Is it wrong to expect a donation for spiritual guidance?

[tkctwbd]

Hi All,
I was wondering if it is wrong to charge for spiritual guidance? It seems to me that it would be because God gives Himself to us freely and generously, and so all who are serving Him, in His name, ought to do so in like manner. On the other hand, I have heard the argument that the one providing the guidance also needs to live… and priests and others who do not charge still do expect us to tithe.

Thanks.

 

[smithm29]

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it if it’s how someone makes a living. I would prefer to see someone who I pay in a roundabout way (a priest or a religious), but I don’t have a problem with the principle.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

When I took classes in spiritual direction this was a topic that came up. There are arguments on both sides.

Traditionally people don’t charge for spiritual direction. However, traditionally direction was done by a priest or religious. These are people who are already being supported financially and who do spiritual direction as part of their ministry.

In more recent times people charge for spiritual direction. These may be people who are not otherwise supported who need the money to support themselves. In some cases even religious request a donation or stipend because it helps support their convent/retreat center/other ministries.

There is also an aspect that people may value something more when they pay for it than when they don’t.

Hopefully if a director charges for the sessions, there is also some kind of provision for people who can’t pay at all or can’t pay the full fee. I would hate to see someone cut off from direction because they can’t afford it.

 

[JohnDamian]

It is not wrong to give the person being directed the opportunity to donate.

It is wrong to expect a donation as part of the direction process; be the director a lay-person; a Priest, a religious or anything else. It is also wrong to imply a donation is required or expected.

 

[smithm29]

I disagree. If you’re a layman whose job is spiritual direction, you should definitely let people know in advance that some sort of compensation is expected. The laborer deserves to be paid.

 

[tkctwbd]

Thank you all for your thoughts. My main worry with expecting a donation is the aspect of self-interest. The minute a fee is expected, it seems to me that the one guiding would have to be very careful about having a pure intention, and saying what the guidee NEEDS to hear as opposed to saying that which the person may WANT to hear. When you have nothing to lose by telling a soul the truth, I think one is more prone to do this; it gets much harder when you know you may be losing this person’s regular stipend if you stick to your guns and say what ought to be said, plus risk having this person complain to all his/her friends and thereby further reduce what has now become a “business” rather than a means to lead a soul closer to Christ. Further, I personally would have trouble trusting my guide’s real intentions: is s/he calling me up and encouraging more regular spiritual guidance for the good of my soul, or because s/he is not making ends meet this month?

Finally, what would be the difference between expecting payment for spiritual guidance, and the Church’s prohibition on selling items that have been blessed? It seems that the principle here is one cannot sell things that are spiritual… and so this would also apply to spiritual guidance (although the question for consideration is not charging per se, but only making it clear that a donation is expected).

Thanks again.

 

[smithm29]

Advice isn’t a sacramental and doesn’t have a priestly blessing imposed upon it? I suppose if you can’t trust the person offering you advice, you shouldn’t go to them.

 

[Michael1985]

I don’t think spiritual directors should charge. If we look at the life of saint Paul we have this wonderful verse “that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel.” 1 Cor 9:18

Paul could have charged for his ministry, in fact it was his right to. But he proclaimed the Gospel by day and worked by night to support himself so that others would see he had no alterior motive.

Personally I never charge for anything I offer like spiritual direction, and if someone says how can I repay you I say do something nice for the person you don’t like. I think the Gospel should always be free, even if that places a burden on us.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Personally I never charge for anything I offer like spiritual direction, and if someone says how can I repay you I say do something nice for the person you don’t like. I think the Gospel should always be free, even if that places a burden on us.

I currently don’t charge either, but that’s because I support myself through another job.

However, that means that the time I have available to meet with directees is limited.

I often hear people say that it’s hard to find a spiritual director. Perhaps it would be easier if more directors had the time available. But if they give up their jobs so they can provide spiritual direction, how are they supposed to live?

I’m able to use space at my church to meet so there’s no expense to me. I know of at least one Catholic center that makes space available for spiritual direction, but charges for the use of the space. If the directee doesn’t pay anything, then the director has to cover the cost and that’s a problem.

