Table of Contents

Introduction

Part I: The Situation

Juvenile Delinquency in Albuquerque

National Trends: Juvenile Crime and Public Opinion
Local Trends: Albuquerque/Bernalillo County:
Challenge to the Church

Characteristics of the Juvenile Delinquent

The EQUIP Program
Social Development Delays
Cognitive Distortions: Thinking Errors

Self-Centered
Minimizing/Mislabeling
Assuming the Worst
Blaming

Social Skills Deficiencies

Part II: The Foundation

A Theological Foundation for Juvenile Detention Ministry

Scripture

Luke 2: 8 – 10
Matthew 25: 31 – 46
Matthew 18: 1 – 20

Recent Church Teaching
Recent Initiatives

Boston’s Ten Points Coalition
Communities for Youth: The NCCB Initiative with America’s Promise

Juvenile Justice Ministry: A Canossian Approach

Beneficiaries
Three Branches of Canossian Ministry

Education – Human Promotion: To Potentiate/Capacitate
Evangelization – Formation: To Liberate
Pastoral Care of the Sick – Reflection/Introspection: To Integrate

Charismatic Fidelity

Part III: The Response

Thresholds Mentoring: An Approach to Juvenile Justice Ministry

Thresholds Mentoring – Archdiocese of Santa Fe

Mentoring
Detention Ministry of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe
Thresholds Youth Reintegration Mentoring – An Overview

The Mentee – The Mentor

Mentees
Mentors

Thresholds Mentoring – Tasks and Tools

Responding to the needs of youth

Developmental Assets
Social Development – Cognitive – Social Skills Deficiencies

Responding to the Call of Scripture and Tradition:

Enabling the Community
Reintegrating Offenders

Expressing the Canossian Charism

Education – Human Promotion,
Evangelization – Formation and Liberation,
Pastoral Care - Integration


A Final Word: Mentoring as Presence
Conclusion
Appendix

Project Summary: May 2000 – September 2001
Thresholds Mentoring Manual Excerpts

The Mentee
The Mentor
Mentoring Procedures
Session Procedures
Mentoring Tools

Bibliography

We are still a long way from the time when our conscience can be certain of having done everything possible to prevent crime and to control it effectively so that it no longer does harm, and at the same time, to offer those who commit crimes a way of redeeming themselves and making a positive return to society. If all those in some way involved in the problem tried to . . . develop this line of thought, perhaps humanity as a whole could take a great step forward in creating a more serene and peaceful society.

Pope John Paul II, July 9, 2000

The vast majority of incarcerated persons will leave the detention facility and re-enter into society. In the Albuquerque area of New Mexico, this includes several thousand teenagers who are released each year from county and state facilities. The juvenile justice community is working to develop detention alternative and other kinds of supervision programs, and there is an increasing openness work with faith-based programs to assist at-risk and delinquent youth. As the majority of incarcerated youth in New Mexico are Catholic, the juvenile justice system invites the presence of Catholic ministry not only within the juvenile detention facilities, but also as an integral part of reintegration and after care efforts.

The Bishops of the United States present this same challenge to us. In their November 2000 Document: Responsibility, Rehabilitation and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice, they speak of the need to provide opportunities for the spiritual healing and renewal of the incarcerated through an on-going Catholic and sacramental presence. They also exhort parishes to help reintegrate offenders back into the community, providing an environment of support, assistance and love.

This paper will present a model for ministry with juvenile delinquents that assists them in the transition to their local and faith communities, and that also challenges parishes to be more aware of the needs of all ex-prisoners, especially youth. For this ministry to be well grounded, viable and effective, it must be supported by an acute awareness of the issues around juvenile justice and the youth in the juvenile justice system, a strong theological foundation of Scripture, church teaching and tradition, and the structure and tools necessary to implement and sustain an on-going ministry.

The first part of this paper will outline general trends of juvenile delinquency, and look more specifically at the situation in the Albuquerque area. Much of the focus will be on some of the work done in the youth detention facilities of the State of New Mexico. This approach considers the social development delays, cognitive distortions and social skills deficiencies present in the majority of delinquent youth. Any ministry model must respond to the specific and unique challenges that these characteristics present in order for it to be relevant and effective not only as spiritual support, but as an integral part of the young person’s journey back into society and community.

Next, this paper will offer a theological foundation for detention ministry, with the specific thrust of juvenile detention ministry. It will be seen, through the Gospels and in the social teaching of the Church, that such ministry is a mandate of the Catholic faith. Highlighted will be the efforts of three Dioceses to respond to the challenges of the juvenile justice system in there area.

Another area of consideration will be the charism of the Canossian Daughters of Charity, Servants of the Poor. There are members of this congregation who feel that this ministry with juvenile delinquents does not fit with the intention of the founder, St. Magdalen of Canossa. The author, also a member, believes however that this ministry typifies her intention, and should be considered as a possible outlet for Canossian apostolic action. Furthermore, the specific approach to ministry of St. Magdalen will be considered as a model for ministry with juvenile delinquents.

Finally, this paper will propose a faith-based reintegration mentoring as a model for ministry with incarcerated youth. This model will be designed to meet the various and specific challenges of the situation of juvenile delinquents, and of our Catholic tradition. Structures and tools for the planning and implementation of this ministry will also be outlined. Included in the appendix will be specific information about the pilot implementation of this model in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe.

Part I: The Situation
Juvenile Delinquency in Albuquerque

National Trends: Juvenile Crime and Public Opinion
According to the US Department of Justice, juvenile crime in 1999 was at its lowest rate in 25 years. Its Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s 1999 report also shows:

• A 36% drop in violent crime overall from 1994 to 1999, the lowest since 1988;
  
• A 68% decline in the juvenile arrest rate for murder from 1993 – 1996, the lowest level since 1966;
  
• A 31% drop in rape from 1994 to 1999, the lowest since 1980;
  
• A 24% drop in aggravated assault from 1994 to 1999, the lowest since 1989;
  
• A 39% decline in the juvenile arrest rate for weapons law violations, the lowest since 1988;
  
• A 23% drop in the juvenile arrest rates for property crime from 1997 to 1999.¹
  

Levels of Assets Among Albuquerque Youth

With 0 to 10 assets
With 31 to 40 assets
43%
16%
8%

Table 1⁵

33%
With 21 to 30 assets
With 11 to 20 assets

The study also shows a direct correlation between the number of assets present, and the number of at-risk behaviors (21 forms of risk taking including alcohol and drug use, sexual activity, anti-social behavior, violence). (Table 3) This correlation holds true across gender, race and ethnicity.⁶

Number of Assets	Average Number of 21 Risk Behaviors
If 0 to 10 If 11 to 20 If 21 to 30 If 31 to 40	10.3 6.5 3.5 1.3

Table 3

Challenge to the Church
An estimated 70% of youth referred to the Bernalillo County Juvenile Court are identified as Catholic. Both the Search Institute study and the SAFE2000 Report identify faith congregations as necessary components of a community effort to improve the situation for at-risk youth. Clearly the Church must address the situation of at-risk and delinquent youth.

Congregations can play a major role in the generation and nurturance of developmental assets through both formal programming and informal interaction with youth and families. Fostering intergenerational relationships, listening to what youth say they want, maintaining year-round connections with youth, and providing opportunities for youth to be leaders and contributors to the congregation are just a few of the challenges that the Search Institute directs towards communities of faith.

The SAFE2000 Report notes that public perception of youth is often negative. Positive information about youthful accomplishments and pro-social activities and about efforts of community organizations to promote the success of youth is under reported. There is also a felt need in Albuquerque for an increase and expansion of community activities aimed at prevention, intervention and rehabilitation. These require the coordinated efforts of a wide variety of community partners, including faith communities.⁷

What can the Church do? How can we generate and nurture developmental assets in youth? Can we influence public opinion – at least within our own faith communities – about youth? What can we offer, as part of the mission of the Church, to contribute to the community effort to deal with at-risk and delinquent youth?

