I entirely agree with you that no personality type should be elevated. There are strengths and weaknesses to all of them. The shame is that they are, at least as far as some congregations and cultures are concerned.

That said, I like your idea of using MBTI to reflect on your sins. Provided it’s that, and not an attempt to compensate for gifts you don’t have, I think that’s creative and constructive.

Welcome here and thanks for the comment. I’m sorry if you’re having a tough time. That in essence was why I did this research as part of a sabbatical. I have moved appointments since then, but certainly I did not fit in a lot of ways in the appointment I was in at the time. I discovered (when it was too late) a hidden bias towards extraversion in what many of the people wanted, and the research was an attempt to deal with the strains this caused. To discover from my questionnaire just how low down INTP was rated by ministers and congregations underlined the pain.

I don’t know what tradition or denomination you’re in, but in the Methodist Church here in the UK the ‘Chair of District’ (somewhat like a bishop) is a key person in finding new appointments for ministers. I talked extensively with mine about what I’d been through, and to cut a long story short the result was the place I’m now in, where I’m much more accepted and my gifts are far more highly welcomed. Maybe there are channels like that open to you?

I think that’s a really important insight, and takes MBTI further than I’ve heard it expounded before. I’ve heard MBTI referenced as a tool for working on your weaknesses, but never before have I heard it connected to characteristic sins of different personality types. I’m grateful for you airing it here.

Some quick thoughts. I think churches take different approaches. Here are a few I’ve noticed.

1. Some churches do expect the minister to be ‘good at everything’. I think that attitude is decreasing, but it can still be present – not necessarily individually, but sometimes as the sum of conflicting aspirations in a congregation, perhaps when seeking a new leader. There is also here the exact danger you mention, of wanting someone to do Christian ministry for them. These are churches that buy a dog and refuse to wag their own tails.

2. Some churches are more realistic than 1 above and recognise no minister will have the gifts to fulfil every leadership rôle. When a minister with a certain set of strengths and weaknesses leaves, they seek someone who can compensate for what the departing leader was not good at. While these churches are good at accepting the limitations of their ministers, they fail to fill out the other gifts, as would be possible in some kind of team leadership model. I don’t think it even has to be one based on ‘paid staff’, as at St Andrew’s Chorleywood; the gifts may well be present in the congregation.

3. I think there’s a real problem with those who simply follow the inherited view of the minister, based on an understanding that ordained ministry is about preaching the word to the faithful, celebrating the sacraments and exercising pastoral care. Not that any of these things should be demeaned, they are essential parts of church life, and it’s not far from the internal leadership in the NT at Philippi according to Paul’s letter to them. However, I suggest this model of ministry comes from the Christendom culture of the past, when everybody was assumed to be at least a nominal Christian who just needed to be called back to a lapsed faith. Doctrinally, several historic denominations are left with this view of ordained ministry when we are no longer in a Christendom culture, but a missionary situation in exile. Here, the fivefold ministries and/or other models become an important corrective. The trouble comes when denominations speak of having ‘received’ these ministries, which makes it sound like they are so God-given that no deviation is allowable. Then the apostles, prophets and evangelists end up pushed to the fringes, and – in a move smacking of self-fulfilling prophecy – are labelled as mavericks.

I know St Andrews Chorleywood had 5 clergy on its staff at one point, and each one was suited more to one of the five roles (they made sure they covered all the bases!), and they felt this balanced things well for them, which each person able to champion the cause & need of things that other roles might neglect. Of course most churches don’t have the luxury of having 5 clergy on staff!

I wonder if churches cruelly expect their Minister (or Vicar or Pastors etc etc no matter what NAME they are called), to be good at all five roles.

BUT, I also wonder if in certain church streams/denominations, they tend towards wanting any of those roles more than some of the others. In other words… are your results actually more indicative of churches desiring a particular role/s from their clergy that is more “ENFP” than the others? Is that what our churches are seeking?

Of course maybe the 5 fold roles don’t align with personality traits at all…. but for example, is a shift away from “intellectuals”, a shift away from wanting a “Teacher” as a minister? Would a survey like this in another time, or denomination/stream, have produced widely different results? Would a extremely conservative evangelical church want a more “intellectual” minister because of the value they place upon teaching?

Do churches want more “Pastoral” ministers these days? Maybe they want a leader who is an “Evangelists” so they don’t have to do it themselves?

Anyone have any thoughts?

So Rachel wants to be a minister’s wife? Well, I have to tell you when a minister friend of mine started dating the woman who became his wife, her (almost) first words were, “The Lord has called me to be a minister’s wife”! So watch out! Of course there were all those conversations years ago about you being a missionary …

I think you know what to do about seeking guidance, so I won’t launch into that one. Great to hear from you again. Hope you are well and that parenthood is proving good.

If you ever fancied a dip into Enneagram, then Michael Hampson has done some very interesting work in that area.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Head-versus-Heart-reactions-twentyfirst/dp/1903816920/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242338434&sr=8-2

I went to a day long workshop he ran, and it was very good. He’s an ex- Baptist Pastor (I think), who left to do new development work on extending the Enneagram model, and he is very keen to not let people hide behind the “this is who I am, so I can’t change” type attitude.

Anyway, back to your research, I’ve found it most interesting. Not being a MBTI type person, I couldn’t remember my personality type off hand… so I looked it up… and found I was most likely a ENFP!!! Which is funny, because Rachel said to me just this week (in an unrelated conversation)… “I’d like to be a minister’s wife!”.

Do I have any hope? Or am I just postponing the inevitable!