I would like to start off by saying thank you to Matt for posing this question. I don't know if I have ever thought so long or hard about something I thought I already understood, and the opportunity to do so is quite a mind opening experience.

Webster's defines forgiveness as "the action or process of forgiving or being forgiven". It defines Forgive as "stop feeling angry or resentful toward (someone) for an offense, flaw, or mistake"

I grew up in Christian school, Church, and in a family that "prayed together". I was taught that we all deserve forgiveness if we only ask for it, and that all we must do to be forgiven is to ask. ("Ask and ye shall receive").

But what about people who ask for forgiveness ONLY to try to get a blank slate for something they KNOW they did wrong, not because they actually FEEL any real sense of remorse or responsibility? I don't want an apology just because someone thinks they are saying what I want to hear. On the flip side of that, I don't NEED an apology if I know that someone genuinely feels remorse for something they have said or done. Mind you, this is ALL subject to the severity of an offense. Will I forgive my sister for spouting off hurtful words when she was angry? yes, of COURSE. Will I forgive my child for lying about something to avoid being punished? OF COURSE I will. Will I forgive my client for a last minute cancellation of her appointment for the third Saturday in a row? Yes I will, though I may not allow her to book appointments on Saturday again. Will I forgive my father for abandoning me, or my child's father for abandoning her? Probably not, but that doesn't mean I can't ever feel any compassion for them. Will I EVER FORGIVE the man who held me down and forced himself on me? HELL. NO. I don't want to, I don't need to, and he will never deserve forgiveness for what he did.

All of that being said, I am having a very hard time deciding what forgiveness actually IS. Or rather, if it is something that can be so cut and dry. I know that I am not technically at fault for what happened to me eight years ago (the night I was attacked) but I try to forgive myself. Not forgive myself for what happened, but forgive myself for my reaction (or lack thereof). And not forgive myself in the sense that I claim any fault, but in the way that I finally RELEASE myself from feeling at fault in any way. I deserve to forgive myself if for no other reason than for so long I have blamed myself, even though that blame has been misplaced.

I have forgiven many people for many things, and I have stated many times that I am willing to forgive, but not necessarily able to forget (and this is based largely on the severity of the action or offense against me). As an example: I forgive my boyfriend for drinking too much liquor and then saying mean things, but from that point on I will insist that he not drink liquor around me. I know he feels genuine remorse for what he said, and I love him more than I hate those actions, so I will forgive, but I will not continue to put myself in a position to have to put up with that kind of behavior. And in a situation like that, I define forgiveness as specifically choosing to not nurture feelings of anger or bitterness or resentment. So there it is, (I have to relate it to something I CAN wrap my mind around I guess) But no, as far as the man who attacked me, who INTENTIONALLY hurt me despite my begging and pleading and crying and obvious struggling, I REFUSE to forgive- HE does NOT deserve forgiveness. (But I do forgive myself for choosing not to forgive him, by the way--- remember, I've had it drilled into my head all my life that one should always be forgiving of one's enemies) Ok so, for my own sake, I don't feel like I should nurture anger and bitterness and resentment, but I WILL hold on to them when it comes to this one thing. I will keep them on a shelf, lid on them all, but I will hold on to them. I feel I have a right to reserve all of those feelings towards the monster who did this to me. (Maybe part of that is that a friend of his later told me not to take it personally, that he had done it before and would do it again, that I wasn't the only woman he had done this to) He IS a monster. Evil, selfish, remorseless, devoid of compassion or caring on any level. I WISH, I really do wish, that I could see him tortured and killed, and have him know it was for what he did to me, and to stand there, having all the power to have it stopped, and have him BEG me to make it stop, so that I could say NO. I would say no. I would stand there, cold hearted and impassive, and say "NO, I DON'T CARE". Ok that is as close to unforgiving as I think I will ever be. (I really actually AM a pretty forgiving person, believe it or not). Ok so I have not answered the question at hand, but I was trying.... I will need to think some more and revisit this later...

The question about communion, the Lord's Supper, or the Eucharist has been on my mind all weekend. Growing up, I heard 1 Corinthians 11:23-33 read every 1st Sunday of the month, right before Communion was served. I can remember "examining myself" on the previous Saturday night, long into the night, worried and downright scared that I might be "unworthy".

Here is what I believe now. I feel like I have to issue some sort of disclaimer that it's what I believe right this second, and it may be subject to change at any moment. My theology has been a bit like that over the past number of years. First, about Communion itself: I take this words "This is my body" and "This is my blood" a bit less literally than the Catholic church and far more literally than Baptists. I believe that Jesus told us the most important thing we need to know about Communion -- that we are to remember His death. All the other stuff...how often we serve it, what sort of glasses we use, who is allowed to serve it, who is allowed to receive it...is based on our ideas, not His. I don't think Jesus wants to exclude people from remembering what He did for us. Churches are the ones that create rules and hoops for people to jump through before they are allowed to partake of Communion.

