Tagged: “resentment”
A Forgotten History of Polish People’s Forgiveness After Auschwitz
This is a guest blog post from Edward Reid, who runs the “Polish History” site on Facebook. The essay, copied in full here with Mr. Reid’s permission, shows the forgiving nature of the Polish people after Rudolf Höss brutalized so many in Auschwitz.
Facebook page – April 16, 2025
The essay is as follows:
Image by Karolina Grabowska, Pexels.com
In 1947, Rudolf Höss, commandant of German KL Auschwitz in the years 1940-1943, was sentenced to death by the Supreme National Tribunal in Poland. Two weeks later, on 16 April, he was hanged next to the crematorium of the former concentration camp.
Rudolf Höss did not fear death. What he feared was torture, which he believed was inevitable at the hands of his Polish captors. After all, Auschwitz had been located in German-occupied Poland, and it was the Polish people who had suffered so terribly under his command.
What he encountered instead left him stunned.
He was not met with hatred or violence, but with decency and restraint. “I have to confess that I never would have expected to be treated so decently and so kindly in a Polish prison,” he later wrote. That unexpected mercy opened something within him. Several of the Polish guards, themselves former prisoners of Auschwitz, quietly showed him the tattoos burned into their arms. Rather than seek revenge, they treated him with dignity.
It was an act that brought him shame. If those he had helped torment could offer him humanity, then perhaps, he began to wonder, God might offer him mercy as well. Apathy gave way to guilt. Recognition replaced denial. He began to grasp the weight of what he had done.
For the first time, his soul responded to a flicker of love. The ideology he had once followed so blindly had taught him that Poles were inferior, little more than cattle. But now, through their compassion, he saw clearly the humanity of those he had dehumanized. And in that realization, he began to understand the true gravity of his crimes.“In the solitude of my prison cell, I have come to the bitter recognition that I have sinned gravely against humanity,” he wrote. “I caused unspeakable suffering for the Polish people in particular. I am to pay for this with my life. May the Lord God forgive one day what I have done. I ask the Polish people for forgiveness.”
By all accounts, his repentance appeared genuine. On April 4, 1947, which was Good Friday that year, Höss asked to make a confession. The prison guards struggled to find a priest who spoke fluent German. That is when Höss remembered Father Władysław Lohn, a Jesuit he had once saved from execution. The guards located him in Łagiewniki, Poland, where he was then serving as chaplain at the Shrine of Divine Mercy. Father Lohn heard his confession on the Thursday of Easter week. The next day, he gave him Holy Communion and Viaticum.
Witnesses said that as Höss knelt in his prison cell, he appeared like a small boy.
The man who had once been trained to suppress all weakness now wept openly.
Five days later, on April 16, 1947, as the noose was placed around his neck at Auschwitz, Father Tadeusz Zaremba stood beside him and recited the prayers for the dying.
Whether or not he deserved forgiveness is something each person must decide for themselves. But the crimes committed against the Polish people must never be forgotten.
And neither should the quiet strength of those who, even in the face of unimaginable suffering, chose mercy. This is also why the Polish people, despite their profound heroism and the scale of their suffering were left behind in the telling of history. They did not turn their pain into politics or profit. They did not build monuments to themselves and demand all the world bow to their wounds. They endured in silence behind the Iron Curtain. Many showed mercy when they had every right to hate. And in doing so, they were forgotten by a world that rewards those who shout the loudest, not those who suffer with dignity.
But the truth remains. It was not only the victims who showed humanity – it was the forgotten Polish guards, the priests, the villagers, the mothers, the resistance fighters. They gave the world a quiet, sacred kind of courage.
The kind that history has yet to fully honor…
‘I Forgive You’: After Decades Behind Bars for His Wife’s Murder, Leo Schofield Finds Healing in a Call with the Man Who Confessed
Image by Tyler Lastovich, Pexels.com
On April 11, 2025, The News Review (https://www.nrtoday.com/he-served-36-years-for-his-wife-s-murder-and-then-forgave-the-man-who/article_473a7a92-17a1-4b83-95e0-e353e4bcb615.html) in Oregon reported on a man, Leo Schofield, who allegedly killed his wife. He was released from a correctional institution after serving 36 years. He maintained his innocence throughout the imprisonment.
