|
|||||
|
|||||
| The Questions to Consider | ||
|
||
| Comments | ||
| Like so much of the discussion around living gracefully and with willingness
to forgive, this session brought its own difficulties. "Grace Abuse"
is seen to be a practice of acting or living in a manner that one knows
is inappropriate, immoral or hurtful while assuming that she or he can
"get away with it" or that God or the injured party will forgive
and forget. The classic example which disturbs many is the "death-bed
confession" where, it appears to critics, the immoral, "sinful"
or despicable individual appears to get away with a long life of debauchery
only to be forgiven at the last moment. Grace abuse, upon closer examination seems to be both a theological and psychological problem. It can be called an insult to God or a refutation of holiness, righteousness, a repudiation of "goodness and right-living". Philip Yancey repeatedly employs the image of the person who recognizes his or her "need" for forgiveness, like the woman caught in the act of adultery. In this image one's hands are open to receiving the gift of grace and forgiveness: "where are your condemners?" "Neither do I condemn thee". "Go, and live your life now free of the weight of wrong-doing, remorse, guilt, condemnation, and the traps of unwholesomeness." Psychologically then, (and this can surely be said to be the Spirit in us which is aligned with hope, faith and love) our burdensome and crippling past is set aside. Goodness is often said to be its own reward. But this is not just that others may treat us better because we are acceptably good, since often they do not. "Good people are regularly taken advantage of". Ironically and more consistently it is what holding grudges do to one's self that is paramount. Our inability to risk forgiveness traps us in our own mindset of disappointment in life, negativity, hopelessness and the anxieties associated with hate, revenge, and blame. Dr. Lewis Smedes talks about his own experience nursing the hatred and blame of the reckless driver who has killed his young child. Feeding the desire for vengeance and the wish that the driver live a life of untold suffering serves really as a preoccupation and obsession of Lewis Smedes, with remorse and rage implicit in that sickly preoccupation. It is simply "soul-destroying"--a cancer of the psyche. ...LINK The abuse of forgiveness and grace can be understood as an extension of this "soul-destruction". Some of us may attribute grace and forgiveness to the synchronistic verities, opportunities and newly realized freedoms that life may spring forth. Others will see in such opportunities and circumstances the presence of Divine Gifts. Either way, to use such opportunities and freedom to "indulge one's sinful nature" or to continue in practices which are consciously immoral is to engage in self-defeat. Such behaviour and attitudes fail to take full advantage of the new possibilities granted by God's Grace or life's possibilities. One additional dimension to the inability to act creatively in "graceful circumstances" is the stance that many of us take when we think: "I'm all right Jack" or "I'm a good responsible citizen". Such self-understanding (or absence of it) presents a lack of openness, bereft of the open hands which otherwise eagerly grasp opportunity and Grace. Lewis Smedes outlines five common mistakes people often make in the process of forgiving and which help explain how we exploit or abuse the Grace of God or forgiveness of others. ...LINK (1) Smedes reminds us that forgiveness is not the same thing as excusing. The fact that forgiveness is required implies fault and the application of blame. Were this not a case of responsible or irresponsible behaviour forgiveness would not be an apt medication. The need for, and act of, forgiveness, rests on the assumption of holding another responsible. (2) Forgiving is not the same as tolerance. "Well, it really doesn't matter" is not the essence of forgiveness. Certainly we can come to understand the circumstances of wrong actions and be made more tolerant of the struggle that another much undergo in order to act responsibly. But, forgiveness, in its essence is applied, not to tolerate future abuses, but to aid in the capacity of the other not to repeat the error again, not to tolerate continual recurrences of the same shortcoming. (3) People expect instant results. Instead one might perceive forgiveness as a deposit in a bank account which only builds up interest or collateral over time. It is possible for people to "backslide". It will require, for most, small steps forward to more responsible and unhurtful action. To expect instant results is to re-poison the well of forgiveness, to unrealistically relate to the one who is attempting to use the grace of forgiveness for her restitution. (4) You have to run to the person to tell them. Some of us are in too much of a rush to pronounce "I forgive you" for whatever reasons: self-regard, self-righteousness, concern for the perpetrator. In such a circumstance Smedes reminds us that responsible forgiveness requires discerning action on our part. Do we really mean it when we say "I forgive you"? Is the one to whom we speak these words prepared to hear them at this juncture, or is it premature? We don't often consider these deliberations as part of the forgiveness package. It may be that we don't fully understand the nature of forgiveness, even though we recite its form so regularly in our culture, our theologies, and worship rituals like the Lord's Prayer. (5) You've got to go back to the same relationship. Proof of a general lack of appreciation of the "art of forgiveness" is the unspoken conviction that "of course this is the same old, same old--the same people and the same relationship, except the other fellow is going to suddenly end the abusive or undesirable behaviour". There is no reason why the relationship between say victim and victimizer must remain the same. Nor must it be assumed that "any" relationship whatsoever will continue. The relationship may remain the same, it may change dramatically or slightly to accommodate the egregious action or it may be forced to come to an end, even while fully appropriating the act of forgiveness. In small group discussion participants addressed three further questions: (1)Have you ever made a conscious decision to sin, with the thought of God's forgiveness in mind? What thoughts went through your head? What was the outcome? There are many of us that admit to the act of "sliding this one by". There may be significant differences here between Protestant and Roman Catholic religious forms (informal versus formal confession for example) but