Mental Health, Religion & Culture

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cmhr20

Calling, caring, and connecting: burnout in

Christian ministry

Scott Dunbar , Thomas Frederick , Yvonne Thai & John Gill

To cite this article: Scott Dunbar , Thomas Frederick , Yvonne Thai & John Gill (2020) Calling,
caring, and connecting: burnout in Christian ministry, Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 23:2,
173-186, DOI: 10.1080/13674676.2020.1744548

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2020.1744548

View supplementary material

Published online: 15 Jul 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 34

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cmhr20
MENTAL HEALTH, RELIGION & CULTURE
2020, VOL. 23, NO. 2, 173–186
https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2020.1744548

Calling, caring, and connecting: burnout in Christian ministry

Scott Dunbar, Thomas Frederick, Yvonne Thai and John Gill
Division of Online and Professional Studies, California Baptist University, Riverside, CA, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This article explores burnout, and constructs related to burnout, in Received 19 February 2020
relation to pastors. Burnout has been found to exist in a multitude Accepted 15 March 2020
of occupations that are service-, or people, oriented. As a large
KEYWORDS
portion of the role of a pastor involves contact with individuals, Differentiation in Christ;
pastors may experience burnout. It is through a pastoral lens that burnout; pastors; self-care
burnout, and concepts related to burnout such as emotional
labour, role salience, differentiation of self, and differentiation of
self in Christ, are examined. Methods to cope with burnout such
mindfulness and prayer are also reviewed.

The construct of burnout is an established area of scholarship that first began with Herbert
Freudenberger in 1974 (American Psychologist, 1999). Christina Maslach, a predominant
author and researcher in the area of burnout, started her research on the construct of
burnout shortly after Freudenberger (Frederick & Dunbar, 2019). To this day, Maslach’s
work provides both the central definition as well as the most widely used measure of
burnout. “Burnout is a prolonged response to chronic emotional and interpersonal stres-
sors on the job, and is defined by the three dimensions of exhaustion, cynicism, and
inefficacy” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 397). Religious leaders, such as clergy and pastors,
often experience burnout and the ramifications associated with burnout. A study con-
ducted by Visker et al. (2016) found approximately 65% of the clergy in their study
were either suffering from burnout or on the verge of burnout. As with individuals
working outside of religious institutions, clergy may experience burnout due to pro-
fessional and personal complications and may feel drained and discouraged when experi-
encing burnout (Barnard & Curry, 2011; Visker et al., 2016). Burnout research specific to
clergy reveals that younger clergy are more prone to experience burnout and are unsa-
tisfied with their spiritual life (Doolittle, 2010; Randall, 2007). Burnout research continued
to evolve since its inception and has progressed through three major phases; the Pioneer-
ing Phase, the Empirical Phase, and the Expanding Phase.
The Pioneering Phase was the initial phase of burnout. This phase was exploratory, as
early burnout researchers sought to characterise, understand, and define burnout.
Research during this phase was relegated to individuals working in service-oriented
fields (human services and healthcare), was descriptive and qualitative in nature. While
burnout research using clergy did not take place during this period, the work of pastors
can be considered a service-oriented field. Clergy are called to serve the larger community

CONTACT Scott Dunbar sdunbar@calbaptist.edu

© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
174 S. DUNBAR ET AL.

and their individual congregations. Clergy may pour themselves out for their congrega-
tions and should establish healthy boundaries and time management skills to stave off
burnout (Doolittle, 2010). The Pioneering Phase of burnout was followed by the Empirical
Phase of burnout.
This Empirical Phase started in the 1980s and continued into the 1990s. During this
Empirical Phase, the research being conducted shifted toward quantitative methods, as
researchers used questionnaires and surveys to study burnout. The predominant
burnout measurement scale, the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI; Maslach et al., 1996),
was developed during this phase. Scales such as the MBI allowed researchers to use stat-
istical tools and methodologies to study the complex relationships among organisational
factors and the three components of burnout, exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy. It was
during this phase that researchers began to study clergy burnout from viewpoints such as
stress, workload, and family needs. Examples include The Myth of Clergy Burnout by Joseph
Fichter in 1984 and Clergy Burnout: A Self Psychology and Systems Perspective by Olsen and
Grosch in 1991.
The Expanding Phase of burnout followed the Empirical Phase of burnout. The use of
quantitative survey instruments such as the MBI continued to be used in this Expanding
Phase, and researchers began to study the ramifications of technology and burnout.
Additionally, burnout was not shown to be limited by profession as the study of
burnout continued to spread across a plethora of industries, cultures, and physical
locations. Researchers took a multidisciplinary approach to study burnout and incorpor-
ated workplace spirituality and the psychology of religion. Of particular note, researchers
investigated methods to mitigate burnout in clergy. Such methods included a positive atti-
tude towards prayer, increasing levels of self-compassion, professional development pro-
grammes based on emotional intelligence, and increased levels of Differentiation of Self
(DoS; Barnard & Curry, 2011; Beebe, 2007; Francis et al., 2019; Turton & Francis,
2007).2011; Beebe, 2007; Francis et al., 2019; Turton & Francis, 2007). This translated into
researchers further studying the effects of work-life balance and interrole conflict (Freder-
ick & Dunbar, 2019).
Burnout leads to negative effects, for both the organisation for which the individual
experiencing burnout works and the individual. As one would expect, burnout is positively
associated with lower levels of job satisfaction and intent to turnover (Lee, 2019). Employ-
ees experiencing low levels of job satisfaction may withdraw from those they serve, from
coworkers, and from individuals in leadership roles. In addition, the individual’s job per-
formance may decline; he or she may have increased absences or arrive to work tardy,
or possibly result to workplace violence (Maxon, 2011). As one would expect, an individ-
ual’s home life and work life are negatively affected when he or she experiences the afore-
mentioned psychological and/or physical consequences of burnout. Research indicates
that clergy experiencing burnout suffer from depression, are unsatisfied with their spiritual
life, and feel used up, fatigue, and irritation (Doolittle, 2010; Visker et al., 2016).
Burnout, however, is also caused by interrole conflict. This means that individuals often
experience stress responses, as measured by the MBI, when family and work demands
differ or place conflicting demands on workers. That is, burnout results from the mismatch
between an individual’s roles in the separate spheres of work and family. This mismatch
generally occurs due to conflict revolving around time, strain, and behaviour (Greenhaus
et al., 2003; Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) as well as (1) conflict which based on attitudes and
 MENTAL HEALTH, RELIGION & CULTURE 175

