Can You Forgive Someone Else’s Enemies?

My thoughts have been drawn to this topic any number of times in the past few days. As we near the anniversary of the tragic events of 911, I see plaintive postings of that day saying, “Never forget” (or words to that effect). The Orthodox faith teaches us that the remembrance of the departed should be eternal (“Memory Eternal,” is our prayer). I suspect that what is being urged, however, is not the remembrance of those who have died, but remembrance of the great evil that was done. There have been over 250,000 civilian deaths in America’s military actions since that day, deaths for which no memory is suggested, and for some, not yet enough. There have been very few rules governing modern warfare other than the “optics” of any given response. There can be a darkness in the remembrance of past wrongs. In many corners of the world, the wrongs that seem fresh occurred in long-passed centuries. The cycle of violence becomes unending, and is born anew within the heart of every generation. These are among the most intractable problems within the modern world. Christ came into a generation that had known many centuries of wrongs and a present-tense suffering of military and political occupation. It is in that precise context that He speaks regarding enemies. Those words were, no doubt, hard. They remain difficult for us. I reprint this article as we all wrestle with the injuries done to us and to those we love. May God give us grace!

I have written from time to time about the concept expressed in Dostoevsky’s Brothers Karamazov, “Forgive everyone for everything.” It is a quote taken from the fictional Elder Zosima, but it is certainly a sentiment well within the bounds of Orthodox thought. I have recently been challenged in several places by people arguing that we cannot forgive those who have not sinned against us – that this right belongs only to the victims involved. I believe this is profoundly untrue. But to understand why, it is necessary to look deeply into the meaning and function of forgiveness.

What happens when we forgive? A very important example is found in St. Mark’s gospel:

Then they came to Him, bringing a paralytic who was carried by four men. And when they could not come near Him because of the crowd, they uncovered the roof where He was. So when they had broken through, they let down the bed on which the paralytic was lying. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven you.” And some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, “Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” But immediately, when Jesus perceived in His spirit that they reasoned thus within themselves, He said to them, “Why do you reason about these things in your hearts? “Which is easier, to say to the paralytic,’Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say,’Arise, take up your bed and walk’? “But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins”– He said to the paralytic, “I say to you, arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.”  (Mar 2:3-11)

What sin did Jesus have in mind when he forgave the paralytic? Had the man done something wrong to bring a punishment of paralysis upon himself? There is no such indication. Indeed when Christ healed the man born blind He was asked who had sinned, the man or his parents such that he was born that way. Christ says, “Neither.” But it would seem clear from the greater context of the gospels that Christ could have said to the man, “Your sins are forgiven,” and he would have received his sight. There is a simple conclusion to be drawn from this: forgiveness is not, strictly speaking, the remission of a legal debt or wrong that has been done. It is far greater.

There are parallel passages in the gospels regarding the forgiveness of sins:

If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained. (Joh 20:23 NKJ)

and

Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. (Mat 16:19 NKJ)

Forgiving is “loosing.” Refusing to forgive is “binding.” The imagery of loosing and binding helps move the imagination away from a legal construction. When we sin, or even when we are involved in sin, we become bound. There is a binding that occurs because we ourselves were the cause of the sin. There is a binding that occurs because we ourselves were the victim of a sin. There is a binding that occurs because we simply witness the sin. There is even a form of binding that occurs to the whole of humanity because of the diminishment of even one of its members. If everyone were somehow only responsible for their own actions the world would be quite different. As it is, the action of one involves the binding of all. Adam’s sin has left us bound ever since. We are not being held legally responsible for Adam’s action. We are existentially and ontologically bound by Adam’s sin. Through his sin, death enters the world, and all men die (Ro. 5:12).

And just as there is a binding that occurs in each of these things, so there is a loosing that is appropriate to each. Obviously, the injury that a victim suffers binds them far tighter to their enemy than someone who is at a remove. And such a loosing is greater and represents a greater spiritual effort. But that effort is itself impeded by the refusal of all around to share in the loosing. And just as the refusal of all around impedes the loosing, so the participation of others makes the loosing easier.

These things are difficult to understand if we insist that all of reality is, at best, psychological or legal. But the death of Adam is not shared in a merely psychological or legal manner: we all die. And the resurrection of the Second Adam is shared in a manner that encompasses the whole of creation. The Paschal Canon contains the verse: “Let us call brothers even those that hate us, and forgive all by the resurrection.” It is a perfectly strange thing to sing unless we understand the true nature of forgiveness – and how it is that the Resurrection of Christ makes it possible for us to forgive everyone for everything.

Of course it jars us to hear that someone dares to forgive the killer of a child. “Only the child could offer such forgiveness!” These words were spoken by Ivan Karamazov as he professed his refusal of God’s mercy. He demanded justice for an injured child. Forgiveness that works by justice is no forgiveness at all. Forgiveness is not the child saying, “What you did to me is ok.” It is loosing the bonds that are forged in sin.

