Archive for the 'Forgiveness' Category

Page 3 of 19

More on why people won’t forgive Michael Vick

Late last week I pointed to Rick Reilly’s Sports Illustrated article arguing that it’s time to forgive Michael Vick.  It was a “quick link” on my part with no real interaction.

Now, however, Molly at Brittle Crazy Glass has considered why it is that people have such a hard time forgiving Vick.

I don’t particularly follow football, but I’ve been intrigued on and off this season by the dramatic comeback of Michael Vick. Here’s a guy who has, by all appearances, radically reformed himself in every way. He spent what should have been the height of his career in jail; he worked his butt off all summer and has come back better than ever both as a player and as a person. Who doesn’t love an underdog story? Who doesn’t love a tale of redemption?

A lot of people, apparently. . .

Read more here.

Sports Illustrated’s Rick Reilly contends that the time to forgive Michael Vick is here

Michael VickRick Reilly says it’s time to unpack forgiveness with Michael Vick.  I agree.

I’m just not sure what people want Michael Vick to do.

Quit football? Return to prison? Drown himself in the same lake where he and his crew used to drown dogs? Would he be forgiven then?

Now that Vick is having an eye-bugging season for the Philadelphia Eagles — 11 touchdowns, zero interceptions, four starts, four wins, one "Monday Night Football" jersey sent to the Pro Football Hall of Fame — it seems only to have torqued off dog lovers worse.

"If it were up to me, they would have locked him up and thrown away the key," blogged Sumo Pop recently.

As if 18 months in Leavenworth, and six more in a halfway house, aren’t punishment enough.

"Michael Vick should give half of his … salary to animal rights groups," Liz McGowin wrote on PETA.org.

As if losing $100 million and three years in the prime of his career wasn’t steep enough.

"Michael Vick is a Sociopathic Dog-Torturing, Dog-Maiming, Dog-Drowning, Dog-Electrocuting Pile of S—," somebody posted on Vick’s Twitter page Thursday. Vick’s Twitter page was running about half against him this week — until it was frozen for "suspicious activity." . . .

Read the rest here.

A review of Unpacking Forgiveness

Ben at Cross-Centered Counseling has written a review of Unpacking Forgiveness (Click here).

Darryl Dash tells what book he loans out the most

You may respond that it’s only because they’re desperate for good reading up in Canada – - still this is your chance to see what Dash loans out (click here).  And, it’s not, “The Greatest Hockey Stories Ever Told,” which Darryl probably keeps locked in a safe.

I do appreciate the second sentence of the 4th paragraph.  Indeed, I am truly thankful for the post.

So what do we do when Christians cannot resolve a conflict?

The Bible outlines a process for Christians to follow when we have a conflict. 

Ideally, Christians would neatly resolve every conflict.  In reality, Christians cannot get to the bottom of every disagreement.  One of the chapters in Unpacking Forgiveness: Biblical Answers for Complex Questions and Deep Wounds outlined biblical principles to follow when differences are not neatly resolved.

The below summary of that material is found in Chapter 15 of Unpacking Forgiveness and responds to the question, “What do we do when Christians come to an impasse?”  It follows a discussion of Paul and Barnabas’ impasse in the book of Acts.

************

Accept it: Impasses do happen.

It happened. The first missionaries in the history of the Church disagreed sharply with one another and parted company

If you or I were recording the beginning of the Church, we might have omitted the conflict between Paul and Barnabas. We might have been tempted to present an idyllic picture of leaders who worked through things without ever raising their voices. But, Luke’s goal was not to glorify Paul and Barnabas. Rather, Luke wanted to describe how the beginning of the Church and the advancement of the Word was a gracious work of the Holy Spirit. The Church and the Word moved forward, not because of people, but in spite of them.

If this kind of conflict could happen to the likes of Paul and Barnabas, then be assured it will happen to us, as well. Don’t be surprised. Impasses happen.

Fix your eyes on Jesus and continue forward.

Perhaps Paul and Barnabas themselves never considered throwing in the towel on ministry. But I’ll bet that John Mark felt like quitting for good. Can you imagine being him, the very source of the conflict between Paul and Barnabas? If John Mark had never messed up in the first place, his restoration would never have been necessary. How easy it would have been for John Mark to say, “Oh, just forget the whole thing.”

Have you ever felt like quitting the Christian life because of a conflict with another Christian? You may be there right now. Hurt by the sin of others, discouraged by your own failures, and unsure how much is your fault and how much isn’t, you want to say, “Oh, just forget it.”

It’s not really that you want to completely renounce your faith. Rather, you wish you could unplug yourself from any commitments in a local church, or that you could simply cut off all contact with someone who once was close to you.

