I’m privileged to publish Rhoda’s research and personal experience regarding forgiveness. This article comes with a caution: child sexual abuse.
***
Forgiveness, like any power, can be used for good or for ill.
Understood and implemented correctly, it can bring freedom and relational delight.
However, it has also been used to firmly establish captivity and relational anguish, especially when we forget that its complexities require unusual grace.
God’s forgiveness of us when we realize we’ve done wrong spills into sheer revelry in His goodness. Expressing His love to others by forgiving those who seek forgiveness? Living in meaningful relationships where we seek and give forgiveness when appropriate? Forgiveness can be a gift.
However, if you want to bully, control, and belittle those whose cries for justice ring through heaven, simply teach them a misguided approach to forgiveness, make promises Scripture does not make, and attach God’s name to the whole mess.
May God bring justice if you do so.
Part of the complexity of the discourse around forgiveness stems from two different sources. They are both highly influential and legitimate in their respective endeavors. They discuss the same concept but from two different lenses.
Different perspectives on forgiveness
The fields of theology (the study of God) and psychology (the study of the human mind) are not inherently at odds with one another: one can study God and study the human mind, with great delight in both studies.
However, these two fields do at times diverge in perspective and recommendations.
A third approach is that of nouthetic counseling, sometimes referred to as ACBC counseling or deviously, biblical counseling.
I’ll consider the psychological and I’ll describe the nouthetic, but it is primarily the Scriptural view that I want to highlight.
The psychological perspective
A 2022 systematic review by Brady and colleagues noted that within the field of psychology, researchers disagree over how to conceptualize forgiveness. However, they emphasized scholarly agreement on this broad definition: “Scholars broadly agree that forgiveness is an intra-individual process involving a prosocial change towards a perceived transgressor.” (See MCullough, Hoyt, & Rachal, 2000.)
Herein lies the crux of the matter: an intra-individual process is not the same as an interpersonal process. That which is intra-individual is located or occurs within the (one) individual; other parties, by definition, have no need to be involved. Interpersonal matters are matters between two or more parties.
A strictly intra-individual approach may encourage an attitude of “forgive; grant them release; but don’t tell them.”
As the authors above mention, there are differences in the field. I do not purport to speak for all academics, but I wish to invite you to consider if you might be mapping a psychological definition onto a spiritual matter without realizing it (or if perhaps you are living under the weight of the nouthetic approach, detailed below).
The Scriptural perspective
While the appeal of the psychological definition lies in its simplicity, I am increasingly convinced that if we are to understand Scripture’s take on forgiveness, we are going to have to be more patient both with ourselves and with others.
Scripture doesn’t give us a concise definition of forgiveness tucked into the opening line of the abstract of a research article. It gives us Jewish tradition, Jesus, and parables: we sit and learn from those before we understand His view of forgiveness.
Scripture presents forgiveness as relational, restorative, and costly. When Scripture discusses forgiveness, the goal is the relationship itself, and forgiveness is granted after the offender acknowledges his (or her) inability to restore himself or repair his wrong in the situation.
Forgiveness is rooted in God’s character: gracious, abundantly merciful. In this view, forgiveness is rooted in a genuine warmth of character, an eagerness to see an enemy thrive rather than seeking vengeance.
From this internal posture, one can meet an offender’s genuine repentance with forgiveness. The two parties can then begin to move towards reconciliation.
Similarities and differences between the two views
| Scriptural | Psychological | |
| Definition | A group of people absorbing the costs that the penitent cannot repay so that relationships can be restored (my own understanding from Biblical study) | “Forgiveness involves willfully putting aside feelings of resentment toward someone who has committed a wrong, been unfair or hurtful, or otherwise harmed you in some way.” (American Psychological Association) |
| Cultural setting | Collectivistic
Collectivistic cultures typically value the lengthy, story-telling method of teaching. In collectivistic cultures, relationships are important, sometimes at the expense of the individual; this is notable simply because we are hearing Jesus’ teachings on repentance, restitution, and forgiveness through a very different cultural lens. |
Individualistic
Individualistic cultures typically value the short, sound-bite method of teaching. The individual is important, sometimes at the expense of relationships.
|
| Community role | To help the wronged absorb costs; to extend tenderheartedness
|
None—this is an individual process.
However, religious adherents of this view typically do engage in communal reprimands for an individual’s failure to forgive, and often promise individuals that God will punish them for failures here. This is where the nouthetic merges with the psychological definition. |
| What is addressed | Any known costs not covered by restitution. Lifts sins off a relationship; benefits the relationship | Emotions. Releases negative emotions after offense: may be of benefit to the one forgiving. |
| Purpose | Partner with the penitent to restore a relationship and address costs associated with original wrong | Find emotional ease or relief from negative emotion |
| Why it matters | Pertains to our relationships with God and others. | Involves scholarly research. Pertains to the therapy client’s emotional state |
| Immediate benefits | No emotional or mental benefits mentioned in Scripture: in fact, absorption of cost is heavily implied. Forgiveness is costly. | Emotional relief
|
| Long-term benefits | Receiving forgiveness from God; restores relationship with the one who could not pay
. |
Emotional relief, improvement of life quality
(Note: Some longitudinal data supports the view that well-being precedes the ability to process negative emotion, not that addressing the emotion causes well-being. See Orth et al., 2008). |
| When to forgive | After confession and repentance, as part of the restitution/relational repair discussion between the penitent and the wronged.