We often think that not forgiving someone is only destructive for them. But the lack of forgiveness is often equally devastating for their victim as well. I had opportunity some years ago to be involved with a Victim-Offenders Reconciliation Program. In it, mediators helped work to bring restitution and reconciliation for various crimes. I eventually became involved with efforts of ministry with families that had suffered a murder (as had my family). The darkness of the crime extends mercilessly beyond the victim alone. Forgiveness is the only way forward.

It is striking how utterly central forgiveness was to the ministry of Christ. It dominates almost everything He did. Many observe that He kept company with “sinners.” But He first and foremost forgave them. Their loyalty and devotion to Him flowed from the spiritual loosing that they found in Him. A woman “who was a sinner,” bathes Christ’s feet with her tears and anoints them with fragrant spices. Those around Him are offended. But He says:

Therefore I say to you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little. (Luk 7:47 NKJ)

I cannot make your enemy be reconciled to you, nor can I do for you what you alone must do. Your enemy is yours to forgive. But he is mine as well, and the bond of unforgiven sin that links my life to his is still mine to loose. It is for this reason that we are bidden in the wisdom of the Fathers to forgive everyone for everything. Anything less is a bondage of destruction. Forgive all by the resurrection.

About Fr. Stephen Freeman

Fr. Stephen is a retired Archpriest of the Orthodox Church in America, Pastor Emeritus of St. Anne Orthodox Church in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. He is also author of Everywhere Present: Christianity in a One-Storey Universe, and Face to Face: Knowing God Beyond Our Shame, as well as the Glory to God podcast series on Ancient Faith Radio.



Posted

in

, ,

by

Comments

133 responses to “Can You Forgive Someone Else’s Enemies?”

  1. Byron Avatar
    Byron

    Which suggests to me that part of the forgiveness piece done well is not just an unbinding, but an unbinding in a way that creates something better.

    Good observations, Chris. Father has often pointed out that, in the cross, God transforms evil, He does not simply destroy it. He works through all things for good. I think your recollection of “Jacob and the dark stranger” is spot-on. Thanks for that!

  2. Fr. Stephen Freeman Avatar

    Chris,
    The Lukan passage, for me, should be pushed back a verse or two. There’s this: “But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil.”

    There is a mystery in the binding and loosing. On the one hand, I think it speaks to the nature of the spiritual power that is given to us. “Binding” comes up in the verse concerning the “strong man” (the devil). I think this power of binding is about spiritual warfare – not particularly about somehow not forgiving. It is, if you will, one of the things in the “tool box” of the spiritual life. Pascha is the shape of our life – in His Pascha, Christ “binds the strong man,” shatters the gates of hell, and sets the captives free. There we see both binding and loosing. That, I think, is the model.

    It is undoubtedly the case that unforgiveness binds us to our adversaries. They haunt us and occupy our thoughts. There are many cases in which someone has been victimized – “bound” by their enemy. They are not in the position to “forgive” in the way we normally think of it. First, they need to be “unbound.” Psychologically, that looks like restoring a proper boundary that breaks the psychological bond created by the damage. That is itself an act of “loosing.” I have suggested in a number of places that when dealing with such damaging and dangerous “enemies,” we should use a prayer that says:

    “O Lord, on the day of judgment, do not hold this against them on my account.”

    That is a sufficient “loosing.” I ask God not to wreak retribution on them. I think we imagine that forgiving an enemy means, somehow, to feel ok about them. That we feel bad about certain enemies is pretty much normal – it is an emotional function that says, “Warning, this person is not safe.” I do not think that is a sin – it’s just emotional information.

    Much of what we do in the work of forgiveness is the act of putting things in God’s hands rather than ours. I can forgive because God is good – He’s got my back.

  3. Anna Avatar
    Anna

    Dean and Dino,
    Thank you for your dialogue. I am one of those young people that was blessed to read this today.

  4. Dean Avatar
    Dean

    Fr. Stephen,
    Sometimes you read a verse hundreds of times, and then, you really see it. The verses in Luke you quoted says we are to love our enemies. But then, God Himself is “kind to the ungrateful and evil.”
    If we are to love our enemies, then God Himself loves His “enemies.” How is this squared with John 3 which notes that God’s wrath abides upon those who do not believe in the Son?

  5. Dean Avatar
    Dean

    Thanks Anna,
    Wish I’d had this blog when I was young. 🙂

  6. Fr. Stephen Freeman Avatar

    Dean,
    I think that we have to say that whatever “wrath” means – it is a kindness. There are no exceptions to the love of God. St. John doesn’t just say that “God loves.” He says, “God is love.” We know from St. Paul that “love is patient and kind.” This is medicine for souls injured by the brutality of certain Christian views of God.

  7. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Father, perhaps ‘wrath’ describing God indicates the great perturbation of sin that is brought about contrary to His natural order and peace? It is a violent eddy and we are permitted as a kindness to experience the effect of such perturbation. I find it very dangerous to ascribe the context and nature of human feelings to God as if He were a mere human. Most of the modern discussion of God’s wrath is conditioned by the Calvinist blasphemy concerning the nature of God.

