Abstract

 

This study explores the interaction of Christian faith and narcissistic features demonstrated in two case studies. The purpose is to examine on an ideographic basis the ways that these clients use their faith to reinforce their narcissism or to address it in a manner that promotes change. Viewpoints taught and practiced in the Evangelical Church that interact with narcissistic features in individuals are discussed as the underlying context of this study. Both clients were middle aged males who attended Evangelical churches. Case study #1 explores narcissistic features from the theoretical perspective of James Masterson while Case study #2 explores narcissistic features with an underlying borderline structure from the theoretical perspective of Otto Kernberg. Since this study examines the interaction of the theological with the psychological in the context of case studies, it is divided into three sections: the psychological theories of narcissism, the theological perspectives of Christian faith and church context, and the case studies. Due to the different personality structures of the individuals, the client in Case Study #1 understood his faith at a higher level of abstract reasoning and was less limited in perception. Client #2's perceptions were skewed by the polarization caused by the defense mechanism of splitting. Both clients experienced a predominance of projection which hindered the ability of their faith to address the narcissism. However, the client in Case Study #1 utilized his understanding of Reformed Biblical doctrine to re-align his narcissistic perceptions. The client in Case Study #2 was prone to Gnostic, magical interpretations of his faith. While, the Pietistic, charismatic church context offered both men practical limitations, and an emotional, intellectual, and physical avenue to God, it appeared weak in doctrine that could ameliorate the narcissism.            

iii

 

                                                         Table of Contents

Approval Page...................................................................................................................................i

Table of Contents........................................................................................................................ii

Abstract......................................................................................................................................iii

Introduction.................................................................................................................................1

Psychological Perspective of the Therapeutic Setting and Its Approach to Narcissism..................8

Therapeutic Definition of Narcissism................................................................................8

Psychology of Religion...................................................................................................11

Theological Perspective of Therapeutic Setting and Its Approach to Narcissism.........................18

The Theological Context of the Evangelical Church.......................................................18        

Evangelical Theology as Related to Narcissism...............................................................21

Correlation Between Theological and Psychological.......................................................29

The Interaction of Faith and Narcissism as Seen in Case Study #1..............................................30

 Theoretical Approach of James Masterson....................................................................30

Case Study #1................................................................................................................38

The Interaction of Faith and Narcissism as Seen in Case Study #2..............................................50

Theoretical Approach of Otto Kernberg.........................................................................50

Case Study #2................................................................................................................60

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................85

References.................................................................................................................................91

ii

                                                           Introduction                                                                              

Increasingly, it has become apparent that an extraordinary number of people that seek psychotherapy in my private practice setting at a Christian clinic display narcissistic features. It is especially disturbing to me that these clients use their Christian faith and their understanding of scripture in a way that reinforces their narcissism in their everyday lives and intimate relationships. Consciously or unconsciously, their faith engenders and justifies actions and attitudes that ensure chronic problems in relationship and create a skewed world‑view. Unlike normal narcissism which is the libidinal investment of the self (Kernberg, 1975), pathological narcissism, as defined by Lasch (1990), is a fundamental “revolt against the reality of our dependence on forces external to ourselves” (p. 518). This revolt propels individuals  to look to their own resources for sustenance and self definition. The resulting tunnel‑like vision of the pathological narcissism is reinforced by misguided faith so that it is difficult to respond to reality appropriately.

The evidence in the psychotherapy office of an increase in clients with narcissistic features has been reflected upon as a concern for our culture at large.  Christopher Lasch (1990) observes, "the upshot, it seemed to me, was not that American society was "sick" or that Americans were all candidates for a mental asylum but that normal people now displayed many of the same personality traits that appeared, in more extreme form, in pathological narcissism” (p. 513).  Lasch correlates this mainly to the decline of the family in our society in general and, in particular, to the changing socializing process in the family that tends to encourage our cultural preference of a peer‑oriented, outward directed personality. In the competitive bureaucratic milieu of our culture success often hinges on the impressions of others. Personal charisma counts significantly in personal success and is often regulated facilely when others are used as a mirror of the self. It is as though, in our preoccupation with ourselves, there is an unseen audience for which we must act. In this cultural play, self acceptance is based on being cast as the script writer, director, and lead player, all in one! This cultural emphasis on outward appearances sets the stage for the actors to experience "a feeling of inauthenticity and inner emptiness" (Lasch, 1990, p. 514). Concurrently, our confidence in our technology and our ability to harness nature for our intents and purposes supports our narcissistic tendency toward self‑sufficiency and independence that denies outside need. Lasch (1990) states that, "the dream of subjugating nature is our culture's regressive solution to the problem of narcissism‑ regressive because it seeks to restore the primal illusion of omnipotence and refuses to accept limits on our collective self‑sufficiency" (p. 518).  