Characteristics of the Juvenile Delinquent

In considering how the Church can answer the above questions, it will be helpful to understand some of the common characteristics of youth who engage in the kind of behavior that results in referral to juvenile court.
The EQUIP Program
The EQUIP program⁸ is a youth based treatment program specifically designed for youth with anti-social behavioral problems. In designing this treatment approach, Gibbs, Potter and Goldstein assess three major areas of deficiency in youth with anti-social behavior: 1) social developmental delays, 2) cognitive distortions and 3) social skills deficiencies. Understanding the nature of these deficiencies can help us as Church formulate a holistic pastoral approach that takes into account the specific needs and issues of these youth in prevention, intervention and rehabilitation.
Social Development Delays
The social development delays of these youth are generally thought of in terms of moral development. The primary problem to be addressed is a lack of empathy; an inability of these young people to consider how their behavior might affect others. Drawing from Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, (Table 6) it would seem that delinquent youth are often stuck in the “pre-conventional” stages of moral development.

LEVEL	STAGE	SOCIAL ORIENTATION
Pre-conventional	1	Obedience and Punishment
	2	Individualism, Instrumentalism, and Exchange
Conventional	3	“Good boy/girl”
	4	Law and Order
Post-Conventional	5	Social Contract
	6	Principled Conscience

Table 4⁹

What is “right” in the first stage (Obedience and Punishment, also referred to as the Power Stage) is what I can get away with. In this stage, the dynamics of obedience and punishment are a question of power. What I decide to do depends on which side of the perceived power struggle I find myself. If another person has the power to punish me, then I choose to obey in order to avoid the punishment. I place little or no value on the desired behavior itself. This stage is also manifested in decision-making based on the principle of “might makes right” or “survival of the fittest.” If I have the power to get what I want, or what I perceive I need, I am justified in using that power for my own interest, regardless of the consequences to others. If I do not think that I have the power, I will either choose to do without, or seek to augment my power. I may use a weapon or employ other physical means of intimidation so that I can get what I want. In this stage, if a behavior or action does result in punishment, I do not see the behavior itself as problematic. The fact that I have been caught is what I will regret, and I may seek to increase my power to avoid being caught in the future. The reasoning of this stage is absolutely egocentric and devoid of the perspective of others. The bottom line is getting what I want without suffering any immediate negative consequences.

The second stage (Individualism, Instrumentalism, and Exchange, also called “Deal-making”) is also egocentric; “right” is what is in my best interest, although more sophisticated means are used to achieve that interest. Rather than relying on the force of power, I will seek to make a deal. I may choose to do something good for you, but only if I benefit from at least an equal good. What is good for you is valuable only to the extent that I reap benefits. While I may appear to be working towards an equal exchange or reciprocity, my reasoning is geared toward the best outcome for me, even if this requires trickery or manipulation. Thus I may offer to trade all of my nickels for all of my little brother’s dimes. The reciprocity of this stage can also be manifested in negative terms: if you hit me, I will be right to hit you back.

Among juvenile delinquents, there are some behaviors and attitudes that seemingly indicate movement into the third stage (“Good boy/girl”) and second level of moral development. Persons in this stage define what is right in terms of what is expected by those close to them. When shaped by the expectations of being the good daughter or son of a morally reasonable parent figure, this stage is where the young person begins to move beyond self-interest in making moral decisions. Many juvenile delinquents, however, manifest strong third stage characteristics of trust, mutuality and loyalty to gangs or other groups (even family systems) that as a group act out of first or second stage morality. Despite the fact that my motivation in decision-making is to gain approval from others, and despite that I may also experience intense empathy when a family or gang member is wronged or hurt, these “others” may be experienced more as an extension of myself. Thus, my decisions are still based on the best interest of myself/my group, and I will seek to achieve these interests through power or deal making.

Individuals who do achieve the third stage begin to develop an awareness of “shared feelings, agreements, and expectations, which take primacy over individual interests.”¹⁰ This is exactly what is lacking in the decision-making process of delinquent youth. It is not simply that they don’t care; it is more complex than an attitude problem. It is a question of development, an incapacity to understand that my actions impact others one way or another. A shift to at least elementary levels of mutuality must begin to shape the decision-making and resulting behavior of delinquent youth. This shift is required for young people to be able to negotiate higher stages of moral development. More specific work in these stages is generally beyond the scope of juvenile justice.
Cognitive Distortions: Thinking Errors
The second of the major tasks in EQUIP is to correct the “thinking errors” (or cognitive distortions) characteristic of delinquent youth. Thinking errors are inaccurate or rationalizing attitudes, thought, or beliefs concerning one’s own or others’ social behavior. Thinking errors help to reduce the guilt or negative feelings connected to a behavior by justifying or rationalizing the act. Sometimes delinquent youth are portrayed as individuals who have no remorse. For many, however, the pervasive sense of remorse is so strong and potentially debilitating that the psyche distorts thinking to protect the person from paralyzing guilt and remorse. To change, delinquent youth must assess more than their personal pattern or problematic behavior; they must become aware of and alter the thinking that allows or encourages them to behave as they do. The cognitive distortions of delinquent youth are categorized into four main thinking errors: self-centered, minimizing/mislabeling, assuming the worst, and blaming. It may be evident that these thinking errors exist among most people, not just delinquent youth. In the degree to which they are exhibited in delinquent youth, however, they contribute to anti-social and criminal behavior.
Self-Centered
Self-centered thinking means that the person’s opinion and feelings are more important than the opinions and feelings of other people. How another person might feel about things is not even considered. Self-centered thinking can also be shortsighted; the person thinks only about what he or she wants right now and does not think about how a specific behavior or decision will affect him or her in the future.
Examples:

• Because I am in hurry to get somewhere, it is okay if I drive too fast, switch lanes abruptly, or cut in front of another driver. Yet I am likely to become angry if I find myself behind someone else driving like this.
  
• A young person might try to justify stealing something simply because he or she needed it, or felt that they deserved to have it.
  

• I was only going 5 miles over the speed limit; there were other cars going faster. I shouldn’t have received a ticket.
  
• I don’t know what the big deal is. Their insurance replaced the VCR I stole.
  

• A drug dealer describes a delivery as “helping out a friend.”
  
• “She was a “snitch” so she deserved to get beat up.
  

• “He bumped into me walking down the line. I know he did it on purpose to start a fight, so I hit him.”
  
• “I knew my probation officer was going to violate me for no good reason, so I went ahead and used cocaine.
  
• “I knew I was going to flunk the test, so I dropped out of school”
  

• “They were stupid enough to leave the keys in the car – it’s their fault it was stolen.”
  
• “I shouldn’t go to jail for that – I was so high I didn’t know what I was doing.”
  
• “If he hadn’t said that about my gang, he wouldn’t have been beaten up.”
  

Part II: The Foundation
A Theological Foundation for Juvenile Detention Ministry

Ministry with and on behalf of delinquent youth is much needed. Yet, it is often underdeveloped – if not non-existent – as a ministry of a parish or diocese. It is not difficult to understand why. The Church often finds its shrinking resources stretched by increasing pastoral concerns. Youth in detention facilities are in many ways invisible. Those released from detention, or on probation or other kinds of formal supervision may not be forthcoming about their situation, especially if social status is a concern. The community may fear these youth, and families may desire that such young people do not participate in parish programs and events for fear of them influencing their own children. Some members of the faith community may feel it more appropriate to expend parish resources on those considered more deserving; it is hard enough to engage well-adjusted youth in parish programs.

