On earth as it is in heaven: healing through forgiveness.

Griffin, Brandon J. ; Lavelock, Caroline R. ; Worthington, Everett L. 等

In this article, we hypothesize that health outcomes associated with forgiveness, if it is received from God, others, or oneself or if it is granted to others, foreshadow the eschatological regeneration of Christians. Over a decade of scientific inquiry supports a working model that integrates forgiveness, health, and Christian (primarily Reformed) theology. To support this model, we examined studies, reviews of scientific literature, and theological sources to adduce relevant evidence according to four areas of for-giveness--by God, others, or oneself and granted to others. We thus identify domains in which God's promise of forgiveness and Christians' ministry of forgiveness to others might be associated with improved mental and physical health outcomes. In this way, the healing effects associated with forgiveness ultimately function as a glimpse of God's redemptive plan for humankind.

Investigations of the forgiveness-health relationship may be a lens through which scholars observe the eschatological restoration of Christians. Scripture states that, although the consequences of sin and wrongdoing are deadly (NIV; Rom. 6:23), Christ's incarnate sacrifice provides salvation to those who seek divine forgiveness of sin (Jn. 3:16; Col. 1:15-20). People who are forgiven by God consequently anticipate being conformed to the image of the resurrected Christ (Phil. 3:20-21), which includes expressing forgiveness toward others and toward oneself (Eph. 4:32; 1 Jn. 1:9; 1 Jn. 3:19-20). However, salvation does not occur at a specific point in time, such as upon conversion or at the second coming of Christ. Instead, the Apostle Paul described the mystery of salvation as a daily labor (Phil. 2:12-13) that has already begun but is not yet complete (Phil. 1:6). It is therefore argued herein that the mental and physical health benefits that are associated with forgiveness foreshadow the final outcome of salvation.

In the present article, we maintain that forgive-ness--whether it is experienced in the context of being a perpetrator or a victim of offense--embodies part of God's redemptive plan for Christians. We make this claim by adducing evidence from both empirical psychological literature and theological sources regarding four perspectives on the forgiveness-health relationship. We first examine health outcomes experienced by perpetrators of offense who: (1) feel forgiven by God, (2) feel forgiven by others, and (3) practice responsible self-forgiveness. Then, we examine health outcomes experienced by victims of offense who (4) grant forgiveness to their perpetrators. Finally, we propose several caveats to and implications of this integrative discussion that may inform future investigations of the forgiveness-health relationship.

Receiving Divine Forgiveness

God's redemptive agenda hinges upon divine forgiveness, and we argue that health outcomes that are associated with feeling forgiven by God foreshadow the final outcome of salvation. Given the belief that Christ's resurrected body functions as a proleptic sign of the salvation that God promises to people of faith, one might suggest that divine forgiveness of sin has implications for both one's temporal and eternal life On. 10:10, Jn. 3:16). It is this foundation from which we suggest that improved health outcomes associated with feeling forgiven by God are indicative of the ultimate salvific transformation of Christians.

For example, in a survey of adults (N = 605) between 50 to 92 years of age, Lawler-Row (2010) found significant bivariate associations in the anticipated directions between a single-item used to assess feeling forgiven by God and two of four measures of health (successful aging and depressive symptoms but not well-being or presence of physical symptoms). Hirsch, Webb, and Jeglic (2012) used the same measure of feeling forgiven by God and found significant bivari-ate associations between feeling forgiven by God and decreased levels of inward anger and suicidal behavior as well as increased levels of outward anger among college students (N = 372). Also, Webb, Robinson, and Brower (2009) found similar results after administering the same measure to adults seeking outpatient treatment for alcohol use disorders. They assessed patients upon entry to a program (N = 157) and at a 6-month follow up (n = 126), and they observed bivar-iate correlations to suggest that patients who felt forgiven by God also reported fewer depressive symptoms and total number of symptoms of mental illness. Nevertheless, feeling forgiven by God appeared to be less consistently associated with mental illness relative to forgiveness of oneself and forgiveness of others. Future research is needed to specify the direction of the relationship between feeling forgiven by God and mental health outcomes.

