Mercy as the Driving Force of Reconciliation

Reconciliation often happens spontaneously, and it is neither plannable nor producible. The peculiarity of this phenomenon may explain why reconciliation – along with forgiveness – has always been attributed in Christian theology to the realm of grace, and within this, to the virtue of mercy. In modern times, however, the latter has faced extensive criticism: Mercy consolidates an imbalance of power instead of eliminating it; it elevates itself above the law; it can never be obligatory; and it is unsuited to bringing about structural change. However, these objections can be refuted with reference to biblical sources, by analysis grounded in moral theology, and from the perspective of an inclusivist theory of virtue. On this basis, mercy and justice can be understood not only as “two sides of the same coin”, but also as personal virtues and at the same time socioethical principles. Mercy – as a gift given to those in need of help and forgiveness – must therefore be translated into (legal) structures in the same way as is justice; this is illustrated with examples from modern constitutional states.

Forgiveness – as a prerequisite for reconciliation – in turn is a free and spontaneous act based on attitudes of mercy and justice. It can never be demanded. In this regard, however, we can support ideas that ascribe a key role to mercy in an ethic of political reconciliation, and that seek to expand the concept of liberal peace – which is based primarily on the legal process via (criminal) courts and the protection of human rights. The established religions can be helpful in the context of such an ethic and comprehensive processes of dealing with the past; however, the spirit of reconciliation can only grow from within.