Senior Thesis

HOPING TO SURVIVE, LEARNING TO FORGIVE:

 A Look into Genocidal Psychology

and the Process of Forgiveness

By

                                          RYAN WHITELEY SMITH         

Senior Thesis submitted to my Integrated Studies Board

 of Utah Valley University in partial fulfillment of the

 requirements for a Bachelor of Science in Integrated Studies

PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

Orem, Utah

April 2013

Table of Contents

Abstract........... 4 ........... ........... ...........  

Introduction ........... 5........... ...........

Genocide........... 5

Social Identity Theory........... 7

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions........... 7........... ........... ...........

Rwanda........... 10

Immaculée Ilibagiza........... 13

Genocidal Psychology and Those who Survived........... 16

Coping with Anger and Loving Your Enemies........... 17

What is Forgiveness? ........... 20........... ...........

Learning to Forgive ........... 22

Benefits and Healing Power of Forgiveness ........... 24

Rwanda Revisited........... 25

References........... 27........... ........... ...........

Abstract

            This paper will discuss genocides and the road that survivors take in learning to forgive in the aftermath. Through the stories of survivors such as Immaculeé Iligabiza we learn the importance of hope and perseverance. These stories of survival and forgiveness not only heal the individual, but the country as a whole. The psychological consequences of losing the family and life one once loved can impact a person’s thoughts and future endeavors.

            Forgiveness is the decision to let go of anger, resentment, and thoughts of revenge. Forgiveness can lead to feelings of understanding, empathy, and compassion for the ones who’ve harmed or offended. How does a person forgive another after terrible violence has been done to them? The transforming power of forgiveness can turn individuals from helpless victims to masters of their reality. The concepts of learning to cope with anger and forgiving our enemies as well as forgiveness from a personal and societal viewpoint will be explored.   

           

 

“To err is human, to forgive; divine.” – William Shakespeare

Introduction

            Nearly everyone has been hurt by the actions or words of another. Deep emotional wounds can leave someone with feelings of bitterness, anger, and desire for vengeance. Forgiveness is an undervalued and under practiced principle in society. By embracing the idea of forgiveness a person can also gather feelings of peace, hope, gratitude, and joy. Forgiving will enable a person to travel down a path of physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. Practicing forgiveness can lead to a physical and emotional health. This virtue is one of the highest and most noble of virtues a person can possess.

            This paper will examine the effects of genocide on those that survive and the process of learning to forgive the perpetrators. The transforming power of forgiveness can turn individuals from helpless victims to masters of their reality.

Genocide

            Humanity has experienced many terrible disasters, but non-worse than the genocides that have occurred when one group of people has persecuted and sought the annihilation of another. Genocide and ethnic cleansing have been happening throughout human history. From the Crusades, to the Inquisition, the Reign of Terror, to the Jewish Holocaust and the mass killings in Rwanda, humanity has seen its share of inhumanity and hatred between people. History will continue to repeat itself and humans will likely not overcome the psychology of hate. Lessons that should be learned are lost in ignorance.

            Carny (2000) said “ While democracies must ardently protect freedom of speech, they must also set limits on forces that threaten to undermine the foundations of democratic society, such as efforts to legitimate and incite violence against groups of people” (Carny 2000, pg. 17).

            Webster’s Dictionary defines genocide as “ The deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2004). This leaves unclear what makes up a group of people, or how many people can be killed before it is considered a genocidal event and not just an incident of murder. As humans we still tend to ignore those who have lived through genocide and their experiences. The cry for “never again” seems to be continually forgotten by the global community. Indifference and hate go on and though we have witnessed such tragedies in the past we do nothing to prevent them.

            The human race is connected both genetically and biologically and inside we are all made of the same blood, bone, and tissue. All of us have the basic survival needs, which include mental and physical health, love, and a sense of safety. The view “my tribe is better than your tribe” is a basic indigenous idea engrained in the human psyche. Humans typically view someone else as “the other,” who is below us, and the scapegoat for our problems. Groups that begin genocidal crimes use this idea to weaken others and promote their selfish agendas through propaganda.

            Leaders of genocidal acts use lies to keep the psychology of hate in play. Hitler and his Nazi party used old prejudices against the Jews to label them as outsiders who threatened the Christian German Aryan majority within Germany. It was thought that for the good of the majority a minority, which is unfit to inhabit the same land, needed to be removed. In Rwanda the Hutus used faulty science to prove that Tutsis were of another race and not worthy to dwell among them. They were less than Hutu; they were cockroaches, vermin; they were “the other’s.”

