Restorative Justice at the College Level

           For my youngest child's spring break we went and looked at colleges that had interested her.  Without naming names, I want to talk about one of those colleges very briefly.  Most of what this college had to say for itself was very positive and seemed like a good match for Aislynn.  They talked about being inclusive and aware, though aparently one of their professors had made an inappropriate comment in a fit of anger that was caught on video and was being shown all over the place.  

           This college also talked about using a restorative model for justice on campus rather than a retributive model.  I've written about this before, but to explain again: In a retributive model for justice, misdeeds, mistakes, errors are dealt with by punishing the person who made the error.  Those who use this method seek revenge on the person, often an escalated revenge of what was done in the first place.  This model has many problems with it, beginning with the fact that punishment simply does not work to effectively change behavior.  In fact, the extremely high rate of recidivism in the United States prisons, for example, shows that the punishment we exact on our prisoners ends up cementing their identity as criminals most of the time.  They then have extremely little chance of changing, doing better, or choosing a different way of life.  We also make it almost impossible for those who've been incarcerated to find housing, jobs, or a way of getting out of that system.  We make them into criminals, even if they weren't actually criminals before.  It is also estimated that at least 10% of those who end up incarcerated are not actually guilty of the crimes they were incarcerated for.  Additionally, our retributive system does not provide healing for the victims either.  In our legal system, in fact, our retributive justice system usually ends up revictimizing the victims as they must tell their story in a court of law and have that story attacked and dismantled by lawyers seeking to defend the accused.  

        In contrast to the restributive justice system, a restorative model seeks to understand and provide healing for both victims and those who have done wrong.  There are still consequences for the offenders.  But the consequences tend of be logical or natural consequences: ways for the offenders to correct their mistakes, fix them, look at their own issues that caused the offenders to behave badly in the first place, and invites them to choose to start on a different path.  

       Many of our native tribes (throughout the world!  New Zealand has a wonderful restorative justic program based on the methods of the Maori) have used a restorative model rather than a retributive model with great success.  It sees everyone involved as people not "bad guys" and "good guys" but human beings, all in need of growth and healing.

       Our child development strategies are tending more and more towards a restorative model as we learn that children act out when there is something that needs healing, something that needs training, something that needs help.  It has moved from identifying kids as simply "bad" or "good" into recognizing that all of us are mixes of bad and good and are all on a path of growth.  Many of our schools are also learning and moving more towards a restorative rather than a retributive model.  For example, rather than expelling a child who has done wrong, many schools now work with the child, their family, the victims, and the school system to try to understand what wrong has happened and to do the work to make sure the offenders are not continuing in their behavior.  They are also working more to help the victims obtain healing help.  Expulsion, for many kids, was not only an uneffective punishment, but sometimes was experienced by kids to be a kind of backwards reward.  It encouraged further "bad" behavior rather than correcting what was wrong, teaching more fully about empathy, and helping everyone involved in these situations to heal, grow and do better.  

         So, this college we visited prided itself on teaching and using a restorative model of justice.  It proclaimed that when something happened that was "wrong" that it was explored, analyzed, and addressed individually, working with those who made the mistakes to correct them, to learn from them, and to fix the mistakes rather than to simply be punished, expelled or thrown out as "bad".  

        That's awesome.  I believe deeply in restorative justice and was very excited to find a school that declared its commitment to that system at the outset.

        HOWEVER, many students at the school were protesting, demanding for the firing of the above mentioned professor.  The firing of a teacher follows a retributive model of justice.  It does nothing to correct the problem or even address it.  It does nothing towards healing the victims.  It also simply dismisses the professor, leaving him and his family without income or without a way to correct the problems.  It responds to an error (or even a series of errors) by adding to the list of what is harmful, destructive and angry, rather than offering a way forward that teaches, heals and restores relationships.  It stops conversation, rather than exploring, learning together and working together to truly address the issues in productive and constructive ways.  It also entrenches the professor in a place of simply defending his comments rather than inviting him to do the self-reflection a more restorative process would encourage.  

