Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
The Wisdom of Accepting an Apology
I want to begin by challenging the assumption that there is any equivalence between apology and repentance. That linkage may exist – but it may not.
More than a few folks have been known to offer an abject apology motivated by nothing more than that they got caught. An “apology” is, by itself, no more than a formal expression of regret – the motivation behind that regret may or may not be articulated. It may not even, necessarily, entail an acceptance of responsibility. (“I’m sorry if you misunderstood me.”) Such an apology may, or may not, result in different future action.
Repentance, on the other hand, accepts responsibility and represents a genuine regret that a wrong has been committed (not just a mistake made). Integral to repentance is a deep determination to act differently in the future, regardless of whether or not that determination is specifically articulated. The repentant person will make every attempt to act differently in the future.
The question of “forgiveness”, the acceptance of an apology, or a statement of repentance, is entirely out of the hands of the person making such a statement of regret. Further, that person has no right to expect, much less demand, that their expression be accepted. That is a matter to be determined solely by the person receiving the apology.
My advice to the person receiving an apology is to accept it; accept it for one’s own benefit as much as for the comfort of the person offering it. Nothing is more damaging to a person’s soul than to allow themselves to be enmeshed in a hurt. It is unwise not to accept a way out of that entanglement when it is offered. There is no point in nursing an injury.
While genuine forgiveness, the full acceptance of an apology, means that the injured party will no longer carry that hurt and anger with them, it emphatically does not mean that they are committing themselves to living as though that which has happened has not happened. That’s not necessarily forgiveness, and it may be stupidity. It is important to recognize that restoration of relationship, or the reconciliation of injured parties, are each entirely different and separate issues from the question of forgiveness.
One final point: the enormous power of forgiveness to free oneself from the deadly entanglements of anger and hate is a power reserved to the injured party. That person has the power, within her or his own hands, to forgive even if there has been no repentance, no apology offered. It is terribly important that the injured person always remember that this power is theirs and not, unintentionally, transfer to the offending party the right to determine when the healing power of forgiveness may be offered. That would be to make oneself a victim a second time.
We are wise to begin with forgiveness.
By
Mark S. Sisk
|
April 30, 2007; 9:53 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Apology as Restitution |
Next: Brits Sketchy on Mormonism
Posted by: Betty Wald | May 1, 2007 8:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment
ok, you forgive the man that murders your family, what then? does he go free? or does he get the death sentence he so deserves. what is the difference?
do you have to accept an apology just becasue it is given to you? what if it is not sincere, or you do not think it is sincere?
yes i know what christ said, but we are not him and never will be. jesus never said forgive every sin or wrong.
there is the lords prayer - but when it says forgives us our tresspasses as we forgive those that trepass against us. does that mean we have to forgive everyone everything, or that we use the same standard for them that we would have used for ourselves. i think its the later not the former, but i wont know for sure until its to late for me to change my ways.
Posted by: frank collins | May 1, 2007 3:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I like what Jesus said: Love thy neighbour. It carries with it decency, respect and dignity which is what all of us need to function. Contempt and hollow words have nothing to do with fairness. Rectification requires action over time. A display of repentance many times over comes from treating the wronged with decency, respect and dignity.
Posted by: Robert James | May 1, 2007 12:50 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Wouldn't it be interesting to teach the children to never hurt anyone on purpose instead of Jesus forgives and see if that reduces the level of violence? Third party forgivness allows people to hurt each other with impunity. Does religion help or is it the problem? Can Jesus, God, any god or God forgive or is the offended the only one that can forgive?
People who kill don't expect to ever see their victims again do they? Who thought that up and why? What purpose does it serve, good or evil?
Posted by: BGone | April 30, 2007 2:10 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
I have much to be forgiven for over the years. And I have people I need to forgive as well. When someone says the words "I'm sorry" and mean it, I melt - it's like a balm, and forgiveness rushes in that hurt space. But it's the times when no apology is offered and will never be, that I find the hardest and I feel it is a grace from God that allows us to forgive in spite of this. Sometimes I think I have forgiven, but find it's more intellectual than deep in my heart. I pray for this grace to let go of what I harbor inside, often unaware. I was especially moved by your last paragraph, Bishop.It spoke to me.