I am wondering if introducing a client in psychotherapy to the full definition of forgiveness may be counter-productive. Here is what I mean: If the mental health professional defines forgiving as reducing resentment (including thoughts, feelings, and behaviors) and then includes the giving of positive thoughts, feelings, and behaviors to the offender, including agape love), might this be a big turn-off for a client? In other words, the client’s hearing about being compassionate to the offender, being kind, caring, and loving may seem to be way too much.
You raise a good point. Mental health professionals can avoid the “big turn-off” by clarifying that forgiveness is a process that takes time, and we do not reach the end goal right away. Further, the client needs to hear that we are all imperfect forgivers, as the ancient Greek philosopher reminded us and as Lewis Smedes further reminded us in his book, Forgive and Forget. In other words, not everyone reaches a deep level of forgiving in that the client feels and gives agape love (love for the other’s good) to the one who offended. Yet, at the same time, it is good to present a clear and accurate understanding of forgiveness to clients so that they know the true endpoint of forgiveness in its fullness. Sometimes a client can only offer a cessation of resentment toward the other person. As imperfect forgivers, this may be all that the client can offer today. This does not mean that this is the end of the forgiveness process for this client. As Aristotle reminded us, as we continue to practice any moral virtue, we become more proficient at it. In other words, maybe months down the road, a little compassion toward the other person may begin to grow in the heart of the client.
