Journey Toward Forgiveness

Restitution and Forgiveness:
What's the Difference?

One of the unfortunate realities of life is that other people sometimes unjustly hurt us. When this happens we have to try to make sense of the pain that we are going through, the situation in which the injustice occurred, and the world in which the injustice occurred. As we try to make our way through the healing process, we sometimes confuse the roles of restitution and forgiveness.

Restitution is compensation or restoration. It fits nicely into many people's ideas about what is fair or just. For example, if a careless driver runs a red light and hits another person's car, it is fair and just that the careless driver pay for any damages. Our legal system is based on this type of justice reasoning. The problem with restitution is that it cannot always compensate a person for what was lost. If a careless driver dents our fender, we can fix the fender without too much trouble. However, if that driver hurts a loved one, we cannot be compensated or restored in a way that addresses the pain that we (and others) have suffered.

Interpersonal forgiveness provides people with a path to emotional and psychological health after another person has unjustly hurt them. Research on interpersonal forgiveness has consistently shown that forgiveness can produce positive psychological change for people who have been deeply hurt. While there are many definitions of forgiveness, the definition developed by Dr. Robert Enright and the Human Development Study Group at the University of Wisconsin-Madison illustrates the roles of restitution and forgiveness very well. "Forgiveness is a willingness to abandon one's right to resentment, negative judgement, and indifferent behavior toward one who unjustly injured us, while fostering the undeserved qualities of compassion, generosity, and even love toward him or her."

Forgiveness is about mercy, not justice. Mercy attempts to go beyond making sure the injured person is compensated by the person who initiated the hurtful act. In the forgiveness process an injured person learns to see the person who inflicted harm in a new light. The forgiver does not forget or condone what happened, but decides to see the person as more than just the hurtful act. As anger is confronted and begins to subside, the forgiving person becomes ready to give the merciful gift of forgiveness by no longer thinking, behaving, or feeling negatively toward the offender.

However, just because a person decides to forgive does not mean that he/she has to forgo restitution. While restitution and forgiveness are different, they can fit together very well. If a business owner is robbed by a trusted employee who is also a long time friend, the business owner may choose to forgive the employee, yet expect that the employee pay him back for the stolen merchandise. Another example of restitution and forgiveness working well together would be when an institution systematically hurts a group of people. Business organizations that discriminate based on race, ethnicity, gender, or age would fall into this category. A person may forgive an organization for its behavior and at the same time seek legal justice. The restitution a person seeks may be in the form of new hiring policies or the establishment of scholarships for the group that was hurt. Forgiveness, however, does not hang in the balance of the restitution.

Restitution and forgiveness play two different roles when another person has hurt us. Restitution provides us with a sense of fairness or justice. Forgiveness comes from mercy and provides us with emotional and psychological health. One of the worst things that can happen in the recovery process is to seek restitution as our end goal; it will never address our anger.

John Klatt
Graduate Student in Educational Psychology
University of Wisconsin/Madison