Currently, in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, around 70% of youth in detention facilities are Catholic; however, the vast majority of ministry to them is offered by non-denominational, fundamentalist churches. Incarcerated youth are very appreciative of any religious programming. However, in the Albuquerque area, this ministry can lead to religious confusion among youth who have been raised Catholic. Furthermore, in a primarily Hispanic population, where Catholic religiosity is often a cultural and familial element, the challenge to a young person’s Catholic identity can also be experienced as a challenge to their cultural identity and sense of family belonging. We may complain when Catholic youth are criticized for wearing a scapular or having a rosary, or we may be frustrated when these youth give up Catholic practices to join other churches. But these non-denominational churches are the communities maintaining an active presence among incarcerated youth. Our Catholic faith communities must be persuaded and empowered to live out their mission among and on behalf of delinquent youth.

Scripture
Several passages from the Christian Scriptures will highlight the responsibility of the Christian community to minister to the incarcerated utilizing its best resources. These texts emphasize the aspect of Jesus’ ministry to the social outcast and to those perceived as criminals.
Luke 2: 8 – 10
In that region there were shepherds living in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. Then an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid; for see – I am bringing you good news of great joy for all the people: to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is the Messiah.”

The very first to receive the good news of the birth of Jesus were the shepherds. To the shepherds the angels first sang their hymn of glory. And the shepherds were the first to seek out Jesus, the Messiah. This is far more significant than simply a humble and touching image in our nativity set. The familiar image of the shepherd is one of tender care, gentle strength, and loyalty. And in the Hebrew Scriptures “the Patriarchs were shepherds, so was David; ‘to shepherd’ was a synonym for ruling.”¹¹ Jesus himself drew on this tradition as applied to servant leadership. Yet, Luke’s portrayal of the shepherds more likely reflects the “Israelite tradition [that] held that the shepherds were so destitute as to be always on the point of stealing and therefore completely untrustworthy.” ¹² They are considered criminals, and shunned from places where respectable people go. The shepherds, in Luke, represent not only the poor but the outcast, the rejected, the feared; those least deserving of God’s blessing and care, the ones excluded from the community of the righteous. They are criminals whose exclusion is deserved and unchangeable. Yet, right from the beginning the shepherds are identified as the primary and privileged recipients of the Good News, the message of salvation. Clearly this is a challenge to us to consider how we as a community relate with those that society excludes, fears and distrusts, and how we place them in a privileged and primary position to receive the good news that we bear.
Matthew 25: 31 – 46
“ . . . for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.” (Mt 25: 35 – 36)

If the above passage is significant as the first proclamation of the good news, this passage describing the last judgment is significant as Jesus’ last exhortation. “The position of this chapter in Mt at the conclusion of the final discourse of Jesus suggests that it is intended as the last word of Jesus to the disciples. If their love is active, failure to reach perfect morality in other ways will be rare, and it will be forgiven. But there is no substituting for active love.”¹³ Feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, welcoming the stranger, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, and visiting the imprisoned: these corporal works of mercy are not suggestions, not extra acts of charity to be done out of generosity. They are evidence of the transformation of the disciple of Jesus, the litmus test of Christian faith, and the “only Canon of judgment” ¹⁴ regarding the disciple’s duties to God and duties to men and women.

“Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.” (Mt. 25:40) Jesus identifies himself with all who suffer in these ways, the incarcerated no less than the sick or the hungry. We rightly speak of seeing the face of Christ in all of those who suffer, but it is challenging to see the suffering Christ in those who are victims of their own actions. It would be easier if Jesus specified the visitation of those who are imprisoned unjustly! Yet, no mention is made of the reasons for imprisonment – the guilt or innocence of the incarcerated is not an issue. It can be uncomfortable to consider the image of Christ in the prisoner, a challenge to reconcile the question of guilt. Yet Jesus himself makes the identification.
Matthew 18: 1 – 20
“Take care that you do not despise one of these little ones; for, I tell you, in heaven their angels continually see the face of my Father in heaven. What do you think? If a shepherd has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go in search of the one that went astray? And if he finds, truly I tell you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray. So it is not the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost.” (Mt 18: 10 – 14)

This passage can help us understand the both the value that Jesus places on the “strayed sheep” as well as the responsibility of the community to respond to the needs of the at-risk, the strayed and the lost.

Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? Matthew 18: 1 – 20 answers this question in an unexpected way – the greatest is defined in terms of one who is most worthy and needy of attention – the little ones, the at-risk, the weak, the “fallen”. The question is phrased in the context of God’s kingdom, which Matthew often identifies with the community of the church on earth. Dealing with these weak members requires tremendous attention and effort on the part of the community and its leaders. They must do several things: avoid scandal that would cause the little one to stumble (18: 6 – 7), search for those gone astray (18: 10 – 14), and gently correct the mistaken (18: 15 – 20). In the context of troubled youth, a primary task of the Christian community is to prevent anti-social behavior, intervene with anti-social youth, and invite to reconciliation with the community youth who have engaged in criminal behavior.

The analogy of the strayed sheep is particularly relevant in the Albuquerque area, where nearly one out of one hundred youth are referred to the juvenile justice system: the one lost sheep out of a hundred. To understand the full impact of this parable (Mt. 18: 10 – 14) and its implications for the community, it might be helpful to first compare Matthew’s use of this material to Luke’s.

Luke uses the same parable of Jesus to respond to those who “were grumbling and saying, ‘this fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.’” (Luke 15:2) In Luke, we hear of the lost sheep, identified with the sinner, the one who stands outside of the community. Luke’s community seems to be struggling with the issue of exclusion and inclusion – who is in and who is out – and Luke would have that community joyfully extend its boundaries of inclusion. “Rejoice for what was lost is found . . .” This exhortation is brought to full expression in the following passage of the Prodigal. The one who has turned their back on the community is to be sought out, hoped for and welcomed home.

Matthew, however, in answering a different question, is identifying the “greatest” in the community – the one who has the claim to the best efforts and attention of that community. In Matthew, Jesus speaks of the sheep that has strayed, addressing the one who remains part of the community but has wandered. This one is not a non-member, but a weaker member. Raymond Brown calls chapter 18 of Matthew “Jesus’ Sermon on Church Order and Life.”¹⁵ Matthew’s community seems to want to know how to spend its energy; seeking to be efficient, organized and effective. Yet in this chapter, Matthew’s Jesus consistently challenges what would seem “logical” (e.g. keeping the bad kids away from the good) with what is of the “kingdom” (seeking ways to include all). While the order of the community will strive to be efficient and effective, it must not do so at the expense of the weak or the little, or of even one of the strayed sheep. And it must be willing to bring back to full participation the one who is open to repentance and conversion. Above all, Matthew’s church is one called to service to those most in need. These must have priority in the community if its structure, order and leadership is to be attuned to the values of Jesus.

In the analogy of the shepherd, Matthew is speaking about the role of the pastor, the leader of the community, whose joy and primary obligation lies with the weak. Brown points out the reasonable resistance that a community might have to accepting that their leader go to such lengths.¹⁶ Is it right to spend what seems to be a disproportionate amount of energy on just one out of 99? Especially if that one wandered off by personal choice! But, for Matthew, “the disciples, like the shepherd, should experience more joy in actively saving the endangered sheep than in passively tending the sheep who are safe.”¹⁷

Also implied in this passage is that the strength of the community itself should be sufficient for its ordinary maintenance. The 99 should not need to be dependent on their pastors or shepherds for everything, and should be able to free the best energies for searching out and guiding the weak. The strong bear responsibility for themselves and for their community.

First and foremost, this passage challenges us to see that the incarcerated members of our community ARE still members of that community! They may or may not have been previously active members, but that is not the primary pastoral question. The strayed sheep in the gospel didn’t earn the right to be sought after based on their previous pattern of participation; the seeking is the obligation of the caring community. Charity in Matthew’s gospel begins at home – these are members of the family and must not only be treated as such, but as privileged members by virtue of their weakness.