perceptions regarding the relationship between work and family and (2) overload consist-
ing of time and resource demands on the individual needed to complete tasks (Coverman,
1989). Time focuses on the effects of physical presence in either or both domains, strain
focuses on the emotional and psychological demands from both domains, and behaviour
entails physical actions needed to engage in each domain.
Research examining the relationship between work and family domains suggests that
conflict entails negative effects. For example, Jawahar et al. (2012) found that work-family
conflict (workplace demands) contributed significantly to burnout. In fact, work-family
conflict accounted for more of burnout experiences as compared with family-work
conflict (family demands) on work. Research is also identifying the spillover and crossover
effects of work-family conflict (WFC) (Carlson et al., 2019). In terms of spillover, conflict
experienced in one domain spills over into distress in the other domain, while crossover
describes how conflict between work and family roles impacts a family member, specifi-
cally a spouse. Spillover effects caused by WFC impact work attitudes related job satisfac-
tion and organisational commitment. Crossover effects are reflected in lower organisation
citizenship behaviour (OCB) like increased absenteeism.
The focus on interrole conflict highlights several theoretical contributions to explain the
causes of burnout. The focus here becomes the role of the work-family interface as these
domains dominate an individual’s social experiences. There are three main perspectives
on the work-family interface (Allen & Martin, 2017). These perspectives are (1) work and
family in conflict, (2) work and family balance, and (3) work and family enrichment.
First, work and family are seen as being in conflict. Work-family conflict is conceptualised
as bidirectional, meaning that conflict may arise from the work side of the continua or the
family side. A recent study by Vieira et al. (2018) developed a typology of work-family
conflict and balance to determine its effect on job and family satisfaction. Using the coor-
dinates, work-family and balance-enrichment, they identified potential types of work-
family conflict: beneficial, harmful, and passive. The groups experiencing high conflict
and low balance (harmful) have lower family and job satisfaction scores.
Several prominent perspectives have been developed focusing on balance instead of
conflict. That is, individuals should seek to achieve some sort of mutuality between the
sometimes-conflicting demands of work, life, and/or family (Kalliath & Brough, 2008).
There are six main ways that work-family balance has been understood as relating to indi-
viduals living in multiple roles. In viewing work-family (or life) balance, the focus initially is
that conflict and enhancement are possible. That is, there is both positive (enhancing) as
well as negative (conflict) spillover between the two domains. The next approach to work-
life balance focuses on balancing time, involvement, and satisfaction in each domain. The
third approach focuses on feelings of satisfaction across multiple roles. Next, the focus is
on salience or importance across the multiple roles. Fifth, work-life balance emphasises the
relationship between conflict and facilitation so that low levels of conflict and higher levels
of satisfaction lead to increased perception of balance. Finally, the perception of control
and decision-making regarding the demands made between work and family increases
the experience of balance in the domains.
Based on these definitions of work-life balance, the key aspects of balance for individ-
uals are related to salience and satisfaction (Kalliath & Brough, 2008). Individuals experi-
ence higher levels of balance, personal effectiveness, and satisfaction when given the
ability to determine to some extent when, how, and extent of the demands made in
176 S. DUNBAR ET AL.

each domain (Kalliath & Brough, 2008; Maslach & Leiter, 1997). In other words, role salience
is a key component when considering both the individual and organisation contributions
to developing or coping with burnout. Additionally, individuals experiencing satisfaction
in either or both of these roles facilitate work-life balance. In other words, role satisfaction
focuses on the individual’s perception of effectively or competently participating in each
domain, work and family, and how satisfaction in one domain may spillover into satisfac-
tion in the other. Role salience and satisfaction provide huge resources and risks when
approaching burnout as an inter-role phenomenon.
Another perspective on the relationship between work and the family concerns enrich-
ment. Greenhaus and Powell (2006) identify five types of resources that may be translated
or extended from the family domain to work or vice versa. These resources provided by
the family include skills and perspectives, psychological and physical resources, social
capital, flexibility, and material resources. Taken together, families provide critical
resources for developing role salience or the ability to apply skills, resources, and emotional
regulation, a crucial psychological resource, to manage demand conflicts between work
and family spheres. Additionally, role satisfaction or one’s psychological evaluation of
one’s efficacy and valuation of membership in one sphere or domain may spillover into
satisfaction with the other domain when challenges occur.

