Monday, December 9, 2019

Catering to Abuse: When Forgiveness Becomes Toxic

Trigger Warning: mentions of sexual assault, domestic violence, spiritual abuse

I recently watched a movie with Tom Hanks called "A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood". In it, he plays Mr. Rogers and depicts a fictionalized version of a relationship he had with a journalist. As Tom Hanks' (self-professed) biggest fan and a huge Mr. Rogers fanatic (I have good taste), I was more than excited about seeing this film. I say all that so you can understand how pained I was to realize I hated this movie. I had a visceral reaction while watching it and wanted to leave in the middle of it. Afterwards, I was shaking. Why are so many people praising this movie? I got online to see what people were saying. All good things. Finally, I found a Scary Mommy post that was able to put into words my experience: this movie celebrated something I like to call toxic forgiveness. And no-one was seemingly aware of it. Comments poured in on on Facebook calling the author of the post names and accusing her of harboring bitterness. These comments betrayed something I've always known:

Our society fetishizes forgiveness and normalizes abusive relationships. 

It is an interesting experience to be a Christian that finds herself often arguing against forgiveness. That's kind of our bag, right? God is synonymous with grace, and forgiveness is the virtue that is hailed as the ultimate practice. To be unforgiving is to be sinning, and to reject forgiveness is to reject God. And honestly, there is no nuance at all in this conversation. So I come aware that as I write this, I've already lost people. Putting the word toxic in front of the world forgiveness seems like such cognitive dissonance that most people will write it off bitter, arrogant, and sinful. Forgiveness, to many, cannot be questioned, dissected, or more delicately defined. But I'm going to do all of those right now. 

I always write from the lens of centering survivors of abuse. I want those reading to know that when I mention forgiveness, I'm not talking about forgiving people for cutting you off in traffic. These are  conversations around forgiving people for abusive actions, patterns, and behaviors. 


What is forgiveness?


I always like to define terms. Forgiveness means different things for different people. And here's my hypothesis: if you ask a person to define "forgiveness" they are not going to be able to give you a precise definition. 

The dictionary says forgiving means to stop harboring anger or resentfulness against the person who did you wrong. Another definition shows forgiving to be the same as canceling a debt. These seem to be agreed upon definitions, and work well for this conversation. The Bible itself doesn't so much as provide a definition as stories. Often, Scripture shows forgiveness as cancelling debts more so than cancelling anger, but both are given up as good examples.  


Theology of Forgiveness


Anytime we encounter a “wrong” (perceived or real, against us or others) we are faced with a decision about how to respond. Typically, we’re given two choices: let it go or address it. It’s how we choose that reveals to us our inherent beliefs about grace, sin, and atonement.

I call this our theology of forgiveness. That may not be the most accurate language academically, but for me, it gets the message across. Our approach to forgiveness is not only a paradigm, but also rooted in how we view God and his expectations for our relationships. As Christians, when we talk about forgiveness, we mainly do so in the context of God’s rules and regulations on us as a community. My belief (and experience in working with survivors of abuse) is that this communal response is an extremely dangerous way of approaching forgiveness.

I know that hearing this may be jolting. “How can forgiveness be dangerous? Its very essence is grace! It’s a good thing!” But as we begin to understand more about the dynamics of abuse and the way trauma impacts individuals, it becomes clear that the way we address forgiveness can have a long-lasting impact on survivors.


Who gets to command forgiveness?


Forgiveness has a bit of a mythic reputation. It is often seen as a magical “reboot” button that wipes away all pain. We’ve all heard it: 

You can’t heal unless you forgive. Your wellbeing depends on whether or not you forgive those who have wronged you. Forgiving means “letting go.” God wants you to forgive; be the bigger person!

It’s interesting that these comments always come from the other person--the one who wasn’t wronged. As if we believe that controlling someone’s response to trauma will erase their experience. 

Abuse is about power and control. 

The last thing an abused person needs is to feel further controlled once they are removed from their situation. When we expect (even command) forgiveness, we are making them question their experience and setting an inappropriate agenda for their healing. (Claiming that forgiveness helps people heal from their trauma is absent from research. While thoughts of revenge have negative psychological effects, forgiveness in situations of abuse has not been shown to increase wellbeing or decrease symptoms of PTSD.)