Some believe that because the commands to forgive do not explicitly state this, we are to forgive with no regard to repentance. I disagree on the basis of God’s forgiveness to us and my understanding of what a Jewish crowd listening to a Jewish Jesus would have understood. |
When we want emotional relief (unrelated to the offender’s repentance)
|
| Who we forgive | Controversial in the Christian community: Some believe we are to forgive all who wrong us.
I refrain from asking others to do that which God does not do, which is forgive the unrepentant, especially in light of Scripture’s emphasis on relational restoration after repentance and forgiveness. |
Whoever has caused offense, particularly those whose offenses caused distress. The emphasis is on perceived distress, not relationship.
|
| Related ideas | Accounting, debt, mercy, enemy love, forbearance, grace, restitution, relational repair, reconciliation, salvation | Emotional wellbeing, grief-based bitterness, felt compassion, meditation, positive psychology |
What happens when these two views are merged?
Merging the psychological definition of forgiveness with the Scriptural promise of forgiveness can result in spiritual abuse.
The promise
Matthew 6:14, “For if you forgive people their sins, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.”
Merging the psychological definition of forgiveness to the Scriptural promise found in Matthew 6:14-15, gives us something like this:
For if you deliberately release negative emotions towards those who have wronged you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you (lift off, discard your sins). But if you do not release negative emotions towards those who have wronged you, neither will your heavenly Father forgive (lift off, discard) your sins.
In fact, the notorious “nouthetic counseling” view of forgiveness gives 3 qualifiers to define forgiveness. According to them, the person who has forgiven will no longer bring up the offense
–to the offender.
–to others.
–to himself.
But Jesus never said that.
Let’s look more closely at this.
The word “you”
“You” here is plural which means that Jesus is talking to the collective. Forgiveness is something that we do. “For if y’all forgive people their sins, y’all’s heavenly Fathers will also forgive y’all’s sins.”
In contrast, it’s common to hear, “We’ve forgiven him. It’s time you moved on. God wants you to forgive.” When I hear that, I hear, “We’ve processed our negative emotions faster than you have processed yours. Hurry up. God demands it.” Notably, when a community says, “We’ve forgiven him, so he can go back to leadership,” they usually are referring to the amelioration of negative emotions.
But have they carried the costs of his wrongs? Do they even know what his wrongs cost those who have been directly impacted? Did they listen to those who incurred the immediate costs associated with the wrongdoing? If they listened, did they truly take into account the magnitude of the harms?
A community that rushes past the questions of repentance and the costliness of the harm, who seeks to minimize grief by labeling it as “unforgiveness” is a community that, ironically, is disobeying the collective command to forgive.
That is not a communal carrying of cost.
But when Jesus used the word “you,” this is what He was talking about:
Collective forgiveness is not about collective silencing of negative emotions and discussion. It is about collective absorption of cost, collective lifting off of sins so that relationships between harmed and penitent can flourish.
This understanding can provide significant relief if you are suffering from the severe cost of sins against you: it’s not on you, the individual, to absorb all of those costs alone. You have a family in Jesus who have already been told to come alongside you in the costly work of forgiveness.
The word “forgive”
According to the Expository Dictionary of Bible Words (2005, edited by Renn), there are a number of variations in the implications of the original words translated “forgive.”
Sometimes “forgive” implies “bear,” “lift up,” and “carry.” Nothing in Scripture, to my knowledge, indicates that we are lifting up and carrying away our emotions in order to discard them, or that we are carrying our emotions away from the relationship.
The implication is that we might “carry” one’s sin away from the relationship, as God has carried ours. God used a scapegoat in the Old Testament: a goat would carry the sins of the people outside of the camp on the Day of Atonement. Jesus came and carried our sins outside of the camp. Atonement deals directly with the costliness of our sin and the hope that the relationship can be set aright.
Similarly, “leave” and “allow to depart” describe another frequently used verb translated “forgive.” Our sins have been allowed to depart from our relationship with God.
Perhaps this crystallizes the finality and legal connotations associated with forgiveness: it is sometimes used in ways similar to the word “divorce.” As we are now in Christ, our sins are no longer unified with us as they were before we received His forgiveness: they have been “let go” and “sent away.”
The forgiveness words used to portray human-human forgiveness, according to this dictionary, are the “bear,” “lift up,” and “carry” word, as well as “divorce” and “send away.”
Of note, it is the sin here that is seen as the threat to the relationship, not the grief-like emotions resulting from the sin.
So, it is the sin that is being ordered away, not the lament that follows the sin. Certainly, while Joseph eventually “carried away” his brothers’ sin and renewed his relationship with them, he did not send away his emotional experience or his questions of their sincerity.
We love our injured well when we are more concerned about the unjust costliness of the sins they have endured than about their negative emotions regarding said injustices.
The concept of forgiveness does not preclude the concept of restitution: on the contrary, in the parables Jesus taught regarding forgiveness, it seems expected that the one who owes will attempt or has already attempted to pay, and that forgiveness steps in when they are unable, not unwilling, to do so.
Thus, the concept of restitution itself is vital to fully understanding and appreciating the concept of forgiveness. Without the practice and expectation of restitution, forgiveness partners with injustice. Others can inflict costly harms, withhold aid, and expect the victim to carry the cost of those harms.
I would argue that the concept of restitution is foundational to our understanding of forgiveness. Restitution and forgiveness are not at odds. They are different words to describe the roles of different members of the community taking an “all hands on deck” approach to repairing the damage.
