According to Perfect Apology the key steps in any good apology are:
- a detailed account of the offence
- acknowledging the hurt caused
- taking personal responsibility
- recognising one’s role
- stating one’s regret
- asking for forgiveness
- promising that it won’t happen again
- offering resititution
So far from Marlon Wortham I have recieved this
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:48:51 -0800
> From: XXXX@…….com
> Subject: Re: REFUND
> To: ………..@hotmail.com
>
> OK MARCH , U WILL DEFINITELY, WITH GOD’S HELP BE
> GETTING YOUR REFUND, OK, LEAVE ME YOUR PH # TOO,
>
> PLEASE,
>
> THANKS
from Andrew I recieved this on feb19th 2008
Sent: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 2:30 pm
Subject: RE: ….
…….. -
I do not accept this rebuke. I send it back to where it came from. You two lack great discernment. I want a divorce.
I do not want to go any further with you or …… at all IN FRIENDSHIP OR RELATIONSHIP.
Please dont try to fix me any longer. You XXXX, .r espically XXXXX I dont want any of your help.
I am doing so well now and you all will never see it because you have a warped view of the Lord and His grace in my opinion.
You all need to repent for the vindication and the unconditional love that you all have show me in the name and under the guise of christianity . ……. there is nothing else to say to you.
I want you to send me those papers right away. I will never want to be with you ever . Do you undersatand that ? Stop trying to fix me and fix yourself.
I done even want to hear from you guys because the focus is always and will always be upon me. Send me the damm papers please. I want to be done with you all and the memories of Canada. I will me changing my email soon so get with it.
All I get is oppression and condemnation from you and ….. ,not christian love.
I want you to leave me alone.
I am sorry that I cannot talk to you any other way but there is and has been no love from any of you only reminders of all the things that I have done wrong. Leave me alone .
Send me the papers to where I said, serve me .When I get some extra money someday I will gladly pay you and ……. back ,until then, LEAVE ME ALONE!
> — Andrew Tammaro <XXX@XXX.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear ……….- Feb 20th 2008
> >
> > Thank you for your understanding.You will always
> > be my friend .I am going to send to you the address
> > tomorrow as I do not have it with me . I want so
> > much to write a final letter to ……. and
> > ………After much prayer this is it .It goes like
> > this .
> >
> > Dear…… and ……
> > I am asking you one last time for you both to
> > forgive me . Please forgive me for any offences
> > ,shortcomings ,even the things that you have been
> > convinced that I have done which I have not, and to
> > forgive me COMPLETELY and lay all of this aside now
> > once and for all.
Whatever debt that I owe to you
> > both or you may think that I owe to you I am asking
> > that you both forgive me according to Matthew
> > 16:21-35.
This is sincere and comes from my heart
that I have prayed about .
I will vow before the
> > Lord that as I am financially able to do so in the
> > near future ,to pay back any reasonable debt that I
> > owe to the both of you.Please once again forgive me
> > for all that I may have caused you two . May you
> > find it in your hearts to forgive me fully and
> > completely .
> >
> > Sincerely Your Brother In Christ – Andrew
> > …….. this is the very best that I can do .My
> > conscience is clear now before the Lord with no
> > condemnation or accusations from the enemy .The
> > responsibility now rests upon their shoulders.
We both know what is required of them . This is my
> > hearts desire to be restored even if now ………
> > and I have ended our relationship . Hope that you
> > can see that my heart is pure and sincere in this .
> > Please pass this to …… and to ……. . My
> > prayer is that I receive a response that they have
both forgiven me .
Much Love In Christ -Andrew> >
~~~~~~~~~~~
“Powerful and sneaky people use apologies as end runs around
repentance. They betray a trust; and, when they have been found out, they say they are sorry for “mistakes in judgement”.
They smile through their oily apologies when their crime calls for quakes of repentance. They get by only because we have lost our sense of the difference between repentance for wrong and
> apologies for bungling….
