Three Modes of Interfaith Direction
.

By John R. Mabry
.

(Published in PRESENCE: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPIRITUAL DIRECTION, Vol. 11 No. 1, 2004)

See Charts accompanying this article.

.
Many years ago, when my old spiritual director moved away, I was faced with the difficulty of finding a new one. The direction relationship is such an intimate one, I approached my search with some trepidation. I was sure of one thing: I didn't want a Christian. Since I am a Christian clergyperson myself, this might seem odd, but in fact I was concerned to find someone with whom I could process the often stormy relationship I have with the Christian tradition and even the Christian God. I wanted to find someone who would not judge me for the questions I was raising, who would have no personal investment in my being on the straight-and-narrow as Christians often understand it. So I did the obvious thing: I grabbed an SDI directory and started looking for Jewish directors in my area.

I made an appointment with Anne, and awaited our first meeting nervously. But I needn't have. Anne was a wise and experienced matron, who had, in fact, started life as a Christian. "I became a Jew because it is the only religion they can't throw you out of," she told me with a hearty laugh. I knew then that this would be safe space to ask my hard questions.

I have been with my "new" director for over five years, now, and I couldn't be happier with our relationship. I also know that I am not alone in participating in such interfaith direction. There is a long-standing tradition, ever since the ecumenical movement in the 1950s of Roman Catholics receiving spiritual direction from Protestants and vice versa.

More recently, though, Jews have been companioning Christians, Christians have been walking with agnostics, and Wiccans have found themselves directing Buddhists. Most of my own directees are not Christians, in fact, but are Jews, Buddhists, Wiccans, and even agnostics. Directors are increasingly finding they are being sought out across denominational and even religious lines.

This practice definitely offers advantages. Sometimes someone with some distance from our own religious environment can see more clearly what is happening within it. But it comes with its own set of difficulties as well. How do we ensure that individual journeys are respected, that proselytism is avoided, and that misunderstandings and stereotypes are not perpetuated? Is interfaith SD appropriate for everyone? Who is qualified to do it?

Most importantly, what exactly do we mean by "interfaith spiritual direction"? This article will articulate three models for interfaith work, and will discuss advantages and pitfalls relating to each mode.

A Ministry for Everyone?
Just as spiritual direction itself is not an effective ministry for everyone, just so, the different modes are going to appeal to different people at different places in their spiritual journeys. To help speak about this with more precision, I will be making reference to the ground-breaking work of James Fowler and his theory of faith development (Stages of Faith. San Francisco, CA, USA: HarperSanFrancisco, 1976). Fowler's system is complex and baroque, and in my opinion, a little Piaget goes a long way. Therefore, for the purpose of this paper, I will make reference to Scott Peck's simplification of Fowler's system (Different Drum. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1989).

In Peck's recasting of Fowler's faith stages, Stage I is chaotic and antisocial. Essentially this is the unregenerate soul, interested primarily in self-satisfaction. Peck says that "most young children and perhaps one in five adults" fall into this stage (p. 150). It is the stage of undeveloped spirituality, where real, self-giving love and sacrifice are rare.

Stage II is formal, institutional faith. In this stage, a person gives over the care of his or her spiritual life to an authority (such as a religious institution, scripture, dogma, or even a certain minister or guru), whereby a person is liberated from chaos, and life is given order, meaning, and purpose. This is a very real salvation in itself, similar to the purpose the military gives for some, and is appropriate for older children, and many adults. In this stage, the authority acts on behalf of the divine, and one is strives to align one's own will with it. The divine is largely seen as "other," a transcendent being with very clear boundaries regarding conduct and doctrine. Among Chrsitians, all fundamentalists and many catholics and mainline protestants fall into this category. Orthodox Jews are also most likely to be Stage II believers, and in fact most religions have conservative wings that fit into this category.

Not everyone will be content with the degree of legalism this stage entails, however. Those who begin to question the institution move into Stage III, or skeptical, individual faith. Many Stage III seekers are agnostics, acknowledging that they do not know what ultimate reality is, nor how to approach it. They may read far and wide in the fields of philosophy and world religion, and may begin to piece together an eclectic and individual spirituality that is uniquely theirs. This "rebel" period puts them at odds with most institutions, and Stage III seekers are generally suspicious of organized religion of any kind. Many people will find a lifelong home in this stage, creating meaning in their lives as activists, humanists, or social reformers.

