Review for Religious

Review for Religious
1943 May

ALMOST a year ago (July, 1942) we published an editorial entitled 'Spiritual Direction by the Ordinary Confessor'. Our purpose was to stimulate constructive discussion of the important topic of spiritual direction. To aid in the discussion, we subsequently published articles on The Need of Direction, Cooperation with Direction, Manifestation of Conscience, and The Prudent Use of Confession Privileges. During the course of the discussion we received many communications, most of which were published, at least in digest form. We were unable to publish some letters, and from those published we had to temporarily omit certain points. It is now time to make a survey of the entire discussion. This survey will include not merely the published material, but the unpublished suggestions as well.

The reading of the survey will not entirely supplant the reading of the original articles and communications. The articles developed certain points thoroughly, whereas we can merely touch on them here. The communications contained such a variety of suggestions that it seemed impossible to weave them all into one readable article; consequently we had to select what appeared to be the most important. The communications also revealed certain pronounced differences of opinion. As we did not wish our survey to be a mere catalogue of such differences, we felt that we had to "take sides," at least to the extent of trying to give a balanced judgment.

Those who have followed the discussion on spiritual direction have no doubt noticed that it gravitated almost entirely to the guidance of Sisters. One Brother master of novices sent an excellent communication; all the other letters were from Sisters or from priests who appeared to be thinking almost exclusively in terms of the direction of Sisters. In preparing the survey we had to decide on our point of view: should we speak exclusively of the direction of Sisters, or should we keep the matter sufficiently general to include everyone? We decided to give the survey with Sisters principally in mind: but we think that religious men who are interested in the matter will find that almost everything said here is equally applicable to them.

Meaning of Spiritual Direction

In our introductory editorial, we were thinking of spiritual direction in terms of the definition given by Father Zimmermann in his Aszetik (p. 230): "Instruction and encouragement of individuals (italics ours) on the way of perfection." This definition brings out one element of spiritual direction that ascetical theologians usually stress: namely, it is individual.

This individual, or personal, quality of spiritual direction excludes such things as the Commandments of God: the precepts, counsels, and example of our Lord; the laws of the Church; the constitutions and rules of a religious institute. All these things may be called spiritual direction in the sense that they give us the plan of a perfect life; but they are not direction in the technical sense or even in the ordinary popular sense. For the same reason, spiritual reading books and community conferences, even though they help much to clarify our ideas of perfection and stimulate us to desire progress, cannot be called spiritual direction.

In their communications many zealous priests have  spoken of certain types of "planned instruction" in the confessional. In so far as these instructions are general and the same for all they do not substantially differ from community exhortations. They lack the individual element of spiritual direction. This does not mean that they do not serve a good purpose. Some priests can use them and accomplish much good by them. They do give the penitents some generally helpful thoughts; they do remind the penitents that the priest's time is theirs; and they are often the means of breaking down a barrier of reserve and preparing the way for personal direction. Moreover, such general admonitions, given by a confessor of a religious community, are frequently very helpful in that they enable the individual religious to get a good start (for example, in keeping silence better), because all have been urged to do the same thing.

All this is negative. It may be summed up by saying that spiritual direction is not general, but particular, individual, personal. Its purpose is to help an individual to attain to the degree of perfection to which God is calling him. It supposes, therefore, a knowledge of the individual's own problems and aspirations, of his external circumstances and his talents, and of the way the Holy Spirit operates in his soul.

In what does direction actually consist? Father Zimmermann sums it up in two words, "instruction and encouragement." In themselves, these words are not adequate to express all the functions of the spiritual director, but they do indicate the two principal ways in which, according to circumstances, he is to exert his influence on his spiritual charge: namely, on the intellect (by instruction), and on the will and the emotions (by encouragement).

