No, I won’t allow you to borrow my car again.

Say, for instance, Zeke lends and entrusts his car to Buster, who then takes it on a business trip to Ames, Iowa.  (Why someone would go there on purpose, I am at a loss to explain, but let’s say he does.)  Buster returns the car after the trip but the car now has some slight damage.  Seems that Buster had lent the car to another man, Dave, who is one of Buster’s best customers.  If Buster compels Dave to admit his conduct, he will lose him as a customer.  Buster decides to simply return the car to Zeke and says nothing about the damage.  Zeke notices the damage, and though he is not happy, decides to simply fix it, and move on. In making this decision, Zeke understands (because he has read the book “Peacemakers” by Ken Sande), that:

> he decides not to dwell on the matter, 

> he decides not to mention the matter again, 

> he decides not to compel Buster to make restitution,

> and he decides to not allow the incident to become a part of their relationship.

(Let’s set aside the very minor, but significant, flaws in the comprehensiveness of Sande’s book for the moment.)

So, let’s say Buster, nine months later, appears at Zeke’s door and asks for the keys to the car again.  Zeke declines, and upon seeing the vexation on Buster’s face, goes on to say that Buster returned the car damaged last time and that he will not entrust his car to Buster’s care again.

Has Zeke truly forgiven Buster if he refuses to lend him the car again?  

Some would have Zeke be a doormat, but they are wrong: that Zeke never mentioned the damage until now is a particular feature OF his forgiveness – this new request by Buster to borrow the car is a separate incident..

Is Zeke refusing to reconcile? His overlooking the previous damage shows that as far as it depends on Zeke, he is living at peace with Buster.

Is Zeke withholding forgiveness?  Not at all.  He is not refusing to reconcile because Zeke has decided to overlook previous offense by forsaking pursuit of remuneration or punitive measures.  He is not griping or grudging or gossiping to others about Buster.  He is not jeopardizing a friendship – one could even question whether there was a friendship between them in the first place.  Zeke is simply acting according to Buster’s character and his own experience of Buster’s trustworthiness.

See, if Buster’s the kind of man who fears Dave’s disapproval and loves Dave’s money to the point that he would violate Zeke’s trust and disregard Zeke’s personal worth, then Zeke is right to set this boundary for Buster.  And if Dave is the type of man who can’t see others’ obsequiousness toward him, Zeke is perfectly justified removing Buster and Dave (and their toxic favoritism) from his circle. And, while Zeke’s forgiveness is not dependent on Buster’s unwillingness to make restitution nor Dave’s lack of self-awareness, Zeke may certainly withhold entrusting his car to Buster and avoiding them both in the future.