Over the last 25 years or so, I’ve noticed with bemusement an unfortunate trend in the United States in which an increasing number of lay people arrogate to themselves the title of “spiritual director.” I regard this as unfortunate because, except in certain rare exceptions, lay people are simply not qualified or competent to serve as spiritual directors.
Even lay people who have some formal training in theology do not, by virtue of that fact, have the requisite qualities necessary to be spiritual directors.
I’ve seen some real messes result from lay people attempting to give spiritual direction to others. For example, Regnum Christi (RC), the lay movement associated with the embattled Legionaries of Christ religious order of men, had for years appointed numerous goodhearted, sincere, and wholly unqualified RC lay women to be “spiritual directors” for other RC lay women in the absence of a priest. As you might imagine, problems and misunderstandings ensued. Eventually, at least here in the U.S., the Legionaries and RC leaders abandoned the moniker “spiritual director” in favor of the less dubious “spiritual guide.”
My guess is that virtually all lay people who style themselves as spiritual directors (including those who are regarded as such by others, even by some deacons and priests), are really just confusing spiritual direction with counseling. That such a benign confusion is prevalent these days shouldn’t come as a surprise. After all, upwards of three generations of Catholics nowadays are, by and large, woefully under-catechized in the doctrinal and spiritual teachings of the Catholic Faith.
This is not to say that those goodhearted and sincere lay men and lay women who present themselves as spiritual directors are necessarily themselves woefully under-catechized (although some may very well be), but their laudable service to others, insofar as they seek to offer helpful advice of a spiritual nature, does not make them spiritual directors in the classical Catholic sense of the term.
Don’t get me wrong. By all means, Catholic lay people should strive to offer good counsel and spiritual advice when the need and opportunity arises. Counseling can be done informally or formally, such as in the case of a man or woman who is properly trained in the art of counseling (for example, having earned a master’s degree in that field). But counselling and spiritual direction are not the same thing. It’s proper and good for lay people to engage in the former though, in my view, not the in latter.
Now, since I am confident that my remarks here will elicit some push back from those who are convinced spiritual direction is indeed suitable for lay people, I’d like to advert to the wise and erudite advice on this question from the late Father Jordan Aumann, O.P. (1916-2007), who wrote Spiritual Theology, a masterful explanation of the ways and means of the spiritual life, including what to look for in a spiritual director. While he doesn’t come right out and declare that spiritual direction is not a suitable domain for lay people (except, as I’ve said, under certain, rare circumstances), I think you’ll see that the cumulative force of his explanation militates inexorably toward that conclusion.
PERHAPS NO WRITER HAS OUTLINED with such clarity and precision the technical qualities of a good spiritual director as have St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross. She states that a good spiritual director should be learned, prudent, and experienced. St. John of the Cross also maintains that a director should be learned, prudent, and experienced, and he places great emphasis on experience.
Learning. The learning of a spiritual director should be extensive. In addition to having a profound knowledge of dogmatic theology, without which he would be exposed to error in regard to matters of faith, and of moral theology, without which he could not even fulfill the office of confessor, the spiritual director should have a thorough knowledge of ascetical and mystical theology. He should know, for example, the theological doctrine concerning Christian perfection, especially regarding such questions as the essence of perfection, the obligation to strive for perfection, the obstacles to perfection, the types of purgation, and the means of positive growth in virtue. He should have a detailed knowledge of the grades of prayer, the trials God usually sends to souls as they advance from the lower to the higher degrees of prayer, and the illusions and assaults of the devil that souls may encounter.
He also needs to be well versed in psychology so that he will have an understanding of various temperaments and characters, the influences to which the human personality is subjected, and the function of the emotions in the life of the individual. He should also know at least the basic principles of abnormal psychology and psychiatry so that he will be able to recognize mental unbalance and nervous or emotional disorders.
A priest should realize that, if he is not competent to direct a particular soul, he should advise the individual to go to someone who possesses the necessary knowledge. A priest incurs a grave responsibility before God if he attempts to direct a soul when he lacks sufficient knowledge. In recent times, with the wider dissemination of knowledge of mental illness, the priest must especially be warned that, as regards the field of psychiatry and the therapeutic methods proper to that branch of medicine, he is a mere “layman” and is incompetent to treat mental sickness. If he suspects that a penitent is suffering from a mental illness, he should direct that individual to a professional psychiatrist, just as readily as he would expect a psychiatrist to refer spiritual problems to a clergyman.
