Forgiveness

Matthew 6:14-15 is Jesus’s own commentary on the one petition in the Lord’s Prayer he chose to expand: “forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors” (6:12). Colossians 3:13 sits in a list of clothing the church is to “put on” (3:12). The motive is retrospective, “just as the Lord forgave you,” and the setting is a community of people who will keep giving each other “complaints.” For the Christian, then, forgiveness is first a theological reality grounded in what God has done in Christ, and it is practiced inside ongoing relationships. It is also, as Everett Worthington has spent a career showing, a psychological process with measurable effects.

Two kinds of forgiving. Researchers now separate decisional forgiveness, a behavioral intention to give up revenge and treat the offender differently, from emotional forgiveness, the gradual replacement of resentment with other-oriented emotions such as empathy and compassion (Worthington et al., 2007). The two often come apart. A man can sincerely decide, in obedience, to cancel the debt and still feel his jaw tighten when the offender walks into the room. The research suggests the health-relevant changes track mainly with the emotional side (Worthington et al., 2007). That fits the shape of the texts: Jesus commands the decision, and Paul describes a character that is put on and worn over time.

Unforgiveness as a stress state. Worthington and Scherer (2004) argued that unforgiveness works as a chronic stress reaction, a blend of resentment, bitterness, hostility, and fear. On that account, emotional forgiveness is a coping strategy that removes the stressor at its emotional source. The laboratory evidence is consistent. Witvliet, Ludwig, and Vander Laan (2001) had 71 adults alternate between rehearsing a real hurt and nursing a grudge, and imagining empathy and granting forgiveness to the same offender. Grudge imagery produced more negative emotion, more brow-muscle tension, higher skin conductance, and higher heart rate and blood pressure. Several of those effects carried into the recovery period after the imagery stopped. Forgiving imagery produced smaller stress responses and a greater sense of control. Lawler and colleagues found the same pattern when people were interviewed about real betrayals. In 108 college students, state forgiveness went with lower blood pressure and heart rate and less cardiovascular reactivity (Lawler et al., 2003). In 81 community adults, the link between forgiveness and fewer physical symptoms ran mostly through reduced negative emotion and reduced stress (Lawler et al., 2005).

The engine underneath is rumination: replaying the offense. McCullough and colleagues (2007) followed 115 undergraduates who had been hurt in the previous week, sampling them up to five times. On occasions when a student was ruminating more than was usual for him or her, salivary cortisol was higher than usual, and the link appeared to run through fear of the offender. Cortisol is the end product of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, the body’s slower stress system. Briefly, the hypothalamus signals the pituitary, the pituitary signals the adrenal glands, and the adrenals release cortisol to mobilize energy for a threat. That is useful for an emergency. It is costly when a memory keeps re-triggering it for weeks. In other words, the grudge keeps the threat system on duty after the event is over. Witvliet and colleagues (2011) then tested alternatives with 54 adults. Rumination sped the heart and lowered heart-rate variability, a marker of the parasympathetic “brake.” Both compassionate reappraisal (seeing the offender as a flawed human who needs to change) and simple suppression calmed the body. Only reappraisal also increased positive emotion and forgiveness.

What happens in the brain? Ricciardi and colleagues (2013) scanned ten healthy volunteers as they imagined hurtful scenarios (a betraying friend, an unjust boss) and were then told either to forgive or to hold a grudge. Granting forgiveness engaged a network including the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, precuneus, and right inferior parietal lobule. These regions are associated with cognitive emotion regulation, perspective-taking, and empathy. A review of the field by Fourie, Hortensius, and Decety (2020) organizes the evidence into three interacting components. The first is cognitive control (lateral prefrontal cortex), which holds back the urge to retaliate. The second is perspective-taking (temporoparietal junction), which models what was going on in the offender’s mind. The third is social valuation (ventromedial prefrontal cortex), which recalculates what the relationship and the person are worth. Put plainly, forgiving takes effort: you restrain the reflex, imagine the other man’s inner life, and re-value him. Ten people imagining scenarios is a long way from real betrayal. The participants were told to use reappraisal, the sample is tiny, and the authors call their results preliminary. Fourie and colleagues also warn that lab paradigms translate poorly to real wounds. Still, the pattern is consistent with what Colossians implies: forgiveness is deliberate and involves seeing the offender differently.

