The Support Gap for Dual Clergy Couples

Dianne K. Kieren, Ph.D.

Faculty of Home Economics, University of Alberta

Brenda Munro, Ph.D.

Faculty of Home Economics, University of Alberta

ABSTRACT: Within this study six levels of support for dual clergy couples with and without children were investigated. Seven dual clergy couples of several synods of the Lutheran church in two western Canadian provinces were asked open-ended questions about the support they had received in several employment and family related areas. While findings in each of the areas varied, overall, most individuals received the most support from their spouse and little from close friends and relatives often due to physical distance. Support provided by other clergy and church administrators was mixed. Only one major difference was found between couples with and without children. The group without children were more optimistic about the support that would be provided by family and friends in the area of child care while couples with children failed to mention support from friends and family.

There has been a remarkable increase in the number of women entering clergy roles in North American mainline protestant denominations (Carroll, Hargrove & Lummis, 1981). From 1977 to the present there was a large increase in the absolute figures even though the proportion of clergywomen to men is still low (e.g. in nine selected Protestant denominations the percentage of female to total clergy ranged from 1.2% in the American Lutheran Church to 7.8% in the United Church of Christ) (Carroll, Hargrove & Lummis, 1981, p. 6).

As we know from the mating-dating literature, propinquity plays a large part in the choice of marriage partners. Thus, it is not surprising that as the number of women in seminaries and clergy roles have increased, there has been a concomitant increase in dual clergy marriages.

The Ecumenical Clergy Couples’ Consultation which brought together 113 of the estimated 650- 1000 dual clergy couples in twelve mainline North American denominations defined a clergy couple as:

A husband and wife, educationally prepared for professional church leadership and set apart by the church by license or ordination for the purpose of performing in a professional capacity in ministry (von Lackum & von Lackum, 1979, p. 41).

Dual clergy couples have been referred to as modern day “collegial ministers” in that their relationship has the same potential for leadership and mutual support as that of the monastic collegium.

Stressors for Dual Clergy Couples

The research on dual career couples has been extensive (see review by Rapoport & Rapoport, 1978). As a type of dual career couple, one would expect that some of the stressors for dual clergy couples would be similar to that of other dual career couples.

Fogarty, Rapoport & Rapoport (1971) in one of the precursor studies pointed out four key dilemmas that dual career couples encounter: 1) the dilemma of identity, 2) the dilemma of work and role overload, 3) social network dilemmas, and 4) discrepancies between personal and social norms. Subsequent research by Heckman, Bryson & Bryson (1977) disclosed these additional stresses: restricted job mobility, demands on each individual’s time and energy, lack of leisure time, family vs. job competition, role conflicts, feelings of competition and/or resentment, and bringing problems home. These studies suggest that there are both costs and benefits to dual clergy couples. Managing existing role strain problems demands individual, couple, and external resources. The level and combination of these resources for solving the problems of such role strain is not fully understood.

The specific expectations associated with various clergy roles present unique occupational stressors and resources for dual clergy couples. While not all clergy-members serve in traditional pastoral roles there appear to be common expectations which cut across these role variations. These include: the mission, the call and commitment, the traditional base, and the absorptiveness of the role.

For many, the shepherd metaphor provides the best illustration of the mission or goal of a person who is a member of the clergy. Leadership, care, and service to God and His people comprise the primary task. This is an all-encompassing task which is difficult to prioritize or put in manageable, life-size objectives. Out of this mission arises the manner in which the person identifies with the task – the call and the commitment to the role. There are many different theological and personal interpretations of the call to serve as a clergy person. Some believe all persons are called to serve whether one is a clergyperson or a truck driver. Others believe that the call to serve as a clergyperson takes precedence over other calls. “The Call” therefore can create the basis for ranking one’s occupational commitment far above commitment to the many other roles in a persons role cluster: marital partner, parent, community participant, friend, or colleague.

Kanter (1977) has provided an analysis of the structure and organization of work life which is helpful to understand several other elements of clergy roles. First, the clergy occupation is absorptive. In absorptive occupations it is expected that the person be immersed in the role. These occupational roles intrude on other roles: personal, interpersonal, and community. As such the clergy could be labeled a “greedy” occupation (Coser, 1974; Kanter, 1977; Kieren & Munro, 1988). In addition, it has been expected, not just desired, that other members of the family, apart from the clergy person, be involved in church activities as well (Scanzoni, 1965). Families with one purpose, usually the husband being a clergyperson, provide a good example of a two-person single career (Papanek, 1975). Second, time and timing are ambiguous for most clergypersons. There is no “9 to 5” scheduling. Clergy are viewed as always being available or “on call.”

