The Cure of Souls: Duane W.H. Arnold, PhD
The phrase itself sounds old fashioned… “the cure of souls”. It sounds as though it is something you might read about in a novel by Charles Dickens or one of his fellow Victorian authors. Indeed, it is old fashioned enough as to hide its meaning from many readers. Encountering the term for the first time, varying meanings are attached to the phrase. “Is it about healing souls from sickness?” “Maybe, it’s about curating souls…” (this from a hipster pastor I was speaking with recently). The phrase actually encompasses some aspects of these observations, but historically it has a far broader meaning. “The cure of souls” is an English translation of the Latin phrase, ‘cura animarum’. In the post modern era, “the cure of souls” is often equated with “pastoral care”. Yet this also truncates the meaning and depth attending “the cure of souls”.
Historically, the phrase belongs to late antiquity and has been used to designate the responsibility of a pastor or priest a group of people, usually defined by a geographic boundary. For instance (in a simple form) the “cure of souls” for a bishop included his diocese, while the “cure of souls” of a priest was a parish, that is, a certain geographic area constituting a village or a town, or the subsection of a city. All the people in that geographic area or parish (here used as a certain area with boundaries) were part of a pastor or priest’s “cure of souls”. Often, there were “curates” who had some special responsibility to a certain group or who were under the supposed tutelage of someone senior.
It would be wrong, however, when speaking of the “cure of souls” in such circumstances, to limit the meaning of the phrase to our modern understanding of “pastoral care”. The real meaning extended far beyond what we think of as pastoral care today. You see, “the cure of souls” encompassed every person within that geographic boundary. The pastor or priest had a responsibility to care for everyone. This involved, of course, baptisms, marriages, confession, absolution and the administration of the Eucharist, but it also involved knowing all those within the parish, especially those who had fallen on hard times and might be in need or want. Teaching and preaching had their part in the cure of souls, but of singular importance was prayer. Morning and evening, when the bell rang at the parish church, everyone knew that their priest or pastor was praying… praying for them, for their families, for their community, for their cares and concerns. This was a holistic approach compared to what today we pass off as “pastoral care”. For the “cure of souls” was to be all encompassing, concerned with the physical and the spiritual, the temporal and the eternal. To be a priest or pastor was to be in a place of service to all at all times, convenient or not.
Now, in the modern age of free enterprise and entrepreneurial churches, we cannot necessarily return to the boundary based parish system described above. Yet, I believe there are lessons to be learned, even for a small local church, located now in a community that seems to have churches on every corner. The most striking lesson might be in regard to our priorities. While many might deny it, I know through years of experience (on both sides of the table) that the first question asked by most pastoral search committees, is along the lines of, “Is he/she a good preacher and/or teacher?” We basically want to know if they “present well in public”. Our orientation is toward the pulpit and the lectern. Additionally, we want some assurance, whether we admit it or not, that their public persona will help with the budget of the church. In forty years, again on both sides of the table, I have only heard a candidate questioned about their prayer life on one occasion. Moreover, in terms of outreach to the surrounding community, the questions are usually along the lines of, “Do you think you can bring young people into the church?” or “How are you at reaching out to young families?”.
Seldom are questions raised about serving the isolated elderly in the town, or how the pastoral candidate intends to become a part of the community. This may be because we see the church not in terms of the community as a whole, but as a singular entity, a place we attend intermittently, with a priest or pastor we have employed to serve and service that particular entity. It is also fair to say that theological education, over the last hundred years and more, have reinforced this view among those they have trained.
Perhaps it is time to ask more questions of those who take upon themselves “the cure of souls”. The first question might be, “Do you pray?” and the second, “Will you pray for us and this whole community every day?”. Other questions might follow, about the administration of the sacraments or about nursing home and hospital visitation. One might enquire about how the candidate deals with grieving families or troubled kids. There’s a long list…
It seems an impossible task. Part of that task, however, is to recognize that the “cure of souls” is not just standing in the pulpit or publicly leading worship. In fact, the first task might be to recognize that those activities may be the least of what the “cure of souls” entails.
This describes my ideal for what pastoral ministry should be…I believe it could transform communities one section at a time…I just wonder if it can come back as a model…
Michael
First we have to get away from the idea of a local church somehow being a franchise of a chain…
I wonder if this would be valuable to people…or if we’re so isolated that it would be considered off-putting…
Michael
It’s a good question. Although, there are small communities that I know where a certain pastor has been there so long that he somehow is considered a “fixture” of the town… That, however, is increasingly not the case…
Hi Duane,
Thanks for the article. I have three questions regarding how this paradigm for ministry might have to be modified (or not) given our contemporary context:
First, during some historical periods, a town might have only one church tradition. Therefore, if someone was a Christian, he or she would be of the same tradition as everyone else in that town.
Second, having to do with the time commitments of a pastor/priest, how did he fulfill all his responsibilities to his family, parish and wider community? I know in some places in Germany, the pastor was paid by the prince, not by offerings of the congregation. Therefore, he could make a living with a small congregation and not have to work a second job. On the other hand, in some of today’s larger churches, the pastor doesn’t even know all the names of the people in his church, much less give pastoral care across the board on an intimate level.
