What is in Kelvin's Head?

Who is the happiest of the them all?

21/03/2014

Mirror, mirror, on the wall….
Who is the happiest of them all?

Turns out the answer is clergy.

According to the BBC, the government is beginning to include measures of happiness in what it attempts to do and part of that has been trying to quantify who the happiest people are in society. Turns out the answer at the top of the list is “vicars/priests”.

I’m not at all surprised. Oh, but there’s so much to say about it – not least the fact that I know plenty of clergy who are very far from happy. My hunch is that those who are unhappy in this job tend not to be unhappy about the essence of the job and are frustrated because they can’t vicar enough to fulfil the hopes that they once had. (My apologies for verbing the noun in that last sentence).

The list itself is fascinating as it lists job categories by average income too. Second most happy people are CEOs bringing in lots of dosh.

Here’e the top ten happy categories:

(Rank) Occupation	Mean income (£s)
(1) Clergy	20,568
(2) Chief executives and senior officials	117,700
(3) Managers and proprietors in agriculture and horticulture	31,721
(4) Company secretaries	18,176
(5) Quality assurance and regulatory professionals	42,898
(6) Health care practice managers	31,267
(7) Medical practitioners	70,648
(8) Farmers	24,520
(9) Hotel and accommodation managers and proprietors	32,470
(10) Skilled metal, electrical and electronic trades supervisors	35,316

I’ve been asking myself why it is that clergy come out at the top. Some combination of the following factors is probably at work:

Very high degree of autonomy – notwithstanding bishops, presbyteries and other forms of oversight, clergy have to be very self-motivated.
We are in the joy business.
There’s a relatively high level of vocational testing before you get in – the churches try to select those who are most likely to cope with a very odd life.
High satisfaction levels around being with people in trauma and emotional need – you know you are doing good very often
High level of variety in daily life.
It is a life not a job.
Inner calling is a greater motivator than money – you don’t go into it for more money.
Lots of opportunity to develop a life where internal reflection allows you to work through your own stuff.
The job involves telling people they are loved and learning how much you yourself are loved too.
You get to walk into places and situations where others are frightened and help them deal with their fears.
Worship.

I’ll write sometime about why clergy are not happy. But for today, I’d be interested in any further comments about why clergy are happy.

Anyone?

vocation, why clergy are happy

10 responses to “So, let me get this right…”

Andrew Page

16/02/2013

I think you have understood if correctly (or at least as fully as it can be understood).

This just shows how confused the church has become, or how keen it is to tie itself into the proverbial knots to appease both progressives and traditionalists.

Either way, this position is both absurd and intellectually unsustainable.

Reply
Kirstin

16/02/2013

Kelvin can I ask what submissions you are referring to, is there a new one?

Reply
Joan H Craig

16/02/2013

I think that, once marriage law is passed, current civil partnerships can convert to marriage by filling form, etc. Don’t think they said what happens if the couple want a religious marriage – or did I miss that?
If our churches persist in saying no to marriage, wouldn’t it be better to do the blessing after they’ve converted their civil status – as in some countries where every marriage is a civil ceremony, and any religious service is done afterwards
I hope everyone has completed the most recent consultation paper

Reply
Rhea

16/02/2013

I think that the church wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants everyone to be happy, and this is probably the best way that it knows to do this.

Is it ridiculous? Of course.

Reply
Kelvin Holdsworth

16/02/2013

There is to be a new one. I’ve not seen it. I understand that the position that the Faith and Order Board is holding to is that “church teaching” is what Canon 31 says – that and nothing else and therefore we are doctrinally against change.

Is that not the case?

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  16/02/2013
  
  So far as I understand it, the SEC has not moved in its position since the first response at all.
  
  The first response included this:
  Question 10: Do you agree that the law in Scotland should be changed to allow same sex marriage?
  The Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church (Canon 31) state that the doctrine of the Church is that marriage is â€˜a physical, spiritual and mystical union of one man and one woman created by their mutual consent of heart, mind and will thereto, and as a holy and lifelong estate instituted of Godâ€™. In the light of that Canon, there is no current basis for agreeing that the law should be changed to view marriage as possible between two people of the same sex.
  
  Reply
2. Kirstin
  
  16/02/2013
  
  The SEC’s last response was in line with what the current law was, indeed still is, this consultation asks a very different question. To which the answer ‘well it isn’t legal, so we can’t say’, (I paraphrase) can’t be the answer this time, can it?
  Of course Canon 31 also states it is a “lifelong estate” but had clause 4 added at a later date to allow for divorce and remarriage.
  
  Reply
Rev David Coleman

16/02/2013

I was watching the evidence to the Westminster parliamentary committees the other day. In all these things, even from churches which are prepared to be tentatively in favour, or declining to be opposed, what is missing from all the evidence is the human experience of joy and delight that actually characterises a true and good wedding, of any combination of partners. How can we get across the compelling and converting happiness when processes take the form they do?

Reply
Rosemary Hannah

17/02/2013

Is there any way of getting hold of the board – of ordinary church members getting hold of it and making it listen?? I mean I know my approach tends to lack in subtlety what it makes up for in directness, but then, well, it is very direct.

Reply
Kimberly

17/02/2013

Rosemary, of all the many beautiful sentences you have written, that is the very very best.

Reply