            During his time in Auschwitz Denis Avey, who was a British POW, describes the horrors he experienced in his book The Man Who Broke Into Auschwitz. He says, “It was days before I was able to reflect on those hours in Auschwitz and appreciate the utter desperation of the place. It was the worse thing you could do to a man, I realised. Take everything away from him – his possession, his pride, his self-esteem – and then kill him. Kill him slowly. Man’s inhumanity to man doesn’t begin to describe it” (Avey 2011, pg. 149).

Social Identity Theory

            Henri Trajfel, a British social psychologist, came up with the Social Identity Theory based on a person’s sense of who they are in relation to the community or group membership they are a part of. He said that the group that a person is part of gives an individual their source of pride and sense of belonging. A group will give a person their sense of social identity within the world at large.             

            Trajfel thought that stereotyping was a normal cognitive process that people inadvertently did. When stereotyping people typically will exaggerate the differences between the two groups, and also the similarities of aspects within the same group.

            To increase out self-image people will try to enhance the status of the group that they belong to. Based upon social categorization the world becomes divided into an “us” and “them” conflict. Social identity theory labels the “us” group as the in-group and the “them” group as the out-group. The in-group will seek out negative aspects of the out-group and discriminate against them to build pride within their own group. Racism spawns from prejudice views amongst cultures and this tension can lead to violent actions and genocide.

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions

            Truth Commissions are an important part of the reconciling that a nation does in the aftermath of genocide. Rimé, Kanyangara, Yzerbyt, and Paez (2011) talk about the importance of a truth commission in their research article:

          After a war or after the downfall of an oppressive regime, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) is a popular tool in the transition to peace. It has already been used in more than 30 countries. TRCs are temporary non-judicial institutions empowered by the state. They provide a forum in which victims, offenders, and other community members can express themselves. Conflicting parties are expected to hear each other’s grievance and suffering with hope to promote understanding and empathy. In post-apartheid South Africa, the famous TRC relied heavily upon such an association of expression, truth telling, healing, and reconciliation. Nelson Mandela explicitly wanted the TRC “to heal” the South African nation’s wounds (Rimé et al. 2011, pg. 1).

            Martha Minow said, “National healing and reconciliation takes precedence over individual healing in the design of the TRC, but it would be wrong to suggest that a commission by itself could accomplish the reconstruction of a society devastated by violent and hostile divisions. The TRC is committed to exposing abuses by the liberation forces as well as the apartheid officials and supporters, and perhaps this commitment to the injuries on both sides can support reconciliation over time” (Minow 1998, pg. 79).

            In South Africa the restorative justice body assembled after the abolition of apartheid (a system of minority domination based on economic, political, and territorial status that lasted almost fifty years) was the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Witnesses who had been identified as victims gave statements of their experiences. Perpetrators were able to give testimony and request amnesty from prosecution. It was an arena open to forgiveness. In Truth Commissions and Procedural Fairness Mark Freeman states, “Since the advent of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in the 1990’s, it is difficult to conjure an example of a political or post conflict transition in which the idea of establishing a truth commission has been overlooked. For the most part this is a good thing. There is often a sense that truth commissions can do magic: heal nations, reconcile victims and torturers, ensure the rule of law, and establish a culture of human rights” (Freeman 2006, pg. 11).

            Established in 1995 set up on terms of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act and based in Cape Town the mandate as to bear witness to, record and in some cases grant amnesty to the perpetrators of crimes relating to the violations of human rights.

            The process by which South Africa arrived at its commission is quite different from other models and was a more peaceful transition than occurred in other countries. It is very democratic in nature and gave as many people as possible the opportunity to participate in the formation of the TRC. The work of the TRC in South Africa has been successful in part thanks to its high profile committee members such as former Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Dr. Alex Boraine, Mary Burton and others. Prominent national figures like Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu helped to give the committee a platform and credibility amongst other nations.

            There are two unique features of the South African model of Truth Commissions: that of parliamentary legislation and the powers granted to the commission. In most cases, the president or the prime minister of the country has appointed commissions. But in South Africa the benefit that came from being based in an act of parliament is that a democratically elected group participated in the debate and finalized the content of the commission. There were three committees formed in order to accomplish the purposes of the TRC. The first committee, the Human Rights Violations Committee, investigated abuses that occurred between 1960 and 1994. The second committee was labeled the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee was given the charge to restoring victims’ dignity and proposals to help with the rehabilitation. The third committee was given the duty to consider applications from individuals who applied for amnesty; this is referred to as the Amnesty Committee.

