of pain.
DEBORAH E. LIPSTADT – Teshuvah, repentance, dreived from the Hebrew word ‘to return’, is Judaism’s process of saying I’m sorry to those we have wronged. It is more than repentance, but is designed to make our relationship with both God and those around us whole again. ... First, one must ask forgiveness of the aggrieved party. This personal encounter is a sine qua non when it comes to sins between two human beings. ... Judaism believes that it is only through human interaction that the victim can best be healed and the wrongdoer most profoundly changed. Making peace with God comes later.
JOHN T. PAWLIKOWSKI – {there is a} significant difference between forgiveness and reconciliation. ... Reconciliation entails several stages: repentance, contrition, acceptance of responsibility, healing, and finally reunion. ... The various stages cannot be traversed quickly. They require demonstrated changes that go beyond the merely verbal.
JOSEPH TELUSHKIN – Moses Maimonides teaches that we can only know the truth of a person’s repentance if the penitent encounters the same situation in which he first sinned, and then refrains from sinning.
I heard a sermon once which dealt with several issues, one of which was forgiveness, and included a reading of the following wonderful passage from a book entitled “Into the Wilderness“ 1990 written by Sara Moores Campbell.
There is incredible power in forgiveness. But forgiveness is not rational. One can seldom find a reason to forgive or be forgiven. Forgiveness is often undeserved. It may require a dimension of Justice, (penance in traditional terms), but not always, for what it holds sacred is not fairness, but self respect and community. Forgiveness does not wipe away guilt, but invites reconciliation. And it is as important to be able to forgive as it is to be forgiven.--------------------------------------------
No, we do not forgive and forget. But when we invite the power of forgiveness, we release ourselves from some of the destructive hold the past has on us. Our hatred, our anger, our need to feel wronged --those will destroy us whether a relationship is reconciled or not.
But we cannot just will ourselves to enter into forgiveness, either as givers or receivers. WE can know it is right and that we want to do it and still not be able to.
We can, however, be open and receptive to the power of forgiveness, which like any gift of the spirit, isn't of our own making. Its power is rooted in love. The Greek word for this kind of love is agape. Martin Luther King Jr. defined agape as "Love seeking to preserve and create community." This kind of love is human, but it is also the grace of a transcendental power that lifts us out of ourselves. It transforms and heals; and even when we are separated by time or space or death, it reconciles us to ourselves and to Life. For its power abides not just between us but within us. If we invited the power of agape to heal our personal wounds and give us the gift of forgiveness, we would give our world a better chance of survival.
SUMMARY – So then, let me summarize simply all of the above. As I've accumulated information on the related issues of anger, hatred, resentment, apology, forgiveness, and reconciliation; and have written this blog entry over time, something has occurred to me. Simply put, it is that when we hate, we tie ourselves to the past—to a past hurt or past injury. Common wisdom advises us to forgive, which is nothing more than letting go of anger and hatred. That wisdom doesn't advise us to forget the injury or to forego the resulting distrust—that's a part of our brains ability to remember and our ability to learn. 'Wisdom' just advises us to let go of the anger and hatred; and that action must sometimes, of necessity, be unilateral and separate from the process of reconciliation. When we do that, and here’s the key, I think, we remove ourselves from the past and let go of it. That opens the door for us to have the best revenge we could possibly have—to live well. Why? Because to live well requires us to live in the present—not the past.