Notwithstanding this small but growing body of evidence, Webb, Robinson, Brower, and Zucker (2006) point out a potential methodological issue that might obscure what scholars know about the relationship between feeling forgiven by God and health. Almost all investigations of this association employ a collection of three single items created by the Fetzer Institute (1999) that on one hand targets a cognitive belief in divine forgiveness ("I know God forgives me") and on the other hand targets behavioral expressions of forgiveness of oneself and others (i.e., "I have forgiven myself for things I have done wrong" and "I have forgiven those who have hurt me"). It is possible that assessing merely a cognitive belief in divine forgiveness might result in capturing only participants' level of agreement with a particular theological doctrine as opposed to an implicit emotional sense of feeling forgiven by God (Toussaint, Owen, & Cheadle, 2012).

Although psychological inquiries that examine feeling forgiven by God are only beginning to accrue, centuries of theological sources concur that God's redemptive plan begins with divine forgiveness and pervades the mind and body of Christians. For example, Watts (2007) illuminates the theme of eschatological transformation that is woven throughout miracles recorded in the Gospel of John and that has ultimate implications for followers of the Christian faith. He argues that Christ's first miracle of changing water to wine, recorded in John 2:1-11, functions as a metaphor to suggest that Christ's power transforms ordinary people in extraordinary ways, including the forgiveness of sin and restoration to communion with God and others. Some even maintain that John's entire gospel is based on a literary framework that reveals Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ of faith as indicated by seven miracles, four that link divine forgiveness to physical healing: the healing of the official's son (4:4354), the disabled man at the Bethesda pool (5:1-5), the man born blind (9:1-12), and the resurrection of Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44) (Strauss, 2007). While we affirm Dietrich Bonhoeffer's (1954) claim that only divine forgiveness is responsible for the forgiveness of sin (one way in which divine forgiveness is unique from receiving forgiveness from others or oneself), we argue that the physical and mental health benefits associated with feeling forgiven by God are a small glimpse of Christ's healing work and the ultimate resurrection of Christians.

Receiving Forgiveness from Others

In addition to receiving divine forgiveness, many Christian traditions share the belief that scripture encourages members of the faith who have committed wrongdoing to confess their sins to one another and to be forgiven by the body of believers (James 5:16, Eph. 4:32). As the Apostle Paul laments in Romans 7:14-25, one's conversion to the Christian faith does not immediately exempt one from committing or suffering wrongdoing. Yet, the Christian Church is empowered by the Holy Spirit in such a way that the body of believers may emulate divine forgiveness by extending interpersonal forgiveness to one another in order to preserve unity amidst diversity and conflict (Eph. 4:1-6). Interpersonal forgiveness between Christians is therefore fundamentally rooted in the character of God. For this reason, we argue that the improved health outcomes experienced by perpetrators of offense who receive forgiveness from others are corporeal changes that symbolize the ultimate transformation of salvation in which believers will be restored to community with one another.

Evidence to support the claim that receiving forgiveness from others is associated with improved mental health outcomes is beginning to accrue. For example, Lyons, Deane, Caputi, and Kelly (2011) found that feeling forgiven by others predicted increased positive outcomes (i.e., purpose and engagement in life) as well as reduced negative outcomes (i.e., resentment) among individuals who were receiving faith-based rehabilitation services for substance use disorders (N = 277). Yet, few studies have investigated the health benefits incurred by perpetrators who receive forgiveness in comparison to the multitude of studies on victims who grant forgiveness. Some evidence also links receiving forgiveness from others to personality traits including agreeableness (Walker & Gorsuch, 2002) and empathy (Hall & Fincham, 2008), though it is unclear how these and other personality-related variables might impact the relationship between receiving forgiveness from others and health outcomes.

By receiving forgiveness from others, Christians experience a part of what it means to be redeemed. The idea that interpersonal relationships help define one's own identity is common among psychological theories (i.e., psychoanalysis, object relations, family systems, etc.). Yet, the Christian perspective offers a unique point of view that extends beyond temporal interactions alone. For instance, Christian philosopher Soren Kierkegaard maintained that humans are spiritual creatures, which is to say that the process of becoming a person only genuinely occurs in communion with God and with others (Evans, 2009). For Kierkegaard, one's relationships with God and others are intimately bound by the Christian ethic of love: "To love God is to love oneself truly; to help another person to love God is to love another person; to be helped by another person to love God is to be loved" (1995/1847, p. 107). Likewise, integrative theorists, such as Hall (2010), maintain that the goals of relational human development and spiritual transformation seem to converge. Such models demonstrate that the fullness of life promised to Christians who share both inherent sinfulness and the relational image of a triune God cannot be experienced apart from the Christian community. We therefore argue that, if the process of becoming the true self that God intends (i.e. salvation) begins with Christ's work on the cross and will be completed upon his return, then the health outcomes shown to be associated with receiving forgiveness from others might be tangible marks of salvation that has rooted and is yet to fully bloom among members of the Christian Church.