    But why should God not be personally disturbed by the destruction of his holy creation by the wayward, ignorant and sinful caretakers who should know better. Nevertheless we must also be reminded of two things: Jesus words from the Cross, Father forgive them, they know not what they do; and whatever God’s wrath is, it is not the same as our wrath. We lack the ability to understand or explain it because we are contingent beings. Just as we lack the ability to understand or explain His ineffable love, kindness and grace.

    “And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.” Romans 8:28.

    It is quite easy to concentrate too much on the nature of God’s wrath to the exclusion of His mercy and love.

  8. Ivan Avatar
    Ivan

    Fr. Stephen,

    Your comment about the binding and loosing gave me a thought – maybe forgiveness simultaneously binds the sin being forgiven, and the devil along with it, yet also looses the freedom of human beings who are involved. I think this has happened through my daily, remarkably painful hundreds of hours of prayer towards forgiveness of sexual abuse (with several different offenders over the years) – I feel liberated from temptations and the devil’s activity in my mind, but also empowered to do good things and live righteously. It is a meaningful liberty to love and bless enemies, and to feel gratitude for who they are despite recognizing their dangerousness. And how else could I love prisoners, who are officially deemed “criminal” and dangerous? I feel like Jesus’ mentioning of prisoners in the Sermon of the Mount is crucial to the whole picture of how He wants mankind to treat enemies – a prisoner is probably someone’s enemy, but that is no reason to not love him/her. This indicates that as in a popular metaphor of forgiveness, loosing releases enemies from “issued tickets” (or angrily intended punishments) – to forgive can be described as pardoning the enemy as if he/she is a prisoner receiving clemency. But this does not mean being hurt gives executive authority, it’s just an empowering metaphor. This imagery implies that forgiveness is related to the royal lay-priesthood received in Baptism, and a beautiful symbol if we consider what an Orthodox person who wears a crown of marriage (or equivalent dignity in monastic tonsure) would naturally do as a generous king or queen in response to an offense. As an aside, the loosing of shame that happens when anger is loosed is so powerful, I wonder how exactly anger is a secondary reaction to shame (and I plan to study this psychological topic academically – participating in this blog has encouraged me to study psychology). Emotional functioning is fascinating.

    ***

    What Dino has mentioned before (I forget when but it reminded me of my veneration for this 20th century Athonite saint) about Elder Joseph the Hesychast’s eventual dispassion from carnal desire is blessing me these days – very recently, while slowly reading Elder Ephraim’s biography of his Elder Joseph, I notice my formerly distracting lusts fade away. It is a new experience for me to view people with pure affection, but not sexual temptation (not that I am at Elder Joseph’s level, it’s just a similar experience). I think it’s also related to how I visited a monastery with an clairvoyant abbess descended (through Elder Ephraim) by disciplehood from Elder Joseph last month. She (I think Dean is a friend of this monastery) promised to pray for me, and told me great things about my future (such as that I will be married sooner than I expected) that repaired my self-esteem and trust in God. I have great trust in her guidance and prayers, because she is such a loving and wise nun. I had not even been sure if I ever could marry before she told me when I would (soon after finishing university). Hearing that my future is bright and centered in Christ makes it easier to be patient, rather than impulsive with any sort of desire. Another surprising blessing in recent months has been a deepening of the flavor of the Eucharist, so I can recognize it as the living, active, and transcendently sweet presence of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    I mention this not only to concur with Dino about the unique, strongly ascetic message Elder Joseph’s life offers us (including longsuffering and meekness), but also as personal evidence that God’s blessings are only possible with forgiveness, not if I were resentful. Gratitude is intertwined with forgiveness (which is not my own idea). I would not expect gratitude for the goodness of an offender (which requires effort in nepsis to observe through the veil of anger) from people who are in the beginning stages of forgiveness, but it satisfies me to have such an ironic (and folly to the world) victory over the sins that were so hurtful. To me the worst part of abuse is that it pressures survivors to repeat sinful behavior, like a contagious infection. It’s wonderful how loving one’s enemies improves a person’s behavior.

  9. Chris Avatar
    Chris

    Thank you Father for that very practical wisdom. Yep, the prayer is indeed going to be useful! As is the idea that much of forgiveness is putting things in God’s hands. Also the idea that we have spiritual power given to us, and that it has a certain nature. It sounds like there is a big story there, and probably you have already told it a few times. I apologise again for my lack of familiarity with the back history of your blogs – I realise it must be very frustrating.

