Summary
For this assignment, the article by Kim et al. entitled “A Theological and Psychological Defense of Self-forgiveness: Implications for Counseling” was chosen. It was published in 2014 in the Journal of Psychology & Theology, and the interconnection between spirituality and mental health assistance is emphasized in the text. The primary topic of the article by Kim et al. (2014) is self-forgiveness, which is the vital step in finding moral balance after a critical situation when the person has to stop generating negative thoughts about themselves.
The authors aim to answer several questions about self-forgiveness and its theological and psychological justification. Kim et al. (2014) ask whether the essence of God’s forgiveness is different from self-forgiveness, what the critical features of self-forgiveness are, and how scholars can answer rationally to the critique of self-forgiveness. Therefore, the discussed article focuses on the interactions between self-forgiveness and divine forgiveness, which entails similarities and differences.
The authors relate to these questions while laying out four implications for therapists working with individuals struggling with self-forgiveness. Many patients need to be given the option of forgiveness for themselves as one form of the fundamental characteristics of reconciliation when guided by a therapist who comprehends the essence of forgiveness for oneself (Kim et al., 2014). Kim et al. (2014) expand on the sub-topic about the difference between divine forgiveness and self-forgiveness using references to the Holy Scriptures. This gesture liberates the person symbolically, which makes it a vital part of self-forgiveness.
While accepting responsibility for the evil committed against someone else, asking for forgiveness does not negate what happened previously. It follows that the only individual who can show forgiveness is the one who was wrong (Kim et al., 2014). Before making amends, God waits for individuals to approach Him via faith in Jesus, confessing their crimes and asking for His pardon. It is possible to find this idea in Colossians 1:19-23 and Acts 2:38 (English Standard Version Bible, 2001). The primary difference between forgiving oneself and forgiving others is that only the Lord has the power to pardon sins (Kim et al., 2014). Forgiving oneself and inter-person forgiveness are identical to the forgiveness of God in that they both extend unconditional affection toward someone.
For some people, forgiving oneself involves passing judgment on oneself. According to religious ideas, God is the sole authority capable of assessing human errors, as stated in Matthew 7:1–5 and 1 Corinthians 4:4 (English Standard Version Bible, 2001). Self-forgiveness would be unreasonable as a judgment, and claiming that people assess the extent of their guilt would contradict both who people are and who God is. Self-forgiveness results in self-reconciliation because the self becomes not merely the sinner but additionally the beneficiary of the blessing of forgiveness (Kim et al., 2014). It implies that when trying to demonstrate that the person has received self-forgiveness, the self-forgiver has to implement the necessary changes in their worldview and behavior.
Another question the authors discuss is connected with the rational justification of the criticism of self-forgiveness. People typically understand the harm that others do to them, and they understand that they harmed others (Kim et al., 2014). Even though they might not always understand the exact consequences of their actions on other individuals, they still can evaluate their wrong actions if they are objective enough (Kim et al., 2014). In this case, psychologists insist that people should be less strict with themselves even though the actions they have committed before do not correspond to their moral standards (Kim et al., 2014). Since forgiveness requires more than merely releasing the burden of resentment or enduring any wrong, self-forgiveness should extend further as an ethical virtue.
Analysis
Since I am deeply concerned about self-reflection and self-acceptance, I selected this article. I was interested in reading what researchers thought, what studies have been done on the subject, how the authors might clarify divine forgiveness, and how these two topics are intertwined because they are closely associated with self-forgiveness. I agree with Kim et al.’s perspective and reasoning, and I appreciated how they structured the process sequentially, showing how the whole thing begins with someone realizing the sin or error, seeking God for forgiveness, and then forgiving oneself and making amends with the Lord, other people, and self. It is written in Matthew 22:39 that people should love their neighbor as they love themselves, and everything starts from love to God (English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Matthew 22:39). It is impossible to accept one’s own mistakes without being modest and understanding that love is the basis of all processes for Christians.