Calling, caring, connecting and pastoral burnout

In pastoral perspective, the challenge of being in an occupation with high levels of work
and family overlap increases the likelihood of experiencing burnout and vicarious trauma-
tisation. Cameron Lee (1999; Lee & Iverson-Gilbert, 2003) has identified the demands
associated with pastoral life. Lee identifies how high demand congregations, i.e., congre-
gants stopping by the pastor’s residence unannounced, pastors cancelling family plans to
attend to congregants’ needs and emergencies, high levels of personal and family
member criticism, are associated with higher levels of pastoral burnout.
The pastorate exemplifies interrole conflict between work and family spheres. That is,
the pastor inhibits a professional sphere that already contains very permeable social
boundaries. These boundaries allow for merging between the congregation and the
pastor’s family. At the same time, the pastor’s family enters the congregation as both
leader and member, thus adding to the bluring boundaries associated with work and
family. Consequently, pastors need skills to facilitate both role salience and satisfaction
as these demands are negotiated.
While the external factors contributing to pastoral burnout are important to address,
the pastor’s own perception of his identity as a pastor and the role of the pastoral
office can play a significant role in preventing or counteracting burnout. Regrettably, it
is not uncommon for pastors to have an unhealthy perception of their vocation and
self-identity as a Christian and pastor. For example, Eugene Peterson suggests that
pastors must move away from the idea and practice of being a “busy pastor,” which
describes a corrupt vision of the pastoral ministry (Peterson, 1989). The reality for many
pastors is that expectations and pressures from the congregation and existing church
culture have shaped one’s own understanding of what it means to be a pastor. Peterson
(1989), while admitting to this reality, casts a vision for a recalibrated pastor: one who seeks
to pray, preach, and listen. Prayer is about fostering the vertical relationship with God. The
 MENTAL HEALTH, RELIGION & CULTURE 177

pastor should not be able to expect to minister to others, if he or she is not being minis-
tered to. Preaching signifies the pastoral role of shepherding others to grow in knowledge
of and faithfulness to the Lord. Preaching is tied to prayer in that the pastor is at once a
shepherd but also part of the flock, both a leader and a follower. As such, the pastor
must not only know how to instruct others to follow God but must also practice it
himself. The act of listening highlights the necessity of knowing one’s congregation and
nurturing the horizontal relationships within the church. The pastoral vocation is necess-
arily relational, but listening to others, knowing one’s flock, has often been replaced by a
variety of goals that subvert one’s ability to know the congregation (and to be known by
them). This idea or principle of cultivating what is most important in the ministry is not
new. Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome from 590 to 604 AD, is just one example who
noted the importance of cultivating the “internal life” while not forgoing the “pastoral”
aspects of ministering to others. He describes the pastor who has forgotten the necessity
of cultivating his relationship with God this way:
When they are fortunate enough to have a moment of quiet, they become all the more
wearied by the quiet itself … And so it happens that while they rejoice in being busied by
worldly happenings, they remain ignorant of the internal life that they should have been
teaching to others. (2007, p. 69)

An unhealthy understanding of what it means to be a pastor results in unhealthy practice.

While the pastor’s work will often be weighty and even overwhelming, a recalibration of
what is essential to pastoral ministry and cultivating real dependence on God can serve to
both rejuvenate the ministry and counteract pastoral burnout.
In other words, the minster exists in an ambigous context as a leader of a congregation
and as a parent and/or spouse. Boundary ambiguity (BA), having a fluid or very porious
interpersonal boundary between the family and the congregation, focuses on identity
and membership for family members and the congregation (Lee, 1995). In other words,
the families of clergy often have their boundaries violated by intrusive congregational
demands. These violations create stress. In Lee’s (1995, p. 78, italics in original) words, “cog-
nitive uncertainty regarding the allocation and enactment of roles, triggered by questions of
family membership.” As uncertainty increases due to increasing amounts of boundary vio-
lations, family members become more and more anxious and stressed. As anxiety and
stress increase, uncertainty increases. This reciprocating process has far-reaching effects
on the pastor, the pastor’s family, and the congregation.
DoS is perhaps the most robust components of natural systems theory (Bowen, 1978;
Kerr & Bowen, 1988; Titelman, 2014). DoS has both inter and intra-personal dimensions.
In intrapersonal perspective, DoS allows one to manage one’s emotional experiences in
order to make meaningful, purposeful decisions. High levels of intrapersonal DoS allow
individuals to have insight into their emotional processes and not become overwhelmed
by them. This insight allows for value-based decision-making and responding appropri-
ately as opposed to being emotionally reactive to one’s experience. Intrapersonal DoS is
also related to having a high level of commitment to one’s basic identity and core
values. This identity and concomitant core values form the basis of action and relation.
Interpersonal DoS focuses on one’s ability to maintain both commitment to one’s identity
and one’s relationships. That is, interpersonal DoS fosters the ability to engage in relation-
ships without compromising one’s core values, despite intense emotional and relationship
178 S. DUNBAR ET AL.