The manner in which these occupational elements relate to one another create some of the stressors present for contemporary clergypersons. We would argue however, that the multiplicative combination of these characteristics of the clergy role organized in a dual career lifestyle are the crucial factors necessary to understand how these couples function on a day-to-day basis.

Clergy Stress and Social Support

Social support can be defined as “a set of exchanges which provide the individual with material and physical assistance, social contact and emotional sharing, as well as the sense that one is the continuing object of concern by others” (Pilisuk & Parks, 1983, p. 138). There are many sources of this support but the primary one had been the family itself, both immediate family members and extended kin. Increasingly, however, friends, work colleagues, neighbors, and community agency personnel have been emphasized as sources of supportive exchanges.

The relationship between stressors, stress, and social support is of considerable interest to contemporary social scientists. Some researchers posit that social support provides a buffer between the stressors of daily life and the resulting effects of these stressors (e.g. Shuval, 1981; Hirsch, 1979; 1980; Rabkin & Struening, 1976; LaRocco, House & French, 1980). Others argue that social support has a more direct effect on resulting stress (e.g. Burke & Weir, 1976; Cobb, 1976).

We have described the ministry as an occupation with a high potential for stress. While the few studies completed to date on this lifestyle partially confirm this description (Rallings & Prato, 1984 a & b; Kieren; 1984, 1985), little is known about the nature and availability and impact of social support for these couples. Fiore, Becker & Coppel (1883) have reported evidence that the social network can actually be a source of stress and support concurrently and in somewhat independent proportions. This suggests that the study of social network impacts should include an assessment of perceived helpfulness (support) as well as perceived upset over unmet support expectations (stress). Thus, the purpose of this paper is to describe the nature and availability of these two elements of social support for two groups of dual clergy couples, one without children and another with children.

Method

This paper reports a portion of the data from an exploratory study commissioned by the Professional Preparations Committee of the Western Canada Synod, Lutheran Church in America. A previous paper in this journal has detailed the methods used (Kieren & Munro, 1988). Using informants within the church body, a total population of nine couples was identified. Seven of these couples agreed to participate in the present study. The seven couples were divided into two comparison groups: 1) couples without child and; 2) couples with children.

Trained interviewers collected the data. Spouses were interviewed separately. All interviews were tape recorded and later transcribed.

Results and Discussion

The results indicate that there were indeed contrasts between the two groups in terms of sources and amount of support in the six areas investigated. The major contrast was that the group without children were much more idealistic in their expectations of receiving support from family and friends in their anticipated roles s parents.

In some ways this difference is not surprising. The group without children represented a younger “new bred” dual clergy couple who were establishing their marital and work roles concurrently. While they intended to have children, they did not have to cope with this complicating aspect of a dual clergy life. The second (with children) was an older “adaptive” group who were making major shifts in their established patterns of work and family to accommodate the new opportunities of women in clergy roles.

Both of these groups described a rather insular pattern for their sources of support. They were not physically close to relatives and they reported having few friends as well as even fewer role models. The dual clergy role is associated with a high degree of mobility. This may limit the potential which family members have to provide large amounts of tangible elements of social support. One respondent suggested that there was a difference between moral support and actual support. Such is the case with relatives who may provide encouragement long-distance as opposed to on-site care and nurturing on a daily basis.

Several reasons may be offered for the limited role which friends play in the support network of these clergy couples. The first expressed by many respondents was the difficulty of developing friendships given the time demands of the clergy roles for two persons. A second factor may also be relevant. While a natural source of friendships often comes from the workplace, many clergy persons operate with a set of role expectations which keeps them from establishing close friendships in their own congregation (Fletcher, 1983; Oswald, Gutierrez & Dean, 1980; Whybrew, 1984). This is expressed by single career clergypersons as well as dual career couples. One member of a clergy family expressed it this way: “I feel cheated of close friends. My husband and I have no close friends in our congregation. To be a friend you have to share and confide – this reveals your vulnerability. Right or wrong, the image of a clergyperson is to be above vulnerability.” This view of the clergyperson as set apart from the other members of the congregation may in effect make that source of support less available.

The identification of a social support gap for dual clergy pastoral couples in this exploratory study suggests several implications for training as well as congregational education.

Nurturance is especially necessary for today’s families to achieve a satisfactory quality of life. Social support can provide some of the nurturance necessary for dual and single clergy couples to handle the stressors associated with this role. While the primary source of support will continue to be the family, other sources are necessary to buffer the stressors of daily life. J.S. House (1981) suggests that there are at least four different classes or types of supportive behaviors which should be considered as potential sources of social supports: emotional (love, esteem, concern, listening), informational (advice, directions, fads), instrumental (aid in form of money, time or services), and appraisal (affirmation and feedback).

