The Sunflower: On the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness: Edward H. Flannery Summary & Analysis

Flannery’s opens with a question: whether it is “permitted” to refuse forgiveness to someone who is sincerely repentant. He notes that Simon is uncertain and guilty following his silence, and that his feelings are even more evident when he visits Karl’s mother.

Flannery states that he can understand Simon’s refusal but cannot defend it. He believes that Judeo-Christian ethics mandate that forgiveness should be granted to those who are sincerely repentant. The only exception, he notes, is the New Testament reference to the “unforgiveable sin,” but argues that that reference refers to the rejection of God.

Flannery equates the German bystanders during the Holocaust with Simon’s behavior, watching a dying man pleading for mercy. He believes that the question of whether Simon has a right to forgive Karl in the name of all Jews is irrelevant, because Karl did not ask Simon to speak in the name of all Jews.

Flannery addresses what he believes to be the primary question posed in The Sunflower: whether there are exceptions to the “fundamental norms of ethics and morality.” He states that there are usually two answers given to this question: one is that there are universal and basic moral laws, and thus no exceptions can be made. The other, he believes, relativizes moral norms, making them subject to change based on individual needs. He says regardless, he would have forgiven Karl.