Is paying for spiritual direction simony?

[Gabriela]

Here's an article about that: http://www.hprweb.com/2016/11/simony-in-spiritual-direction/

Intriguing...

[NadaTeTurbe]

I had never heard of paying for spiritual direction. Weird. I would not trust someone who asked me monney for something that since centuries have been free. 

[PrayerSupporter]

My church has trained lay spiritual directors as well as priests.  I have not participated, but I believe that payment to the lay spiritual directors is requested.

[Maggyie]

I feel it's similar to offering the priest something for a baptism or wedding... it takes time and expertise to be a spiritual director. It shouldn't be a fee structure but some sacrifice in keeping with the person's resources... so, nothing if you have nothing. 

[Gabriela]

Did anybody read the article?

Edited November 4, 2016 by Gabriela

[hep_rsb]

That is a really interesting article.  I had never thought of any of the legal reasons they put forward as potential issues with payment for direction.  I have been looking for a spiritual director for some time, but have been unable to find one, and personally, if I found a good faithful person who was willing and had time to give me spiritual direction, I would probably pay whatever they asked for because the chance of finding someone else is so slim.  If, when I'm old and wise, God puts people in my path to direct, I would not have a fee, probably for all the reasons the article puts forward. 

Thanks for sharing, Gabriela. 

[krissylou]

Generally we've distinguished between paying someone for their time and paying for a spiritual result.

So, for instance.  When you have a Mass said for someone, or enroll a deceased loved one on a religious community's prayer list, some sort of payment is customary.  That isn't considered simony if they aren't promising a result.  If they're saying "Do this and you can be assured your loved one will be released from purgatory" THAT is simony.

(It still feels kinda squicky to me.  I have resolved this by giving significantly more money than they ask for.  To date no one has objected to this.  )

So the answer to the question in the headline is "no."  It's just not.

I've generally seen that spiritual directors who have another "day job" don't ask for financial support but those for whom this IS their job do.  Not that anyone is getting rich off this, but groceries cost money.  And, of course, people who have a separate day job can only take on a few directees as there are only 24 hours in a day.

If we want this resource to be available we need to support the people who are doing it, one way or another.  Groceries cost money.  I'd LOVE to see parishes have enough resources to have spiritual directors on staff so they could offer this service without charging a fee.  I don't see that happening anytime soon.

[krissylou]

And some of the legal issues the article raises strike me as someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

E.g. meeting a directee in their home may be a bad practice but I'm not sure it becomes different in kind if there is a fee involved.  Same with "malpractice insurance" -- I have no idea what that might mean in a spiritual direction context.  But my physician is equally responsible to me whether I'm paying cash, paying by insurance, or a charity patient.  If I'm a charity patient and my physician is negligent, she could not raise "oh but c'mon she wasn't paying me so it wasn't a real doctor-patient relationship" as a defense.

[Gabriela]

36 minutes ago, krissylou said:

And some of the legal issues the article raises strike me as someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

E.g. meeting a directee in their home may be a bad practice but I'm not sure it becomes different in kind if there is a fee involved.  Same with "malpractice insurance" -- I have no idea what that might mean in a spiritual direction context.  But my physician is equally responsible to me whether I'm paying cash, paying by insurance, or a charity patient.  If I'm a charity patient and my physician is negligent, she could not raise "oh but c'mon she wasn't paying me so it wasn't a real doctor-patient relationship" as a defense.

Your point here seems to support what he says in this:

Quote

Fourth, as many of the people receiving fees for spiritual direction also propound a model of direction that flattens, or democratizes, the relationship into “spiritual friendship/companionship,” they may be entering unwittingly into a professional relationship, in the eyes of civil law, by receiving money while yet practicing in a way that eschews the accountability associated with such legal relationships.

Also, your previous post makes a lot of the capitalist assumptions he points out.

I'd really like to discuss the article, not simply the title of the post.

[Amppax]

I read the article, thanks for sharing. I think the legal and philosophical issues he raises are interesting, but not necessarily damning to the practice of paying someone for spiritual direction. I would point to several of St. Paul's statements, particularly 1 Tim. 5:17-18 ("the laborer is worthy of his wages") and 1 Cor 9:3-18 (particularly verse 14 "those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel"). I've seen these and other passages used to defend the practice. 

That being said, the tradition ought to be engaged with more robustly. It is certainly something which those interested in spiritual direction (here I'm specifically of Dan Burke, who seems to have made something of a business out of it) should study. 

Also, would love to get @Sponsa-Christi's thoughts as a canon lawyer. or @LittleWaySoul's thoughts.

 

Edited November 4, 2016 by Amppax
Added last paragraph.

[Spem in alium]

Thanks for sharing this article. The points about valuing things we pay for were so interesting for me. I think it's a true statement: generally, we're more likely to value something, use it properly, not neglect it, etc., if we've invested money (or even time) into it. One thing I think would have been good to discuss is the situation of priests or consecrated persons having a fee for spiritual direction (which does happen). The author mentions permanent deacons and makes good points about their ministry, but I'm wondering if the same applies to priests and consecrated men and women.

[Amppax]

@LittleWaySoul I tried to tag you in my post above. Interested in your perspective, re: canon law. 

 

[LittleWaySoul]

Hm. I'm not yet well-versed enough in canon law to know what to say to this, but I have a gut feeling saying that it seems wrong. That is, charging for spiritual direction seems wrong to me. I skimmed the article and a lot of the points looked like good ones.

That being said, I've never heard of a spiritual director charging a fee before, so maybe that's why I'm inclined to think it's wrong. 

[Feankie]

I'm really pressed for timed right now so I can't really give a detailed answer.  Suffice it to say, as a SD myself, I have NEVER charged directees.  That being said, when I was doing my practicum the SD I saw twice monthly did charge and I found it to be very off-putting.  Most of the SD's I know do not charge, but tell their directees,  if the directee wishes and feels led to do so, to make a contribution of canned goods, etc. to the local food pantry or similar organization.  

[Gabriela]

I also thought the points about deacons were really interesting. I feel like deacons are the Church's most under-utilized resource at the moment, and this seems like a great responsibility to give them, considering their historical ministry is aid to the laity and priests just about never have time to offer spiritual direction these days. I think we should train every deacon in spiritual direction and let 'em loose.