Tuesday, 25th November 2008
In praise of remembering and recounting
I have revisited our collective past in this blog. My piece some time ago about the ransacking of the Curia was such an example. I plan to re-visit other unsavory incidents in the future. I am not the only one. Others have done the same.
Different reactions greet such pieces. I group them in this way.
“In praise of collective (pretended) amnesia” approach. There are those who say that we should not remember unpleasant incidents. Let’s forget even if we are not able to forgive, the exponents of this trend say. The past? Let us pretend that no unpleasant incidents happened in the past.
“Your side did worse” approach. When these persons read of anything they don’t like they react by jotting a list of bad things the other side did. “Whatever we did” they reason out “you did worse.”
“We are the victims” approach. Others go on a trip of partial and selective remembering and forgetting. They project themselves as virgin victims. They were on the receiving end of the stick of history.
Forgetfulness is no forgiveness
I believe that these approaches will get us nowhere. Each and every one of us as individuals has our own past and personal histories. We harbour hurts, anger, disappointments, betrayals etc. If we sweep them under the carpet or hide them in the proverbial cupboard they will grow and fester. Then, when least expected, they will come back to haunt us and cause havoc.
The way forward is facing our dark moments in the face; and the darker they are the quicker one has to face them. We have to face ourselves warts and all. Sometimes we can do this alone. At other times we need help. That’s the way things are.
The same is true about us as a country. Putting things under the collective carpet or pretending that we forgot is not a solution. Forgiveness is not possible if there is forgetfulness!
Dr Klaus Vella Bardon kindly sent me the Longford Lecture delivered by Archbishop Desmond Tutu some years ago. The much loved Archbishop said:
“Mercifully, we don't possess a fiat by which we can declare "let bygones be bygones" and they dutifully become bygones and go and lie down quietly. They have an uncanny capacity to return and haunt us. An unexamined and unacknowledged past finds all kinds of skeletons emerging from all sorts of cupboards to bedevil the present. Just ask General Pinochet. As Santayana declared hauntingly: "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
Ugly things from our past
Many ugly things have happened in our recent past and there still is a lot of suffering and pain as a result. Let me, from the recent past, make a very partial and short list of dark stains on our collective consciousness:
The politico-religious controversies of the Sixties. The murder of Karin Grech and Raymond Caruana. The organised violence during several political public meetings, especially in the 1980s. The bombs that were planted in so many public and private places including the bomb placed on the door step of the Archbishop’s residence at Mdina. The shameful goings on, including systematic torture, in the Police Headquarters. The ransacking of the Curia. The use of broadcasting as a brain washing apparatus.
I am sure that the list can be, and should be expanded.
What should we do about it?
We have to face the hurts that haunt us. We have to face them together as one people. We can’t face them as one group against another. We can’t face them as one group accusing the other. That would be disastrous. We have to face them together but we have to face them honestly and in truth.
In our soul searching we should be guided by the words of wisdom that were written by St Joseph Moscato, a doctor from Naples who died in 1927: “Love the truth; show yourself to be what you are without embarrassment, without fear, without paying too much attention to what they might say about you.”
What should we do to face these and other shameful events?
A number of countries, for example Chile, in Nicaragua, in South Africa and in East Timor had set up Truth and Reconciliation Commissions to remember the past, re-live it vicariously and heal themselves.
These Commissions traded truth for an amnesty. You say the truth and then you are forgiven. It was a period of public confession and reconciliation. It hurt a lot. Some could not take it. But on the whole it was considered as an exercise which helped healing and reconciliation.
Desmond Tutu writes:
“We were exhilarated by many examples of victims forgiving the perpetrators in a display of remarkable magnanimity and generosity of spirit. It was not just black South Africans who did this. Many white South Africans did as well.”
Are we mature enough?
What happened in Malta was not on such a grand and horrible scale as what happened in South Africa and the other countries where such commissions were set up. True. Perhaps this method is not adaptable for our country. This is possible. But we need to find a method to exorcise ourselves from the demons we hid in our cupboards.
Unless we face the hurts of the past and heal them we will continue to be influenced negatively. We need to exorcise these demons and heal these hurts.
Any ideas how we can do this in a mature way?
Till next time I wish you all good bye and good luck.
