Presentation on theme: "Dr. Tim Clinton & Dr. Joshua Straub"— Presentation transcript:
1 Dr. Tim Clinton & Dr. Joshua Straub GOD aTTACHMENTDr. Tim Clinton & Dr. Joshua Straub
2 MADE FOR RELATIONSHIPS The Sacred Romance -- “Lover of our Soul”Love and Marriage -- Genesis 2:18-25; SOS; Matt.19; I Cor. 7; I Cor. 13; Eph.5:21 ff; I Peter 3:1-10The Family -- Deut. 6:6-9, Psalm 127; I Tim. 5:8
3 Attachments vs. Close Relationships The Big FiveSeeks closeness in times of troubleSafe HavenExplorationSeparation Anxiety/AngerLoss Grief
4 Internal Working Models Self – Am I worthy of love?Other – Are others reliable? Trustworthy?A set of conscious and unconscious rules that organize attachment experiences and act as filters through which an individual interprets relational experiences (Main et al., 1985)Self – AnxietyOthers – Avoidance(Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991)
5 Ambivalent Attachment Disorganized Attachment Relationship RulesSecure AttachmentSelf DimensionI’m worthy of loveI’m capable of getting the love I needOther DimensionOthers are willing and able to love meI can count on you to be there for meAvoidant AttachmentI’m worthy of love (false pride)I’m capable of getting love I want and need (false sense of mastery)Others are incompetentOthers are untrustworthyAmbivalent AttachmentI am not worthy of love (I feel flawed)I’m not able to get the love I need without being angry or clingyCapable but unwilling (bc my flaws)May abandon me (bc my flaws)Disorganized AttachmentI’m not worthy of loveI’m unable to get the love I needOthers are unwillingOthers are unableOthers are abusive; I deserve it
6 Attachment and Feelings Secure AttachmentFull rangeGood controlSelf-soothesShares feelingsOK with others’ feelingsAvoidant AttachmentRestricted affectFocus is on controlUses things to self sootheKeeps feelings buriedDoesn’t share feelingsAmbivalent AttachmentPoor controlCan’t self sootheShares feelings too muchOverwhelmed by others’ feelingsDisorganized AttachmentFull range, but few positive feelingsCan’t self-sootheCan’t really share with othersDissociatesEmotions are gas with a purposeDrives behavior, organizes behaviorAdaptive, God given
7 Attachment and Intimacy Secure AttachmentComfortable with closenessShares feelings and dreamsWilling to commitBalances closeness and distanceParticipates in non-sexual touchAvoidant AttachmentNot comfortable with closenessWithholds feelings and dreamsDifficulty with commitmentDistancesAmbivalent AttachmentDesires closeness, but never seems to have enoughWants to merge with otherPreoccupied with abandonmentClings and criticizesDisorganized AttachmentDesires closeness, but fears and avoids itWants to merge, then wants to distanceTerrified of abandonmentSabotages closenessAttracted to people who victimizeEmotions are gas with a purposeDrives behavior, organizes behaviorAdaptive, God given
8 Measuring Attachment Beliefs SELFPositive View Low AnxietyNegative View High AnxietySECUREComfortable with intimacy and autonomyPREOCCUPIEDPreoccupied with relationships and abandonmentDISMISSINGDownplays intimacy, overly self-reliantFEARFULFearful of intimacy, socially avoidantPositive View Low AvoidanceOTHERNegative View High AvoidanceFigure 1.Bartholomew’s model of self and other
9 Attachments vs. Close Relationships The Big Five as it relates to GodSeeks closeness in times of troubleSafe HavenExplorationSeparation Anxiety/AngerLoss Grief
10 God Attachment-Research shows people seek God for a safe haven and secure base during times of stress.Most researched area of attachment theory in the context of religionIn times of emotional distress or loss, it has been found that people: -turn to prayer rather than the church -grieving persons tend to increase their faith and religious devotion -soldiers pray more frequently in combat -times of death and divorce -fears associated with serious illness -emotional crises -relationship problems -other negative events
11 God Attachment As substitute attachment figure (Kirkpatrick, 1992) Provides “felt security” (Sroufe, 1977)More similar to parent-child relationship but moderate and consistent link to romantic attachment (Kirkpatrick, 1992, 1999; Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002)Measured on two dimensions: Anxiety and Avoidance(Beck & McDonald, 2004)
12 Assessing Attachment with a Loving God THE ATTACHMENT TO GOD INVENTORY(Beck and McDonald, 2004)The Experiences in Close Relationships scale(Brennan et al. 1998)-Avoidance of Intimacy-Anxiety about Abandonment
13 God Attachment Results Increased anxiety of abandonmentPreoccupation and worryAngry protestIncreased jealousyResentmentConcerns that they are lovableFears of abandonment in love relationship with GodIncreased AvoidanceA reluctance to communicateAvoidance of emotionalityObsessive self-reliance
14 Assessing Attachment with God Compensation Hypotheses -God may serve as a compensatory attachment figure for individuals displaying insecure attachment patterns (Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1997, 1998).--avoidant attachment types had higher incidents of sudden conversions. These results indicate that God may serve the role of a substitute attachment figure (emotional compensation), compensating for the distant, unresponsive care-giving style they experienced in infancy and childhood. This hypothesis is based upon Ainsworth’s (1985) findings that those with insecure attachment styles seek substitute objects of attachment.
15 Assessing Attachment with God Correspondence Hypotheses -proposes that individuals with secure attachment styles are more likely to sustain a future belief and relationship with God because a foundation has been established throughout childhood. This hypothesis is based on Bowlby’s (1969) idea that relationship permanence and stability stem from stable working models of attachment (Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1997, 1998).
16 Thoughts on Hypotheses According to this hypothesis--the explanation to the root of religiousness in securely attached individuals may be derived “from without”, or socialization processes, whereas the religiousness of the insecurely attached individual may be derived “from within”, or emotional regulation (Granqvist & Hagekull).
17 Thoughts on Hypotheses The connection between attachment insecurity and sudden religious conversion may be considered the most robust and corroborated finding from the research on attachment and religion…This interpretation is in line with ambivalents’ observed tendency to desperately seek care and easily fall in love, and may be a continuation of the inconsistency in parental caregiving that has been shown to be characteristic of parents in ambivalent dyads
18 Breaking Free Step I: Remember Your Story – Narrative Recall Step II: Recognize Your Pain and Need for Healing – “Can’t heal what you don’t feel”
19 Breaking Free Step III: Reframe the Meaning of Your Story Step IV: Repair Your Story – ‘forgiveness, grace and acceptance’Step V: Reconnect – deepening emotional strands of safety, trust and intimacy; able to accept influence from others.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.