LIBERTY UNIVERSITY JOHN W. RAWLINGS SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Specific Contributions of Spiritual Formation and Mentoring Relationships
A Paper Submitted to
the Faculty of the School of Divinity
in Candidacy for the Degree of
Doctor of Education in Christian Leadership (Ed. D) Department of Christian Leadership and
Church Ministries
By
Mary Gracias
Lynchburg, Virginia
3/2022
Specific Contributions of Spiritual Formation and Mentoring Relationships
The data exposed the broad impact of spiritual formation as it contributes to increases in
all but one element of integration satisfaction and activity measured. In contrast, mentoring
relationship contributes to only half of the items and with lesser effect. Critically, both spiritual
formation and mentoring may significantly contribute to the activity of intuitive integration.
This contribution of mentoring relationships hints toward a crucial dynamic hidden within the
data. Increasing mentoring relationship does not correspond with increases in activity of using a
model or theory to guide integration, but it does correspond to moderate increases in intuitive
activity, and increases in satisfaction with use of a model/theory.
Mentoring may allow for learning from modeling, which may reduce the felt need to
actively use one’s own model or theory. This aligns with the findings of Sorenson et al. (2004)
and Sites et al. (2009) who suggest counselors learn primarily from mentors. One could further
surmise that this modeled learning is internalized into convictions in a manner similar to that
espoused by Greggo (2016) and Loosemore and Fidler (2019). Further supporting this theory is
the moderate effect mentoring relationship contributes to counselors’ internal considerations
of the impact of their faith, increases in learning activity, and explicit integrative actions in
sessions.
Increasing spiritual formation corresponded to large increases in activity of integration,
specifically with motivation to learn about integration, thinking about Christian impact during
sessions, and using a model or theory to guide explicit interventions. The mean for each of
these items for the low spiritual formation group started below the mean for low mentoring
relationship group, but ended higher for the high spiritual formation group than the high
mentoring relationship group.
Possible explanations are that spiritual formation might bring the notions of spiritual
competency and/or integrative motivation to mind more regularly, resulting in the increase of
activity. Of course, spiritual formation may also increase a counselor’s sense of dissonance
between non-integrative counseling and their own value system, or it may relate to self-efficacy
with spiritual integration. The underlying motivational factors clearly require further
exploration. What is clear is that spiritual formation and not mentoring relationship
corresponds to increases in satisfaction with integrative practice across multiple elements, and
this likely occurs by primarily promoting alignment between a counselor’s life, work, and
thoughts while they work.
This suggests the importance of coherence between identity and techniques for counselors
to report satisfaction with integration. It also urges us to consider if coherence and identity
concerns related to integration extend to counselors’ general satisfaction and resilience in their
work. This understanding lends validation to the academic discussion focused on trying to help
Christian counselors make sense of their identity, convictions, and practice in a confusing
landscape of licensure, ethics, multicultural concerns, and marketplaces (e.g., Greggo, 2016;
Hathaway, 2009; Scott, 2018; Sells & Hagedorn, 2016). Finally, these findings provoke the
following questions: Does an increase in integration satisfaction precede activity? Or, does an
increase in activity precede satisfaction? Or, is the relationship more complex (which is likely)?
Implications
Findings supports prior researchers’ assertions that spiritual formation and mentoring
relationships are important in clinical training and critically extend this finding for practicing
counselors (see Moon, 1997; Scott, 2018; Sorenson et al., 2004; Strawn & Hammer, 2013;
Walker et al., 2005, among others). Particularly, this study suggests spiritual formation is
critical, as the lowest satisfaction and activity with integration is found in counselors with lower
spiritual formation on almost all indicators. Spiritual formation also increases activity and
satisfaction above and beyond scores associated with higher mentoring relationship experience
on most items. This is highly directive for the thousands of professionals who have little access
to mentors and urges them to engage in their own spiritual formation.
Fostering spiritual formation should be of prime importance to those involved in counselor
training, supervision, peer-consultation, and the like, if they desire to inspire dedication to the
study and action of Christian integration. It is hypothesized that spiritual formation directly
impacts motivation for these activities and this assertion warrants further study. Greggo (2016)
suggested Christian counselors are governed by their convictions and this study lends direct
support to this contention.
Therefore, the author recommends utilizing multiple means to encourage spiritual
formation in our counselor peers. Recommended resources include the work of Strawn and
Hammer (2013) who outline the use of teaching, mentoring, and experience for the purpose of
spiritual formation; Crisp et al. (2019) as they curate a dialogue between psychology and
spiritual formation; and Coe’s (2000) interaction with church forefathers.
While recognizing the importance of spiritual formation, mentoring must not be
overlooked. Mentoring (formal or informal) plays a key role in forming convictions (Greggo,
2016) and helping Christian counselors identify pathways toward active integration (M. E. Hall
et al., 2009). Critically, this study found that low mentoring for those with higher spiritual
formation may lead them to self-determined discovery, but those lacking in spiritual formation
are likely to remain less satisfied and active with integration.
Effective mentoring is encouraged with the caveat that settling for average mentoring may
inhibit Christian counselors in regard to aligning their integration activity with their convictions.
Perhaps moderate mentoring is a distraction, confuses, or worse? If left unaddressed, this could
lead to dissonance, and demoralize or inhibit development (Holaday et al., 1994). This is a
sobering finding that warrants further investigation. Those in education and training
environments would do well to heed these cautions especially as prior research has esteemed
mentoring (Sorenson et al., 2004), yet it is reality that multiple pressures in our lives impact our
best intentions. It also appears that high spiritual formation motivates some counselors to push
through a discrepant mentoring experience and learn their own integrative models and
activities, which may mask issues in mentoring.
Prioritizing spiritual formation or mentoring relationships need not be a conundrum in
counselor training, they can be forged together (Moon, 2012). For example, mentoring
relationships could focus in part on spiritual formation; a supervisor (or peer-mentor) might
guide supervisees (or peer-mentees) to develop a professional and personal rhythm of spiritual
formation and encourage them to maintain this throughout their career.
References
Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of
personality and social psychology, 5(4), 432.
Barto, H. H. (2018). The integration of religious and spiritual issues in clinical supervision
and implications for Christian supervisors. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 37(3), 235-
246.
Blaine, B., & Crocker, J. (1995). Religiousness, race, and psychological well-being: Exploring
social psychological mediators. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(10), 1031-1041.
Coe, J. H. (2000). Musings on the dark night of the soul: Insights from St. John of the Cross
on a developmental spirituality. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 28(4), 293-307.