As for his influence on the intellect, the director's work may vary from the very active function of telling the individual what to do and bow to do it to the almost passive function of simply approving or disapproving the plans made by the individual. He gives pointed moral and ascetical advice, he answers questions, and he corrects erroneous notions. In regard to the will and the emotions, the director not only encourages, but he consoles in, time of sorrow, strengthens in time of weakness, tranquillizes in time of distress, and restrains in time of imprudent ardor. In all these functions, the director must have regard for what he judges to be the designs of God on the soul of the individual committed to his care.

Need of Direction

Rather pronounced differences of opinion were expressed in our articles and communications concerning the need of direction for religious. In fact, there seems to have been a great deal of confusion in the discussion of this topic. Perhaps we can avoid this confusion by referring the subject as definitely as possible to our actual conditions. In actual life, most of us are ordinary earnest religious, not mystics. Hence, we consider here the need of direction for the average religious. Again, in actual life few of us are privileged to have directors with the rare supernatural insight of a St. Francis de Sales. It would be idle speculation for us to consider the need of direction, having in mind a director to whom access would be almost impossible. Hence, we consider here direction that is normally obtainable.

With the question thus brought within the scope of our ordinary lives, we think it reasonable to uphold this proposition: some direction is a practical necessity for the average religious to make safe and constant progress in perfection. This general rule admits of exceptions. God can accomplish wonders in the soul without the aid of a director, but normally God uses the human means of direction.

Also, the general rule applies in different ways to various individuals; the degree and kind of help needed, as well as the frequency with which it is needed, will vary greatly.

Perhaps the relativity of the need of direction can be seen more clearly by referring back to the functions of the director. Young religious, particularly novices, are likely to need a great deal of intellectual help. They are unaccustomed to self-study, to making appropriate resolutions, to choosing useful subjects for the particular examen; and they need guidance in these matters, lest they waste much time and effort. Ascetical principles are still merely the oretical principles to them, and they often need help to see how they apply practically to their own lives.

But the dependence on a director for intellectual help should certainly decrease with the years. Religious who have finished their training and have taken their final vows should be able to plan for themselves; and their need of the spiritual director, in so far as intellectual help is concerned, should be mainly for friendly criticism. In other words, these religious plan their own lives, submit their plans to a director for approval or disapproval, and then occasionally make a report on the success or failure of the plan. Naturally, we make allowance here, even in the case of mature religious, for occasions when they face new problems or undergo special difficulties. They may need very detailed guidance on such occasions.

In regard to the need of the director's help for the will and the emotions, it is perhaps impossible to give a general rule. True, to a great extent progress in the religious life should develop emotional stability. Nevertheless, the problem is largely an individual one, and quite unpredictable.

Age does not free us from such trials as discouragement, loneliness, and worry; indeed, age often accentuates such trials. At various periods in our lives, most of us need sympathetic help or paternal correction lest we lose heart or descend to low ideals. Where to Get Direction Granted the need of some direction, a question that presents itself quite naturally is, "Where are we to get this direction?" This question has already been answered, in so far as we can answer it, in previous issues of the REVIEW. What we have said can be capsuled into these three rules: (1) Get what you can from your superiors. (2) Among confessors, it is normally preferable to get direction from the ordinary confessor. (3) If the ordinary confessor proves inadequate, take advantage of one or other privilege accorded by canon law.

 We suggest these three rules with deference to the special regulations or customs of particular institutes. Some institutes provide a specially appointed spiritual father; and the institute itself will indicate whether it is desirable that the spiritual father act as confessor or simply give extra- confessional direction.

 We have repeatedly mentioned the superior as a possible source of spiritual direction, as did many of the published communications. We think that this point calls for special emphasis, because it seems that one of the reactions to the Church's severe condemnation of obligatory manifestation of conscience has been a swing to the opposite extreme, namely, that superiors are too rarely consulted even in matters in which they are both qualified and willing to give advice. Either extreme is an evil. The present ecclesiastical legislation safeguards what is of prime importance, the perfect liberty of the individual. Granted this liberty, much good can come to the superior, the subject, and to the family spirit of a community, from voluntary manifestation of conscience.

