RELATIONAL COMMUNICATION ABOUT RELIGIOUS DIFFERENCES AMONG IN- LAWS: A CASE STUDY ABOUT THE QUALITY AND HEALTH OF IN-LAW RELATIONSHIPS IN ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN FAMILIES Anastasia A. Widmer A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY December 2013 Committee: Dr. Sandra L. Faulkner, Advisor Dr. Judy L. Adams Graduate Faculty Representative Dr. Lynda D. Dixon Dr. Laura Martin Lengel © 2013 Anastasia A. Widmer All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Sandra L. Faulkner, Advisor This dissertation explores relational communication of in-laws in multi-religious families of American Orthodox Christians and represents an interpretive analysis of collected personal narratives. These narratives describe American Orthodox Christian identity in in-law relationships that is directly tied to ethnic identity. Thus, the presented research is built on the findings about multi-religious and multiethnic family relationships in the fields of relational communication, family therapy, and religious studies. I argue that religion and ethnicity are fundamental bases for the formation of family identity and family culture. Therefore, this dissertation focuses on how religious differences impact the relational health and quality of communication among the in- laws. The theoretical framework of the study is Relational Dialectic Theory; I focus on its two major premises: (1) relationships are products of cultures in which they develop and (2) the broader cultures offer a variety of meanings that we attach to our relationships, many of them are oppositional to each other. To explain relational dialectics in in-law relationships, I used the concept family culture and adopted the critical perspective on acculturation. I argue that there exists a natural connection between acculturation and relational dialectical tensions: people find themselves in constant push towards and pull away from a non-native family culture. (For example, identified in my research dialectical tensions of integration – separation, closedness – openness, which constitute discursive oppositions of wanting to preserve old family culture – wanting to develop independent new family culture and stigmatized – iv stigmatizing Orthodox identity, provide support for my argument.) The combination of these theoretical frameworks allowed me to offer another perspective on existing research of in-law relationships. Particularly, I provide a critique to Morr Serewicz’ in- law love triangle and argue that it is an amorphous structure in which the composition of its relationships perpetually changes in the relational contexts defined by constantly fluctuating dialectical tensions. In addition, this dissertation focuses on the intersections of religious, ethnic, and gender identities in in-law relationships. The attention to these intersections helped to reveal that the meanings participants attach to their faith are influenced by the larger political discourses about ethnicity, faith, and gender. v For Dave and Nicholas. I love you both very much! vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation would not be possible without an immense support of the people around me. First, I would like to thank my advisor and my mentor Dr. Sandra Faulkner. It is after her two amazing courses of Philosophical Foundations and Relational Communication that my dissertation started shaping into something real. I thank her for pushing me to the best of myself in thinking and writing. She taught me what it means to make an argument and defend it – the best skill training one could ask for in academic career and in life. She showed social sciences to me in a whole different light. From her, I learned that social science work is a creative process that can turn into a work of art, poetry. Dr. Faulkner’s approach to research, teaching, and advising remains an inspiration for me. I thank her for all her time and dedication! I am a better person, scholar, and teacher because of her. Second, I am honored to have worked with amazing committee members Drs. Lynda Dixon, Laura Lengel, and Judy Adams. They supported and encouraged me throughout this project. Their wisdom and unique talents shaped me as a writer and as a scholar in a variety of ways. Their insightful feedback pushed me in directions I did not think possible. This dissertation also belongs to my friends and family. I would like specially thank my mentor and my friend Karen for her enormous help with editing the final draft of my dissertation. Karen is a very special person for me: I feel happy when I am with her. Also, my friends Alex, Marne, and Michelle would keep me from going insane and would save me from occasional drowning in my own despair. I thank Alex for asking me some great questions; the answers to these questions became a part of this dissertation and guide me in my career. I thank Marne for her never-ending positive vibes, warmth, vii and smiles. I thank Michelle for her friendship, optimism, and advice. I also thank my mother- and father-in-law for their patience and support in my process of understanding of what it means to be an in-law. I now want to thank the very special people in my life: my Mom, my Dad, and my son Nicholas. I thank my Mom and my Dad for always believing in me, loving me, and sending their support from far-far away. Hours spent with them on skype venting my frustrations or sharing my successes became an imperative part of the dissertation writing process. My baby Nicholas, although he is almost as old as my dissertation, has managed to teach me many lessons. Above all, he taught me to let things go and be happy at a moment. I do not think I can clearly articulate my gratitude and love to them. Finally, I would like to acknowledge my amazing husband Dave who deserves an honorary PhD for his never-ending love, patience, and support. It took a lot of courage and patience to deal with me constantly talking, and sometimes screaming and crying, about relational dialectics and discursive oppositions. He was always there with the right words to tell me when I had to leave our little baby at night, in the morning, during the day and go work on my dissertation. He helped me to believe in myself, and I am forever grateful for his love and dedication. Love you! viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION: RATIONALE .............................................................. 1 CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................ 16 Introduction .............. ............................................................................................. 16 Theoretical View of In-law Relationships ............................................................... 16 Intergroup Perspective: Definitions of Culture, Identity, and Acculturation ........... 23 Identity ......................................................................................................... 25 Culture .......................................................................................................... 30 Culture, Identity, and Acculturation ............................................................. 34 Ethnicity, Religion, and Family Culture ....................................................... 36 Relational Dialectic Theory: History, Current State, and Future Directions ........... 41 RDT’s View of Meaning Production ........................................................... 44 Narrative Approach to In-law Relationships ............................................................ 48 Narrative inquiry .......................................................................................... 48 Family Culture and Family Narratives ......................................................... 50 Research of Relational Communication in American Orthodox Christian Families: Rationale ........................................................................................................... 52 History of American Orthodox Christianity: A Brief Review ..................... 54 The Orthodox Church of America Today .................................................... 60 Gender Identity in the Context of American Orthodox Christianity ........................ 62 Research Questions .................................................................................................. 67 CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 71 ix Introduction ........................................................................................................... 71 The OCA Parish of the Midwest: A Brief Historical Overview ............................... 73 Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................ 81 Methods ........................................................................................................... 82 Participant Observation and Field Note-Taking ........................................... 84 Narrative Interviewing ................................................................................. 91 Procedures: The Challenges and Revelations of Self Reflexive Work ........ 93 Personal Journey to the American Orthodoxy ................................. 93 Challenges of Conducting Ethnographic Research .......................... 97 Solicitation of the Research Participants .......................................... 99 The Arrangements of the Visits for Data Collection .......................