Ask Dr. Forgiveness
If we do not forgive situations, such as a tornado that was destructive, how can we aid children in feeling safe after something like this occurs? In other words, how then can we avoid post-traumatic feelings in the child?
You can work on two issues. The first is acceptance of what happened. This can take time, but it may help children learn that this is an imperfect world and so bad things do happen. The second is to work on what I call “the safe feeling,” which is a sense of being protected by parents and other loved ones. Of course, the “safe feeling” should not become an illusion that bad things will not happen. Working simultaneously on acceptance that bad things can happen, and that loved ones are here to assist, may help the child reduce any post-traumatic stress that has emerged.
When we forgive, do we forgive situation or persons?
If forgiveness is a moral virtue in which we are good to persons who are not good to us, then this is a focus exclusively on persons and not on situations. If you think about it, how can you practice moral goodness toward a situation? You cannot be good to a tornado or to a traffic jam. If persons are responsible for the traffic jam and if they are acting unfairly in some way, then you can forgive those persons, but you do not forgive the situation.
You said earlier to me that when we forgive we do not acquiesce to the other’s demands. May I respectfully disagree on this. I disagree because I have been reading recently and seeing on media videos some people discussing what they call “toxic forgiveness.” To those who use this term, there is an element to forgiveness that is out of balance with fairness. Is it not reasonable for all of us to be aware of how forgiveness can get out of balance to such a degree that it becomes “toxic” for the one who forgives?
I think there is a serious misunderstanding of what forgiveness is and what it is not by people who use the words “toxic forgiveness.” They usually refer to people who “forgive” and then just put up with the unfairness of the other person. This is not an issue of forgiveness at all, but instead of a serious misunderstanding of what forgiveness is. When we forgive, we do not give in to the other’s demands. When this happens, the one who supposedly is “forgiving” is instead deciding to turn away from a fair solution and then is calling this “forgiveness.” Forgiveness as a moral virtue of goodness does not give in to unfairness. Otherwise, it would not be a moral virtue at all. Here is an analogy to make my point clearer. Suppose a person wants to become physically fit. This person walks about 200 steps, then sits down and eats a gallon of ice cream. This occurs every day and the person gains 20 pounds. Suppose now that this person says, “I have tried physical fitness and it is toxic. All it does is put weight on me.” Is it really physical fitness that is the problem, or a distortion of what it truly means to start a physical fitness program? Suppose now that many people start saying that physical fitness is “toxic.” Where does the error lie, with physical fitness itself or with a conceptual distortion, and a serious one at that, regarding what it actually means to engage in physical fitness? It is the same with “toxic forgiveness.” People distort the meaning of forgiveness and then proclaim that forgiveness is “toxic.”
If I cannot offer this “moral love” or agape to the one who hurt me, does this mean that I have not forgiven?
No, it does not mean that at all. Aristotle makes a distinction between Essence and Existence. Essence is the core meaning of any object or concept. The highest Essence of forgiveness is to offer this moral love or agape to the other person. Existence in terms of forgiveness is how you express now that forgiveness to the other person. You might be able to reduce some resentment right now. If you can do that as you commit to do no harm to the other, you have begun the process of forgiveness. You have not reached the highest Essence of forgiveness, but you are expressing it to the best of your ability now. Here is a sports analogy to try to make this clearer. Suppose you are playing basketball and you are shooting free-throws. You make 4 out of 10 shots. This is your Existence (how you behave now) at the free-throw line. The Essence of basketball is to successfully make 10 out of 10 shots. Even though you are not matching the perfect Essence of free-throw shooting, you are playing basketball. It is similar with forgiveness. Even if you cannot offer complete forgiveness in terms of agape love, you still are forgiving as you commit to do no harm to the other and as you work in reducing resentment toward that person.
You say that to forgive is to offer “moral love” to another person. What exactly is moral love? I don’t think I can reach that high with my partner at this point.
Moral love, or agape in the ancient Greek, is a deliberate caring for another person (or other persons) for that person’s own sake, for the good of the other. This sometimes can be difficult because it requires effort and persistence on your part. It is not doing something so that you get something in return, but done for the other person’s sake.
