Lately I keep running into articles and posts about forgiveness. For the most part they have to do with minor grievances and petty annoyances – certainly nothing as serious as abuse. Nevertheless, I’ve found these writings helpful. If nothing else, they offer a different way to frame my response – which is a respite.
It’s a bit ironic, because back in the worst days, people would tell me in very black and white terms that either I must or I must not forgive the offending minister. There seemed to be no middle ground. Those who said I mustn’t believed he had to apologize first. Typically these were the people who supported and cared about victims. If I had to pick a side (if it really was so black and white), I would definitely pick theirs. Those who said I must forgive him invariably minimized the damage done, and had little or no understanding of possible misinterpretations. Essentially it made their lives easier.
Gradually I came to see that a personal, quiet forgiveness was possible. If you were to ask me if I forgave him and if I trusted you to understand, I would say yes, but that didn't mean I thought he was fit for ministry – that it was more like letting go.
Now, as I read these snippets on forgiveness, once again, I wonder what place it has in the picture? If I were to tell those who have recently hurt victims of clergy misconduct (including me) that I forgave them, they would think me presumptuous. As best I can tell, they don’t think they’ve done anything wrong. Since I don’t wish to appear (much less to be) presumptuous, this has the net effect, once again, of silencing me. So how do I do forgive now? I don’t have the answer yet. The closest I can come is letting go of the anger I feel as often as needed. I keep having to drag out that thing I learned a number of years ago. It doesn’t matter if the anger is righteous. I’m still the one most hurt by it.
On days like today – a Sunday, when church is more a part of my life – it seems as if I have to let go dozens of time. I see the author of a hymn I’m singing, recognize the name, and wonder, where is he on this issue now? I have to let go. Talk of GA is all around me, and I don’t feel safe going. I have to let go. I attend a meeting where talk of the MFC is central, and I have to let go. That was just today.
It’s interesting. The ones whose faces I know I have an easier time forgiving. The ones who are just names and harsh written words, I have to give them a pretend face. And then forgive. And let go.
The most helpful piece of all I ran into was about the Dalai Lama. "He also made a distinction between forgiveness and forgetting. Actual forgiveness means that you no longer keep any feeling of revenge. ‘Forgiveness does not mean you accept whatever has been done.’"
I don’t accept what has been done. But I certainly have no desire for revenge. I guess, therefore, I am in some measure succeeding at forgiveness. Now I just have to succeed at sleep. That too is much more possible without anger.
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Well I had a most interesting Sunday uugrrl. . . ;-)
I very much agree with what you have said here. There are a variety of reasons why I have not forgiven U*Us for the injustices and abuses that they are clearly and unequivocally guilty of but, amongst those reasons, is the fact that most if not all of the U*Us involved refuse to believe that any injustices and abuses ahave been committed. Until such a time as the very real injustices and abuses committed by U*Us are clearly and unequivocally acknowledged by U*Us there can be and will be no forgiveness.
The hubris of most of the U*Us I know is really quite stunning. I have in the past considered picketing the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a picket sign slogan that said -
A "CHURCH" THAT HAS NO SHAME
but I finally decided against displaying that particular picket sign slogan since I am quite convinced that Montreal U*Us, and indeed U*Us more generally, would take it as a compliment. . .
No joke.
I like this, BTW.
I've never been through anything involving a clergyperson, (indeed, the UU clergy people I've talked to about things like this have been wonderful; which I don't say to diminish your experience in any way. I suspect it is far easier when the issues don't hit quite so close to home) but my experience in this area has lead me to believe that forgiveness is the only way one can escape from a cycle of using one's anger against oneself.
I personally achieved it without any apology from the person involved. Actually, I suspect an apology would have in an irrational way provoked my anger. I can't imagine any apology would ever truly be satisfying.
I fundamentally try to not consider myself a victim, partially as a means of trying to avoid some of the traps I see self-identified vicims fall into (E.g. "I was abused by my first husband, so whenever my second husband displeases me, he's abusing me.")
The conscious desire to avoid victimhood as a self-identification has made forgiveness in a sense easier. The more distance I get, the more I view mental illness as a natural disaster, a tornado that fucks with everybody in the trailer park, though some homes are more destroyed than others.
CC
Thanks, chalicechick. It sounds as if you might have been listening in to my dinner conversation. ;-) I said to my SO, "Oy, it seems like the anger is going inwards again." And he agreed.
I also basically agree with you about "victims." It's such a double-edged sword in the world of CSM (clergy sexual misconduct). People deny that you ever were a victim, sometimes even saying the minister was the victim. So "victim" is a word it's important to claim -- but then not to identify with it. I actually don't like the word survivor either, because it too feels overly identifiged with the whole thing. About the best I've come up with is "former victim."
Your trailer park analogy is perfect for CSM too.
Post a Comment