    The one line of yours that still has me wondering though is “I think we imagine that forgiving an enemy means, somehow, to feel ok about them. That we feel bad about certain enemies is pretty much normal – it is an emotional function that says, “Warning, this person is not safe.” I do not think that is a sin – it’s just emotional information.” It is true that I have thought of forgiving as having a significant component of being able to be at peace with someone who has done wrong – even if I don’t trust them again, part of the point of forgiving them is so that I won’t be in their power and in that sense I am forgiving them for the sake of my own peace of mind and soul. That may or may not be ok, but it’s the flip side that is perhaps more interesting: if I ‘forgive’ someone (perhaps by saying to myself or to God that I forgive them) but they still get me completely knotted up (ah binding language again!) with very negative feelings, have I really forgiven them? Which is maybe another way of asking what actually IS forgiveness anyway – presumably it’s not just me saying “you are forgiven” or even “these bonds are loosed”? It must mean some real letting go surely? Perhaps the acid test is this: how do I know that I have really forgiven someone, and that I’m not deluding myself that I have in order to do the Right Thing? Is it a feeling, or are there objective signs that we can look to?

  10. Dee of St Hermans Avatar
    Dee of St Hermans

    Dino, I sincerely appreciate your responses. (Sept 14 at 3:31 am)

    Forgive me as I return to your words that you use to express these things, for I am concerned how they might be interpreted by the catechumens, for which I have an obedience to help, and also for my own thorough understanding of St Silouan’s words, for which I have been given an obedience to understand his words and intent and implications as well. It is not with some cantankerousness that I return to your intent in your meanings.

    It frequently sounds as though you have conflated the condition of the soul after death with the eschaton. Perhaps they are one in the same for the soul but in the case of the latter (in English, in the “age to come”) there is the resurrection. In the latter situation I have heard the words used such as ‘the fullness’, or in other words, “the consummation’, of the Kingdom of God, which perhaps is your intent.

    However, in the statement “key” idea: “The key point stands though. The greater the participation in the Kingdom here and now, the greater the desire to depart to the fullness“. I see a problem.

    So frequently your knowledge of Greek is helpful to us who do not have the advantage of it as our first tongue and so frequently your translation of the Greek is helpful. However you are now expressing in the words of St Silouan, someone whose mother tongue was Russian and the monastery in which he worshiped on Mt Athos was Russian. In the book St Silouan of Athos, there is a picture of his cursive writing which I’m not able to distinguish between cursive Greek or cursive Slavonic. I think it might be Slavonic because some letters resemble letters in an inscription on a cross I wear. I say all of this because it might be possible your translation of St Silouan’s words might have been more ‘Greek’ in tone than what the original writing had.

    I too have checked with my teachers to make sure I’m not misinterpreting your words in such a way that is peculiar to myself. I have received confirmations that your words appear to mean something that I suspect you do not intend.

    In sum: it looks like you are describing a false dichotomy (at least that’s how it reads) setting up the ‘afterlife’ over and against the current life.

    Here is what I have read in Archimandrite Sergius’ book Acquiring the Mind of Christ, which he, in turn, is quoting Hierotheos Vlachos in his book Orthodox Psychology: The Science of the Fathers (trans y Esther Williams, 2006) pg 9:

    We Orthodox are not waiting for the end of history and the end of time, but through living in Christ we are running to meet the end of history and thus already living the life expected after the Second Coming.

    Archimandrite Sergius continues: pg9: In the Church, the Kingdom is already present and revealed, but “yet to be consummated”.
    What we know so far about “consummation” is that we have been told is that there is a Resurrection awaiting all with body and soul together once again.

    Also regarding what is ‘to be’, here is additional scripture:
    1 Cor 2:9 Eye has not seen, nor ear heard nor have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him.

    Archimandrite Sergius continues pg 9 (in this case quoting Elder Zacharias) “Our primary tool for evangelism is serving the Liturgy and the services of the Church. (Now I highlight the important part for this discussion) It is this which constitutes the sanctification of the world and grants us an opportunity to participate in the holiness of God Himself”

    Archimandrite Sergius continues:

    Therefore, we must always remember that the Church and its Liturgy are the Kingdom, the world to come, present in our midst today. St Nicholas Cabasilas says, “What is the kingdom if not this Holy Bread and this Holy Cup?” We must beware of supposing that heaven is something that is only in the future.

    So my question, Dino, is: Do you interpret what you have written to have the same meaning as this quote above?

    In my obedience to reading St Silouan’s words, I’ve been reading this book for about 2 years and some parts more than three times (actually, I’ve lost count). Being young in the faith when I first started reading it (and still young in the faith) I still glean new understandings each time I read it. So it was for this, and not for making some argument that I ask for the specific references so that I might learn the ways of your interpretations.

