Posted by Benjamin on: 03.09.2007 /
We have the right to say that it hurt.
-Alex Mpondo
Red Dust is a movie about apartheid, truth, forgiveness, and reconciliation. It’s a combination of mystery and morality play that kept me riveted from beginning to end.
The movie really helped me cement my new, post-evangelical understanding of forgiveness. It’s a much more demanding forgiveness which requires both victim and perpetrator to fully inventory the exact nature and consequences of harm, and then choose to re enter relationship. It’s a dizzying, overwhelming, intense, gut wrenching type of forgiveness which requires a lot.
As the movie progresses, you can see that these characters, in the process of wrestling through memories they had forgotten, and would rather continue to forget, are becoming more alive, and more human.
Having looked the beast in the eye, having given and received forgiveness, let us shut the door on the past, not to forget it, but to allow it not to imprison us.
-Desmond Tutu
It seems to me that international peace is impossible without this type of forgiveness. What do you think?
*warning: this movie contains graphic depictions of brutal torture
Leave a Reply
Comment by: ncxian
1 03/9/07 5:39 AM | Comment Link |I’m curious, Benjamin, what was your evangelical understanding of forgiveness? It appears that you mean it is different from Tutu’s understanding. So do you think that it is a definition that varies from Christian to Christian (or denomination to denomination)?
Tutu appears to be talking about human beings forgiving each other, as opposed to being forgiven by God. Is that perhaps a change in focus that you see between the two Christian points of view?
It’s funny . . . everybody else seems to come to this discussion with an understanding that the fundamentalist evangelical point of view is THE christian POV and discovers here what non-evangelicals and non-Christians think. My biggest surprises have come in discovering from ex-fundies what they used to think!
Comment by: ncxian
2 03/9/07 5:42 AM | Comment Link |In the last paragraph above, I meant to say that everybody seems to know what what fundy Christianity is all about but me! How have I been missing that?
(Can we get “edit” on this blog?)
Comment by: Helen
3 03/9/07 7:29 AM | Comment Link |I like the emphasis on restitution embodied in AA/12-step.
My experience with forgiveness in the conservative evangelical belief system is that because what REALLY counts in that system is being forgiven by God, believers don’t always put enough emphasis on seeking forgiveness and/or on making restitution and/or reconciling with other people.
The conservative evangelical message is - all you have to do is believe (and confess, I suppose) and God will forgive you. No ifs, no buts, guaranteed, forever, period.
Seeking forgiveness and making restitution with other people isn’t that simple. They might hold grudges. You probably have to earn their trust all over again (which is harder the second time). You might owe them a debt you can’t actually repay and what will they do with that?
The conservative evangelical message can make it too easy (imo) for believers in it to say “well, God forgives me and that’s what really matters” and then they have an excuse not to do the hard work of addressing their broken human relationships.
Some Christians have sensitive consciences and do care a lot about their human relationships - even going as far as apologizing for a wrong someone didn’t know they committed against them. But - again, imo - it seems left a bit much up to individuals how far they go in seeking to repair their human relationships.
NCxian I really do admire your patience with all the comments about Christians that don’t actually apply to you.
Thanks for the reminder about edit - I’ll put it on the list.
Comment by: Rachel
4 03/9/07 8:56 AM | Comment Link |I think it is enlightening that in South Africa they formed Truth and Reconciliation Committees. First there must be truth, THEN there can be reconciliation. First there must be justice, then there can be mercy. Sometimes in Christian circles, because of the emphasis on forgiveness, there can be pressure on the offended party to “let go and move on” before true accountability and reconciliation have taken place.
Comment by: ncxian
5 03/9/07 9:00 AM | Comment Link |Thanks!
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
6 03/9/07 9:37 AM | Comment Link |ncxian,
I was just reminded–apparently they’ve also formed a truth and reconciliation commission in Liberia. This might bear on the answer to your question as to why the turnaround there.