We should not let each other get away with it. A deep and unfair hurt is more than a mere faux pas. We cannot put up with everything from everyone; some things are intolerable.
When someone hurts us deeply and unfairly [deliberately], an apology will not do the job; it only trivializes a wrong that should not be trifled with.”
> — Lewis B. Smedes, “Forgive and Forget”
~~~~~~~~~~
The Inability to Apologize
Ever since the pioneering work of Klein (e.g., 1937), analysts have been interested in the process of reparation, with both internal and external objects. In a loving relationship perceived as temporarily damaged by one party’s hunger or aggression, the (actual or fantasied) injuring party ordinarily seeks to restore the loving tone of the relationship. In adults, the usual vehicle is the apology.
What intrigues us about the reparation process when a narcissistic defense is operating is that what is repaired is not the damage to the relationship, but the subject’s illusion of perfection. Narcissistically impelled people may be at least temporarily incapable of genuine expressions of remorse, because inherent in an apology is the admission that one is not needless and faultless. In characterological narcissism, this defect is sometimes embraced as a virtue, as in Woody Hayes’s boast that he never apologized to anybody, or in the peculiar belief of Erich Segal’s heroine that “Love is never having to say you’re sorry.” In less gross manifestations of narcissism, the avoidance of apology is much more subtle, much less visible to those who might legitimately expect some expression of sincere contrition. What a narcissistically defended person seems to do instead of apologizing is to attempt a repair of the grandiose self in the guise of making reparation with the object. We have identified several different ways that narcissistically motivated people tend to substitute some other kind of interpersonal transaction for an apology. For the party on the receiving end of such a transaction, it also becomes a problem to restore intimacy, since it is difficult to forgive in the absence of the other person’s genuine remorse.
1. Undoing
When a narcissistically defended woman has inflicted some emotional injury upon her husband, instead of apologizing, she is likely to go out of her way later to be especially solicitous of him (initiating sex, making a special dinner, etc.). A father who has unfeelingly criticized a child may similarly avoid admitting his insensitivity but instead offer some attractive treat subsequent to his transgression. The object of the undoing can be expected to remain hurt, in the absence of an emotional expression of regret, and will suffer a natural reaction to the undoing that will lie somewhere between cold rejection and grudging acquiescence. If neither party can articulate the difference between making real emotional reparation to the object and engaging in the defense of undoing, they will both be further estranged by these operations. The undoing party will feel affronted and resentful that his or her ministrations are not appreciated, while the injured person may suffer attacks of self-criticism for an inability to forgive, forget, and warm up to the partner. Both people wind up lonelier than they were previously.
2. Appealing to Good Intentions
People who are engaged in defending their internal grandiosity may become adept at giving ostensible apologies that really amount to self-justifications. Narcissistically driven people do not seem to understand that saying one is sorry represents an expression of empathy with the injured party irrespective of whether the hurt was intentional or avoidable. The woman who is kept waiting and worrying when her husband is late coming home will feel immediately forgiving if he expresses genuine sorrow that she has suffered on his account. In narcissistically defensive states, however, people seem to go by the general rule that such expressions of sympathy and regret are called for only if they were “at fault” in some way. Thus, the tardy husband meets his wife’s anxious greeting with, “It wasn’t my fault; there was a traffic jam,” communicating not remorse but resentment of her distress and rejection of its validity.
The organizing, overriding issue for people with narcissistic preoccupations is the preservation of their internal sense of self-cohesiveness or self-approval, not the quality of their relations with other people. As a result, when they feel their imperfections have been exposed, the pressing question for them is the repair of their inner self-concept, not the mending of the feelings of those in their external world (cf. Stolorow’s [1979b] definitions of narcissism). They are consequently likely, in a state of defensiveness about exposed faults, to protest that they meant to do the right thing, as if the purity of their inner state is the pertinent issue – to others as well as to themselves.