    Here is a quote from this book, pg 40 in the chapter III Monastic Strivings:

    “These alternations between a certain measure of grace followed by abandonment of God and the assaults of the devils were not sterile: they kept Simeon’s [St Silouan} soul alert and vigilant. Unceasing prayer and mental watchfullness, acquired with his characteristic patience and courage, opened new horizons of spiritual knowledge and enriched him with new weapons for the war against the passions.”

    pg 43 : (after God’s prescription to “Keep thy mind in hell and despair not”)
    Now did his soul triumph…It had been given him to know the great mystery of Being, to know it existentially….His first vision of the Lord had been full of ineffable light, and had brought him a wealth of experience, of abundant love, the joy of the resurrection and an authentic impression of the transition from death to life. Why then had it withdrawn?…(pg 44) Had the gift been incomplete or had it been to much for his soul to bear?…Now it became evident, and Silouan realized, why he had lost grace–his soul had lacked both the knowledge and the strength to bear the gift. But this time he received the ‘light of knowledge’.
    pg 45: Silouan came to know experimentally, from the experience of his own life, that the field of man’s spiritual battle with evil — cosmic evil– is his own heart. He saw in spirit that sin’s deepest root is pride, that scourge of humanity…

    I did come across one passage that was somewhat similar to one of the passages you had in your memory that you wrote, [“Weary while still on this earth”, or when he wishes that “for love of Him we might forget the earth, and live in heaven and behold the glory of the Lord.”]

    The passage was this: (page bottom of pg 49)

    Indeed, prayer is often wordless, the mind in an act of intuitive synthesis being away of everything simultaneously. Meanwhile the soul hovers on that brink where one may at any moment lose all sense of the world and of the body, where the mind ceases to think in separate concepts, and where the spirit will be sensible only of God. Then the world is forgotten, supplications die away, and in rapt silence the soul simply dwells in God. ‘When the mind is entirely in God, the world is quite forgotten,’ the Staretz would say.
    When, for reasons we do not know, this dwelling in God draws to a close, there is no prayer, but peace, love and a profound tranquility in the soul, together with a certain intangible sadness because the Lord has left, for the soul would wish to dwell in Him eternally.
    The soul then lives out what is left of her contemplation.

    I still understand this passage as different from what you have in your memory. For example ‘forgetting the world’, is the effect of dwelling in/with God. I don’t sense in this something we aspire to do that is to ‘forget the world’ in order ‘to be with God’, after all we are to pray for the world and for it’s salvation, while we are still living on this earth and perhaps even while we are in the ‘afterlife’. And I will certainly continue to read and re-read those latter parts of the book to see if I can find the areas that you are referring to.

    I want to assure you that I appreciate what you write. Even if I should disagree with you, the work that I do to explore why I find your words to be (or imply) ‘a problem’ is very beneficial.

    Last, your words in your comment at Sept 14, at 12:04pm are very inspirational and I am very edified when you write on prayer.

    For those who might be curious about Archamendrite Sergius’ presentation on this topic, rather than buying the book I mention, you could just listen to his talk on YouTube:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrAjVB_XiNs

    It’s a lengthy video, more than an hour. The points in this video that touch on this topic in this very long comment can be found at the times of: 7:50 8:00, 8:33, and 8:49.

    I particularly liked his reference to Liturgy as the “Inaugurated Eschatology” (at 8:49) which he says it is so essential to have a clear understanding of the Liturgy…”the life of the Liturgy is the Life of our salvation, in Liturgy we are in contact and move in eternity”.

  11. Dee of St Hermans Avatar
    Dee of St Hermans

    Ok typo: Archamendrite should be spelled Archimandrite

    And the words “What we know so far about “consummation” is that we have been told is that there is a Resurrection awaiting all with body and soul together once again.” are my words not Archimandrite Sergius’ words. The lack of enough spacing might encourage the assumption that they are his and not mine, which would be incorrect.

  12. Dee of St Hermans Avatar
    Dee of St Hermans

    Sorry I discovered one more typo concerning the state of prayer regarding St Silouan’s words:
    “Indeed, prayer is often wordless, the mind in an act of intuitive synthesis being aware of everything simultaneously.”

  13. Dee of St Hermans Avatar
    Dee of St Hermans

    Please forgive me for these many comments.

    I think it’s worth while to continue in the passage in I Cor 2:11-16
    For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man that is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.
    These things we also speak, not in words which is man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him: nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.

    In my interpretation of this scripture, the mind of Christ, isn’t something we wait for (after death), rather, if we prepare ourselves to receive this grace and if God grants this grace, we can live in this ‘mind of Christ’ here and now, for love of God and for the love of all humanity and for the “Life of the World” (Fr Schmemann).

  14. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Dee
    I think it would be pretty impossible to write in a way that pre-emptively explains things that catechumens might misconstrue while also describing something for another.
    For your question:
    “the Kingdom, the world to come, present in our midst – in the Holy Bread and Holy Cup” is not something that is only in the future, no, however, it is the ‘immutability’ in that state that actually is in the future. That is in the future.
    If the (felt in the present) transition from death to life would not be sealed through actual death, St Ignatius’ words above (I strongly suggest you reread them with more attention) would make no sense at all.
    Fr John Behr has some useful talks on the Christian mystery of death and its importance you would enjoy.

  15. Chris Avatar
    Chris

    Dee
    My personal sense is that these temporal things are one of the deepest mysteries of them all – the warp and weave of kronos and kairos and all that.