But many will find that their skeptical journey brings them back around to the truths to be found in faith traditions. Stage IV Mystics are in love with the Mystery that pervades the universe, the inefffable divinity which cannot be named, comprehended, or quantified. Mystics value religious tradition, but hold its institutions lightly, investing in the vision of divinity offered by a tradition, but not necessarily in the trappings. Dogma and discipline may be useful fodder for contemplation, but for mystics, all of this is subordinate to the essential Mystery which transcends the human, cultural "clothes" it is dressed in in any given faith. Mystics see all things as connected; all beings, all places, all times meet and are at One in the Mystery.

As Scott Peck writes, Mystics "love mystery, in dramatic contrast to those in Stage II, who need simple, clear-cut dogmatic structures and have little taste for the unknown and unknowable. While Stage IV men and women will enter religion in order to approach mystery, people in Stage II, to a considerable extent, enter religion in order to escape from it. Thus there is the confusion of people entering not only into religion but into the same religion-and sometimes the same denomination-not only for different motives but for totally opposite motives" (p. 154).

Spiritual directors may range from Stage II through Stage IV (if one finds a Stage I spiritual director, one would be advised to run far and fast in the opposite direction!). Likewise, most of our directees are from these same stages. In ages past it is safe to assume that most spiritual direction took place between directors and directees who were both at Stage II. Knowadays, however, with the advent of interfaith consciousness, many of the exclusive claims of Stage II religion are being questioned. The majority of spiritual direction training programs assume a stage IV orientation, and it is safe to assume that most directors-in-training are not horrified at their instruction. Most directors have had the experience of being approached by a directee not of their particular religious persuasion, and in fact, it is becoming the norm. Part of the reason ofr this is cultural. One can see the twentieth century as a culture in Stage III. Our culture is beginning to teeter into Stage IV in this new century, where we are beginning to see people of other cultures as being much like ourselves, and their religious traditions as providing the same comfort and salvation as our own. Spiritual directors who are knowledgeable about this profound cultural shift can help make the transition a smooth one.

Fowler's theory of faith stages is, of course, an inadequate system. Helpful as it is, it implies a heirarchy, leading the casual observer to the conclusion that Stage II is inferior to Stages III or IV, and this is not so. These are developmental stages, and each has its appropriate place. While Stage II may indeed be an inferior state for a person destined to go on to Stages III or IV to try to remain for his or her life, it may also be inappropriate for a person who needs the structure of Stage II to be forced into Stage III. In fact, it would be violence. Spiritual directors must be on guard against such spiritual snobbery, and acknowledge that the divine has different plans for each of us, and that Stage II faith is appropriate for a large cross-section of the population.

Faith stages is, however the best tool for the job at hand. When considering interfaith spiritual direction it will be helpful to employ this system, inadequate as it is, as different modes of interfaith work will be effective for some faith stages and not for others. In the discussions of the various modes which follow, we will give attention to faith stages appropriate for director and directee in each mode.

Mode I: Sharing Wisdom
When Kay approached me for spiritual direction several years ago, she did not know very much about me. She was a mainline protestant who had come from an evangelical background. She was aware that I was a catholic clergyperson, and was open to the possibility that I might have a valid spiritual journey as well, and, to a limited extend, was open to the insights of catholic spirituality. We agreed that we would not try to convert one another, and when we sat together, we did so as protestant and catholic, respectively. She was fearful at first, when I suggested reading one of the medieval mystics ("It's all so catholic!" she complained after her first foray), but she has since warmed to them and acknowledges that they do indeed have something to teach her about the spiritual journey. I have encouraged her to maintain a devotional practice congruent with her tradition, and to increase her involvement in her local church.

This is the most popular mode of interfaith spiritual direction. In this mode, director and directee each sit securely in their respective faith traditions, utilizing wisdom from each freely. Not trying to convert, but respecting each person's path as distinctly theirs. For this reason, it is important that each party agree that valid spiritual paths exist outside of their own-a difficulty for some stage II believers. However, many stage II Christians believe that other Christian denominations, and even some Jews, have a valid relationship with the divine. Similarly, Jews do not doubt that God has valid covenants with gentiles. Stage II directors who can respect the validity of covenants with such "other sheep" will most likely be able to effectively companion those of another faith tradition.

Although it is possible to accompany someone of another tradition having no knowledge of the directee's native faith, it is far better to have an understanding of the major principles of their faith tradition. Misunderstandings about religion are legion, and misconceptions abound, and can have disasterous results in direction. For instance, a Baptist spiritual director should not assume his Catholic directee believes he has to work his way into heaven, a common notion in Baptist circles. The director has some responsibility to do basic research on a directee's spiritual tradition, as well as to be teachable during sessions.