With these three passages, it is hopefully clear that youth in the juvenile justice system are numbered among those whom Jesus privileges with revelation, care and concern. It is the outcast – the criminal element in society – to whom the good news of the Messiah is first announced. Regardless of questions of guilt or innocence, (incarcerated persons are often victims of inconsistencies and injustices, yet the vast majority are indeed guilty of something) the imprisoned, by the fact that Jesus identifies himself with them, claim the attention of Christian disciples. The strayed sheep in Matthew’s gospel wasn’t taken, wasn’t stolen, but under its own power went afar. But both in the parable of the sheep, and in the exhortation to visit the prisoner, the guilt or innocence of the strayed is not questioned. It does not condition, much less lessen, the responsibility of the community.

We can also consider how these three passages themselves are good news to delinquent youth. Without condoning anti-social behavior, we can help them to identify themselves with the shepherds, the imprisoned (with which Jesus identifies himself), and the lost sheep.

It is interesting to note the different image of the shepherd that we seem to hold in the Christian community – the image that Jesus claimed. In the gospel, this image seems to have been transformed through the reception of the message of glory. How can the “outcast” juvenile delinquent experience this transformation? What might it mean for such youth to recognize themselves as worthy of being privileged with the good news? Identified with Jesus, might they not see themselves as worthy of being ministered to? And identified with the strayed sheep being sought, could they not recognize themselves still worthy of belonging to the flock? As we, in our communities, become able to answer these questions, we will be able to live the answers with the troubled youth among us.

Recent Church Teaching
In the Jubilee year, 2000, Pope John Paul II proclaimed July 9 as the Day of Jubilee for Prisoners. In a papal message released for the occasion, the Pope echoed centuries old Catholic teaching that “punishment of wrongdoers is clearly justified in the Catholic tradition, but is never justified for its own sake. A compassionate community and a loving God seek accountability and correction but not suffering for its own sake. Punishment must have a constructive and redemptive purpose.”¹⁸

The Holy Father continues by affirming the
Plan of God who wishes to save all his children, especially those who have gone away from him and are looking for the way back. The Good Shepherd is always going in search of the lost sheep, and when he finds them he puts them on his shoulders and brings them back to the flock. Christ is in search of every human being, whatever the situation!
This is because Jesus wants to save each one. And with a salvation which is offered, not imposed. What Christ is looking for is trusting acceptance, an attitude which opens the mind to generous decisions aimed at rectifying the evil done and fostering what is good. Sometimes this involves a long journey, but always a stimulating one, for it is a journey not made alone, but in the company of Christ himself and with his support. Jesus is a patient traveling companion, who respects the seasons and rhythms of the human heart. He never tires of encouraging each person along the path to salvation.¹⁹

In this way, the people of God and disciples of Jesus are also called to journey with those who are imprisoned, those youth who are considered delinquent.

The Jubilee message was not only addressed to those in prison, but also to society as a whole and to the Church. While affirming the progress human society has made in the areas crime and criminal justice, he asserts that “we are still a long way from the time when our conscience can be certain of having done everything possible to prevent crime and to control it effectively so that it no longer does harm and, at the same time, to offer to those who commit crimes a way of redeeming themselves and making a positive return to society.”²⁰

In November of the same year, the U.S. Bishops released “^{Responsibility, Rehabilitation, and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice}.” The document begins with an exposition of some issues regarding crime and punishment from the point of view that the status quo of criminal justice falls short of our religious heritage and the capacity of our nation. The bishops then outline the rich tradition of Catholic social teaching which offers both foundation and direction for our response to crime and criminal justice. Here, we will apply six basic tenants of this teaching to some of the issues encountered in the juvenile justice system and by delinquent youth.
Human Life and Dignity
As children of God, created in the likeness and image of God, each person has an inviolable dignity, value and worth. This dignity is neither earned by good behavior, nor lost or diminished by bad behavior. It is a responsibility of the Church to recognize, promote and defend this dignity, especially on behalf of and among those whom society devalues. When we communicate to society, and to youth with problematic behavior, that “none of us is the sum total of the worst act we have ever committed,”²¹ we witness to the hope that is contained within the basic dignity of even the worst offenders.
Human Rights and Responsibilities
Youth who commit crimes must be held responsible for their behavior. This accountability, however, must take into account the rights of these same youth. Not only their rights within the juvenile justice system, but also their inalienable rights to “those things that make life human: faith and family, food and shelter, housing and health care, education and safety.”²² While we cannot blame life’s hardships for the decision youth make to commit crime, we must recognize that when these basic rights and needs are not fulfilled, youth are less able to understand and accept their responsibilities to themselves, their families and their communities. When we can assure that families and communities fulfill their responsibilities to ensure the rights of all young people, we can expect these youth to grow in their own responsibilities.

Family, Community, and Participation
It is generally accepted that the breakdown of family and community life contributes to crime. Especially affected are youth, who often turn to gangs or give in to peer pressure to fulfill their need for belonging. Strengthening families and communities is a centerpiece of youth crime prevention. Rebuilding these ties can also help youth understand the wider impact of their anti-social behavior. Creating opportunities for greater participation and leadership of youth in society can foster and reinforce their sense of belonging to, and responsibilities for, our families and communities.

The Common Good
In responding to youth crime, the common good includes the needs of the community, the victims and the offenders. This must shape all efforts to correct criminal behavior and hold delinquent youth accountable. Punishment cannot be solely punitive; much less a means of retribution or retaliation. Rather, it has to include means to bring about the conversion of the offender and his or her restoration to the community and its educational, employment and social structures.

The notion of rehabilitation is not as politically attractive as “get tough measures” such as harsher sentencing. Yet, numerous studies confirm that measures which take the needs of offenders into account, and focus on those needs, offer far more not only to offenders but to the greater good of the whole community.²³

The Option for the Poor and Vulnerable
Poverty does not automatically lead to crime; the majority of those who are poor and vulnerable do not resort to criminal behavior. At the same time, the majority of incarcerated youth and adults are victims of sexual, physical or emotional abuse or neglect. They are usually poor, undereducated, mentally ill, or otherwise vulnerable. To be incarcerated is to be poor and vulnerable. The option for the poor and vulnerable as a tenant of Catholic social teaching “recognizes that every public policy must be assessed by how it will affect the poorest and most vulnerable people in our society.”²⁴ We as Church are called to apply this principle to our pastoral ministry with and among at-risk and delinquent youth.

Subsidiarity and Solidarity
Subsidiarity and solidarity are ways in which communities are strengthened to care for their members. Subsidiarity encourages community level problem solving through local networking. Out of justifiable fear and frustration, some communities might wish to remove delinquent and problem youth from their midst, shifting responsibility for their care and the solution of youth crime to state programs or distant detention facilities. While removal from the community may at times be necessary to protect the common good, communities must also strive to help develop local prevention, intervention and support initiatives for youth and all affected by youth crime.

