Crowhill makes the point:
There is a perspective on the problem of (heterosexual) abuse that I think Catholics avoid — for obvious reasons.
When a man gives a woman spiritual counsel, it is an intrinsically intimate thing and the possibility of sexual entanglement is very real. The husband is the head of the home and of his wife. When a priest gives “spiritual direction” to a married woman, he is usurping the husband’s place and creating sexual tension.
No man, priest or not, has any business giving spiritual counsel to any woman who is not his wife. And no woman has any business giving spiritual counsel to a man.
I have been researching anticlericalism. It is much milder in Protestant countries than in Catholic countries, where it sometimes becomes murderous.
A recurring theme in Catholic anticlericalism is the resentment and jealousy that the husband feels when his wife starts talking intimately to another man, whether in confession or spiritual direction.
Jules Michelet, the French historian, was horrified by this intrusion into the relationship of husband and wife. He objected to confession because priests asked detailed questions about sexual practices. One historian has observed that French disliked priests “because through the confessional, where the penitents were mostly women, they exercised power over men’s sexuality.”
A really sore point in France for Catholic men was contraception. If the married couple practiced coitus interruptus, the wife was blameless; the sin was solely the husband’s. The French bishops in 1870 at the First Vatican Council were going to ask the Council to allow priests to give absolution to a man if he was practicing coitus interruptus, but the Council adjourned because of the political situation before the matter could be discussed.
I raised this issue once before somewhere, and somebody said that there used to be norms in place to regulate the priest’s contact with women penitents for precisely this reason. I believe somebody said that the screen between priest and penitent was partly to protect against this sort of problem.
Also, while I think there is a problem re: confession, it’s unavoidable (since women can’t be priests, and husbands can’t absolve their wives) and simply has to be regulated.
The bigger problem is “spiritual direction.” I don’t believe men should be allowed to give women spiritual direction.
Crowhill: Would you say that no males should be obstetricians or gynecologists? Or no male urologists should take female patients? Or no male psychologist should take female patients?
Exactly what is spiritual direction anyway and who is qualified to give it and how do they get qualified?
Caroline, there is an old answer and a new one. the new one is this: Spiritual direction is non-directively helping the person discern God’s action in her life, and you can become a spiritual director by attending a series of workshops or classes to get certified, and these classes generally will contain little or no theology of any kind. A few good schools are starting to spring up, but I find the concept absurd.
Men do not own women. Women have the freedom to choose their own spiritual directors and confessors.
Rick, no I would not say that. I think there should be more women in those fields, and I think it’s better for a woman to see a female doctor, but I wouldn’t prohibit male doctors caring for women.
Also, while there is some danger in the doctor-patient relationship, I don’t think it’s as great as the danger of a male “spiritual director.” Emotional intimacy is more dangerous.
Along those lines, it’s interesting to note that (as I understand it) modern medical practice is to have a female nurse present when a male doctor examines a woman.
I suppose the church could adopt a similar rule that requires another woman to be present when a priest gives spiritual direction to a woman. But it makes more sense to me to follow the biblical model and have older women instruct younger women. See Titus 2.
It’s often amusing to me how frequently Catholics miss these very simple and obvious biblical instructions. It tends to confirm the Protestant prejudice that Catholics really don’t know their Bibles.
I was always taught the priest was your SD in the confessional.Of course we always had confessional boxes or rooms and one was separated by both a wall and the screened window.
What I find more disturbing today is the practice of lay SD, which I first heard about as part of the Regnum Christi.i might add that the members who told me this were extremely unhappy at the practice because there innermost thoughts and sins were not protected by the seal of the confession.
Even more disturbing to me was to read that Opus Dei priests go to Lay Spiritual Directors.The old rule of subsidiarity has been turned on it’s head in the Church, leaving cradle Catholics of my generation to wonder if it has become something like a masonic organization?
Who are in charge and does the laity have the right to tamper with one’s free will by using supposed spiritual authority over another?
