On 6 and 7 May 2025, as part of the entrepreneurs’ Jubilee, the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross hosted the international congress “Common memory and collective forgiveness”, with the aim of exploring new horizons and paths to achieve peace in contemporary society, injured in interpersonal relations and torn by social tensions of various kinds. Among the guests, the cathedtic Mariano Crespo, of the Universidad de Navarra (Spain) is among the guests, who intervenes on the theme for forgiveness, detector of the human person. In the following text, the scholar explores the difficult path of forgiveness as an inner healing process.
by Mariano Crespo
* * *
It is sufficient to browse the pages of a newspaper to realize that in our world today – as well as in that of the past – wars, conflicts, violence and abuses abuse. All this certainly does not represent a novelty. Since the dawn of human history, conflicts, more or less violent, have marked our path. The main difference, in general terms, lies in the fact that today we have more information about it. In any case, coming to know the testimonies of the victims of brutal violence always remains an experience that shakes deeply.
In the face of these stories, you are wrapped in impenetrable silence. What can be said in front of the suffering of those who have lost a husband, a father, brother or son in war, or who has suffered serious abuse? As Viktor Frankl said, after losing most of his family in Auschwitz, “where words say so little, every word is too much”. Today we are witnessing the contrast between the suffering of concrete, unique and unrepeatable people, and the indifference of those who little or nothing knew of their victims.
Numerous questions arise in the face of this scenario. Perhaps the most important concerns the possibility of forgiveness. Forgive those who inflict a tangible evil, or does it inflict it to our loved ones, does not mean going beyond the threshold of the imperdantable? Not only for the extent of the evil inflicted, but also because, in many cases, those who would really have legitimized to forgive – the direct victims of the crimes – are no longer in a position to do so. Wouldn’t it be presumptuous to arrogate the right to do it in their own place?
They are not questions that it is easy to answer (let alone in a short reflection like this). One thing appears clear: to forgive means to “purify”, healing memory. This purification is a process that aims to get rid of any form of negative sentiment, without this implying a cancellation or an oblivion of the offense. The foundation of this process is a new attitude towards the person or people who have inflicted objective evil. In this way, the wounded memory is replaced by one Reconciliate memory.
In “purifying” the memory, the families of the victims resemble travelers who move with a light baggage. But here arises a new question: can the memory “purify” without the collaboration of the culprit, without his repentance, without his distance from the crime committed? It seems difficult. In this regard, Max Scheler has masterfully illustrated as not only we have power over our future, but we can somehow order our past. This is because “every experience lived has not ‘concluded’ as regards its value and meaning until it has given all possible fruits”. But repentance is much more than a simple recognition of responsibility for an act committed in the past. Authentic repentance consists of an explicit and active renunciation of offense.
The testimonies of those who have forgiven generally agree on the liberating and restorative character that forgiveness has represented for them. In cases where there was repentance and request for forgiveness from the authors of crimes, violent acts or abuse, forgiveness was more accessible. The ability to live without grudge and to offer forgiveness undoubtedly contributes to a more serene life in the face of suffering and death. However, it seems difficult that this is possible without the collaboration of those who have caused evil.
Forgiveness involves an element of trust very different from the acceptance of the morally negative value of the action committed. Ultimately, building a peaceful memory does not mean forgetting, but recognizing the evil immediately and turning the gaze to the future.