For this mode, the director can be at stage II, III, or IV; the directee may be at II, III, or IV, as well. In this mode, the director should listen closely for elements in the directee's faith tradition that have charged significance that the director might be missing due to his/her unfamiliarity with the tradition. The director should be liberal with questions about unknowns in a directee's tradition.

Directors should also feel free to offer analogies and anecdotes from his/her own faith tradition. Since religious feeling is fairly consistent throughout humankind, such analogical experimentation can help a director understand and empathize with a directee's religious experience, and the director should not hesitate to employ it.

A particular pitfall to this approach is the (often unconscious) assumption of the superiority of one's own tradition, which can afflict a director at any faith stage. Most will deny this cognitively, but it is the dearness of the familiar which can-and most often does-betray us. Again, caution against the prejudice for one faith stage over another is also required. At times in my relationship with Kay, I have drifted into Stage III questioning. She always reacted badly to this, and once scolded me for it, and rightly so. I realized that my questioning, so normal for my own path, but a violence to hers, was inappropriate. Learning to respect the boundaries of one's directee in regard to faith stages is imperative.

If the director is at Stage IV, and directee at Stage III or IV, the work may begin in Mode I, but may proceed to Mode II or, more probably, Mode III as the relationship develops. A familiarity and comfort with each of the modes will help a director to move from one to another when it seems appropriate to do so.

Mode 2: Paradigm Shifting
When Mary first wrote to me requesting email spiritual direction, I was caught a bit off-guard. She presented herself as a "questioning agnostic," and had gleaned from my own writings on my website that I might be a suitable spiritual director for her, even if she wasn't sure she had a spiritual life at all. But she was very firm about her boundaries, as well. Since I am a Christian, she had to be sure she could trust me not to "take the easy way out," by appealing to revelation or tradition. Having a good grounding in existential philosophy, I felt I could meet Mary on her own ground, and companion her effectively as she sought depth and meaning, even if she could not accept the notion of God. To do this, I had to leave my own universe behind each time I came to the keyboard to answer her emails. I had to make a conscious choice to exit my own universe and enter into hers. It has been tempting to bring a "picnic basket" of wisdom with me, and I have now and then snuck in an item or two, but I have been largely successful at checking my own paradigm at the door, and entering fully into hers.

In this mode, Mode II, the director "surfs" from one paradigm to another, entering completely into the worldview of the directee. The director, essentially, "puts on" the religious universe of the directee the way Mr. Rodgers puts on his sweater, leaving his or her own religious tradition on a peg in the hall.

Mode II is much more demanding on the director than the first mode. To do this effectively, the director needs to have a nearly encyclopedic knowledge of the directee's faith tradition, and at least some first hand knowledge as well. Because of this, a director is going to be limited in those he/she can direct in this mode. But if one is a convert from one tradition to another (and assuming one is on good terms with one's faith of origin), or has over time studied many religions, this can be a very effective mode indeed.

The assumptions of this mode are that while religious experience is common to all peoples, the cultural clothes in which that experience finds expression (the religious tradition) is to some extent arbitrary. A director conversant in many traditions-and comfortable with them-can enter a string of conflicting universes with minimal vertigo.

Directors in this mode must be of either stage III or IV, while directees may be of stages II, III or IV.

Trouble spots to look for in this mode include assuming more knowledge about a tradition than one actually has, and the possibly false assumption that one can adequately empathize with religious experiences in garb with which we are not adequately familiar or comfortable. Another danger is forgetting which room of the cosmological house one is in and "slipping back" into another paradigm, especially one's preferred paradigm. This mode demands that we remain with the directee in the directee's own spiritual universe, speaking to them in their native religious language, and illustrating one's points with stories and examples largely from their own tradition.

Another pitfall is a director's possible neglect of the spiritual disciplines of his or her own tradition once one has achieved such an inner sense of religious relativity. This is more likely in stage III directors, as their direct experience of the divine may be limited, although Stage IV directors are also susceptible. Professional responsibility demands due attention to spiritual discipline and spiritual community, even if such are acquired in a variety of settings.