There are two types of forgiveness we encounter in society: 
  • Communal forgiveness
  • Individual forgiveness

Communal forgiveness is when the community, as a whole, forgives those who have wronged them. (Think about the church that Dylann Roof targeted. That community practiced a communal forgiveness.) Individual forgiveness is when the wronged person forgives the one who wronged them. The first is guided by the community and leadership, the second by the individual.

The problem is that we get these confused.  

We don’t see them as separate entities--we often expect that the community is called to forgive
in place of the individual, and that the individual must follow the community’s lead. 

But actual instances where the community is entitled to be a part of the forgiveness process are few and far between.

Forgiveness for abuse should never be a trickle down action. The survivor must always be the first to initiate and if they don’t, people must respect and understand that choice.


The Trauma of Forgiveness


When someone is pushed to forgive, especially in cases of abuse and assault, retraumatization is bound to happen. Commanding that she forgives not only minimizes her feelings and effectively silences her, but also shifts the focus away from her trauma to the feelings and needs of her abuser. Furthermore, some studies have found that an increased willingness to forgive abuse often led to women returning to their abusive partners. There are many examples of this communal forgiveness happening within society. From Josh Duggar to Bill Cosby, we have an obsession with wanting abusers to feel forgiven.

Why do we do this? Why do we seem so dead set on asking people to forgive their abuser?

To begin with, testimonies from abusers sound a lot more dramatic and impactful than the messy testimony that can arise from a survivor. People would rather touch on the former because it allows God’s power to be shown in a dramatic, clear-cut way. “Oh look at how God intervened in this situation!” We can tie the story into a nice little bow.

For a survivor’s story to be shared, however, there is often still hurt, frustration, and no easy fix. It ends up being a story that is still processing, changing, continuing, and often contains very uncomfortable truths (like the ones that say to the church, “I wish you would have intervened here”). These stories aren’t as simple as twenty-minute sermons and often, can’t fit on cardboard for snappy video presentations. I think this is how people started to preference hearing about the abuser who changed his ways, rather than the battered or raped woman still dealing with her bruises.

Along with the comfort factor, there’s an inherent centering of an abuser because he (or she) is well-versed in manipulation. One of the biggest barriers in the support of survivors arises from the polished reputation of the abuser. He manipulates his environment so that it seems absolutely crazy that he would be the source of the issue. 

For example, Tony Jones is a very popular Christian author. He is also accused of abusing his now ex-wife. When she came forward with this, no one believed her, citing her mental health, calling her “bat-s*** crazy” and denying anything ever happened. Though there were medical records showing bruising and fractures, her testimony seemed less reliable than his. His network, authority, wealth, and power has allowed him to sue her for custody of their children and leave her without resources to support herself. Even today, some of the most popular Christian authors and bloggers take his side because he “would never” do anything like that. And besides, don't you know that she is crazy?

Even when everyone agrees that the abuser perpetrated against his victim, he still often gets the platform to tell his story--pushing aside the person he abused. There’s a large church on the East Coast that hired a sex abuser, featured his testimony on stage and on the website, and when criticized, said they were in the right because that’s what God’s grace is all about. Several years ago, Ken Starr wrote a letter to a judge asking for leniency for a friend who perpetrated on a teenager—vouching for his friend’s character and saying that he was a good guy because he was sorry for his actions. There are even some examples of Churches of Christ hiring known sex offenders for leadership positions under the guise of “grace and forgiveness”. Yet, families directly affected by their abuse are pushed out in the name of the same “forgiveness.”

This is, without a doubt, toxic forgiveness.


Toxic Forgiveness


Toxic forgiveness commands that forgiveness be given as an atonement or peace-offering and looks like people commanding the following:
  • That abused women forgive their husbands in order to “save” the marriage.
  • That sexual assault survivors forgive their assailant as a recognition that they, too, must have played some part in their abuse.
When people engage in this type of messaging, they are trying for two things:

1. Path of Least Resistance
2. Reconciliation

The first is damaging, but easily fixable. It may be hard work to stand with survivors (messy, uncomfortable, even jarring), but that’s the work we must do. The second, however, goes a lot deeper than just pulling up our bootstraps and getting to work--it requires extensive examination of our teachings and biblical interpretations on grace.