Upon being released to regular society, Mr. Schofield took about one year, and then he had a telephone conversation with the man, Jeremy Scott, who proclaimed on several occasions that he was the one who murdered Mr. Schofield’s wife. It was at that time that Mr. Schofield forgave the other man, reporting that forgiveness is a process of “being freed from the effect” of the hurt he carried inside.
Mr. Schofield seems to have gone through the process of what we call the Work Phase of forgiveness, in which he started to think about Mr. Scott in new ways, not to condone what he did, but to better understand him. As reported in The News Review, Mr. Schofield said this, “‘I developed a certain respect and somewhat of an affinity for the guy,’ he said. ‘I wanted to tell him that I genuinely forgive him and, more important, I wanted him to know that there are people that care about him and want to see him do right.’”
Dr. Robert Enright and IFI colleagues featured in recent edition of APA Journal
Image by Pixabay, Pexels.com
Robert Enright was the special issue editor for the first issue of 2025 in the American Psychological Association’s Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. His colleagues and he published the centerpiece article on what they call the “definitional drift” in how researchers understand the moral construct of forgiveness. There are at least eight different definitions of forgiveness in the published literature, most of which are philosophically incorrect. The central article was followed by commentaries from three philosophers and three psychologists and a final comment by Robert Enright, Jichan Kim, and Jacqueline Song. The centerpiece and final article of the special issue are these:
Song, J., Enright, R.D., & Kim, J. (2025). Definitional drift within the science of forgiveness: The dangers of avoiding philosophical analyses. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 45(1), 3-24. Note: This is the centerpiece article for a special issue on the definition of forgiveness within psychology. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/teo0000278
Enright, R.D., Kim, J., & Song, J. (2025). Our hope that definitional drift in forgiveness will cease from drifting: Our comments on the six commentaries. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 45(1), 65-71. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/teo0000306
Dr. Enright Gives Keynote Address at Restorative Justice Conference
Dr. Robert Enright
Dr. Robert Enright gave the keynote address at the national restorative justice conference, Embracing the Circle Conference, at Stranmillis University College, Belfast, Northern Ireland, on February 5, 2025. The address was entitled Developing teachers and students as transmitters of forgiveness. One of his main points is that restorative justice primarily is centered on dialogue. Yet, if students or adults are dialoguing with resentment in the heart, then the conversation likely will be less effective than when people have forgiving and, therefore, compassionate hearts. In other words, people can be civil when they are face-to-face at a peace table, but if there is deep anger in the heart, this can fester once those who are dialoguing leave the table. He encouraged those who emphasize restorative justice to consider changing hearts prior to meeting for dialogue. That conversation might bear more fruit between and among people.
The Role of Emotional Validation in Apologies and Forgiveness
This blog post is by Dr. Suzanne Freedman, a Contributing Writer and Researcher to the IFI. She is a Professor in the Educational Psychology department at the University of Northern Iowa in Cedar Falls, Iowa.
I did something to hurt my daughter the other day. It was unintentional, but she was angry and hurt, and she had a right to her feelings. When she shared her emotions with me, I realized that my actions were wrong. I felt bad about what I had done; I apologized and assured her that it would not happen again. However, I apologized immediately after she expressed her anger, while she was still upset. Fortunately, through my study of forgiveness and the psychological process of forgiving for over 30 years, I understand that forgiveness is not instantaneous.
Although I wanted my daughter’s forgiveness, I knew expecting it right away was neither fair nor realistic. People often apologize and expect immediate absolution before the injured has processed their emotions. Many individuals who say, “I forgive you” upon receiving an apology later discover they do not feel that forgiveness in their hearts. This is because genuine healing requires time, not just words.
One of the most overlooked aspects of apologizing is allowing the hurt people time to work through their emotions. Expecting immediate forgiveness disregards the necessary emotional processing that follows a deep, personal, and unfair injury (Smedes, 1996). Emotional reactions to conflict and personal injury are normal and natural, and those who have been hurt need time to feel and express their emotions. As a student in my college class on interpersonal relationships stated, “Forgiveness is not immediate—you cannot just say ‘I forgive you’ and expect everything to be better. Especially if saying it is not true—saying it just to stop talking about it does not make it better for you or them. Yet, I see it all the time, and people wonder why their relationships/friendships are never the same. There are steps you can take to forgive someone, even if you never forget what happened or your relationship isn’t the same” (personal communication, March 2025).