            A further difference from most commissions is the powers that were given to the TRC. The commission has the powers of search and seizure and this allows them to invite alleged perpetrators to come before the TRC. The commission can secure documents that had been secreted away by the previous government. Thus, agreements have been made between by political parties and the military to make submission to the committee public. The South African model widened the mandate to include public hearings of major institutions such as political parties, the legal system, faith communities, and the armed forces. In dealing with the case of South Africa Rotberg and Thompson says:

            Another common defense of truth commissions adopts the perspective of the victims. Some proponents of this defense follow a therapeutic approach, pointing to the psychological benefits of offering public testimony and receiving public confirmation of injustices. Others take a more theological approach, focusing on the value and meaning of acts of forgiveness and repentance. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the chair of the TRC, has emphasized Christian forgiveness as a great value of the body’s proceedings. He connects this Christian idea to the secular goal of the commission –reconciliation (Rotberg and Thompson 2000, pg. 29).

Rwanda

            The people of Rwanda have a common past. The people who first lived there raised crops and cattle. Those who owned the cattle were called Tutsi and everyone else was referred to as Hutu. During this early time a person could change categories through marriage or the acquisition of more livestock. Soon after the Europeans arrived in the area the terms “Tutsi” and Hutu” denoted a racial role. Germans were the first to colonize Rwanda in 1894 and they felt that those labeled as Tutsi had more European characterizes, such as a taller frame, lighter skin, and a thinner nose, thus Tutsis were put in roles of responsibility.            

            Following World War II the Germans lost control of Rwanda to the Belgians who took over running of the country. The Belgians further emphasized the categories of  “Tutsi” and “Hutu” and mandated that every person carry an identification card with them. Tutsis, although making of about 10% of the population still carried out roles of responsibility and this upset the Hutus. In the country’s struggle for independence, the Belgians, facing a revolt by the Hutus switched the status of the two groups, which in turn angered the Tutsis. The Hutus now ran the new government and animosity would continue for decades.

            In his book Escape from Rwanda John Yves Bizimana describes the history of the country from what he remembers of his childhood. “I have heard the notions that Rwandans were once a reasonably united people. I don’t know that they were actually united. I think it was more a case of respecting each other’s turf; they may not have been completely peaceful, but at least they could get along with teach other. That easy peace existed until the Belgian colonizers came and played on what they observed to be differences between these two groups. The Belgians emphasized those differences in their strategy of dividing in order to conquer” (Bizimana 2010, pg. 18).

            In 1994 the East African state of Rwanda had a population of close to seven million people and was made up of three different ethnic groups: Hutu (85%), Tutsi (14%), and the Twa, a small group of hunter-gatherers (1%). The country was stained red with blood when Hutus murdered nearly 800,000 Tutsis after a plane carrying President Habyarimana, who was Hutu, was shot down. Tutsi extremists were believed to be behind the attack and tensions between the two tribes had reached a boiling point. The government called upon the Hutus to rid the country of all Tutsis and so began a bloodbath in which Hutus embarked on a relentless campaign to kill every Tutsi “cockroach” they came across. Political leaders in positions of authority and other high-profile opponents of the Hutu extremists, who may have been able to control the situation, were killed immediately. Those suspected of being Tutsi, and even Hutus who opposed the killings, were found and killed. Often entire families and neighborhoods were slain at a time. Women were brutally raped and children and infants were killed and left in the streets or thrown into massive piles. As frightened Tutsis fled roadblocks were set up throughout the country to catch people trying to escape to neighboring countries. The plan was to destroy the entire Tutsi population.

            The genocide only ended when the Tutsi dominated group, the RPF (Rwandan Patriotic Front), took down the Hutus and President Kagame, a Tutsi, took office. In roughly one hundred days nearly three quarters of the Tutsi population had perished.

            National governments elsewhere share in the shame of this tragedy in part because they were aware of what was occurring and didn’t respond. The world needs to learn from Rwanda and be ready to intervene when another event of this magnitude takes place. Concerning ignorance of the Rwandan genocide Möller (2010) said “The construction in the West of memories of the Tutsi genocide is indicative of the curious workings of memory: people can collectively remember an event that they had decided to ignore when it took place” (Möller 2010, pg. 7).