Health and longevity, honestly stated. Pooling 103 samples (26,043 participants), Rasmussen and colleagues (2019) found a reliable association between forgiveness and health. It was stronger for psychological than physical health, though links with heart rate and blood pressure were robust. In a five-week study of 332 adults, weeks when forgiveness rose were followed by less perceived stress and, in turn, fewer mental-health symptoms; the reverse direction fit worse (Toussaint et al., 2016). In a U.S. national sample of 1,232 adults aged 66 and older, people whose forgiveness of others was conditional (given only if the offender apologized or made amends) had higher mortality risk over follow-up, partly through poorer physical health (Toussaint et al., 2012). These are correlational findings, and none proves that forgiving will lengthen anyone’s life.

Forgiveness can be learned, and cheaply. A meta-analysis of 54 reports found that structured forgiveness interventions increased forgiveness compared with no treatment (Δ = 0.56) and with alternative treatments (Δ = 0.45). The interventions also reduced depression and anxiety, and the gains held at follow-up (Wade et al., 2014). The most striking recent test was a preregistered, randomized trial of 4,598 adults in Colombia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, South Africa, and Ukraine. A self-directed REACH Forgiveness workbook, taking roughly two hours, reduced unforgiveness (standardized difference −0.53) and modestly reduced depression and anxiety (about −0.2) at two weeks, compared with a waitlist (Ho et al., 2024). The trial was short and relied on self-report, but it is large and international.

A necessary caution. Forgiving is not excusing, and it is not the same as reconciling. In a four-year study of newlyweds, spouses who were more forgiving saw their partners’ psychological and physical aggression stay level, while less forgiving spouses saw it decline (McNulty, 2011). Releasing the debt and confronting ongoing sin (Matthew 18:15) belong together.

Practice

Living it out

Five practices drawn from this passage. Each says how strong the research behind it is. What the labels mean.

1. 1

   Pray the fifth petition with a name in it

   When you pray “forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors,” name one person and say the decision out loud: “I release him from what he owes me.” This is decisional forgiveness, the step Jesus commands in Matthew 6:14-15. Decisional forgiveness is well defined in the research but is not by itself the part most tied to physiological benefit (Worthington et al., 2007, a review). So treat the prayer as the starting line, not the finish. Evidence for the prayer itself as a health practice: none tested directly. Evidence that decision and emotion differ: moderate.

2. 2

   When the replay starts, switch to compassionate reappraisal

   You will notice the mental re-run: the argument you should have won, the speech you will give. Spend two minutes deliberately picturing the offender as a whole person, someone with his own history and pressures who needs God’s work as much as you do. Then pray for his good (Luke 6:28). In lab studies this swap lowered heart rate and blood pressure, and only reappraisal (not suppression) also increased forgiveness (Witvliet et al., 2001; Witvliet et al., 2011). Evidence: good experimental support for short-term physiology in small samples (n = 54–71). Long-term health effects are not shown.

3. 3

   Work through REACH with a brother, once a quarter

   REACH stands for Recall the hurt (without blaming), Empathize with the offender, offer the Altruistic gift of forgiveness (remembering you were forgiven, Colossians 3:13), Commit to the forgiveness you have experienced (write it down), and Hold on when the old feelings return. The free workbook takes about two hours. Pair up, each pick one specific hurt, and compare notes a week later. Evidence: strong. A 4,598-person multinational randomized trial found that the workbook reduced unforgiveness, with smaller drops in depression and anxiety (Ho et al., 2024), and a meta-analysis found longer, structured programs work best (Wade et al., 2014).

4. 4

   Write down what “it” was, then mark the date you released it

   Colossians says “whoever has a complaint.” Name the complaint specifically on paper, and when old feelings flare, go back to the dated note rather than reopening the case (“I already released this on March 3”). This is the “Commit” and “Hold on” steps of REACH. It also targets rumination, which in a within-person study tracked with higher cortisol on high-rumination days (McCullough et al., 2007). Evidence: moderate for the link between rumination and stress hormones. The written note itself has not been tested on its own and is part of the workbook package.