The repentant offender makes restitution insofar as they are able, and everyone else covers the rest: this is forgiveness.
Christ’s forgiveness of us is incredibly good news because we were unable to pay at all. He wants nothing less than our love–for Him first, and then for others. We are notoriously terrible at loving Him, and it shows in a lack of love for others. Suppose we were to try to get our actions in line by trying harder, doing better, and being generally decent humans? If the love piece is missing or short, we’ve added to our costly errors.
It’s a heart issue. We can’t repay, because the Christian life is not simply a to-do list, it’s a mind-and-heart issue that eventually spills into action or inaction.
But He offers us to be made whole, with transformed minds and hearts that can love as He loves.
The context of “forgiveness” in the Jewish nation
Once again, I’m relying on the Expository Dictionary mentioned above, page 406:
“The Mosaic law covenant makes provision for the granting of forgiveness for Israelite worshipers after appropriate sacrificial offerings have been made… However, mere sacrifices alone do not automatically guarantee forgiveness—an appropriate spirit of repentance must also be in evidence.”
We can conclude that scriptural forgiveness occurs in the context of repentance, not in the context of unrelenting evil (although we may sincerely hope for repentance and restoration to those who have chosen evil).
While I recognize and respect that other believers disagree with me here, I do not find it necessary or helpful to tell people to forgive when their offender is unrepentant and has not attempted restitution.
When an offender is repentant and willing but unable to make restitution, Scriptural forgiveness involves the community (you, plural) as I outlined above, sharing the grief and any tangible costs associated with the wrongdoing. That is, focusing on the costliness of the harms rather than the “negative emotions” following injustice.
In that light, telling the victim “you just need to forgive [release negative emotions]” is a profoundly unscriptural, callous take. “The victim needs to forgive in order to heal,” compounds the problem. It makes a promise on behalf of God that God does not make.
Yes, forgiveness is in some ways intra-individual (within the one person): those who want their abusers to suffer can go through a transformation within themselves where they begin to want their abusers’ genuine wholeness.
This is a notably different desire than wanting their abusers’ ease or supporting their abusers’ lies.
When Scriptural forgiveness is messy and complex
I experienced repeated sexual abuse, threats, and layers upon layers of harm by those who consider themselves good people. (I’ve learned to either not tell my story to people who aren’t experienced with severe abuse, or to tell only tiny snippets of it, so cultish and layered it is.)
I am told that I was two years old the first time I was sexually violated. According to the adult who spanked me afterwards, I should have done a better job of keeping my dress down.
My teen years were years of profound harm. I frequently heard some version of, “We can’t report it, because imagine how he’d suffer in prison,” or “Forgiveness doesn’t seek revenge, and reporting is just using the government for vengeance,” or “Asking for restitution is asking someone to ‘pay me what thou owest,’” or “I knew he was dangerous but I didn’t know what to do so I just prayed.”
Someone has to pay for the therapies, the chronic physical illnesses, the tangible costs associated with long-term outcomes of child abuse.
For those who believe it’s not right to ask sex offenders to carry a few years’ worth of consequences and/or make ongoing restitution towards the ongoing health outcomes to the children they’ve harmed, then how can it be remotely acceptable to expect the children to absorb those ongoing costs?! The children have even fewer resources with which to absorb the costs of the sins against them!
How can Christians turn a blind eye to people they know are dangerous because they don’t know how to address dangerous predators, and then criticize victims who don’t know how to live with the resulting carnage?
Where is this attitude found in Scripture? Certainly not under the heading “forgiveness”!
In my own life, the overwhelming costs of suffering abuse and religious cover-ups eventually brought me to a point where I stopped assuming that I had to carry those costs because “my abuser could not.”
Instead, I acknowledged the truth: my offender would not carry the costs; he would not tell the full truth; he was not repentant, and I could not sustain the damages, though I had tried.
I had put my whole heart into my limited understanding of forgiveness and reconciliation for so many years, and still the costs exceeded my wherewithal.
The view I held at the time merged the psychological definition of “forgiveness” with aspects of Scripture. I thought forgiveness meant releasing negative emotion, insisting on reconciliation if at all possible, and moving on emotionally. This view is similar to that taught by nouthetic counseling.
This definition of forgiveness was challenged when I miscarried the second time in a row. My doctor said that my hormonal patterns indicated severe stress in my teen years, enough to create ongoing unstable hormonal patterns and cause recurrent miscarriages in adulthood. I went on to have five miscarriages before my first living child and have had more miscarriages since. I’ve yet to receive a diagnosis more specific than what she gave that day.
My offender’s sins against me ultimately cost me something I absolutely could not agree to pay: my children’s lives. I would never sacrifice my children in order to have a relationship with my offender. Their lives are their lives. Not mine. My emotional comfort? My personal desire for vengeance? The money to afford therapy and medical care? Those things, yes. But my children’s lives?! “Write off” or “discard” that cost?!
Was it unforgiving to mourn those losses? To mourn with anger? To recognize that while our laws will never hold him to account for what it cost me, God will? To trust and rejoice in a God of justice?
My offender partnered with evil to inflict costs beyond my ability to carry.
Is it “unforgiving” to say that? Is it “unforgiving” to say that my children have a right to my heart oriented towards motherhood and grief more than my offender has a right to my silencing of the same?
I mentioned above that under the teachings of “nouthetic counseling,” the person who has forgiven will never mention the offense to anyone.
