One important reason is that often victims of violence and injustice are urged “forgive, forgive” and even worse, “forgive and forget.” As more and more of those who have been victimized are raising their voices in theology and ethics, the simple “forgive and forget” language just doesn’t get it done. In fact, “forgive and forget” is recognized by many who have been abused as just continuing the abuse by making the person who has been harmed responsible for the moral state of the perpetrator. Our group was also conflicted over whether repentance and forgiveness can only be pursued by individuals or whether indeed communities and nations can repent and seek forgiveness.

Our breakthrough was to bring responsibility into the discussion of repentance and forgiveness. We called that chapter, “Acknowledge Responsibility for Conflict and Injustice and Seek Repentance and Forgiveness.” Those who have done harm need to take concrete responsibility for their actions whether on an individual or global scale.

The acknowledgment of responsibility means that the perpetrator of harm must engage in self-transcendence. You have to work to cultivate the virtue of empathy in order to recognize the interests and perspectives of the other.

Then and only then can you begin to let go of your own pride and defensiveness and acknowledge harm. That is the true meaning of repentance and it often also includes an offer of restitution if the victim of harm desires that.

Forgiveness may follow as the one victimized chooses to let go of grievance, but the work of cultivating the virtues of self-transcendence and empathy on the part of the victimizer goes on regardless.

So…Don Imus, a serial racist and sexist, has not learned from his past errors and his “sorry, sorry” rang hollow. Paul Wolfowitz has not clearly acknowledged responsibility and will not resign, he says. Pope Benedict, as I said in an earlier column on this site, should also have acknowledged the Catholic Church’s complicity violence in his apology—as other Popes before him have done. Those apologies were incomplete, in my view.

But the absolute worst current example of this “failure to grasp the concept” of the relationship among acknowledgment of responsibility, repentance and forgiveness is the recent testimony of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Senate Judiciary committee. The Attorney General said he did not remember 45 times before the lunch break and then concluded with an apology to the eight U.S. attorneys who had been summarily fired, saying “They deserved better from me.” What they deserved and what we all deserved was for the Attorney General to remember and acknowledge responsibility as the necessary first step to apology.

“Sorry” doesn’t get it done, Mr. Gonzales.