As a psychiatrist, I am well-acquainted with psychological evaluations. During my 44 years in the field, I’ve evaluated everyone from firefighters to police officers to military officials and private sector employees to ascertain their mental health. I understand the importance of these evaluations as well as their limitations.
However, when my Committee on Preparation for Ministry (CPM) informed me eight years ago that I would need to complete a psychological evaluation as a part of the preparation for ministry process, I was surprised. I was told the evaluation was required if I wanted to pursue ordination. Yet, no one explained why the evaluation was required or what questions it was supposed to answer, other than to identify “red flags.”
I was perplexed. What was the real reason that these evaluations were required?
Why are psychological evaluations required to become a Presbyterian pastor?
Psychological evaluations are a valuable tool in mental health assessments. But they have their limitations. A psychological evaluation is a medical procedure. Therefore, consent, interpretation, confidentiality and record storage are critically important. To be meaningful, a specific question(s) needs to be identified by those requesting the assessment. By its very nature, wounds from past trauma may be opened during the assessment resulting in mental anguish or distress — a serious problem when therapeutic follow-up is not made available. Finally, responses may result in impressions that do not accurately reflect the true state of the individual.
Interestingly, a review of professional peer-reviewed literature in the fields of religion and psychology revealed no consistent benchmarks or validity measures regarding the relationship of psychological evaluation results and success in ministry.
As a candidate for ordination, and later as chair of my presbytery’s CPM, I spoke with other CPM chairs, candidates for ordination, pastors at various stages of their careers, and seminary faculty about the required psychological evaluation. No one that I spoke with could identify the specific question(s) to be answered or the implications of these evaluations. I was not the only one who did not understand the “why” of the process!
My questions regarding the requirement have continued to plague me throughout my career and became the focus of my thesis project for my recently completed Doctor of Ministry degree. Why do presbyteries require these evaluations? Is there a better way to assess and guide candidates for ministry?
Why do presbyteries require these evaluations? Is there a better way to assess and guide candidates for ministry?
To explore this question, I surveyed 25 ordained pastors to elicit responses regarding their experiences during their psychological evaluation, perceptions of its utility, and thoughts regarding more effective ways of discerning readiness for ordained ministry.
Pastors offer mixed perceptions on the required psychological evaluation
In the responses to my survey, pastors shared positive and negative perceptions regarding the utility of the psychological assessment.
Survey respondents expressed that they didn’t understand the purpose of evaluations and were concerned the results might be used to block their career progress. Several participants who reported successful ministerial careers noted that they were initially discouraged from pursuing their call based on psychological evaluation results. Most importantly, several reported that the evaluation opened wounds from past trauma or emotionally difficult experiences without providing any means of closure.
Despite concerns, most respondents also identified benefits from the evaluation, including insight into personality characteristics and discerning their role as a leader. Participants also reported the evaluation benefited their discernment process and relationship with God.
Balancing ministry assessment with nurturing discernment
How can we assess a candidate’s readiness for ministry while also nurturing them on their journey of discernment and ministry?
How can we assess a candidate’s readiness for ministry while also nurturing them on their journey of discernment and ministry? I propose there are alternatives to the “required” psychological evaluation that could more effectively meet the needs of candidates and the presbytery during the preparation for ministry process, while also paving the way for a healthy and sustainable career in ministry.
- Recruit feedback from the candidate’s professors and supervisors.
Develop an intentional liaison relationship with the candidate’s seminary. Feedback from professors and supervisors who have interacted with the individual on an ongoing basis in a variety of settings will be more revealing than any formal evaluation involving a limited encounter. Psychological testing will not reliably identify “red flags” that have not previously been recognized. If candidates authorize the seminary to speak about their time as students with the CPM, confidentiality and legal concerns could easily be assuaged.
- Ask the CPM to be more pastoral.
Create a dedicated mentoring relationship between the candidate and CPM. When more than a once-a-year “check-in,” this relationship can be a source of support and aid the candidate in their personal discernment process.
- Require the CPM to do more check-ins.
Most presbyteries require the CPM to check in with candidates just once a year. If the CPM increases their meetings to at least twice a year, it would encourage a more supportive and productive relationship between the candidate and CPM.
- Involve psychologists on a case-by-case basis.
Psychological evaluations with clearly defined and individualized questions to be answered can still be used on a case-by-case basis as one of many avenues to assess and guide a candidate. Feedback should be provided by a professional trained in the measures used. Resources should be made available to the candidate to address any issues that arise.
- Help leaders understand when, where, and how psychological evaluations could be helpful.
At the denominational level, education can be provided to presbyteries regarding the effective use of psychological evaluations. Training should include indications for their use, limitations, appropriate utilization of results, the need for follow-up when indicated and record management.
Leaving space for God’s Spirit in the ordination process
Ordained ministry is a complex career path. Academic, social, emotional and spiritual elements play an important role in one’s ability to navigate challenges that await them. Those charged with assessing an individual’s readiness for ordained ministry have a responsibility that goes beyond assuring that a checklist of requirements is completed. By focusing too heavily upon human constructs – for instance, results of a psychological evaluation – there is a risk of writing God’s participation out of the equation. God’s wisdom is infinitely more powerful than anything our human brains can imagine. Ultimately, God’s presence can reveal the divine in the individual and guide those shepherding the candidate toward molding their talents into effective ministry to the congregations and communities to which they will be called.
The Presbyterian Outlook is committed to fostering faithful conversations by publishing a diversity of voices. The opinions expressed are the author’s and may or may not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the Outlook’s editorial staff or the Presbyterian Outlook Foundation. With every submission, we consider clarity, accuracy and respect. We also consider if the position adds additional perspectives to the discussion. You can join the conversation on the “write to us” page.
