By: Obed Pineda
Reconcile (v.): 1. To reestablish a close relationship between. 2. To settle or resolve (The American Heritage Dictionary, p. 700).
There is a question that, in this author’s modest assessment, is worth contemplating very attentively. What is more difficult: to ask for forgiveness or to forgive? At once, the question is already establishing that an offense has transpired from one person (the offender) toward another (the offended). There is little to no doubt that the offender would undoubtedly prefer for the offended party to simply forgive them and “let bygones be bygones,” thus relieving them from the burden of having to suffer the shame of asking for forgiveness. It would, in the offender’s opinion, speak volumes about the character of that person who willingly forgave without the need of an apology. Yet, this concept ignores one very valuable detail that is exhibited in the art of asking for forgiveness; accountability. Those who are not accustomed to apologizing to those whom they offend are the very same who continuously repeat this same action with multiple people because it has tragically become a “normal” habit for them. They deceive themselves into believing that it is the responsibility of those around them to accept that it is “who they are” and cannot change. However, the truth is to think this way is to be arrogant, disrespectful, and unloving toward one’s neighbor. Because it is painful to take accountability for their wrongdoing, the offender would most likely respond that it is easier to forgive than to ask for forgiveness. On the other hand, the offended will counterargue that it is easier to ask for forgiveness seeing as it does not invoke as many emotions as suffering an offense does. The pain and embarrassment that a person asking for forgiveness suffers is incomparable to the amount experienced by the person being insulted and offended, would likely say the person on the receiving end of the emotional injury. This thought process, too, is overlooking a precious detail tied to the art of forgiving; peace. Those who resist forgiving an individual their offenses are actively choosing to hold on to those bitter sentiments that only incubates anger and resentment, that will hatch into hatred. Those who chose to carry around these agonizing emotions with them will argue that they are owed an apology and for this reason have every right to constantly keep in mind the offender’s heinous actions as a warning to prevent themselves from being hurt a second time. Curiously, allowing oneself to believe that his mindset is justified is to be self-righteous, proud, and unloving as well. The one thing that both sides who claim they are in the “more challenging” position have in common is that neither side is showing interest in repairing the damaged relationship. Due to this travesty, it demonstrates just how shallow and brittle the connection always was evinced by how easily it was tossed aside. When either of these attitudes possess a man, it blinds him of the Divine instruction, “just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise” (Luke 6:31, cf. Matthew 7:12). Admittedly, there is no right answer to our question considering that a breach of trust is in urgent need to be repaired. What is true is that both parties must be ready and willing to do their part in order to “have gained your brother” (Matthew 18:15). The Master encountered a society that was profoundly immersed in self-righteousness and bitterness that blocked the pathway to reconciliation between fellow neighbors. A primary reason that this seemingly unmovable obstacle impeded the healing process was because a key ingredient was missing in the hearts of all those against reconciliation. Those unwilling to ask for forgiveness as those unwilling to forgive both were in dire need of repentance. It is true that the offended party most likely has nothing to repent of since they are not guilty of causing harm to their brother. However, when an individual chooses not to forgive their brother their trespass against them by harboring ill will toward them, then one becomes guilty of sin against God (cf. Matthew 18:21-35, Mark 11:25-26, Ephesians 4:31-32, Colossians 3:12-14). The pathway to repairing and restoring any relationship tested by acrimony irrefutably begins with true penitence, as exemplified in the Savior’s parable of the lost son (cf. Luke 15:11-32). The moment the younger son accepted that his actions were wrong and that he needed to correct them, repentance appeared (cf. Luke 15:17-19). Holy Writ reveals what true and acceptable penitence is when it states that “he arose and came to his father” (Luke 15:20a). The young man boldly put his words into action and did not allow uncertainty to detain him from attempting to repair his relationship with his father. The father, too, contributed to the gorgeous portrait captured by the Master’s parable as he “saw him and had compassion, and ran and fell on his neck and kissed him” (Luke 15:20b). Let us take note of what the father did not do nor say; he did not react in resentment to his son’s arrival nor did he speak to him with contempt. The father’s immediate actions unveil that he had already forgiven his son’s offenses and that he was always waiting in hope for his return. May we do the same.