I call this the “silenced sufferer” view of forgiveness. This is what I was taught and believed. I sat with those tumultuous questions for years—years—in my “silenced sufferer” view of forgiveness, telling very few what my doctor had said was the cause of my miscarriages, because that was “mentioning it to others.”
How “unforgiving” of me it would have been to do that, I thought.
My views have changed.
My abuser will never hear me tell him that I forgive him the cost of my children’s lives, because their lives aren’t mine, they are theirs. He will also never hear my miscarried children verbalize forgiveness, because they’re dead. I protect my living children from him, because even genuine repentance doesn’t eliminate old tendencies and desires, and no amount of his repentance will cause me to budge on those boundaries. He has sinned beyond the point of ever experiencing full relational restoration from all involved in this lifetime.
If he were to repent, what would a path towards reconciliation look like for us, given the extravagant relational costs associated with his choices?
How do we view forgiveness when we are staring down outrageous costs, complexities, questions of repentance and safety, and impossibilities due to communication barriers, death, distance, or some other factor?
Legalism won’t tell you this, but scriptural forgiveness, like Joseph’s relationship with his brothers in the book of Genesis, can be messy.
- What if someone wrongs you and then dies?
- What if you wrong someone, genuinely have a change of character (like Joseph’s brothers) and yet fear consequences from them or others for years?
- What if someone is flagrantly unrepentant, and your best wish is for their repentance, growth, and thriving? When do you tell them your wishes, and when do you wish from a distance?
- What if someone is actively sinning against you but you can’t move on due to financial or legal restraints?
- What if you have released negative emotions and found peace?
- What if you sinned against someone and then they sinned against you worse?
- What if offenders have no means to make restitution?
- What if you have no means to carry the costs of the harms done to you and your community does not hold to a communal approach to addressing the fallout of the wrongs done against you? (Friend, if this is you, I am angry for you.)
My first thought is to take the legalism out of it: forgiveness is less about accomplishing a perfect checklist in a very messy world and more about reflecting God’s heart towards sin and sinners. He wants the sin out of the relationship because it is sin that creates distance—not God’s or our negative emotions towards sin.
Maybe some of the spiritual abuse we’ve experienced is precisely because our leaders forgot God’s heart towards us and instead tried desperately to get us to meet their checklist with little regard to the cost imposed upon us.
In my own life, when I realized that something in my understanding was wrong, I studied Scripture, while tuning out the noise of evangelical nouthetic counselors. This proved to be a deep comfort rather than a burden.
Exodus 34:6-7 is a favorite passage of mine because it’s where God introduces–not His rules, not His difficult prophecies, not His mysteries–but His heart to His people. They had just been enslaved for hundreds of years and now He was their God, establishing a deeper understanding of the relationship. What would He say?
“The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.”
Some of the perplexities above can be hotly debated to the point that we forget the point of forgiveness: to reflect God’s heart. Maybe I would call it mercy, someone else would call it forgiveness, and another would call it preparedness to forgive, but there should be an eagerness in us to see the evil people in our lives become truthful and free so that they can experience the costs of their sins being lifted off of their relationships.
There is joy in that. You know this if you’ve ever been honest about something you regret.
Maybe some would call it accountability and others would call it unforgiveness, but God doesn’t clear the guilty who don’t repent.
That’s comforting to me.
God’s heart is first of all, for relationship, for you, and sin is against relationship, so the sin must go. If the guilty hang onto the sin, the sin directs the relationship away from reconciliation. If the guilty repent, God’s forgiveness moves towards reconciliation.
The whole time though, God is eager and ready to forgive because His heart is gracious. He wants to restore the relationship.
In many ways, by the emotional definition of forgiveness, I have forgiven. My past rarely influences my emotional or mental state; there is an ease, a relief of the emotional turmoils that followed the things I’ve suffered. The best thing that could happen to my abuser would be for him to become truthful, strengthened and encouraged to face his consequences, and for him to live a life surrounded by those who know him rather than this illusion he’s created. I wish those things from a safe distance. By many people’s definition, I’ve “forgiven.”
However, my current understanding of Scripture means I don’t describe myself as such. He has not carried any of the costs he imposed on me, nor has he confessed his wrongs with enough specificity to count as a legal confession. Any apology has been an apology for “what happened” or “objectifying me”–confessions that wouldn’t disrupt his cushy life as could an apology for childhood sexual abuse and violent threats. There’s been absolutely no apology or acknowledgement of the slander; despite the adult/child dynamic and threats to my safety, he portrayed it as a mutual relationship.
I’m not callous or vengeful towards him; we are simply not at the stage where the forgiveness that results in reconciliation can be granted. If we ever get there, reconciliation will still carry the heavy asterisk of my children’s safety coming first at all times, no matter what.
As to the questions of complexities? Our Shepherd’s heart is gracious–not only to the penitent but to those who are broken by others. He is Healer, Comforter, Friend, Saviour, Wonderful Counselor. He is Emmanuel: big enough to get in our various messes and walk us through them when the time is right for it.
And when I’ve felt overwhelmed at the costliness–the therapy costs, the lost relationships (because it’s never just the abuser, it’s everyone the abuser sways to their narrative), the sheer agony of it all, I find comfort in knowing that He sees the sparrows fall. He has an eye for details, and He can provide now or later, but He is here.
***
From Rebecca: I appreciate Rhoda’s thoughtful study and expression of her heart to help us bring clarity to a difficult subject. I want to add an important reminder that isn’t about forgiveness, but it seems appropriate here. In Matthew 18 Jesus had some words about offenders:
“Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin [or to stumble], it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
He went on to say:
“See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven.What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray? And if he finds it, truly, I say to you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray. So it is not the will of my Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish.”