            “For evil to succeed all that was needed was for the righteous to do nothing.” – Ernie Lobet, survivor of Auschwitz.

Immaculée Ilibagiza

            The story of Immaculée Ilibagiza is one of faith, determination, and a remarkable ability to forgive others who inflicted tremendous pain upon her.            

            Immaculée and her family were Tutsis, but when the killings in Rwanda began her father told her to go to the house of a Hutu minister named Simeon Murinzi. He was a lifelong friend of the family and they hoped he would have compassion on them and help to hide Immaculée during the massacre. Murinzi was reluctant at first, as he was already trying to protect other Tutsi women, but he agreed to take her in. In order to hide from the killers, and the extended family of Murinzi, Immaculée was forced to hide in a tiny concealed bathroom at the back of the house with six other women. While in hiding Immaculée taught herself to read. She finished the entire King James Bible hiding in the bathroom for nearly three months.

            Immaculée naturally began to hate those who went through the streets killing her neighbors and friends, but as she prayed to God she struggled to find it in her heart to forgive. In her book she recounts her pleadings, “Please open my heart, Lord, and show me how to forgive. I’m not strong enough to squash my hatred –they’ve wronged us all so much … my hatred is so heavy that it could crush me. Touch my heart, Lord, and show me how to forgive” (Iligabiza 2006, pg. 93).

            She learned to love thanks in part to a God who she found during the darkest moments of her life. One of the best examples of love is that displayed by Immaculée while meeting her family’s killers after the genocide in Rwanda was finally over. One can’t help but marvel at the strength and faith shown by Immaculée within those small walls of that bathroom alongside six other women.

            She says “In God’s eyes, the killers were part of His family, deserving of love and forgiveness. I knew that I couldn’t ask God to love me if I were unwilling to love His children” (pg. 94). Immaculée further recounts:

            In the midst of the genocide, I’d found my salvation. I knew that my bond with God would transcend the bathroom, the war, and the holocaust…it was a bond I now knew would transcend life itself. I lifted my heart to the Lord, and He filled it with His love and forgiveness. Being in that bathroom had become a blessing for which I’d be forever thankful. Even if my parents had perished in the bloodshed outside, I would never be an orphan. I’d been born again in the bathroom and was now the loving daughter of God, my Father (pg. 107).

            She decided, “I knew that my heart and mind would always be tempted to feel anger–to find blame and hate. But I resolved that when the negative feelings came upon me, I wouldn’t wait for them to grow or fester. I would always turn immediately to the Source of all power: I would turn to God and let His love and forgiveness protect and save me” (pg. 197).

            She had suffered exactly what one would expect someone to suffer in such an ordeal: mortal terrors and a bitter anger at the men who were out to destroy her. Her entire family was murdered except one brother who was in a nearby country attending a university.

            Much later in life Immaculée went to a prison to visit a man that had murdered her mother and her brother Damascene. His name was Felicien and she recognized him as the father of some of her childhood friends. Upon meeting him she realized that his voice was among those that had called out her name during searches of the pastor’s house while she sat cramped in the bathroom. Felicien had once been a handsome, well-dressed, respectable businessman, but now he sat unkempt, and covered in sores, merely a shell of his former self. He sobbed and looked at the floor as Immaculée approached. In her own words she recalls the meeting.

       I could feel his shame. He looked up at me for only a moment, but our eyes met. I reached out, touched his hands lightly, and quietly said what I’d come to say. “I forgive you.” My heart eased immediately, and I saw the tension release in Felicien’s shoulders before the guard pushed him out the door and into the courtyard. Two soldiers yanked Felicien back to his cell and when the head prison guard returned to me he was furious. “What was that all about Immaculée? That was the man who murdered your family. I brought him to you to question… to spit on if you wanted to. But you forgave him? How could you do that? Why did you forgive him?” I answered him with the truth: Forgiveness is all I have to offer” (pg. 204).

            From the love shown toward the killer of her family it shows that forgiveness not only benefits the victim and their family, but also the perpetrator. A sense of peace is realized and a small amount of restitution is bestowed upon someone who once displayed hate but has pleaded silently for a chance at forgiveness.

            She ends her book with these words, “The love of a of a single heart can make a world of difference. I believe that we can heal Rwanda–and the world-by healing one heart at a time. I hope my story helps” (pg. 210).