Mode 3: Beyond Traditions
Gary had walked the mystic's path for some time, going from Roman Catholic practice to Episcopalian to Baptist and back to the Anglicans in his spiritual journey. He read widely in the world's religions, and had come to regard many faiths to be valid paths to liberation. He struggled with which tradition to participate in, when something strange and mysterious happened. The Goddess came to him in a dream and claimed him for her own. Discerning that this was a true sign, Gary devoted himself to the study of Wicca, the old way of the Goddess.

This was the native religion of Europe, expressed through myriad pantheons, in which earth's vital forces (such as fire, wind, and fertility) were entrusted to disctinct gods or goddesses. In worshipping these deities, Wiccans honor the vital forces of the Mother planet, and learn to understand them and cooperate with them.

Gary felt he had come home, and his spiritual journey kicked into high gear when he began to work towards his initiations. He is now a Wiccan priest, the first Wiccan hospital chaplain in his area, and the first Wiccan member of SDI to so state his religious preference.

Since I had studied Wicca formally, I might have journeyed with Gary from one paradigm to another, as in Mode II. But instead, though Gary's religious practice changed dramatically, he still viewed the world with an essentially universalist perspective, acknowledging many valid spiritual paths. Thus our conversations drew from Taoist, Christian, Buddhist, and many other spiritual traditions, in addition to Wicca. We met at that place where there is no name, but every name, no way but every way, no distinction yet myriad expressions. It is a place outside of any one tradition, but informed by many.

This path is the rarest of the modes, as it requires both director and directee to be at Stage IV. It also assumes that the director and directee are knowledgeable of many spiritual traditions, or at least eager to explore them. Speculation along mystical lines is possible with Stage III seekers, even for extended conversations, but it is not ultimately sustainable. Of course, to Stage II believers, such talk is heresy. Among Stage IV mystics, however, this mode is usually optimal.

Often a director may accompany someone betweeen stages. When a directee is emerging into Stage IV, it is hard to contain the relationship within either of the other modes, nor should the director try. This transition is likely to be made with great exhilaration, but may also entail much fear and trembling. Great care should be exercised not to "bump" the Seeker prematurely into the next level.

To walk with Stage IV Mystics in this mode it is helpful to have a wide knowledge of mystical literature. Your directee may need frequent reading suggestions, as new Stage IV's are fairly voracious. Seasoned Mystics will need literary mentoring as well as they attempt to ground the mystical vision in daily life.

A danger of this Mode is it's headiness. Mystics can get lost in the One and lose interest in other aspects of their lives. Directors can help Mystics remember that the One includes their mundane lives as well. Disconnected from a tradition, a Mystic can languish with no spiritual discipline, rule of life, or community. The Benedictine monastic tradition lends insight to the need to balance contemplation with hard work and close community, and Buddhist mindfulness practice will also help ground Mystics in a sangha (spiritual community), where needs for fellowship and service can be met.

A potential danger is the director's own level of comfort with religious elements that a mystic might bring to a session. If a directee senses that a director has a prejudice against, say, Hinduism or the occult, mystics may find it uncomfortable to disclose the width and breadth of their spiritual explorations. When directees move into uncomfortable spaces, directors can responsibly accompany them by remaining supportive in the session, and doing their homework outside of it.

Conclusion
Just as people frequently move from one stage of faith to another, directors will find that a similar fluidity between the modes of interfaith spiritual direction. It may be obvious at a first meeting which mode is appropriate for a particular directee, but it is very likely that if the directee is in transition from one faith stage to another, the mode of interfaith work will change as well.

Directors will undoubtedly find that they feel more comfortable with one of the modes than the other two, but flexibility as to which mode to use will be rewarded, especially as the needs of each directee are unique.

Those who work with groups will find the modes helpful as well, especially as a group is trying to discover "who" it is and what it seeks to accomplish. Mode III is inappropriate for group work, as the subjective demands are too great, but Modes II and IV both work well with groups, and it may be that the group will make a conscious decision which mode they choose to work in.

Just as no one stage of faith is superior to others, we should be cautious not to value one mode of interfaith spiritual direction over others. My own favorite mode to work in is Mode II, but it is obviously inappropriate for most of my directees. Mode IV is not the goal, any more than Mode I should be thought of as transitional. Each mode has its proper place in interfaith work, and, no doubt, other models will emerge with time. Interfaith spiritual direction may be fairly new in the history of the ministry, and it will still seem a novelty to some, but it is quickly becoming the normative model. Much more theoretical work is needed to help us understand, assess, and assist those who come to us, from whatever tradition they hail. It is my hope that an understanding of these initial modes will foster further discussion and discovery.