Speaking of Grace


Grace is the “free and unmerited favor of God.” The grace we receive from God is boundless. We are right to elevate and proclaim its wonders. But God's grace is not our grace. And we are not called to match it in instances of abuse. 

We seem to like a good grace story. So much so that we seek it at the expense of the hurt and abused. Under the guise of grace, people often leave victims of abuse in the dust as they seek to redeem the abuser. But grace is not a “get out of jail free” card, and crimes are not merely mistakes to be simply brushed aside. There are consequences to actions—not just governmental, but spiritual. And a community that invites the offender, but excludes the offended, is a dangerous community indeed.


But what if they are really, really, really sorry?


When we hope for reconciliation, we must be careful that we aren’t seeking it at the expense of the survivor. We don’t get to dictate grace or reconciliation. We don’t set the time, place, or agenda for a survivor to forgive her abuser. And if she decides she doesn’t want to? That’s ok. That’s what centering her and her needs looks like.

Toxic forgiveness can mask itself well. But healthy forgiveness looks a lot different than the toxic kind.


What is healthy forgiveness?


1. Toxic forgiveness says “Forgive and forget.” Healthy forgiveness says, “I let go, but I still hold you responsible.”
2. Toxic forgiveness excuses actions. Healthy forgiveness confronts actions.
3. Toxic forgiveness is forced. Healthy forgiveness is voluntary.
4. Toxic forgiveness is shaming. Healthy forgiveness is affirming.
5. Toxic forgiveness holds both parties at fault for abuse. Healthy forgiveness recognizes that the abuse is the fault of the abuser and the abuser alone.

It’s important to understand that mental health professionals can encourage forgiveness in abuse situations, but only if it comes with the recognition that (1) forgiveness doesn’t (and shouldn’t) mean reconciliation, (2) forgiveness is never coerced and can take many years before it is offered, if at all, and (3) forgiveness does not erase consequences.

Forgiveness doesn’t always mean reconciliation, and in the instance of abuse or sexual assault, people should never suggest, teach, or require it.  

But here's the deal:

Forgiveness is NOT required to live a flourishing life. And shaming people into forgiving is just wrong.


Committing to Center the Survivor


The benefits of supporting the survivor will always outweigh the benefits of supporting the abuser.

Glib comments about “submitting in all things” or that people who are close to God are the ones that forgive “no matter what” do more harm than good. People have a responsibility to the most vulnerable, and that includes survivors of abuse and sexual assault.

Instead of centering forgiveness, let us become experts in the arena of resourcing. Where are your domestic violence shelters? Do you know what a mandated reporter is? Who do you call if a child tells you they’ve been sexually abused?

The story of the victim--not the victimizer--must be prioritized. We cannot and should not force someone to forgive their abuser. Not under the guise of love or grace or pop psychology. We need to be extremely comfortable with the fact that the abused may never forgive their abuser—and that they don’t have to feel joy and peace and love. Everyone gets to own their own story—I may find forgiveness freeing, but that doesn’t mean everyone will. Richard Schwartz calls this unburdening. Everyone can unburden--but it may not resemble forgiveness as the church has traditionally taught it.

So all this to say, here are my rules about forgiveness. I encourage you to think about them before you tell someone that forgiveness is the gold standard.
  1. Forgiveness shall not be coerced by the community.
  2. Forgiveness is never offered in someone else's place.
  3. No one should be shamed into forgiving.
  4. Forgiveness is not a replacement for accountability.
  5. Forgiveness does not mean forgetting.
  6. Consequences stay--even after forgiving.
  7. Do not offer forgiveness to someone not asking for it.
  8. Abused people did not cause their abuse. Don't make forgiveness something they need to seek from their abuser.
  9. Do not forgive indiscriminately.
  10. Do not force forgiveness as a spectator sport for the curious.

The Four Ideologies of Abortion

TW: Abortion I can’t turn off comments on individual posts, so I’m asking you to be respectful of my page. Remember, social media consum...