University of Wisconsin-Madison

    Over the past year I have tried to amass a bibliography on all published works on person-to-person forgiveness that have appeared in English or were translated into English.  My quest turned up only 110 works between the time of Augustine and 1970.  Most publications within that span of time, with only a few exceptions, are not major treatises.  Even if I
failed to find, let us assume, 1000 works, it would still mean that less than one publication a year has appeared on the topic of interpersonal forgiveness in the English language.  The more accurate conclusion seems to be this: publications, that we can read in English, on the topic of interpersonal forgiveness have appeared at a rate of approximately one every 10 to 15 years between 400 A.D. and 1970.  Is this not virtual silence on this topic, especially when we compare the vast numbers of publications on issues of morals and justice during the same period?

     Since the 1980's a growing number of scholars and practitioners in such diverse fields as psychology, psychiatry, medicine, theology, philosophy, social work, counseling, and education have examined forgiveness within their own disciplines.  Because of this burgeoning  interest in forgiveness, the time is right to begin organizing people into an interdisciplinary forum for mutual learning about forgiveness.  Recent research has shown that people who are deeply and unjustly hurt by others can heal emotionally by forgiving their offender.  Other research suggests that warring communities may benefit from an exploration of forgiveness as part of peace negotiations.  The applications of forgiveness are broad across various contexts (such as families, schools, communities) and cultures.  As we learn from one another we may be better able to devise programs for deeply hurting people to help them forgive, reconcile, and be conduits for good within their families and communities.  Five activities are proposed for the institute.

                                                    Information

     Just yesterday, I received a call from a theologian at Creighton University who recently completed a book on interpersonal forgiving.  She asked me to review the book before it is published.  Last week I received a letter from a professor who holds joint appointments in the Law School and the Philosophy Department at Arizona State.  He wished to debate certain fine points about forgiveness.  Is forgiveness a sign of self-respect or is it a sign that we are caving in to others' injustice, making forgiveness a sign of moral disrespect toward self and offender?  His is a challenging question, indeed.  Recently, I received a letter from a physician in New Zealand who has been incorporating principles of forgiveness with his patients for 20 years.  He wished to be put into contact with others studying and applying forgiveness.

     None of the people mentioned above knows one another, but they should.  All would probably deepen their knowledge of forgiveness if they could hear of the others' work.  Because forgiveness is so interdisciplinary, scholars in one field will rarely have the opportunity to know of scholars' work in related and distant fields to their own.  The International Forgiveness Institute would be a forum for introducing scholars and practitioners to one another.

     "The Forgiveness Newsletter" will be a major project of the institute.  On a quarterly (or at first, a semi-annual) basis we will mail the newsletter to all on our mailing list to update the reader on the new journal articles and books recently published on forgiveness.  The latest workshops and conferences will be highlighted, allowing people sufficient time to attend some of these.  We will have invited articles from leaders in the field who propose new ideas or critique a new book.
 
                                                     Education

     Many people have contacted me in an effort to learn more about forgiveness. To aid these people, the institute will plan to sponsor regular workshops that allow people the time to understand forgiveness and to practice it in their own lives if they so choose.

     The institute in the future plans to be a major sponsor of conferences on the topic.  The first-ever conference on the topic of forgiveness at any university was held at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison in the Spring of 1995.  Scholars at the University of Maryland at Baltimore (who attended the conference in Madison) immediately made plans for a second conference, which was held in April, 1996.  It appears that such conferences will be commonplace within this decade.

     To assist people's learning, we plan to develop an extensive library of books, articles, videos, and audio cassettes on forgiveness. This is a major undertaking, given that the topic is scattered in diverse journals across a dozen or more fields.  We at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have begun this endeavor.  It has taken at least five years to amass the literature on the topic.  As the published literature flies off the presses at a faster rate, our keeping the library up-to-date
will be a challenge.
 