Solidarity is akin to the adage: “it takes a village to raise a child.” We are challenged to extend our concern beyond our immediate family and neighborhood as we seek the face of Jesus in all. “Through the lens of solidarity, those who commit crimes and are hurt by crime are not issues or problems; they are sisters and brothers, members of one human family. Solidarity calls us to insist on responsibility and seek alternatives that do not simply punish, but rehabilitate, heal, and restore.”²⁵

Scripture and Catholic social teaching form a solid backbone for ministry with at risk youth and youth already in the juvenile justice system. Our Church can also look back on a long tradition of ministry with youth through orphanages, youth centers, schools, religious education programs and organizations like the CYO (Catholic Youth Organization). Catholic Charities provides many services to youth and their families. Countless men and women religious have dedicated themselves to working with youth. There are also a number of promising recent initiatives in which the Church is working to address the needs of at risk and delinquent youth.
Recent Initiatives
Across the country, the civil community is increasingly interested in involving the faith community in addressing problems of crime among youth. George W. Bush, both as governor of Texas and as President of the U.S., has strongly supported the efforts of faith based organizations in social services, with a particular interest in corrections and criminal justice. Violence prevention leaders agree that local community leaders, including leaders of faith communities, are in the best position to understand local issues and the best ways to address them. The National Funding Collaborative on Violence Prevention is actively seeking to engage the faith community.²⁶ In a society that increasingly seems to place barriers between the domains of church and state, those working in juvenile justice seek to form bridges and partnerships rather than walls. Many Catholic communities are beginning to be more directly involved.
Boston’s Ten Points Coalition
Sparked by four black pastors who walked the streets at night among gangs and youth, the Boston Ten Point Coalition has become a model strategy of juvenile crime prevention and intervention. This model involves a close collaboration “among religious leaders and law enforcement and court officials, as well as a pervasive presence of people of faith on the streets offering outreach, opportunities for education, and supervised recreation to at-risk youth. The strategy also sends a clear signal that criminal activity in the community will not be tolerated.”²⁷

The Archdiocese of Boston has participated in the coalition by providing funding for locations and programs, and offering to at-risk youth a summer camp opportunity to “develop these teenagers’ character, critical thinking and communication skills by utilizing the attraction of the music industry in hands-on, practical ways.”²⁸

Collaboration between agencies, government and a number of churches is a strong asset of the Coalition. It has greatly influenced public opinion and policy, as well as having a tremendous positive impact on young people in Boston’s troubled neighborhoods. The Coalition is credited with reducing juvenile gun deaths, over a several-year period, from epidemic proportions to near zero.
Communities for Youth: The NCCB Initiative with America’s Promise
America’s Promise was established under the leadership of General Colin Powell. Based on the Assets model (see above), America’s Promise seeks to provide youth with five major resources that will greatly increase the chance of youth becoming successful adults. The promises are identified as:

• An ongoing relationship with a caring adult – parent, mentor, tutor or coach;
  
• A safe place to be with structured activities during non-school hours;
  
• A healthy start (health care and proper nutrition)
  
• A marketable skill through effective education; and
  
• An opportunity to give back through community service.
  

Juvenile Justice Ministry: A Canossian Approach

Since the challenges of the Second Vatican Council, religious congregations have done much work to re-discover and reclaim their founding charisms. Many apostolic communities have realized that this work involves much more than an attempt to replicate the pastoral options and works modeled by their founders. Often, the kinds of ministry in which founding members engaged are not effective or even relevant in the face of contemporary pastoral needs. Yet the founding inspirations and charismatic foundations of religious communities can be revitalized and revitalizing when approached with openness, courage, humility and creativity.

Most founders of religious communities were men and women who sought to live a Gospel radicality within their historical situation, with a focus on responding to a particular and urgent need. In this quest, they courageously risked new and untried initiatives, and were able to move to the edge of convention in response to the signs of their times in accordance with a particular charism. Their charism is experienced as a gift of God that centers their motivation, gives clear focus to their vision, and provides direction in their journey with and for others. Other men and women, moved by the same charism, join them in their vision and mission, and form a community that lives according to a particular style of life.

Today, especially in the light of the Second Vatican Council, contemporary religious communities ask the same questions that their founders asked, and seek to respond in creative fidelity to the specific charismatic heritage on which their identity is defined and expressed. One such community is the Canossian Daughters of Charity.

St. Magdalene of Canossa (1774 – 1835) was born into a family of nobility in Verona. She founded the Daughters of Charity, Servants of the Poor (Canossian Sisters) in 1808. Motivated to fulfill the two great precepts of charity – love towards God and towards neighbor – she took as her model the Crucified Christ. Inspired not by the suffering, but by the incomparable expression of Love on the cross, she sought to make that love real in the lives of the poor of her time.

Originally drawn to a vocation in the Carmel, she was unable to put aside an attraction for the poor she encountered both within and outside of her family’s palace: the uneducated servant class and the many who were “badly hit by the Napoleonic wars and the Restoration that followed.”³¹ It was among them that she longed to make Jesus known. In dialogue with both civil and ecclesial authorities, including some astute maneuvering with Napoleon himself, Magdalene formulated a plan to minister to the whole person through projects of Education, Evangelization and Pastoral Care of the Sick. Above all, through these modalities, Jesus would be known and loved, and sin would be prevented. In this way, she believed that the members of the poor classes, especially youth and women, would be formed as solid Christians and citizens, and responsible contributors to their families and communities.

Is ministry with youth in the juvenile justice system a faithful expression of Magdalene’s intentions? At first glance, more difficulties than possibilities might be presented. Magdalene’s focus on youth, particularly in terms of education, was in view of a “prevention of sin.” In her original Rule of Life, introducing the regulations for her charity schools, she writes:
. . . if the conversion of sinners is considered, as it is by all the Saints, a great proof of love for God, how much better will it be to prevent and impede sins before they are committed, and save, one might say, the Lord from offenses, rather than obtaining the humiliation of the offender.³²
Some may find that this goal precludes working with youth who are already juvenile offenders – it is too late to engage in a process to prevent sin and anti-social behavior.

Magdalene identified Education, Evangelization and Pastoral Care of the Sick as the three perennial ministries of the Canossian Sisters. She and her first sisters engaged in these through formal, institutional ministries in schools, parishes and hospitals. These modalities have been the primary sphere of Canossian ministry for much of the Institute’s history. If we hold that fidelity to the charism necessitates a replication of the specific modalities, juvenile justice ministry may indeed be beyond the scope of the Canossian Sisters.

This author, however, (a member of the Congregation) believes that the youth St. Magdalene felt called to serve were actually in trouble, although there was not in her time and place a comparable model of juvenile justice. She favored serving youth who lacked a structured environment that would provide moral guidance, human formation, and spirituality. While her choices (and only viable options) for activity involved institutionalized settings in her time, her underlying philosophy of education, evangelization, and pastoral care lays a firm foundation for a wide array of ministerial settings and contexts.

Who did Magdalene favor in her service to others? Can the ministries of Education, Evangelization and Pastoral Care, as she envisioned them, encompass juvenile justice ministry? What criteria would need to be in place to ensure charismatic fidelity to such ministry?
Beneficiaries
The name given to her congregation – Daughters of Charity, Servants of the Poor – makes obvious Magdalene’s intended beneficiaries. “Since God himself is Charity,” she writes, “being His children, we owe Him a reverent, tender, filial love, and as Servants of the Poor, we owe them our attention, labor, cares and thoughts.”³³ Like many other congregations, the Canossian Sisters have struggled to define exactly who “the poor” are. Magdalene did much to respond to the immediate needs of the materially poor. Yet she understood that there are many poverties that impede full human and Christian development. The Canossian General Chapter of 1990, focused on a requalification of ministries, identified charismatic criteria in determining the beneficiaries of Canossian apostolic work with youth
in all stages of their growth, beginning from those categories that suffer from more forms of poverty: economic, moral, affective, cultural, and who are therefore more exposed to evil and to being marginalized and rejected (e.g. the refugees, the 3^rd world people, the immigrants, the illiterate, the difficult characters, the slow-learners, the drop-outs, etc.)³⁴

Magdalene herself writes in an early exposition of her plans that “The way of this Congregation would be to educate only abandoned boys or girls or those who roam the streets without any assistance for their soul, or those who, even though they may not be roaming, are really deprived of any help and attention . . . [who need to find] the love and affection of the parents they do not have or, perhaps, it was better they did not have.”³⁵ It is possible that we have at times preferred to imagine these youth as wide-eyed innocent waifs, suffering their neglect and poverty in
docility and submission. It is more realistic, however, to consider that while the under supervised youth she sought to serve were not part of a formal juvenile justice system, it is probable that while spending much of their time on the streets, they were engaged in a variety of anti-social behavior, including that which we now consider juvenile crime.

