|
|||||
|
|||||
| The Questions to Consider | ||
|
||
| Comments - recorded by Larry Fisk | ||
| Every week participants view Philip Yancey on video where he both reviews
and updates material in the relevant sections of his book. The video segment
this week reinforced Yancey’s conviction that forgiveness can be extremely
difficult. Yancey says: “I know of nothing harder than forgiveness, and
also nothing more urgent. Jesus was blunt. ‘Your Father will forgive you,’
he said, ‘as you forgive others’. We offered several interpretations of this segment of the Lord’s prayer. The first stresses the significance of the “as”. We are forgiven, Yancey stresses only AS we forgive others. But, it was argued, does not this limit God’s action? If we are only forgiven AS we forgive others then perhaps we may come to see our action as a precursor to God’s forgiveness and action. Such an understanding limits God and also puts into doubt his unconditional love. Lewis Smedes raises yet another interpretation of the act of forgiving others while receiving God’s forgiveness. Smedes says that when we forgive we: (1) surrender our right to get even (2) give our enemy’s humanity back (3) receive the freedom to wish that person well (4) become willing to be open to what God wills. Each of these ingredients of forgiveness come with great difficulty and may be argued to be more or less appropriate under different circumstances. These reservations certainly entered into our discussions. For example, does surrendering our right to get even provide a carte blanche for the “enemy” to harm us all over again? However, when one considers the four elements in Smedes’ description of forgiveness we can become aware of how important it is to revise our picture of the so-called enemy. To see the other as a struggling, oftentimes failing human person, contributes generously to the end of dehumanization of the other person. The “new relationship” possible with the former enemy need not be clearly defined. Since it will not be as it was previously, it is beneficial to understand it as being held in God’s hands and not something we can quickly imagine or manufacture. Rather like, “Behold, I make all things new”. One can argue that forgiveness as described above makes profound sense “psychologically”. Yancey, on the other hand, wants to stress that “Forgiveness has supernatural power. It works in the forgiving party. It works in the forgiven party. And in an extraordinary act of linkage, it brings the two together.” In the concluding group discussion some participants emphasized the importance of trusting in God’s fairness, allowing God to be judge. Victor Hugo’s story in Les Miserable shows the totally undeserving Jean Val jean as the recipient of the Bishop’s grace. Val Jean’s police pursuer, on the other hand, seems bent upon justice, and is destroyed in the process of seeking that justice. Grace and forgiveness in this story seem larger than some of us can take in. It was noted that Canadian author Vern Redekop in his “From Violence to Blessing: How an Understanding of Deep-Rooted Conflict Can Open Paths to Reconciliation” describes the mimetic or copycat nature of escalating violence. Such an escalation (Redekop cites the Oka confrontation) seems to lack any turning back for as long as there is no crack in the armour of eye for an eye, a wrong given back for every imagined wrong received. However, in theological terms, the mimetic nature of God’s love (Her’s or His), incarnated in action by one side or the other, helps bring the beginning of the end of copycat violence. Is it that one of the combatants has experienced something other than the escalating violence and distrust which enables her or him to act out of conviction and gratitude? Is this what unwarranted, unexpected self-giving: God’s? Christ’s? makes possible even in the political realm? There are those of us who argue that forgiveness, like grace, is not an ingredient commonly found or rooted in other world religions. Islam, it was noted by some, does not emphasize forgiveness. Other participants do not see this world as the final battlefield for souls and their eternal condition, as many or most of Yancey’s descriptions are often seen to support. Some of the group spoke instead of the development of a superior consciousness in people like Jesus, of the possibility of continuing on in a life beyond until union with the divine and higher consciousness is realized. Both of these matters will undoubtedly arise in the coming weeks. The former: forgiveness and grace in other religions will receive attention in the coming weeks. The latter: “life after death” may take a little longer. |
||
 |
Oct 2006
