1. Dr. Tim Clinton & Dr. Joshua Straub
GOD aTTACHMENT
Dr. 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 3:1-10
The Family -- Deut. 6:6-9, Psalm 127; I Tim. 5:8

3. Attachments vs. Close Relationships
The Big Five
Seeks closeness in times of trouble
Safe Haven
Exploration
Separation  Anxiety/Anger
Loss  Grief

4. Core Beliefs Relationship Rules
Self
Other
Are you trustworthy?
Are accessible?
Are you capable?
Are you willing?
Am I worthy?
Am I capable?
Am I willing?

5. Ambivalent Attachment Disorganized Attachment
Relationship Rules
Secure Attachment
Self Dimension
I’m worthy of love
I’m capable of getting the love I need
Other Dimension
Others are willing and able to love me
I can count on you to be there for me
Avoidant Attachment
I’m worthy of love (false pride)
I’m capable of getting love I want and need (false sense of mastery)
Others are incompetent
Others are untrustworthy
Ambivalent Attachment
I am not worthy of love (I feel flawed)
I’m not able to get the love I need without being angry or clingy
Capable but unwilling (bc my flaws)
May abandon me (bc my flaws)
Disorganized Attachment
I’m not worthy of love
I’m unable to get the love I need
Others are unwilling
Others are unable
Others are abusive; I deserve it

6. Attachment and Feelings
Secure Attachment
Full range
Good control
Self-soothes
Shares feelings
OK with others’ feelings
Avoidant Attachment
Restricted affect
Focus is on control
Uses things to self soothe
Keeps feelings buried
Doesn’t share feelings
Ambivalent Attachment
Poor control
Can’t self soothe
Shares feelings too much
Overwhelmed by others’ feelings
Disorganized Attachment
Full range, but few positive feelings
Can’t self-soothe
Can’t really share with others
Dissociates
Emotions are gas with a purpose
Drives behavior, organizes behavior
Adaptive, God given

7. Attachment and Intimacy
Secure Attachment
Comfortable with closeness
Shares feelings and dreams
Willing to commit
Balances closeness and distance
Participates in non-sexual touch
Avoidant Attachment
Not comfortable with closeness
Withholds feelings and dreams
Difficulty with commitment
Distances
Ambivalent Attachment
Desires closeness, but never seems to have enough
Wants to merge with other
Preoccupied with abandonment
Clings and criticizes
Disorganized Attachment
Desires closeness, but fears and avoids it
Wants to merge, then wants to distance
Terrified of abandonment
Sabotages closeness
Attracted to people who victimize
Emotions are gas with a purpose
Drives behavior, organizes behavior
Adaptive, God given

8. Attachments vs. Close Relationships
The Big Five as it relates to God
Seeks closeness in times of trouble
Safe Haven
Exploration
Separation  Anxiety/Anger
Loss  Grief

9. 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 religion
In 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

10. 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)

11. 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

12. God Attachment Results
Increased anxiety of abandonment
Preoccupation and worry
Angry protest
Increased jealousy
Resentment
Concerns that they are lovable
Fears of abandonment in love relationship with God
Increased Avoidance
A reluctance to communicate
Avoidance of emotionality
Obsessive self-reliance

13. Attachment and Spirituality
Christian Attachment-based therapy
Attachment and Spirituality
Attachment style impacts how God is viewed
Secure: He is there, I can count on Him. He will accepts me, in spite of my flaws
Avoidant: He isn’t there for me when I need Him. I will have to go at life alone. I don’t really need Him.
Ambivalent: I’m too flawed; God is sure to reject me. I probably committed the unpardonable sin
Disorganized: I’m flawed, beyond repair. God will strike me down if I turn toward Him. He will surely reject or punish me.
Christian Attachment Therapy

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. Three Kinds of Religious Doubt
Factual
Emotional
Volitional

19. Qualities of Sensitive, Growth Promoting Relationships
Warmth and security—responsiveness and attunement
Regulation so child is not overwhelmed
Relatedness and engagement
Back and forth emotional signaling and gesturing
Problem solving
Using ideas in meaningful and functional way
Thinking and reasoning

20. 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”
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.