Magdalene warns her sisters that often the young people with whom they will work are “not only rough, ignorant and very poor but among them there are some who have been brought up either on the street without any moral principle or by parents of the life without any discipline.”³⁶ In fact, the Sisters came under harsh criticism from some in their local communities for including such children and youth in their activities. In Milan, the third house founded by Magdalene, the Sisters were not only
little appreciated, but were also despised. . . the majority of their pupils lacked good manners, some of them were rather arrogant. Even in the churches where the Sisters took the girls to attend Mass or receive the Sacraments of Confession and Communion, Magdalene's Daughters were looked down upon and compelled, at times, to go away with their big group of girls who were considered to be noisy and irritating. People even said that ‘these good ladies’ were wrong in teaching the girls to be “familiar with the Holy Sacraments.’³⁷

Comparing what has already been written here about juvenile delinquents with even this brief survey of the Canossian tradition regarding beneficiaries, it is clear that youth in the juvenile justice system do indeed “qualify” for our ministry. Charismatic fidelity, however, also requires that we serve these youth in accordance with the goals and style that mark Magdalene’s insight and inspiration.
Three Branches of Canossian Ministry
Since the very beginning of the congregation, Canossian Sisters have engaged in the three ministries of Education, Evangelization and Pastoral Care of the Sick. For Magdalene, this was more than a response to immediate needs for these ministries. As the foundation of her apostolic religious family, the threefold presence of these ministries “is not casual but an original insight: the realization of all three of the branches correspond to the integral needs of the human person and their sequence indicates an obligatory journey, so that the person and God are both respected as they encounter each other.”³⁸ Thus, each Canossian community even today is called to incarnate the love of the Crucified in these ministries.

The philosophical and anthropological model from which Magdalene’s works of charity flow is personal freedom, by which one is empowered

• To use fruitfully the opportunities available in society according to God’s plan,
  
• To build up deep spiritual convictions which will shape one’s decisions and actions, and
  
• To discover the significance of life in the experience of frailty, illness and death.”³⁹
  

Table 5

Here we will highlight aspects of the goals, style and modalities of these ministries that can be used as criteria by which to evaluate a charismatic option for juvenile justice ministry.

Education – Human Promotion: To Potentiate/Capacitate

“The love of God who wishes that every person
has access to the goods and opportunities of life.”⁴⁰

Goal
The goal of Canossian education is not expressed in terms of academic achievement or vocational success. “The charismatic goal that qualifies this ministry is that of promoting the integral growth of the person” through positive relationship with self, God and others “by forming the mind and heart and preparing the person for life and for family, for social and ecclesial responsibilities.”⁴¹ The primary objective is the formation of the heart, the life-center of the whole person. Thus the young person can grow in the knowledge and appreciation of self, recognize God’s love for him/her in the present, concrete reality, and seek God’s will for his or her life and mission in society. To achieve this aim it is essential to:

• Promote the growth of persons by acknowledging their dignity and personal gifts;
  
• Orientate them towards self-knowledge and self-fulfillment and the discover of self as a gift for others;
  
• Foster a healthy self-evaluation through a correct interpretation of personal experiences in daily life;
  
• Promote the assimilation of knowledge and the ability to develop it and to form a critical and responsible conscience.⁴²
  

“There is no greater act of charity than that of making Jesus known . . .
revealing how God’s love is capable of unifying and fulfilling our entire existence.”⁴⁶

Goal
Evangelization emerges as our participation in the Church’s mission of proclaiming the Good News to all. Sharing of this Good News reveals the authentic face of God and is significant for every aspect human existence. This ministry seeks to encourage and enable youth to respond to the love of God with the heart and in action. “It involves fostering the authentic act of freedom, the decision to love as one’s personal response to God and to others, in view of building unity within the church and a more just world.”⁴⁷
Style
As with the ministry of education, relationship marks the Canossian style of evangelization. “Before being a question of initiatives and action, [evangelization of youth] is a relationship, and encounter of persons. The relationship is the first resource for the pastoral work, and [the youth] – through their history, their life situations, and their desires – are the starting point.”⁴⁸ In the context of this relationship, the Sisters are exhorted to “break the bread of
the word” in simplicity and respect, facilitating the encounter between the young person and the Lord, rather than dictating the content of that encounter.

The Province of Cristo Rey (Albuquerque, New Mexico) further identified characteristics of Canossian evangelization as the Provincial response to the 1990 General Chapter:

• Ministry is incarnational – This means that it is rooted in the cultural realities of the people we serve. It begins with the people and where they are before it begins with set programs.
  
• Ministry is enabling – we seek to empower people and raise up leaders so that they too, out of their own baptismal commitment, will sense their call to serve others.
  

  ---

• Ministry is cooperative – Our Canossian way of doing ministry is always in collaboration with others, especially the laity.
  
• Ministry is attuned to the local Church – We are inserted in the local church . . . we seek to be in touch with the directive and the thrust of that local Church.⁴⁹
  

Jesus experienced and encouraged profound solidarity in the face of every human suffering, ‘with his invincible patience, sweetness, sufferance, and gentleness.’

Juvenile justice ministry is undeniably far from the scope of Magdalene’s pastoral care of the sick. At the same time, there are several aspects of her approach that can help us understand her approach to those who are suffering and vulnerable.
Goal
Magdalene’s goals for this ministry were two; to comfort the poor in the hospitals, preparing them for death, and for those who would physically recover, “to recover [the health] of the spirit for their own benefit as well as for that of the family.”⁵¹ The Sisters were expected to comfort, instruct and assist the sick and suffering poor.

To comfort means “to be ready to meet the other in the concrete situation, creating an atmosphere of loving presence in which the person feels accepted.”⁵² Once that atmosphere is established, it is possible to instruct – “to accompany the sick towards accepting their reality of limitations in the light of faith, a faith which assures them of God’s loving care and makes them feel precious even in their state.” And the Sisters are to assist by offering personalized support, attentive to the real needs of the person, without “disrupting the process of growth which the individual can undertake.”⁵³

Magdalene gives specific instruction to the Sisters who will be working with those persons expected to recover from their illness and return to their homes. From the following passage, one can infer that at least some of these patients are in poor health because of their own irresponsibility. (Bracketed words are placed by the author to indicate a potential parallel between “patients” and “inmates.”)
Finally, with regard to getting a change or improvement in their life should they recover [be released], the Sisters should try to bring it about by making them reflect seriously on the path they are taking and will inevitably find themselves on again. They should also make them reflect on how vain it will then be to regret what they have omitted to do and should have done or what they have done and should not have. Let the Sisters try to strengthen them in their good resolutions and when the patients [inmates] go out let them see to it that they have the support of good Confessors. The patients [inmates] ought to leave the hospital [prison] resolved to attend Christian Doctrine and to educate their children in the best way they know and can. The Sisters will arrange ways . . . to plan how to bring about any reconciliations if need be, really try every way to obtain work, a place to serve or any other similar provisions for them.⁵⁴
Style
As in all of the ministries, Pastoral Care is to be marked by individual attention. In addition to modeling the “patience, sweetness, sufferance, and gentleness” of Jesus on the Cross, the Sisters are also advised to practice the “prudence and wariness of the serpent . . . otherwise they would easily get preoccupied with false compassion.”⁵⁵

Charismatic Fidelity
Hopefully, the above lays a solid charismatic foundation for Canossian ministry with youth involved in the juvenile justice system. These youth are too often forgotten, hidden and under served by the Catholic community. These youth, as a result both of their own actions and often of their life situations, stand in need of the capacitating action of human promotion, the liberating action of holistic Christian formation, and the integrating action of reflection on their own limitations and struggles.

The Canossian emphasis on interpersonal relationship as a primary dynamic of ministry can model and contribute to a developing capacity for and experience of the kinds of healthy relationships lacking in the lives of so many of these young people.