pressure to modify one’s core beliefs. During high levels of anxiety and stress, relationship
pressure increases. This pressure seeks to maintain relationships and loyalty, even at the
expense of one’s identity. DoS provides individuals with the ability to manage relational
anxiety and pressure both intra- and interpersonally so that value-based actions and
relationships are maintained.
BA as both a cause and consequence of family stress impacts families circularly. That is,
stress and anxiety are experienced due to BA. This stress and anxiety are then dispursed
through family communication patterns. From a Bowen Family Systems Perspective
(Bowen, 1978; Kerr & Bowen, 1988; Titelman, 2014), anxiety and stress are dispersed in
the emotional nuclear family via triangulation. Specific individuals may draw closer
emotionally and distance themselves from their percieved cause of stress. In this case,
the non-clergy spouse may triangulate with a child against the pastor in order to cope
with stress due to BA. Additionally, pastors with lower levels of DoS will engage in
higher levels of triangulation.
Beebe (2007) investigated how DoS functions relative to role perception, conflict man-
agement, and burnout regarding how pastors’ engage as leaders with their congregations.
Beebe documented how pastors experience emotional stress by overwhelming role
demands (time, energy, and expectations) from their families and congregations, how
these demands increase conflict at the church and home, and their resulting in a dimin-
ished sense of personal efficacy on the part of the pastor. This means that pastors with
low levels of DoS regarding their role as pastor experience relational conflict in more per-
sonal terms that results in exacerbating negative responses to the congregation’s ministry
demands. Ultimately, this culminates in lowered personal efficacy and increased burnout.
In other words, interrole conflicts create burnout, especially for those lower in DoS.
Burnout moderated the relationship between DoS and turnover among clergy. In other
words, clergy with higher levels of DoS are able to manage their emotional experience
(intrapersonal DoS) by engaging in a responsive, not a reactive manner and not take
conflict personally. Additionally, these clergy are able to prevent burnout and remain in
the ministry longer than those with lower levels of DoS.

Differentiation of self in Christ (DifC)

Differentiation of self in Christ DifC emerges from Christian reflection on the differen-
tiation of self. Namely, DifC embodies the core of one’s identiy as grounded in Christian-
ity (being adopted into the family of God via Christ’s saving work) and living out
relationships based on enacting Christian virtues like faith, hope, and love (Balswick
et al., 2005; Balswick & Balswick, 2006). In fact, Balswick and Balswick (2006) describe
DifC as being a differented unity – basing one’s relationships on one’s core identity as
a child of God. We propose that DifC is the critical way to address the boundary ambi-
guity of pastoral ministry as well as prevent and cope with pastoral burnout. DifC
entails finding one’s identity in Christ which forms the basis of one’s values and goals
that are lived out or expressed in marriage, other relational commitments, and one’s
vocation (Frederick & Dunbar, 2019). DifC focuses on basing one’s identity in Christ, as
adopted into the family of God via Christ’s saving work on the cross. DifC provides the
solid basis from which to base one’s identity – one is a child of God, adopted into
Christ’s family. As a result, one’s identity is based on Christian values and characteristics.
 MENTAL HEALTH, RELIGION & CULTURE 179

These core values encorporate intrapersonal aspects – practicing spiritual disciplines to

enhance emotional regulation and value-based actions – as well as interpersonal aspects –
relating to others while maintaining Christian value commitments.
Calling, Caring, and Connecting are three primary ways pastors prevent and cope with
burnout, especially burnout caused by interrole conflict. In thinking about burnout in the
pastorate as interrole conflict it is useful to focus on the role of differentiation of self (DoS)
and emotional labour to manage this conflict. DoS is a family relationship characteristic
used in describing the pastor as leader (Friedman, 1985). As a differentiated leader, the
pastor is able to encourage value-based action in the face of challenges. For example,
Beebe (2007) describes how pastors taking a more value-based approach to leadership
are able to resolve conflict in the congregation better and reduce burnout.
In returning to discussion of DoS expressed as calling, it is important to provide a brief
summary of this doctrine. Stevens (1999) reviews the four primary ways that calling has
been used in Christian theology. The first sense of call is to become a disciple or Christian.
This type of call is sometimes referred to as salvific call. Next, there is the providential call
of God on the individual. This type of call provides meaning and a sense of God ordaining a
particular life situation or vocation. Third, calling also refers to charismatic gifting or super-
natural empowerment. Finally, calling is associated with inner motivation and feeling.
Frederick and Dunbar (2019) summarise these types of callings this way:
Combining what has been developed from calling thus far, it is a person’s response to (1) the
current circumstances of life, i.e., relationships, employment, (2) brings to fruition one’s abil-
ities and talents, in order to (3) advance the kingdom or reign of God. These definitions
have been summarized with Oz Guinness’s (2003) demarcation of calling as primary and sec-
ondary. (pp. 71–72)