                                                     Consultation

     If a business or other organization is having trouble with the interpersonal relations, we plan to train and send representatives from the institute to such sites in an effort to quell angers and effect
reconciliations among the affected individuals.  Should not forgiveness be an important part of any peace negotiation?  The consultations would take place directly within the environments experiencing the injustices.
 
                                                                Research

     Forgiveness is not a topic high on most foundations' lists of giving.  In the future, we could be the primary source of funding for graduate students' Ph.D. dissertation work on forgiveness.  We could provide summer salaries for professors to write and research on the topic. We could provide sabbatical leaves for therapists who wish to engage in intensive study of forgiveness before introducing the idea to clients. Clergy could have time off to learn the latest ideas for pastoral
counseling and forgiveness.
 
                                    Association of Forgiveness Studies

    We have initiated an Association of Forgiveness Studies  that allows people for a modest annual fee ($30) to be affiliated with the institute's activities.  Members will be sent the newsletter, grant
announcements, and other information on forgiveness research and educational opportunities.

                                        Structure of the Institute

     The institute is a non-profit, private corporation in Wisconsin. It is administered by a Board of Directors.  A President is elected for a fixed term that is renewable.  A Secretary and Treasurer also are elected. All descriptions of officers and laws governing the institute are contained
in a separate document available upon request.

     We plan an Honorary Board composed of people who have exemplified the ideals of forgiveness in their own lives.  The Rev. Desmond Tutu is the first such honorary member of the board who has agreed to serve in that capacity.

     Although we have initiated a fund-drive to support research, no grant applications are being accepted at this time.  A panel of scholars representing different disciplines will constitute the panel.  It will be the panel's job to determine which grant requests are meritorious for funding.  The panel will report directly to the Board of Directors.
 
                                            A  Definition of Forgiving

          A number of colleagues and I have been struggling with the definition of forgiveness for over a decade.  We believe that any definition of one person forgiving another must be centered in moral issues, not primarily in psychology or self-help.  We say this because all of the ancient traditions that discuss forgiveness (Hebrew, Christian, Islamic, Confucian, and Buddhist traditions) and the vast majority of modern philosophical writings place forgiveness within morality or the quest for the good.  Forgiveness is moral in two senses.  First, as I forgive, I give up the resentment to which I am entitled.  Giving up resentment in this context is moral (and paradoxical) precisely because I
am giving a gift to the one who injured me (the gift is that I no longer resent the injurer even though I have a right to resentment).  Second, forgiveness is moral in that the forgiver reaches out to the other who injured him or her with at least one of three moral principles:  merciful restraint, generosity, and/or moral love (ahab or hesed in Hebrew; agape in the ancient Christian writings). By merciful restraint, we mean that the forgiver refrains from deserved punishment.  By generosity, we mean that the forgiver actually begins to give good things to the injurer, such as attention, time, favorable judgements, and so forth.  By moral love, we mean that the forgiver gives of oneself toward the rehabilitation and betterment of the injurer.

     One who forgives need not be consciously aware that he or she is utilizing a moral principle, but one who is genuinely forgiving at some point in the forgiveness process will begin to  demonstrate verbally and/or behaviorally one or more of the above principles.  We certainly make room for the slow development of forgiveness in that the forgiver may begin by ever so slightly giving up resentment, then gradually moving toward a merciful, generous, and/or loving response.

     It is possible for one to say that he or she is forgiving, but then not act consistent with the above definition.  In such a case, it is possible that the person is trying to accept what happened, is trying to "move on," is trying to cope with the injury, but the person may not actually be engaged in forgiveness despite the announcement that he or she is forgiving.  Forgiveness is not the same as condoning, excusing, or forgetting.  One may condone without any moral response, as is required in forgiving.  Forgiveness is not the same as reconciliation.  Reconciliation includes at least two parties coming together in mutual respect. Forgiveness is one person's moral response to another's injustice.  One can forgive and yet not reconcile, as in the case of a spouse continually
physically abused by the partner.