In reality, we will generally not find these youth enrolled in parochial schools, or seated in our confirmation classes. True fidelity to our charismatic option for those youth most in need may require a departure from traditional modalities. Our charismatic heritage, rediscovered and rearticulated in light of a call to renewal, is entrusted to our fidelity and creativity. We receive it in gratitude, and with the duty to safeguard and share it so that Jesus may be known.
Like Magdalene, we are called to journey along:

• By an attentive reading of the signs of our time;
  
• In communion with and at the service of the universal Church;
  
• According to the customs of the Institute, which provides guidelines emphasizing above all a relational and formative approach.
  

Part III: The Response
Thresholds Mentoring: An Approach to Juvenile Justice Ministry⁵⁷

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) of the US Department of Justice has promoted entoring as a powerful tool. “Dealing with the problems of delinquency, creating more positive opportunities for youth, and helping them find strong and positive role models in their lives are among the societal goals that can be achieved in part through the implementation of sound mentoring programs.”⁵⁸ Thresholds Mentoring is a program of one-to-one mentoring of at-risk and delinquent youth in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe. This ministry has been developed as a response of the Church to the needs of these youth, the theological challenges of scripture and church teaching, and as a manifestation of the Canossian charism.
Thresholds Mentoring – Archdiocese of Santa Fe
Mentoring
There is nothing new about the concept of mentoring. The word “mentor” is defined as “a trusted advisor.” Its origins are found in Greek mythology: “Mentor is the name of the trusted friend who in Ulysses’ absence protects, nurtures, educates and guides his son Telemachus into adulthood.”⁵⁹ Today, the mentoring relationship is generally understood as “friendship with someone a little more experienced, a person who acts as a guide in regard to a new career, profession, job or developmental stage.”⁶⁰

Mentoring programs for youth generally seek to match an unrelated adult and child/juvenile in a supportive relationship that is developed and sustained through regular encounters over an extended period of time. Thresholds Mentoring specifically seeks to match adults with youth in the juvenile justice system.
Detention Ministry of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe
As a ministry of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, Thresholds flows from the Catholic Detention Ministry Mission Statement of the Archdiocese:

“When I was in prison . . .” Matthew 25:36

Recognizing the dignity and worth of the incarcerated youth, women and men in the detention facilities within the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, we seek to enable parish communities to support, serve and accompany these brothers and sisters. Our aim is to help the incarcerated to find and claim their place among the people of God and in our parish families of faith, as we strive to help individuals and communities fashion a response to crime that is deeply rooted in our identity as followers of Jesus.
By bringing together parish communities, committed volunteers and the incarcerated, we believe that we can facilitate a mature, educated and coordinated Archdiocesan response to the needs of those affected by incarceration, especially as they reintegrate into their communities and families of faith.

Thresholds is about opening doors. Through the ministry of Reintegration Mentors, the incarcerated are invited not only to walk out of the open doors of detention facilities, but also to enter into the open doors of parish communities, and of faith sharing relationships. Thresholds also seeks ways to enable and prepare Parish communities to open their doors to those who have been incarcerated.
Thresholds Youth Reintegration Mentoring – An Overview

Thresholds provides support for youth leaving a detention facility by matching them with an adult Mentor from their a Catholic faith community. The Thresholds mentor helps the young person set and work towards his or her own goals, connects that person to resources in the Church community, and accompanies them in their faith journey. This mentoring process:

• Is a structured, caring, one-to-one relationship or partnership.
  
• Is designed to provide encouragement and support to incarcerated youth who face challenges of transition into the faith community while on probation or parole.
  
• Is a process of working together to achieve agreed upon goals.
  
• Focuses on the needs of the mentee.
  
• Helps the mentee to develop his or her own vision for the future.
  
• Encourages individuals to develop to their fullest potential.
  
• Helps the mentee in developing problem solving skills.
  
• Is a strategy to develop active community partnerships.
  

The Mentee – The Mentor

Thresholds Program materials (see appendix) include more specific information on the requirements and expectations of mentees and mentors, as well as application procedures for each. Some general comments will be made here.
Mentees
Above all, a mentee is a young person with unique gifts, limitations and life situations that need to be recognized and accepted. Like all young people, those in the juvenile justice system struggle to negotiate the challenges of adolescence. These, however, have made choices in response to those challenges that lead them to be referred to the juvenile justice system. The Thresholds mentee may be on formal or informal supervision, held in a detention center, serving time in a state juvenile facility, in a residential treatment facility, or involved in another detention diversion or alternative program. Mentees may request a mentor, or their attorney, probation officer, social worker, or counselor may refer them to the program.

For the mentoring relationship to have any chance of success, mentees, whether they apply themselves or are referred, need to exhibit some level of interest in having a mentor (although this interest may be reinforced by the expectations of a probation office or other agent of the judicial/supervisory system). The young person’s interest is gauged to some extent by an application and screening process. They also need to have some degree of openness to participation in religious activities. This may or may not include regular attendance at religious services.
A screening process, implemented in conjunction with juvenile justice professionals, is important. Some youth may apply to have a mentor because it “looks good to the judge.” These youth may actually sign up for so many programs that it would be impossible for them to participate in everything. Others may willingly comply by submitting an application, but have no real intention of establishing a relationship. No screening process with this population can claim to effectively identify those who are best candidates, but networking with probation officers, public defenders and other juvenile justice personnel can strengthen the screening process. It may not be necessary to screen candidates based on their offenses. Consultation with a probation officer, however, can ensure that the mentee’s delinquent history is not one that poses risk to a potential mentor.
Mentors
“Christian ministry is the public activity of a baptized follower of Jesus Christ flowing from the Spirit’s charism and an individual personality on behalf of a Christian community to witness to, serve and realize the kingdom of God.”⁶¹ The Thresholds mentor is thus a minister of the Church. As a minister, the mentor is responsible to the faith community as well as to those he or she is called to serve. As with all ministers, mentors are not self-commissioned, but are called and sent forth by the local Church. The same Church must ensure that mentors are suitable for the ministry of accompanying youth in Thresholds.


The young people in Thresholds are vulnerable in many ways. Often they have experienced abandonment (physical and/or emotional), or have been affected by dysfunctional relationships. Mentors, therefore, must be highly committed to their ministry, and able to maintain regular and sustained contact with the mentee. Mentors must also be personally well-adjusted and able to model and engage in healthy, mature behavior and relationships. Ethical concerns are paramount: mentors need to be above reproach in their ability to develop appropriate relationships and maintain healthy boundaries.

“Ministers who truly believe in the incarnation will have a reverence for the grace of specific times and places, the actual situations, in their ministries.”⁶² Mentors must be able to see the presence of God even in the most difficult, tragic and sinful situations. From this perspective, the hope of “what can be” is sustained by the conviction of the inherent goodness and dignity of the mentee.

Delinquent youth are in many ways victims themselves, and mentors must be compassionate. At the same time, they must not be naïve. Compassion cannot be confused with pity. The histories of these young people are often painful, and need to be addressed, but the mentor cannot ignore the fact that these mentees have committed acts that are illegal and potentially harmful to themselves and others. To fail to take the young person’s behavior into account can enable continued anti-social behavior, and even place the mentor at risk of being manipulated and exploited. Mentors need to be willing to extend trust as it is earned, within clearly defined boundaries and with clear accountability.
Some caring men and women who desire to serve as mentors may not be appropriate for this ministry. Those who are recent victims of crime, or have recently been personally affected by juvenile crime in any way, may unintentionally project their struggles with anger, fear or pain onto the mentoring relationship. Some may themselves have a history of crime and/or substance abuse. If their own journey of recovery and rehabilitation is still in early stages, they risk not only their own progress, but also that of their mentee. Persons with law enforcement, corrections, or military backgrounds may feel as if they have much to contribute (structure, respect, discipline) – and indeed they may. Care needs to be taken, however, that these Mentors are able to step out of role and not impose their professional function on the Mentee.