A number of objections have been raised against our insistent preference for the ordinary confessor. Some Sisters have pointed out that they have had almost as many ordinary confessors as they have lived years in religion; others have said that the ordinary is not interested, does not come on time, does not come regularly, does not understand their life, and so forth. These are certainly practical difficulties. They indicate cases in which a complaint might well be lodged with a competent authority, or in which individuals might profitably and justifiably avail themselves of one or other of the confessional privileges given by canon law. But the difficulties do not detract from the wisdom of the general rule.

Many questions have been sent us concerning the advisability of direction by correspondence. The general rule given by ascetical masters and, we think, confirmed by many distressing experiences, is that such direction should be either entirely discouraged or reduced to an absolute minimum. It is true that some priests have accomplished great things in this way, and that for some souls it is the only possible way of obtaining genuinely needed help. But it can hardly be approved as a normal practice. It tends to consume immense amounts of time, it seldom has the assurance of the strict privacy that intimate direction calls for, and of its very nature it is open to grave dangers of misunderstanding, both on the part of the director and on the part of the directed. Only in rare instances is it a genuine apostolate.

How to Get Direction

The next logical question is: "How is one to get direction?" This question has been asked often in the course of our discussion; and many bits of helpful advice have been scattered through the communications. The subject is too vast for complete development here. At best we can give only an outline, trying to incorporate the suggestions in some ready and readable form. It may be well to note that  the outline will concern only confessional direction. We begin with three preliminary negatives.

Don't make "direction" the principal purpose of your confession. It is often said—in fact, so often and by such reliable persons that there must be some truth in it—that many religious do not know how to make a fruitful confession. Confession is a Sacrament. It produces its sacramental graces in accordance with the disposition of the recipient. Essentially, this disposition is one of true contrition; and perhaps the clearest sign of this contrition is a sincere purpose of amendment. All people who confess frequently and have' only small things to tell have practical difficulties on this score; there is always the danger that their confessions will be routine in the evil sense of this word: that is, they confess with a very vague and indefinite purpose of amendment, with the result that Penance plays a very slight part in the efficacious bettering of their lives.

Yet this is the principal purpose of frequent confession and it can be accomplished, even though the confessor never gives advice.

We have said that this is the first purpose of confession and in itself independent of the "spiritual direction" aspect. We might add, however, that the two can be admirably combined. For instance, if the penitent were to tell the confessor: "Father, I want to make my confessions more fruitful, and I'd like your help in going about it, "this might be the beginning of the simplest yet sanest program of spiritual direction possible for most religious.

A second "don't" concerns prejudices: Don't be influenced by a prejudice against any confessor. These prejudices are manifold. For instance some religious think that the only one who can direct them is another religious; some think that all the good confessors belong to one religious order; some, on the contrary, believe that the most sympathetic and helpful confessors are diocesan priests. We have heard all opinions expressed, particularly those concerning confessors from religious orders. An honest judgment must label such opinions as prejudice. The actual facts are that good confessors can be found in fair proportions both among the religious and among the diocesan priests.

Other prejudices concern individuals and arise from hearsay. This has been mentioned so frequently in the communications that it must be somewhat common, particularly among Sisters. No confessor should be judged by gossip; and as for the gossip itself, we feel that we could recommend many more profitable subjects of conversation.

Even an unpleasant personal experience with a confessor should not be too readily interpreted in a derogatory fashion. One of the most difficult of all priestly works is the hearing of confessions. The technique of doing it—if we may use such an expression—admits of constant improvement. The confessor has to exercise exquisite judgment concerning such things as the precise question to ask, the tone of voice to use, the advice to give. He cannot see the penitent, be is often unable to judge from the voice whether the penitent is young or old; and at times he gets very little help from the penitent in the way of clear and unequivocal statement. When troubles concerning other persons are mentioned, he knows that there is another side to the question, and he must give an answer that is fair to both sides. In view of such difficulties, it should not be surprising that a confessor might occasionally make an unpleasant impression or even seem to misunderstand one's case. He is the minister of God; he is not God.

