Restorative Justice and Pastoral Care: Shared Principles and Practices

ABSTRACT

This article proposes that there is significant overlap between pastoral care as a theory and practice and restorative justice as a theory and practice. It provides an introduction to the principles of restorative justice as well as an analysis of the theoretical intersections between the two fields. Finally, the article offers suggestions for how pastoral caregivers might integrate restorative justice into their work.

KEYWORDS:

• Restorative justice; pastoral care; trauma

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Howard Zehr is often misattributed as being the founder of restorative justice. Zehr himself notes that he has been falsely recognized for this achievement and that credit deserves to be given to Indigenous communities who created and continue to use restorative practices as the cornerstone of their justice systems. See Zehr, The Big Book of Restorative Justice, 20–21, 56.

2 Pavelka, “Restorative Justice in the States,” 1–23.

3 For a book-length consideration of how and why schools should use restorative justice, see Evans and Vaandering, Little Book of Restorative Justice in Education.

4 For but one example of how restorative justice yields lower recidivism rates than the criminal justice system does, see Karp and Sacks, “Student Conduct, Restorative Justice, and Student Development," 154–72.

5 Sered, Until We Reckon, 7.

6 “Recidivism Among Federal Violent Offenders,” United States Sentencing Commission.

7 Sered, 68–69.

8 For a book-length examination of racial injustice in the criminal justice system, see Alexander, The New Jim Crow.

9 “Criminal Justice Fact Sheet,” NAACP.

10 Alexander, 205.

11 For a book-length examination of the relationship between restorative justice and race, see Davis, The Little Book of Race and Restorative Justice.

12 Latimer, Dowden, and Muise, “The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Practice,” Government of Canada.

13 Sered, 91–129.

14 Sered, 92–93.

15 Mary Moschella notes that pastoral theologians may overfocus on care during times of suffering while neglecting to consider how care may also occur in times of joy. While joy may appear to be a state that lacks vulnerability, Brené Brown suggests that vulnerability may be profoundly accompany experiences of joy because at such times, the positive feelings people have may make them aware that they have much that could be lost should the feeling dissipate. This can lead to fear, acts of self-preservation, or even self-sabotage. See Moschella, Caring for Joy, 2–4; Brené Brown, Atlas of the Heart, 215–16.

16 Justes, Please Don’t Tell, 29. Here Justes recognizes that active listening, openness, and receptivity on the part of pastoral caregivers creates space for the care seeker to regain agency by deciding for themselves what they care to share and what they do not.

17 Doehring, The Practice of Pastoral Care, 15–21.

18 While Christian communities—particularly Mennonites—have adopted restorative justice principles into their practices because they align with their theology, Zehr notes that restorative justice primarily emerged in Indigenous communities and was adopted by Christians. See Zehr, 20–21, 56.

19 Law, “Flowers and Songs: A Liturgical Approach to Pastoral Care,” 173–83.

20 Herman, Trauma and Recovery, 155–74.

21 Ibid., 175–214.

22 For a significant series of articles in the field of pastoral care that offer analyses of the field from an intersectional perspective, see volume 28, no. 3 of the Journal of Pastoral Theology, as well as the introduction by editors Samuel Lee and Melinda McGarrah Sharp, “Interrogating Identities, Histories, and Cultures” (133–38). For a helpful intersectional introduction to restorative justice principles and practices, see Woolford and Nelund, The Politics of Restorative Justice, 152–80.

23 Clebsch and Jaekle, Pastoral Care in Historical Perspective, 11–32.

24 This is not to say that restorative justice never incorporates punishment into its practices. Indeed, it acknowledges that restorative techniques are not suited for all circumstances and that sometimes, punitive measures are both necessary and warranted. For but one well-publicized example, consider the case of Kate and Andy Grosmaire, whose daughter Ann was murdered by her boyfriend, Conor McBride. The family requested a restorative procedure be used prior to sentencing. In that restorative process, Kate and Andy were able to be in direct conversation with Conor in order to ask questions that were important for their own healing and understanding of the event. They advocated for Conor to nonetheless be incarcerated for a period of time. It is important to note, here, that in advocating for Conor to be sentenced, it also gave Conor the chance to hear from those he harmed that incarceration was a meaningful form of accountability to them. Conor was sentenced to twenty years in prison and ten years of probation.

25 The Episcopal Church, for instance, has changed its disciplinary structure to include a restorative component, as it noted the efficacy of restorative justice procedures, as well as how the theory behind them aligned with the denomination’s theological commitments.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Danielle Tumminio Hansen

Danielle Tumminio Hansen is a professor at Emory University's Candler School of Theology. She researches trauma and is the author of multiple publications, including Conceiving Family (Baylor University Press, 2019) and Speaking of Rape (Fortress, 2024).