Skip to content

Ontological Jurisdiction and Professional Drift: A Sociological Analysis of De-Differentiation in Spiritual Care

Tim Mussche

OALib 2026 DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1115662 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed
Keywords Jurisdiction Spiritual care Ontology Ontological security Epistemology Law Engineering ethics
Key points Argues that spiritual care occupations are undergoing professional de-differentiation by voluntarily adopting the lexicon, credentialing logic, and outcome-measurement regime of psychotherapy and counseling, thereby conceding the cognitive ground of their distinct ontological jurisdiction.

Abstract

Spiritual care occupations-spiritual direction and professional chaplaincy chief among them-occupy a professional jurisdiction whose cognitive foundation is not a body of techniques but an ontological commitment: the claim that the phenomena they address (vocation, discernment, encounter, the experience of being addressed by something exceeding the self) are real in a manner not exhaustively reducible to intrapsychic process.Drawing on Abbott's theory of professional jurisdiction and DiMaggio and Powell's account of institutional isomorphism, this article argues that these occupations are undergoing a process of professional de-differentiation, by which a once-distinct jurisdiction loses its boundary and is progressively absorbed into the adjacent jurisdiction of psychotherapy and counseling.The mechanism is not external displacement but voluntary mimicry: practitioners adopt the lexicon, credentialing logic, and outcome-measurement regime of the therapeutic professions because these constitute the legitimated currency of the contemporary helping-profession field, and in doing so concede the very cognitive ground that constituted their jurisdiction.Locating this drift within the broader Weberian process of disenchantment and the rise of a therapeutic culture, the article identifies three isomorphic mechanisms operating across four domains of practice, and proposes that re-differentiation depends on the explicit re-articulation of what is here termed the profession's ontological jurisdiction.The analysis connects this rearticulation to the constructs of liminal competence and the recognition paradigm, offering a sociologically grounded account of how a contemplative profession might retain its distinctiveness.

Explore topics