    I thought the sources you picked and where good at giving a sense of this, but really didn’t they all end up concluding that there is indeed a very deep mystery here? Is it worth trying to be precise about the mechanics of how the Eschaton works, especially with newbies (and I’ve stared at this stuff for quite a while, but I’m still one of those)?, Rather might it not just be best to give them a sense of the stakes, and of some of the dimensions around the mystery and what is at stake. In that vein – although I don’t know whether or not this is helpful – good poetry can be helpful, On this particular topic I like T..S. Eliot’s Four Quartet’s poems and these might be another way of introducing the topic. The first one (Burnt Norton) starts with this :

    “Time present and time past
    Are both perhaps present in time future
    And time future contained in time past.
    If all time is eternally present
    All time is unredeemable.
    What might have been is an abstraction
    Remaining a perpetual possibility
    Only in a world of speculation.
    What might have been and what has been
    Point to one end, which is always present.
    Footfalls echo in the memory
    Down the passage which we did not take
    Towards the door we never opened
    Into the rose-garden. My words echo
    Thus, in your mind.
    But to what purpose
    Disturbing the dust on a bowl of rose-leaves
    I do not know.”

    My favourite specific lines on the topic come later :

    “Time past and time future
    Allow but a little consciousness.
    To be conscious is not to be in time
    But only in time can the moment in the rose-garden,
    The moment in the arbour where the rain beat,
    The moment in the draughty church at smokefall
    Be remembered; involved with past and future.
    Only through time time is conquered.”

    The last words of the last poem (Little Gidding) are these remarkable lines:

    “We shall not cease from exploration
    And the end of all our exploring
    Will be to arrive where we started
    And know the place for the first time.
    Through the unknown, unremembered gate
    When the last of earth left to discover
    Is that which was the beginning;
    At the source of the longest river
    The voice of the hidden waterfall
    And the children in the apple-tree
    Not known, because not looked for
    But heard, half-heard, in the stillness
    Between two waves of the sea.
    Quick now, here, now, always—
    A condition of complete simplicity
    (Costing not less than everything)
    And all shall be well and
    All manner of thing shall be well
    When the tongues of flames are in-folded
    Into the crowned knot of fire
    And the fire and the rose are one.”

    All that said, I really don’t know how Orthodox catechumenal formation works, and this kind of thing might be completely not the right way to go. If so, I hope you just find it to be something of beauty and use anyway. All the best with it, and your important work.

  16. Fr. Stephen Freeman Avatar

    Chris,
    Our highly psychologized culture pays a lot of attention to how we’re feeling – and probably misunderstands feelings to a certain degree. We tend to think of emotions as our “ontology” – our actual state of being. Instead, they are sensations – like touch, taste, etc. If I was stabbed by someone and lived, I would have a wound that needed to heal. I could forgive them long before the wound healed. And, even then, 20 years later I will have a scar, that does not mean I have not forgiven them.

    Forgiveness is what I do to/for the other. My healing could be hurried along through that process – but it depends on the nature and depth of the wound. If someone had stabbed me, and 20 years later I thought about the incident, it would be strange to no longer think of it as dangerous or frightening.

    It is possible to confuse ourselves with an insistence that our emotions/memory somehow attain a state of indifference or happiness. Forgiveness ultimately looses someone from the “debt” of retaliation (lex talionis). Our healing often has to run on a separate track.

  17. Chris Avatar
    Chris

    Thank you again Father, all very helpful. I rather thought after I sent the last post that that word “feelings” might land me in trouble! I think I meant even then something more like a real shift in the heart, and you have articulated that very nicely. You are of course right. Forgiveness cannot just be a feeling or an emotion. Nor is it an intellectual rational thing. While those might accompany it, it is something else, and deeper. The unbinding has to be directed towards healing – and maybe freedom. I continue to think, though, that judgement is tied in with it all though. Maybe it is in part a real decision to shift one’s frame of reference for how one judges or thinks about what has happened?
    Anyway this whole discussion has been immensely useful for me. Thank you again.

  18. Byron Avatar
    Byron

    Ivan,

    May God continue to bless you.

    Chris,

    If judgement is a part tied in with “unbinding”, then it may be useful to remember that God’s judgement is His mercy. It is His cross.

  19. Paula AZ Avatar
    Paula AZ

    Ivan…I second Byron’s words, God’s blessings to you. Always and forever.

    Also, thanks Byron for keeping it simple. The Cross of Christ is the beginning and the end of all things. It is all about self-emptying Love.
    Chris, have you read this article?…
    https://glory2godforallthings.com/2016/03/31/16163/

  20. Chris Avatar
    Chris

    Thanks Byron. His Cross, yes, but also his Pascha, and even his Transfiguration. My thought about my attempts at forgiveness maybe being about a change in my frame of reference for making judgements was in that direction. I can’t help think that a blocker to forgiveness is just the way I am looking at a situation (“he did that to me”) and that if I could change perspective (towards a Christ-like one) then forgiveness would become a whole lot easier. In fact, forgiveness itself also helps change the perspective, so perhaps the two things work hand in glove. I am also thinking in practice this kind of forgiveness/change in judging perspective is a progressive thing since many of us (certainly me) simply cannot make the leap from where we are to perfect kenosis! I liked Father Stephen’s image of forgiveness (loosening) being part of the ‘toolkit’, but the objective is the love of Christ. One of the stages after early forgiveness would be to actually love one’s enemies. Surely that really does require a shift in the heart?

