Thesis (M. Div.)--Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 121-140).

This thesis explores the theme of interpersonal forgiveness in the Gospel of Matthew and argues that the idea of interpersonal forgiveness is quite central to this Gospel. Its main foci are on demonstrating the centrality of this theme in the Gospel and understanding the nature of interpersonal forgiveness in it. It proposes five sets of evidence in support of this claim. First is the concept of reciprocity and the link between mercy and forgiveness, together with the link between reluctance in the praxis of them and judgement. Second is the emphasis on the offended person's responsibility in forgiving and the connection of this with the concept of spiritually mature and immature Christians. Third is a reinforcement of the forgiveness concept by the use of related concepts. Fourth is the strategic rhetorical positioning of interpersonal forgiveness texts and related passages within the Matthean text. Fifth is the proportion these texts occupy in the Sermon on the Mount and the Community Discourse. In an attempt to demonstrate the prominence of the theme in the first Gospel, all Matthean forgiveness and forgiveness-related texts are surveyed. Then two key texts, in which the idea of interpersonal forgiveness is stated directly, are singled out for a thorough examination. The method of interpretation used in this thesis is discourse analysis. Discourse analysis, as with many models used in NT exegesis, is not without its potential limitations. It is employed in this thesis because it offers valuable insight into Matthew's point of view of the subject under scrutiny. To serve as the background to the present study, the rhetoric of interpersonal forgiveness in Graeco-Roman literature and in Jewish literature in Greek is considered. The analysis of these data will assist in the description of the dynamics of human forgiveness. The forgiveness pattern that emerges from them differs remarkably from its pattern found in Matthew where granting forgiveness appears not only as a reasonable act, but reluctance or failure to grant it does make the unforgiving person accountable to God - a note sounded nowhere else (except Sir 28:1-4 and Dionysius, Ant. Rom. 8.50.1-4) in the literature surveyed in this work.

No description available.

No description available.

published_or_final_version / Education / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

In organizational life, trust breach is a common but destructive phenomenon. This dissertation explores how a prosocial, virtuous response to trust breach -- interpersonal forgiveness -- might influence the behaviour and attitudes of teams and their members in the wake of such a breach. In a series of three manuscripts, the dissertation looks at the consequences of forgiveness for the person perceived to have broken a victim’s trust (the transgressor), and for the teammates who observe the breach and the response that follows it. Forgiveness is described as playing two important roles. For transgressors, we describe forgiveness as a favour, drawing on social exchange theory to argue that forgiveness triggers reciprocal helping directed at both the victim and the team at large. And for teammates, we argue that forgiveness serves as a powerful signal, communicating the cohesion and efficacy of the group. These predictions are tested experimentally with a laboratory study of transgressor-victim dyads (Chapter 2) and of transgressor-victim-teammate triads (Chapter 3), and a series of two vignette studies from the perspective of teammate observers (Chapter 4). Focusing on the linkages between forgiveness and justice, each study considers the interaction between forgiveness various transgressor-initiated and victim-initiated attempts at restoring justice, including apologies, punishment, and restorative justice practices. Chapter 5 discusses the mixed support found for our predictions, considers how the limitations of our studies might be addressed, and introduces a series of directions for future research. / Thesis (Ph.D, Management) -- Queen's University, 2012-09-27 19:40:29.248

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2005. / Also available in print.

Bea Dumont's life was full of youthful joys; cribbage games with her grandfather and Sunday morning pancackes with her older brother, Trip. When something happens that tears her typical American family apart, she begins a lifelong struggle to understand why it all came crashing down and learns along the way what it takes to forgive.

Although its consequences can be devastating, revenge is surprisingly understudied. In this dissertation, I address several key questions. For example, are the factors that trigger revenge the same across different individuals? What are the psychological processes that facilitate revenge? Does revenge have any adaptive value? These issues were addressed with a series of three studies. Study 1 explored whether personality predictors of self-reported revenge generalize across four specific transgressions. Results indicated that narcissists were only vengeful after social rejection whereas psychopaths and neurotics tended to be vengeful across transgressions. Study 2 expanded on these results by exploring trait-level vengeful fantasies and vengeful behaviors and the impact of a potential mediator, namely, anger rumination. Neuroticism was shown to be predictive of vengeful fantasies: This association was entirely mediated by anger rumination. Psychopathy predicted vengeful behavior: This association was partially mediated by vengeful fantasies. Study 3 involved the analysis of participants' personal anecdotes about how they reacted to transgressions against them. Coded variables included revenge as well as 10 other coping behaviors: These 11 predictors were then evaluated with respect to their impact on both immediate relief and long-term recovery. Although the revenge option fostered immediate relief, it did not benefit long-term recovery. Only one coping behavior (meaning-making) actually fostered recovery. The contributions and limitations of this research plus suggestions for future studies are discussed.

Research has shown that forgiveness promotes individual psychological well-being as well as positive relationship functioning. Moreover, couples themselves report that forgiving is one of the most important reasons that their relationships stand the test of time (Fenell,1993). However, the partner behaviours that facilitate, or even thwart, forgiveness in romantic relationships have been the subject of limited empirical research. In the current study, I investigated the effects of two sets of partner behaviour—offers of amends and expressions of responsiveness (i.e. understanding, validation, care)—on forgiveness for real-life hurtful events in romantic relationships. Sixty-four couples participated in a lab-based, experimental study in which I manipulated whether the partner who disclosed feelings about an unresolved, hurtful event (“victim”) received a videotaped response from his/her partner in which this partner (“offender”) expressed: 1) responsiveness only, 2) amends only, 3) both responsiveness and amends, or 4) neither responsiveness nor amends (control group). Trained coders provided micro-ratings of offenders’ specific responsive (e.g., perspective-taking) and amends (e.g., apology) behaviour as well as macro-ratings of more global displays of these behaviours (e.g., overall understanding, overall remorse). Victims also completed measures of relationship satisfaction, event severity, perceptions of their partners’ amends, perceptions of their partners’ responsiveness, and forgiveness. The findings suggest that event severity moderates the effectiveness of the general act of offering amends and/or responsiveness in promoting forgiveness. When event severity was high, the experimental manipulation of the presence vs. absence of amends and of responsiveness did not affect forgiveness. However, it did affect forgiveness for less severe events. Specifically, expressions of amends, responsiveness and their combination yielded similarly more forgiveness than no response at all. These effects were iv mediated by the victim’s perceptions of the offender’s responsiveness to his/her experience of the hurtful event. Further, results indicated that the victims’ perceptions of the offenders’ responsiveness could be promoted, or thwarted, by the content of the offenders’ amends. Micro-ratings of offenders’ amends behaviour demonstrated that when event severity is low, more elaborate offers of amends, in particular remorse, increase the victims’ perceptions of partner responsiveness, which in turn, facilitate forgiveness. To the contrary, when event severity is high, offering more elaborate offers of amends has no effect at all in facilitating victims’ perceptions of responsiveness, and expressing more remorse in particular, may backfire. Finally, the associations between coders’ ratings of the offenders’ behaviour with the victims’ perceptions suggested that the victims’ perceptions, especially of responsive behaviour, are perhaps largely self-construed.