In terms of primary calling, identity is paramount. Focused on one’s primary calling or iden-
tity as a Christian, the basis of one’s being is defined in relationship to God via Christ. Chris-
tians experience adoption into the family of God via Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Christ’s
identity becomes the believer’s identity. This new identity forms the value base for
relationships and actions. We call this DifC.
DifC allows Christians to express their identity (primary calling) via there secondary call-
ings. “If one’s primary calling entails finding one’s identity in Christ, this forms the basis for
distinctiveness or particularity. One’s values and goals are lived out by one’s identity being
expressed in marriage (among many other relational commitments)” (Frederick & Dunbar,
2019, p. 109). The focus on secondary calling emphasises the expression of identity in
relationships, social settings, and work. DifC in terms of calling incorporates the inner
motivation and experience of calling to motivate one to express one’s identity via one’s
vocation.
DifC entails finding satisfaction based on one’s identity as well. Satisfaction is important
in terms of competence relating to the family and the pastorate. Core or total identity is
founded in Christ. This core connects one to God (comradeship) and forms the values/
virtues or core beliefs (distinctiveness) that pastors use to engage in ministry. Sometimes
pastors (and others) equate their satisfaction in a domain with statements about their
overall identity (Beebe, 2007; Friedman, 1985). It is important to experience a sense of sat-
isfaction based on one’s secondary callings. The issue is using that type of satisfaction as a
reflection on one’s total identity. DifC expressed as calling bases one’s sense of satisfaction
180 S. DUNBAR ET AL.

primarily on one’s identity in Christ. An example of this is expressed in the baptism narra-
tive found in Mark 1:4-12. In this passage, John the Baptist baptizes Jesus. When Jesus
comes out of the water, a voice pronounces God’s love for Jesus, “You are my Son,
whom I love; with you I am well pleased” (Mark 1:11). Jesus then bases his ministry on
his identity – the Son of God. The pastor has the same basis for identity and calling – adop-
tion into the family of God via Christ’s gift.
Role salience is the ability to determine the relative importance of the demands of one
domain compared with the demands of the other. In other words, role salience or discern-
ment allows the individual to identify the valence (emotional tenor, and relative emotional
strength) and the accuracy of the demand in order to make a value-based response to the
demand. That is, individuals’ level of DoS allows for the management of anxiety and stress,
both inter- and intrapersonally, to manage the emotional pull of the demand (both
domains usually have highly emotional requests) as well as determine its relative
legitimacy. DoS provides psychological resources based on one’s identity to make these
determinations. For example, an individual with lower levels of DoS may tie his or her iden-
tity into the work domain. When demands are made from the home domain, these
demands are viewed in a more threatening manner, i.e., the home is making identity
demands. As a result, the individual becomes increasingly reactive to the family
members making the demands. DifC provides the value-based resources to determine
the relative salience of demands made either at home or in the pastorate. DifC allows
one to determine the most salient ways in which to express one’s primary calling when
experiencing pressure in different secondary domains. Because one’s total identity is
not constructed in either the pastorate or the family, but in Christ, the pastor is able to
acknowledge the legitimacy of the demand in the separate roles without responding to
them in an anxious manner. While there is no empirical literature connects DifC with
burnout and family conflict. Previous research has connected DoS to burnout, and spiri-
tuality to burnout (Frederick, Dunbar, Purrington, et al., 2018). However, the present
article builds theoretical networks between these concepts.
DifC is not independent of the family and the pastorate. DifC is one’s identity that is
expressed in both domains. If we think of DifC in terms of calling, the primary calling is
one’s core identity as a Christian. This primary calling is expressed through secondary call-
ings. For example, my identity as Christian is expressed as a father or mother or pastor (Fre-
derick & Dunbar, 2019; Guinness, 2003).
DifC, viewed through the lens of primary calling, speaks directly to salience and satis-
faction. DifC as primary calling grounds one’s selfhood in Christ and his adoption into
the family of God. When stressors arise, individuals with higher levels of DifC are able to
ground their identity in Christ and respond to the stressors in a Christ-like, value-based
manner. One is able to experience God’s overwhemling piece in the face of intense
anxiety and relational stressors and live out one’s secondary callings. As Edwin Friedman
(1985) warns, pastors with lower levels of DoS have difficulty separating their selfhood
from their role as pastor risk intense disappointment, and actually create dependency
on the part of the congregation. Leaders with lower levels of DoS are unable to (1)
respond in a value-based, non-reactive manner, and (2) they will likely maintain and repli-
cate reflexive, learned responses and relationship patterns from their family of origin, thus
making the organisation ineffective. That is, the congregation is unable to develop and
 MENTAL HEALTH, RELIGION & CULTURE 181