Prudence. This is one of the most important qualities for a spiritual director. It comprises three basic factors: prudence in judgment, clarity in counseling, and firmness in exacting obedience.
If a spiritual director lacks prudence, he is usually lacking several other virtues as well. Prudence enables an individual to do the right thing under given circumstances. Spiritual direction is not concerned with the general doctrine of spiritual theology, nor with theoretical situations that one may imagine, but with the individual soul placed in concrete circumstances at a given moment or in a given phase of spiritual growth.
The director is not called upon to make decisions regarding general doctrine; most people could find such answers in any standard manual of spiritual theology. The director’s role is precisely to recognize the particular circumstances of a given situation and to give the advice needed at that moment. In order that the advice be prudent, a spiritual director must have the empathy by which he is able to place himself in the given circumstances and must have the patience to listen attentively. Of the various factors that militate against prudence, the following are especially common: lack of knowledge of the various states of the ascetical and mystical life, lack of understanding of human psychology, prejudice in regard to particular states of life or particular exercises of piety, lack of humility, excessive eagerness to make a judgment.
The second characteristic of prudence in the spiritual director is clarity in the advice given to the one directed and in the norms of conduct prescribed. In order that he may be clear in his direction, he must. possess clarity in his own mind. In speaking to the soul he is directing, he should avoid any vague or indecisive language, but should always express himself in concrete and definite terms. He should resolve problems with a yes or a no and, if necessary, he should take the time for further deliberation before making his decision. If a soul perceives that the director is not sure of himself, it will lose confidence in him, and his direction will lose all its efficacy.
Moreover, the director should always be sincere and frank, without any partiality or selfish motives. It would be a serious fault if a director were to avoid offending the person directed lest that person should go to some other priest for direction. Those priests who place great importance in attracting and retaining a large number of followers are, by that very fact, disposing themselves to failure as spiritual directors. The director should never forget that he acts in the name of the Holy Spirit in directing souls, and that he must endeavor to treat those souls with kindness and- understanding, but with firmness and utter frankness.
The director must also take care that he does not become the one who is directed. Some persons are extremely competent in’ getting their own way in everything, and even the director is in danger of falling under their power. For that reason, once the director is certain of his decision and the course that should be followed; he should state his mind with unyielding firmness. The individual must be convinced that there are only two alternatives: to obey or to find another director.
But the director should not forget that he should never demand of a soul anything that is incompatible with its state of life or vocation, its strength, or present condition. He should realize that there are some things that can be demanded of advanced souls but could never be required of beginners; that some things would be perfectly fitting in dealing with a priest or religious but not with a lay person. Excessive rigor does nothing but frighten souls and may cause them to abandon the road to perfection. There is, therefore, a world of difference between firmness in demanding obedience and an excessive rigidity that discourages the soul of the penitent.
Experience. This is one of the most precious qualities of a good spiritual director. Even if he is less perfect in knowledge and somewhat deficient in prudence, experience can make up for these deficiencies. This does not mean that the experience of the director must necessarily flow from his own spiritual life, for he may obtain the benefits of experience from his observation and direction of others.
As regards the personal experience of the director, if it is a question of the guidance of the average Christian, he needs little more than the experience any priest can obtain from the faithful fulfillment of his duties in the sacred ministry. If it is a question of advanced souls who have already entered the mystical stages of the spiritual life, it is desirable that the priest himself have some experience of those higher stages. If he lacks this, a delicate sense of prudence, coupled with competent knowledge of the mystical states, will suffice in the majority of cases.
But personal experience alone is not sufficient to make a spiritual director as competent as he ought to be. There are many different paths by which the Holy Spirit can lead souls to the summit of sanctity. It would be a serious mistake for a director to attempt to lead all souls along the same path and to impose on them his own personal experiences, however beneficial they may have been for himself. The spiritual director should never forget that he is merely an instrument in the hands of the Holy Spirit and that his work must be entirely subjected to the Holy Spirit. If, through a lack of understanding of the variety of divine gifts and the multiplicity of roads to perfection, he were to force all souls to travel by the same road, he would become a veritable obstacle to the workings of grace in the soul.
