hello? Anybody here?
Yeah, I noticed that too. Creepy, eh?
Perhaps the board came down right when jlzania was posting?
Well, the board sure is fast when there is nobody here!
Hopefully, jlzania will be back soon to complete an OP to this thread.
Can we forgive the board for this?
I don’t think so…it goes beyond the limits of my abilty to forgive, sorry.
** Yes the board ate my post yesterday **
During WWII, Simon Wiesenthal was presented with a rather unique dilemma. A brief description follows:
Wiesenthal details his reaction in his book, “The Sunflower”. He remained silent-unable to forgive the SS officer for the crimes that he had perpetrated.
He also met with the officer’s mother after the war. She insisted that her son was a “good” boy, a devout Catholic that had been lead astray by the Hitler Youth . Although she was aware that the SS had committed horrible crimes-she insisted that *her son * would have never participated in mass murder. Wiesenthal ** did not ** disillusion her.
- Should Wiesenthal have forgiven the young officer or are there certain crimes that are so heinous that they become, by definition, unforgivable? Was he right to remain silent when questioned by the officer’s mother?
- Can you forgive on behalf of others? Who is entitled to speak (forgive) on behalf of the victims?
- Does repentance alone justify and bring about forgiveness?
- By granting absolution, do you somehow lessen or diminish the gravity of the act?
- Is there such a thing as collective guilt or collective forgiveness?
-
I cannot judge his actions, only to say that I would have probably done the same, whatever my feelings on the matter.
-
No, I don’t think so, you can only forgive the hurt that you have suffered - if someone rapes my wife, I can only forgive the hurt that has been done to me by the act, it is up to my wife to forgive the hurt done to her.
-
No - forgiveness comes from within the forgiver, and although repentance on behalf of the perpetrator may make it easier to forgive, it is perfectly possible to forgive someone who hasn’t yet repented (or who never will repent). And to withhold forgiveness long after it has been sought.
-
No, the perpetrator of the act must still face the consequences of his/her actions - if I cheat on my wife, she may forgive me, but I will need to live with the fact that she doesn’t trust me for a long time after the fact.
-
Yes, as a white South African, I benefited from a system of government that persecuted people on the basis of the colour of their skin. I recieved better healthcare, education, protection under the law and oppurtunities than my fellow citizen. As a result, even though I never, personally persecuted anyone, I was part of a system that did so and am guilty of (and tainted by) its prejudices. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission that was set up upon the dismantling of Apartheid is an example of the possiblity of collective forgiveness. The fact that South Africa was able experience a peaceful transition to a democratic government is largly due to the attitudes of collective forgiveness demonstrated by many of the formally oppressed peoples, given witness by the reports of the TRC.
I think that Wiesenthal was in no position to offer any form of forgiveness to the SS officer. The SS officer, it would seem, became nervous about his afterlife and wanted to die with a clear conscience. He probably should have asked a Christian rather than a Jew for forgiveness, it is my understanding that “accepting” Christ as your saviour wipes the slate clean even after a lifetime of evil. Jewish people are supposed to atone for their sins directly to God, and no person can pass judgement.
In fact the officers request is the perfect example of Nazi arrogance. Wanting absolution for ones crimes is understandable, but there is no evidence that the SS stooge did anything to make life easier for any victim that was facing certain death. If I knew that the SS officer in question had gone out of his way to give somebody food or save somebody from medical testing, then I would maybe tell them that God would take that into consideration.
My father will turn 81 this May. There are days I look into his eyes and know he did not sleep well the night before. He dreams, a lot, of his time on a train thru Germany and in a concentration camp. (I do not know which one, I don’t know if he does, he rarely speaks aloud of the details.)
He was a prisoner for over 120 days, far less than most, but that does not diminish his pain.
I don’t think the idea of forgiveness is even a thought that crosses his mind. He lived this, he continues to live this, no one has or ever will ask for his forgiveness; I think he tries hard not to dwell on the depth of the inhumanity he lived through.
I don’t know if he would forgive a POW guard if he was asked to, I will ask him tonight though. I don’t know that I could, not when I see the depth of pain that my father still carries, over fifty years after his release.
I don’t know if I have the right to not forgive on behalf of my father, but it’s the way I feel about it. It’s not a hatred or something I actively pursue, it’s just something I know I feel when I think about it.
I do not hold Germany responsible, and I do believe there has been a collective forgiveness of Germany of sorts, the place, the time but not the individuals who perpetrated the acts.