I believe that, even if Communion was a completely symbolic act, it has a certain powerfulness to it. It's kind of like just thinking about burying hatred in the ground or singing about it -- versus writing the word "hatred" on something and actually digging a hole and burying it. When we actively DO something, it becomes so much more powerful and real.

I also believe that, on a mysterious and spiritual level, there is something more going on than just eating unleavened bread and drinking wine as a symbolic way of remembering.

My belief is that none of us are worthy. That's the whole point of Jesus' death on the Cross. He took our unworthiness on Himself and we can now receive the worthiness that was His alone. I think that the only unworthy way to take Communion is by forgetting or ignoring its intent, which is that we would remember in a very concrete sort of way. There is nothing in the Bible that I can find that says we need to forgive anyone in order to be worthy to take communion. The only thing that makes us worthy -- Jesus' death -- is what we are supposed to be remembering.

Because of the messages I got in church growing up, I still struggle with this at times. I'll sit there and start questioning myself, just as the bread is being passed in our church fellowship. I will come up with a million reasons not to take Communion: I'm not ready to forgive my brother...I lost my temper not an hour before...I'm assailed with doubts about whether God really, really loves me...I'm still plagued by guilt and shame...maybe I'm even hung over from trying to self-medicate the night before...but Communion is far more about Jesus than it is about me. It's all about remembering Him, not about remembering every lousy thing I've ever done. It's remembering what He did so that all my failures could be forgiven.

I am not being silent here. It has just taken me several days to read and process all of this. I have really been struggling with Forgiveness for many things. I have been reading "all the books". I even read a book called "Angry with God" which ended up being about forgiveness. I am still not sure I know what to do on this subject, or will ever be able to complete what some call "forgiveness". To forgive my rapist, myself, my God...I am just not sure...I will have to think about this more. My therapist who is a christian therapist has suggested that I ask God to help me find forgiveness. Still processing all of this...

Just say the words and I may be healed

or Just say the word and I shall be healed

I remember that part of communion.

Lucinda on the communion thing, in my church as well its once a month , when he dropped the forgiveness bomb, I walked out and anytime I see the communion set up in the sanctuary, I just don't attend. This subject is long and deep. I like what you wrote Matt in that paragraph about purging and cleansing in order to re emerge as the whole I was intended. I'm going to sit on this one a while. Benn out of the loop here for a long time, slowly comin around again.
B

In order to forgive it is unnecessary to receive sorrow from the offender. If possible, however, the offender must be called to admit guilt, not just because that is what he owes you but because that is what he owes himself. A rapist, for example, though he first and foremost offends against his victim offends against himself. It is unnecessary to purge oneself of just indignation but anger is a destructive force as is sadness.
When such symptoms are pathological, hope is invaluable that was was taken may be restored.

As one who suffered the theft of a child through unlawful adoption, hope is the key. Yet only hope in a life to come can provide hope for what is irretrievably lost in this world.

"In order to forgive it is unnecessary to receive sorrow from the offender."

That is only true for the definition of forgiveness that everyone here has condemned and deemed not appropriate for a Survivor. As we have all stated multiple times, forgiveness in the terms of rape is NOT forgiving the rapist. Anyone who would ever ask us to forgive the rapist is crazy, in my opinion. It is, in my opinion, the most unforgiveable act, comparable to murder. It is murder of the soul.

" If possible, however, the offender must be called to admit guilt, not just because that is what he owes you but because that is what he owes himself."

There is an entire chapter on this in rar that describes how confrontation can be a very dangerous thing. Especially because the majority of rapists will do one of a few things. Either totally deny the claims and brush you off, deny the claims and become violent in an attempt to make you believe the claims are deniable, admit to it and beg forgiveness in order to soften the heart of the survivor and instill guilt back where he/she wanted it to be, or rape again.

"A rapist, for example, though he first and foremost offends against his victim offends against himself. It is unnecessary to purge oneself of just indignation but anger is a destructive force as is sadness. "

I feel that a rapist offends against the one he chooses to rape. He does not offend against himself. Rape is a choice and if he chooses that life for himself, then he has not offended himself he has made a lifestyle choice. No different than those men who CHOOSE not to take advantage of someone in one of the "typical" rape scenario's that everyone warns you about. Or the boyfriends or girlfriends that CHOOSE not to take advantage of their partners.

