|
SPIDIR newsletter 60 |
|
|
Newsletter
main page Contact the Newsletter Editor Contents of Issue 60 Autumn 2003
by Richard Buck Almost exactly ten years ago Kenneth Leech dropped a bombshell on the world of spiritual direction with an article in The Tablet entitled "Is Spiritual Direction Losing its Bearings?". We all sat up with a jolt, because Leech occupied an almost unique place in English spirituality. In 1977, his book, Soul Friend, was hailed as prophetic and groundbreaking. It paved the way in the 80's for a remarkable revival in the ministry of spiritual direction, which has in turn engendered many training courses such as SPIDIR itself, to promote and explore spiritual direction in the life of the Church. In the years since Soul Friend, Leech has produced a steady stream of books such as True Prayer, True God, The Social God and The Sky is Red, which revealed a remarkable amalgam of ascetic theology with a radical socio-political stance. Because of his proven record, his negative analysis of trends in spiritual direction should not merely be shrugged off. I suggest that the gap of ten years since he wrote, gives us now a good opportunity to assess the accuracy or otherwise of his assessment. Let me take in turn the four main points of his argument. First he is worried that spiritual direction as one ministry among many has become dangerously inflated. "Directors play an important but quite lowly and limited function within the wider context of pastoral care and theological formation. I detect now a tendency in some quarters to make the spiritual director more important than he or she is, in a way which is at variance with the mainstream of the tradition". His second point follows on from the first: "I am worried that this ministry is being professionalised and seen as a specialist ministry in a way which is potentially extremely dangerous. There is now an international organisation of spiritual directors with headquarters in the United States. There - and here maybe - some spiritual directors charge fees for their services, something which would have horrified the saints in all ages. People are being 'accredited' with certificates, diplomas, and doctorates in spiritual direction by the many institutes and departments which have sprung up". Leaving aside the contentious question of charging of fees for this ministry, Leech's charge of creeping professionalism can hardly be refuted. Ironically it is The Tablet, the weekly Roman Catholic journal which gave Leech his platform in 1993, which is the leading advertiser of the plethora of academic and experiential courses available. Many of them, especially in the U.S. and Ireland, are staffed by religious, particularly Jesuits and Dominicans, with many of the women's congregations closely involved. I personally believe we need at one level to put this new growth industry in its sociological perspective. It is significant for instance, that many of these courses have filled the vacuum left by the virtual collapse of the Catholic educational system, which was such a prominent and powerful agent in world-wide Catholicism. Many of the religious - especially women - who came out of teaching in the 80s hoped the ministry of spiritual direction would provide them with new outlets of ministry. They realised that this ministry was separate from the growing call within many of the congregations for the ordination of women to the priesthood. The Roman Catholic Church has its own agenda, which of course does not automatically apply to other denominations where spiritual direction is now being explored, but we should be aware of and reflect on these sociological signs of the times which are so profoundly changing the face of the church in the twenty-first century. Leech's third point will strike a chord with many of us. "A whole chapter of Soul Friend was devoted to trying to significant areas of overlap. I am increasingly worried not only by the tendency in some quarters to blur these distinctions and to assimilate direction into a therapeutic model, but also by the uncritical and simplistic adaptation of certain quasi-therapeutic tools." Leech singles out in particular the use of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator, which has, he claims, "rapidly become de fide in parts of the spirituality circuit". The same could be said of the Enneagram which is now integrated into the three month course of 'Apostolic Spirituality' offered by St Beunio's Ignition Spirituality Centre, which has deeply affected the theory and practice of spiritual direction in this country. It should also be noted in passing that the Enneagram has recently been under review by the Holy Office in the Vatican, which is unhappy with what it sees as its lack of Christological emphasis. Finally, Leech tries to put direction in a wider perspective which anchors Christian spirituality in the context of the challenge of the Kingdom of God in the world. "I am worried", he wrote, "because much of spiritual direction assumes a view of spirituality which is not wholesome and only tenuously Christian, and which reflects the individualism and privatisation of religion in he West rather than an embodiment in a corporate tradition. Within classical Christian understanding, spiritual direction is a personal ministry which takes place within a corporate framework of sacrament, discipleship and social action. It takes place within a context of theological reflection and social struggle. Only within such a context can it make sense and progress. It is because I see a loss of such a context that I remain, and become increasingly worried". I have not contacted Ken to ask whether ten years on, he feels we are back on course. I suspect he would not be sanguine. That said, I believe that all of us who are involved in this ministry owe him a debt of gratitude for firing that gunshot over our bows in 1993. Whether we agree or disagree with his analysis, he has put his finger on many crucial points that remain as important today as when he aired them. We ignore them at our peril. |
||
| ©
SPIDIR Last updated: 23/11/05 Webmaster |
||