RSS
Comments
You again assume to be the only legitimate judge and jury. Your understanding of reconciliation stops at establishing guilt and power positions . How many times do you need to hear that in negating the pain of others and in declaring that some events never happened or should not even be discussed you demean the pain of others and throttle truth? If you do not perceive that than do not be so dismayed that some of all persuasion will go away with the impression that you are simply out for your pound of flesh. I will resign myself to letting you have the last word if that comforts your sense of righteous indignation.I won't however, give up hope that at some point in time your perceptions may change and that you might try to walk in the painful shoes of the 'others'.
You make it a habit not to reply to my requests for clarification of some of your more outrageous assertions. The most reasonable explanation would be that on checking what you had written you found yourself just as baffled as your readers. Undeterred you simply change tack and plod on heaping more howlers on to your previous ones.
I do not agree with you that language is necessarily "the currency of truth". In the wrong hands it can be the currency of lies such as when it is used to defame and to accuse innocent people of doing things they have never done or holding prejudices that they abhor.
Reconciliation is not a concept you seem familiar with. You demean the pain of others when you insist that some events did not happen or are indeed a fabrication and when you flippantly insist on leaving out past pain. You claim the role of the only legitimate arbiter scuppering any attempt at rational discussion . I will leave you alone with your delusion if you find that comforting, but please do not insist that you are for any reconciliation yet, the last line in your comment belies this. I will nonetheless still remain hopeful that you can experience a change in perception.
My apologies if you perceive any insult in the discussion. Please understand that just as you carry your pain, others walk with theirs everyday too. Some have for a very long time indeed!
I wish you well.
I have read your latest dissertation without finding any reply to my previous questions - but I did find new perplexities, for example your assertion that I insist to "demean the pain of others". Where and when did I ever do that?
Neither did I ever claim to be in possession of "the absolute truth". I am always open to persuasion by comprehensible, intelligent and logical arguments - not by unsubstantiated strongly held opinions or by insults.
The final perplexity is your advice to "walk and carry the guilt of the other". This implies that reconciliation should be based on a lie!
@ Dr Saliba
Do not think of discussion as a waste of time. Language as the currency of truth and healing is a beautiful tool. Why are you so insistent on demeaning the pain of others? What can you possibly hope to achieve through that? My comment refers to the futility of negating the pain of thousands by assuming that only the pain of the other thousands merits the utmost consideration. Professing a commitment to reconciliation and establishing the truth would then be rendered a hollow exercise. As you seem convinced that yours is the absolute truth I can only hope that the great majority of Maltese would like to move away from tribal absolutes and discover meaningful dialogues in equitable spaces. I would welcome that opportunity. The courage to walk and carry the guilt of the other so that he/she can be reconciled as one’s equal is difficult and goes beyond a forgiveness which merely aims at establishing positions of power.
@ Victoria Grech
My apologies for any overindulgence in tribalism.
Seddaq il-ghaqda fil-Maltin u s-sliem
This is a quote from l-Orizzont (3\11\1984 which was quoting you and EFA in the Daily Express “EFA; I feel violent eruptions –soon And if that happens, then they quoted you ....in these tightly knit islands it will make Beirut look like a joke” In court you claimed that the Daily Express misquoted you but you did nothing to correct that paper.
You lost that court case and if you feel that I am being unfaithful to these facts you can take me to court.
Readers may get the full facts of your libel case when they follow this link.
http://docs.justice.gov.mt/SENTENZI2000_PDF/MALTA/CIVILI,%20PRIM%20AWLA/2003/2003-01-29_1576-1999-1_16700.PDF
"It would be rash for the electorate to assume this without credible assurances. "
In 1996 pre election campaign this is what the PN was warning! Don't vote PL or we ll go back to the 80s! As everyone knows none of this happened (It was a disasterous 2 years for PL but for other reasons). Please name an act of violence perpetrated by PL in the 1996-1998 legislature.
I find high faluting bombastic rhetoric perplexing and amusing rather than enlightening. Please explain in plain language where we could trace your "enlightened historian" and where or when he said that "the sixties were Malta's democratic Garden of Eden" or how at the time "we loved each other to bits". Was your "damnation psychological terror" real or was it only a "fabrication" and an "attempt at revisionism"? Did Christ declare that his Kingdom was not of this earth because all the time it was actually your blasphemous "Republic of Christ"? And finally what did this imaginary Republic do?
Something tells me I should not have asked!
