Relational Saturation: When our Love for People Turns to Burnout - Part 2

Authors Jeff and Sara Simons April 2015

Part 1 - Relational Saturation: When our Love for People Turns to Burnout

Are you able to “un-plug” and put down work and relational dynamics on a regular basis? 

Do you have places to process and connect outside of your direct ministry context and donor base? That’s what matters for resiliency…

Areas We’re Drowning Ourselves…

How do we think creatively about this with the ever-increasing pressure to grow the connections in our context, with those back home, and with those available to us virtually?

Joseph Myers, in his work, Search to Belong, provides a helpful construct for us to process this for our personal areas of relational saturation and management. He labels the 4 relational spheres in which we develop our personalities, culture and communication and through which we move towards creating a sense of belonging: 

·       Intimate sphere (often only 1-3 people in your life actually are intimate connections); e.g. married couple, very close friendships, close siblings: “Intimate Belonging occurs when we share “naked” information and are not ashamed” (Myers 67).

·       Personal sphere (3-9 people connecting); e.g. closer person or group of friends, often share with deeper passion/knowledge: “Personal belonging occurs when we share private (but not ‘naked’) experiences, feelings, and thoughts” (67).

·       Social sphere (usually between 8-25 people connecting); e.g. new small groups, work teams or groups : “Social belonging occurs when we share ‘snapshots’ of who we are” (65).

·       Public sphere (25 or more connecting) “Public belonging occurs when people connect through an outside influence [such as a team or a church]” (64).

Now, obviously there is overlap between these spheres of connection for us in our day-to-day. However, one thing that may surprise us, especially in the ministry world, is that in all 4 spheres we have potential to connect, to be committed and participate, and to find the connection significant. 

Contrary to ideas and fads, belonging is not demonstratively achieved through more time, more commitment, more purpose, more personality, more proximity, or more small groups. These can be helpful environments, but don’t show a promising track record for yielding increased “belonging” in people. Belonging happens spontaneously when the environment is conducive. Therefore attention to the environment for others and ourselves, and realistic expectations for the level of appropriate connection that can take place in that setting becomes very important. People must move from the public sphere first and must do so willingly. Contrary to many relationally-minded people, not ALL people want to move or even should move from the public to the intimate sphere. Ultimate health and balance in one’s relational health is determined by the balance in all four.

Community—the goal humankind has sought since the beginning of time—is achieved when we hold harmonious connections within all four spaces. Harmony means more public belongings than social. More social belongings than personal. And very few intimate. True community accomplished through the significant relationships we embrace in all four. This study provides insight into the environments we spend our time in, and sheds a light on the appropriateness of our expectations for connection in those environments. 

How many times have you participated in a small group (or the like) that formed out of a larger community or gathering? The first few meetings often involve telling our life stories in an attempt to quickly form “intimacy” and commitment. Within the walls of the church the focus is most often on two spheres: the public and the intimate to the neglect of the other two spheres. The balance is what is needed for healthy community and more importantly like Clinton would say, support structures. We ourselves fall into the same trap, and then feel the inauthenticity and guilt that relates.

The principal power behind all of this is that we are given a construct with helpful guides/boundaries to be able to evaluate our significant connections in our social life, to determine if there are areas that are missing, or would be good to lean into; and if there are areas that we are over-saturated for whatever reason, and need to healthily take a step back and give ourselves grace and boundaries. Seasons of transition and grieving are especially unique seasons of grace extension. The ultimate goal is for healthy balance and authentic, reciprocated relationships. It is here that we can find healthy balance and avoid unnecessary emotion burnout and fatigue, or unnecessary loneliness and isolation. That we would be able to effectively and authentically engage and know when we are able to give and when we are not.

Some key questions that could emerge from these principles:

• Which sphere is most challenging, or confused for you currently?

• Which sphere is most life-giving and healthy for you?

• Is there a relationship and connection that you feel you need to either consider more realistic boundaries, give yourself more grace, or that the Spirit may be nudging you to be more open?

• In what ways, if any, do these perspectives change the way you are doing, or will do ministry in the future?

• In what ways do you need to give yourself grace in the pressure you feel for connection levels in your context?

• In what ways do you need to credit others with more trust and grace, allowing them to belong to the space they choose in this season?