PeaceBang

27 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. I think the minister/clergy person getting married to someone in the congregation made a lot more sense before there was “dating.” Doesn’t always mean it was a good idea, though.

   Comment by h sofia — August 25, 2007 #

2. I was divorced when I entered the ministry and faced this issue for many years until I met my current spouse through a magazine personal ad. I tried all kinds of other avenues but the personals allowed me to meet the largest number of people. To do this, however, you do have to be very careful and go into it with the attitude of one acquaintance who told me “When I was in sales it took me fifty contacts to make a sale — so I decided I would need to meet a lot of men before I met the one who was right for me.”

   On the issue of whether or not to share what you do — I always tried to wait until a second date to devulge. I found that otherwise the guys got distracted by my profession and we didn’t get a chance to get to know one another.

   Comment by Kate R — August 25, 2007 #

3. Thanks, PeeB for the thoughtful list. Keeping all of that in mind while trying to date took me some time to really master. I had to practice and show myself a certain degree of compassion - and honesty - to get it down.

   I add another tip: how to deal with parishioners flirting with you. It happens. Nothing inherently wrong with flirting, but when one is a little lonely and not paying attention, the situation becomes potentially dicey.

   Men have commented on my weight loss (when I was so lucky as to have had a weight loss). “You’re looking really good,” one says. I like this answer: “Thanks - I feel good.” That puts it back into the category of health and well-being, and squelches the flirting. And if that doesn’t do it, walking away fast helps. Somehow acknowledging a compliment and then changing the subject seems to work well.

   Should be writing my sermon…

   Comment by Rev. Gidget — August 25, 2007 #

4. Check out the featured couple at NY Times–a female pastor from the UCC. Her husband says that he first fell in love with her when he watched her preach. Vows: Melanie and William.

   Comment by ck — August 26, 2007 #

5. OK, being a dumb Spaniard who has grown up in a country where most clerical people are sexually lapsed (i.e. non-practising) men, it is hard for me to understand all the subtleties of the situation. Please help me understand: you say that a minister cannot date someone from his/her congregation and that one of them should leave the church, because it would be bad if they split, and people would gossip about romance, and who knows what else that you prefer to conceal. But then, is it normal that already married ministers bring their spouses to the service? I thought so, please correct me if I am wrong and the spouse has to go to the nearest UCC church around. My God, there are even ministerial couples who are living together at home and at the pulpit! Is that not the case that they also may split, that they also may generate gossip, etc.? Why the same “no-sex-in-the-same-congregation” policy is not applied to people already married, including when they are both ministers of the same church?

   Comment by Jaume — August 26, 2007 #

6. Everything that you wrote is true, PB. I would add that I found it useful to list that I was a UU minister at Match.com because it eliminated the awkward conversations about ministry and the even more awkward conversations about Unitarian Universalism. The downside of listing my vocation in my profile was that too many women were looking for a counselor rather than a date. In New England many respondents wanted to talk about their spiritual lives or their psycho-social issues. While this is part of a normal relationship, it was clear that my vocation was overshadowing the date.

   In the local UUMA chapter to which I belong, about four of us met our significant others through Match.com. It does work but requires patience. Kate’s posting about 50 contacts before a sale is probably right.

   Comment by Larry Smith — August 26, 2007 #

7. One more thing on which I have STRONG opinions. I tended to fall in the other direction as Sister Kate R on the issue of disclosure. I told right away. It was and is such a huge part of my life, I couldn’t imagine any in-depth conversation without talking about it. Maybe that says something about my life needing more rounding, who knows?

   And when I met “the one” I knew it because he thought it was COOL to be a minister - that it showed depth, compassion and intelligence. Which we all know it does.

   Comment by Rev. Gidget — August 26, 2007 #

8. Oh, what a minefield. It’s enough to make me want to throw in the towel and give up on dating entirely. Starting with seminary, which almost no classmate’s marriage survived, and continuing through the high demands of life as a minister, there seem to be so many forces working toward us being single.

   One of the tensions I’ve run into are the generational differences in how we understand the “rules of engagement”. Quite a few of our longer-tenured colleagues began in ministry when the norms around dating congregants were quite different. And some have contributed to the conversation by saying, “well, I met MY wife by dating in the congregation and didn’t destroy the church!” (Perhaps, but the ones who DID mess up the church aren’t as likely to be part of this conversation.)