A final negative preparation for obtaining direction is this: Don't expect too much from a confessor. In the communications sent to the REVIEW, many priests expressed their opinion that the confessor should take the initiative and this in a very active way, such as, for example, asking definite questions: "Is there anything you wish to ask me?" "Can I help you in any way?" and so forth. On the other hand, some priests have indicated that they do not approve of this method or at least they could not use it. We feel justified in concluding that religious would be unwise to expect such active initiative. Many may want it and feel that they could do better if the confessor would make some such advance; but if they wait for this they may never get spiritual direction. They have a right to expect the confessor to give help if they ask for it; also that the confessor will even give help spontaneously when something in the confession seems to call for it. These are the minimum essentials for all good confessors; but beyond these minimum essentials, there is a great diversity of practice. On the positive side, the first requisite for obtaining direction is to want it. This implies a sincere desire of progress and a willingness to do the hard work necessary for progress. One reason why some confessors do not take the initiative in this matter is that they know that many penitents would resent direction especially if it concerned the correction of certain inordinate attachments or humiliating faults.

A second positive preparation for obtaining direction is to know what you want. In other words, one should try to know oneself—one's ideals, talents, temptations, faults, and so forth. Self-activity is necessary not merely for cooperation with direction but also as a preparation for it. In making the immediate preparation for confession, it helps much to say a prayer to the Holy Spirit, both for oneself and for the confessor. This is supernatural work or it is nothing. The whole purpose of it is to further the plans of God for individual souls; and, as we know, in God's ordinary providence. He wants us to pray even for the things He is delighted to give us.

The actual work of "breaking the ice," especially with a new confessor or with one from whom they have not previously received spiritual guidance, is a serious problem for many religious. It really need not be a dread formality. Many helpful suggestions have been made in our various communications. One suggested opening was: "Father, I should like to use my confessions as a means of making spiritual progress and of getting spiritual direction. Do you mind helping me?" Such an opening puts the priest "on the spot." If he doesn't wish to help, he must say so; and that means that he assumes the responsibility before God. He should not be hearing the confessions of religious. On the other hand, if he is willing to help, the initial difficulty of approach has been solved.

Other suggested approaches were: "Father, will you please help me with my spiritual life? I have such and such ups and downs."—"I have trouble in the line of. . . "—"I just feel the need of talking myself out."—"I know I need help, but I don't know where to begin."

The foregoing, or similar approaches, should be sufficient for any sympathetic priest. However, the mere fact that this initial contact has been made does not solve the entire problem. It may take some time for definite results to be produced, despite the willingness of both penitent and confessor. That is one reason why it is good, when possible, for the penitent to have some definite plan to submit to the confessor. This plan need not be very comprehensive. It might begin with the simple attempt to make confession itself more fruitful; and from that it could grow out into the entire spiritual life. Once a beginning has been made, the method of carrying on the spiritual direction will have to be worked out by the confessor and penitent. In large communities the time element presents a real obstacle. However, it is not insuperable. Very few penitents need direction every week; a brief monthly consultation is generally sufficient. No one should resent it if the confessor were to suggest some method of spacing these monthly consultations so that they would not all fall on the same day. Also, if both penitent and confessor understand that there is to be no beating about the bush, and if neither is offended by a certain directness of speech, much time can be saved.