Potential mentors who are overly naïve to the realities of at-risk and juvenile delinquents may hold unrealistic expectations for a mentee, and become easily frustrated if the mentee fails to return all calls promptly, be on time consistently, complete all tasks as assigned, etc. Some mentors may conclude that the young person isn’t interested, or “isn’t getting their act together.” If the mentees “had their act together” they would not likely be in the juvenile justice system. Mentors can set the bar high but must also be able to exercise patience. Another risk of naiveté in a potential mentor is that of being manipulated or exploited. Also, mentors who are easily “shocked” by the experiences that mentees share risk alienating them. Finally, the mentor candidate who appears to be lonely may be seeking a relationship for his or her own needs: this is unhealthy and unethical, and can obviously lead to disaster. Care especially needs to be taken when female mentors insist on working with male mentees.⁶³
The initial and on-going training of mentors is highly important. Training that draws on the expertise of members of the juvenile justice, provides a theological foundation, and equips the mentors with practical skills for mentoring is indispensable.

Thresholds Mentoring – Tasks and Tools

“We know that faith has a transforming effect on all our lives. Therefore, rehabilitation and restoration must include the spiritual dimension of healing and hope. The Church must stand-ready to help offenders discover the good news of the Gospel and how it can transform their lives.”⁶⁴

The dynamics and tasks of Thresholds Mentoring are shaped by the needs of at-risk and delinquent youth, a theological foundation of Scripture and Tradition, and the apostolic charism of St. Magdalene of Canossa. The following will identify some of these tasks, and suggest some tools that can be used in the mentoring process, in the faith community, and in the Canossian tradition.
Responding to the needs of youth
Thresholds is a ministry of the Church. The religious nature of this ministry is regarded by the juvenile justice community as an essential component of an integrated community response. And we certainly wish to guide youth into a meaningful encounter with God through the Christian community. But mentoring has to be much more than having a prayer partner.

Religion in [the juvenile and criminal justice system] needs to be kept in perspective. If religion alone, isolated from all other human needs, were able to deter people from crime, it would surely have worked by now. There are more bibles in jails and prisons than in any church or seminary. The supposed intent is that the offender, once exposed to the Holy Word, will experience a conversion and turn from his or her evil ways. Jail house religion is a phenomenon that comes with incarceration. It is a simplistic attempt to solve very complex issues.⁶⁵

For the mentoring relationship to be effective, it cannot be based on a spirituality or devotional practice that doesn’t consider and address the whole person – the unique needs and issues of the young people involved. Two of those issues already identified in this paper are Developmental Assets and Social Development – Cognitive – Social Skills deficiencies. Mentoring is not intended to be the sole, nor the primary, agent in addressing these issues. But mentors can support and reinforce the efforts of other agents as they companion the mentees in their struggle through these issues, and, in the context of these realities, communicate the Good News that transforms.
Developmental Assets
Even a quick survey of the Development Assets (See table 2, p. 4) makes it evident that mentoring can directly contribute to the external assets experienced by youth. Mentoring provides adult role models, and a potentially significant relationship with one or more adults outside of the family system. Mentors can set the kinds of high but reasonable expectations that motivate and give confidence to youth. As a ministry of the Catholic faith community, mentoring communicates to the young person that her or she is valued by the community that provides the opportunity. Fot some, it may be the first and/or only direct connection they have with the religious community.

Within an established mentoring relationship, the internal assets of a young person can be fostered, encouraged, and supported. Positive values (caring, equality and social justice, integrity, honesty, responsibility, restraint), can be modeled by a mentor, and that mentor can affirm manifestations of these values in their mentee. The development of Social Competencies (planning and decision-making, interpersonal competence, cultural competence, resistance skills, peaceful conflict resolution) can also be nurtured through goal-setting, problem-solving and role play.

A specific internal asset that in which mentors can play a large role is that of self-esteem. In the Christian tradition, our self-esteem is rooted in our very creation. “God created humankind in his image, in the image and likeness of God.” (Genesis 1:27) Mentors can be attentive to this when spending time with their mentee, and keep in mind specific ways to build and reinforce that self-esteem:

Building Self-Esteem

• Help mentees focus on their strengths and find situations where they have to use these strengths. • Reinforce, compliment and model positive behavior. • Seek opportunities for the mentee to: • Make meaningful contributions • Explore their ability to act

independently • Have the opportunity to make their own decisions • Find creative solutions to their own problems. • Listen to and acknowledge your mentee’s thoughts and feelings. • Let your mentee experience success no matter how small. • Model your own

healthy self-esteem. • Help your mentee understand that although you may dislike a specific behavior, you do not disapprove of him/her as an individual. • If your mentee fails in an endeavor, help him/her understand that there are many ways in which s/he

has been successful. • Identify your mentee’s talents, strengths and assets. • Give recognition for effort or improvement. • Show appreciation for contribution and demonstrate confidence and faith in your mentee. • Value your mentee no matter how s/he per

forms. • Suggest small, attainable steps in new or difficult tasks. • Have reasonable expectations.

⁶⁶Given the correlation between the number of assets experienced by youth and their initiation of at-risk behaviors (see Table 3, p. 5), the contribution of mentoring to the development of these assets can be significant.
Social Development – Cognitive – Social Skills Deficiencies
These are the needs identified and addressed through the EQUIP program (see pp. 7 – 14). The EQUIP program, as implemented in a detention facility or other group setting, is conducted by teachers and counselors. It is important to remember that the mentor is neither. A mentor does not approach the relationship with a curriculum or a lesson plan. It is, however, useful for a mentor to have an understanding of these issues to be able to reinforce concepts learned by youth in EQUIP or similar program. Through modeling, appropriate sharing of Christian concepts, and awareness of the manifestations of these issues, the mentor can help to address these deficiencies.
Social Development - Morality
The primary need of delinquent youth, in terms of social and moral development, is the development of a sense of mutuality and empathy; an understanding that one person’s actions affect many others in direct and indirect ways. Three areas of our Christian tradition – the relational effects of original sin, the image of the Church as the Body of Christ, and the communal dimension of the sacraments of Eucharist and Reconciliation – can be engaged in the dialogue regarding moral development.





Original Sin – Disrupted Relationships
The author of the book of Genesis identifies five effects of the original sin of Adam and Eve in terms of relationships. Discussing the story of original sin in Genesis, young people usually note that the first effect of their disobedience is that Adam and Eve hide from God. In Gn 3:7, however, we find that the first action they take is to clothe themselves in shame. They are ashamed not only of what they have done, but of themselves and their identity. In this shame they cover themselves. The first relationship disrupted by sin is that of the self with the self. The next level of relational disruption is between the self and God, although it is important to note that this disruption is initiated NOT by God, but by the ones who hide from God. (Gn 3:10) The third level is the disruption of the relationship between the self and another, manifested in the Genesis story through blame: Adam blames Eve, who in turn blames the serpent. (Gn 3:12 – 13) Not only the sinful action, but the refusal to take personal responsibility adversely affects relationships. Later, we also see this manifested as envy and a violence: Cain kills Abel. The next level is the disruption of the harmony between the human person and the created world. The order of the Garden of Eden, in which all were provided for in comfort and peace, gave way to enmity and hardship and suffering. (Gn 3:14 19) Finally, some chapters later (Gn 11:1-9: the tower of Babel) we see that the progression of sin in the world leads even to the divisions between groups of people.

The tenants of Catholic Social teaching reflect this same movement from the “I” to the “We” in terms not of the effects of sin, but in the understanding of the responsibility of the people of God.
Members of the Body of Christ
Young people seek a sense of belonging. Belonging to the Christian community includes being one member of the Body of Christ, comprised of all who are baptized into this body. “For just as the body is one and