Forgiving Oneself

Forgiving oneself prompts health benefits that reveal God's redemptive work among his people. Yet, self-forgiveness should not come without restraint. One must heed the Apostle Paul's admonition: our sin has been crucified with Christ, so that we may live a resurrected life free from sin (Rom. 6:1). With similar refrain, Worthington (2013) maintains that responsible self-forgiveness entails managing the spiritual and social consequences of wrongdoing, as we previously discussed, before one turns to the psychological consequences that might occur as a result of violating one's moral standards or failing to meet one's self-expectations. One benefit that is associated with practicing responsible self-forgiveness is the amelioration of debilitating health outcomes that result from chronic negative emotions such as regret, anger, shame, and self-condemnation. For this reason, scholars regard self-forgiveness as closely related to health (Hall & Fincham, 2008; Worthington, Witvliet, Pietrini, & Miller, 2007).

In 1997, Coates performed one of the earliest examinations of self-forgiveness and health and concluded that the absence of self-forgiveness was correlated with increased levels of anxiety, depression, and hostility in women who were victims of domestic violence (N =107). Macaskill (2012) found that self-condemnation predicted poorer mental health (namely, somatic symptoms, anxiety, insomnia, depression, etc.) and life dissatisfaction among undergraduates (N = 1,297). And, Toussaint and Friedman (2009) found that increased levels of self-forgiveness were positively correlated with improved health outcomes such as affect balance, wellbeing, satisfaction with life, and gratitude among a sample of psychotherapy outpatients (N= 72).

Self-forgiveness may be especially pertinent to the health of people who experience traumatic events. For example, Witvliet, Phipps, Feldman, and Beckham (2004) found that the inability to forgive oneself predicted post-traumatic distress, depression, state anxiety, and trait anxiety among veterans seeking treatment for PTSD (N = 213). Worthington and Lang-berg (2012) argue further that military personnel with combat exposure may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of self-condemnation that might cripple one's physical, mental, social, and spiritual health. Some studies even link self-forgiveness to improved treatment outcomes among people who face physical and psychological health concerns such as cancer (Romero et al., 2006), spinal cord injury (Webb, Toussaint, Kal-pakjian, & Tate, 2010), and substance use disorders (Webb et al., 2009).

The concept of self-forgiveness is perhaps the most contested type of forgiveness from both psychological and theological perspectives. For example, Vitz and Meade (2011) criticize proponents of self-forgiveness based on three premises, which we find to be less convincing upon critical review. First, Vitz and his colleague seek to expose an impossible paradox that occurs when one's "good" self forgives one's "bad" self Although we contend that this critique provides a valid refutation of indefensible models of self-forgiveness that necessitate reconciliation of disparate parts of oneself (Enright & The Human Development Study Group, 1996; Hall & Fincham, 2005), this criticism and the definitions that it purportedly refutes erroneously collapse the act-agent division. Instead, we maintain that reconciliation between bifurcated parts of the self is not a condition of self-forgiveness and that self-forgiveness occurs when a responsible moral agent recognizes incongruence between one's behavior and moral self-representation and is able to resolve the incongruence while also accepting oneself as a flawed but valuable person (Mills, 1995; Holmgren 1998). That is to say, self-forgiveness does not require dividing the self, and it is consistent with the scriptural teachings that people are flawed (Rom. 5:8) and imbued with the imago dei (Gen 1:27).