fulfil organisational goals outside of the drive and identity of the pastor. This makes BA and
boundary violations that much more impactful and stress-producing.
The pastor’s personal efforts to increase DoS allow for greater engagement at both
home and church. That is, pastors should be actively practicing differentiation practices
like (Frederick & Dunbar, 2019): (a) moving toward one-to-one relationships, (b) decreasing
participation in triangles that form in response to stress and anxiety, and (c) increasing
one’s emotional self-regulation. For example, research connects higher levels of DoS
with more relational forms of religious coping that are associated with increased psycho-
logal well-being (Frederick et al., 2016). Beebe’s (2007) research connects higher levels of
role differentiation, which is based on DoS, with lower levels of pastoral burnout and min-
istry turnover. These skills practiced in a highly emotional system like one’s nuclear family
will increase levels of differentiation that spillover into other life areas like work.
The final issue with DoS and the pastor concerns the foundation for identity. This is
where DifC is critical. The pastor that merges his or her identity with the leadership role
of the church will experience the boundary violation and amibiguity more personally –
as an attack on identity. Further, there will be no psychological space to engage in a
value-based decision-making process to determine role salience at a given time. With
higher levels of DifC, pastors’ identities are not solely contained either in the roles at
home or the church, thus providing the emotional distance to engage in responsive,
value-based action in determining role salience.
DifC provides the psychological resources to address satisfaction concerns. One’s satis-
faction in multiple roles is not directly tied to outcomes. Instead, satisfaction comes from
being adopted into God’s family via Christ’s saving work. One should recall the words
spoken of Jesus at his baptism from John the Baptist in Luke 3:22, “You are My beloved
Son. I take delight in You!” As Christians are baptized in solidarity with Christ, those
words are spoken over each believer. This experience and participation in the Kingdom
of God base satisfaction and well-being on Christ and not on humanity’s works. Similarly,
satisfaction spillover occurs when satisfaction in either work or family domains spillsover
into the other domain.
DifC also provides the psychological and practical skills necessary for coping with the
emotional labor (Hochschild, 1983) associated with the pastorate. Interaction with
people, besides leading to fatigue, requires the regulation of emotions and is thought
to trigger burnout (Rafaeli & Sutton, 1987). Sentiment override occurs when an immediate
emotional experience is effected, positively or negatively, by one preceding it. For
example, research shows that positive marital bonds influence how wives interpret
mildly negative affects and behaviour from their husbands (Hawkins et al., 2002). This sen-
timent override may also be negative like a pastor responding more angrily to a parishi-
oner right after having a negative interaction with a board member. DifC provides the
psychological resources needed to have insight into one’s emotional experiences. This
insight provides emotional regulation strategies allowing one to engage in emotion regu-
lation so that negative sentiments do not override current social engagements. This is
called surface acting. Deep acting, on the other hand, represents more of authentic
expression of one’s experience (Hochschild, 1983). DifC facilitates deep acting by integrat-
ing one’s self-knowledge (intrapersonal) with the maintainance of relationships with
others (interpersonal). Authentic expression reflects one’s views of others based on
one’s identity in Christ.
182 S. DUNBAR ET AL.

DifC provides the necessary resources as well as practical skills needed to prevent and
cope with burnout. First, DifC provides a solid identity base from which to engage in value-
based, goal-directed action. Second, DifC facilitates the adoption of Christian spiritual prac-
tices and disciplines to improve emotional regulation. As emotional regulation is crucial in
one’s ability to respond and not react to anxiety and stress, Christian spiritual disciplines
provide techniques and skills to improve this ability. Finally, DifC supports relationship
maintainence in the face of intense conflict and emotional pressure.
DifC entails a sense of care. Frederick and Dunbar (2019) describe care in this manner:
Care as stewardship, liberating, and spiritual empowerment culminates in humanity’s
doxological orientation to God. This means that humans collaborate and partner with
God as image-bearers. Living out the image of God as a doxological orientation makes
care an expression of stewardship, liberation, and being spiritually empowered. Work as
care supports the sustaining and maintaining work of God; it expresses order and lawful-
ness. (p. 89)
One way that pastors care for their congregations occurs through leadership. Pastors
support the spiritual growth of the congregation. As part of this leadership, pastors encul-
cate Christian virtues in the congregation and facilitate the congregation in ministry to the
world (VanHoozer & Strachan, 2015). Care is the expression of the pastor’s identity to tend
the congregation.
Burnout entails reduced capacity to care. As argued elsewhere, burnout eviscerates the
spiritual vitality of individuals (Frederick et al., 2018). Burnout exacerbates the sense of
emotional exhaustion or lack of sympathy and understanding for others’ concerns. That
is, the effects of emotional exhaustion on the individual is captured in the term acedia (Fre-
derick et al., 2018). Burnout is best captured as apathy – not caring or sympathising with
the plight of others – as well as indifference. Indifference may be thought of acting at the
surface level in order to address someone’s concern or need. Indifference is a dispassio-
nate response to the demands of others. However, this indifference is expressed in the
manner in which the needs are met. Indifference is simply going through the motions.
Care is the antidote in DifC terms to indifference and apathy. Pastors are able to
provide value-based care to those making demands. Further, care demonstrates the
value the pastor places on both the family and congregation.
The final aspect of DifC that is important for burnout is connecting. There are two
important aspects of connecting. First, connecting fosters relationships for the pastor per-
sonally. The pastor is part of the universal church, and the local church through the sense
of calling. The pastor is oriented toward expressing his or her calling in connection with
and the values and ministry of the Kingdom. At the same time, connecting facilitates
relationships between the pastor and the local congregation. “Christianity is connecting
others with the local community of believers, and this local community connects
through shared meaning-making to the larger kingdom of God” (Frederick & Dunbar,
2019, p. 100).
Calling, caring, and connecting are the primary virtues of DifC for pastors. These three
virtues provide the resources necessary for pastors to prevent and cope with bunrout due
to role ambiguity and interrole conflict. Further, these virtues allow pastors to experience
satisfaction based on engaging in their work and family vocations via their identity in
Christ. This identity-based perspective fosters skills needed to discern role salience. We
turn now to discuss some specific tools useful for this process. The next section will
 MENTAL HEALTH, RELIGION & CULTURE 183

provide several concret spiritual practices that may be useful for pastors in preventing and
coping with burnout.