     The above definition and clarifications are not, in our view, immutable.  We are open to dialogue, feedback, debate, and disagreement as we sift and winnow regarding the definition of forgiveness.  When faced with a challenge to our view we will try to operate by the following
questions: 1) Does the challenge point out a logical flaw or philosophical error in our approach? 2) Does the challenge correct our position? 3) Does the challenge move us to a deeper understanding of forgiveness that was not there before?  If the challenge advances understanding in the ways
specified by the above questions, we will give serious consideration to altering our definition.
 
                                      A Process Model of Forgiving

     Our eleven years of discussion, research and educational interventions have led to the development and continuing refinement of a process model of interpersonal forgiving.  This model has a series of 20 steps which are organized into four distinct phases. (See Table 1)  This is our best estimate of the general pathway that people follow when they forgive someone who has unjustly injured them.  This process is not a rigid sequence and individuals may experience all or only some of the steps. The following is a brief description of the four phases of forgiveness.
 
                                            Uncovering Phase

     During this phase the individual becomes aware of the emotional pain that has resulted from a deep, unjust injury. Characteristic feelings of anger or even hatred may be present.  As these negative emotions are confronted and the injury is honestly understood, individuals may experience considerable emotional distress.  Deciding on the appropriate amount of energy to process this pain and still function effectively is an important consideration during this phase.  However, as the anger and other negative emotions are brought out into the open healing can begin to occur.
 
                                                Decision Phase

     The individual now realizes that to continue to focus on the injury and the injurer may cause more unnecessary suffering.  The individual begins to understand that a change must occur to go ahead in the healing process.  The individual may then experience a " heart conversion" or in
other words a life change in a positive direction.  The individual entertains the idea of forgiveness as a healing strategy.  The individual, then, commits to forgiving the injurer who has caused him/her such pain. Complete forgiveness is not yet realized but the injured individual has decided to explore forgiveness and to take initial steps in the direction of full forgiveness.  An important first step at this point is to forego resentment and revenge toward the injurer however much it may deserved.
 
                                                 Work Phase

     Here the forgiving individual begins the active work of forgiving the injurer. This phase may include new ways of thinking about the injurer. The injured individual may strive to understand the injurer's childhood or put the injurious event in context by understanding the pressures the injurer was under at the time of the offense. This new way of thinking is undertaken not to excuse the injurer of his/her responsibility for the offense, but rather to better understand him/her and to see the injurer as a member of the human community. Often, this new understanding may be accompanied by a willingness to experience empathy and compassion toward the offender. The work phase also includes the heart of forgiveness which is the acceptance of the pain that resulted from the actions of the injurer.  This must not be confused with any sense of deserving the pain
but rather a bearing of pain that has been unjustly given.  As the individual bears the pain he/she chooses not to pass it on to others including the injurer.  The individual, in addition, may become ready to offer goodwill toward the injurer. This may or may not include a reconciliation. The goodwill may be offered while at the same time taking into consideration current issues of trust and safety in the relationship between the individual and the injurer.
 
                                     Outcome/Deepening Phase

     In this phase the forgiving individual begins to realize that he/she is gaining emotional relief from the process of forgiving his/her injurer.  The forgiving individual may find meaning in the suffering that he/she has faced.  The emotional relief and new found meaning may lead to increased compassion for self and others.  The individual may discover a new purpose in life. Thus, the forgiver discovers the paradox of forgiveness:  as we give to others the gift of mercy and compassion, we ourselves are healed.
 
     This process model of forgiveness has been shown to be effective in at least three scientific works to date.  Freedman and Enright (1996) demonstrated gains in forgiveness, self-esteem and hope in a longterm educational intervention with female incest survivors.  In addition, these women experienced a decrease in anxiety and depression.  Al-Mabuk, Enright and Cardis (1995), report positive psychological outcomes for parentally love-deprived college students following a workshop on forgiveness education.  Hebl and Enright (1993) demonstrated forgiving responses and a decrease in anxiety for elderly participants after an eight week forgiveness course.  This research suggests that the forgiveness process as it has been described here can promote psychological healing for the injured individual.
 