When one of these hard-hearted offenders refuses to respond to the Spirit when the people of God approach him with his sin, Jesus said, “Let him be to you as a Gentile [not one of the people of God] and a tax collector [a sell-out to the enemy].” It is clear here that forgiveness from the people of God is to be withheld when there is no turning from the sin.
And of course, any discussion of forgiveness needs to be accompanied by a discussion of repentance. What is it really? How do we determine it?
For that, I recommend “Erring on the Side of Grace” When it Comes to Repentance?
And also, Why “Metanoia” Is So Much Greater Than “Repentance”—And Why That’s Important
If you’re interested in articles I’ve written about forgiveness, you can find them here:
The “Root of Bitterness” in Hebrews–It Isn’t Unforgiveness
How to Handle Those “Forgive and Forget” Scriptures
That Forgiveness Talk at Harvest Bible Chapel
How Pedophiles Are Forgiven, From the Teachings of Jay Adams
***
Go here to download your free Guide, How to Enjoy the Bible Again (when you’re ready) After Spiritual Abuse (without feeling guilty or getting triggered out of your mind). You’ll receive access to both print and audio versions of the Guide (audio read by me). I’m praying it will be helpful.
This is so needed in the universal
Church today.
I especially enjoyed a new understanding of communal carrying of the cost.
“it’s not on you, the individual, to absorb all of those costs alone. You have a family in Jesus who have already been told to come alongside you in the costly work of forgiveness.”
Yes, amen.
I have learned one size does not fit all everyone has a different personality. So some ppl have more serotonin going on and some don’t. Stop comparing yourself of what you think the outward display of forgiveness looks like. Most of the time it’s false. Some ppl need a good kick in the pants real tough love is harder than just forgive and forget. Because someone who hurt you does not just roll off like others again stop comparing yourself. It’s okay to be struggling. It’s okay if you don’t have a forgiveness story.
I believe the things you talk about here are the very things Rhoda is wrestling with in this article. “What does an outward display of forgiveness look like?”
Your response makes me wonder if you read the article in full. Rhoda does NOT endorse “forgive and forget,” and neither do I. I’ve even written about that in one of the articles linked at the bottom of this one.
I’m puzzled by your reprimand, “Stop comparing yourself.” What are you referring to?
When you say, “It’s okay to be struggling,” it sounds like you think Rhoda hasn’t struggled? Her article makes VERY clear that her struggling has been *tremendous.*
Your response, on the whole, is difficult to understand.
I think I expressed myself wrong. No I do think Rhonda struggled with forgive and forget in the culture. Yes the whole article was about her struggles. Stop comparing yourself is my own struggle in life. Maybe others do the same thing. Thanks
Ah, okay, thank you for clarifying!
I am not a doctor, but I seriously doubt that your friend’s miscarriages were caused by stress from her abusive past … what a horrible burden to put on someone…. horrific!
Research is sometimes surprising, isn’t it? If you are interested in reading about this, I recommend using Google Scholar and searching terms like “allostatic load in adolescence”, “endocrine” and “longitudinal”. We don’t know a lot of detailed information but we do know that severe, prolonged stress in adolescence has longterm effects on physical health.
It honestly didn’t feel like a burden when she told me those things that day. A doctor had told my mom that my body showed signs of severe stress or trauma when I was a teen, so this was the second medical professional to notice the trauma because of my body’s responses to it. The burden of guilt falls to those who caused the severe, prolonged stress.
The book The Body Keeps the Score by Bessell van der Kolk absolutely supports what you are saying, Rhoda.
Rboda,
I have a similar story of ongoing childhood, teen and even adult abuses by both parents. Physical abuses and other types. Terror too from having to witness ongoing Domestic Violence between parents. My family Dr recognized PTSD in me way back in the ‘70s from my strange (to me) symptoms. He gave me Valium for panic attacks in my young teens!
And I had extreme menstrual dysfunctions from onset at the age of 12 until I was 39. I was newly married things got so bad finally had to have my endometrium layer removed to stop the hemorraging and brutal cramps from periods that came every 2 weeks. That choice between continuing to be debilitated by the lifelong menstrual irregularities and painful symptoms or to have the laser removal of my endometrium to stop these symptoms but I’d be left unable to have a child was agonizing. I chose to have the procedure. I had endured so much suffering from all the abuses and my resulting bad and physically abusive first (escape from home marriage). So I chose to enjoy my happy new marriage without being bedridden in constant pain.
Many adult children of abuse choose not to have children so they don’t have to repeat/relive the parent/child dynamic because it was so traumatic. But the choice was taken away from me! By the physical COST my abusers made me carry.
I now know about adrenal fatigue and flooding the brain from the stress chemicals cortisol and adrenaline from all the surging toxic stress. I was later told by my immunologist treating my nearly non-existent immune system that the abuse in childhood and teens and even adulthood was the cause of my autonomic systems going haywire. I now have chronic daily nerve pain. My brain’s “pain signaling” won’t turn off. All this has been attributed to the abuses.
So I can relate all too well to your situation and your cause/effect truth. Although sadly your miscarriages were so much more devastating than my ailments for sure. SO COSTLY! With no restitution to you ever possible. My forced “choice” to become infertile to stop unending pain-COST-was itself extremely costly.