Second, Vitz and Meade (2011) hold that self-forgiveness implies moral subjectivity. They maintain that one's authority to judge oneself by practicing self-forgiveness is incompatible with upholding one's moral responsibilities to others and to God. Yet, Christ expressed that the Christian moral standard applies to both one's actions and thoughts (see Mt. 5; 2 Cor. 10:5). And, if self-forgiveness includes replacing negative self-condemning emotions, thoughts, and behaviors with pro-self emotions, thoughts, and behaviors (Worthington, 2013), then Vitz and Meade's (2011) critique seems to violate a largely accepted ethical principle proposed by Immanuel Kant (1999/1792). Kant argued that a person who possesses a certain moral obligation must necessarily be capable of fulfilling that obligation ("ought implies can," see Holmgren, 1998). While the Kantian model affirms that an offender ought make every reasonable effort to fulfill moral obligations to others and to God, it does not follow that an offender's authority to forgive oneself ought to depend on whether or not a victim of offense is willing or able to offer interpersonal forgiveness. If one ought to be held morally responsible for one's thoughts, including one's own moral self-representation in the aftermath of wrongdoing, then one's own ability must be sufficient to form either morally permissible or morally impermissible beliefs about oneself even after committing wrongdoing. And, given God's offer of divine forgiveness, it may be that forgiving oneself and embracing one's capacity for moral growth in addition to making reasonable efforts to receive forgiveness from others is the best way that a moral agent might recover after perpetrating wrongdoing.

Finally, Vitz and Meade (2011) maintain that self-forgiveness ignores interpersonal accountability, thereby perpetuating a culture of narcissism. Although this critique identifies an egocentric and reckless type of self-forgiveness that is certainly incompatible with responsible moral agency (i.e., excusing oneself of blame), forgiving oneself need not ignore the divine and social consequences of wrongdoing. On the contrary, giving priority to one's own self-condemning appraisal over the forgiving appraisal of God may be equally consistent with Vitz et al.'s (2011) presumed culture of narcissism. This critique might be best refuted by empirical investigations of responsible self-forgiveness using measures that are not confounded by simply excusing oneself of blame for committing wrongdoing (Woodyatt & Wenzel, 2013). We therefore maintain that responsible self-forgiveness is theologically defensible and that improved health outcomes that are associated with self-forgiveness provide evidence of the restoration of sinners to God, to others, and to one's true moral self.

Granting Forgiveness to Others Granting forgiveness to an offender gives Christians a taste of what it means to be truly redeemed, and we see this from the health benefits reported by victims who grant forgiveness to their perpetrators. 'When one seeks to forgive those who cause harm, one empathizes with the Father's forgiveness and Jesus' merciful self-emptying love. In fact, by forgiving others, we experience life in true Christian community, which functions as a foretaste of eternal life spent alongside our creator within the body of believers.

Investigations of trait forgivingness, that is one's disposition to forgive regardless of circumstantial details, dominate the forgiveness-health literature (Hall & Fincham, 2005). This is perhaps because discernable changes in health related to forgiveness may be in part the result of chronic stress and more easily identified among those who consistently forgive across situations and over the lifespan (Webb, Toussaint, Kalpakjian, & Tate, 2010). Numerous studies link trait forgivingness to lower levels of depression, anxiety, and hostility. For example, Lawler-Row and Piferi (2006) concluded that trait forgivingness was associated with reduced stress and depression as well as increased psychological well-being and health behavior among older adults (N = 425). Also, Berry, Worthington, O'Connor, Parrott, and Wade (2005) found that trait forgivingness was related to health-promoting positive affects (agreeableness, empathic concern, perspective-taking, and extraversion) and fewer illness-inducing negative affects (neuroticism, trait anger, hostility, depression, and fear) among undergraduate students (N = 179). Likewise, forgiving another person of a single offense, or state forgiveness, has also been associated with improved health outcomes. One study conducted by Messay, Dixon, and Rye (2012) revealed that state forgiveness was related to lower levels of psychological distress, especially depression, anxiety, and stress among undergraduates from a Catholic university (N = 242). Still, studies of the health outcomes associated with trait forgivingness far outnumber examinations of state forgiveness and health.

Correlates of forgiveness, such as increased positive and reduced negative affect, lead some scholars to question how mental health outcomes intercede in the relationship between forgiveness and physical health (Green, DeCourville, & Sadava, 2012). For example, decreased levels of anxiety, depression, anger, and stress associated with forgiveness may help explain why forgiving individuals are at lower risk of developing cardiovascular problems (Friedberg, Such-day, & Srinivas, 2009; Lawler-Row, Karremans, Scott, Edlish-Matityahou, & Edwards, 2008). Also, people who forgive others appear to exhibit stronger immune systems (Seybold, Hill, Neumann, & Chi, 2001), decreased physiological reactivity to stress (Lawler et al., 2003), lower blood pressure (Wirvliet, 2005), and fewer physical symptoms overall (Toussaint, Williams, Musick, 8c Everson, 2001). All of these studies allude to a common point: the relationship between forgiveness and physical health is likely mediated by mental health mechanisms and moderated by factors such as personality traits, religiousness, and spirituality.