One of our patients described how her close friend had failed to send her a wedding present. When she admitted her disappointment, the friend replied, “Gee, I meant to get you something – I even had a gift in mind, and I don’t know why I didn’t get to it.” This was offered as if it were an exonerating explanation; interestingly, the woman never did buy a gift, even (or perhaps especially) in light of the explicit expression of its significance to her friend. This seemingly odd perseverance in a breach of etiquette might be explained by the observation that the rectification of an error is an admission that an error has in fact occurred. If one displaces the issue to the area of intention an error has in fact occurred. If one displaces the issue to the area of intention, an error has not occurred, since one’s intentions were faultless.
3. Explaining
A related substitute for apologizing is the practice of explaining. Unless the listener is particularly sensitive, an explanation can sound remarkably like an apology. In fact, a relationship between two people is apt to go on a considerable length of time before the party on the receiving end of explanations begins to feel a bothersome absence of genuine contrition in the other. The advantage of the explanation to the person protecting a grandiose self is that it avoids both asking for something (forgiveness) and admitting to a sphere of personal responsibility that includes the risk of inevitable shortcoming. Hence, the illusion of personal needlessness and guiltlessness is maintained. “I would have visited you in the hospital but my schedule got really crazy,” or “I must’ve forgotten your birthday because it came right on the heels of my vacation this year,” or “Your dog just ran in front of my car and I couldn’t stop fast enough” are the kinds of apology-substitutes that may appear to connote remorse, but actually stop short of expressing sorrow and making emotional reparation.
A special case of the explanation sans apology is that of the person who has become adroit in offering his or her psychodynamics as explanatory, exculpating principles behind behavior that is remiss. “Maybe I was acting out my envy,” or “I wonder if I did that because I’m going through an anniversary reaction to my sister’s death,” or “I must have been feeling unconsciously hostile toward you because you remind me of my father” are the kinds of nonapologies typically offered by the psychoanalytically sophisticated when protecting a grandiose self-concept. Evidence that a genuine apology has not been made can be found in the state of mind of the recipient of such commentaries: explanations without apology produce either pained confusion, or understanding without warmth. Because the explainer is defending his or her action to an internal critic who expects perfection, the listener often ends up, because of being the target of a projective-identification process, feeling inarticulately critical.
4. Recriminating
We have noticed the tendency for narcissistically vulnerable people to engage in a kind of ritual self-castigation in the wake of an undeniable or unrationalizable failing toward someone. This is a process even more elusive than explaining, and harder to distinguish from true apologizing. This recrimination is expressed to witnesses and objects of the transgression with the implicit invitation that the transgressor should be reassured that despite the lapse, he or she is really fine (i.e., perfect or perfectable), after all. In the case of a person with a narcissistic character disorder, recrimination is probably as close as he or she ever comes to apologizing, and is doubtless believed to constitute sorrow and reparation.
A special case of the explanation sans apology is that of the person who has become adroit in offering his or her psychodynamics as explanatory, exculpating principles behind behavior that is remiss. “Maybe I was acting out my envy,” or “I wonder if I did that because I’m going through an anniversary reaction to my sister’s death,” or “I must have been feeling unconsciously hostile toward you because you remind me of my father” are kinds of nonapologies typically offered by the psychoanalytically sophisticated when protecting a grandiose self-concept. Evidence that a genuine apology has not been made can be found in the state of mind of the recipient of such commentaries: explanations without apology produce either pained confusion , or understanding without warmth. Because the explainer is defending his or her action to an internal critic who expects perfection, the listener often ends up, because of being the target of a projective-identification process, feeling inarticulately critical.
Self-castigating statements, mild ones such as “I can’t understand why I did that!” and severe ones such as “I must be a terrible person,” appear to manifest remorse, and may on that basis elicit sympathy and a wish to relieve the offender’s apparent guilt and pain. A close look at the transaction, however, reveals that the subject is suffering self-condemnation mainly for a lack of perfection, and that the injured object has been switched into the position of comforting the person who inflicted the hurt. The party who is legitimately entitled to an apology goes without it, while the transgressor achieves reinforcement for a pathological belief about the self.