Third, I get the impression that even among unbelievers, the vast majority of people in the past though well of clergy, both there motives as well as their ethics. Today, due to several factors, including, without limitation, the attachment of high profile Christian leaders to political causes, a wide swath of unbelievers in a community might not see clergy in a favorable light.
Could you comment on how our current context would need to be taken into account?
Thanks.
The unchurched keep pastors around for superstitious reasons.
I was speaking to my pastor a couple of weeks ago about a town ministerial group he belongs to. Among other things he said they answer calls from city / county groups who invite pastors to come and pray at the opening of the meetings.
I asked him why he caters to such requests? Isn’t there some on the council / board or in the audience who can open in prayer? I told him they think of him (or others in the group) as the town shaman.
It’s hard anymore to get a footing. I know at my church, we sit right in a neighborhood – all houses and one church. We have gone door to door offering ourselves up as the neighborhood parish and that we were there to help in any spiritual and temporal needs – not too many folks were buying it – it is a different mindset from centuries past. I think that era died with the last Pat O’Brien movie 🙂
MLD
Of course…
Jean
Denominational life makes it more difficult, but it amazes me how much ministry is simply “contained” within varying churches. Plus, I think some prefer this…
As to the second concern (bi-vocationalism) there are no easy answers. Then again, in the past (and to some extent now) denominations essentially subsidized smaller churches, especially those that were considered vital to the life of the community.
For the third concern, it is a self-inflicted wound. Clergy need to be trained for ministry… not entertainment.
Duane:
“First we have to get away from the idea of a local church somehow being a franchise of a chain…”
History shows this will be very very difficult.
Why? I ask myself.
My answer is the denominations sell themselves as such., “Come to our church and have faith in what we teach…”
Why is it so many seem to not teach, “have faith in God, the creator of all, and Jesus our Christ and Lord. Listen to Him and His teaching.”
It would/should be so much simpler and yet the schisms continue to grow.
Oh well, MLD will let us know. 😉
MM
Yes, it is continual…
MM,
“Come to our church and have faith in what we teach…”
If your church has a statement of faith, then they do the same thing. “Here is what we believe and teach.”
MLD
Yes, but I’m finding most of our “statements of faith” are far too long and restrictive. Generally, it is my opinion, and yours will vary, Christianity seems to be more about siding with the right schism rather than learning and walking with the God who created all.
Again, in my opinion, like Abraham faith is a lifetime and daily walk with Him and not a method of worship designed to please Him. My personal study of scripture tells me God is more interested in how I walk, and live within His creation than my practice one or two days a week.
But your mileage is (or may be) different, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
“and not a method of worship designed to please.” In the Lutheran Divine Worship Service there is not a thing done that is done to please God (except perhaps showing up) – it is all about God giving to us his good gifts of grace and forgivness – Jesus pleasing us.
“and live within His creation than my practice one or two days a week.” Perhaps you know who they are but I have never been a part of a church (CC, SBC, Lutheran) where there was any thought that the showing up to church was the totality of the Christian life. All of them have been that going to church is the refueling station for the Christian to live out the Christian life the remainder of the week.
Do you really know churches that teach this?
MLD
It’s not what they say, write as some sort of slogan, pledge, or chant it’s what church do that counts.
I have never been to a church that didn’t say something like you wrote:
“ All of them have been that going to church is the refueling station for the Christian to live out the Christian life the remainder of the week.”
But, the reality all too often negates this statement.
Most churches I know of struggle to Attract people and keep their doors open. This seems to cause the main focus to be more about one day rather than helping to train people for the week to come. The ability to get a return crowd seems to be the emphasis.
I’m sure yours is different and I will wager your ideas about what the “refueling” is comprised of varies from mine. Again that’s ok with me.
Let’s just leave it at that.
MM, I was just trying to get clarification on your own statements. If this isn’t just bellyaching on the church in general, let me ask this – is your church listed among those ‘not doing it right’?
Is there actually a ‘right way to do church? Is a church with no statement of faith the ideal?
But we can just leave it.
One last thing just for the idle curious here. We do see the divine service as a refueling stop of sorts. We come in Sunday morning on empty and Jesus fills us back up through the absolution pronounced on us, the word spoken in our ears and his body and blood poured down our throats.
A little Bible study and fellowship to top us off and we are pushed out like Dale Earnhardt Jr. leaving pit row!
Sundays are exciting, but nothing compared to what awaits us in our homes and communities.
I hope your experience is similar. 🙂
MLD
I can only do my part in the circle(s) I live in.
And there was nothing for you to clarify, you’ve made yourself very clear on this blog about your Sunday services.
And to answer your question, yes my circle(s) always needs to improve and learn what it means to walk and fellowship with Him. It’s a lifelong process we struggle with.
MLD
One more thing, Deut 6, reaffirmed by Jesus Himself, is the statement we need to live out and teach our sons and grandsons.
Just for clarification 🙂 I wasn’t trying to clarify anything, I was trying to get clarification from
you on your statements I quoted – I think I have it.
“Walk and fellowship with him” puts me at a disadvantage. I don’t know what that means as that is evangelical language. I serve Christ through my vocation to my neighbor. If that is what you mean, then I’m with you.