I’m not entirely comfortable with charging, but I can see good reasons why someone would. And while I haven’t been charged for direction, I do make donations to my director’s religious order. I doubt I would make those donations if it weren’t for my relationship with my director. So that’s another form of payment and that kind of financial support is why he doesn’t have to charge me for his time.

I wouldn’t hold it against a spiritual director because they charge any more than I would hold it against a doctor, lawyer, psychologist, or anyone else who provides their time.

 

[Newbie2]

How about a jar on the table labeled “TIPS”?

In all seriousness, though, I have mixed thoughts on whether spiritual guidance should cost someone money.

 

[tkctwbd]

I currently don’t charge either, but that’s because I support myself through another job.

However, that means that the time I have available to meet with directees is limited.

I often hear people say that it’s hard to find a spiritual director. Perhaps it would be easier if more directors had the time available. But if they give up their jobs so they can provide spiritual direction, how are they supposed to live?

I’m able to use space at my church to meet so there’s no expense to me. I know of at least one Catholic center that makes space available for spiritual direction, but charges for the use of the space. If the directee doesn’t pay anything, then the director has to cover the cost and that’s a problem.

I’m not entirely comfortable with charging, but I can see good reasons why someone would. And while I haven’t been charged for direction, I do make donations to my director’s religious order. I doubt I would make those donations if it weren’t for my relationship with my director. So that’s another form of payment and that kind of financial support is why he doesn’t have to charge me for his time.

I wouldn’t hold it against a spiritual director because they charge any more than I would hold it against a doctor, lawyer, psychologist, or anyone else who provides their time.

Thank you for your post… it was hearing this perspective yesterday in a conversation that prompted me to start this thread.

I understand the concern, but it leads to other questions. The specific character of the laity is secular - we are to live our consecration to Christ through our activity in the world. So, it seems proper to me that the laity support themselves through a job. A priest or a religious lives their consecration to God in a different manner, through a radical imitation of the life of Christ, who left to the Father the care of his needs. And so a priest or religious gives freely, and our Lord responds in kind by moving us, the laity, to provide for their needs. I absolutely agree that it is proper to tithe, to give donations to orders, and perhaps even to make a spontaneous, voluntary donation right after finishing spiritual direction. But all of this is given by the lay person to *God *through the Church, as an expression of the lay person’s self-donation to God and offering of the fruits of his labor in the secular realm. It is not first and foremost a “payment” for the things of God.

So this leads to the question: is it appropriate for a lay person to convert a means of perseverance and growth in union with Christ (true, not a sacramental and not something with a blessing) into a job? It seems to inapproprately straddle the demarcation between the two states of life.

Again, thanks to all who are sharing their thoughts…

 

[smithm29]

It seems to inapproprately straddle the demarcation between the two states of life.

And this is, I think ,where I would fundamentally disagree with you. A religious is a layman (unless he is also a priest or a deacon). So, does the religious inappropriately straddle the states of life? How about a paid music director for a parish, or a paid youth minister?

I think that a lot of this comes from an idea of the priesthood as be-all end-all of life as a Christian. The priest’s job is sacramental. Even if he is a horrible counselor spiritual director, homilest, or anything else- he still presents the sacrifice to God the Father for us. Those other roles can and should be filled by laymen. They are usually filled on a volunteer basis, but sometimes the job is so important or time consuming (or the layman so good) that they need to be filled on a full-time, paid basis. On the other hand, there are ordained clerics who work a regular job and receive no payment from the Church.

Yes, our character as laymen is in the world, but that does not necessarily mean that we should all be mechanics or doctors or lawyers or soldiers. What about the stained glass artist who brings people spiritual comfort through the beauty of the churches he decorates? Or the musician that helps people find God through song? Or the philosopher, poet, or theologian who writes stunning works about God? Should these jobs be unpaid because they touch on what is holy, should they be reserved for clergy, or should the laborer be paid his fair wage? If they should be paid, why is spiritual direction any different?

I can agree that it sometimes “feels dirty” to pay for these things, but I think that has more to do with our preoccupation with money than it does with the appropriateness of the act.

 

[PatriceA]

I disagree. If you’re a layman whose job is spiritual direction, you should definitely let people know in advance that some sort of compensation is expected. The laborer deserves to be paid.

