Apologizing and forgiveness: deciphering the quandary
by Rafa Kalapa
Sometimes when someone apologizes to us, it’s hard to take it in. It’s hard to accept the apology and forgive. Other times when we want to apologize, and know that it would be a good thing to do, we resist it. We know our actions stimulated pain in someone else, and yet we don’t think we did something wrong. With the possibility of guilt and shame added to the mix, the thought of apologizing is painful. In cases like these, how do we reach reconciliation?
“My husband and I took a workshop with Marshall Rosenberg two years ago, and he said that people really practicing NVC never apologize. And ever since then, my husband has taken it as free license to be an asshole! What gives?”
The attendee at my workshop was rightfully confused by Marshall’s “koan” about apologies.
The answer boils down to two kinds of apologies:
1) Guilt-and-shame based: “I shouldn’t have spoken to you that way. I was wrong [and deserve to be hated by you]” (or some variation based on wrongness).
2) Sincere mourning: “I feel sadness and disappointment thinking about how I spoke to you. It didn’t meet my own needs for consideration and respect, and I’m sorry.”
The second version:
– is not making anybody wrong in a moralistic sense;
– demonstrates taking responsibility by acknowledging the connection between the speaker’s actions and needs
– opens the space for more connection and reconciliation, as well as self-forgiveness
The first version:
– inhibits connection by focusing on wrongness
– compounds the problem by adding guilt, shame, or justification of punishment, all of which further hinders healing
If I punch you and follow it with “I’m sorry”, it will be hard for you to receive my apology unless you trust that I fully understand the pain that that caused you. So before apologizing (which is a form of truth-telling: “I’m sorry”) we need to be prepared to listen empathically. If I run over my neighbor’s dog because I drove into her driveway too fast, I need to first listen to and receive her pain about that. Only then will she have space to receive my apology. And being present to her pain can also help connect me to the consequences of my actions which many times opens the door to the sincere mourning that constitutes a true apology.
After the aggrieved person has been heard about their pain, and after they receive a true apology, they often want to know “why did you do it?” How we handle this next step is what leads us toward or away from forgiveness as well as self-forgiveness. If we get caught up in static language, judgments and criticism of ourselves (“I ran over your dog because I’m an idiot”) we will not complete the cycle of reconciliation, and are only more likely to further spin the wheel of pain. Rather, we need to get in touch with exactly what was going on for us, and what needs were being met. (“I was in a rush to make an appointment, was distracted wondering if I had everything I needed on the passenger seat, was turning down the radio, and didn’t even consider that your dog could be in your driveway.”) Remember, this is after (1) empathy and (2) the sincere mourning that I’m calling a true apology.
Once I connect with the needs I was trying to meet by doing the thing that caused another pain, then I can forgive myself.
Many of the above examples involve a giver and a receiver. If they seem to over-represent the giver, you can re-read them from the perspective of the receiver. How might we coach a friend who is trying to apologize before they’ve given us empathy? (“My friend, before I can fully take in your apology, I want to trust that you’re fully connected with the consequences for me of your actions. Would you be willing to hear and receive that first? I want to reassure you that my intent is not to make you wrong, but to create more connection about what’s important to each of us, and how we impact each other…”)