Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    How Can I Forgive You?: The Courage to Forgive, the Freedom Not To
    How Can I Forgive You?: The Courage to Forgive, the Freedom Not To
    How Can I Forgive You?: The Courage to Forgive, the Freedom Not To
    Audiobook7 hours

    How Can I Forgive You?: The Courage to Forgive, the Freedom Not To

    Written by Janis A. Spring, PhD and Michael Spring

    Narrated by Coleen Marlo

    4.5/5

    ()

    About this audiobook

    Until now, we have been taught that forgiveness is good for us and that good people forgive. Dr. Spring, a gifted therapist and the award-winning author of After the Affair, proposes a radical, life-affirming alternative that lets us overcome the corrosive effects of hate and get on with our lives-without forgiving. She also offers a powerful and unconventional model for genuine forgiveness-one that asks as much of the offender as it does of us.

    This bold and healing book offers step-by-step, concrete instructions that help us make peace with others and with ourselves, while answering such crucial questions as these:

    How do I forgive someone who is unremorseful or dead?
    When is forgiveness cheap?
    What is wrong with refusing to forgive?
    How can the offender earn forgiveness?
    How do we forgive ourselves for hurting another human being?
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherTantor Media, Inc
    Release dateAug 23, 2016
    ISBN9781515980988
    How Can I Forgive You?: The Courage to Forgive, the Freedom Not To

    Related to How Can I Forgive You?

    Related audiobooks

    Psychology For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Financial Reasons Not to Divorce

      Jan 9, 2019

      Statistically, approximately 50% of all first marriages end in divorce. The odds of second marriages succeeding are lower, and the odds of third marriages making it are lower still. In other words, there is an inverse relationship between the numbe

      2 min read

    • Article

      The Rise of Gray Divorce: Why and Why Not?

      Jan 23, 2019

      Till death do us part? Not so much. In the past 25 years, the divorce rate for Americans over the age of 50 has more than doubled. While divorce rates for other age groups have leveled off or even fallen, one out of every four people going through

      2 min read

    • Article

      THE RISE OF micro-cheating

      Nov 17, 2019

      THE RISE OF micro-cheating
      6 min read

    • Article

      FRIEND or FOE?

      Oct 25, 2022

      FRIEND or FOE?
      6 min read

    • Article

      Podcasts For Couples

      Jan 3, 2020

      Podcasts For Couples
      2 min read

    • Article

      Got A Friend Who's Divorced? You May Be Next, According To Science

      Aug 17, 2018

      Got a divorced friend? You might be next. It turns out that divorces are contagious. Laura Soncrant of Chicago filed for divorce in February, after her two best girlfriends got divorced. One ended her marriage three years ago, and the other got divor

      3 min read

    • Article

      Life after BETRAYAL

      May 26, 2022

      Life after BETRAYAL
      5 min read

    • Article

      An AFFAIR Tore My Life Apart

      Sep 26, 2019

      An AFFAIR Tore My Life Apart
      5 min read

    • Article

      Tell Tale Signs

      Dec 8, 2019

      Tell Tale Signs
      3 min read

    • Article

      The Husband’s View

      Aug 3, 2021

      Anna’s husband Phil Robinson says: It took Anna about five attempts to explain The 80/80 Marriage. My initial read of it was that, as long as I spent 80% of my time taking out bins and listening to Anna talk about her dreams, I could spend 20% playin

      1 min read

    • Article

      From Blame to Love

      Sep 24, 2019

      From Blame to Love
      4 min read

    • Article

      How To Forgive And Forget

      Oct 23, 2023

      Forgiveness is a huge stumbling block for many. When you don’t forgive, you carry the story of hurt within yourself for a lifetime. Eventually this hurt becomes part of the story you tell yourself. The moment you recognise the burden of that story an

      5 min read

    • Article

      The Fine Art Of Apologising

      Jul 19, 2023

      The Fine Art Of Apologising
      2 min read

    • Article

      Forgive And Forget?

      Jan 16, 2024

      THE MESSAGE IS drummed into us from childhood: forgive people who’ve wronged you, because it’s the right thing to do. Forgiveness is a virtue, we’re told—the only way for us to truly move on and heal, freed from the baggage of bearing ill will. Call

      2 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for How Can I Forgive You?

    4.5/5

    21 ratings4 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 5/5
      Thank you so much. This book helped me while going through a sudden break up with someone I was still love with. I was angry and mad about how he left things and could not understand why he was doing the things he was doing. Because things were going great. This book helped me understand his actions and where he was coming from. I was able to let go of the anger and make peace with my situation. And salvage a great friendship. I was able to communicate with him about how I was feeling in a non-confrontational way. And he was able to let his guard down and express his feelings to. Definitely recommending this book. Thank you again.