Confession is yet another tool for power and control. When hubby and I were religious back in high school, we’d go to confession for the “mortal sin” of “making out” (i.e., 2nd/3rd base). One day we went to a Father George, who gave my husband (then boyfriend) absolution but refused to give it to me. I learned years later from my husband that Father George frequently asked boys to “help him out in the basement”. He was warned by other boys about this and stopped being an altar boy (the priest creeped him out anyway). We think that the priest recognized my husband, was angry that my husband had not submitted to him like a good little altar boy, and took it out on me (as the evil temptress who kept my husband from holy priests by defiling his pure male sexuality). I wondered for years about this until my husband was finally willing/able to talk about it a few years ago (he told his mother and told me in separate conversations). In addition, a priest in college *technically* maintained the seal of the confessional while using all the info hubby provided against both of us – to gaslight me and to try to get into hubby’s pants. I would *never* trust a priest in confession regarding *any* “sin”. They’re all a bunch of sick creeps, narcissists, and sociopaths.
Crowhill: You do not understand what happens in psychotherapy, where a female often reveals things to her male therapist that she would not reveal in confession either because it’s not a matter of being sinful, or it occurred in the distant past. Revelations of an extremely intimate nature occur regularly in psychotherapy, and the psychotherapist does not have a “grace of office” to assist him in managing temptations. In my view, a priest has many more spiritual supports that would help him combat the temptation to abuse the confessional relationship. Of course, there are very weak, and in some cases very evil, priests that did not use the spiritual support, and it is these guys who get all the publicity lately.
ClevelandGirl: There are physicians who use there status and knowledge to take advantage of patients. This does not mean that all physicians are “sick creeps.” It does not follow from you and your husband’s very unfortunate experiences that ALL priests are “sick creeps…” At best you might believe that homosexual priests have some serious issues and should not be in the priesthood—on this we might agree. Fortunately, probably 70% of priests are not homosexual, but the level of homosexuality varies considerably from diocese to diocese. The percentage of homosexual priests in Boston, Chicago and LA is (or at least, was) very high but in Fort Wayne, Indiana, the percentage of homo priests is very low–—not sure about Cleveland. It has a lot to do with the seminaries and the watchfulness of the bishop.
Mr. Podles — it’s interesting that priests would ask “detailed questions about sexual practices.” Did they ask “detailed questions” about any of the things Peter and Paul emphasized?
+ reverent in their behavior,
+ not malicious gossips
+ not enslaved to much wine,
+ teaching what is good,
+ encouraging younger women
+ loving their husbands,
+ loving their children,
+ sensible,
+ pure,
+ focusing on inward beauty,
+ having a gentle and quiet spirit,
+ workers at home,
+ kind,
+ subject to their own husbands,
and so on?
(Titus 2, 1 Pet 2, etc.)
Rick — you’re right that psychotherapy might provide another “near occasion of sin.” How does change anything?
As someone who has a medical background, I can say with certainty that most male doctors have a nurse present for gynecological exams, but not for other exams. And they don’t have nurses present for visits that don’t include examinations, visits which may include conversations that touch upon intimate issues. And certainly, as Rick points out, male therapists and psychiatrists who treat women often have conversations that concern the marriage relationship, which by their very nature are emotionally intimate. So if emotional intimacy is the concern, then let’s extend the concern to beyond the priest-penitent relationship
But besides all this, I find an unacceptable assumption inherent in the suggestion that no woman should never confide to a man other than her own husband– that women are infantile creatures who are easily manipulated by men.
Mere Catholic: Exactly. Thank you. I would only add that there many men in the priesthood and in the clinical professions who have learned how to manage their temptations on such matters.
Crowhill: “How does (it) change anything?”
Your assertions began with an accusation about the prurient interests of priests. You then admitted that prurient interests were possible for physicians, but that perhaps not as much since what they do is not as intimate. Now you observe that psychotherapy is perhaps even more intimate than confession.