       I continue to be amazed at the lack of compassion that humans show to one another.  I continue to be deeply saddened by the ease with which people choose to label, categorize and "other" those around them.  This professor stopped being a person to these students.  He is just a "bad guy" now to throw out, another person to be "gotten rid of,"  to punish, to condemn.  It was obvious that for all the rhetoric at the school claiming to follow and teach a restorative justice model that they have not been able to actually instill that value into the student body.  We have a long way to go.

What Is Right Vs. What Is Expedient

 

Psalm 146

John 19:1-16a

               In today’s scriptures we hear a very difficult passage which is usually only read on Good Friday, if it is read at all, because it is so very hard to hear.  It is hard to hear because it is graphic, violent, and tragic towards Jesus, of all people, who did nothing but love those around him, heal and help those around him, and encourage us to do the same.  It is also hard because we hear Pilate’s struggle, and may recognize in it some of our own.  When the pressure is high to act in one way, it can be very difficult, even when you know it to be wrong, to choose to behave differently. 

               I have a friend who joined Noom.  Noom is the newest, latest, supposedly most effective, weight loss program out there.  One of its gifts is that it teaches a lot of psychology to people who are struggling to change their patterns and habits, and to find a healthier way of life.  My friend was sharing with me that a couple NOOM sessions were discussing the fact that our eating is greatly influenced by those around us.  Part of human psychology is to match the behaviors of the people around you, even with things as simple and easy as food.  So, if the person sitting with you at the restaurant orders an appetizer, you are much more likely to also order an appetizer.  If the person next to you is ordering a dessert, or a drink, you are also much more likely to do the same.  Even the main meal itself can be greatly influenced by the choices of those around you.  When you read the menu you may have one item in mind to order, but if everyone else orders first, their choices often affect our own: “ooo, that sounds good!” we say, “I’ll have the same!” 

               This behavior, of copying, mirroring or matching the behaviors of those around us extends far beyond food choices, though.  Sometimes this happens in healthy ways, and sometimes not.  If those around you exercise, you are much more likely to also exercise (a good, healthy thing).  If those around you relax by sitting in front of the TV and mindlessly eating, you are much more likely to do that (obviously not such a healthy thing).  Whatever it is: if the folk around you play games, or read, or do puzzles.  If they pray, go to church, vote: all of these affect and influence our choices.

               NOOM’s suggestion, then, when it comes to our physical health, is to be the first to order, or the one to set the trends of exercising more or moving more.  Be the one to help those around you make healthier choices.  The NOOM staff also suggest planning ahead: go into the restaurant with some idea in your head before-hand of what you plan to eat and be intentional about reminding yourself that you do not have to do what those around you do.

               But what happens when you can’t plan ahead?  What happens when something unexpected happens?  And what happens when the pressure is HIGH to do something specific, to behave in a very specific way?  We have a really hard time saying no.  For lots of reasons.  We want to be liked.  We don’t want to lose our influence or connections.  We want to be respected and trusted.  And it is just part of our human DNA to do so.

I’m not talking here so much about facing normal temptations.  Normally we are tempted by things we want.  But that’s not what this sermon or today’s scripture is about.  Pilate here is not being asked to do something he enjoys or wants to do, so this isn’t a normal temptation.  This is simply pressure from the community to do something he doesn’t want to do, and that he feels is wrong.  Even in his high position, even as the ruler and leader of the people, he cannot escape the pressure and he caves in to it.  Think about how much more strongly that pressure effects us when it is our boss, or people we love and care about, or a community of people who are of greater or equal influence on us? 

In my pastor circles we talk about the pressure to preach sermons that won’t upset or even challenge people too much.  We have pressure to not alienate or scare people.  Even when scripture points out to us important things that we should be saying, the pressure to “make nice” or avoid ruffling feathers can be difficult to resist.  And like Pilate, we justify it in many ways: I can’t speak on this because it will split the church.  I can’t say it this way because people will leave.  But again, is that what we are truly, deeply called to do?  Is it what Pilate was truly, deeply called to do - to ignore his inner voices telling him this was wrong?  We often react with what is expedient over what is right.  It is very, very tempting to act in the ways others want us to act.  It is much harder to stick to our beliefs and to act with integrity in the face of the pressure to do otherwise. 