            Since leaving Rwanda Immaculée Iligabiza has since spent much of her life helping others to learn to forgive as she did. She works for the United Nations in New York City and has established the Ilibagiza Foundation, which helps others begin healing from the long-term effects of genocide and war.

Genocidal Psychology and Those Who Survived

            What is it that allows a person to endure such persecution and survive to tell their story for the world to learn from?  What sort of mental endurance and determination keep a prisoner and victim clinging to any amount of hope? The psychology of survival is exactly that: hope. When all seems impossibly lost finding belief in an external force can turn helplessness into a plan to live.

            Josef Stalin once said, “A single death is a tragedy. A million deaths is a statistic.” As casual as this statement is it is surprisingly psychologically accurate.

            Perpetrators of war and hate crimes rely on putting their victims into a cycle of fear, humiliation, guilt and despair. To dehumanize another person someone may label a group separate from the majority with a symbol, identification card, or number. This classifying affects victims psychologically and with laws that only pertain to them, a group will feel much inferior to those around them. Dehumanization is a key tool to the destruction of a group of people, using their differences, no matter how small; to alienate them from their own society and show they are unwelcome.

             Most victims live in constant fear and shut down emotionally and eventually give up completely, losing any will left to live. Others start believing that something is different and wrong about them, and that their enemies are justified in their thinking. 

            After living through such inhumanity the experiences of genocide live on in the survivors’ psyche. Living with the humiliation of torture and rape or watching this done to others, and unable to do anything; leave a person blaming his/herself of being physically or spiritually weak. Flash backs of the horrors of war stay with a person all their life and leave them with survivor’s guilt and emotional and mental problems. Post-traumatic stress syndrome, phobias, and addiction problems can hurt a victim for a long time without intervening help.

            Sandi Dolbee in her article on forgiveness mentions a study done to see the physical effect that people exhibited when they remembered the transgressions against them focusing on heart rate, blood pressure, facial expressions and sweat levels. She found that when people remembered the transgressions, these bio-markers showed elevated stress and tension. She says, “When we had them think about forgiveness the results were significant. It had a fascinating quelling effect” (Dolbee, 2008). This same study about forgiveness made headlines involving Vietnam military veterans experiencing post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The research showed that vets who had trouble learning to forgive and let go experienced more problems with PTSD.

             “We create a more meaningful life, in which we realize our responsibility to love others, is in itself an appropriate way of living.” - Victor Frankl

Coping with Anger and Loving Your Enemies

            Anger is a reaction to injustice and it creates energy and motivation to fight against political or social systems. It can cause groups to go on strike and to defend human rights. On a personal level anger can be expressed in healthy ways rather than to punish or harm others.  Anger is intensely and primarily physical. In the adrenalized state that your body takes after harm has occurred aggression mounts. To prevent further exploitation you enter a pure survival-oriented sense. Anger is one of the very hardest impulses to control because of the inner value of defending against danger.

            To use a healthy approach in productively coping with anger four strategies can be used before love and forgiveness are possible. These steps are taken from the Psychology Today online journal article written by Dr. Judith Orloff who is an Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at UCLA. She advises:

               The first step is not to lash back impulsively. Wait before you speak. Pause to regroup and take a few slow breaths to decide what next to do before something is said or done that you will regret. Second, an extended “time-out” from a situation and removal from a negative environment will help to further vent upset feelings. Manage your stress in a calmer setting where you can be alone. Remove your thoughts from the present time and anger will expel from your system. The third step in coping with anger is to allow appropriate time to identify what has made you angry so that your feelings of hate are not misplaced. Allotting time to resolve the conflict lets you tap into a more compassionate response. Finally, don’t address anger when you are tired or before you sleep. Anger revs up your system and can cause insomnia. And being well rested makes you less prone to reacting with irritation. She says “The goal with anger is to own the moment so this emotion doesn’t own you. Then you can mindfully respond rather than simply react” (Orloff, 2011).

            Dealing with anger is a hard process and individuals will employ different coping methods to ease the burden of outrage and resentment. It is very hard to reach a higher stage of love, compassion, and forgiveness. It requires self-discipline almost greater than we are capable of. In discussing constructive avenues for our anger Paul Gelinas says:

 Thus ordinary happening arouse at least mild anger, which is felt not only as frustrating but also sometimes disguised as sadness. Admitting, then, the prevalent anger as a result of frustration we must seek to reduce that frustration by persisting in expending the energy stirred by anger. We can reach for love, for a meaningful career, and a way of improving ourselves and mankind. The process begins at birth and ends only with the grave. Anyone seeking to avoid that struggle is denying life itself. On the other hand, there is joy and happiness in loving actively utilizing anger toward the continuing challenge of frustration in our changing world (Gelinas 1979, pg. 24).

