The Politics Of Forgiveness

The following is a summary of an article by Frederick W. Keene published by "On The Issues" magazine, fall 1995 and that appeared in the summer 1996 newsletter of the Rape Crisis Intervention Service of Carroll County, MD. This article is reprinted from Challenges.

Editorial Comment: "While Challenges sees real value in this article, we feel it must be mentioned that not all Christian denominations share the same philosophy about forgiveness as presented here."

"For centuries the Christian church has guilt-tripped survivors of sexual abuse to forgive their abusers. Now startling new biblical evidence exposes a sanctimonious scam.”

This is a quote of Frederick W. Keene in a recent article on the politics of forgiveness. He says, “Many Christian clergy interpret the Bible to mean that survivors of child abuse, battery, and sexual assault are supposed to forgive the perpetrator. Add to this many psychologists and therapists, advice columnists, talk-show hosts and self-help gurus, and it seems as if everyone in the world believes the same dictum: If you have been abused, you should find it in your heart to forgive your abuser, and if you cannot, there is something wrong with you.”

The idea of forgiveness is one of the most difficult issues with which survivors of sexual or domestic violence must deal. Keene believes that the virtue of “forgiving those who harm us” is part of Christianity’s pervasive legacy to Western culture. He says it is invariably attributed to the teachings of Jesus as found in the Christian Bible. However, Keene does not believe Christ taught about this type of interpersonal forgiveness. Rather he believes that the teaching of Christ regarding forgiveness does not deal with someone of a lesser power forgiving someone of a greater power. He sees forgive-ness being taught only when it deals with same level-- ”brother forgiving brother” or higher level forgiving lower level, i.e., Jesus forgiving the sins of a prostitute.

Keene believes there is a very political reason for preaching to the less powerful that they should forgive unconditionally: it protects the powerful and perpetuates the status quo. He says, “Having taught for centuries the necessity of forgiving one’s abuser, the church now uses the doctrine to protect abusive clergy, making survivors of clerical sexual abuse feel at fault.”

Keene states, “If the actual New Testament teachings were applied, the result would be quite different. In the New Testament, the only way a person can forgive is to be no longer the weaker party in the relationship. Either the survivor must be raised up to equal power, or else the abuser must be stripped of power. One way or another, the former power relationships must no longer exist.”

The concept of power is a familiar one to those who work with people hurt by sexual violence. Abuse generally occurs most frequently when there is an imbalance of power, but seldom when the power is relatively equal. Those who object to the idea that abusers must give up power often raise the idea of “repentance.” Although abusive clergy often express sorrow and remorse, especially when caught, true repentance requires a real, substantive change. It means, “a reversal” or “turning around.” The abuser must no longer have the power to continue the abuse.

Put simply: the meaning of repentance is the giving up of power. Only with equal power does a victim of abuse have a genuine freedom to choose to forgive:; dispensing forgiveness because that was the safest or socially prescribed thing to do is hardly the same act of freedom, and ultimately release, that forgiving from a base of equal power can be. Only when the choice is made from a position of power can it be considered to be genuine.

How can this process be implemented? Keene sees two possible ways. First, the person with the power must give it away--or have it taken away. This may mean the clergy being stripped of his position thus taking the power away. Or, a second way suggested by Rev. Marie M. Fortune of the Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence in Seattle, is to use justice-making as efforts to “help empower those rendered powerless by abuse so that forgiveness... becomes an option.” This means giving power to the survivor. The writer did not elaborate on how the justice making is done, and perhaps this is an area where everyone, clergy, counselors and society need to concentrate much more attention.

Certainly it is neither useless nor unhealthy for people to forgive. People often need to let go of their pain in order to heal, but letting go must not mean letting those who hurt them off the hook. No survivor should be guilt-tripped into forgiving.