Moral Qualities of a Spiritual Director . . . (continue reading)
Hard to believe, but Nancy and I have been raising kids for nigh unto 31 years now. We’ve done our best to lovingly and prudently herd our oldest 10 children into and through their teenage years and, so far, everyone seems intact and no worse for the wear.
Nancy and I, on the other hand, while not any worse for the wear either, have come to the point in life where we can begin to savor the tantalizingly pleasant realization that our eleventh and last child, Stephen, will soon be entering teenagehood. And that means (dontchyaknow), that, for us, raising teenagers will in the not too distant future be something we wondrously behold . . . in the rearview mirror.
Don’t get me wrong. It’s not that we haven’t loved and been grateful to God for all these years of living with a rambunctious throng of teens in our house at any given time, but we’re . . . shall we say, close to being ready, to transition to the next phase.
One of our favorite comedians, the insanely funny Tim Hawkins, delivers in this video some innovative advice on how to deal with teenagers. If only I could play the guitar and sing as well as he does, maybe I’d try it on my kids. Check it out.
The other day, I was telling one of my teenage sons about what it was like when I was a kid and went out trick-or-treating, back in the 1960s and early 1970s. For one thing, Halloween was always observed on October 31st. None of this modern-day social engineering stuff where the local municipality “transfers” Halloween to a different day. Also, back in those days, it was pretty uncommon for parents to be out walking the streets as chaperons for their kids, unless, of course, they were little kids. But pretty much, if you were 7 or 8 and up, you’d be out trick-or-treating sans parents and with your neighborhood pals. Boy, have times changed. It’s the foolish parent who’d let his grammar school aged child go out unattended these days. As for hauling candy, I learned early on (like this comedian mentions) that a pillow case is a much better, more effective confectionary repository than a paper bag, and for the very reasons he talks about.
Yes, this gem of a video has been around awhile, though perhaps some of you haven’t seen it yet, so I thought I’d post it for your daily dose of humor and levity. Personally, I think every guy (or at least every normal guy) would secretly like to have one of these jibs to tool around in — I know I would. Imagine showing up on a drive-through window on one.
This model doesn’t look street-legal, but it would be the perfect thing for some of the big Catholic conferences I speak at. What would really be deluxe would be if the conference organizers could have a ramp installed so I could ride up to the podium in style. Seriously, I’d add this to my Amazon Wish List, if only they carried it.
Every day, across the United States — indeed, throughout the world — men and women, boys and girls, get themselves tattooed and pierced. And not just their ears. They are participating in the modern fad of “body art,” which has its origins in antiquity, but which in recent decades as developed into some extreme forms that are often quite disturbing.
— By Deacon Robert Lukosh, Envoy Magazine —
The intentional marking or mutilation of the human body under the guise of “body art” goes beyond simple tattoos or ear-piercing as adornment for women. For many, it is a personal expression of solidarity with a social cause, a trend that attracts predominately young people, driving them to ever wilder and more shocking expressions of what some term “personal mutilation” that includes: total-body tattoos, pierced eyelids, lips, noses, tongues, foreheads, and even disfigurement of the genitalia, in a never-ending quest for the most “outrageous” form of self-expression through what is commonly known as “body art.”
These forms of personal exhibition have spread rapidly throughout contemporary Western society, resulting in a secondary wave of participants (namely, the children of those who engaged in radical body art during 70s and 80s) who, like their parents and role models, are disfiguring their own bodies irrevocably, claiming as their justification “personal freedom” and a right to unlimited self-expression.
In earlier generations, garish tattoos and unusual piercings were found almost exclusively only among members of social groups and subcultures that lurked at the fringes of mainstream society. Aside from your relatives who served in the military (which is definitely not a fringe subculture), chances are, neither of your parents nor any of your grandparents, aunts, or uncles — in the case of those born before 1950 — have tattoos or unusual piercings. But look around today and you will see a massive number of people — especially young people — who have become enamored of extreme tattoos and unusual piercings.
This modern fad of body art permeates American society, affecting virtually every industry, age group, race, sex, and religion. Since many of these people occupy leadership and mentoring roles in the lives of children and young adults, such overt displays have an additional rebound effect by providing tacit justification sufficient to overcome the doubts of those who are unsure if they want to dabble in the body art fad themselves, resulting in yet a third generation of pierced and tattooed bodies. . .