We have found that a good way to discriminate between narcissistic recrimination and object-related remorse is to ask the allegedly regretful person whether, under identical circumstances, he or she would do the same thing again. A truly repentant sinner will unhesitatingly and believably say no, while a person protecting the grandiose self will tend to launch into a series of hedges, rationalizations, or less than credible denials.
5. Deflecting Blame
The readiness of narcissistically vulnerable people to convey criticism is equaled only by their resistance to assimilating it. Frequently, they seem to have mastered the art of deflecting blame. As an example of this dynamic, let us consider the familiar situation of supervising a narcissistically preoccupied trainee in psychotherapy. If narcissistic patients are hard to treat (as is their reputation), narcissistic supervisees seem even harder to supervise. Except in certain phases of idealization of the supervisor, they react to honest feedback about their shortcomings and limits not just with defensiveness – a natural and universal response – but with a particular kind of defense: the effort to share their “badness” with the supervisor.
When the mentor has failed to support the grandiose self of a narcissistically impelled student, he or she can count on paying for it. A response to the effect of “I’ll confess that I acted that out, but I think you have your part in this, too,” is typical. And the supervisee is often right, or has a piece of the truth at least, but in such cases, the content of the criticism of the supervisor is usually not the point. The process boils down to: “I feel mortified that you saw a limitation in me because I aspire to perfection. You probably aspire to perfection, too, or should, so I’ll point out that you haven’t yet reached it, either.” The supervisee thus perpetuates the false premise that perfect self-sufficiency is a legitimate goal. It seems not to occur to a narcissistically motivated person that comfort with imperfection might be both the supervisor’s attitude toward his or her own work, and the attitude the supervisor wishes to instill in the trainee.
Several years ago, one of us worked with a brilliant, attractive, talented, and quite grandiose analyst-in-training. For about a year, the atmosphere of the supervision was delightful, as both parties engaged in what amounted to a folie a deux of mutual idealization. The supervisor, out of her own narcissistic pathology, joined this man believing that reported problems with previous supervisors derived from his having been insufficiently appreciated by, or even having been felt as threatening to, these therapists. Then he sought her collusion in overreporting his hours of control analysis to the institute. (He believed that he had had so much equivalent training that his background fulfilled the “spirit” if not the letter of the training provisions, and that the particulars of the program requirements were needlessly stringent.) She refused. He abruptly devalued her, as he had his previous instructors, but since it was in his interest to maintain the relationship until he had passed a Case Presentation requirement, he stayed in supervision. When she tried to make ego-alien his narcissistic entitlement, he accused her of acting out all kinds of unpleasant dynamics, including having contributed to his expectation of special favors by her prior warmth and support, which he now labeled seductive and transferential. He was, of course, right to a considerable extent, as narcissistically defensive people, with their hypervigilant sensitivity to others, often are.
He somehow structured the psychological situation as follows: “If you deny your part in the dynamic, you are self-deluded and therefore not worth listening to; if you admit it, you and I can lament your shortcomings together, construe my actions as responsive to your mistakes, and avoid looking at my own problems.” It is very difficult to turn this bind into a learning situation for the trainee. We have seen examples of narcissistically preoccupied analysts-in-training who, by structuring their experience of supervision this way, develop a set of quite prescient beliefs about each of their teachers’ dynamics, with no observable growth in their comprehension of their own.
-Narcissistic Pathology of Everyday Life: The Denial of Remorse and Gratitude
(reprinted with persmission, Contempory Psychoanalysis, volume 26, #3, July 1990, pp. 430-451)
Nancy McWilliams, Ph.D.
Stanley Lependorf, Ph.D.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Of course we have not heard from any of them in keeping to there promise of making restitution to the other Christians they wronged.
