Sustainable desistance from crime is one of the fundamental questions of contemporary criminology, addressed by two major theoretical traditions: “social explanation,” centered on reintegrative shaming, and “narrative-identity explanation,” centered on the redemption narrative. However, these two traditions have so far largely developed in parallel, and an explicit process model explaining the step-by-step relationship between them has rarely been formulated. Aiming to fill this theoretical gap, the present article seeks to answer the question: What is the relationship between reintegrative shaming and the redemption narrative, and how can they be combined within a coherent framework to explain sustainable desistance from crime? The study employs comparative qualitative content analysis and theoretical synthesis, and its main claim is that reintegrative shaming, as a strong structural facilitator, provides the social context for the formation of the redemption narrative, while the redemption narrative explains the mechanism of internalization and sustainability of reintegrative effects—although in some cases (such as self-starters) this relationship can form without specific external support. Findings indicate that the message of reintegrative shaming—“You are a good person who has done a bad thing”—acts as “narrative fuel,” and rituals of reintegration supply the raw materials for the individual’s redemption story. In contrast, the redemption narrative transforms social acceptance into an internal identity. . In conclusion, the article explains the policy implications of the model in terms of revising exclusionary laws, designing narrative-based programs, and utilizing restorative justice.