Dr Saliba, Mr Buttigieg, we are Maltese first and then PN or PL. Let's not forget this. Give it a rest. Please?
Seddaq il-ghaqda fil-Maltin u s-sliem
@ Father Joe Borg.
You may be full of good intentions like many of us out here but do you really see yourself as the ideal person to mediate between ‘us and them’?
You might have had your good reasons when you compared Malta with Beirut but can’t you see that that put you in the arena of ‘us and them’?
@ Father Joe Borg.
A quick look at the comments would show you that you are being lauded by the PN sympathisers and opposed by the others; does this tell you that the Nationalists want reconciliation and the Laburisti want a status quo? Even if that were a fact it would prove that the self appointed mediator is not doing a good job.
And you want to press on regardless? I’ll see you after the show.
I am an optimist. but several comments on this blog sadden me. It is very clear that many people are not ready to listen and to dialogue. They are ready to twist what one says and quote it out of context.
It is very clear that the us versus them mentality is alive and kicking.
It is very clear that for some the only way forward is "you did worse then us" mentality. For some others the way forward seem to be general amnesia. They long for collective dementia.
There are other who are ready to dialogue and discuss.
that attitude gives me hope.
So I will keep on writing.
@ The enlightened historian
Where exactly are the concrete facts proving the sixties were Malta's democratic Garden of Eden? Which historian was it exactly that concluded that all was rosy and we all loved each other to bits? Discrimination, violence, the hellfire and damnation psychological terror were really all a fabrication and attempts at revisionism. That is truly enlightening. Then half of the population did not exist and the Republic of Christ flourished did it?
@father Joe
If your good intention is to establish a neutral space to consider reconciliation then this is not it. The notion of reconciliation aims at an equitable status where both parties can walk away as equals not where the act of magnanimous forgiveness assumes that only the other is guilty. This will only feed feelings of vengeance in years to come, couple that with a selective inclusion of past pain and the scenario becomes piteous.
I do believe that we need a mechanism to help put the wheels in motion; we speak loftily of intercultural dialogue but fail miserably when it comes to ‘intra-cultural dialogue. We should acknowledge that ours is a shaky identity and the allegiance of some is not to a whole.
Lesser fry in the LP are now hinting that the new leader's casual mentioning of "past mistakes" should be interpreted as a full apology for past political violence and that we may assume that no future government would dream of reintroducing it because it would be suicidal. In view of the disquieting fact that relics from that violent past are emerging and acquiring positions of prominence, the anxieties of the electorate are being exacerbated and these should be allayed by a responsible categorical admission that one of the admitted mistakes was indeed the state-tolerated political violence, that the violence is regretted and that it would not be allowed to recur. It would be rash for the electorate to assume this without credible assurances.
It is not Fr Joe Borg's fault if, after he takes the horses to the trough, they refuse to drink.
@ Franco Farrugia. This priest is one with a mission, as holy as the Christian Crusades-to save our Holy Land from the Partit Laburista.
Empty phrases, personal opinions based on fables and not a single argument that has not been rebutted by facts and concrete evidence already.
If I were in your shoes (but then, I am not!), I would be very careful about what my real intentions are.
My guess is that you need simpler and kinder language to explain to your private self the uncomfortable realities you wish not to discuss and hope to obliterate. This is assuming of course that you have the merciful ability to expunge resistant pain from the collective memory of thousands of Maltese minds. I have long ago accepted that cognitive dissonance is the refuge of the politically pseudo pious. I understand very well that no reconciliation is possible without the courage to walk some distance from one's own pain. There is no other way to resolution ,empty platitudes regarding reconciliation will sound hollow indeed otherwise. Reconciliation requires acceptance of what befell us and the other, don't confuse it with forgiveness they are not interchangeable. Forgiveness (particularly that with precondition) is not sufficient for reconciliation, .
I do find engaging a brick wall in conversation mildly challenging but can't say I won't honestly try.
'police was then vested in the MLP'
Elements of the police force that were involved in the violence were given promotions during the PN administrations!! It seems the politicians have closed this open wound for good!! this is just you, everyday trying to reinforce and nurture the belief that PN should reign supreme!! You avidly criticise the decline in democratic ideals in the 80s when you're still so much in love with a one party ''dictatorship' [sic]. I voted both PN and MLP, you ll have to understand that there are more pending issues at stake right now that will help me decide for the next election. I cant afford to base my decision on political behaviours that cannot be repeated by any party without committing political suicide!! 25years of being in the opposition are enough to punish mlp for any misbehaviour.