   Being gay or lesbian further complicates this, partly because the already-small pool is that much smaller. For gay men, at least, the social scene takes place almost entirely in the bars and therefore entirely DURING THE WEEKEND. And there’s a sweet but frustrating cluelessness in the efforts of congregants trying to match me up with someone: “Oh, I know a gay man — you two would be perfect for each other!” As if being gay were my only criterion.

   A real arrow in the heart, though, is when your congregation turns out to be supportive of LGBT equality in theory, but freak out when they actually SEE you holding someone else’s hand. Colleagues have left ministries over this rude awakening.

   As sad as it is to admit, the best thing I ever did for my social life, my happiness level, and my overall health was to get out of the ministry to pursue my doctorate. I want to believe that ministry and healthy relationships aren’t mutually exclusive, but my personal experiences haven’t been very encouraging.

   Comment by Scott Gerard Prinster — August 26, 2007 #

9. I’m one of the folk Scott describes–my first marriage disintegrated by the time seminary ended. I had several months of dating before meeting my new wife. I clearly identified myself as a liberal minister (though not specifically as a UU) on my internet dating profile. The two or three strangest contacts I had were from women whose profiles were filled with evangelical language, and whose initial e-mails to me stressed their desire to find a man who would support their needs to serve God. I could only draw one conclusion: they wanted to be pastors’ wives. It broke my heart to think these may well have been women who heard a call to ministry, but were convinced the only way they could live that out was to attach themselves romantically to a male minister. But I sure didn’t go out with them.

   Comment by Eric Posa — August 27, 2007 #

10. On the bright side, it’s NOT just us! Librarians and doctors have similar problems. I have friends in both fields and we commiseurated regularly! High-education careers are tough!

    I agree with all PB has said, and also with those who said ‘what a minefield’! I was Single Clergy for a while, and it’s HARD. It’s lonely and demanding. I was lucky to have a caring friend who said, “Sweetie, you are watching WAY too much TV! Please leave your house immediately!”

    Our conduct in the public field (i.e., in view of our congregations) should be sparkly clean and blameless. If nothing else, think of how the kids and the teens will be perceiving us. How can we make our churches ‘SAFE SPACE’ for them?

    Think of the church as if it were an office. You are a boss. All the parishoners are your workers. Would you date your secretary, the junior partner, the janitor, or your client? Or, if you like your church, think of your church as your family and friends. Would you date your brother’s best friend? (I wouldn’t). Would you date your friend’s ex? (Iffy…)

    On the bright side, I met my spouse when I went out and did a ‘fun’ class just for me without thinking of ‘meeting someone’. Boy was I surprised. But the point is that it was outside my field, away from my town, and let me have FUN. Go and do likewise!

    Comment by Rev. Bee — August 27, 2007 #

11. I am a proud member of the laity, but I think some of what have shared is applicable even to those of us who do not wear the cloth.

    I had a teacher in high school who told us all about her efforts to get a date–even provided weekly updates. I found that extremely inappropriate then and still do.

    I have the scars to prove that dating within a church group can often be perilous. If I had it to go over again, I would have paid attention to red flags as they arose and not been so eager to commit myself.

    This can happen at any church, regardless of denomination, and if I had it to go over again I would be more cautious about dipping my toe into the church dating pool.

    Comment by Comrade Kevin — August 27, 2007 #

12. In the Orthodox Church, priests can choose to marry or be celibate. Only celibate priests are elevated to bishop. Married priests need to be married before they are ordained. In other words, they need to choose before they enter the ministry, and if they enter it unmarried, they will stay that way and never have to deal with this minefield. If celibacy is not their gift, they find a partner before ordination, also avoiding this whole question.

    Just something to think about.

    Comment by PP le C — August 27, 2007 #

13. Jaume–

    There’s a big difference between already married/committed clergy couples and already married/committed ministers in churches, and a single minister treating the church like a dating pool. It’s not the fact that they’re having sex, it’s the complexities of power and authority.

    There are many many boundaries to consider, speaking as the wife of a minister in a brand-new settlement. I cannot serve in any kind of leadership positions, lest I be seen as his “eyes and ears” or as having some kind of power over him in the area the committee serves. I have to make it absolutely clear in every conversation that I speak for myself and not the minister. I have to beware of those church members who would treat me as confidante in place of the minister, or as an avenue to influence over the minister.

