2 minute read
The small group leader erupted in rage and publicly threw you out of his home. All because you asked a sincere question about an unsightly passage in the Old Testament. His action damaged a number of relationships. A month later, he begrudgingly says, “Fine. If I hurt your feelings, I’m sorry, OK?” If?! The pastor’s wife gossiped about you in the guise of forming a prayer chain. This tarnished your reputation. When you confront her, she defensively replies, “Sorry I didn’t handle that the best way, but I was only trying to help.” But?! Welcome to Christian culture.
Nowhere in the world will you find a more frequent use of non-apology apologies than among Christians. Because of its fixation on guilt and shame themes, Christian culture quite often teaches people to only reluctantly admit mistakes and, even then, to only do so in a such a way that still avoids culpability. Instead of being characterized by forgiveness and reconciliation like Peter, Christians readily accept God’s ultimate forgiveness while divorcing that experience from the social norms of their daily lives. It’s the ultimate habit of passive-aggressive hypocrisy.
In their book, Say the Right Thing: How to Talk About Identity, Diversity, and Justice, co-authors Kenji Yoshino and David Glasglow propose a helpful model for authentic apology. It’s far better than anything I’ve ever heard from a pulpit. They suggest an apology is only an apology if it has the four “R”s of Recognition, Responsibility, Remorse, and Redress. To be genuine, an apology must 1) contain overt recognition of a mistake, 2) take unequivocal responsibility for the error, 3) express sincere remorse for the harm, and 4) be serious about redress to set things right.
I’m beyond tired of Christian culture deploying “if”s and “but”s to hedge apologies. It’s Orwellian doublespeak, and it ain’t OK. Likewise, my patience is gone for emotionally constipated and/or psychopath Christians offering perfunctory apologies that evince little empathy and no sorrow. But more than anything I’m done with Christians thinking reconciliation doesn’t usually require a process of restorative justice. If a person lied, sincere apology requires the uncomfortable step of going back to that original conversation partner and confessing the dishonest testimony.
The original beatniks didn’t have a well-developed philosophical ethic of apology, but what they did have was a finely-tuned BS detector. They had no graciousness toward the sanctimonious rhetorical maneuvering of religious people. Sorry, church folk, but you don’t get to look humble without being humble. It was Brennan Manning who said, “The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and walk out the door and deny Him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable.”
