Divinity Professor and Pastor of Harvard University’s Memorial Church, Matthew Ichihashi Potts, defines forgiveness as the commitment to forgo retaliation. He writes in Forgiveness an alternative account, “Forgiveness turns away from retaliation, not only because it rejects the satisfaction of its own understandable desire for vengeance, but also because it denies the possibility of eradicating its own pain. The loss it has suffered is so grave and irredeemable that it can only accept the ineradicability of its loss while turning away from any customary or compensatory satisfactions.”
Forgiveness an alternative account, is a complicated book, and for me, a difficult read. I had several major challenges in reading this book.
First, the interwoven detailed book reports of four books, which each describe a wrong or series of wrongs, caused me more than a little confusion. Each novel serves as a focal point for the author to develop his ideas. Although they all sound interesting, I had not read any of these novels, when I first read Potts’ book:
• The Buried Giant by Kazuo Ishiguro;
• Gilead by Marilynne Robinson;
• LaRose by Louise Erdrich;
• Beloved by Toni Morrison.
I enjoy books that open me to new ideas and sources. I enjoy using a highlighter, a dictionary, a notepad (often the book margins), and a search engine when I read for fun. Part of the fun is learning new things. Nonetheless, I felt adrift as I read the plots and character development from the four novels, and how the author felt these things related to his philosophical and theological arguments. His review of Latin and Greek terminology and a number of theology and philosophy tracts was more than an adequate opportunity for me to use my library and search engines. It is quite possible that I will one day choose to read all of his cited novels. But in the short run, it made it harder for me to read his book. After my first reading of Potts' book, Forgiveness, I was inspired to read and study Toni Morrison’s Beloved, a novel with more than enough challenges of its own. When I then reread Forgiveness, particularly parts that were written about Beloved, I was better able to follow Potts' attempts to resolve relevant philosophical, theological, and literary conflicts.
I also found the attempt to relate a Biblical God’s forgiveness with human forgiveness challenging. I have long felt that the Bible is multiple books, written by many authors, in several different languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin), during multiple eras of history. I don’t think the God described in most Old Testament writings bears much similarity to the God described in the New Testament. The former is harsh, judgmental, and prone to rage. Much of the Old Testament is focused on barbaric punishments inflicted by this vengeful God. In contrast, the New Testament is largely about forgiveness and redemption. Like the original books, a book about Biblical forgiveness would be incomplete if it didn’t attempt to synthesize paradoxical and contradictory concepts. To his credit, Pastor Potts does not shy away from this task. He includes numerous other pastors’ sermons and exegeses and contrasts them. His attempts to discuss resurrection, from multiple perspectives included the caveat that God and god’s intentions and motivations are unknowable by us mortals.
I have no doubt I will continue to reread Forgiveness, over the years. Already, I have tried to incorporate a number of ideas from pastor Potts’ book, which are important to my maturing worldview. Among those concepts are:
1. The notion that forgiveness is essentially about the commitment to not retaliate or seek revenge
2. An alternative view of forgiveness that does not require:
a. forgetting;
b. letting go of righteous indignation and resentment;
c. the economic model of repayment; and/ or
d. confession, contrition, apology, or recompense by the wrongdoer, as a precondition for the wronged person to choose to forgive.
3. The role of grief as a critical element of forgiveness.
a. To neither suppress nor stamp down the memory
b. To not ignore how our lives are changed by our history of trauma
c. To remember rightly
d. To remember in sequential steps as advised by Dante in Purgatory; whereby one first forgets, after drinking the waters of Lethe; and then remembers (rememory is an important concept in Beloved) after drinking the waters of Eunoe.
4. The separation of the concept of forgiveness into individual, dyadic (wronged and wrongdoer), and community topics.
5. Comparisons of the perspectives on forgiveness based upon systems of law and justice from systems of religion.
6. Emphasis on the idea that the original sin of American Christianity was, and remains, its support of white supremacy, and its part in trying to gloss over slavery and its legacies.
7. The authenticity with which Potts approaches the Bible, biblical exegesis, and literature, including four of his personal favorites novels, requires that the reader put aside the ideas of:
a. perfect heroes, and
b. happy endings in circumstances where there are no happy endings to be found (slavery, genocide, dehumanizing ‘others’).
8. The encouragement to read and study Beloved by Toni Morrison. The look at United States history through the prism of slavery, which Nobel laureate, Toni Morrison, provides is akin to watching Ken Burns’s PBS documentary on America and the Holocaust. They force us to confront the difficult realities of our national past.
9. An introduction to the work of author Kazuo Ishiguro (The Buried Giant). This parlayed into my wife and I watching the Netflix movie called Living, which had been written by Kazuo Ishiguro (Ikiru), and starred Bill Nighy.
Matthew Ichihashi Potts’ book, Forgiveness an alternative account, will take a place near Harriet Lerner’s The Dance of Anger on my bookshelf. Lerner’s book emphasizes that anger is a normal emotion, and trying to suppress our feelings of anger can sometimes be akin to denying hunger or thirst. Potts has focused my attention on the implications of retaliation and considering reasons not to exact revenge. His book goes on to develop the case that trying to erase wrongdoing or trying to excuse injustice, is counterproductive to the goal of learning from wrongdoing and developing the resilience to overcome injustice.