Download PDF

Back to Previous Page

Coming Home: Blessing or Challenge

Ken Phillips, TOR
Vol. II No. 5
Oct./Nov. 1998

The return of a religious to community after treatment evokes many feelings among its members. Questions present are - what do I do with this person, how can I be supportive, I'm not a shrink, this is not a therapeutic community, am I responsible if they relapse? Perhaps less talked about are feelings of resentment that they received all the attention and how much money did we spend on them again. These feelings and others can make the return of a religious from treatment one more challenge for the community when there are already enough challenges. These feelings need to be acknowledged and dealt with, although not necessarily with the returning person. Sometimes when those returning feel they have made the sacrifice of giving up their dysfunctional behavior, and they feel they ought to be applauded and recognized for their efforts, those around them may still be feeling the sting of the consequences of having lived with them or ministered to those who were hurt.

The return of someone from treatment need not place a guilt trip on the community nor ought they feel that they need to be psychotherapists to know what to do and not to do. (If the person were that fragile they should still be in treatment.) The principles of ALANON are important here. I didn't cause this person's problem, I can't control it and I can't cure it. We can be supportive as they continue on the journey to recovery and offer a reality check if asked, but we are not responsible for the person's recovery or relapse - they are! There are competent professionals still available for them helping with their re-entry into the community. Early recovery is a tentative time, but if the community feels it is walking on eggshells it will not be helpful to the person or the community to be co-dependent.

One of the most frightening experiences for someone returning to ministry is attending a community-wide conference or liturgical function. The anticipation of what the greeting or non-greeting of fellow clergy or religious might be like is often very scary. A simple "it's good to see you, welcome back" can go a long way in making a person feel accepted once again as a peer.

The returning person has begun a journey of living life differently. They will be trying out new ways of being in community and relating. The first attempts may be awkward or overdone and will take time to do them more competently. Treatment is the beginning of a process, it is not all completed once a person is discharged. The person has been learning new interpersonal skills, is beginning to practice them and will want people to be supportive and welcoming but also to respect their privacy. They will choose with whom they wish to share their experience and the community needs to respect their personal boundaries. The support group chosen by the person will be invited to have greater access into the more personal details of treatment and recovery and the community also needs to respect the boundaries of the support team. If the support team is well instructed and the person is willing, they will be the prime support and challengers of the person.

The community need not feel they are excluded from the support team nor from twelve step meetings the person may find supportive. These are unique support systems which may not be understood by those not participating in their fellowships. The community needs to know that the person continues to have a support group and therapist who can professionally address recovery issues. The whole community is not their support group or therapist. The community doesn't need to take on these responsibilities. To turn the whole community into a therapeutic community to reproduce what was experienced in treatment is not healthy for the person or the community. The person may have learned some skills in communicating or relating which the community could find beneficial. Ongoing education on these topics for the whole community at a later date might prove helpful upon realizing the need.

While some of the community may look on the residential treatment of the returning person as a vacation, the returning person may be exhausted from the intensity of the experience. There can be a certain fear in the community that the person is too fragile to deal with and cannot be asked to take responsibility in the community. More often, the opposite is true. The returning person needs to feel welcomed into the community by being given some work at which he/she can feel competent. They should not be made to feel like an invalid, but as a person who can take on responsibility. Some accommodation for their recovery needs, such as evening twelve step meetings or time out of the day to go to therapy, may be necessary. They need to feel responsible and to be held accountable for their work within the community. Learning from systems theory, we realize that when one member of a family or group changes for the better, it affects the whole group. A returning member can indeed be a blessing for the community rather than one more challenge to be faced.

Ken Phillips, TOR, is the Coordinator of Continuing Care at Saint Luke Institute.

LUKENOTES is a bimonthly publication of Saint Luke Institute.
Permission to use these materials must be requested in writing by contacting
lukenotes@sli.org

SLI EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
Saint Luke Institute
8901 New Hampshire Ave.
Silver Spring, MD 20903
(301) 422-5499 • (301) 422-5519 (fax)

back to top