And I love your idea that since our God’s character and heart are to be emulated, we too must require repentance and restitution and/or agreement to be willing to carry the cost for the high COST we have to carry in order to forgive as He does. He requires that full repentance and we should not have to accept any less.
That never came close to happening for me. MORE abuses happened after I insisted on accountability and there was none. I reported their violent crimes to the police. I went No Contact. No justice with the “abuse ignorant” legal system. Then spiritual abuse by everyone I knew who chose to rally behind evil and choose to “believe”/ally themselves with the known abusers they’d witnessed abusing me as a child and an as an adult. THAT TOO WAS COSTLY. I lost everyone I’d falsely thought has always “loved and cared” about me. Had “prayed” for me to overcome the known COSTS of my abuses. But they NEVER offered a hand or lent a compassionate ear. Too afraid the abusers might think they believed me instead of their still continuing defamation campaign about me.Cowards who knew what they were doing.Supporting me would have been too COSTLY to them! So twisted. That mass betrayal hurts as much as the abuse did. And is harder to overcome.
I’m so sorry you had to grapple with all you have and to have to write this article and to struggle with falsehoods and questions about forgiveness. I’m so sorry for all your losses. I think you are brave and courageous. I wish we’d both received better examples of the hands and feet of Jesus by the “christians” around us to help us bear the costs of the harms done to us in so many ways.
The Body Keeps the Score” by Bessel Van der Volk supports what happened to our bodies and brains.>❤️>
ButImmanuel is our Living Hope! God bless and keep you, my sister.
Thank you for sharing your story. We are less alone in this than it seems sometimes. I’m so sorry–you truly have encountered extravagant costs. Thank you for the understanding and kindness that came through.
God is a God of love, forgiveness AND accountability, justice. We have to balance these in our relationships and it’s hard… depends on all of the circumstances… Jesus is the only person who ever lived who struck the perfect balance. But… it is totally wrong to judge others (victims) for how they personally strike this delicate balance… let people accuse you of ‘unforgiveness’ and ‘holding a grudge’ and ‘revenge’ when you set protective boundaries… they don’t know; only YOU know!
I have gained much from how King David handled his abuser, Saul. David refused to take revenge; but he spoke the truth concerning Saul’s injustice and abuse AND David protected himself from Saul – even after Saul’s multiple times of repentance – David knew NOT to trust him! Best, Jane
Yes, that’s an excellent example. Thank you, Jane!
You have put into words how I have come to perceive the Biblical meaning of forgiveness. Thank you!
I suffer great costs from unrepentant parents and the abuse and trauma they caused for 24 years of my life.
My mom is deceased and my dad still unrepentant, but I rejoice in the new supportive community I have and in the grace of God to help me live each day serving Him to the best of my physical ability. (I suffer chronic illnesses as a result of the trauma I endured).
I’m so sorry, Abigail. I see chronic illness and autoimmune diseases so much in the lives of abuse survivors. God bless you, sister.
I have also come through similar false teachings to a freeing understanding of forgiveness. I think of it as forgiveness allows me to ‘stand ready to reconcile, but I can’t reconcile until the offender has repented’, because it just doesn’t work. If there is no repentance, it’s just a fake relationship. The other aspect to this is that even though we may ‘reconcile’ that doesn’t mean the relationship goes back to what it was, pretending nothing happened. The sin impacted us. It shaped us. We can develop a new relationship, but it won’t ever be what it once was. And that new relationship can have as many boundaries as necessary to keep everyone safe. I also think that when repentance is not there, I can still let go and bring whatever debt there has been to God for God to repay. I LOVE your concept of community being a part of that repayment. Yes and AMEN!
Amen, and thank you, Shari.
“It’s just a fake relationship,” and our God doesn’t deal in deceit. Love this.
I am so so grateful to read this today. Rhoda, thank you for your boldness and transparency in sharing your story in relation with this deeper look at forgiveness. Rebecca, thank you for inviting her to share. This is something I will revisit and reread and contemplate more. I was having a hard time wrapping my head around it at first, and when you shared it in context with your story, it all started to click for me.
I’ve always considered myself a very forgiving person, but lately I have really struggled with some things due to lifelong spiritual abuse. It has taken its toll, and my physical health/the chronic illness I deal with has been debilitating lately. To know how God really intends forgiveness to be and how the church at large has weaponized it to protect the offenders more than the victims is eye-opening, and I’m grateful to learn some more truths that will inevitably set me free.
Thank you for pointing to a God whose desire is not to inflict more harm on those who have already been harmed. That mercy, goodness, forgiveness, justice, and love are not mutually exclusive, but can and should dwell together in perfect harmony the way He designed it to be.
Beautiful. Thank you so much, Alicia.
I’m so sorry….heartbreaking, that you were sexually violated starting at age 2, then spanked and scolded for it…..I’m so sorry…..
I did not marry until age 36, had 2 miscarriages, then a full term stillbirth at age 43….no more pregnancies after that….in my mid-50s, I began to reconsider what I may have been exposed to from the womb – some sort of pharmacological endocrine disruptors from the OB…”I don’t remember” was all my mother could say.
I was also a difficult pregnancy for my mother, who did not want anymore children as well as supposedly me being “conceived in rape!!” Lots of androgens/stress hormones floating around in my amniotic fluid…..I have the much longer ring finger to index finger ratio on both hands as a testament to such ….
I also had an adolescence from hell with depression, suicidal ideations and an attempt at age 15….
I don’t remember large swaths of my childhood, whereas my other siblings did.