    These kinds of boundaries are very difficult to figure out and practice. The major concern that I see in a minister finding a date, or a spouse, from the congregation is that the relationship starts in a lopsided balance of power, where the minister has a position of authority over the church member. I’m sure there are those who have navigated this successfully, but they are few and far between! Then there’s the transition between being a church member, and being “elevated” to partnering the minister. The role is so completely different, and difficult for that member’s other friends in the congregation to understand, and can cause major rifts in the membership.

    So, to sum up, it’s not so much about sex as it is about power.

    Comment by Jess — August 27, 2007 #

14. Scott —

    As one of the early “straight” single women in UU ministry I have to say that when some of my parish members became aware that I was dating — even discreetly outside the parish — they were none too happy. Several of my married female colleagues had their congregation act out when they became pregnant — some even lost jobs. I think that for some, ministers, like one’s parents, are not supposed to have a romantic or sexual side to their lives, however discreet. So while certainly some of the dismay evidenced by church members when they see gay and lesbian ministers dating may be homophobia, it may also be the unconscious feeling of a parishioner being “jilted” in the odd transference that many have with clergy. If the congregation has some issues with clergy sexual misconduct hanging around from its past (and at least half our parishes do) you can get some really bizarre behavior, anger, acting out.

    Comment by Kate R — August 27, 2007 #

15. To add to Jess’s comments, there is also the simple fact that aside from the power imbalance, when someone begins to date their minister, they lose their minister. You cannot date someone and pastor to them. Hence my recommendation that there be a conversation as soon as possible regarding which one will leave the church. There should be NO covert dating of congregants for any reason. It still happens too often and it’s wrong.

    Comment by PeaceBang — August 27, 2007 #

16. Thanks, Jess. I appreciate your effort to explain the situation to someone like me who has very limited experience in what is the everyday life of a minister-led congregation. I still have difficulties to understand some things that you say. Particularly the “position of authority” part. I had naively believed that theoretical stuff about congregational polity, about the congregation ruling its own affairs, about the priesthood (and even the prophethood!) of all believers, and so on. But you tell me that the minister has a position of “authority” over his/her flock? I thought it was the other way round, that the congregation had authority over the minister! I see that I have been very naif about liberal religion.

    Comment by Jaume — August 28, 2007 #

17. Jaume, your sarcasm is way out of place here and your misunderstanding of pastoral authority evident.

    Pastoral authority in the church doesn’t mean power over anyone in the way that you imply, it means having been granted the power of being in a position of incredible trust. Pastors are trusted with extraordinarily sensitive information and therefore must constantly guard against manipulating people or misusing their unique knowledge of situations and persons. There is a lot of power in holding so much confidential information about a group of people. Pastors who date within their “flock” are often exploiting the vulnerable without realizing it or taking responsibility for that fact.
    We are there to minister to people, not to become romantically involved with them. The power problem comes from using our pastoral position to go after what we want without regard for what the member of the church needs and deserves, i.e., the same minister who pastors to everyone else in that congregation.

    Strong individualists who wave the banner of congregational polity and have fits when ministers suggest that we have real power often fail to realize that a huge amount of ministry has nothing to do with the governance of the church (financial, programmatic, etc.) and everything to do with accompanying people through the most confusing, troubling and emotionally volatile milestones of their lives. To be a religious leader in a congregational setting is to be called, trained, and ordained to the work of making religious and theological meaning of our shared lives. There’s a lot of power in that that is unconnected to the shared power of governance. Ministers are granted the trust and authority to influence people’s hearts and souls in a way that very few people outside the ministry understand. Even Unitarian Universalists — intellectual, independent, and very much free to think for themselves — still want to be able to give their ministers the power to touch their hearts and souls. We should not repay that trust with exploitation and objectification.

    It may make you uncomfortable or unhappy, but it’s how it works. There is no way for a minister to learn everything we learn about our people and not gain a manner of power from that.

    Comment by PeaceBang — August 28, 2007 #

18. Peacebang,

    One argument that UK repubicans voice against the hereditary monarchy system is that it condemns members of the royal family to very stressful and abnormally unhealthy lives.