Coping with pastoral burnout

Prayer is perhaps the most central Christian spiritual disciple to prevent and cope with
burnout. For example, Chandler examines the role of Christian spiritual renewal prac-
tices, including prayer, along with rest-taking and community support systems to
reduce burnout among pastors (2009). Chandler’s study demonstrates the positive
role of Christian spiritual practices on pastoral burnout. Prayer is intimately connected
with DifC. Prayer reconnects pastors with their identities in Christ. Further, prayer
allows pastors to identify role salience and develop role satisfaction (based on their
role as a child of God). As burnout is an extreme experience of emotional depletion,
spiritual reinvigoration is key to coping with it (Frederick et al., 2018). To reinvigorate
one’s spirit, prayer is the key. One form of prayer is daily use of the Jesus Prayer
(Talbot, 2013). The Jesus Prayer simply is, “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy
on me, a sinner.” Talbot recommends using the prayer daily in one’s devotional life.
Since it is a shorter prayer, it is useful to recall and meditate on when stress or
conflict arises in one’s daily life. For one’s daily spiritual practice, Talbot provides reflec-
tions on each of the words in the Jesus Prayer. In moments of stress, the individual may
simply recall and recite the prayer in order to reconnect with God’s spirit in the prayer
and call on Christ’s redeeming feature. Rubinart et al. (2017) describe the positive
benefits of the Jesus Prayer on improving mood and emotional well-being. Additionally,
research has demonstrated the effectiveness of the Jesus Prayer on reducing stress,
even in the short-term (Knabb & Vasquez, 2018).

Conclusion
Burnout has been shown to exist in a multitude of careers, particularly those in service-
oriented fields. This includes pastors who are often called to serve congregants during
high-stress emergencies and outside of work hours. Feeling called to serve God through
the pastoral vocation, pastors may experience work-family imbalances, inter-role
conflict, negative physical/psychological effects, and emotional labour. Such experience
may lead pastors to experience burnout.
Multiple coping mechanisms exist to help pastors mitigate burnout. For example, deep
acting promotes role salience, a key dimension in allowing a pastor to make value-based
responses to demands. Another coping mechanism is DoS, which consists of an intraper-
sonal perspective and an interpersonal perspective, which allows pastors to manage rela-
tional anxiety in order to maintain value-based actions and relationships. Finally, DifC
promotes salience and satisfaction by enabling pastors to ground their identities in
Christ, and enabling pastors to respond to stressors in a Christ-like, value-based manner.
As such, DifC aids pastors in maintaining relationships in the face of intense conflict
and emotional pressure. Finally, pastors may use the practices of prayer mindfulness to
mitigate burnout.
184 S. DUNBAR ET AL.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Kristen Sandberg for her assistance with the manuscript.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

References
Allen, T. D., & Martin, A. (2017). The work-family interface: A retrospective look at 20 years of research
in JOHP. Journal of Occupational and Health Psychology, 22(3), 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1037/
ocp0000065
American Psychologist. (1999). Gold medal award for life achievement in the practice of psychology:
Herbert J. Freudenberger. American Psychologist, 54(8), 578–580. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.54.8.578
Balswick, J. O., & Balswick, J. K. (2006). A model for marriage: Covenant, grace, empowerment, and inti-
macy. IVP Academic.
Balswick, J. O., Ebstyne King, P., & Reimer, K. S. (2005). The reciprocating self: Human development in
theological perspective. IVP Academic.
Barnard, L., & Curry, J. (2011). The relationship of clergy burnout to self-compassion and other per-
sonality dimensions. Pastoral Psychology, 61(2), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-011-
0377-0
Beebe, R. S. (2007). Predicting burnout, conflict management style, and turnover among clergy.
Journal of Career Assessment, 15(2), 257–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072706298157
Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy and clinical practice. Jason Aronson.
Carlson, D. S., Thompson, M. J., & Kacmar, K. M. (2019). Double crossed: The spillover and crossover
effects of work demands on work outcomes through the family. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104
(2), 214–228. https://doi.org/10.1037/ap10000348
Chandler, D. J. (2009). Pastoral burnout and the impact of personal spiritual renewal, rest-taking, and
support system practices. Pastoral Psychology, 58(3), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089008-
0184-4
Coverman, S. (1989). Role overload, role conflict, and stress: Addressing consequences of multiple
role demands. Social Forces, 67(4), 965–982. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/67.4.965
Doolittle, B. (2010). The impact of behaviors upon burnout among parish-based clergy. Journal of
Religion and Health, 49(1), 88–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-008-9217-7
Fitcher, J. H. (1984). The myth of clergy burnout. Sociology of Religion, 45(4), 373–382. https://doi.org/
10.2307/3711300
Francis, L., Emslie, N., & Pyne, V. J. (2019). The effect of emotional intelligence on work-related
psychological health among Anglican Clergy in Wales. Journal of Religion and Health, 58(5),
1631–1647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-019-00798-7
Frederick, T. V., & Dunbar, S. E. (2019). A Christian approach to work and family burnout: Calling, caring,
and connecting. Lexington Books.
Frederick, T. V., Dunbar, S. E., & Purrington, S. (2016). Differentiation of self, religious coping, and sub-
jective well-being. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 19(6), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13674676.2016.1216530
Frederick, T. V., Dunbar, S. E., Purrington, S., Fisher, S. Y., & Ardito, R. (2018). Exploring the relative con-
tributions of differentiation of self and mindfulness for predicting burnout. In L. Brewer (Ed.),
Meditation: Practice, techniques, and health benefits (pp. 185–204). Nova Science Press.
Frederick, T. V., Dunbar, S. E., & Thai, Y. (2018). Burnout in Christian perspective. Pastoral Psychology,
67, 267–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-017-0799-4
Friedman, E. (1985). From generation to generation: Family process in church and synagogue. Guilford.
 MENTAL HEALTH, RELIGION & CULTURE 185

Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of
Management Review, 10(1), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4277352
Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K., & Shaw, J. (2003). The relation between work-family balance and quality
of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(3), 510–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/S00018791
(02)00042-8
Greenhaus, J. H., & Powell, G. H. (2006). When work and family are allies: A theory of work-family
enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 72–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.
19379625
Guinness, O. (2003). The call: Finding and fulfilling the central purpose of your life. Thomas Nelson
Publishers.
Hawkins, M., Careere, S., & Gottman, J. (2002). Marital sentiment override: Does it influence couples’
perceptions? Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(1), 193–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.
2002.00193.x
Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart. University of California Press.
Jawahar, I. M., Kisamore, J. L., Stone, T. H., & Rahn, D. L. (2012). Differential effect of interrole conflict
on proactive individual’s experience of burnout. Journal of Business Psychology, 27, 243–254.
https://doi.org/10.1007/sl0869-011-9234-5
Kalliath, T., & Brough, P. (2008). Work-life balance: A review of the meaning of the balance construct.
Journal of Management & Organization, 14, 323–327.
Kerr, M. E., & Bowen, M. (1988). Family evaluation. Norton.
Knabb, J. J., & Vasquez, V. E. (2018). A randomized controlled trial of a 2-week internet-based contem-
plative prayer program for Christians with daily stress. Spirituality in Clinical Practice, 5(1), 37–53.
https://doi.org/10.1037/scp0000154
Lee, C. (1995). Rethinking boundary ambiguity from an ecological perspective: Stress in Protestant
clergy families. Family Process, 34(1), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.1995.00075.x
Lee, C. (1999). Specifying intrusive demands and their outcomes in congregational ministry: A report
on the Ministry Demands Inventory. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 38(4), 477–489.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1387607
Lee, C., & Iverson-Gilbert, J. (2003). Demand, support, and perception in family-related stress among
Protestant clergy. Family Relations, 52(3), 249–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.
00249.x
Lee, Y. H. (2019). Emotional labor, teacher burnout, and turnover intention in high-school physical
education teaching. European Physical Education Review, 25(1), 236–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1356336X17719559
Maslach, C., Jackson, S., & Leiter, M. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory manual (3rd ed.). Mind Garden,
Inc.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. (1997). The truth about burnout: How organizations cause personal stress and
what to do about it. Jossey-Bass Inc.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W., & Leiter, M. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397–
422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
Maxon, R. (2011, November 29). Stress in the workplace: A costly epidemic. Fairleigh Dickinson
University Magazine. http://www.fdu.edu/newspubs/magazine/99su/stress.html
Olsen, D., & Grosch W. (1991) Clergy burnout: A self psychology and systems perspective. Journal of
Pastoral Care, 45(3), 297–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/002234099104500310
Peterson, E. (1989). The contemplative pastor: Returning to the art of spiritual direction. Eerdmans.
Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1987). Expression of emotion as part of the work role. Academy of
Management Review, 12, 23–37.
Randall, K. (2007). Examining the relationship between burnout and age among Anglican clergy in
England and Wales. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 10(1), 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13674670601012303
Rubinart, M., Fornieles, A., & Deus, J. (2017). The psychological impact of the Jesus prayer among non-
conventional Catholics. Pastoral Psychology, 66(4), 487–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-017-
0762-4
St. Gregory the Great. (2007). The book of pastoral rule. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press.
186 S. DUNBAR ET AL.

Stevens, R. P. (1999). The other six days: Vocation, work and ministry in Biblical perspective. Eerdmans.
Talbot, J. (2013). The Jesus prayer: A cry for mercy, a path of renewal. InterVarsity Press.
Titelman, P. (2014). The concept of differentiation of self in Bowen theory. In P. Titelman (Ed.),
Differentiation of self: Bowen family systems perspectives (pp. 3–64). Routledge.
Turton, D. W., & Francis, L. J. (2007). The relationship between attitude toward prayer and professional
burnout among Anglican parochial clergy in England: Are praying clergy healthier clergy? Mental
Health, Religion & Culture, 10(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670601012246
VanHoozer, K. J., & Strachan, O. (2015). The pastor as public theologian: Reclaiming a lost vision. Baker
Academic.
Vieira, J. M., Matias, M., Lopez, F. G., & Matos, P. M. (2018). Work-family conflict and enrichment: An
exploration of dyadic typologies of work-family balance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 109, 152–
165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.007
Visker, J., Rider, T., & Humphers-Ginther, A. (2016). Ministry-related burnout and stress coping mech-
anisms among Assemblies of God-ordained clergy in Minnesota. Journal of Religion and Health, 56
(3), 951–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-016-0295-7