I’m wondering how many other children your perpetrator acted against…..
And how long do we have to wait for perpetrators to stop giving in to their addictions for sex/power while they get their act together, before we say enough is enough, no more access to children, off to prison you go….”forgiveness” can come later….
Sadly, the court system makes this very difficult. Many victims and survivors of abuse choose not to report the crime committed against them because of the grueling and re-traumatizing court process that may or may not result in a conviction of the criminal.
This article is incredibly helpful, thank you both so much.❤️
I’m very sorry for what you went through Rhoda. It’s horrendous. If I may throw out some ideas about your article. . .
I agree that Christian brothers and sisters should come alongside and support victims. I ran your article by my pastor son and we have to disagree with the collective forgiveness idea. The only situation might be if it’s a collective sin – for example, an adulterous pastor has harmed the whole church family. But collectivism is an Eastern idea. Christianity made individuality important. Forgiveness is between the harmed and the offender. How can you forgive a sin against someone else? That doesn’t make sense.
We were also concerned because it appears you may be confusing forgiveness with consequences (putting him back in a leadership position). Maybe we misunderstood. Forgiveness does not remove consequences. Putting someone back in a leadership position should be based on the level of his violation of trust. And when it comes to domestic abusers, they will always look charming and godly WHILE committing violent offenses behind closed doors. I’ve forgiven my ex-husband/pastor but he has still served time in prison. Yet, his current pastor sings his praises to the judge about his good character and swears a miracle has changed him. If he’d changed, he wouldn’t have spent thousands to defend his “not guilty” plea at his 2nd trial.
You may also consider that, theologically, forgiveness is not atonement.
Lastly, what’s wrong with negative emotions? Christians constantly are admonishing victims to “move on” and “start healing”. And yes, we can’t wallow in self-pity, refuse to grow or do the hard work of re-adjusting the patterns in our brain. But grief is natural and victims don’t need more guilt loaded on them. In cases of domestic violence and coercive control being exerted over years, especially in children, negative emotions are part of your fabric and re-living horrific experiences are just around the corner. We do have hope in the Lord, however, because one day these triggers and emotions will all be erased.
Thank you for sharing, Rhoda. Much was encouraging!
I’m glad you found it encouraging!
Hi, I’m back.
I wanted to give your comment more thought before I responded.
1. I admittedly lean heavily on the communal aspect of forgiveness. The other places in Scripture that discuss forgiveness also use the plural “you”, so it wasn’t used just for the crowd. That said, I would argue that the most common scenario involving forgiveness is small–a hard disagreement between spouses, miscommunication between friends, etc, where the offense was not so profoundly costly as it is in the cases I’m discussing in the article. I do lean towards community though; my biases are influenced by my background (I was raised Mennonite which is very collectivistic culture). I lived in Asia for several years; and my current pastors do not fail to point out the many “y’all’s” of the New Testament. So those are some things influencing how strongly I hold to the collective view of almost anything that involves following Jesus. Sure, we follow individually. But we follow with strength and joy when we follow together.
2. I think you misunderstood but I could have been clearer. I am *not* saying that forgiveness relieves offenders of responsibility or sidesteps justice. I fully agree with everything you said in that paragraph. My comments in the article involving leadership were a push back to rapid restoration of position and power before the costliness of the wrong has even been assessed. Too many when they hear of collective forgiveness think it means something like that, and it does not.
3. Your last topic–about negative emotions–I agree emphatically with you. The Psalms are rich in emotive candor in the face of many injustices. Jesus freely expressed emotions. Our God doesn’t merely tolerate our big emotions. He has them; He created them; He understands them. Frankly, I think the views of forgiveness that seek to downplay and silence grief are encouraging a spiritualized form of dissociation.
Oh, I missed one. On forgiveness and atonement being two separate things–yes, but I would argue that they are closely related. You can’t really encounter one in Scripture without encountering the idea that sin is costly, and our God addresses the cost while inviting us back into relationship. Atonement and forgiveness both push back against our modern sense that my sin is just mine; it doesn’t really matter and it doesn’t really affect anything.
I think you’re on to something with the communal emphasis. Both OT and NT emphasize or addresses the church community far more than the individual. Also most cultures on the planet have always been communal and very family/ community oriented. It’s only the United States and those who try to imitate us that are individualistic. But the church is not be like the United States. The church is the family of God so it makes sense that we can forgive and do justice more fully in the context of community.
Right. We have one King, and He doesn’t bow to other kingdoms’ values–not even American values.
Yes, America is very individualistic. The Jewish people of the OT were collective, communal, and so is the setting of the Gospels. Much of human history is. Faith was covenantal and communal, and people stuck with the God or gods of their fathers. To break covenant with those gods/God was to break covenant with family, community. The Christianity of the middle ages was more communal, too. Only in the modern age, has faith become more individualistic.
Joy,
I see in your post that you and your family have experienced great harm yourselves and have much to say on this topic. I have a far less horrific position from which to speak in terms of similar experience, however, my griefs, my learned understanding of forgiveness, and the churches responses to this saint lend one-for-one to this conversation.