Comment by: ncxian
7 03/9/07 10:27 AM | Comment Link |I am beginning to get an overall impression of conservative evangelicalism as having all its emphasis on the vertical relationship (God and individual), and little on the horizontal (individual to individual). I am wondering, however, if we must put “American” in front of that for it to be accurate. I would imagine that in Africa, Latin America, and such places that have not traditionally subscribed to our John Wayne-esque, rugged individualism, conservative evangelicalism might look really different. I hope that adopting a conservative evangelicalism in those places would not also carry with it the baggage of individual isolation (albeit with God). Or maybe the “personal relationship with Jesus Christ” trumps everything else, no matter where that belief system touches down? Or is that emphasis just in American evangelicalism?
Also, my understanding is that other conservative Christian groups–Orthodox, Catholic–maintain a notion of the interconnectedness in community. So, even in doctrinally rigid Catholic communities, social justice is still a critical piece of the practice of Christianity.
BICBW
And perhaps I am over-generalizing about American CEs. There does seem to be a concern in those circles that everybody behave “properly”, which is a horizontal issue, I suppose.
Comment by: Helen
8 03/9/07 10:49 AM | Comment Link |ncxian wrote:
Certainly in my experience, I’ve been concerned that conservative evangelicals often tend to overemphasize the vertical and underemphasize the horizontal. And I say that based on what the Bible says - since they claim to be under its authority.
My sense is that the emphasis somewhat results from the theology, so that would probably happen in other countries too. Also, to some extent I think the US has exported its brand of ‘conservative evangelicalism’ to other countries as a package deal which would incorporate the US emphases.
On the other hand, I think the lifestyle of Americans in general underemphasizes the horizontal, so that part would be cultural and differ from country to country.
To be fair, it also is in some CE groups. One church Jim and (Matt) Casper visited - and which is reviewed in their book - is Lawndale Community, which is in a low-income neighborhood of Chicago and does all sorts of helpful things for the community. For example it has its own health care center that it set up for the community.
It is - but “behave properly” can as easily be disfunctional as healthy. If it means “be kind to others” then that’s awesome. But if it means “conform to the appearances we approve of, or face our disapproval” then a disfunctional overly controlling relationship has been created between the community leaders and its members.
Comment by: ncxian
9 03/9/07 11:50 AM | Comment Link |Oh, I agree. That’s why I put “properly” in quotes. But that would still be counter to my initial proposition that perhaps horizontal is underemphasized, vertical is prime.
Comment by: Laura M.
10 03/13/07 2:50 AM | Comment Link |If what you’re saying here is that true forgiveness requires reconciliation, I agree. I also believe there cannot be true forgiveness and reconciliation without true remorse and admission on the part of the wrongdoer.
I’ve personally experienced this many times and truthfully, it has been very hard on me. I don’t believe a person should apologize unless they truly feel remorse and are willing to discuss that with the person they’ve injured. I’ve been told by one relative of mine that I’m bitter and vengeful because I won’t forgive this person, yet they refuse to talk with me about what I’m supposed to be forgiving ! I’m told that it is in the past now and I’m supposed to ‘let it go’.
I truly have let it go, or I suppose I would be bitter :->, and what I believe is that this ‘relative’ is the one having a hard time forgiving themself and letting go. When a person cannot be fully honest about their own behavior, I believe the problem is theirs, and not that of the party from whom they are asking forgiveness.
Forgiveness is not some mystical force or property which we can magically share or bestow on others, “You were condemned, now I impart to you my forgiveness”.
No, a person must be truthful about the harm they have caused to others, regret their actions, not just the consequences to themselves of their behavior but the effect it has had on others, and approach those others from a place of honesty and remorse. Then I think forgiveness and reconciliation has occurred for the ‘guilty’ party regardless of the reaction of the other person(s).
Comment by: Laura M.
11 03/13/07 2:55 AM | Comment Link |This is terrific !
I agree.
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
12 03/13/07 2:50 PM | Comment Link |Laura, I think you said it perfectly.
I would only add that it seems to me that sometimes it would be presumptive to approach the harmed party prematurely–that is, before *they* are ready to deal with it–kind of arrogant on the part of the offender.