In addition to psychological analyses, theological evidence compels Christians to forgive others. For example, divine forgiveness provides a prototype by which Christians learn to forgive within the body of Christ and in the world at large. As C. S. Lewis poetically stated: "To be a Christian means to forgive the inexcusable, because God has forgiven the inexcusable in you" (2001/1949, p. 182). Emphases on forgiveness and community are essential to the Christian faith and the relational character of God. Grenz (1994) maintained that the social harmony displayed by the triune God--Father, Son, and Spirit--is a model for ideal communal living. He argues that insofar as people bear the image of God, the goal of personhood is to live in community with one another and with God instead of existing in isolation (1 John 1:3). And, among the community of believers, forgiveness is the thread that holds the fabric of Christian congregation together. It is thus revealed both in the assembly (e.g., ecclesia) and its rituals (e.g., the sacrament of communion, which in the Catholic tradition, is to be withheld if one is not at peace with one's neighbor).

Christ charged his followers to live according to the principles of love and forgiveness so that all people might recognize the eschatological Kingdom of God by how Christians treat one another (Mt. 5:43-48; Jn 13:34-35). The Apostle Paul recapitulated this idea when he argued that Christians must imitate Christ in their relationships with one another in anticipation of their Lord's return (Phil. 2:5-11). Even more, Paul argued, Christians possess a ministry to reconcile all people to the divine forgiveness available in Christ (2 Cor. 5:18-19). It is thus a Christian's ministry of forgiveness to all humans, believers and nonbelievers, that establishes people of faith as the instruments of God's forgiving work in addition to being recipients of divine forgiveness. So, by forgiving others, Christians incur health outcomes that point toward the restoration inherent within God's redemptive agenda.

Caveats to this Analysis

Three caveats qualify our integrative discussion of the mental and physical health outcomes associated with forgiveness. First, participants in the studies reviewed herein were not solely Christians, and Christians neither exclusively bear the image of God (Gen. 1:27) nor exclusively reap the benefits of all God's promises (Mt. 5:25). Yet, we maintain that religiousness and forgiveness may jointly explain health outcomes (Worthington, Berry, & Parrot, 2001) and that religiousness may amplify the benefits of value-congruent virtues (i.e., forgiveness) beyond what is experienced by people who hold a non-religious worldview (Worthington et al., 2012).

Second, we agree with Strelan and Covic (2006) and Worthington (2006, 2013) that the health outcomes associated with forgiveness might be explained according to an adapted stress-and-coping model (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Offenses in which one is either a victim or a perpetrator might serve as an initial stressor that prompts one to form primary appraisals (i.e., perceptions ofwhether or not an offense is relevant to one's self-representation) and secondary appraisals (i.e., perceptions of blame, availability of coping resources, and implications of the event for one's future) pertaining to the offense. If an offense is appraised as threatening, then one might manifest a stress-response comprised of potentially chronic negative emotions, cognitions, and behaviors. The stress response is primarily comprised of negative emotion and might be construed as unforgive-ness toward others, in the case that one is rhe victim of an offense, or as self-condemnation, in the case that one is the perpetrator of an offense. Finally, one may attempt to cope with the stress-response via a variety of coping methods (i.e., seeking revenge, pursuing legal or divine justice, excusing an offense, etc.), but forgiveness affords the person with a health-promoting coping strategy by replacing chronic negative emotions with positive emotions. Future evidence might reveal how religious variables influence this stress-and-coping process among people of faith.

Third, we acknowledge the role of both mediating and moderating variables in the forgiveness-health relationship (Griffin, Worthington, Lavelock, Wade, & Hoyt, in press). It is probable that psychological states (i.e., increased positive emotion and decreased negative emotion) function as mechanisms by which dispositional forgiveness and forgiveness of a specific offense might impact health. In addition, health outcomes that are associated with forgiveness of a specific offense occur within the context of particular people involved in particular offenses. In cases such as these, the forgiveness-health relationship is to some degree moderated by individual differences specific to the parties involved (i.e., male v. female, religious v. nonreligious, etc.), the nature of the offense (i.e., pre-offense closeness, severity of offense, etc.), and the proximity of the harm (i.e., within a marriage, the workplace, at sociopolitical level, etc.).