    Perhaps a similar thing can be said about clergy.

    Putting a person in the role of minister may be unfair to the minister.

    Is it fair to put a person into that position?

    Perhaps it’s time that we followed the example of the Quakers — an example of one liberal religious group that doesn’t have clergy.

    Comment by Steve Caldwell — August 28, 2007 #

19. Steve C.,
    Having spent a bit of time with Quakers recently, I feel I have to correct you on something. There are some Quakers who have ordained clergy; they are called Programmed Quakers.

    Most of us are familiar with the other type of Quakers; they are the Unprogrammed ones.

    Whether a meeting will be Programmed or Unprogrammed is entirely up to the meeting.

    Comment by Kim Hampton — August 29, 2007 #

20. Kim,

    Thanks for pointing the Programmed Quaker variation out … My apologies for suggesting accidentally that all Quakers were of the Unprogrammed variety.

    The only reason I mentioned Quakers was to point out that it’s possible for liberal religious communities to survive without requiring any person to endure the stresses of being the minister.

    Comment by Steve Caldwell — August 29, 2007 #

21. Wow, Steve, that’s really insulting.

    Implying that any mention of the reality of the “stresses of being the minister” shows that it’s just too much burden for a person to bear, so we might as well just throw in the towel — that is just a low blow. You might as well say that ministers, who went through a minimum of seven years of school along with field education and the many hoops of denominational criteria, accumulating an average of $60,000 in debt along the way, to answer a deeply held conviction that they could make some positive change in the world are all just wasting their time.

    Ministry is hard, yes, but also immensely rewarding to both individual ministers and to the congregations they serve.

    The point is not to paint ministry as a completely rosy experience, because, let’s face it, there are human beings involved here. But if there were no ministers, I for one think that liberal religion would not even exist. I thank god every day for ministers of many faiths, that they are willing to make the sometimes incredible personal sacrifices it takes to devote their lives to serving other people and the greater good.

    Comment by Jess — August 30, 2007 #

22. Jess,

    When did asking a question in a civil tone become “insulting”?

    I also think you read way more into my question.

    I never said anything about the financial and personal costs of becoming a minister being a waste. I never said there were no positive benefits of having UU ministers in our movement.

    All I asked is for an examination of the costs vs. benefits.

    I do think we as an association of congregations should ask if the current model for ministerial formation fits our needs.

    Are we totally wedded to a system that leave a minister and his/her family with $60,000 of student debt?

    Does ministry require seven years of education?

    Could we create different models for ministerial formation?

    Could we also explore the possibility that ministry may be something that many congregations cannot afford?

    Are we wedded to a system that demands this type of sacrifice?

    Are there ways that one could get the same or nearly-the-same benefits without these costs?

    There may be a way for us to create liberal religious communities without the personal and financial costs of ministry that I’ve read about here and elsewhere (which is why I mentioned the Quakers).

    The other example exists within Untarian Universalism — the fellowship movement used by the AUA, UCA, and UUA after WW II.

    Comment by Steve Caldwell — August 31, 2007 #

23. Sadly, I have been on the other side of a minister’s dating within their congregation. I have been the congregant receiving unwelcome “googly eyes” from the minister. I could speak at length about the power dynamics involved but I think Jess has already done that topic justice. I simply write to remind all that the problem of clergy sexual misconduct isn’t limited to male ministers. Though writings on misconduct often use male pronouns (even in our open-minded UU world), women ministers are guilty, too. My plea to all ministers, regardless of sex, is to heed PB’s advice. It is not okay to date within your congregation.

    Comment by QUU — August 31, 2007 #

24. I’m unordained, but approved for ordination once I’ve been given a call in the ELCA. A good friend of mine recently started dating a member of her internship congregation, and after 2 months has already started to plan her wedding. She’s also breaking our code of conduct, which is called Visions and Expectations (V&E in Lutheranese). I also think the guy is a loser. Immature. Alcoholic. Idiot. Do you have any advice? I’m at the point where I’m fairly certain I’m just going to have to accept. Her school/synod are aware of the relationship and while they disapprove they haven’t ended her internship. She’s already asked her supervisor to do the wedding and he’s apparently really excited to. Her bestfriend said she thought that she could “love him out of his alcoholism”…. in other words I think I’m the only sane one left, and in no position to change anything. I’m just feeling really bummed out about this situation. I feel like she’s choosing some schmoe over her career.