If you are discouraged because of conflict, I can relate. There have been several times since I have been a pastor that it was so discouraging to not be able to see people agree with one another and reconcile. I remember one situation where a group of people disagreed strongly with our elders on several issues. The elders arranged a meeting to try to resolve the conflict. I can still picture what I saw when I walked by them on my way into the building that evening: The people who opposed the elders were standing in the church’s parking lot, praying. Like Paul and Barnabas, they too were convinced that they were the ones in the right. But we certainly never found agreement that evening in the meeting.

It still hurts to think about that time. I wish the outcome had been different. But, we cannot allow such setbacks to stop us from wholeheartedly serving Christ in his church. Hear the encouragement of Hebrews 12:2-3:

Looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted.

Jesus endured less than ideal circumstances and relationships, and so must we. No quitting. No unplugging. Keep on for Christ.

Say less: “Without gossip, a quarrel dies down.”

Whenever we face conflicts that are not easy to resolve, there is a powerful temptation to present the particulars of our case favorably before other people. We have a remarkable ability to justify what the Bible calls “whispering” or “gossip.” But, tragically, when we rationalize gossip, we provide the fuel that keeps the conflict burning. So many interpersonal fires would be doused if people would simply stop talking about them (Proverbs 26:20). See “Keep the Circle Small,” page 121

Submit: Respect God-ordained authority structures.

One of the first questions that we ought to ask when facing an impasse is, “What authority structures are already in place?” A teenager and his parent might find themselves at an impasse about whether or not the teen should have a cell phone. The reasons teens present for having a phone are often quite compelling, at least in the eyes of the teen. I have personally been on the receiving end of brilliant explanations why teenagers should have their own cell phones.

However, there may be some parents out there, wise parents even, who may not be swayed easily by their teens’ rationale. And, in that case, the Bible clearly states a resolution to the impasse: Children are to obey their parents (Ephesians 6:1-2). As long as the parents are not demanding something that goes against God’s revealed commands, the teen’s final answer in that case is that he ought to submit to his parents’ wishes.

Similarly, there are God-given authority structures in place in a local church. God has called some to lead and others to submit to their leadership (Hebrews 13:17). Of course, this does not mean that leaders should abuse their authority or lord it over people (see 1 Peter 5:3). But it does mean that there are times when the leaders must make a decision so that the work can move forward, even though agreement is not unanimous. When leaders do have to make decisions like that, people who have submitted themselves to their leadership should submit themselves to those decisions (unless, of course, they are asked to disobey God).[1]

Be hopeful and wait: Time heals what reason and emotions cannot.

We should always strive to settle our differences before the sun sets. But, when we are unable to achieve resolution, we should be hopeful for the future. This side of heaven, Christians should always dream that time and distance may provide ample enough space for eventual healing and a clearer understanding of the situation. So often it is true that when we cannot find resolution by reasoning with one another, time and distance will allow us to heal and mature to a point where resolution does become possible.

If you come to an impasse and simply cannot resolve it, then continue to pray and hope. Time heals wounds that emotions and reason cannot. You may be amazed at the healing you may find as both parties continue to grow in Christ.

Soften: There’ll always be something to admit.

Less of a man than Paul might not ever have been willing to pay John Mark a compliment, lest it come across as though he were admitting his earlier stance was an error. But Paul did not let his pride stand in the way of acknowledging what God had done to change John Mark into a profitable servant. Perhaps, Paul realized that earlier he had been too hard on John Mark. Later, when John Mark had proven himself over time, Paul spoke of him both publicly and affectionately. Do not allow a bitter difference you have had with someone to keep you from ever again demonstrating respect and care. The cause of Christ is too dear for us to hold on to old offenses. If you were treated unfairly, or the situation leading to conflict was unjust, leave the matter to God. Be willing to admit that others might change over time, showing themselves to be the real deal.


[1] See Acts 5:29.

Route 5:9: “I’m sorry that you were offended”

In a fallen world, conflict is never far away.  If you haven’t offended anyone recently, rest easy, you will soon.  How are you doing with the 7 A’s?  This from the Peacemakers blog:

This comic made me chuckle when I saw it on one of the blogs I follow:


(via)

I thought it relates perfectly to what Ken Sande has to say about why making a sincere, selfless apology matters:

As God opens your eyes to see how you have sinned against others, he simultaneously offers you a way to find freedom from your past wrongs. It is called confession. Many people have never experienced this freedom because they have never learned how to confess their wrongs honestly and unconditionally. Instead, they use words like these: “I’m sorry if I hurt you.” “Let’s just forget the past.” “I suppose I could have done a better job.” “I guess it’s not all your fault.” These token statements rarely trigger genuine forgiveness and reconciliation. If you really want to make peace, ask God to help you breathe grace by humbly and thoroughly admitting your wrongs. One way to do this is to use the Seven A’s.