            Mercy cannot rob justice and society needs to be protected from criminals and those who wish to do harm. As much as forgiveness is a source of power it does not relieve us of consequences. When tragedy strikes we must avoid personal revenge, allow justice to take effect and learn to let go. Letting go is difficult to do and takes time before we are able to empty our hearts of resentment.

            In his book Man’s Search for Meaning Victor Frankl talks about the meaning of love. He mentions “No one can fully aware of the very essence of another human being unless he loves him. By the spiritual act of love he is enabled to see the essential traits and features in the beloved person; and even more, he sees that which is potential in him, that is not yet actualized but yet ought to be actualized” (Frankl 1963, pg. 176).

            Henderson recounts part of the story of Corrie ten Boom, who was imprisoned in Ravensbrück during World War II, and described seeing one of her guards in a congregation in Munich. “He came up to her after she spoke and put out his hand, saying that Jesus had washed away his sins. Corrie, who had preached forgiveness, wondered how she could give it to someone who had behaved so badly, but she discovered that when God tells us to love our enemies, he gives the love itself along with the command.” She said, “You never so touch the ocean of God’s love as when you forgive and love your enemies” (Henderson 1999, pg. 126).

“Forgiveness is the highest, most beautiful form of love.”- Robert Muller

What is Forgiveness?

            There are many different interpretations to the meaning of forgiveness and this confusion points to the complexity of the process of letting go of the past. Forgiveness is a voluntary act in which a decision is made about how a person will handle an event that occurred in the past. This process shows people how to repair emotional pain by viewing the person that harmed them in a different light. We learn to see the world and ourselves in a manner that is more loving and accepting. The transforming power of forgiveness can turn individuals from helpless victims to masters of their reality.

            Forgiveness is a personal and conscious decision to let go of feelings of resentment. The act or event that has harmed someone may always remain a part of their life, but forgiveness can loosen its grip and help to focus on the other positive aspects of life. Forgiveness can lead to feelings of understanding and empathy towards the offender.

            Forgiveness can be a powerful tool that turns anger and bitterness into feelings of neutrality, or even to positive emotions for some.

            Chris Williams, a devoted husband and father of four, lost his wife and two children in a drunk driving car crash on a cold February night in 2007. His message is one of moving forward despite tragedy and the empowering effect of forgiveness. In his book Let It Go he says “It has been more than five years since the night of the crash. I feel I have travelled forward sufficiently for that experience not to be so painful to revisit or recall. After that fateful night, I found that it was very hard to move forward and cover a substantial amount of distance. In the first few years after the crash, I was better off thinking in terms of “baby steps.” The grieving and longing for my family hasn’t stopped, nor do I expect it to until we’re together again, but those moments of pain are increasingly sweet and positive experiences” (Williams 2012, pg. 147).

            In the New Testament Jesus Christ tells his followers that a person should forgive another seventy times seven. This has a deeper meaning than a set amount of times that we are to forgive another person and that it is required to forgive all men whenever needed. While dying on the cross Jesus himself said “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” This is a profound statement as many people look to Christ as the ultimate example in how to live.
            Forgiveness isn’t denying the hurt or pain, and it does not have to rely on someone who is untrustworthy. The power of forgiveness gives a person control of their life. Within the process of forgiving, you accept responsibility for your past and this allows you to change your future. You decide then that you are ready to let go of recurring emotional experiences and feelings of hate.

            We need to begin by recognizing and acknowledging angry feelings. It takes humility to do this. As we focus on positive aspects of life and learn to love others despite their misdeeds we rid ourselves of bitterness and allow place for comfort to return to our hearts. 

            Sometimes the act of pardoning is substituted for the idea of forgiveness. Although they many appear similar on the surface they are theoretically different. In his book titled Forgiveness Haber mentions two ideals that are not a part of forgiveness: pardon and mercy, but often are referred to in the same context. The first ideal is pardoning. He states, “We may say that the primary difference between pardoning and forgiving is that the former can issue only from one who is empowered to do so. In other words, only an authority formally constituted within a legal system or other system of normative rules is qualified to pardon. Forgiving, however, is something we do as individuals. Thus we pardon as officials in social roles, but forgive as persons qua persons. In pardoning an individual we will either forgo or mitigate punishment that is otherwise deserved. Furthermore, we pardon individuals for offenses committed against a normative order other than a moral order” (Haber 1991, pg. 61).