the end result may be the same. "I cheated on my income tax (again)". Forgiveness. Penance. Then, come next April we start all over again. Other participants did confess that there may be much larger issues at stake here. There are those of us who do knowingly commit acts (in anger, revenge, jealousy, competitiveness, sexual lust, control over others, greed and gluttony) that are repetitive and too often made with the assumption that forgiveness by God and others is easy or automatic. Addiction, it was felt by some, may be a special case. For those who do commit the offence or "sin" there is often a load that is felt, a heaviness and if the situation is one of hurting another, a continual state of enmity between the parties is poisonous, as we explained here earlier. (2) Have you ever been called to show grace to someone in your life who was acting in obvious sin? How did you respond? What was their response to you? It is admittedly difficult show grace to someone whom we believe is "acting in obvious sin". It can be argued that there are many uncertainties here. How do we know for sure that the person is so acting? Assuming we do know, are we aware of all the factors and would a larger knowledge change the nature of our conclusion and response? Assuming that the facts speak for themselves and the other is acting in a manner which can accurately and objectively be described as "sinful", "evil", "immoral" or "unethical", another question arises: do we really know what we need to know about the nature of forgiveness along the lines of what Lewis Smedes has described? Are we willing to take the risk in the hopes that the other does "need" the opportunity to change directions? Sometimes, even while being criticized by others, we may choose to befriend, support and forgive the "abusive other". Perhaps in such situations it is as important to understand the responsible and discerning nature of forgiveness as it is to hopefully and lovingly take the risk. If the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer can aid us with his understanding of "cheap grace" and the "cost of discipleship" perhaps we might add to his lexicon "cheap forgiveness" and its avoidance. (3) Why is it so difficult for us to admit our faults, confess our sin, and repent? In plain English "who wants to admit wrong and make herself or himself look bad in the eyes of others?" Even in a discussion amongst some Christians it is difficult for us to jointly or publicly "own up" to our habitual failures. Surely, most of us have them. Is it the place of small groups or public forums to so confess such failings? Perhaps this is what private confession with priest, friend, and counsellor or in private prayer, is all about. It was suggested that spiritual pride may be amongst the most subtle and destructive of our consistent failures. Perhaps it is like the dying elderly patriarch whose life could be scrutinized and criticized for lack of time with family or general self-giving. Picture the family gathered around his bedside. Family members begin to recite possible virtues. He has been a good provider. He was reliable. He seemed a man of his word. On went the list. Then in a muffled voice from deep in the hospital bedding came the voice: "You forgot humility!” Need I say more? Such is the nature of spiritual pride. Each of the sessions in the Yancey study includes a number of biblical readings which are designed to illustrate the issue at hand. In this session a number of readings from Romans: 6:1-2; 6:15-18; 6: 22-23; 7:5-7; and Colossians 3:12-17 illustrate the point that to continue in the way of sin, immorality or debauchery because God's grace and forgiveness is already assured, is to live in a state of failure or death. C. H. Dodd in his classic treatment of the book of Romans describes the biblical concept of "sin" as a "state of being" rather than a particular act. Sinful acts, if we are compelled to speak of such things, emerge from the state of sinfulness which gives rise to them. Perhaps a good illustration of this "state" and its stranglehold on our person is seen in the individual who has chosen to curse and employ four-letter words whenever he or she "f---ing" well pleases. Those of us who know such persons have come to realize how quickly they become addicted to their new and socially offensive vocabulary. Every noun carries the same over-used adjective. Their vocabulary itself becomes limited as a consequence, their descriptive capacities become truncated, and their social grace is made untactful and unwelcome. They have become "slaves" to their choice of inappropriate or foul language. The state of grace (unabused) is an "eternal" one, a qualitatively abundant and uplifting presence in our lives as they happen, filled with the promise of an equally abundant future. In biblical terms we are "free from the power of sin". We are released from the "state of self-defeat" in control of the dying part of our psyches. The biblical sources point, therefore, to the costs of not grasping grace or of flaunting it, thus resulting in self-destruction or "death". But these sources are first and foremost witnesses to the grace that is capable of lifting persons(literally to begin with the early Christians in Rome and Colossus)to a freedom from destructive old habits, a distinct end to the crippling demands of social and religious laws, forms and practices. The latter is a much more compelling source of motivation, a motivation rooted in gratitude. We are, it can be argued, motivated by our action of confidence in a Universe built upon the Unconditional Love of grace and forgiveness. Postscripts: Each session ends with a section related to "looking inside one's self". In the case of this seventh session the inside look is entitled "Looking for Grace Inside Myself". This concluding section contains the following questions: (1) Is there someone in my life that needs me to respond in grace to his or her conscious sinning? How is God's Spirit impressing me now to love this person? (2) Is there any conscious sin in my life that is killing a part of me and denying my love for God? (3) Where do I need to pry my fingers away from the rule book, open my hands, and admit to God my need for his grace? (4) How is God’s Spirit prompting me to change my views on legalism? On Holiness? On discipline? For those of you interested in seeing and listening to more of Lewis Smedes and how he dealt with the question of homosexuality, please view the extended video interview entitled: “There is a Wideness in God’s Mercy: Video Interview with Dr. Lewis Smedes on Romans 1.” Mel White conducts a rather sobering introduction. ... LINK |
||
 |
Oct 2006
