Within the Christian life, there are many varying doctrines from Protestant sect to Protestant sect. However, one of the most interesting doctrines that transcend a number of sects is the belief concerning forgiveness.
When we look at the text of Matthew 18 verses 21-22, we find what appears to be the definitive Christological view on forgiveness: “Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.” Though Christ’s words are symbolic of an unlimited amount and the parable following in verses 23-35 demonstrate the need for unlimited forgiveness, what is strangely missing is the juridical viewpoint of Western Christianity that the normal consequences of sin are not obviated by forgiveness. Well, at least most of the time this is the case.
Although the word consequence or consequences does not appear in the New Testament of the Authorized Version or the New International Version, the concept of “consequences” resonates within the Bible, especially 2 Kingdoms (2 Kings). In the story of King David and Bathsheeba, the prophet Nathan foretells the consequences of David’s sins of adultery and murder. As king, David will suffer internal strife and struggle within his own house (incest, fratricide, and rebellion), warfare from without, and the child born of adultery will die. Not even David’s moving repentance psalm (Psalm 50) will alter Nathan’s prophecy, despite the psalm being a model of true repentance for his sins.
So just what does the unlimited forgiveness in Matthew 18 address?
Forgiveness, like David’s “Against you only have I sinned” (Psalm 50:6), only addresses the forgiving party, which is the “offended” party. God knows just how much unforgiveness hurts the individual that was wronged, which is why He commands us to forgive. Thus, forgiveness is about healing one’s self. It is not about excusing the consequences associated with the offender’s conduct, whether prophesied or a known result codified in a country’s laws or the severing of a relationship, etc. Forgiveness heals. And God is so adamant that His children be healed (so that He can proceed with the individual’s theosis), He commands us to forgive – for our own sake!
But what of the offender? How does the offender heal?
Again, as demonstrated by David in Psalm 50, the offender is healed through repentance and God’s forgiveness, not man’s forgiveness. In another synoptic Gospel, the Scribes correctly ask who can forgive sin but God alone (Mark 2:7). Again we see God’s amazing mercy for both the offended and offender. One is healed by the commanded act of forgiveness and the other is healed by sincere repentance.
But what about insincere repentance and lengthy forgiveness?
Depending on how egregious the offense is, it may take a considerable amount of time to forgive an offending party. Human beings are fallible and sometimes forgiveness becomes a process. Yet, as God sees one struggle in moving toward forgiveness, His Fatherly heart is joyful as any parent is when watching their child make spiritual progress. The important aspect of forgiveness is neither to be slack or too eager to forgive when not ready to completely forgive. Continue to pray and continue to move toward forgiveness, especially when the offense is devastating. As for insincere repentance, the offended needs to be extremely careful! If one thinks insincere repentance is the mark of the offender, such an “observation” may be commensurate with weeding another’s garden or looking at the speck in another’s eye. However (and this is a big however), if the offending party continues to repeat the offense on a regular basis, then a change of heart or “turning away” from the sin is not evident. There should be fruit that demonstrates sincere repentance. And, no, it does not have to be a series of mea culpas. Yet, there does need to be something noticeably different in the offender’s behavior.
Can you give an example of when an offense irrevocably destroys a relationship?
Within the context of marriage, adultery is the first one – and sometimes only one – that is recognized as a basis for divorce within many (if not most) Protestant sects. Yet, what of spousal rape? Physical abuse that blackens eyes or breaks bones? Emotional abuse? A spouse not returning at night on a regular basis (a form of abandonment)? Clearly these types of behaviors go to the heart of the marital relationship, so why are they not a basis for divorce? In God’s “economy” there is really no legitimate reason that these behaviors are not grounds for divorce. Unfortunately, the Western Church in its overall “protest” (Protestant) fails to grasp the concept of ekonomia that has resided within the historic Church. In its zeal to re-balance the scales imbalanced by Roman Catholicism’s excesses, the Reformation oft times throws the baby out with the bath water. Add into the equation its own form of juridical legalism inherited from the Catholic Church, and today’s Protestant sects can become loveless pits of conditional love and harsh judgmentalism. Such things are not part of the Kingdom of God.
What about non-marital relationships – can they be irrevocably destroyed by an offense?
Any relationship can be lost when not attended to and Christ makes it clear that relationships are the most important thing we do. Love God and love others are the basis for the most simplified distillation of the Gospel message. When we fail to love, we can easily fall into neglect of our critical relationships, as well as sin. Perhaps one of the deadliest offenses to the non-marital relationship is gossip and there is far too much gossip within the church. Another example is the “gutless” Christian. Christ is both the Lamb of God and the Lion of Judah and, within these polar opposites, Christ embodies a completely balanced persona in His humanity. Often times contemporary Christians fail to obey God, because they are afraid of man. Complicating this quandary is the American Christian affinity for “interpreting” the Bible literally or with a post-Reformation hermeneutic. In both instances, the Christian can readily justify an abusive pastor, by failing to align one’s self with the historical church, its creeds and councils, and its checks and balances. Today’s Christian landscape has become a hodge-podge of non-denominational “churches” lead by “self-ordained” pastors. Unfortunately, not only can these conditions lead to cult formation, the pressure to conform overrides critical thinking. And let someone “rock the boat” with a legitimate concern or biblical basis for disagreement, and the group pounces on the individual in attempts to bring them back to the “fold.” The damage done to these strong individuals, both by excommunication or dis-fellowship, can be devastating and effectively destroy a non-marital relationship.
Lastly, it is important to remember that God provides healing for both parties to an offense. It is also important to understand that healing does not automatically equate to the restoration of a relationship. Sometimes it may take years for a relationship’s full restoration, even though both parties are presently healed by the respective mechanisms God provides. It is particularly important to note that an offense can be so egregious and consequence-laden that a relationship is permanently destroyed (e.g. spousal rape). However, even though marriages and non-marital relationships may not withstand human hurt, all of us can be reconciled to God through forgiveness and repentance.


