District Executive's Page

TJD Home

Boundary Crossing/Crossing Boundaries

By Qiyamah A. Rahman, Thomas Jefferson District Executive

Boundaries

Recently I came across the following message in a congregational newsletter, “We are concerned about the safety of our children, especially after service when adults are busy with meetings and fellowship business.  We have established guidelines, which we hope will keep them safe: 1. WALK when inside the building and 2. OUTSIDE BOUNDARIES – stay within the following borders: between the back of our building and the front of the Memorial Garden.”  We would be so lucky if everything in life were so clear and simple.  As a District Executive I find that some ministerial boundaries tend not to be clear, and if taught, are not easily understood and internalized by aspirants.

Rev. Ellen Brandenburg, Director of Ministerial Education at the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations believes that while boundary violations such as clergy sexual misconduct are more dramatic and draw our greatest attention and consternation, it is the more subtle situations that are more frequent yet often undetected until too late.  For example, internships where the students fail to realize that the nature of their relationships with church members has changed.  Brandenburg suggests that some interns typically forget their relationships are no longer “mutual.” Such oversights open up the possibility for boundary violations.  Such students, Brandenburg states, sometimes forget that they are there to serve the needs of the congregation as a minister and to learn how to be a professional.  “They must get their PERSONAL needs met elsewhere”, she contends. “They can’t dump their feelings, especially about the minister, on church members. This is particularly difficult when young students go far away to an internship site where they don’t know anyone.  This is very risky,” warns Brandenburg.

Why is it so risky? She believes it is risky for a number of reasons.  The combination of loneliness, lack of awareness, poor sense of self, and emotional vulnerability may be the triggers that desensitize aspirants.  This in turn may create a disconnect from the professional ethics that they would normally be guided by. This combination renders individuals vulnerable to poorly functioning boundaries that ordinarily might be present.  It is the lonely intern that wants to be liked at all costs that is at risk of boundary violations.  It is the over functioning workaholic that is at risk of boundary violations. But equally at risk is an individual that has no sense of the power and authority of their role as aspirant or “minister.”  It is the individual who naively wants to be one of the parishioners, yet denies any difference between themselves and their parishioners.  This individual may be as dangerous as the “predator” who consciously uses their power to “have their needs met regardless of the cost to others.” 

While some research suggests that the likelihood of a minister’s involvement in misconduct, such as illicit sexual behavior, cannot be predicted solely by the presence of unfulfilled personal needs, inadequate marital relationships, lack of peer accountability, spiritual coldness, and immaturity, Rev. Deborah Pope-Lance, a UU minister that conducts trainings on ethics, asserts the single most important factor in predicting misconduct is the lack of safeguards existing within the ministerial role.  The risk of misconducting behavior is inherent in the very job of minister, according to Pope-Lance because the nature of ministry is about intimacy. In order to do ministry it requires being in intimate relationship with others. People let ministers into a vulnerable part of their lives according to Rev. Mary Higgins, District Executive in the Florida District.  Because of their role, ministers are invited into the most sacred parts of individuals’ lives and parishioners assume a level of safety with an aspirant/minister.

Boundary suggests the Safe Congregations Panel of the UUAs Restorative Justice for All initiative is, “the perimeter of a rule or a generally accepted norm governing relationships between people, including sexual behavior between Ministers and others, e.g. inappropriate words and overtones, and physical movement or contact.” [1]

While it is important to talk about individual boundary violations, there is a danger in overly focusing on individual incidents at the risk of ignoring the systematic nature of the patterns of power and oppression in our society. We therefore need to examine some of the ordinary assumptions about power dynamics and existing dominance relations that particularly victimize women.  Such discrepancies in power are at the heart of ministerial misconduct and often include vast differences in age, race, culture, size, abilities and access to resources. Such vulnerabilities create a lack of options, thus resulting an individual’s vulnerability.  Aspirants should be exposed to concepts of dominance in their ministerial education that better help them examine and better understand power dynamics as related to their roles as ministers. When ministers ignore their professional codes of conduct they diminish their capacity to do an effective job.  It is also important that aspirants understand that boundaries are useful and important guidelines in maintaining their greatest effectiveness, and that ministry is hard and complicated work.

Prevention

The ageless maxim, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” is an appropriate reminder in this discussion about boundaries.  The difference between a “wanderer” and a “predator” according to Pope-Lance is that a “wanderer” can approach the boundaries and come back.  Predators will see the boundaries and continue past them. Much of our denominational focus as UUs has been legalistic, with little emphasis on the ethical parameters.  Ethics on the other hand is about competency.  It is about making the highest levels of standards and projecting them as professional codes of conduct.  The following might serve as a reminder to a wanderer and call him or her back to right relations. A boundary violation is:

1. A violation of the ministerial role and a breach of fiduciary responsibility
2. A misuse of authority and power
3. An abuse of power that takes advantage of someone vulnerable
4. The absence of meaningful consent
5. Irreparable damage to one’s profession, career, loved ones and the victim(s) involved.
6. Never the fault or responsibility of the victim but is always the responsibility of the professional

As sexual beings we all have sexual thoughts and feelings.  It is good to be aware of them and to manage them appropriately.  However, the following behaviors are inappropriate and would never be considered acceptable behavior by an aspirant or minister.  They are offered as points for discussion and not intended to be a comprehensive list:

1. Sexualizing any relationship with a child, parishioner, staff person or persons one is called to serve as minister
2. Use of pornography with youth; downloading and/or viewing pornography
3. A minister that continues to provide pastoral counseling and encourages contact after a parishioner has indicated an inappropriate interest, comes on to the aspirant/minister, or attempts to sexualize the relationship
4. Verbalized sexual innuendos, jokes, and /or comments about body parts particularly sexual parts of body
5. Behaves seductively and flirtatiously, expressing excessive flattery designed to manipulate individual(s)
6. Uses information learned in professional role to manipulate a person’s weaknesses
7. Utilizes parishioner friendships to meet personal and emotional needs
8. Holds secrets for the purpose of manipulation, hiding wrongdoing, or enrolling one’s victim in the secrecy
9. Demonizing an individual that s/he has victimized so others will be less likely to believe them or to divert accountable, eg., “you know how so and so is”
10. Has knowledge of a colleague’s misconduct and does nothing

While the Unitarian Universalist Minister’s Association Guidelines do not preclude a minister dating a single parishioner a boundary violation an aspirant/minister would need to approach a dating relationship within the congregation with extreme caution.

Maintaining Healthy Boundaries

The following list identifies some sure ways to guard against boundary violations:

1. Build networks for personal support and professional growth so that you have appropriate peers to form and engage close and healthy relationships.
2. Cultivate the difficult, but necessary art of empathetic detachment so you are available but not “available.” This will diminish the possibility of forming unhealthy counseling relationships.
3. Practice self-care, including proper eating, sleeping and exercising.  Maintain spiritual disciplines.  Seek interventions when necessary – minister, heal thyself and do no harm.  A healthy mind, body and spirit will nurture a balanced disposition with healthy boundaries.
4. Take time for yourself to - love and nurture yourself - so that you are not looking for love and nurturance in inappropriate ways with inappropriate individuals.
5. Do not try to heal yourself through your counselees or your work.
6. Cultivate your right brain thinking and trust your instincts.  If you have a feeling that things are moving in an unhealthy direction, act with prudence.

As aspiring ministers you have a moral responsibility to prevent injurious behaviors while maintaining the integrity of your ministerial relationships formed over the course of your career.

Happy journey and may it be so!