    One of the things I have been finding useful as I have been pondering this stuff has been revisiting the prayer of a Serbian Bishop, Nikolai Velimirovic, who spoke out against Nazism until he was arrested and taken to Dachau. A man who surely really understood enemies but really who is just light years ahead of where I am in taking that journey of forgiveness through love of enemies towards the Cross and Pascha of Christ.

    “Bless my enemies, O Lord. Even I bless them and do not curse them.

    Enemies have driven me into Your embrace more than friends have. Friends have bound me to earth, enemies have loosed me from earth and have demolished all my aspirations in the world.

    Enemies have made me a stranger in worldly realms and an extraneous inhabitant of the world. Just as a hunted animal finds safer shelter than an unhunted animal does, so have I, persecuted by enemies, found safest sanctuary, having ensconced myself beneath Your tabernacle, where neither friends nor enemies can slay my soul. Bless my enemies, O Lord.

    They rather than I, have confessed my sins before the world.
    They have punished me, when I have hesitated to punish myself.
    They have tormented me, whenever I have tried to flee torments.
    They have scolded me, whenever I have flattered myself.
    They have spat on me, whenever I have filled myself with arrogance.
    Bless my enemies, O Lord. Even I bless them and do not curse them.

    Whenever I have made myself wise, they have called me foolish.
    Whenever I have made myself mighty, they have mocked me as though I were a dwarf.
    Whenever I have wanted to lead people, they have shoved me into the background.
    Whenever I have rushed to enrich myself, they have prevented me with an iron hand.
    Whenever I thought I would sleep peacefully, they have wakened me from sleep.
    Whenever I have tried to build a home for a long and tranquil life, they have demolished and driven me out.

    Truly, enemies have cut me loose from the world and have stretched out my hands to the hem of your garment.

    Bless my enemies, O Lord. Even I bless them and do not curse them.

    Bless them, and multiply them and make them more bitterly against me :

    so that my fleeing to you may have no return;
    so that all hope in men may be scattered like cobwebs;
    so that absolute serenity may begin to reign in my soul;
    so that my heart may become the grave of my two evil twins: arrogance and anger;
    so that I might amass all my treasure in heaven;
    ah, so that I may for once be freed from self-deception, which has entangled me in the dreadful web of the illusory life.

    Enemies have taught me to know what hardly anyone knows, that a person has no enemies in the world except himself.

    One hates his enemies only when he fails to realise that they are not enemies, but cruel friends.

    It is truly difficult for me to say who has done me more evil in the world: friends or enemies.

    Therefore bless, O Lord, both my friends and my enemies.

    A slave curses enemies, for he does not understand. But a son blesses them, for he understands.

    For a son knows that his enemies cannot touch his life. Therefore he freely steps among them and prays to God for them.

    Bless my enemies, O Lord. Even I bless them and do not curse them.”
    (As quoted in The Illumined Heart by Frederica Mathewes-Green)

    And thank you Paula AZ for that reference to Father’s article, which does indeed look foundational. I am up to Part IV of it. It is amazing, but there is a lot to take in there and some careful chewing is required. I shall be revisiting many times, I rather think.

    Ivan, I too echo Byron’s and Paula’s prayers and love for you. You are remarkable.

  21. Dee of St Hermans Avatar
    Dee of St Hermans

    Ivan thank you so much for your personal story and witness. I just now read it. Indeed forgiveness of one’s enemies ( and abusers) opens one’s heart to the healing power of God’s love. May God continue bless you and strengthen you!

  22. Drewster2000 Avatar
    Drewster2000

    The lesson I drew from the main article and conversations was that we are called to practice forgiveness as best we can. It’s easy to get sidetracked by questions like…
    –You can’t forgive unless you’re the victim, can you?
    –But sometimes there’s psychological and they can’t forgive!
    –How many times should you have to forgive?
    –How is that we at a certain level carry the guilt for every sin?
    –How about civil authorities? What is their part in all this?

    Ultimately those questions come int o the realm of the Pharisees, trying to satisfy the letter of the law instead of living in the spirit of it. As I understand it, the translation of the word “forgive” is “to give back” or “restore”. We are trying to give everyone back the ability to become what God made them to be. It’s not about the satisfaction of justice but of truly trying with our whole lives to make things right, as they should be. This is a thankless job that could get you killed, but then you cannot die if your life is hid with Christ. It is hard work, but it is what we’ve been called to – and it is rewarding in a way that makes the riches of this world pale in comparison.

