[1] Each year at Augustana College, a faculty committee selects
a book which all first-year students are encouraged to read over
the summer prior to beginning their college careers. The book
chosen forthe 2007-2008 academic year was The Sunflower: On
the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness, an extended essay
written by Simon Wiesenthal with responses by Rabbi Harold S.
Kushner, Bishop Desmond Tutu and others. Wiesenthal recounts
an episode in his experience as a prisoner in a concentration camp
during the Holocaust. Part of a work detail of 50 men, their
forced march took them to Janowski Street in Lemberg, a street
Wiesenthal knew very well, having "sauntered along it, as a student
and later as an architect." They turned left on Sapiehy
Street, on which the Technical High School was
located. Wiesenthal recalled, "For years I had walked along
this street several times a day, when I was working for the Polish
diploma" (17).
[2] The Technical High School had been converted to a
hospital. A Red Cross nurse asked him to accompany
her. After climbing the stairs to the upper hall, the nurse
asked him to wait by the door to what had been the office of the
Dean of Architecture. A few moments later, the nurse returned,
took him by the arm and pushed him through the door. The
writing desk and other once-familiar pieces of furniture had been
replaced by a hospital bed in which there was a dying man, his head
completely bandaged with openings only for his mouth, nose and
ears. From the bed, a weak voice asked Wiesenthal to come
closer.
[3] The voice was that of a German soldier-a member of the hated
SS. After recalling his childhood years and the events that
led to his joining the SS, he spoke of an atrocity in which he had
participated in Dnepropetrovsk during the Russian campaign. At
the square in Dnepropetrovsk, there was a huddled mass of perhaps
200 civilians, all of them Jews, many of them children. A
truck arrived with cans of gasoline, which the SS detachment forced
the stronger prisoners to carry to the upper stories of a
house. They then forced the prisoners to enter the
house. A truck arrived with more Jews, who were also crammed
into the house. Hand grenades were thrown through the windows
to ignite the gasoline. Those who tried to escape were shot
(31-43).
[4] Haunted by the memory of this horrific atrocity, the dying
Nazi "longed to talk about it to a Jew and beg
forgiveness." Wiesenthal had been brought in to hear his
confession. Wiesenthal listened but left without responding
(54-55).
[5] The story is set against the backdrop of a very traditional
notion of forgiveness-one that involves being pardoned and by being
pardoned no longer being held liable for what one has done. This
notion of forgiveness and the accompanying notion of absolution
have traditionally played a significant role in Christian
thought. For example, in Setting One of Holy Communion in
Evangelical Lutheran Worship, the presiding minister announces
after the confession of sin:
|
In the mercy of almighty God,
Jesus Christ was given to die for us,
God forgives us all our sins.
As a called and ordained minister
I therefore declare to you
the entire forgiveness of your sins . . . (96).
|
[6] The notion of authority is intrinsic to this concept of
forgiveness, be it in a religious context or in a secular
setting. You and I do not have the authority to grant a pardon
to someone convicted of a crime; only the governor of the state
where the trial was held can do that or, in the case of a federal
crime, the president of the United States.
[7] If that was the sense of forgiveness the dying Nazi had in
mind, he had come to the wrong address. Wiesenthal was correct
in observing, "If he had really rediscovered his faith in
Christianity, a priest should have been sent for, a priest who
could help him die in peace" (34).
[8] There is, however, also an entirely different sense of
forgiveness. One of the most insightful (and least noted) Biblical
passages tells of Jesus having dinner with tax collectors and other
sinners:
And as he sat at dinner in the house, many tax collectors and
sinners came and were sitting with him and his disciples. When the
Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, "Why does your
teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?" But when he heard
this, he said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but
those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy,
not sacrifice.'
For I have come to call not the righteous but sinners" (Matthew 9.10-13
NRSV).
[9] The tax collectors of Jesus' day were notorious crooks who
cheated taxpayers by charging them more than they owed and cheated
the government by skimming off part of the take. Yet, here was
Jesus dinner with them. The religious types were
aghast! Didn't Jesus realize what he was doing?
[10] In this story, Jesus, of course, was in no way condoning
cheating or any of the other terrible things the crooked tax
collectors were doing. And when Jesus was paying whatever
taxes carpenters and itinerant teachers paid in those days, I
seriously doubt that he said, "I don't mind being cheated. Help
yourself. Take whatever you want."
[11] That, however, is not the point of the story. Rather, the
story serves to remind us that Jesus was able to see something most
of us fail to see-the person behind the faults. While not excusing
their conduct (more on the notion of accountability later), Jesus
realized that even crooked tax collectors are human beings who are
precious in God's eyes.
[12] The people most of us meet in day-to-day life have flaws of
character of far lesser magnitude than the crooked tax collectors
of Jesus' time or the dying Nazi whose confession Wiesenthal was
summoned to hear. Yet we often magnify what we perceive to be the
faults of others, making mountains of things that are trivial. By
so doing, we block out any possibility of seeing their humanity.
When we start criticizing other people for this and that, for
wrongs that we perceive or imagine, it is very easy to overlook the
fact that those with whom we share life on planet earth are real
people just like ourselves. People who have hopes and fears,
moments of joy and moments of sorrow, times of success and times of
failure.
[13] In short, this second notion of forgiveness involves being
able to see the person behind the faults without in any way
excusing the faults or suggesting that she or he should not have to
suffer the consequences for what he or she has done. Even though
Wiesenthal did not respond to the dying Nazi's request for
forgiveness, there is a certain sense in which he did extend
forgiveness to the Nazi, for in this conversation under the most
difficult of circumstances, he became aware of and recognized the
humanity of Karl, the dying Nazi. This is underscored by the
fact that after the war, Mr. Wiesenthal searched for-and
found-Karl's mother. As Wiesenthal stood in front of Karl's
portrait, his mother said of him, "He was my only son, a dear good
boy." Wiesenthal made no attempt to persuade her that Karl was
not "a dear good boy" (85-87).