There is a Warrant for Andrew Tammars arrest in Canada.
He has done nothing about that or the fact he owes money to a lot of different people.
He has not acted in accordance with his word because he is a chronic, pathological liar with no conscience or empathy about how he victimizes people or about his behavior and its effect on his victims.
Andrew has changed his last name to Tammara and has not kept in contact with any of his victims in Canada. He now owes money from the Divorce Judgement where it was granted under “Emotional and Physical Abuse”.
These Sociopaths get away with this because they know there is a False teaching in the church that claims we have to forgive them. Forgiveness is for ourselves to set us free.
God wants us to hold others who claim to be Christians accountable for there behavior.
Could this be the single reason why Christians are preyed upon?
Could this also be why so much has been gotten away with by criminals ?
If we don’t stand up to this kind of behavior will it become the normal in our Society and will we be comparable to a third world country where this corruption is the norm.
Do these offenders not understand the truth of the ” Power of God ” and how We need to fear Him ? I am not condoning violence or anything that is against the Law.
” Vengance is mine sayeth the Lord” but holding a predator to accountability is our Job and we are commanded to do that .
Ephesians 4
3But (G)immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints;
4and there must be no (H)filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which (I)are not fitting, but rather (J)giving of thanks.
5For this you know with certainty, that (K)no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom (L)of Christ and God.
6(M)Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things (N)the wrath of God comes upon (O)the sons of disobedience.
7Therefore do not be (P)partakers with them;
Matthew 6:24
“No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and
despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money
THIS ALSO INCLUDES SEXUAL IMORALITY
Jude 7
just as (W)Sodom and Gomorrah and the (X)cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and (Y)went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an (Z)example in undergoing the (AA)punishment of eternal fire.
8Yet in the same way these men, also by dreaming, (AB)defile the flesh, and reject authority, and revile angelic majesties.
Collosians 3-5-6
G)Therefore consider (H)the members of your earthly body as dead to (I)immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry.
6For it is because of these things that (J)the wrath of God will come [a]upon the sons of disobedience,
7and (K)in them you also once walked, when you were living in them.
1 Thessolians 4-3-5
3For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you (F)abstain from sexual immorality;
4that (G)each of you know how to possess his own [c](H)vessel in sanctification and (I)honor,
5not in (J)lustful passion, like the Gentiles who (K)do not know God;
6and that no man transgress and (L)defraud his brother (M)in the matter because (N)the Lord is the avenger in all these things, just as we also (O)told you before and solemnly warned you.
Hebrews 12-17
12Therefore, (X)strengthen the hands that are weak and the knees that are feeble,
13and (Y)make straight paths for your feet, so that the limb which is lame may not be put out of joint, but rather (Z)be healed.
14(AA)Pursue peace with all men, and the (AB)sanctification without which no one will (AC)see the Lord.
15See to it that no one (AD)comes short of the grace of God; that no (AE)root of bitterness springing up causes trouble, and by it many be (AF)defiled;
16that there be no (AG)immoral or (AH)godless person like Esau, (AI)who sold his own birthright for a single meal.
17For you know that even afterwards, (AJ)when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought for it with tears
Keep Fervent in Your Love
1Therefore, since (A)Christ has [a]suffered in the flesh, (B)arm yourselves also with the same purpose, because (C)he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin,
2(D)so as to live (E)the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for the lusts of men, but for the (F)will of God.
3For (G)the time already past is sufficient for you to have carried out the desire of the Gentiles, (H)having pursued a course of sensuality, lusts, drunkenness, carousing, drinking parties and abominable idolatries.
Rev 21-8
But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic
arts, the idolaters and all liars-their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death
I believe it is time for the Church of Christ to stand up to these Sociopaths who prey on the Sheep and think God is such a Wimp he will do nothing about it. And wants us to do nothing about it too.