5. 5

   Forgive fully; set boundaries where sin is ongoing

   Forgiving your wife, son, or coworker does not mean pretending nothing happened or staying quiet about a continuing pattern. Release the debt, and also have the Matthew 18:15 conversation. Where there is abuse, get pastoral and professional help. Longitudinal data show that forgiving without accountability can let aggression continue (McNulty, 2011). Evidence: one well-designed longitudinal study of newlyweds; it shows forgiveness is not a stand-alone fix.

Studies cited on this page15

1. ↗ Fourie, M. M., Hortensius, R., & Decety, J. (2020). Parsing the components of forgiveness: Psychological and neural mechanisms. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 112, 437–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.02.020
2. ↗ Ho, M. Y., Worthington, E. L., Jr., Cowden, R. G., Bechara, A. O., Chen, Z. J., Gunatirin, E. Y., Joynt, S., Khalanskyi, V. V., Korzhov, H., Kurniati, N. M. T., Rodriguez, N., Salnykova, A., Shtanko, L., Tymchenko, S., Voytenko, V. L., Zulkaida, A., Mathur, M. B., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2024). International REACH forgiveness intervention: A multisite randomised controlled trial. BMJ Public Health, 2(1), e000072. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2023-000072
3. ↗ Lawler, K. A., Younger, J. W., Piferi, R. L., Billington, E., Jobe, R., Edmondson, K., & Jones, W. H. (2003). A change of heart: Cardiovascular correlates of forgiveness in response to interpersonal conflict. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 26(5), 373–393. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025771716686
4. ↗ Lawler, K. A., Younger, J. W., Piferi, R. L., Jobe, R. L., Edmondson, K. A., & Jones, W. H. (2005). The unique effects of forgiveness on health: An exploration of pathways. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 28(2), 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-005-3665-2
5. ↗ McCullough, M. E., Orsulak, P., Brandon, A., & Akers, L. (2007). Rumination, fear, and cortisol: An in vivo study of interpersonal transgressions. Health Psychology, 26(1), 126–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.26.1.126
6. ↗ McNulty, J. K. (2011). The dark side of forgiveness: The tendency to forgive predicts continued psychological and physical aggression in marriage. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(6), 770–783. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211407077
7. ↗ Rasmussen, K. R., Stackhouse, M., Boon, S. D., Comstock, K., & Ross, R. (2019). Meta-analytic connections between forgiveness and health: The moderating effects of forgiveness-related distinctions. Psychology & Health, 34(5), 515–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2018.1545906
8. ↗ Ricciardi, E., Rota, G., Sani, L., Gentili, C., Gaglianese, A., Guazzelli, M., & Pietrini, P. (2013). How the brain heals emotional wounds: The functional neuroanatomy of forgiveness. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 839. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00839
9. ↗ Toussaint, L. L., Owen, A. D., & Cheadle, A. (2012). Forgive to live: Forgiveness, health, and longevity. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 35(4), 375–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-011-9362-4
10. ↗ Toussaint, L. L., Shields, G. S., & Slavich, G. M. (2016). Forgiveness, stress, and health: A 5-week dynamic parallel process study. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 50(5), 727–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-016-9796-6
11. ↗ Wade, N. G., Hoyt, W. T., Kidwell, J. E. M., & Worthington, E. L., Jr. (2014). Efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions to promote forgiveness: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 82(1), 154–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035268
12. ↗ Witvliet, C. V. O., DeYoung, N. J., Hofelich, A. J., & DeYoung, P. A. (2011). Compassionate reappraisal and emotion suppression as alternatives to offense-focused rumination: Implications for forgiveness and psychophysiological well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(4), 286–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2011.577091
13. ↗ Witvliet, C. V. O., Ludwig, T. E., & Vander Laan, K. L. (2001). Granting forgiveness or harboring grudges: Implications for emotion, physiology, and health. Psychological Science, 12(2), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00320
14. ↗ Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Scherer, M. (2004). Forgiveness is an emotion-focused coping strategy that can reduce health risks and promote health resilience: Theory, review, and hypotheses. Psychology & Health, 19(3), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/0887044042000196674
15. ↗ Worthington, E. L., Jr., Witvliet, C. V. O., 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-007-9105-8