Research on forgiveness has continued to be produced at ever-increasing levels of quantity and quality. Nathaniel Wade and I just published the second edition of the Handbook of Forgiveness (Worthington & Wade, 2020b). In that volume, 33 teams of researchers reviewed the accumulation of research in their specialty areas. In the final chapter (Worthington & Wade, 2020a), we noted some important trends. Perhaps the one most surprising to me was the increasing attention that reviewers were paying to both sides of the forgiveness equation—what goes on with the forgiver and with the offender. In the previous edition of the Handbook (Worthington, 2005), the attention of researchers had been almost exclusively on the forgiving person. Now researchers are interested in telling a more rounded, complete story that includes the forgiver, offender, and even the context of the community in which the offense occurred. This often involves considering things like making apologies, offering to make restitution for losses, and considerations of self-forgiveness. A second trend was to tell a more rounded tale about the virtues. People whose characters are formed by the “renewal of your mind” (Rom 12:2) until we approximate “the mind of Christ” (see 1 Cor 2) should be expected inevitably to exhibit a panoply of virtues—like both forgiveness and humility or like forgiveness, humility, generosity, gratitude, hope, faith, and love. A third trend that will likely govern future research on forgiveness is an examination of interventions to promote forgiveness. Up to now, almost all forgiveness intervention studies have investigated one approach against control conditions (like a waiting list or an alternative like relaxation). Few if any have compared different theories head to head. The one exception I can think of is Nathaniel Wade. Wade has compared group-process approaches with the psychoeducational REACH Forgiveness approach (Wade & Meyer, 2009; Wade et al., 2018). While some, but not a lot of, research has yet addressed this new emphasis on a more well-rounded science of forgiveness, many reviewers in the second edition of the Handbook were calling for more of such research in the years to come. As I was watching these reviews come in, I had just read Mark McMinn’s (2017) excellent book, The Science of Virtue: Why Positive Psychology Matters to the Church. Mark made the point repeatedly that even secular research on forgiveness (and other virtues like wisdom, humility, hope, and grace) was essential to the church because the language of the day is science. Mark, though, showed how the church could add to the value of such research by contextualizing it within centuries of writing, teaching, preaching, and practicing of traditional Christian formation. He also discussed how many Christian authors were contributing to secular research on the virtues, which allows the values of Christianity to be looked at within research, even if it did not address Christian beliefs and values directly.

中文翻译：

---

编辑页面

关于宽恕的研究在数量和质量上都在不断提高。Nathaniel Wade 和我刚刚出版了《宽恕手册》的第二版（Worthington & Wade，2020b）。在该卷中，33 个研究人员团队回顾了他们专业领域的研究积累。在最后一章（Worthington & Wade，2020a）中，我们注意到了一些重要的趋势。也许最令我惊讶的是评论家越来越关注宽恕等式的两边——宽恕者和罪犯的情况。在手册的前一版（Worthington，2005 年）中，研究人员的注意力几乎完全集中在宽容的人身上。现在，研究人员有兴趣讲述一个更全面、更完整的故事，其中包括宽恕者、犯罪者、甚至犯罪发生所在社区的背景。这通常涉及考虑诸如道歉、提出赔偿损失以及考虑自我宽恕等问题。第二个趋势是讲述一个关于美德的更全面的故事。在我们接近“基督的心意”（见 1 Cor 2）之前，其品格是通过“心意更新”（罗马书 12:2）形成的人，应该不可避免地表现出一整套美德——比如宽恕和谦卑或者像宽恕、谦逊、慷慨、感恩、希望、信仰和爱。第三个可能支配未来宽恕研究的趋势是对促进宽恕的干预措施的检查。到现在，几乎所有的宽恕干预研究都研究了一种针对控制条件的方法（如等待名单或放松等替代方案）。很少有人对不同的理论进行正面比较。我能想到的一个例外是纳撒尼尔韦德。Wade 将团体过程方法与心理教育 REACH 宽恕方法进行了比较（Wade & Meyer，2009 年；Wade 等人，2018 年）。虽然一些研究（但不是很多）已经解决了这种对更全面的宽恕科学的新强调，但手册第二版中的许多评论者呼吁在未来几年进行更多此类研究。当我看着这些评论进来时，我刚刚阅读了马克·麦克明 (Mark McMinn) (2017) 的优秀著作《美德的科学：为什么积极心理学对教会很重要》(The Science of Virtue: Why Positive Psychology Matters to the Church)。马克反复指出，即使是对宽恕（以及其他美德，如智慧、谦逊、希望和恩典）的世俗研究，对教会来说也是必不可少的，因为当时的语言是科学。然而，马可展示了教会如何通过在几个世纪以来传统基督教形成的写作、教学、讲道和实践中将其置于背景中来增加此类研究的价值。他还讨论了有多少基督教作家为美德的世俗研究做出了贡献，这使得可以在研究中审视基督教的价值观，即使它没有直接涉及基督教的信仰和价值观。展示了教会如何通过在几个世纪以来传统基督教形成的写作、教学、讲道和实践中将其置于情境中来增加此类研究的价值。他还讨论了有多少基督教作家为美德的世俗研究做出了贡献，这使得可以在研究中审视基督教的价值观，即使它没有直接涉及基督教的信仰和价值观。展示了教会如何通过在几个世纪以来传统基督教形成的写作、教学、讲道和实践中将其置于情境中来增加此类研究的价值。他还讨论了有多少基督教作家为美德的世俗研究做出了贡献，这使得可以在研究中审视基督教的价值观，即使它没有直接涉及基督教的信仰和价值观。