In his article on Cooperation with the Director, Father Coogan called attention to certain qualities that should characterize one who sincerely seeks direction. The first of these qualities is humble candor. It is vain to ask for direction if one does not wish to be honest, if one wishes the director to know only one side of one's life. Along the same line, many correspondents have suggested that in confessing it is a good thing, even in regard to small faults, to give the confessor a more accurate picture of what has happened by indicating the circumstances arid by confessing motives. Evidently such practices are not necessary for the confession, but they are very helpful from the point of view of direction. It seems that one obstacle to candor, particularly among Sisters, is an erroneous notion of charity and community loyalty. Many are under the impression that the manifestation of certain difficulties regarding charity and obedience would be an unjustifiable reflection on the members of the community. This would be true if such things were recounted uselessly or if there were danger that the confessor would violate his obligation of secrecy. The danger on the part of the confessor is rarely present; hence, in ordinary circumstances, the penitent may manifest everything that pertains to his own trials and faults. ( Cf. Volume II, p. 4·1.)

Father Coogan also insisted strongly on docility. And rightly so; for it seems absurd to consult a spiritual director if one does not intend to follow his advice. However, this spirit of docility does not necessarily involve blind obedience, except in cases of severe trial, such as scruples, when one's own judgment is unbalanced. Normally, if one does not understand the meaning of the advice given, one should ask for further explanation rather than try to follow it irrationally. And if one has good reason to think that certain advice would prove harmful or would not produce the desired results, one should mention this to the confessor. Such reasonable cooperation with direction is in perfect accord with humble docility.

A very practical aspect of confessional direction is the followup. Usually it is better that the penitent take the initiative in this. The confessor may be hesitant about referring to the past, lest he be talking to the wrong person.

Some confessors have no difficulty in this respect, but others find it quite perplexing, even after they have heard the penitent's confession a number of times. To avoid all risk, the penitent should have a definite understanding with the confessor. No one can give progressive direction without at least recognizing the case.

Does it make for better confessional direction if the confessor knows his penitents personally? Our communications indicate that religious are just like seculars in this matter; some prefer to be recognized, others wish to remain unknown. In practice, this rule should be observed: any penitent who wishes the confessor to recognize him and to use his extra-confessional knowledge of him in giving direction should make this quite clear and explicit to the confessor. Unless the penitent docs this, the confessor is not likely to show any sign of recognition or take into account any of his personal extra-confessional knowledge of the penitent.

A final problem, especially practical among religious in our country, concerns the changing of confessors. It often happens that one is just getting a good start or is going along quite nicely with one confessor, when the religious himself is transferred or a new confessor is appointed. What is to be done? Two extremes are to be avoided. One extreme is to think it necessary to give each new confessor a complete account of one's whole life history. This is surely going too far. Only in rare cases are these lengthy manifestations really necessary for the confessor, and they are seldom helpful to the penitent.

On the other hand, it is not prudent to withhold all reference to the past from the confessor. This is the other extreme. The new confessor should be given a brief, but accurate, picture of the penitent's main tendencies, and should be acquainted with the way in which the former confessor was directing him. Without this minimum of information there is apt to be needless repetition and no real progress.

Concluding Remarks

No doubt much remains to be said about spiritual direction; but we think it best to close our discussion, at least for the present. Some readers may be under the impression that it is just like many other discussions: much has been said, yet few definite conclusions have been drawn. Very likely such an impression is not without foundation. Nevertheless, certainly some definite good has been accomplished if interest has been stimulated and if some of the causes of misunderstanding and prejudice have been removed.

Masters and mistresses of novices can help to make this discussion fruitful if they see to it that their novices know how to get and cooperate with direction. Some may find the plan suggested by the Brother master of novices (cf. I, p. 344) or some similar plan very useful. Superiors can help by seeing that the legitimate complaints of their subjects are lodged with the proper authorities and by making it possible for their subjects to use the special privileges approved by the Church when this is necessary. Some correspondents have told us that no real good can come from this discussion unless we can get the message to priests. This is a real difficulty, as we do not have a large number of priest subscribers. However, we know that the priest subscribers we have are interested in this project and that many of them have excellent opportunities to influence their fellow priests and seminarians. We feel sure that they will help in preserving and propagating the useful points brought out in this discussion.