  23. Dean Avatar
    Dean

    Chris,
    Yes, St. Nikolai is one of my favorites. I believe he was only 22 when he wrote, “Prayers by the Lake”.
    If I recall correctly this prayer is found in that book, along with other amazing prayers by this saint.
    I have a friend whose uncle helped prepare his body at his repose. He said it was the most scarred body he had ever seen…resulting from his time in the German concentration camps.

  24. Dee of St Hermans Avatar
    Dee of St Hermans

    Drewster2000,
    Thank you for your reflections. Indeed the thinking that forgiveness involves a legalistic relation between offender and victim, doesn’t grasp what forgiveness is. And I suspect pride (and shame) are involved, a degree of lacking in repentance, and even a lack of understanding what this life in this world is.

  25. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    I have great difficulty separating repentance and forgiveness especially in light of the Lord’s prayer: forgive us as we forgive others.

  26. Howard Merken Avatar

    Remembering historical events helps prevent us from making the same mistakes. The Holocaust is a prime example. It’s not a matter of holding a grudge vs. forgiving, but of not letting something escape our collective memory. Maybe 9/11 is like this. In the case of both 9/11 and the earlier Holocaust, we don’t want to forget, because we don’t want it to happen again.

  27. Drewster2000 Avatar
    Drewster2000

    Michael,

    Forgiveness can happen in a moment, but repentance can take a lifetime. You can see that the timing doesn’t line up. Thus the command to forgive your brother seventy times seven times. The penitent takes a lot longer to complete his cycle and thus may need several repeats of forgiveness to catch up. Forgiveness is the act of the offended giving the offender another opportunity to become healthy in the next encounter.

    Caveat: As mentioned, sometimes the wound is too deep and the offended is not able to continue the relationship to allow that next opportunity. But for the sake of their own healing, they must still forgive.

  28. Fr. Stephen Freeman Avatar

    Howard,
    Forgive me – both will happen again. The Holocaust already has, several times. Even 9/11 could happen tomorrow – you cannot keep bad things from happening – no matter how hard you try. We should make reasonable efforts – but “never again” is a political slogan, not a way of life.

  29. Matthew W Avatar

    A thought I have been thinking as I have been pondering this post.

    A person does a harmful thing, and the question comes up – do I have the right to forgive? Maybe that isn’t the right question. This person who has done the harmful thing, do I judge him, criticize him, put myself in the place of God in his life assuming that I have the right to condemn?

    “And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?” – Matthew 7:3

    If I do, perhaps it is I who needs forgiveness. maybe I should ask forgiveness for judging, criticizing, or condemning. Should I ask forgiveness of the one whom I’ve judged unworthy of Christ’s salvation, the one whom I’ve criticized for “missing the mark”, the one I’ve condemned even though the rain falls on the just and the unjust?

    I don’t think anyone in our society would see as sane someone who would ask forgiveness of a murderer, a rapist, or an abuser, for thinking ill of them. Not even the murderer or rapist would understand. However, for me, I think the mental exercise is important in readjusting how I look at myself and at those around me, and I do pray that I might learn to love, just as Christ loved those who persecuted him.

    This is not to say that I will ever feel safe around, or trust certain people, just, and only, I try to let go. I push to stop hating, and if I can’t love as Christ would, I try to just let Christ do the work. I push to keep the thoughts out of my mind, and stop obsessing. I avoid triggers that remind me of the damage, and if that means removing people from my life, I do it, and pray that distance may allow me to forgive them in a way that close proximity might not.

    “Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things.” – Philippians 4:8

    Just some thoughts.

  30. Fr. Stephen Freeman Avatar

    Matthew,
    The Elder Zossima, in Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, pondered the mystery of our connectedness. In that vein, even with a murderer, he wondered what role he/we might have played in creating them. This is not to relieve the murderer of his responsibility – it’s simply to realize that we are all responsible for the whole of things. It’s a great mystery.

  31. Byron Avatar
    Byron

    Matthew,

    At the beginning of every forgiveness vespers, our priest reminds us of something Fr. Dimitri said: We should always ask forgiveness of others for, if nothing else, we have failed to see and acknowledge the Image of God in them.

    It makes me think that if we strike at others, physically or otherwise, we strike at God. It gives me pause and helps me reconsider my words and actions, at times. It has also helped me to begin praying that, if I may do nothing else, let me not be a stumbling block to those around me.

  32. Matthew W Avatar

    I think I may have cried when I first realized that Elder Zossima was fictional, and not an actual Orthodox saint. I bought the book several years ago, and to this day, have only read the chapter detailing his life.

    I resonate a great deal with him, even across the cultural divisions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Subscribe to blog via email

Support the work

Your generous support for Glory to God for All Things will help maintain and expand the work of Fr. Stephen. This ministry continues to grow and your help is important. Thank you for your prayers and encouragement!


Latest Comments


Read my books

Everywhere Present by Stephen Freeman

Listen to my podcast



Categories


Archives