Nope. Forgiveness is a choice made by an individual.
To the remainder of the questions, I agree with grimpixie completely.
Oh, I’ll also add that while collective guilt and collective forgiveness exist, they do not take the place of individual guilt and individual forgiveness.
**1) Should Wiesenthal have forgiven the young officer or are there certain crimes that are so heinous that they become, by definition, unforgivable? Was he right to remain silent when questioned by the officer’s mother? **
“Should” is atricky word to apply to forgiveness. Forgiveness cannot be forced, one either has the capacity to forgive a particular act or one does not. True, one might sometimes feel an ethical obligation to try to forgive, but the attempt does not guarantee forgiveness. Speaking the words insincerely, or even sincerely but without true conviction, is not forgiving.
As to Wiesenthal, I do not think that I would have been able to forgive the officer in his situation. Perhaps more to th epoint, I would not have felt any ethical obligation to try and forgive.
I think staying silent with the mother was the right decision. The officer was dead; destroying the illusions of his mother would cause her pain without benefitting anyone else. Causing pain to no purpose is not a good act.
**2) Can you forgive on behalf of others? Who is entitled to speak (forgive) on behalf of the victims? **
No. Forgiveness is an expression of my heart. No one else can speak for my heart, and I can speak for no one else’s.
**3) Does repentance alone justify and bring about forgiveness? **
No. Contrition and attempts at recompense are reflections of the heart and mind of the guilty party. Such acts may inspire forgiveness, but they are neither necessary nor sufficient to create forgiveness.
**4) By granting absolution, do you somehow lessen or diminish the gravity of the act? **
No. One could argue, though, that the specific element of damage to the relationship between transgressor and victim is ameliorated by forgiveness. In Grimpixie’s example, forgiveness would indicate that his wife had overcome her natural resentment and anger at his faithlessness. As he notes, though, even within said relationship loss of trust remains. Forgiveness does not erase the crime; it simply provides a chance for theparties to “move beyond” teh crime in their personal relationship.
Is there such a thing as collective guilt or collective forgiveness?
No. Guilt and forgiveness are individual qualities. Grimpixie, to again turn to his example, suffers individual guilt to the extent that he willingly participated in and accepted the benefits of an unjust system. He is not guilty because he is a white South African; he is guilty because he individually and willingly accepted the unjust benefits of his position. Said guilt would be ameliorated, of course, by any actions he undertook individually and willingly to resist, undermine, or overthrow said system.
With respect to the Truth and Reconcilliation Commission, I see it not as an example of “collective forgiveness”, but rather as a shining example of how a political or social structure can help its members individually forgive and transcend grievous wrongs. The Commission did not forgive for the people; the Commission helped people find it in themselves to forgive.
This is too heavy for me to do much, but I’ll venture that repentance/forgiveness for these crimes is impossible for humans. Repentance requires some sort of restitution (IMHO) and clearly cannot be accomplished. Forgiveness requires action by the offended. Mostly, they’re dead!
When I was a kid, the barber gave me too much change for a haircut. Being a kid, I didn’t figure it out for a few years. I went back to the barber to pay him back, but he had died. I still feel bad about it.
How on earth can us regular people forgive what the Nazis did, when I can’t restore a lousy few bucks I accidently took?
Fair comments… although, had it not been for the concept of a collective responsibility and hence a collective guilt, I do not think that there would have been any feelings of individual guilt - i.e. it would have been too easy to say “I was a child - I had no choice in the matter - therfore I cannot feel guilty about it.” But the fact is that I benefited from the system, and that makes me an implicit perpetrator of it.
I guess the role of the TRC was more that of a “national priest” pronouncing the forgiveness that the majority of the oppressed people seemed to want to express (and whites needed to hear) but didn’t have the means to…
Gp
I agree: collective guilt and forgiveness are “social fictions” which can sometimes serve a noble purpose. Unfortunately, like all social fictions they can be a double-edged sword.
I daresay that “collective guilt,” as with all feelings of guilt, best serves its purpose when it is used as impetus to keep the failures of the past in mind, with the intention of not repeating them.
Do I feel “guilty” because I’m white and white people enslaved other people and invaded people’s homes? Nope. But I maintain a sense of understanding, and the fervent wish for myself and my society not to repeat those actions.
But then, people love to feel guilty for some reason.
Not quite correct. Jewish people are supposed to atone for their sins against God directly to God. But for sins against other people, God will not grant forgiveness until the wronged person has.