Forgive: Why should I and how can I? (part 3)
Book Review (Timothy Keller)
Third (and final) part of my review of Keller’s new book on forgiveness. Read parts one and two.
11
Whereas ch 10 deals with internal forgiveness, ch 11 turns to horizontal, external reconciliation. Whereas we ought always practice internal forgiveness, it is not always possible to reconcile, because this depends on the other party. However, genuine internal forgiveness always seeks, aims, works for, and remains open to external reconciliation.
The shape of this chapter is three-fold. It begins with Mt 5:21-25 and Jesus' teaching on anger. Though there is a righteous form of anger, most anger isn't, and we need to deal with that first. Immediately following this, Jesus goes on to teach practically about reconciliation. Keller connects this by pointing out that anger is so serious, we are to be concerned if we have made someone else angry, not just when we are angry. Secondly, he notes the urgency here, "First go" and then "settle matters quickly"; so too Eph 4:26, "Do not let the sun go down on your anger".
Jesus and Paul are not so much laying down literal rules for timing as they are denouncing the procrastination and avoidance that characterize almost all of us when we know there has been a breach in a relationship. (p. 186).
Then we turn to Matthew 18:15-17. Keller doesn't read this as primarily a manual in how to do church discipline, so much as a pattern for practicing reconciliation. He makes a few points here:
First, go privately. In Keller's view this is best done face to face, and it may require repeated meetings, but it's best to handle things individually and privately at first.
Go positively. You ought to go in order "to win the person, not the argument", because the goal here is not to save the reputation of the community, but the spiritual wellbeing of the other party. And if you don't go positively, then you are going to rebuke in a spirit of vengeance. Practice internal forgiveness first, before seeking external reconciliation.
Go repeatedly if needed. Mending a relationship shouldn't be assumed to be a one-off deal, you might need to meet with them multiple times to work through issues.
If the first stage doesn't work, then involve others. At first, one or two others. Why?
they can help you refine your understanding of what happened and speak more persuasively. They can call you out if you are speaking excessively or unhelpfully. On the other hand, they can confirm to the perpetrator that he or she is truly in the wrong and that repentance is required. Two or three is more persuasive than one. To involve one or two others is in some ways a strategy for holding both parties accountable. (p. 189).
If the second stage doesn't work, involve the whole local church. If everything else fails and an offender won't recognise their wrong, then an appeal to the whole church (though perhaps embodied in the leadership rather than every single person), is part of a final appeal to persuade the other person. Not to "humiliate, shame, or punish". Even here the goal is justice and love, with reconciliation in view.
Putting Matthew 5 and 18 together, Keller also suggests:
Regardless of fault, "it is always your move to initiate relationship repair".
"there are usually some things for which both sides can confess and both sides forgive." (p. 190). Yes, there are some cases where there is all fault on one side, but for most disputes and conflicts between people, recognising your own fault and sin first will go a long way in promoting reconciliation.
In the second half of the chapter Keller turns from Jesus to Paul, and Romans 12:14-21. Here the principle is "overcome evil with good", and Keller sees five practical ways in this passage to do so:
Pray for them. Firstly, "it's hard to stay angry if you are praying for them". It also helps cure feelings of superiority. It's an act of genuine love to pray for their good.
Forgive them, insofar as the passage forswears seeking revenge, and giving up revenge and payback is the cost-bearing internal forgiveness.
Don't avoid them. I am a person whose natural reaction is to give people the silent treatment, and this spoke to me:
Some say, “I have forgiven the person, but I want nothing to do with them,” but that is actually a form of retaliation. Even if the other person remains hostile so you can’t restore the relationship, you don’t contribute to the hostility. You act as kindly, as helpfully, as respectfully as you can—you are always seeking a relationship. (p. 193).
Give them what they need, to whatever degree they allow. (with much discernment, Keller qualifies)
Do it humbly. Without any concept of superiority.
The chapter closes by returning once more to the power that makes forgiveness possible - the experience of the forgiveness of God in Christ.
Epilogue and Appendices
The book closes with an epilogue and then four appendices. I'm not entirely sure they were needed, but they cover (1) A list of key principles summarising the book, (2) Biblical Texts on God's Forgiveness, and then two more that walk through very clearly, concisely, and practically (3) Forgiveness practices - what you should do and not do in terms of internal forgiveness, and (4) Reconciliation practices - what you should do and not do in terms of external reconciliation. Those two appendices are actually a really clear distillation on how to practice forgiveness, you could almost photocopy them out as a handout in themselves.
There's some material here on what to do if the other person won't reconcile, as well as some very helpful teaching about what to do when you're a third party to a conflict, and how you ought best to act in order to encourage reconciliation. Keller also speaks about slander, gossip, and other verbal attacks, not just how and why we ought to not speak in such ways, but how we subconsciously do under other guises, and also how we should respond if we hear such negative talk from others about others.
Final Thoughts
I wanted to leave myself some space here at the end to reflect a little on how this book differs from Volf's "Free of Charge", which I read earlier in the year, and earlier in my own conflict. It strikes me that Volf's book is operating at a more theological level, and Keller at a more pastoral. Volf is working out how both giving and forgiving work in God's economy and our practices, whereas Keller only treats forgiveness. Volf is a much heavier read, Keller lighter. None of this should imply that Keller's book is "less", it's just oriented differently. I think a lot of this comes out of Volf being a professional theologian, Keller having been a long-time pastor. You can feel the sensitivity in Keller's book, the care of experience that knows human beings, their stories, and the myriad inclinations of their hearts and how they get it wrong, and also what happens when they get it right.
I wouldn't go around giving a copy of Volf to anyone, because it's not an easy read. But I think I'd be much happier to give a copy of Keller to the average church member, or use it to walk with someone through these issues. Keller also gets much more nuts-and-bolts than Volf does. Whereas Volf kind of takes you deeper into the inner things of God.
This review already got a lot more personal than I'd intended, but let me finish up by saying that reading this convinced me that I need to keep at the ongoing work of receiving the forgiveness of Christ as a bedrock in my life, as well as practicing forgiveness towards others, and guarding my heart against bitterness and the temptations to extract emotional revenge from others. It also gave my a keener insight into the depths of how broken I am, and how desperately I need the work of God’s grace to be constantly at work in my heart.
Post-Post-Script
At the risk of making an already longer review even longer, in more than a few books lately I’ve been presented with that ideal (and sometimes idealistic, but not without warrant) of Christian community as places and spaces where we encourage each other, disciple each other, love each other, and forgive each other. I do think this is meant to be a distinctive feature of Christian life together, not because people of other faiths or none can’t do forgiveness, but because it’s meant to be woven into the very fabric of our faith practices. Just recently I stepped down as a moderator of a very large online community, and I always remember a particular conversation around whether we should consider unbanning an individual who had massively violated our norms. One moderator essentially argued a “no second chances, no forgiveness” position. And, from their viewpoint it made sense - they had no reason nor basis to extend a second chance. Christians, however, by definition are people of second chances, because we are recipients of second chances, and our life together is likewise meant to be characterised by loving with the same forgiving love with which Christ has loved us.