Matthew 6 is from the Sermon on the Mount. It’s excerpts are where the collective “you” is where the author has given rise to to the thought you disagree with above about collective forgiveness. As I have read and re-read that portion of the article, I understand the author’s meaning in the same, clear way in each reading:
What I understand clearly here is not, as you say, anything at all about collective forgiveness, as if outside parties ought to impose themselves somehow… as much as the author is pointing out the importance of all the saints making an attempt of recognizing the cost of the tragedy to the injured, and acting, actually acting towards the injured saint in an appropriate manner. Please use your sanctified imagination to list all the many ways expressions of support that mirror scripture might be. How might you – the collective you – exercise humbleness, justice, mercy on those under the stronghold of oppression. I’m reminded of Ecc. 4:1 Again I saw all the oppressions that are done under the sun. And behold, the tears of the oppressed, and they had no one to comfort them! On the side of their oppressors there was power, and there was no one to comfort them.
Respectfully,
Daina Westman
I really appreciate this discussion. It’s making me think more deeply of distinctions between collective and individual obedience.
If we are to assume that Matthew 6’s “you” is plural only because it’s the Sermon on the Mount, we need another explanation for the many plural “you”s elsewhere.
Further, reading the plural you and assuming that surely He actually meant the individual you is interjecting a Western interpretation into the text. We are the culture that will assemble a whole crowd in order to convey a message intended to be interpreted for the individuals. It wastes less time. But concerns over wasting time, and communication strategies that depend upon a then-nonexistent individualistic interpretation are distinctly modern issues.
When I started to see this, my first feeling was fear: what if my religious circles are not experiencing God’s forgiveness because we (plural) aren’t practicing this? And then, I felt responsibility: who around me can I partner with? Who near me is dealing with sin issues they want to be free of? Who near me needs help living with unfair consequences of another’s choice?
Rebecca,
“When one of these hard-hearted offenders refuses to respond to the Spirit when the people of God approach him with his sin, Jesus said, “Let him be to you as a Gentile [not one of the people of God] and a tax collector [a sell-out to the enemy].” It is clear here that forgiveness from the people of God is to be withheld when there is no turning from the sin.”
This “it is clear here that forgiveness from the people of God is to be withheld when there is no turning from sin” appears to me to be an assumption.
Jesus when he hung on the cross whilst being crucified and suffered all he had endured, said “Father forgive them for they don’t know what they are doing”.
No repentance or turning from sin is required for God to forgive them (us) and non is required for us to forgive.
Forgiveness simply means to send the offense (heart wound) away from yourself. You have two options, forgive (send it away) or retain the offense (hang onto it).
Forgiveness does not mean you have to trust them again. Trust is earned.
Blessings!
Warren
South Carolina, USA
Jesus asked the Father to forgive “them.” Who was the “them”? He doesn’t say.
But we can see from the Pharisees in John 11, and when they responded to Judas, that they DID know they were condemning an innocent man who was a miracle-worker. No one could rightly say they didn’t know what they were doing, so they couldn’t have been the people Jesus was talking about.
Who was it who didn’t know what they were doing?
It was the Roman soldiers who were simply nailing another man on the cross, as they did with hundreds of men a year. And before the end of the day one of them was actually bowing down at the cross, saying “Surely this man is the Son of God.”
Yes, when Peter preached in Acts 2, many scribes and priests and Romans and others were among the 3,000 saved.
But if you’re thinking that God saves people without turning to Him? Then is it correct to conclude that you’re a universalist?
“But if you’re thinking that God saves people without turning to Him? Then is it correct to conclude that you’re a universalist?“
I am not thinking that God saves people without turning to Him.
But, I am thinking that He forgives without anyone turning to Him, as He has told us to do.
I am sure He does not tell us to forgive our enemies (which He has) when He won’t forgive His enemies also.
So, I think that I am NOT a universalist.
Blessings,
Warren
I agree with Rebecca. The Bible is very clear that we are to forgive only those who repent as God forgives only those who repent. And Jesus prayed for His enemies on the cross. The act of forgiveness has not yet occurred. There’s more to what forgiveness entails than just praying for someone. God did say to pray for your enemies. And that’s what He did. He never said forgive your enemies even if they don’t repent. When God forgives His enemies He also saves them and are enemies no longer. Which is what makes reconciliation possible.
“Let the wicked forsake his way
And the unrighteous man his thoughts;
And let him return to the Lord, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon. Is 55:7
You cite the statement Jesus made as though you assume it means we should forgive all offenders. Jesus commands us to love our enemies and to pray for them, which He did here (see Rebecca’s view as well). Asking God to forgive an unwitting wrongdoer isn’t the same as forgiving a willfully unrepentant offender.
Since God does not allow the guilty to go unpunished, I assume that means you believe that God retains their offenses?
Switching forgiveness from sending repented sins away, to sending heart wounds away, is dangerous. It implies that victims can send their wounds away by forgiving. Scripture never makes such a promise nor does it imply it. Views like this are why victims are told to forgive more when really, they should be surrounded, supported, and comforted in their grief.
We can be prepared to extend generous and prompt forgiveness when the other shows readiness to humbly and truly receive it. In fact, I’d argue that we can live with a deep well of mercy and be eager to forgive. But I disagree that we are to forgive those who are willfully, knowingly harming us. He doesn’t clear the guilty.
I fully agree with your closing statement that trust is earned. And that–trust towards previous offenders–is not commanded in Scripture.
I have no words for how fantastic is this research and this article! It saddens me to see Christians, of all people, get forgiveness wrong. This teaching is soooo needed in the church today, especially in advocacy! Well done! Is there a way to connect with the author?
Hi! You can find me on Facebook (Rhoda Witmer page, or Rhoda Witmer Hostetler personal). We can carry our conversation on through Messenger. I don’t quite want to put my email here.