    [Oh, that’s an ugly situation, and I’m sorry. To date a member of our congregation is also considered a violation of collegial guidelines in our movement, but people still get away with it — an infuriating hypocrisy (do we have a code or don’t we? Do we honor it or don’t we?). My friend, I don’t think there’s a thing you can do but stand by. Anyone who thinks that they can “love someone out of their alcoholism” is not living in reality. This sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Good luck. - PB]

    Comment by Sara — February 3, 2008 #

25. Peacebang,

    I’m sure I’m not the first woman going through a painful divorce to develop a crush on her intelligent, compassionate single minister. (Every minister probably has embarrassing stories about this.) I’ve been an erratic churchgoer at best, in part because I didn’t want to exacerbate the problems in my marriage, but now the emotional and spiritual support is really helpful. But to be honest, I am much more interested in my pastor as a man than as a minister (although he is quite good at the latter).

    This is complicated by the fact that my husband doesn’t want a divorce, but he doesn’t want to give up his (much younger) girlfriend, either. This has been going on for some time, and it’s starting to look like the situation will be permanent unless/ until I decide to move on.

    Sigh. Any advice? Shall I stop going to church and wait until my divorce is finalized, then ask him out? Or shall I tell him my dilemma? Or stay silent but keep going to church, then bring up the issue after the divorce? (If the latter, I probably shouldn’t be turning to him for advice right now.)

    Confused Congregant
    [oh girl, what a hot mess you have going on!!! Two things you should know: (1) We are not supposed to date parishioners, no way, no how. ESPECIALLY parishioners who are in any way vulnerable and whom we are counseling. It’s called sexual misconduct and it could get your Rev. Dreamboat into a lot of trouble if he feels similarly attracted to you and decides to see you on the sly. Lead him not into temptation if you care about him. (2) Your situation at home is a nightmare!! Get a lawyer, get out, kick that cheatin’ dog to the curb!! What the hell!!!?? Honey, you DO have a therapist, I hope? If so, and if he/she hasn’t helped you to realize what a sick environment you’ve tolerated for this long, get a new one! (3) My advice is: Keep going to church. You need the support and the community. Get your divorce and get healthy. Date others if you want to. If after a year or so of being single (because you really need some time for you) you find that you still want to date Rev. Dreamboat, tell him so. Tjhen the two of you can figure things out from there.

    But if you have any thought of dating him, don’t get close to him in a counseling relationship. Keep in mind, however, that you might really need him as a counselor right now — even more than you think you need him as a boyfriend later. Perhaps you’re crushing on him because you know he’s a safe person to flood a lot of love onto without having it reciprocated “in that way.”

    Consider the uses of all the energy. Crushes are a GOOD thing. They mean that our hearts are open and our libidos alive. God is in eros as surely as God is in agape love. Use all that good juju in a positive way and don’t worry so much about whether or not you’re going to get to snog with your Rev. in the near or distant future. Also, take it from me: he’s probably way less of a dreamboat in real life than you’ve made him out to be from knowing him in church.

    That will be $10.

    Good luck!! - PB]

    Comment by Confused Congregant — June 1, 2008 #

26. Thanks, Peacebang, that really helps. I’ll put your $10 in the next charitable contribution jar I see! [If you’re serious, just click on the
    Support the PeaceBang Blog button and contribute through PayPal! - PB]

    CC

    Comment by Confused Congregant — June 3, 2008 #

27. I am not a minister but have a calling on my life. Jesus has turned what was meant as evil to the good. He is using me and my testimony to show hurting women that HE is there for them if they would just ask HIM for help.

    I am single, divorced. I have been hoping to meet a ministry minded, kindred spirit to be my best friend, love and husband. I want to be his help meet and him mine.

    So, I have gone to all the singles events at my church. There are mostly all women and only a few men in these groups. We actually joined together in a group of about 10 and went to other churches singles events… Nada…

    Where on earth does a child of God go to find a mate? My church is 1500 strong and yet???

    My birthday is tomorrow, I will be 54 and it seems that life is getting short. It is getting really lonely these days…

    Anyway, God bless you all.

    Linda

    Comment by Linda — July 22, 2008 #

Leave a comment