            The other concept that is often viewed as synonymous, but is not, is that of mercy “As I see it the main difference between mercy and forgiveness is in that to which we are waiving a right. In mercy, we waive the right to whatever it is we have a right to do. In forgiveness, -more specifically we waive the “right” to resent the wrongdoer” (Haber 1991, pg. 65).

Learning to Forgive

            Kimball (1969) in his book says,” Forgiveness is the miraculous ingredient that assures harmony and love. Without it there is contention. Without understanding and forgiveness there is dissension, followed by lack of harmony, and this breeds disloyalty” (Kimball 1969, pg. 275).             Learning how to forgive helps to heal a relationship and lead to a fuller, richer life. Understanding that each person routinely makes mistakes and offends others helps us to realize that when we need to find the power to forgive it’s about letting go of the imperfections of another person. Learning to forgive is a commitment to the process of change. 

            President James E. Faust of the LDS church related a story during a General Conference in 2007 in which he recounts an event that happened in a small Amish community of Pennsylvania.

            The Amish are a devout group of Christian people that live the simple life without automobiles, electricity and the use of modern machines. They work hard and live peaceful lives, separate from the rest of society. They grow crops from their own fields and sew their own clothing, which is modest and plain.

            One day a local milkman that lived with his family in the nearby Amish community of Nickel Mines, lost all sense of reason and control and burst into the Amish schoolhouse. He proceeded to tie up 10 young girls after releasing the boys and adults. He then shot them, killing 5 and injuring the other 5 before taking his own life.

            This shocking violence caused anguish and remorse among the Amish but no anger. Although they were hurt they chose not to hate, and their forgiveness was instantaneous. As they reached out to the devastated family of the milkman a calming peace settled in the hearts of the Amish.

            “Forgiveness is not always instantaneous as it was with the Amish. Most of us do not think first about forgiveness. Our natural response is anger. We may feel justified in wanting to ‘get even’ with anyone who inflicts injury on our family or us. Forgiveness is freeing up and putting to better use the energy that once consumed by holding grudges, harboring resentments, and nursing unhealed wounds. It is rediscovering the strengths we always had and relocating our limitless capacity to accept other people and ourselves” (Faust 2007). The following statement was released from the family of the milkman:

            “To our Amish friends, neighbors, and local community: Our family wants each of you to know that we are overwhelmed by the forgiveness, grace, and mercy that you’ve extended to us. Your love for our family has helped to provide the healing we so desperately need. The prayers, flowers, cards, and gifts you’ve given have touched our hearts in a way that no words can describe. Your compassion has reached beyond our family, and our community, and is changing the world, and for this we sincerely thank you.” 

            Their example of forgiving is an example of Christian love. It had become an essential component of their religion. We need to forgive to be forgiven.

Benefits and the Power of Forgiveness

            Many studies link forgiveness to improved physical and emotional well-being. The benefits of forgiveness can be startling, regardless of age, gender, or even the most imaginable hurts, such as severe sexual abuse or the murder of a parent or child. Results have indicated that people who are forgiving tend to have less stress and develop better relationships. They have lower incidences of more serious illnesses such as depression, heart, disease, stroke, and cancer. Nursing a grudge raises blood pressure and lowers immune function, makes one more depressed and causes physical stress to the body.

            Quoting Stephanie Dowrick in his book Forgiveness Henderson says, “Forgiveness is most healing, most profound when it grows out of humanity and realism, a hard–won sense that, whether you are entirely to blame in these events and I am blameless, there is in each of us insufficiencies and imperfections that can be our greatest teachers” (Henderson 1999, pg. 121).

            Tutu (1999) said, “True forgiveness deals with the past, all of the past, to make the future possible. We cannot go on nursing grudges even vicariously for those who cannot speak for themselves any longer. We have to accept that for generations past, present, and yet to come. That is what makes a community a community or a people a people–for better or worse” (Tutu 1999, pg. 279).            