I also had critical situations when I could not cope with guilt from my actions and doubted whether I was moral. My spirituality assisted me in finding support, and after I acknowledged my sins, I felt God forgave me. It allowed me to understand that I should continue living without feeling the burden of my sins, and I also forgave myself. I thought about the lines from Romans 5:8, where it is written that God forgives sinners instantly, even when they do not understand that they are sinning. He does not expect people to be sinless. However, He expects people to repent and to become better (English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Romans 5:8). It does not mean that a Christian should not be strict with oneself in moral judgment. However, they should remember that humans can make mistakes, and God forgives them. Therefore, they should also try to forgive themselves and continue living without guilt for their errors.
The article’s content by Kim et al. corresponds to the ideas typically discussed in the context of Christian morality. The three types of forgiveness, divine, self, and person-to-person, have parallels and differences that people must be aware of to put into practice (Kim et al., 2014). Self-forgiveness tracks human development in person-to-person and divine forgiveness (Kim et al., 2014). My life experience correlates to these ideas because I learned how to be more forgiving to other people after I understood how to forgive myself. This knowledge allowed me to apply religious knowledge and understand the essence of God’s love. In all cases, the points made by Kim et al. about the connections between religious spirituality and psychology have a rational justification and can be illustrated by the evidence from real-life experience.
Christians nonetheless have to seek God to pardon their faults because self-forgiveness is incapable of relieving humans of their errors. In the end, self-forgiveness cannot be substituted with acceptance of oneself. Alternatively, people face the philosophical problem of being unable to demonstrate other ethical values, including generosity, regard for oneself, and the virtue of self-love that the Bible encourages (Kim et al., 2014). In contrast to forgiving other people, self-forgiveness must result in a feeling of self-reconciliation (Kim et al., 2014). The self-forgiver forgives those willing to accept it (Kim et al., 2014). In simple terms, reconciliation is a crucial step in self-healing because it involves offering and receiving a pardon from oneself.
Application
As a therapist, I would carefully evaluate every patient to see whether they had someone in their circle with whom they might need to reconcile. I would investigate if the client encountered an individual obstacle that necessitated self-forgiveness. If my client wanted to ask the Lord for forgiveness, I would also determine it. I would clarify how forgiving oneself can make one feel less sad, angry, and embarrassed. Where necessary, I encourage forgiveness as a professional counselor and Christian.
Forgiving oneself to these people could be difficult due to diminished worth, low self-esteem, humiliation, remorse, and anger toward self. Based on the research, self-forgiveness should include a part focused on others when an individual harms another, such as when the culprit apologizes to the offender and reinforces their dedication to their ideals (Neff, 2023). In their method, they go through the four Rs of real self-forgiveness that might be applied in a therapeutic setting (Neff, 2023). These principles include responsibility, remorse, restoration, and renewal (Neff, 2023). Therefore, the client should cope with the negative feelings they experience and cause guilt and shame using the therapeutic patterns.
For instance, responsibility is manifested when someone asks for forgiveness; they accept responsibility rather than placing blame. Remorse supposes that the counselors urge people to work through complicated feelings like embarrassment in order to move on to more offense-specific sentiments, including regret, that are inclined to motivate people to make amends (Neff, 2023). The following step is restoration, which is a concerted attempt to right the wrongs, rebuild the relationships, and reaffirm any moral ideals violated (Neff, 2023). Self-forgiveness, empathy, and respect for oneself are all signs of renewal in this situation. The person experiences moral development due to this procedure (Neff, 2023). These steps show that applying the self-forgiveness principle in the counseling practice is a complicated procedure requiring the therapist’s attention to detail.
References
English Standard Version Bible. (2001). ESV Online. Web.
Kim, J. J., & Enright, R. D. (2014). A theological and psychological defense of self-forgiveness: Implications for counseling. Journal of Psychology & Theology, 42(3), 260-268. Web.
Neff, K. D. (2023). Self-compassion: Theory, method, research, and intervention. Annual Review of Psychology, 74, 193–218. Web.