Nah. There’s no “maybe” about it, boyo. You were dumb then (all 70 +/- times) and you obviously are still dumb now — extra-strength dumb, if you ask me. But I will give you credit for not being so dumb that you failed to disclose your dumbness to this nice lady who seems to have been thinking, at least until this freaky moment was captured on film, that you might be a worthy candidate for husbandhood. I applaud Your Dumbness for at least letting her know about this.
(Can you imagine Ozzie & Harriet having to deal with this?)
Then @Jesus told his @disciples, “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his #cross and follow me. For whoever would save his #life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it … http://bit.ly/nMJb6A
Imagine my surprise (and delight) when I saw the headline above on the NewAdvent.org website. And to think! I didn’t even attend the event. So, I’m guessing I should be hearing something soon from the WYD check-writers about this. Of course, a wire transfer would be just fine, as far as I’m concerned. Guess I’d better start picking out all the worthy Catholic charities and apostolates to whom I’ll be donating all my WYD profits.
Here’s the text of an excellent mission statement I ran across many years ago and which I have read at various seminars I’ve given around the country. I did not write this, though I adapted it slightly, and since so many folks have expressed how much they like it, I post it here for those who would like a copy.
Those of you who live in Central Ohio either already know and love your local Catholic radio station — Saint Gabriel Catholic Radio — or you soon will. The signal is already heard strongly across the greater Columbus area and, happily, the station is making progress toward its goal of being able to dramatically increase its reach with a planned range covering nearly the entire state of Ohio! Here’s a little video clip I recorded earlier this year in which I talk a bit about why Catholic radio is such a beneficial and important part of the Church’s outreach in a given locality. If you aren’t already supporting your local Catholic radio station, please get on board and help this very important cause. It’s well worth it, believe me.
My lovely wife went shopping today and returned laden with our family’s next two weeks’ worth of victuals and delectables. This colorful package was among the items she very thoughtfully picked up, no doubt not having read the label closely. But I did. And I couldn’t resist sharing it with you. I don’t know if it properly qualifies as Engrish, or if it is just an example of crass hi-jinx from an oh-so-clever American package designer.
My advice: Keep your wits about you if you should ever venture over to World Table.
From Envoy Magazine:
No subject is more important, in any day. And no subject is more misunderstood, in our day.
Most mature people, if asked to choose just one word for the meaning of life, Life’s greatest value, the most important gift one can give or receive, the thing that makes us the happiest, the thing that makes one a saint, the supreme wisdom, and even the eternal inner life of God, would say that it is “love.” And they are right.
Without qualification, without any ifs, ands, or buts, God’s Word tells us, straight as a left jab, that “love is the greatest thing there is” (1 Cor 13: 13).
Scripture also tells us that “God IS love.” It never says God is justice or beauty or righteousness, though He is just and beautiful and righteous. But “God is love,” (1 John 1:8), not just loving or a lover, though He is that too. (That’s why He is a Trinity: He is Lover, Beloved, and Loving, complete love in three Persons. Love is God’s essence, His whole being. Everything in Him is love.)
Even His justice is love. Paul identifies “the justice of God” in Romans 1: 17 with the most apparently unjust event in all history: deicide, or the murder of God, the crucifixion; for that was God’s great act of love. On our part, that was the most unjust, evil, and hateful thing we ever did; but on God’s part, that was His perfect justice, because it was perfect love, and so good that we call the holiday on which we celebrate this murderous deed “Good Friday.”
But no word is more misunderstood in our society than the word love. One of the most useful books we can read is C. S. Lewis’s unpretentious little masterpiece The Four Loves. In it, Lewis clearly distinguishes supernatural love, agape (ah-gah-pay), the kind of love Christ is and lived and taught, from the natural loves: storge (natural affection or liking), eros (natural sexual desire), and philia (natural human friendship). All natural loves are good; but supernatural love, the love that God is, agape, is the greatest thing in the world. And part of the Gospel, the “good news,” is that it is available to us; that Christ is the plug that connects us to the infinite supply of divine love-electricity. . . . (continue reading)