Samples of manipulation of the truth in your comment:
a) The Church has already officially apologised for any share in the hurt caused by the politico-religious dispute of the 60s in clear unambiguous terms. It is the MLP that has never done so.
b) The NP could not have had any "stake" in the state-sponsored violence that occurred during the Mintoff-KMB era because control of the police was then vested in the MLP. As soon as the NP regained power this state-sponsored violence was terminated at once and any jubilant violence after that election was stamped out immediately and the culprits prosecuted.
c) It is not true that any "mlp leader has voiced an apology" in any unambiguous terms. An incidental mention that the MLP had made "mistakes" without specifying that these mistakes were criminal acts of state-endorsed political violence is not admissible as an apology .
The MLP officialdom has never intimated that it admits its pedigree of violence from the Mintoff-KMB era as one of its "mistakes", it has never apologised for it and has never regretted it officially and publicly. It has only tried to justify it by ridiculous excuses.
Quote mining as usual...
It was the maltese revolution for all I care!!! ... I was refering to the sixties... l-interdett!!
You then decided to shift to the 80s and name every mlp injustice. I just focused on what the church did and how Fr Borg interpreted it.
Anyway, Your conclusion is that we should all be held at ransom of this huge apology we should all be expecting from the mlp and vote Pn forever and ever and ever and ever [amen]. Not too many people are making a huge thing out of all the past violence because the politicians aren't. They meet in parliament and also have friendly chats with each other. Why should I still feel sore about the past when the big players from both ends are now sharing coffee and cake. Your motivation is clear, Dont vote mlp because they are still those swines you saw in the past. Its unbelievable that the PN zealots are still trying to get some leverage from the pain of those who suffered in the past to foster further political polarisation.
The answers to your rhetorical questions are explicitly given or clearly implied in my previous comments if you take the trouble to read them slowly and to digest them. I will not have my time wasted by unnecessary repetitions in simpler language.
During the evanescent 1996-1998 blip of governing the MLP was so preoccupied with its own internal back-stabbing and its own desperate attempt to survive its own internal enmities that it had no energy left to tackle its political adversaries. Any more hints?
I take note that now you are pleading that you care about the MLP political violence whereas only 42 hours ago you were boasting "for all I care!!!" Don't blame me for your fickleness.
The Germans, Italians and Japanese have given ample proof, a long time ago, of their regret for what they did 60 years ago. The MLP has still not shown any official regret for the state-endorsed violence of the Mintoff-KMB era and the lesser fry of the party are engaged full time in trying to justify. That is the big difference!
Fair arbiters who truly disregard the biases built into their political or ethical beliefs, and/or commitments to a social group are not a blessing the Maltese nation can boast of yet.
RE "We should be pragmatic and confine our consideration to the last time when today's main parties were in power etc......for a length of time sufficient to leave a clear imprint. "
Why do you suddenly decide to be pragmatic and very selective when it comes to Pain? Why do you ignore socio –historicity? Do you think action is rooted in the immediate only? You argue for facts yet present one interpretation as absolute while obscuring and consigning to the history’s dustbin relevant facts regarding pain and Maltese politics. There are enough survivors who remember all the elections held in Malta, their pain and view is as valid as any other Maltese citizen born at a later date. What you simply want to redress is the pain of one group at one point in time. I cannot agree with you regarding time lines, suffering should be addressed and acknowledged whenever it happened for true reconciliation to be realised.
“Today's political parties have progressed beyond any resemblance to their remote ancestors”
It is heartening and that you subscribe to this conviction and acknowledge that political parties change. The lucid nonagenarians (and still eligible voters) I speak of, who experienced every election held in Malta acknowledge that same change as a positive development for Malta.
Theirs however is a more hopeful vision for the nation.
As a clergyman I am surprised you're upset by that considering that thousands of small kids are indoctrinated through the 'brain washing apparatus' of the church! I was horrified to find out that my three year old nephew is already being moulded into a pious follower!! Disgraceful !!! Absolute abuse of a developing mind that is totally gulible. Why cant religion be taught at a later stage, say 15 years of age? whats the problem with that? Does the church prefer small spongy brains?