[14] The second notion of forgiveness is part of what is at
stake in the story of Jesus having dinner with tax collectors and
other sinners - but only part. As noted in the text quoted
above, when Jesus was questioned about what he was doing, he
responded by saying, "Those who are well have no need of a
physician, but those who are sick." A longtime colleague who
is now retired has frequently noted that, in contrast to the
traditional view that repentance must precede forgiveness, it is
often the other way around with the experience of being forgiven
helping set the stage for repentance. In having dinner with
the tax collectors and other sinners, Jesus was reaching out to
them as human beings in the hope that they would change their ways
and be restored to wholeness.
[15] It is worth noting that just as there are two contrasting
notions of forgiveness, there are also two contrasting notions of
salvation-contrasting notions that roughly parallel the two notions
of forgiveness. The traditional notion of salvation, at least
as it has developed in popular Christianity, characterizes
salvation as being saved from the fires of hell by no longer being
held accountable for the sins that one has done. It is, of course,
this notion of salvation to which the traditional sense of
forgiveness is closely linked.
[16] There is, however, a second notion of salvation, one that
dovetails with the second notion of forgiveness. This second
notion characterizes salvation as being restored to wholeness-i.e.,
a process of healing. It is this second sense of salvation
that was operative when Jesus used the metaphor of a physician to
describe what he was doing when having dinner with tax collectors
and other sinners to the consternation of the religious types of
his time. Being restored to wholeness is often understood
within the context of restoration of community. It is not
coincidental that the story noted above involves a meal, for it is
in sharing a meal that the fullness of community is often
realized.
[17] Granted, repentance and restoration to wholeness do not
always occur. Apart from Matthew, we have no way of knowing
how many of the tax collectors and other sinners with whom Jesus
had dinner-if any-changed their ways as a result of Jesus reaching
out to them and treating them as human beings. That, however,
does not exempt us from the obligation to treat all of our fellow
human beings as human beings. That is something we ought to do
simply because each person is precious in the eyes of God. And
it is something we must do if we are to be a part of the process of
healing and restoration to wholeness.
[18] Back to the notion of accountability. By wiping the
slate clean, the first notion of forgiveness in effect says that
those who are forgiven are no longer accountable for what they have
done. It is, when all things are considered, escape from
punishment. In contrast, the second notion of forgiveness
does not exempt wrongdoers from the consequences of what they have
done. Indeed, part of the process of repentance and
restoration to wholeness often is making amends for the wrongs that
one has done.
[19] Several years ago while in Pittsburgh doing research
for a book on intergenerational issues, I had occasion to have a
conversation with Glenn Surgest, who had just been released from
prison after doing time for homicide. "I know I can't bring
that guy back," he noted with great sadness in his voice. "I took a
life; now I want to give something back." The something he is
giving back is helping others by being a good parent and a good
friend. "God gave me the strength to change," he
stated. "I'm lucky; I'm blessed. The friends I've got, I
cherish them" (Lee, 140-141). Glenn didn't use the language of
salvation to describe what he was experiencing, but that is what it
was.
[20] The friend Glenn was helping when our paths happened to
cross on a busy street in Pittsburgh was Tyia Carrington, who was
struggling to deal with the paralysis resulting from multiple
sclerosis. Like Glenn, he was doing what he could to help
others, often visiting patients in the Veterans Hospital where he
was treated and telling them, "God didn't bring us this far to
leave us" (148-150).
[21] By challenging us to see the person behind the faults
without in any way exempting others from accountability for the
wrongs they have done, the second notion of forgiveness demands of
us both love and justice. It is far easier to have love
without justice or justice without love. Love without justice
recognizes the humanity of others but brushes aside the question of
accountability. Justice without love condemns others for the
wrongs they have done and by focusing only on the wrongs they have
done gives short shrift to their humanity. Neither is
acceptable if one is to have an ethic of both love and justice,
which is precisely what the second notion of forgiveness demands of
us.
[22] In placing so much emphasis on the second notion of
forgiveness, I am not by implication suggesting that the
traditional notion of forgiveness should be abandoned, though it
has lost a good deal of its persuasive impact now that belief in a
fiery hell has diminished. I am suggesting, however, that we
would all do well to do a better job of seeing the person behind
the faults, rather than just focusing on what we perceive to be
their faults.
[23] Granted, this is sometimes far easier said than
done. Even though seven years have passed since 9/11, it is
still exceedingly difficult to look beyond the horrible acts of
violence perpetrated at the behest of Osama bin Laden and gain any
sense of his humanity. There is a time for anger.
[24] But there is also a time for forgiveness. Why should
we forgive others? It is as much for our own sake as for their
sake. We all know individuals who have lived for years with
chips on their shoulders because they cannot bring themselves to
forgive those who have wronged them. Is that any way to
live? Forgiveness sets the stage for healing, reconciliation
and restoration of community, which, as noted above, are intrinsic
to the second notion of salvation. Developing our forgiving
skills is also essential if we are to realize our own humanity, for
it is in discovering the humanity of others that we discover our
own humanity.
Sources Cited:
Evangelical Lutheran Worship. Minneapolis: Augsburg
Fortress, 2006.
Lee, Daniel E. Generations and the Challenge of
Justice. Lanham, Maryland:
University Press of America, 1996.
Weisenthal, Simon. The Sunflower: On the Possibilities
and Limits of Forgiveness.
Rev. ed. Trans. H.A. Pichler. New York: Schocken
Books, 1997.
© September 2008
Journal of Lutheran Ethics (JLE)
Volume 8, Issue 9