      1 person found this helpful

    • 5/5
      I'd like to see a second edition of this book. Parts of it are rather weak, but Spring's discussion of forgiveness in the last part of the book is brilliant and badly needed as a counter to the general preference for what Spring calls "cheap forgiveness" "a quick and easy pardon with no processing of emotion and no coming to terms with the injury. It's a compulsive, unconditional, unilateral attempt at peacemaking for which you ask nothing in return." I see it as when the injured, milder, more reasonable, or more compromising person takes total responsibility for the situation, digging deep to find their inner martyr, thus relieving everyone else of any need to deal with the more difficult person. After all, it is much safer to nag a mild person to forgive that to tell a more volatile person to shape up. Spring also insightfully points out that the definition of forgiveness is rather vague: "Often forgiveness is defined in such lofty, absolute terms that people can't grasp it [...] What is missing is a concrete down-to-earth vision of forgiveness--one that is human and attainable."Spring asserts, in the best part of the book (and I thought it was great), that it takes two to create Genuine Forgiveness. The hurtful party or parties need to acknowledge the wrongs and resolve to work towards improvement. It may be that both or all sides need to do this, but there will be no resolution unless they do. This really isn't, or shouldn't be such a startling idea. It says in the Bible that it is the penitent who receive God's forgiveness, but somehow this has gotten lost in the rush for "cheap forgiveness."Spring somewhat timidly introduces an important concept, which she calls "acceptance." It is a common fallacy that if one does not forgive another person, one is in a state of stress and tension resulting from active anger. This is the excuse for nagging the injured party to be forgiving, for "their own good." In fact, one may simply have decided to arrange matters to avoid the stress of dealing with a hurtful person and rarely ever think about them. Spring is arguing that it is possible to reach a state of calm and peace without forgiving the offender. To give an example, a Friend of mine has a friend, call him Foaf, whom she describes as not knowing how to behave around people. After several years of intermittently dealing with ever worsening rudeness, I decided to have not more to do with Foaf. Having turned my anger into a decision that solved the problem, I never thought about him except when Friend would nag me to forgive him. This, and not anger at Foaf caused me stress. I suggested that since she thought Foaf's behavior was inadvertent, that as his good and great friend she have a talk with him and urge him to work on his manners, but she preferred to nag me to take on the stress of experiencing and tolerating his conduct. I was now angry at Friend, not at Foaf. I shocked her by asserting that as an autonomous adult, I have the right to choose my associates.My problem with Spring's development of her concept of acceptance is that most of the section is filled with advice on weighing all the circumstances, e.g., did the injured party in some way contribute to the situation, are there circumstances in the the hurtful party's past that serve to explain his conduct? In short, all the premises that people use to argue that one never has a right to be angry, or that it is necessary to forgive. Assuming that this needs to be in the book at all, why in this particular section, rather than in a separate section at the beginning? It seems like Spring is putting an enormous burden on the person to justify choosing acceptance. I found it rather intimidating. How about this argument: after a consideration of the consequences in a particular case, and the importance of the relationship, the injured party is free to decide without elaborate justifications that it is best to terminate this relationship, or to make arrangements that lessen the stress rather than attempting to salvage a relationship? In my own example, I don't care what Foaf's childhood was like, he's not important enough to me to put up with his behavior. If he were more important to me, I'd put in more effort to work the situation out.The section on "not forgiving" is a bit weak. It's not a good choice of terms, since "acceptance" is also not forgiving. She discusses the advantages and disadvantages, but she gives us an odd example. She tells us that the two personalities unlikely to forgive are the narcissistic and the Type-A personality. She give us an example of a Type-A personality. He has waited with his family to be seated in a crowded restaurant. When they are at the head of the line, another couple pushes in. The host seats the intruders (presumably narcissists, although Spring doesn't say so) knowing that it was not their turn. Type-A pitches a fit and is promptly seated. I don't see how this is an example of not forgiving. One might argue that pitching a fit is justified: it led to a fair solution. Perhaps having gotten his turn, Type-A is perfectly happy and the incident recedes from his mind.I hope that this book has had and will have a lot of influence. A more realistic model of forgiveness is certainly needed.

      1 person found this helpful

    • 5/5
      Very well written and incredibly helpful. A Unique but sound perspective about genuine forgiveness, superficial forgiveness, and the alternative option of acceptance when the offending person shows no remorse or attempt to right their wrong. The author is open about how her writing differs from other perspectives on forgiveness and makes reference to these other sources.