If I am obsessed by anything it is by the fear that, if and when returned to power, the MLP will resume where it left off in 1987. That is no idle fear because Dr Joseph Muscat has not clearly denounced that violence and that people intimately connected with it are gaining strength and position of influence within the party.
The guesswork, presumptions and pious hopes that those days are past is left to the lesser fry of the new MLP.
Saliba has no faith in change in his world view!! He still has a watchful eye on those Germans, Italians and Japanese.
@Francis Saliba
I don't deny the past and I care about what happened fullstop I am telling you I care!!!. The fact remains that the mlp leader has voiced his apology. Its a starter. The PN also had a stake in the violence and injustices but never tried to apologise for that!! You still have failed to acknowledge the wrongs of the church in the sixties. I dont deny history but you rather be talking with an unapologetic hardcore labourite which I am not! You ll have to answer one question. If mlp comes to power will we experience the 80s again? Answer Yes or NO? (Hint: 1996-1998).
P.S
PN was no Gandhi! it did not practice any concept of nonviolence rest assured, thats why most perpetrators retained their positions following 1987! Both parties had a stake in it. obviously the mlp had more responsibility because it had the power to stop it.
I am mentioning historical "facts" not "interpretations". This blog is an attempt to pave the way for a serious fundamental reconciliation and not an attempt to paper over past mistakes in the the hope of scoring points in anticipation of the next election.
I see no use in pushing the period under consideration to distant years prior to the birth of today's electors. Today's political parties have progressed beyond any resemblance to their remote ancestors. We should be pragmatic and confine our consideration to the last time when today's main parties were in power for a length of time sufficient to leave a clear imprint. For the MLP that would be from 1971 to 1987 (under Mintoff-KMB) and for the NP that period would be1987 to today under Eddie Fenech Adami-LawrenceGonzi.
Fr Joe Borg is clearly seeking a common ground for the healing of recent wounds not reopening old ones. An essential preliminary is the admission of the state-run violence of the Mintoff-KMB era giving rise to a near monopoly of government by the NP for which I do not foresee any end unless Joseph Muscat's MLP convinces the electorate that state violence will not return.
Then Dr. Saliba who seems to be obsessed by these issues, hijacks the blog, and turns it into a political debate, and associates it to Alfred Sant and now Dr. Muscat and seeks fame or blame or whatever he is trying to prove.
Father Joe are you sure this is a good practice.
Would you think it is a good idea opening a blog in a leading German press and remind the Germans repeatedly of their past by writing eveytime it is the anniversary of one of Hitler's many Atrocities? As if they do not realise enough.
Nelson Mandela also said that people are made such that they cannot forget as otherwise they live to regret doing it again but he said, we need to unlearn the past too.
At the Musew I had learnt that forgiveness needs repentance i.e. that he or she are capable and willing not to do that sin again.
Or are we thinking now that Dr. Joseph Muscat could resort to doing what other Maltese did 50 years ago?
You have also mentioned formidable people like Tutu who have contributed to the healing of their nation through dialogue. This is what is missing in our country: one voice who has the power to unite everyone; someone who is beyond reproach and suspicion as to the motives and intention of their actions. Your piece is very encouraging but maybe half the country may perceive you to bat for the other team.
"So what? Our history records that the MLP exhibition of "force" (for which read "violence") in the sixties, supposedly confined only against the "clutches of the politically controlling church", was no isolated short lived episode but a modus operandi "
Which interpretation of history are you referring to regarding the sixties not obviously to the one experienced by thousands of Maltese families then. Do you really want to go into the modus operandi re violence, repression and political intolerance in the sixties or will you simply lob it in the lap of the Church absolving the still living thousands of faithful lay members that zealously " followed instructions" and conveniently lost or never really found their democratic conscience? It is interesting how the narrative changes according to which side of the fence one sits upon. Wrongs are not put right by diminishing the pain of others.
Re change : Would you by your own argument then argue that the PN of today is the exact same party of the '30's as experienced very negatively by some Maltese nonagenarians still alive to tell their story? Is there no faith in change at all within your worldview?
Why bother to deny the obvious truth that you did really write that you don't care what happened? I read it in the last line of your original comment!
You write that the MLP "seems" to have learnt from its past. I would like to know why the MLP does not eliminate your guesswork by unequivocally admitting its violent past, its regret that it ever happened and its determination never to recur to it again. I find that glaring omission very disturbing and ominous indeed especially now that some of the prominent characters involved are being returned to powerful positions in today's MLP.