My points are these: (a) that your problem is not with priests–which is where you began–it is with men counseling women. This is not a problem if reasonable precautions are taken. (b) That your position is irrelevant to the recent history of clerical sex abuse. The scandal was 80% about homosexual clergy hitting on teenage boys. Quite frankly, if there were no homosexual priests in the US Church over the last 70 years, there would not have been an abuse scandal, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Confession and SD are separate, but generally people would use their confessor for spiritual direction. Monks and nuns also gave spiritual direction to laity and to those in training under them. spiritual direction was more concerned with growth in virtue and with discerning aspects of one’s prayer life. Being a spiritual director required holiness, wisdom, and a knowledge of theology, and people were sought out for their reputations in these things. Regnum Christi has a record of using young women for spiritual direction of adolescents, and of other young. women, and of doing so with little formation or malformation, and for using SD as a means of recruitment. confidentiality is often broken in RC and the Legion, by many reports.
as you can see, the modern certified non directive SD is a far cry from the old way, generally. I was even told, in my ministry, that trainees were not to say that abortion was wrong. Everything was about how “God” is leading you through your subjective consciousness.
MC — who said it was the man manipulating the woman? Maybe you should stop and examine your own assumptions.
The point is that sharing intimate details of your life is likely to create an emotionally intimate situation, which is dangerous.
Thanks for explaining spiritual direction. The new style is as bad as I thought. I forgot to ask if they charge a fee. If I need any spiritual direction I will talk to a friend whom I consider to be abounding in common sense as the first qualification even more to the point than holiness.
Rick — You, like Mere Catholic, need to evaluate your own assumptions.
I never said anything about the prurient interests of priests. I never implied that it was the priest who was pursuing the woman. What I said, and what I continue to say, and, IMO, only someone living in fantasy land could deny, is that when a man and a woman are alone sharing intimate details of a person’s life, that creates a close bond that causes sexual tension.
That seems ridiculously obvious to me, and it doesn’t require that either the priest or the woman intend for anything to happen, or have any bad motivations.
I also said that the situation is somewhat unavoidable in confession, and that steps should be taken to mitigate the problem. For example, having a screen between the priest and the penitent.
Also, I said that the same applies to a woman giving counsel to a man.
My days as a social worker taught me that there’s plenty of “sick creeps, narcissists and sociopaths” to go around in every profession and walk of life. Had I judged by my work experience (oh and by the way, I was rated as having higher than average empathy and was good at what I did), I would have concluded that various forms of incest, violence and criminal activity are common features of North American family life. Certainly they are widespread (much more than most people know) but I doubt they’re the norm.
My experience of priests while growing up was largely good. The only person to have ever taken advantage of me was a married woman when I was about eleven (my mother told me I “imagined” it). Most people I’ve talked to say the worst memories they have of priests involve being yelled at in confession (a horrible sacrilege on the priest’s part), refused a sacrament or being pressured for money. None of those is to be treated lightly, but they are not sexual violations. Yes, some guys have told me of having a priest make moves on them. I also know of some priest’s having romantic relationships with ladies ( a problem we don’t hear about much as most of these women remain silent).
It’s easy to label an entire group as being this or that. It makes the division between good and bad guys easier to manage. But reality is very messy and nuanced, and the line between the good and the bad is hard to trace. The Talmud says that every human person is an entire universe with unfathonable depths and secret joys and sorrows. We are each too big and wonderful to be captured by stereotypes. So let’s be careful in painting any group with one brush
With respect to spiritual direction, I am very careful. I know priests who will only give spiritual direction to women in an old fasioned confessional. I make sure to sit next to the window in my office door no matter who I’m counseling.
Caroline, you could also find a good nun, or a priest. I know someone who maintains her spiritual direction relationship with a priest by phone or mail.
rowhill: I stand corrected, you did not speak of prurient interests. Allow me to add that it is obvious to both of us that sexual temptation is a common problem in the relationship between a male therapist/priest/doctor and a female patient/penitent. But unlike you, I don’t see the problem as a major issue for most people, and believe that you propose a solution that will do more harm than good–first because for the foreseeable future it is the priests that are in the position to give an educated counsel, and second, because I think that as a general rule (there are notable exceptions) the priest makes better director than the woman. Men don’t make better therapists than women, but my opinion (and that is all it is) is that men do make better spiritual directors. My thinking on the matter was influenced by St Theresa of Avila.