I also find your last sentence a bit conflicting. You say it is unnecessary of people to purge themselves of just indignation but that they should be purging themselves of anger and sadness as well. The definition of indignation is righteous anger. Is it healthy to have anger that leads to self destruction? No. But that's not the anger we're talking about here. I feel that we, as Survivors, have every right in the world to have righteous healthy anger as well as healthy and sometimes complete sadness. I claimed that right for myself a long time ago and I'm standing by it. Some days, I'm pissed at my rapists! Pissed! Just totally and completely pissed. I've written hate letters to them in the past, said some nasty things to one in person, I have become public and because of that made my peers aware of his tendencies. The only reason I was capable of doing that was because of my healthy anger.

I have also been overwhelmed by sadness on some days. My hubby has come home to find me sobbing uncontrollably in the shower. I have cried myself to sleep. My hubby woke me up a couple weeks ago because I was sobbing in my sleep due to a night terror and it led to a very difficult and sad, triggery day. But there is nothing wrong with sadness if it is felt in a healthy way. Overwhelming depression sadness, suicidal thoughts, self injuring, those things are not healthy. But that does not make sadness as a whole unhealthy.

"As one who suffered the theft of a child through unlawful adoption, hope is the key. Yet only hope in a life to come can provide hope for what is irretrievably lost in this world."

This paragraph just totally confused me.




I do not agree with your postings, 4Lizzy. I want you to know that I am not saying this in an attacking manner, but purely as a debate and healthy disagreement. I simply do not see it the way you do. I hope that you respond with a rebuttle. I would love to discuss this more.

4Lizzy, welcome to the resurrection after rape group! I'm sorry to hear of the loss of your child.

I'm wondering. You use the word "must" when you talk about the offender admitting guilt, but seem to question your own words when preface it with the words: "if possible". I'm wondering if you are struggling here with two ideas that have been a theme through out this thread: (a) common sense says forgiveness without justice is cheap - hence "must be called to admit guilt" (b) reality says that justice doesn't often happen, at least in this life.

This is indeed a difficult problem. If forgiveness is "wiping the slate clean" or "letting go as if it had never happened" AND forgiveness is necessary for healing (something that many people say), then anyone who suffers injustice is really in a pickle. Most times, we can't get justice. If justice is a part of forgiveness, then our inability to get justice would mean we can't forgive. But if justice is irrelevant - why even bother talking about forgiveness? Without justice, how can there even be a need to forgive?

If forgiveness is necessary to heal and we need justice to forgive we're out of luck. Without forgiveness we continue to suffer. If we continue to suffer because of another's sin, then the injustice only compounds further.

I hope you will take a chance to read through this very, very long thread. I know it can be overwhelming (more than 140 replies!), but I think there are a lot of really good ideas here that can get us out of the above mess.

The idea I find most helpful is simply to recognize that healing a victim and healing a relationship are two very, very different things and they relate to the problem of injustice in entirely DIFFERENT ways.

To heal ourselves as survivors we DON'T need to wipe the slate clean. To the contrary we need to own the injustice as injustice. Naming the injustice lets us both fight against its long term impact (purge ourselves) and also grieve that we had anything to fight against in the first place. It validates our experiences and allows us to build a life based on truth rather than denial. Truth allows us to heal. Thus healing can happen completely independently of the offender. It needs neither the offender's sorrow nor even his admission of guilt.


To heal whatever relationship we had with the offender, we do need to wipe the slate clean BUT this is the END result of a long process that begins with the offender acknowledging guilt and ends with the wrong being righted as much as is possible given that we can't change the past. It is not something that the survivor initiates or is even responsible for initiating. The survivor can heal, regardless of whether his or her relationship with the offender is healed.

To heal a relationship, the offender must offer far more than a mere admission of guilt. In addition it requires sorrow and empathy for the victim, a sincere desire to change, active efforts make a change, and efforts to make amends - both on a wider social scale and directly to the victim.

I'm not sure we need to wipe the slate entirely clean, or if it's even wise to do so. Even if my son and/or I would choose to renew some sort of relationship with his offender, the slate would never be completely wiped clean, and the fact of the abuse would necessitate a different sort of relationship. We would feel a need for boundaries that weren't there before. I don't think we would ever be comfortable allowing the offender around minor children. The reconciliation could only be up to a point.

Some people see that as a lack of forgiveness. I see it as wisdom and prudence. A truly repentant offender would agree with me.

In the phrase, "wipe the slate clean," what does "slate" represent? (Traditionally, it meant a board marked with talleys that represented debts between two people. Wiping it clean meant eliminating the debt owed by one to another. So I agree that "wiping the slate clean" is a bad metaphor for forgiveness)

Perhaps that's the core of our misunderstanding. People use "forgiveness" to mean "wipe the slate clean," when it ought to be used to mean "wipe our soul clean." If forgiveness isn't about reconciliation and overlooking a debt, and if it's really about self-made justice in the form of becoming free from the betrayer, then it truly is a form of soul-cleansing. Not that our soul was "soiled" before, but it's a really, really good analogy to the *feeling* of finally wiping an abuser's presence out of us.