In order to acknowledge or reaffirm the reciprocal nature of supporting one another, pastors must see their role as receiver as well as give of support. Second, both pastors and congregations need to review the current role cluster of the pastor (confidant, marital partner, child to his or her own parent, relative to others, friend, parent to his or her own children). Such a review should allow for a pastoral and congregational reassessment of long standing traditional expectations. In some congregations a pastoral care committee might be used to implement changes.

The study of role patterns for dual clergy couples has provided a source of important information about the interface between work and family life in religious work settings. Further study and sensitivity to social support may prove useful to more effectively manage the stressful lifestyle of the dual clergy couple.

Reference Notes

Burke, R.J. and T. Weir, (1976) "Some personality differences between members of one-career and two-career families.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 138:453-460.

Carroll, J., Hargrove, B. and A. Lummis, (1981) Women of the Cloth. San Francisco: Harper and Row.

Cobb, C. (1976) "Support systems as a moderator of life stress." Psychosomatic Medicine, 38:300-314.

Coser, L.M. (1974) Greedy Institutions. New York: Free Press.

Epstein, C. D. (1971) "Law partners and marital partners: Strains and solutions in the dual career family enterprise." Human Relations, 24:549-563.

Fiore, J., J. Becker and D. Coppel (1983) "Social network interactions: A buffer of a stress," American Journal of Community Psychology, 11:423-439.

Fletcher, J. (1983) Religious Authenticity in the Clergy. Washington, D.C.: Alban Institute.

Fogarty, M., R. Rapoport and R. Rapoport (1971) Sex, Career and Family. London: Allen and Unwin.

Hirsch, B. (1979) "Psychological dimensions of social networks: A multimethod analysis." American Journal of Community Psychology, 7:263-277.

Hirsch, B. (1980) "Natural support systems and coping with major life changes." American Journal of Community Psychology, 8:159-172.

House, J. S. (1981) Work Stress and Social Support. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.

Kenter, R.M. (1977) Work and the Family in the United Sates: A Critical Review and Agenda for Research and Policy. New York: Sage.

Kieren, D. K. (1984) “Dual clergy marriages: New variant on an old theme.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Family Relations, San Francisco.

Kieren, D. K. (1985) “Dual clergy marriages: New variant on an old theme.” Unpublished manuscript, University of Alberta.

Kieren, D., and B. Munro. (1988) “Handling greedy clergy roles: A dual clergy example.” “Pastoral Psychology, 36:237-248.

LaRocco, J., and J. House and J. French (1980) “A model of mental health, life events, and social supports applicable to general populations.” Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 22:324-336.

Martin, T. W., K. J. Berry and R. B. Jacobsen (1975) “The impact of dual career marriages on female professional careers: An empirical test of a Parsonian hypothesis.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 37:734-742.

Oswald, R., C. Gutierrez and L. Dean. (1980) Married to the Minister. Washington, D.C.: Alban Institute.

Papenek, H. (1975) “Men, women and work: Reflections on the two-person career.” American Journal of Sociology, 78 (January):853-872.

Pilisuk, M. and S. H. Parks (1983) “Social support and family stress.” Marriage and Family Review, 6:137-156.

Rabkin, J. and E. Struening (1976) “Life events, stress and illness.” Science, 194:1013-1021.

Rallings, E. and D. Pratto (1984a) Two clergy marriages. Paper presented at the 1984 annual meeting of N.C.F.R., San Francisco.

Rapaport, R. and Rapaport (1978) “Dual career families: Progress and prospects.” Marriage and Family Review, 1, 5:1-12.

Rallings, E. and D. Pratto (1984b) Two Clergy Marriages: A Special Case of Dual Careers. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.

Scanzoni, J. H. (1965) “Resolution of occupational – conjugal role conflict in clergy marriages.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 27:396-402.

Shuval, J. (1981) “Contribution of psychological and social phenomena to an understanding of the aetiology of disease and illness.” Social Science and Medicine; 15A:337-42.

von Lackum, N. J. and J. P. von Lackum (1979) Clergy Couples: A Report on Clergy Couples and the Ecumenical Clergy Couple Consultation. New York: Professional Church leadership, Division of Education and Ministry, National Council of Church of Christ. (Distributed by Alban Institute Inc., Mt. St. Alban, Washington, D.C.).

Whybrew, L. (1984) Minister, Wife and Church. Unlocking the Triangles. Washington, D.C.: Alban Institute.