Showing posts with label Forgiveness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Forgiveness. Show all posts

Thursday, July 1, 2004

Forgiveness: What It Is Not

Note: This article was first published in Life in the Delta in July 2004.

In following up last month’s article “Forgiveness: What It Is,” this month’s article addresses the counterpart – what forgiveness is not. I will summarize and then expound more fully: forgiveness is not reconciliation or pardoning or condoning or excusing or forgetting.

To briefly recap, emotional forgiveness is the replacement of the negative emotions of resentment, bitterness, hostility, hatred, anger, and fear, following an offense, with positive other-oriented emotions such as love, empathy, compassion, romantic love, or an altruistic gift to bless another. The benefits of forgiveness can affect us in many ways, including physical and emotional health. This type of forgiveness is intrapersonal, that is, it takes place inside the person. Forgiveness can be granted. It can either be expressed or not expressed to the other party.

The pardoning or excusing of an offense by the act of behaving as if it did not happen is more of a decisional forgiveness. The decision not to avenge or avoid the person may or may not actually alleviate the experience of the negative emotions. This may be a hollow forgiveness. It may make life easier, especially in family disputes or in workplace situations, but it may not bring the positive health oriented benefits, according to recent research in the area of forgiveness. We can either experience or not experience the forgiveness we express.

How then does reconciliation relate to forgiveness? Reconciliation is the restoration of trust when trust has been damaged. Reconciliation is interpersonal, that is, it takes place between two parties. Trust cannot be granted – it must be earned. Trust is earned by many trustworthy experiences over time. Both parties must decide whether to reconcile. It is like building a bridge – each must start from their own side and work toward the middle. One person cannot build a bridge to the other’s side.

Of course, the best scenario is to forgive and to reconcile. But as mentioned, one person cannot effect reconciliation. Reconciliation is a process which involves many steps, including confession, contrition, acknowledgment of pain, valuing of the other person, restitution, and patient waiting. Fortunately, however, reconciliation is possible. I have successfully witnessed several marriages that have survived an affair and have become stronger and healthier. But it took work by both sides. I have also seen one person make a decision to reconcile too soon and derail the process. Bitterness or anger may fester beneath the surface only to erupt unpredictably and uncontrollably. These emotional outbursts are a sign that forgiveness has not fully taken place. This is because reconciliation generally needs repentance – that being sorry for one’s offense and making the effort to change. Also, to reconcile requires that we take the time to grieve whatever we feel we have lost. If the offending party refuses to change or even acknowledge the hurt they have caused, then true reconciliation cannot generally occur. Reconciliation may even put some people in danger of re-injury, as in cases of sexual abuse. Sometimes reconciliation is just not possible, however much one would like for it to occur. That too is a loss that must be grieved. Forgiveness, however, is possible and desirable.

Tuesday, June 1, 2004

Forgiveness: What It Is

Note: This article was first published in Life in the Delta in June 2004.

At the recent annual meeting of the Mississippi Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, I was privileged to hear keynote speaker Dr. Everett L. Worthington, Jr. Though a Christian, Dr. Worthington has been working in the secular field at the Virginia Commonwealth University where he has done extensive research in the area of forgiveness. He is highly regarded for his expertise on the topic and has published many of his studies. Though all the major religions value forgiveness, it has also become an area of interest to secular psychologists who have found great personal health benefits for individuals who practice it. I would like to share with you some of Dr. Worthington’s findings.

One of the difficulties of discussing forgiveness is in defining it. Therefore, Dr. Worthington establishes the definition as the basis from which to work. He says that there are two types of forgiveness: decisional and emotional. In decisional forgiveness, a person decides to control the tendency to avenge or avoid their offender and by their outward behavior they “release the debt.” Many people have this type in mind when they think about forgiveness. But the forgiveness that Dr. Worthington says that brings the physical and emotional benefits to people is the second type – emotional forgiveness. This is the one he has in mind when discussing forgiveness. Therefore, he first defines it in the negative: emotional unforgiveness is the complex combination of six negative emotions – resentment, bitterness, hostility, hatred, anger, and fear, which occur after there has been an offense. Living in our world, we are continually faced with being hurt or offended by others. After the transgression happens, we usually respond with hot emotions, such as anger or hurt or fear, but this response is not unforgiveness. Unforgiveness develops over time as we ruminate about the offense. These six above named emotions can then become combined and deeply rooted and difficult to give up.

After an offense Dr. Worthington says an “injustice gap” is created, which can be dealt with in several ways. Emotional forgiveness is just one of the ways to close this gap, though it is impossible to fully close the gap and return to things as they were before. Other ways to close the injustice gap include personal revenge, legal recourse, invoking divine justice by turning it over to God, accepting that bad things happen (which is forbearance), or demanding an apology or restitution, just to name a few. These things can help alleviate negative emotions. But Dr. Worthington contends that emotional forgiveness is the replacement of the negative emotions of unforgiveness with positive other-oriented emotions, such as empathy, sympathy, or love – either romantic or altruistic (a gift to the other person).

Dr. Worthington says the level of hurt is crucial. The offense of someone cutting you off in traffic may be categorized as a nickel hurt, whereas a big hurt such as the murder of a loved one may be worth $500. It may take a while to cycle over and over again through forgiveness in cases of traumatic, deep wounds to reach the replacement of the negative emotions with positive ones. But the key is empathy – the identification with and understanding of another’s situation, feelings, and motives. This does not negate the hurt, but if you can separate the action of the offense from the negative emotions, then perhaps you can find ways of letting go of those emotions. For example, you can ask God to heal the emotions. Perhaps you can attempt to see the offense through the eyes of the offender or as an observer objectively telling the story. Maybe remember a time when someone forgave you and what that felt like. You can limit the time you ruminate over the offense, e.g, delegate it to a designated limited time period during the day. All of these are ways to replace negative unforgiving emotions with positive other-oriented emotions. Emotional forgiveness can be expressed or not expressed to the offender. Emotional forgiveness is an intrapersonal experience, that is, it takes place inside the person.

Our bodies are designed to meet an acute stressor by pumping out the hormone cortisol. People with unforgiveness have been found to have higher levels of this stress hormone cortisol, which can lead to many physical health risks, such as cardiovascular and immune disorder risks. Basically, emotional forgiveness is better for your health. (Note: See next month’s follow-up article – “Forgiveness: What It Is Not.”)