We need to restrict the word "forgive" to religious contexts involving the pardoning of offenses that are not forms of traumatic betrayal, since the dictionary definition is:

1. to grant pardon for or remission of (an offense, debt, etc.); absolve.
2. to give up all claim on account of; remit (a debt, obligation, etc.).
3. to grant pardon to (a person).
4. to cease to feel resentment against: to forgive one's enemies.
5. to cancel an indebtedness or liability of: to forgive the interest owed on a loan.

âverb (used without object)
6. to pardon an offense or an offender.

All well and good when we're talking a person who cut in front of us in traffic, or said something unkind, or borrowed money and didn't repay, or forgot to tape the last episode of Battlestar Galactica (*although that might be unforgivable). But it's waaay out of proportion to a healthy response to betrayal trauma. I submit it's the wrong word entirely, like using an aspirin to cure a headache and then preaching that aspirin ought to also be used to cure a cancer. Nope; just because such a mild curative works in one context--and is RIGHT in that context--doesn't make it portable to all other traumas too.


Possible replacement words for "Forgive":

Untie (...myself from my betrayer)
Purge (...my betrayer's effects from my life)
Cleanse (...myself of shame and despair)
Sever from (...my betrayer/my shame and despair)

I'm not a fan of the wiping the slate analogy either. I think it comes from the mentality that some people have that justice is some kind of keeping score or some sort of balance - scales of justice and all that.

To my way of thinking, justice, and hence forgiveness, is more multidimensional. Tzedek, the Hebrew word for justice, also means "righteousness" and it is related to the word tzdakah, meaning acts of righteousness or charitable donations, i.e. money we give to fulfill our social obligation to take care of one another. It isn't something we calculate on a slate, but rather something we pursue: "Tzedek, Tzedek, tirdof" -- Justice, Justice you shall pursue (Deut 16:20). If justice is something we pursue, then forgiveness must be something that enables the offender's and our own pursuit of justice. Sometimes that might be wiping the slate clean, but sometimes, as StehtFest points out, it might be something entirely different.

Matt, I'm still wondering why you want to use the word "forgiveness" for wiping ourselves clean. Is there some value you attach to the very word "forgiveness"? I love the idea of "wiping the abuser's presence out of us" and I like the idea of viewing it as a form of self-made justice.

I see wiping ourselves clean as part of justice, for sure. First it is justice because that clean state was the way things should be (and I dare say the way God sees us). Second, to the extent that the offender wanted power over another, it robs the offender of any long term significance to his actions. We have returned things to alignment, at least within ourselves.

But I don't understand how that is forgiveness. Whatever its meaning, the word forgiveness still has a direct and indirect object. If wiping our souls clean is forgiveness - then who is forgiving whom and what exactly is being forgiven?

I view myself as having forgiven the rapist, but I didn't do it by wiping myself clean in any way. That came later as I worked through the memories and the way they impacted me. Nor did I forgive by reconciling. I have no desire to have any sort of relationship with the rapist. Forgiveness to me seems something entirely separate from either wiping myself clean or reconciling with the rapist. It plays a role in either process (self-cleansing or reconciliation), but it shouldn't be confused with them.

In my case I forgave by separating out my anger at what happened from the fact I was a target. Forgiveness to me is letting go of my anger at being the target and shifting my attention to the wrongness of the action itself, regardless of who is the target. Forgiveness is about becoming genuinely ego-less in one's anger at injustice. For me, forgiveness was necessary to heal because making my anger ego-less meant that I no longer needed to be wounded in order to "prove" that a wrong had happened. Even if the rape hadn't damaged me a bit, it would still have been wrong because it is wrong to choose to disrespect the most intimate boundaries of another human being. Even if no human punishes it, it is still wrong.

Matt, I was writing my response at the same time as yours. I see now that we both are uncomfortable with using "forgive" to mean "wipe ourselves clean".

"Matt, I'm still wondering why you want to use the word "forgiveness" for wiping ourselves clean. Is there some value you attach to the very word "forgiveness"? I love the idea of "wiping the abuser's presence out of us" and I like the idea of viewing it as a form of self-made justice. "

I don't. In fact, I just wrote a post before yours offering replacement terms for it, and on page 14 said "I'm not in love with the word 'forgiveness.'" As I said, I'm fine with it for certain issues in certain contexts, but feel the word has been spoiled for any application to betrayal trauma. Nearly all my posts here have been about punching holes in the word, discrediting it, pushing alternatives to it. If I've given the impression I want to sustain it because I attach value to it, I've failed somewhere!

"Matt, I was writing my response at the same time as yours..."

Ha ha! Yup, me too. So maybe I didn't fail after all? :)