Discussion

Christian theology provides insight for the scientific investigation of healing effects associated with forgiveness. In the present article, we described how health outcomes associated with receiving forgiveness from God, others, and oneself, as well as granting forgiveness to others, are incarnate expressions of the salvific restoration of Christians. The integrative model we propose only begins to unfold the fabric of the forgiveness-health relationship; therefore, we posit implications of the model for future research.

First, according to Christian doctrine, people are both perpetrators in need of forgiveness and victims who may exercise the divine activity of forgiveness. Indeed, Christ taught his followers to pray, "Forgive US our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors" (Mt. 6:12; Lk. 11:4). Yet, empirical examinations of forgiveness from the perspective of victims of harm far outnumber examinations from the perspective perpetrators. Future research should adopt the multi-perspectival scriptural model of forgiveness to inform investigations of forgiveness and health from both the perspectives of perpetrators and victims of offense.

Second, findings related to the impact of divine forgiveness on health are mixed. One possible explanation for the disparity is a possible methodological flaw by which divine forgiveness is assessed according to doctrinal assent not implicit emotional knowledge of having been forgiven by God. This potential confound may be particularly misleading in studies of forgiveness and health, which depend upon the emotion focused stress-and-coping model. While some effort has been made to examine the effect of feeling personally forgiven by God (McConnell & Dixon, 2012), scholars need an instrument that is more sensitive to the emotional experience of feeling forgiven by God that might in turn yield more accurate knowledge about the affect of feeling forgiven by God on health outcomes.

Third, our discussion of the psychological and theological critiques of self-forgiveness may help introduce the burgeoning self-forgiveness literature to a theologically equipped audience. In fact, our integrative platform offers a conceptual critique of self-forgiveness overall. For example, some scholars suggest that self-forgiveness entails reconciliation with oneself (Hall & Fincham, 2005); yet, we argued that self-forgiveness is concerned with repairing one's moral self-representation in the aftermath of wrongdoing rather than the reconciliation of conflicting parts of the self. Furthermore, the self-forgiveness literature shows promising indications of being particularly relevant to the forgiveness-health relation, and there is only a small amount of literature that seeks to explain how religious factors influence the process of self-forgiveness among people of faith.

In conclusion, studies of the healing effects of forgiveness now occur beyond theological circles alone and incorporate the methodological rigor of the social sciences. We attempted to integrate these distinct theological and psychological points of view regarding the effect of forgiveness on health. We further hope that future investigations of the forgiveness-health relationship will continue to occur within the context of God's redemptive plan for his people. In this way, scholars examine the intimate connection of Christ's incarnation and God's redemptive agenda for the community of believers.

References

Berry, J. W., Worthington, E. L., Jr., O'Connor, L. E., Parrott, L. Ill., & Wade, N. G. (2005). Forgivingness, vengeful rumination, and affective traits. Journal ofPersonality 73(1), 183-225.

Bonhoeffer, D. (1954). Lift together: The classic exploration of Christian community. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.

Coates, D. (1997). The correlations of forgiveness of self, forgiveness of others, and hostility, depression, anxiety, self-esteem, life adaptation, and religiosity among female victims of domestic violence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58(5), 2667B.

Enright, R. D., 8c The Human Development Study Group (1996). Counseling within the forgiveness triad: On forgiving, receiving forgiveness, and self-forgiveness. Counseling and Values, 40, 107-126.

Evans, C. S. (2009). Kierkegaard: An introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Fetzer Institute/Nacional Institute on Aging Working Group. (1999). Multidimensional measurement of religiousness/spirituality for use in health research. Kalamazoo, MI: Fetzer Institute.

Friedberg, J. P., Suchday, S., & Srinivas, V. S. (2009). Relationship between forgiveness and psychological indices in cardiac patients. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 16(3), 205-211.

Green, M., DeCourville, N., & Sadava, S. (2012). Positive affect, negative affect, stress, and social support as mediators of the forgiveness-health relationship. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(3), 288-307.

Grenz, S. (1994). Theology fir the community of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Broadman and Holman Publishers.

Griffin, B. J., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Lavelock, C. R., Wade, N. G., & Hoyt, W. T. (in press). Forgiveness and mental health. In L. L. Toussaint, E. L. Worthington Jr., & D. R. Williams (Eds.), Forgiveness and health: Scientific evidence and theories relating forgiveness to better health. New York: Springer.

Hall, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2008). The temporal course of self-for-givenesslourna/ ofSocial and Clinical Psychology, 27(2), 174-202.