      The book is both easily digested, filled with gems, helpful to understand both perspectives of offender and betrayed, and offers ACTIONABLE steps to take for all people involved. I really appreciated the later section which reviewed how attachment wounds can manifest behaviorally. I would love to read more from this author and dive even deeper into the content.
    • 5/5
      I'd like to see a second edition of this book. Parts of it are rather weak, but Spring's discussion of forgiveness in the last part of the book is brilliant and badly needed as a counter to the general preference for what Spring calls "cheap forgiveness" "a quick and easy pardon with no processing of emotion and no coming to terms with the injury. It's a compulsive, unconditional, unilateral attempt at peacemaking for which you ask nothing in return." I see it as when the injured, milder, more reasonable, or more compromising person takes total responsibility for the situation, digging deep to find their inner martyr, thus relieving everyone else of any need to deal with the more difficult person. After all, it is much safer to nag a mild person to forgive that to tell a more volatile person to shape up. Spring also insightfully points out that the definition of forgiveness is rather vague: "Often forgiveness is defined in such lofty, absolute terms that people can't grasp it [...] What is missing is a concrete down-to-earth vision of forgiveness--one that is human and attainable."Spring asserts, in the best part of the book (and I thought it was great), that it takes two to create Genuine Forgiveness. The hurtful party or parties need to acknowledge the wrongs and resolve to work towards improvement. It may be that both or all sides need to do this, but there will be no resolution unless they do. This really isn't, or shouldn't be such a startling idea. It says in the Bible that it is the penitent who receive God's forgiveness, but somehow this has gotten lost in the rush for "cheap forgiveness."Spring somewhat timidly introduces an important concept, which she calls "acceptance." It is a common fallacy that if one does not forgive another person, one is in a state of stress and tension resulting from active anger. This is the excuse for nagging the injured party to be forgiving, for "their own good." In fact, one may simply have decided to arrange matters to avoid the stress of dealing with a hurtful person and rarely ever think about them. Spring is arguing that it is possible to reach a state of calm and peace without forgiving the offender. To give an example, a Friend of mine has a friend, call him Foaf, whom she describes as not knowing how to behave around people. After several years of intermittently dealing with ever worsening rudeness, I decided to have not more to do with Foaf. Having turned my anger into a decision that solved the problem, I never thought about him except when Friend would nag me to forgive him. This, and not anger at Foaf caused me stress. I suggested that since she thought Foaf's behavior was inadvertent, that as his good and great friend she have a talk with him and urge him to work on his manners, but she preferred to nag me to take on the stress of experiencing and tolerating his conduct. I was now angry at Friend, not at Foaf. I shocked her by asserting that as an autonomous adult, I have the right to choose my associates.My problem with Spring's development of her concept of acceptance is that most of the section is filled with advice on weighing all the circumstances, e.g., did the injured party in some way contribute to the situation, are there circumstances in the the hurtful party's past that serve to explain his conduct? In short, all the premises that people use to argue that one never has a right to be angry, or that it is necessary to forgive. Assuming that this needs to be in the book at all, why in this particular section, rather than in a separate section at the beginning? It seems like Spring is putting an enormous burden on the person to justify choosing acceptance. I found it rather intimidating. How about this argument: after a consideration of the consequences in a particular case, and the importance of the relationship, the injured party is free to decide without elaborate justifications that it is best to terminate this relationship, or to make arrangements that lessen the stress rather than attempting to salvage a relationship? In my own example, I don't care what Foaf's childhood was like, he's not important enough to me to put up with his behavior. If he were more important to me, I'd put in more effort to work the situation out.The section on "not forgiving" is a bit weak. It's not a good choice of terms, since "acceptance" is also not forgiving. She discusses the advantages and disadvantages, but she gives us an odd example. She tells us that the two personalities unlikely to forgive are the narcissistic and the Type-A personality. She give us an example of a Type-A personality. He has waited with his family to be seated in a crowded restaurant. When they are at the head of the line, another couple pushes in. The host seats the intruders (presumably narcissists, although Spring doesn't say so) knowing that it was not their turn. Type-A pitches a fit and is promptly seated. I don't see how this is an example of not forgiving. One might argue that pitching a fit is justified: it led to a fair solution. Perhaps having gotten his turn, Type-A is perfectly happy and the incident recedes from his mind.I hope that this book has had and will have a lot of influence. A more realistic model of forgiveness is certainly needed.