    Other research projects that study this forgiveness model are in progress.  We continue to review and revise this model.  We welcome your questions and comments.
 
 THE PROCESS OF FORGIVING ANOTHER TABLE ONE
 * Uncovering Phase
      1.   Examination of psychological defenses (Kiel, 1986).

     2.   Confrontation of anger; the point is to release, not harbor the anger (Trainer, 1981).

     3.   Admittance of shame, when this is appropriate (Patton, 1985).

     4.   Awareness of cathexis (Droll, 1984).

     5.   Awareness of cognitive rehearsal of the offense (Droll, 1984).

     6.   Insight that the injured party may be comparing self with the  injurer (Kiel, 1986).

     7.   Realization that oneself may be permanently and adversely  changed by the injury
            (Close,1970).

     8.   Insight into a possibly altered "just world" view (Flanigan, 1987).
 
* Decision Phase
 
    9.   A change of heart, conversion, new insights that old resolution strategies are not working
            (North, 1987).

     10.  Willingness to consider forgiveness as an option.

     11.  Commitment to forgive the offender (Neblett, 1974).
 
* Work Phase
 
    12.  Reframing, through role taking, who the wrongdoer is by viewing  him or her in context
             (Smith, 1981).

     13.  Empathy toward the offender (Cunningham, 1985).

     14.  Awareness of compassion, as it emerges, toward the offender  (Droll, 1984).

     15.  Acceptance, absorption, bearing of the pain (Bergin, 1988).
 
* Outcome/Deepening Phase
 
     16.  Finding meaning for self and others in the suffering and in the  forgiveness process.
            (Frankl, 1959)

     17.  Realization that self has needed other's forgiveness in the past (Cunningham, 1985).

     18.  Insight that one is not alone (universality, support).

     19.  Realization that self may have a new purpose in life because of  the injury.

     20.  Awareness of decreased negative affect and, perhaps increased  positive affect, if this
            begins to emerge, toward the injurer.

          Awareness of internal emotional release (Smedes, 1984).
 
Note: This table is an extrapolation from Enright and the Human Development Study Group
          (1991).
 

***************************************************************************
References
 
Al-Mabuk, R.H., Enright, R.D., & Cardis, P.A.(1995). Forgiveness with parentally love-deprived college   students. Journal of Moral Education.Vol. 24, 427-444.
 
 Enright, R.D., & The Human Development Study Group. (1995) Counseling with the Forgiveness Triad.   Counseling and Values.
 
 Enright, R.D., & Reed, G. L. (1995).  Forgiveness as a first step in the reduction of racism and violence.  Paper presented at the UNESCO Conference on Racism and Violence, Stadtschlaining, Austria.
 
 Frankl, V. (1959) The will to meaning: Foundations and applications of logotherapy. NY:World    Publishing House.
 
 Freedman, S.A.,  & Enright, R.D. (1996). Forgiveness as an intervention goal with incest survivors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology.
 
Gassin, E.A., & Enright, R.D. (1995) The will to meaning in the process of forgiveness.  Journal of Psychiatry and Christianity, 14, 38-49.
 
 Hebl, J.H., & Enright, R.D. (1993). Forgiveness as a psychotherapeutic goal with elderly females. Psychotherapy, 30, 658-667.
 