            There are individuals that are often deemed as “unworthy” to qualify for forgiveness. These are people such as murderers, rapists, ex-spouses, parents, and others that have scarred someone else physically or emotionally to the point that they are felt to be undeserving of any future love. Anyone can and should be a candidate for forgiveness. It takes a lot of understanding and learning to realize that all situations and circumstances are worthy of our forgiveness.

            Some people hold onto grudges for a lifetime, unaware that courageously forgiving those who have wronged us is wholesome and therapeutic. If we can find it in our hearts to forgive those that have caused us hurt we will rise to a higher level of self-esteem. Those who forgive become less angry, more hopeful, less anxious, and less stressed with daily tasks. Forgiveness is a liberating gift that people can give to themselves.

            “Forgiving is not forgetting; it’s actually remembering—remembering and not using your right to hit back. It’s a second chance at a new beginning.” - Archbishop Desmond Tutu

Rwanda Revisited

            It has been almost twenty years since the genocide in Rwanda occurred. How has the country been able to recover? Have the people been able to move on from such and tragedy and can scars slowly fade from the darkest time in Rwandan history?

             Josh Ruxin of the New York Times, and director of Rwanda Works at Columbia University has been living in Rwanda the last few years trying to help with public health and he recently reflected on the upcoming anniversary of the genocide. In his article published online in the New York Times he wrote:

            “Rwanda has rebuilt itself in the aftermath of that tragedy, setting itself apart from other developing nations by intelligently, efficiently, and transparently making the most of other nations’ investments and creating the building blocks of success in agriculture, social services, entrepreneurship, and basic infrastructure. It is likely that ten years from now, Rwanda intends to be on par with Brazil, Thailand, and other nations that have pulled themselves out of poverty in recent decades. The challenges are epic but so is the progress to date. This nation has shown it can rise from the aftermath of unspeakable violence, and it is determined to keep that momentum going and take the next critical steps toward real prosperity” (Ruxin, 2010).

            In conclusion, while there has been similar revolutions and oppression in other parts of the world, Rwanda’s example is one of a more peaceful recovery and transition. Although there have been terrorist attacks in the country and unrest in neighboring regions Rwanda has made important strides since the genocide in ’94 and if the determination shown by the people are any indication then Rwanda can do it. Their healing hearts are learning to love again and this journey begins with individual people.

References

Avey, D. (2011). The Man Who Broke Into Auschwitz. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.

Bizimana, Y. J. (2010). Escape from Rwanda. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company.

Carny, I.W. (2000). Innocent Denials of Known Genocides: A Further Contribution to a             Psychology of Denial of Genocide 1. Human Rights Review, 1(3), 15.

Faust, J.E. (2007). The Healing Power of Forgiveness: LDS Ensign Magazine May 2007

Frankl, V. E. (1963). Man’s Search for Meaning. New York:  First Pocket Books.

Freeman, M. (2006). Truth Commissions and Procedural Fairness. New York: Cambridge             University Press.

Gelinas, P. D. (1979). Coping with Anger. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc.

Haber, J. G. (1991). Forgiveness. Savage, MD: Roman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Henderson, M. (1999). Forgiveness: Breaking the chain of hate. Wilsonville, OR:

            Book Partners, Inc.

Iligabiza, I. (2006). Left to Tell: Discovering God amidst the Rwandan Holocaust. New York:

            Hay House, Inc.

Kimball, S. W. (1969). The Miracle of Forgiveness. Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, Inc.

Möller, K. (2010). Rwanda Revisualized: Genocide, Photography, and the Era of the Witness

Minnow, M. (1998). Between Vengeance and Forgiveness. Boston, MA: Beacon Press

Orloff, J. (2011). Four Strategies to Cope with Anger in a Healthy Way. Retrieved from             http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/emotional-freedom/201102/four-strategies-cope-anger-in-healthy-way/

Rimé, B., Kanyangara, P., Yzerbyt, V., & Paez, D. (2011). The impact of Gacaca tribunals on             Rwanda: Psychosocial effects of participation in a truth and reconciliation process after             genocide. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(6), 695-706, doi:10.1002/esjp.822

Rotberg, R. I., & Thompson, D. (2000). Truth v. Justice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University             Press.

Ruxin, J. (2010). 16 Years after the Genocide, Rwanda Continues Forward. Retrieved from             http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/16-years-after-the-genocide-rwanda-continues-forward/

Tutu, D. M. (1999). No Future Without Forgiveness. New York: Random House, Inc.

Williams, C. (2012). Let It Go. New York, NY: Shadow Printing, Inc.