The prophets struggled with this too.  Jeremiah didn’t want to do what was right, he knew it would cause him to be unpopular so he said he was too young.  Moses didn’t want to do it, so he said he couldn’t speak, Jonah didn’t want to do it so he ran away.  Even Peter was impacted by those around him when he denied Jesus three times.  He knew acknowledging his connection to Jesus could get him killed, so he denied him. 

Our stories of heroes tend to be those who stuck to what they knew was right and chose to act despite their subsequent unpopularity.  And we know what happens to those folk.  MLK ended up murdered, Ghandi ended up murdered. Jesus ended up murdered.  People who stand up against what the masses want end up dead.  And Pilate?  We don’t know what would have happened if he had refused to do what the crowds demanded.  But my guess is he was afraid, maybe mortally afraid, of the consequences if he ignored the pressure from the crowds.  Is it any wonder that he resisted?  Is it any wonder when we resist?  That we are so easily influenced by those who demand we behave in a certain way, even when we know they are wrong? 

I invite you to think for a minute about a time you may have been pressured to do what you knew (or strongly believed) to be wrong by those around you.  How did you react?  What did you do?  Did you cave in?  And if you did, how did it feel?  If you didn’t, what happened then? 

Ronald Richardson in his book, Creating a Healthier Church, (p 59) wrote, “In Germany in the 1930’s there was a very high level of anxiety.  The primary source of this anxiety, but not the only one, related to the chaotic economic conditions.  The Germans are an intelligent and well-educated people.  But as their anxiety went up, they were increasingly attracted to the simplistic ideas of the Nazi party and Adolf Hitler, who offered, as the cause of Germany’s problems, Jews, communitists, [LGBTQ persons], and others whom he saw as social misfits who diluted the quality of what he called the “pure Aryan race.  In the midst of so much anxiety, the majority of the people lost their ability to think clearly, put aside their own deep spiritual beliefs and values and participated in a social/political movement that heped them to fell better and more confident about themselves.  They gave up many of their beliefs to go along with the ‘party line’.  Dictators thrive in situations where people are anxious, and so the Nazi party was voted into power.”

Pilate, even as he stood in power, was experiencing a great deal of anxiety when faced with the pressure to kill Jesus.  And so he did it.  He could not resist that pressure even in the face of his own convictions about Jesus’ innocence.  He could not choose what was right over what was expedient, simple, and the path of least resistance. 

Few of us are the heroes who choose integrity and what we believe to be right in the face of those loud voices and strong peer pressure to choose something different.  And sometimes the issue is that we honestly don’t know what is best.  We know what we believe to be right, we know it doesn’t feel good to be pushed to act contrary to what we think is right.  But, if you are like me, in the face of high pressure we can doubt our own sense of the world, our own convictions.   When we really don’t know for sure and when the pressure is high to behave in a way contrary to our own inner voices, what do we do in those moments? 

James Baldwin said, “Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within.”  When we are struggling to know what to do, we should always fall back to doing what is most loving.  What is most kind.  What is most compassionate. 

               But there will be times when we can’t.  And then?  The Good News in this is always God’s abundant forgiveness and continuing call on our lives.  Just as Jesus forgave Peter for his denials, God forgives us.  Just as Jesus, from the cross, begged forgiveness for those who had killed him (which included Pilate), God forgives us.  But God also doesn’t leave us there.  We are asked again to do what is right.  We are called to try again to act with integrity despite the pressures around us to behave differently. 

               That may not feel like good news.  But it is.  God is not calling us to do what is “right” just for the world’s sake, though that is part of it.  God calls us to do what is right for our own wholeness, our own well-being.  So even when we mess up, God gives us another chance, and another, to try again.  Again, we have to remember that even Jesus understood this.  “Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do,” he said.  And I believe he said that with all conviction. 

               Our invitation is to trust our inner voices.  Our invitation is to always choose love.  Our invitation is also to forgive ourselves for the past mistakes we’ve made and to move into the future with the determination to do better next time.  God has loved you into being and God will love you into the next opportunity to walk towards wholeness.  Thanks be to God.  Amen.