So what? Our history records that the MLP exhibition of "force" (for which read "violence") in the sixties, supposedly confined only against the "clutches of the politically controlling church", was no isolated short lived episode but a modus operandi adopted for the following decades and it was directed against all strata of society. It stopped only when the MLP was voted out of power.
@Dr Francis Saliba
I never said that the violence never happened or that I dont care what happened! I was just refering to the sixties and the fact that the struggle for the separation of church and state was historically important and necessary. Obviously I don't agree with the fact that they tried to bomb the archbishop but surely I can't blame Joseph Muscat or mlp for that. The past should not be forgotten but should not be used in the wrong context. During the 2 years of Sant as pm I exercised my right to protest against what the government did on the stipends. The labour government did nothing to stop me and other students from exercising our freedom of speech! Its useless bringing up the past when it is clear that many things changed. It seems that the mlp learned from its past. You surely did not hear Obama trying to crush the republican front by requoting the errors of Nixon. Or take germany! they have a very shady past!! should we distrust them and prohibit them from being active players in the EU.
Robert Attard's was not speaking about the eighties (as you were) but about the socio-political conflict in the sixties. I am sure he would disagree with events you quoted anyway.
I think his main aim was to illustrate how Fr Borg's blog was disguised as a philosophical piece whilst in fact it was put in such a way to tell everyone who he thinks the main culprit was.
One can only hope and pray that this is not the prevalent attitude of the new MLP that we have been promised, otherwise no Truth & Reconciliation Committee would have an earthly chance to succeed
If only it were true that the MLP used force only to be free from "the clutches of a politically controlling Church!" No Sir! The MLP demanded freedom from interference from just about everybody else! It wanted to be:
free to deprive the citizen of the protection of the Constitutional Court and an independent judiciary,
freedom from criticism by an independent press on pain of being burnt down,
freedom from opposition political parties that pretended to hold public meetings without the benefit of being tear-gassed or shot in the back, or to run clubs without the pervasive risk of being ransacked, burnt down or sprayed with machinegun bullets,
freedom from uncowed independent trade unions that dared to carry out industrial action in defence of downtrodden workers,
freedom from pesky university students expecting to receive their education in their native land,
freedom from doting parents who desired to have a say in the choice of a school for their children,
freedom from demanding housewives who expected to have running water in their taps and chocolate and toothpaste available from the shop at the corner, reliable telephones and, horror of horrors, colour television and mobile phones!
What a testament of fviolence!
when reading this sentence I get the feeling that you're not trying to blame anyone but then you mention "the bomb placed on the door step of the Archbishop’s residence at Mdina". suddenly its obvious who was the victim and who was the aggressor. Its quite evident that in your attempt to be impartial you're still trying to alienate readers from the whole truth! Its like alienating readers from the historical importance of the french revolution by describing the horrors of the guillotine. Do you really think that political terrorism is still a living threat in this country? I don't think so! Well we've learned something there. What we still have to learn is to keep religion out of politics. The sixties are a testament of the force of those who wanted to be free from the clutches of a politically controlling church that was instilling fear in people by threating them with hellfire !!! It was the maltese revolution for all I care!!! There is actually nothing controversial about it.
There is a big difference between forgiving and forgetting. An honest, practicing Christian must forgive without any reservation. Forgetting is another matter altogether. This could be an unwarranted risk. It implies the foolhardy wearing of a blindfold, refusing to derive profit from the bitter lesson of history and rashly risking a repetition of the same mistakes.
To deny the truth of proven acts of political violence when its victims are still around to tell the tale should be an absolute non-starter. To attempt to justify a sustained state-tolerated violence by the excuse of minor, rare, spontaneous and immediately suppressed violent acts would imply that two wrongs make a right and that it is legitimate to amputate a whole arm in retaliation for a pricked finger.
We are still suffering from an unnecessary festering sore that could be easily healed without any Truth and Reconcilitaion Committee. That impediment is the total absence of a frank admission and repudiation of this state-sponsored political violence and a credible assurance that there is no intention to return to it in spite of the emergence of politicians with this tainted past.
The answer to your last question is perhaps to be found in the Pater Noster, where we ask our Divine Father to "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us."