I agree, especially if the person giving the spiritual direction has a college degree or the credentials to counsel. I expect to pay anyone that offers me counseling or advice in a professional context, be it medical or spiritual.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Finally, what would be the difference between expecting payment for spiritual guidance, and the Church’s prohibition on selling items that have been blessed? It seems that the principle here is one cannot sell things that are spiritual… and so this would also apply to spiritual guidance (although the question for consideration is not charging per se, but only making it clear that a donation is expected).

Hi,

A priest isn’t allowed to charge for blessings, which is why blessed items can’t be sold. You can sell spiritual things like medals, etc. but not if they’re blessed.

There’s no similar rule banning lay people from charging for spiritual direction. Keep in mind that these people may have costs associated with being a director. For example, do they pay for courses they take that help them be better directors? I know of one group here that charges a fee for spiritual direction, and they are good. It’s not as nice as the honor system where people hopefully make a donation for the person’s time, but there’s nothing wrong with a worker receiving his pay.

Neil

 

[tkctwbd]

And this is, I think ,where I would fundamentally disagree with you. A religious is a layman (unless he is also a priest or a deacon). So, does the religious inappropriately straddle the states of life? How about a paid music director for a parish, or a paid youth minister? .

According to Christfideles Laici, the Religious is neither a priest nor lay. They have their own state of life, and therefore their own specific contribution to Church life.

I of course agree that the laity ought to participate in the life of the Church! But all the examples given (making stained glass windows, serving as a youth minister, teaching, etc.) are positions that paid by the Church, by the whole community of that location, and not an individual member. Further, the Church is supported by free, voluntary and unspecified donations… so that it is possible that some benefit from the services of the Church without paying for them. So a youth may benefit from the friendship and mentoring of the youth minister, but it not an instance of “my money for your counsel.” If two parishoners want to work out a private arrangement, that is one thing, but Spiritual Guidance is an official ministry of the Church, so much so that one cannot offer it willy-nilly, but must be authorized to do so by the Church.

My point is that those who receive from the Church receive without pay. The Church receives free donations and relies on Divine Providence for the rest. In no case is there a business transaction. I would think, therefore, that the same system would then need to apply to Spiritual Guidance, a ministry of the Church.

 

[smithm29]

According to Christfideles Laici, the Religious is neither a priest nor lay. They have their own state of life, and therefore their own specific contribution to Church life.

I of course agree that the laity ought to participate in the life of the Church! But all the examples given (making stained glass windows, serving as a youth minister, teaching, etc.) are positions that paid by the Church, by the whole community of that location, and not an individual member. Further, the Church is supported by free, voluntary and unspecified donations… so that it is possible that some benefit from the services of the Church without paying for them. So a youth may benefit from the friendship and mentoring of the youth minister, but it not an instance of “my money for your counsel.” If two parishoners want to work out a private arrangement, that is one thing, but Spiritual Guidance is an official ministry of the Church, so much so that one cannot offer it willy-nilly, but must be authorized to do so by the Church.

My point is that those who receive from the Church receive without pay. The Church receives free donations and relies on Divine Providence for the rest. In no case is there a business transaction. I would think, therefore, that the same system would then need to apply to Spiritual Guidance, a ministry of the Church.

I was wrong about religious being laymen. That doesn’t change the rest of it. The church does not pay for my private music collection, my books on theology or philosophy, or, extending the example, my private art and iconography. There is a business transaction between me and those people- people who enrich my spiritual life. I’m not sure why you think that only the Church can provide spiritual direction. I have never read or heard that before in my life, but it’s possible that I missed it. I can agree with it in the sense that, if I provide spiritual direction to someone, I do it as a member of the Church, sealed in the Holy Spirit. I don’t think it’s correct in the sense that the hierarchy is supposed to sanction and support all spiritual directors.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

I of course agree that the laity ought to participate in the life of the Church! But all the examples given (making stained glass windows, serving as a youth minister, teaching, etc.) are positions that paid by the Church, by the whole community of that location, and not an individual member.

They also benefit the entire community or a portion of it. Spiritual direction is a one-to-one ministry.

If two parishoners want to work out a private arrangement, that is one thing, but Spiritual Guidance is an official ministry of the Church, so much so that one cannot offer it willy-nilly, but must be authorized to do so by the Church.