Read the rest here.

I again recommend Ken Sande’s, The Peacemaker.

A fun illustration for this point, “Before confronting, ask, ‘How sure am I that I am right?’”

Listen to this clip.  It’s only 1:50 and you won’t be disappointed! It comes by way of the indefatigable Vitamin Z.  Then read the below post.  We’ll let you count this as part of your devotions for the day.

One of the chapters in Unpacking Forgiveness is, “To Drop, or Not to Drop.”  Obviously there are some offenses per Matthew 18:15 ff where we must approach the other party.  At the same time, Scripture tells us that love covers a multitude of sins.

So how do we decide when to drop it and when to confront it?

I suggest several criteria (more here) in Unpacking, one of which is, “How sure am I that I am right?”

Almost always, a conflict between two parties is complicated. Even if you were genuinely offended, right and wrong might not be immediately clear. You may be hurt that someone was rather curt about you being late for an appointment. And, maybe the other party was too direct. On the other hand, perhaps it was inconsiderate for you to be late.

In those instances where right and wrong are not clear, it is usually best to drop the matter. Love covers over a multitude of sins. A person’s wisdom gives him patience.

Two other observations are in order. First, if there truly is sin in the life of the other person and it is someone with whom you interact on an ongoing basis, then it will probably come up again. You can talk about it at that time. Second, if you always—or almost always—think you are right, then you have a pride problem.


Credit to James Jeffery, Unpublished Lecture on When to Confront

Unpack Forgiveness with this case study: “Church forgives equipment thief”

If you want a forgiveness study, try out this case study.

The case: A man broken into a church.  Later he was scared and convicted about what he had done.  He returned what he stole.  The church forgave him and he joined.  (HT: Z).  You can read the whole story here.

Discussion questions:

  1. At what point should the church have forgiven the thief? 
    • Should they have forgiven him as soon as they became aware of the crime?
    • Or, should they have waited until he returned the equipment?
    • Or, should they have waited until he joined?
  2. Did the church do the right thing in not reporting him to the authorities?
  3. Is there ever a time when you would forgive a thief and yet report him to the police?
  4. Are there times when it would be wrong not to report the thief?

 

Question: What price do we pay when forgiving others?

I often receive forgiveness questions from those who read Unpacking Forgiveness: Biblical Answers for Complex Questions and Deep Wounds.  Below is an excellent question.

There is one statement of the book that has caused me think more than anything else.  On page 55, in the chapter Defining Forgiveness for Christians, you make the statement, "In Biblical forgiveness, the forgiving person pays the price of forgiveness."  I understand how that statement works in within the definition of forgiveness from the Divine pattern for it was and is Christ’s death on the cross that is the price of forgiveness.  What I am struggling to wrap my head around is what the "price" is that we pay when forgiving others.  Is it that when true forgiveness takes place we no longer seek justice for the wrong against us?  Or is the price that we in forgiving put aside or "forget" the hurt that has been done to us?  Maybe I’m trying to over think this or maybe I’ve missed something in the book, but if you could help me to understand I would appreciate it.

The brief answer is that just as Christ absorbed the price of sin, we are called to absorb the price of the offense and commit to no longer holding against the repentant offender.

We need to be clear.  As I point out in my book, forgiveness does not mean the elimination of the consequences.  Repentant bank robbers still go to jail.  Nor, does it mean restitution is no longer appropriate.  But, it means if they are forgiven, then the offense no longer stands as a relational barrier between the two parties.

Let’s go over the components of forgiveness by applying it to a marriage case study, namely, how my wife Jamie forgave me when I carelessly broke something her mom gave her. I am intentionally using a matter that was not that big of a deal. (Though, I am still not sure I have told my mother-in-law). The point is to apply this definition and to show how the basic model of how God forgave us can be applied to the things that happen to us every day.

The below example is a bit silly, but it may help you consider the different aspects of forgiveness.

A Marriage Case Study

Once when we were first married, I threw a racquet ball at Jamie. I intended to throw the ball “to” her. In the end, it was more “at” her.

It was a playful thing. I was not trying to hit her. I envisioned Jamie, though surprised by a black missile flying through our living room, making a great catch. I have always been proud of Jamie’s athleticism.