 INTERNATIONAL FORGIVENESS INSTITUTE ASSOCIATION OF FORGIVENESS
                                    STUDIES MEMBERSHIP
 
    I am requesting an annual membership of the Association of Forgiveness Studies.  I understand that in so doing I will become affiliated with the groundbreaking activities of the International Forgiveness Institute in this way: I will receive the newsletter of the International Forgiveness
Institute for one year.  This newsletter will include information pertaining to seminars, workshops, conferences, educational resources and research priorities. My association membership will also contribute to the development of the International Forgiveness Institute in these activities. I will be sent additional information as it becomes pertinent to the continuing development of the International Forgiveness Institute itself and the concomitant expansion of activities and services.
 
                                    Quarterly newsletters are planned.
 
 

Annual Subscription only                                     $20.00

Annual Student and Senior Citizen Subscription only          $15.00

Annual Association of Forgiveness Membership                 $30.00

($20.00 subscription and $10.00 contribution)

Annual Student/Senior Association of Forgiveness Membership  $20.00
($15.00 subscription and $5.00 contribution)
 
                                                AN INVITATION
 
 "Without Forgiveness, There is No Future." Desmond Tutu, 1995 National Conference on Forgiveness
    To provide a base for the work of the International Forgiveness Institute solid financial support is needed.  You can be part of the worthy effort to provide conferences and workshops, underwrite dissertations and scholarly articles, build an extensive library, develop consulting services for families, businesses or international disputes and expand our services where the need leads us.
    To this end, you are invited to become a supporting member in one of the following ways: (All contributions beyond the subscription level are tax deductible).
 
               Sustaining Members       $50+

               Sponsors                 $100+

               Patrons                       $500+

               President's Club         $1,000+

               Director's Club               $2,500+
 
 Please provide your name, profession and mailing address and make checks payable to The International Forgiveness Institute.
 Mail To:
          International Forgiveness Institute

          Director of Communications/Gayle Reed

          6313 Landfall Drive

          Madison Wisconsin, WI 53705
 
    - Some Books on Interpersonal Forgiving That You May Find Helpful

     - Compiled by Robert Enright

     - International Forgiveness Institute

     - Madison, Wisconsin

     - August, 1996
 
 David Augsburger, _The Freedom of Forgiveness_. Chicago: Moody Press, 1988.

(I believe Mr. Augsburger is a Lutheran Minister.  This is a Christian approach to interpersonal forgiveness).
 
Doris Donnelly, _Learning to Forgive_. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1979.

(I believe Ms. Donnelly is a theologian and professor.  This is a Christian approach to forgiveness).
 
 Terry Hargrave, _Families and Forgiveness_. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1994.
    (Mr. Hargrave is a therapist and a professor at Amarillo College in Texas.)
 
 Rabbi Charles Klein, _How to Forgive When You Can't Forget_. Bellmore, NY: Liebling Press, 1995.
(Rabbi Klein approaches the topic of forgiveness from a Jewish perspective).
 
Earnie Larson, _From Anger to Forgiveness_. New York: Hazelden Books, 1992.
(Mr. Larsen is a therapist involved in the recovery movement and the 12-step approach to healing).
 
Karen Burton Mains, _The Key to an Open Heart_. Elgin, Il: David C. Cook Publishing, 1987.

(Ms. Mains is an Evangelical Christian.  This particular book is geared to women and women's Bible study).
 
 Patricia Raybon, _My First White Friend_. New York, NY: Viking Press, 1996.
(Ms. Raybon is an African-American journalist who offers a beautifully articulated personal journey of forgiveness.)
 
Lewis Smedes, _Forgive and Forget_. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1996.
(Mr. Smedes is at Fuller Theological Seminary.  This is a Christian approach and the classic in the field of interpersonal forgiveness).
 
 Lewis Smedes, _The Art of Forgiving_. Nashville: Moorings, a division of Random House, 1996.
(This is the latest offering from a master in the field.  Again, it is from a Christian perspective).
 
Father Eamon Tobin, _How to Forgive Yourself and Others_. Ligouri, MO: Ligouri Publications, 1993.
(Fr. Tobin is a Catholic priest who approaches the themes of forgiveness from a Catholic perspective).