This isn’t true. Some people do spiritual direction as part of their ministry, but there’s nothing that says someone has to work for the Church in order to do spiritual direction. Further, the Church doesn’t authorize or certify people to do spiritual direction.

In my case the pastor knows that I do spiritual direction and refers people to me and I use parish facilities to meet with my directees. But I don’t need his permission or authorization to do it and if I wanted to meet in my home or some other location I could simply do that.

 

[tkctwbd]

I was not saying that the Church employs spiritual directors, or that one has to work for the Church in order to give spiritual direction, but that if spiritual directors were to be paid for what they do, I would see it as falling under employment by the Church, not as a business between director and directee.

Your point about the Church not authorizing spiritual directors is, frankly, puzzling to me, but I don’t claim to have the birds’ eye view, since I only have the experience of my diocese to fall back on. The fact, though, that your pastor is aware that you do it indicates to me that even though you may not have received formal approval or authorization, you still sought to perform this function in union with the Church, and not on your private initiative. I would find it odd that a spiritual director would act independently.

I guess all along I have placed spiritual direction in a separate category from other things that enrich one’s spiritual life… and this because it seems to affect a person in a way that books, music and stained glass windows don’t. Spiritual direction is about dicerning God’s will, and carries a certain gravity. Of course, the person retains his freedom and must act according to his conscience and must ultimately take responsibility for his own decisions, but I’ve always understood that an indication received in spiritual direction is not to be taken lightly and should be followed. The same is not true for what you may get out of a good spiritual book, good spiritual music, or beautiful art. That is why I think it needs to be kept separate from the world of business transactions.

I can see, though, that if it taken as just another form of advice, like the South Beach Diet, well, sure, one can charge for it.

I do appreciate all responses… they are helping me to p(name removed by moderator)oint more precisely where my difficulty is lying. Are there are replies then to the way I am understanding spiritual direction? Am I making it something more than it is?

 

[smithm29]

No, I think it is a very important matter, just like counseling for depression. I would say that the problem isn’t necessarily that you’re overrating spiritual direction, but that your undervaluing everything else. I think that reading Augustine’s Confessions and applying it to my life is just as important a matter as spiritual direction. Or purchasing an icon or a statue that I will use for meditation to focus my communication with God- that’s also a very important matter, and equal to spiritual direction. The wrong decision or discernment in either of those decisions could have very bad consequences, or at the very least, no good consequences. I think that comparing iconography, stained glass windows, hagiography, and theology to the South Beach Diet is a bit too much.

That’s my opinion- I hope you don’t take it as an insult. Spiritual direction is important, but it isn’t the holy grail of growth with God. Saint Anthony had no direction save from the bible, the saints, and the Holy Spirit. Now I’m not Saint Anthony, and a director would help me immensely, but it’s no more important or necessary than an icon or a book.

EDIT: When I say “the problem is”, I probably have said “I suppose the area where I think we differ is…”.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

The fact, though, that your pastor is aware that you do it indicates to me that even though you may not have received formal approval or authorization, you still sought to perform this function in union with the Church, and not on your private initiative. I would find it odd that a spiritual director would act independently.

I’m not sure I have a problem with the idea of someone acting independently. Someone may be very holy and wise – perfect qualities for a spiritual director – but not have an official position in the Church. Someone like this might not promote herself as a spiritual director, but might simply be the kind of person that people turn to for guidance. When I was starting my classes in spiritual direction, this was given as a sign that you might be called to this ministry – people turn to you for insight or guidance regarding their spiritual lives.

I guess all along I have placed spiritual direction in a separate category from other things that enrich one’s spiritual life… and this because it seems to affect a person in a way that books, music and stained glass windows don’t.

I agree with you that spiritual direction is different from buying a book. And I think it’s ideal if someone can offer it without charge. But if someone needs to charge to cover their expenses or help support themselves then so be it. I’d rather have a gifted director be available for direction rather than doing some other type of work in order to make a living.

On the other hand, I would hate to see spiritual direction fall into the category of just another consumer product. Let’s see…on Monday I have my exercise class, on Tuesday I have my music appreciation class, on Wednesday I see my spiritual director, on Thursday I have a facial…yup…got everything covered.