Tagged: “Enright Forgiveness Process Model”
In your book, “The Forgiving Life,” you correlate forgiving with love (agape love). Can a person forgive and feel no love at all toward the one who acted unfairly?
We have to make a distinction between the essence of forgiveness (what it is in truth and on its highest level) and how we actually appropriate forgiveness at any given time. So, even though to forgive on its highest level is to love the one who was not loving toward the forgiver when the injustice occurred, a person can forgive, for example, by committing to do no harm to that other person. While this is not the highest form of forgiveness, it is part of the forgiveness process. So, if today the best a person can do is to commit to do no harm to the one who offended, this is forgiveness (with room to grow in this moral virtue).
When going back to the unjust event, do I have to feel the feelings from that point in time? I might be re-traumatized if I feel those feelings again.
The forgiveness process does not ask you to go back and re-experience your feelings from the past. Instead, the point of thinking back in time is to ask this question: Was I treated unjustly and how unjustly was I treated? We need to ascertain this because forgiveness starts with true injustice. Sometimes, for example, a person might think that Mom was terribly unfair 20 years ago, only to look back and conclude that there was a misunderstanding based on the person’s views as a child. When the person does conclude that, indeed, there was injustice, the process shifts to the effects of that injustice on the person now. How has this injustice affected your current feelings, your level of fatigue, your ability to trust others in general? So, in response to your question, you are not asked to feel the feelings from the past.
To what extent do you think a person should revisit the injustice, feel the emotions from that time, and relive the event in order to gain insight into how to confront all of this now? I am concerned that such revisiting could induce re-traumatization.
The process of forgiveness does not require that the other revisit the event of the injustice. Instead, the big question from that past time is this: Was I truly treated unjustly? If the answer is “yes,” then the goal is to examine, not the actual past event, but instead the current effects of that event on the person now. So, re-traumatization is not likely to occur because the person definitely is not asked to revisit in detail that past event. We have to realize that some degree of trauma exists now, if the injustice is deep. So, it is not that the potential forgiver is revisiting negative feelings. Instead, it is the case that the person is examining current negative feelings that now can be changed to more adaptive emotions and reactions.
What are some key reasons why people will not let go of their anger when treated unfairly by others?
While there are many reasons for holding onto anger, here are a few of these for your consideration:
Sometimes, people feel a sense of power by holding on to the anger. They feel as if no one will be able to treat them badly if they have a deeply assertive attitude. Of course, one can be assertive without being angry, but at times people link these two (being powerful and being angry) together.
At times, people are unaware of the damage being done to one’s inner world by holding on to the anger. It is as if there will be no negative consequences for keeping such deep and abiding anger inside. Therefore, the person clings to the anger thinking that no harm can be done by doing this.
At other times, people are denying the depth of their anger, thinking that a little anger will not hurt them when, in fact, they have much more of this emotion than they realize. At such times, it is important to uncover the depth of the anger for the sake of the offended person’s well-being and for the well-being of those with whom there is frequent interactions.
How can I be sure that the other person truly acted unjustly? In other words, is it possible that I am misinterpreting the situation and there really was no injustice against me?
I would recommend that you scrutinize the issue in three ways:
- What was the actual behavior of the other? Was the action against your own interest, such as an act that put you in some kind of danger (unsafe behavior or words that demean you)?
- What were the circumstances? Was the other, for example, in a difficult situation in which there was little time to reflect and therefore to act wisely? Was the other in a situation that itself could lead to injury such as speeding in a car?
- Although it is difficult to ascertain the motives of other people, what do you think was motivating the other person? Was there a goal to hurt you?
As you reflect on the other’s behavior, circumstance, and motive, this may help you decide whether the other person truly was unjust or not to you. At times, not all three issues have to be present. For example, suppose the person was texting while driving, with no intent to hurt you (no motive to hurt). Yet, the behavior and the circumstance are such that this activity is risky. Therefore, a conclusion of injustice is justified.
