An interesting debate, can lay people be spiritual directors?

A recent video published by Network of Networks has put on the table, with serenity and good doctrine, a delicate and very current issue: spiritual abuses in the context of spiritual direction. Three priests of recognized good doctrine and great evangelizers in the social networks - Pachi Bronchalo, Jesús Silva and Antonio María Doménech - participate in the conversation, offering valuable and necessary criteria. It is worth listening to them carefully. 

They are three priests whom I hold in high esteem, I follow their publications and I have been able to greet them on some occasions, that is to say, I have no desire to open polarizing polemics so typical of our times, also in the ecclesial sphere. However, I do want to raise some questions that come to my mind after watching the video.

Among his many interesting contributions, one fundamental idea stands out: true spiritual direction does not annul the freedom of the person being guided. The one who accompanies does not “command”, does not decide for the other, nor does he supplant his conscience. He offers his opinion, helps to discern, illuminates the path, but always leaves the person before God. For this reason -they emphasize- it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of accompaniment that of address in the strong sense. In times of confusion and real wounds, insisting on this is not only timely, but essential.

An interesting debate

However, the interest of the video is not limited to these accurate warnings. On the contrary, it opens up a fundamental debate that deserves to be considered calmly. The three speakers maintain that spiritual direction properly speaking, in the strict sense of the word, corresponds to priests, since they are especially qualified to “direct souls”. And here the question arises - awkward, but inevitable -: is it really so?

Because the living experience of the Church seems to say something more nuanced. Today there are numerous institutions, movements and ecclesial realities where the laity spiritually accompany other laity, and they do it with fruit, seriousness and fidelity to the faith. Should we affirm that this is not spiritual direction? And if it is not, what do we call it? Accompaniment? Spiritual direction? Believing listening? The problem is not only terminological but requires a theological, ecclesiological and pastoral explanation.

The paradigmatic example of the nuns

The difficulty increases if we look at history. For centuries, countless nuns have exercised authentic spiritual direction over other sisters, and not infrequently also over priests and bishops. It is enough to think of figures such as Teresa of Jesus or Catherine of Siena. Shall we say that this was not spiritual direction, that it lacked an essential dimension because it did not come from an ordained minister?

The history of the Church supports this vision of a spiritual accompaniment not strictly linked to the priestly order, finding in consecrated women its greatest exponents. Already in the fourth and fifth centuries, the so-called «Ammas» or Mothers of the Desert, such as the Amma Synclética, were sought after for their acute discernment to give a «word of life» to those who entered the desert. 

Another key figure was St. Theodora of Alexandria, consulted by many monks for her ability to explain the difference between temptation and sin.

The essential role of priests

It is worth recalling here a basic theological point: the sacrament of Holy Orders confers a specific grace to perform certain acts - celebrating the Eucharist, absolving sins, administering the sacraments - but it does not automatically grant an exclusive grace for the spiritual discernment of others. The ability to accompany souls is also born of the experience of God, of prudence, of knowledge of the interior life and of the gift of counsel, which the Holy Spirit grants to whomever he wills.

None of this detracts from the irreplaceable role of the priest in the spiritual life, especially when direction is intertwined with sacramental confession. But perhaps it does invite us to refine our language and categories. For if we reserve the name “spiritual direction” only for what priests do, we run the risk of delegitimizing - even if this is not the intention - an immense, silent and fruitful work that has been going on in the Church for centuries.

The testimony of John Paul II

In contrast to the views that restrict the accompaniment of the soul to the clerical establishment, John Paul II himself offered in his book Gift and Mystery an exceptional testimony about the layman Jan Tyranowski, a humble tailor from Krakow. The Pontiff not only defined him as “a man of a particularly profound spirituality”, but also acknowledged that from him “I learned the elementary methods of self-formation” that would mark his life. 

Far from being a mere organizer of groups, Tyranowski exercised a true spiritual direction that proved decisive, for the future Pope admitted that his priestly vocation took strength “thanks also to the aforementioned influence” of this manual worker, who introduced him to the mysticism of St. John of the Cross».

What is accompanying souls

Perhaps the debate does not consist in deciding who can or cannot direct souls, but in clarifying what we understand by spiritual direction, what limits it has, and how to prevent it from becoming control, dependence or abuse. And, above all, in recognizing that the true director of souls is none other than the Holy Spirit. All the rest of us, ordained or not, are - when we do it well - simple servants and mediators.

Because, in the end, the question is still there, demanding an answer: if we do not call spiritual direction what priests do not do, what name do we give to it? And what is not well named is hardly well cared for.