A sincere apology involves emotional validation—the acknowledgment of another person’s feelings as real and important. Research shows that interpersonal hurt often evokes a mix of emotions, including resentment, anger, and/or sadness (Freedman & Zarifikar, 2016). If these emotions are dismissed—such as when an offender urges the injured to “move on” or “let it go”—it can lead to emotional suppression or denial rather than genuine healing (Gregory, 2025). Admitting and expressing feelings is a critical step before forgiveness can occur, as emphasized in the first phase of Enright’s (2019) process model of interpersonal forgiveness. Forgiveness is often criticized because individuals fail to recognize this critical step in the forgiveness process and mistakenly believe that forgiveness involves the suppression or denial of one’s emotions (Freedman & Zarifkar, 2016).
I knew that allowing my daughter to feel, express, and process her emotions was just as important as my apology. By validating her anger rather than dismissing it or pushing her toward forgiveness, I communicated that her pain mattered. This act of validation fosters an environment where forgiveness can develop naturally over time. Parents often struggle when they see their children in pain and may react by suggesting they quickly move past the hurt. However, individuals need time to experience and process their emotions before they are ready to move forward. According to Damour (2020), when teens can sit with their feelings and then move beyond them, they develop resilience, realizing they can endure difficult emotions.
Pressuring someone to forgive before they are ready can lead to resentment, emotional dissonance, and distrust in the forgiveness process (Worthington, 2006). Instead of fostering healing, forced forgiveness creates obligation, often resulting in superficial reconciliation (Freedman & Chang, 2010). My college students frequently report that they remember being told in childhood to forgive after receiving a forced apology, despite still feeling hurt. Similarly, offenders are often encouraged to apologize before they truly feel remorse. Genuine forgiveness and apology cannot be demanded—it must arise from within.
In my situation, if I had expected my daughter to forgive me immediately, she might have felt pressured rather than supported. This could have led to resentment or suppression of her emotions instead of real healing. By giving her the space she needed, I conveyed that her emotions were valid. As Damour (2020) explains, psychological health is not about avoiding discomfort but about experiencing the appropriate emotion at the right time and developing the capacity to endure it.
Conclusion
Forgiveness is a process, not a transaction. While an apology is a critical step in making amends, it does not guarantee immediate and automatic forgiveness. Emotional validation plays an essential role in healing by acknowledging the injured person’s emotions rather than rushing the person toward a resolution. Additionally, while an apology is not necessary for forgiveness to occur, it is often important for reconciliation and can make forgiving easier. However, requiring an apology before forgiving can leave the injured trapped in resentment, waiting for an apology that may never come (Freedman, 1998).
My experience with my daughter reinforced a fundamental truth—forgiveness cannot be rushed or forced. Healing requires time, understanding, and the space to process emotions fully. By allowing my daughter to work through her pain without pressure, I honored her emotional experience and our relationship, fostering the conditions for true forgiveness to emerge.
References
Damour, L. (2020) Helping teens make room for uncomfortable emotions. New York Times, April 21, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/well/family/coronavirus-teenagers-uncomfortable-emotions.html
Enright, R. D. (2019). Forgiveness is a choice: A step-by-step process for resolving anger and restoring hope. American Psychological Association.
Freedman, S. (1998). Forgiveness and reconciliation: The importance of understanding how they differ. Counseling and Values, 42(3), 200–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-007X.1998.tb00426.x
Freedman, S., & Chang, W.-C. R. (2010). An analysis of a sample of the general population’s understanding of forgiveness: Implications for mental health counselors. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 32(1), 5-34. https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.32.1.a0x246r8l6025053
Freedman, S., & Zarifikar, T. (2016). The psychology of interpersonal forgiveness and guidelines for forgiveness therapy: What therapists need to know to help their clients forgive. Spirituality in Clinical Practice, 3(1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.1037/scp0000087
Gregory, A. A. (2025). You don’t need to forgive: Trauma recovery on your own terms. Broadleaf Books.
Smedes, L. B. (1996). The art of forgiving: When you need to forgive and don’t know how. Penguin Random House.
Worthington, E. L., Jr. (2006). Forgiveness and reconciliation: Theory and application. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