Unlike you, I think that the sexual temptations between priest and the female client are usually managed well; that competent counsellors/directors will terminate the relationship if the sexual temptations become too strong; that for priests the customs for handling these issues have slipped somewhat since Vatican 2 ; and that the pre-Vatican 2 customs surrounding counseling/confession etc. should be reinstated (e.g., in the older rectories, counselling rooms were always on the main hallway with full-length glass doors; as you propose, screens for confession, or the kinds of precautions that Fr. Michael takes.)
Crowhill: My apology. I inadvertently clipped the letter from you name.
It is not only homosexual priests who were molesting boys. The raping of children, as you already know, is about cruelty. Priests who serially raped children were often acting out of rage and a deep desire to humiliate, often because of their own humiliation at having been raped by priests when they were boys.
We must resist scapegoating. What we know for certain is this: The men at the top were without visceral response to this evil. They allowed known serial child raping clerics to serve on altars and administer six of seven Sacraments, and sometimes all seven. They were impervious, at best, to the evil they proliferated from altars all over this globe. The introduction of evil into the sacred is a frightful thing, and carries an energy all its own, feeding on the souls of children.
aw
Crowhill, my apologies- I read through the post too quickly and you did address that women can be the manipulators as well and you didn’t limit your concerns to priests. I do agree that both men and women need to safeguard their hearts when they confide intimate issues to the opposite sex who are not spouses. But at the same time I am less enthusiastic about a carte blanche approach to limiting the director-directee relationship to same sex individuals and favor instead, as others have pointed, use of precautions.
Rick and Mere Catholic — no worries. It’s easy to read things quickly in comment boxes.
It may be possible to have safeguards to prevent problems. A prudent, well-instructed priest will be very careful to avoid any opportunity for inappropriate behavior.
We may still disagree about whether the modern church can be trusted to teach or enforce prudent rules. IMO, the modern church has given no reason to trust that it has the sense or ability to do such a thing.
As a woman, still ‘young’ (under 40) who has found my life, my happiness and the healing of many ills through the very regular sacrament of Confession spanning over 20 years I must say that my experience has been that my vocation as a wife and mother has been bettered, and indeed saved, through the spiritual direction of priests.
Having said that, I have always sought after priests faithful to the teaching of the Church, particularly older priests as I felt they would understand and counsel better. This spiritual direction has happened over 95% of the time during the confessional, not in a private conversation. I can well see though that any wrong intention or lack of diligence on either part could very well end in disaster.
I agree that prudence in all things is imperative on both parts and the screen between priest and penitent is very beneficial, but not always possible nor is the absence of a screen always an imprudent option either. I have often witnessed in 2 older priests in particular that I seem to be looking into the eyes of Jesus (in a non mystical way that is!) their look of firmness, gentleness and compassion has changed my heart as much as their words.
I would also add that for the benefit of both parties, in discussing sexual matters it is absolutely essential for the words used to be brief, to the point and as non-graphic as possible without leaving anything out that would invalidate the confession.
Despite the possible dangers, I completely disagree that females should be spiritually counselled only by women, though I know this is a legitimate option.
Spiritual direction within sacramental confession gives grace, even when what is discussed are temptations or involuntary faults, whereas woman to woman spiritual direction does not have this (in a sacramental sense, though God can indeed give the grace should He choose!).
Secondly, as previously mentioned, a good priest does not see things with emotion, but rather more rationally. Women being more emotional (generally speaking) benefit by this.
Whilst I have benefited hugely by sharing my problems with female friends, and ‘building one another up’, I simply cannot open my soul up to a woman with regards to the spiritual life. This is exactly what a priest is for, they who act ‘In Persona Christi’. St Francis de Sales’ spiritual direction of St Jane Chantal is a beautiful example of what true spiritual direction should be. Pray for our priests!