Hall, J. H., 8c Fincham, F. D. (2005). Self-forgiveness: The stepchild of forgiveness research. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24(5), 621-637.

Hall, T. W. (2010). The person as spirit: Human attachment and relationality. In Psychology in the Spirit U. H. Coe & T. W. Hall). Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press.

Hirsch, J. K., Webb, J. R., 8c Jeglic, E. L. (2012). Forgiveness as a moderator of the association between anger expression and suicidal behavior. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, /5(3), 279-300. doi: 10.1080/13674676.2011.571666

Holmgren, M. R. (1998). Self--forgiveness and responsible moral agency.Journal of Value Inquity, 32,75-91.

Kant, I. (1998/1792). Kant: Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: And Other Writings (A. W. Wood & G. di Giovanni, Trans.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kierkegaard, S. (1995/1847). Works of love (H V. Hong & E. H. Hong, Trans.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Lawler-Row, K. A. (2010). Forgiveness as a mediator of the religiosity-health relationship. Psychology If Religion and Spirituality, 2( I ), 1-16. doi: 10.1037/a0017584

Lawler-Row, K. A., Karremans, J. C., Scott, C., Edlis-Matiryahou, M., 8c Edwards, L. (2008). Forgiveness, physiological reactivity and health: The role of anger. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 68(0,51-58.

Lawler-Row, K. A., & Piferi, R. L. (2006). The forgiving personality: Describing a life well lived? Personality and Individual Diferences, 41(6), 1009-1020. doi: 10.10164paid.2006.04.007

Lawler, K. A., Younger, J. W., Pifcri, R. L., Billington, E., Jobe, R., Edmondson, K., & Jones, W. H. (2003). A change of heart: Cardiovascular correlates of forgiveness in response to interpersonal con-flict.Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 26(5), 373-393.

Lazarus, R. S., & Follanan, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

Lewis, C. S. (1949/2001). The weight of glory: And other addresses. New York: Harper Collins.

Lyons, G. C. B., Deane, F. P., Caputi, P. & Kelly, P. J. (2011). Spirituality and the treatment of substance use disorders: An exploration of forgiveness, resentment, and purpose in life. Addiction Research and Theory, 19(5), 459-469.

Macaskill, A. (2012). Differentiating dispositional self-forgiveness from other-forgiveness: Associations with mental health and life satisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 31(1), 28-50.

McConnell, J. M., & Dixon, D. N. (2012). Perceived forgiveness from god and self-forgiveness.JournalqfPsychology and Christianity, 31(0,31-39.

Messay, B., Dixon, L. J., & Rye, M. S. (2012). The relationship between quest religious orientation, forgiveness, and mental health. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 15(3), 315-333.

Mills, J. K. (1995). On self--forgiveness and moral self--representa-tion. Journal of Valuelnquily, 29, 407-409.

Romero, C., , M., Elledge, IL, Chang, J., Liscurn, K. R., & Friedman, L. C. (2006). Self-forgiveness, spirituality, and psychological adjustment in women with breast cancer. _Journal ofBehavioral Medicine, 29(1), 29-36. doi: 10.1007/s10865-005-9038-z

Seybold, K. S., Hill, P. C., Neumann, J. K., & Chi, D. S. (2001). Physiological and psychological correlates of forgiveness. Journal of Psychology and Christiania, 203(3), 250-259.

Strauss, M. L. (2007) Four portraits, one Jesus: A survey of Jesus and the gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Strelan, P., & Covic, T. (2006). A review of forgiveness process models and a coping framework to guide future research. Journa/ ifSocial and Clinical Psychology, 25(10), 1059-1085.

Toussaint, L. L., & Friedman, P. (2009). Forgiveness, gratitude, and well-being: The mediating role of affect and beliefs.Journa/of Happi-ness Studies, 10(6), 635-654.

Toussaint, L. L., Owen, A. D., & Cheadle, A. (2012). Forgive to live: Forgiveness, health, and longevity. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 35, 375-386.

Toussaint, L. L., Williams, D. R., Musick, M. A., & Everson, S. A. (2001). Forgiveness and health: Age differences in a U.S. probability sample. Journal of Adult Development, 8(4), 249-257. doi: 10.1023/A:1011394629736

Vitz, P. C., & Meade, J. M. (2011). Self-forgiveness in psychology and psychotherapy: A critique. Journal qfReligion and Health, 50, 248-263.