I pictured that Jamie’s catch would then begin a spontaneous sporting activity between the two of us. She would, without a word, zing the ball back at me. I would effortlessly make an equally great catch, perhaps just a hair better. I would use my left hand to show that I am ambidextrous in addition to being romantic and better than average company. We would laugh, thinking, “What fun we have. Other couples don’t have so much fun throwing balls at one another.”

It didn’t happen. The ball sailed wide of Jamie’s head by a millimeter and crashed into the kinds of stuff wives arrange on end tables in living rooms.

She was not impressed and just said “Chris” in a disgusted way and went to check what I had broken.

I don’t want to sound like I am blame-shifting, this would cause problems later on in the case study, but I do think Jamie could have made the catch. I lived with four other guys in college. Any one of them would have caught that ball with sleep in his eyes while stumbling towards the shower. Astutely, however, I did not point out that my college housemates would have made the catch. I only chuckled in a forced kind of way, still going for the, “Hey, don’t we have a lot of fun at our house atmosphere.”

On the other side of the room, the mood had darkened at the scene of the accident. Jamie said mournfully, “Oh no, it’s my snow baby.”

I could not have told you that a “snow baby” lived in our home. I knew “snow angels” were something you made by lying on your back in the snow. I wouldn’t have known a snow baby if you handed me one in the original packaging with a label that read “Snow Baby.” I sensed, however, that I should have known what it was, so I said vaguely, “Oh, the snow baby.”

Holding the pieces in her hands, Jamie glared at me and responded tersely, “It was a special present my mother gave me.”

Jamie and her mom have always been close.

Even I realized that this spelled trouble. I said, without hesitation, “I’ll buy you another one.”

Not the right thing to say. Jamie responded, “This one was from my mom. And, it cost seventy five dollars.”

I felt bad about breaking something my mother in law gave Jamie. But, what really had me worried was the $75 dollars. I changed approaches quickly. “I’ll bet we can glue it I said.”

So there you go.

Eventually, Jamie forgave me.

But, what exactly did forgiveness look like? What do we mean when we say that she “forgave” me?

In the first place, she needed to be in a position of grace. She had to offer me grace and forgiveness regardless of whether or not I was sorry.

Using our definition of forgiveness, it next meant that based on my repentance, she committed that she would not hold this against me. She would not bring it up to me or others. She would not take revenge. Instead, we were reconciled.

I have broken this down further in the following table.

Forgiveness – a commitment by the offended to graciously pardon the repentant from moral liability and to be reconciled to that person though not all consequences are necessarily eliminated.

Aspect of Forgiveness

How That Aspect of Forgiveness Applied

Forgiveness is conditional. Biblical forgiveness is predicated on repentance.

I took responsibility for my behavior. It was entirely my fault and it was poor judgment to be throwing a ball in our apartment.

This commitment is made by the offended to someone. It is “social” or between two parties.

Jamie forgave me. She did not simply work through this privately or for her own benefit. It was for our relationship. You could make a case that I needed to get my mother-in-law’s forgiveness as well. But, I have always been afraid to tell her. After that, it would not be appropriate for anyone else to forgive me. Jamie was the one I offended.

Forgiveness is a commitment or promise made by the offended.

She committed that she would not hold this against me. I don’t think she felt good about it at that time, but she was willing to make that promise.

Forgiveness is gracious but not free.

Motivated by love, Jamie forgave me on the basis of grace. She did not try and recover the cost of the Snow Baby either formally (although in some instances that would be appropriate) nor did she punish me in some other way. She chose to pay the price herself. (I am not ultimately sure what happened to the pieces of the broken Snow Baby).

The commitment is to pardon from moral obligation or liability

Jamie no longer holds me morally responsible. I have been pardoned from my reprehensible destruction of the Snow Baby.

Forgiveness begins and lays the groundwork for the process of reconciliation.

I would not be using this as an illustration if we had not reconciled over the deal. Reconciliation is inextricably connected to forgiveness.

Forgiveness does not mean the elimination of all consequences.

There are consequences. I am no longer free to spontaneously throw racquet balls to Jamie. I have given up that right. However, Jamie is not trying to get back at me for breaking her Snow Baby. Ideally, I would have replaced the Snow Baby, though to be honest, I don’t think I did.

Listen to 2010 Peacemaker keynote messages online

On the Peacemaker site, you can listen to the 2010 keynote messages.  Speakers include: Josh Harris, Chris Brauns, Ken Sande, Thabite Anyabwile, and Bishop Efraim.

I noticed that they recommend listening to the messages in order because they build one another.  I was so blessed by Josh Harris’ sermon which is the first one.  It is a great place to begin.

Click here.