Walker, D. F., & Gorsuch, R. L. (2002). Forgiveness within the big five personality model. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1127-1137.

Watts, F. N. (Ed.). (2007). Jesus and psychology. Philadelphia, PA: Templeton Press.

Webb, J. It, Robinson, E. A. R., & Brower, K. J. (2009). Forgiveness and mental health among people entering outpatient treatment with alcohol problems. Alcoholism Treatment, Quarterly, 27(4), 368-388. doi: 10.1080/07347320903209822

Webb, J. R., Robinson, E. A., Brower, K. J., & Zucker, R. A. (2006). Forgiveness and alcohol problems among people entering substance abuse treatment. Journai of Addictive Diseases, 25(3), 55-67.

Webb, J. R., Toussaint, L., Kalpakjian, C. Z., & Tate, D. G. (2010). Forgiveness and health-related outcomes among people with spinal cord injury. Disability and Rehabilitation, 32(5), 360-366. doi: 10.3109/09638280903166360

Witvliet, C. V. 0. (2005). Unforgiveness, forgiveness, and justice: Scientific findings on feelings and physiology. In E. L. Worthington, Jr. (Ed.), Handbook offergiveness (pp. 305-320). New York: Brunner-Routledge.

Witvliet, C. V.0., Phipps, K. A., Feldman, M. E., & Beckham, J. C. (2004). Posttraumatic mental and physical health correlates of forgiveness and religious coping in military veterans. Journal If Traumatic Stress, 17(3), 269-273.

Woodyatt, L., & Wenzel, M. (2013). Self-forgiveness and restoration of an offender following an interpersonal transgression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 32(2), 225-259.

Worthington, E. L., Jr. (2006). Forgiveness and reconciliation: Theory and application. New York: Routledge.

Worthington, E. L.. Jr. (2013). Movingfirward: Six steps to forgiving yourself and breakingfree from the past. Colorado Springs. CO: WaterBrook /Multnomah.

Worthington, E. L., Jr., Berry, J. W., & Parrott, L., III. (2001). Un-forgiveness, forgiveness, religion, and-health. In T. G. Plante & A. C. Sherman (Eds.), Faith and health: Psychological perspectives (pp.107-138). New York: Guilford Press.

Worthington, E. L., Jr., Davis, D. E., Hook, J. N., Gartner, A. L., Webb, J., Toussaint, L. L., & Sandage, S. J. (2012). Forgiveness. In T. Plante (Ed.), Religion, spirituality, and positive psychology: Understanding the psychological fi-uits offilith (pp. 63-78). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/Greenwood (ABC/CLIO).

Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Langberg, D. (2012). Self-forgiveness in treating complex trauma and moral injury in present and former soldiers. Journa/ of Psychology and Theology, 40, 274-288.

Worthington, E. L., Jr., Witvliet, C. V. 0., Pietrini, P., & Miller, A. J. (2007). Forgiveness, health, and well-being: A review of evidence for emotional versus decisional forgiveness, dispositional forgivingness, and reduced unforgiveness. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 30(4), 291-302.

Brandon J. Griffin, Caroline R. Lavelock, and Everett L. Worthington, Jr. Virginia Commonzvealth University

Authors Note: Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Everett L. Worthington, Jr., Box 842018, 806 West Franklin Street, Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23284-2018. Email: eworth@ vcu.cdu

Author Information

GRIFFIN, BRANDON J. Address: 806 West Franklin Street, Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23284. Title: Doctoral Student in VCU's APA-accredited Counseling Psychology Program. Degrees: BA (Psychology) & BA (Religious Studies) Southwest Baptist University. Specialization: Secular and religiously-adapted forgiveness interventions, self-forgiveness.

LAVELOCK, CAROLINE R. Address: 806 West Franklin Street, Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23284. Title: Doctoral Student in VCU 's APA-accredited Counseling Psychology Program. Degrees: MS (Psychology) Virginia Commonwealth University. Specialization: positive psychology, interventions designed to promote virtue, patience.

WORTHINGTON JR., EVERETT L. PhD. Address: Virginia Commonwealth University, P.O. Box 842018, Richmond, VA 23284-2018. Email: ewortha@vcu.edu. Title: Professor of Psychology. Degrees: PhD (Counseling Psychology) University of Missouri-Columbia. Specializations: REACH forgiveness intervention, humility, religious/spiritual interventions, Hope-Focused Couple Approach.