At a glance, it would seem that this cultural phenomena might also be correlated with a theological trend in our society. For example,  narcissistic self-sufficiency and independence can readily be seen in a common affirmation of Americans that  “God helps those who help themselves”. Sadly, while many believe that the source of this phrase is from the Bible, it is actually a product of America’s confidence in the isolated self. Paul Vitz (1977) claims that this idea has “much to do with political rebellion, seeking independence from any form of external control...pioneered by American political and social figures ranging from Jefferson and Franklin, to Emerson and Whitman, to John Dewey and Carl Rogers” (p. 98).  It would seem that this extreme emphasis on individualism has been promoted by societal forces and religious trappings, as well as popularized by psychological theorists such as Carl Rogers (Vitz, 1977).

Advanced technology lends to the illusion that we are indeed independent, free from God's rule, even as it is expressed in the laws of nature. Gnostic and Platonic thinking inherent in the New Age movement adds their voices to the thought that we are not only above the laws of nature, but also above the evils of this material world. According to Platonic beliefs the material world is inferior to the spirit world while Gnosticism views the world as an illusion that human beings, as essentially spirit beings, are to transcend. This affords us a spiritual ascendancy over nature's rule and diminishes our sense of dependence on forces external to ourselves (Lasch, 1990). 

When this New Age thinking infiltrates the Christian worldview, God is naively expected to work out problems in the ideal manner pictured by the particular believer. Lasch (1990) points out that some religious trends in our culture originate from New Age "fantasies that serve to maintain the archaic illusion of one‑ness with a world absolutely responsive to one's own wishes and desires" (p. 519). God is a servant of our desires, rather than visa versa. It follows then, that He would not judge us when do not respond to His worldview and directives. We do not want God to be the creator of a universe that includes suffering and pain, especially the pain and suffering of judgment and punishment. The resulting theology is one that  "rigorously separates images of nurture and mercy from images of creation, judgment, and punishment" (Lasch, 1990, p. 520).

A distorted sense of oneness with God and superiority over the evil corruption of the material world opens the door to a world that revolves around the individual as his own god. Paul Vitz (1997) proposes that “New Age spirituality is the transformation of psychological narcissism into spiritual narcissism” (p. 125). “In this sense, New Age is as old as Adam and Eve, who also gave in to the ultimate (as well as the original) narcissistic act, true self-worship, ‘You shall be as gods’” (Vitz, 1997, p. 125). Certain trends in our culture have facilitated this illusion that we can over‑come this fundamental existential difference between God and man. This Gnostic theological trend blurs the lines of differentiation between God and man and thereby undermines our understanding of the necessity of our utter dependence on and subjection to a God who is fundamentally "Other".

Gnostic tendencies, especially as defined by the New Age Movement, have not only impacted our understanding of our dependence on God, but also our understanding of the concept of selfhood. In Gnostic thinking the self becomes associated with the inferior material world that needs to be transcended (Macaulay & Barrs, 1978). The self as part of the material world becomes inherently bad. The bad self needs to be purged by ascetic self‑denial and withdrawal from the material world. Ironically, these Gnostic ideas can also justify a licentious attitude where actions in the material world are of no consequence because man's superior spiritual nature transcends the material world. When spirit and natural world are so divided, a kind of dualistic theology develops which can encourage the extremes of moral laxity or ascetic withdrawal.

The infiltration of New Age thought into Christianity has been helped by the tendency in American religion to veer away from doctrinal truth and disputes. Alan Wolfe (2003) observes, “Americans prefer practical, commonsensical, and even materialistic concepts of religion”  over and above those concepts “driven by doctrinal or theological considerations” (p. 95). According to Wolfe (2003), this practical tendency is a foregone conclusion  “when (American) society chews up ideas of any sort in order to digest them for widespread public consumption” (p. 95).  Wolfe believes that a wide spread anti-intellectualism hinders religious leaders from teaching doctrinal truth. Without doctrinal sophistication, Christians are unable to recognize New Age theology. 

A decline of doctrinal truth can be seen in some branches of modern Evangelicalism which are inclined toward neo-Pietism. These churches are characterized by an emphasis on religious experience over doctrine. Here, “Practical piety and mystical awareness figure more highly than Biblical or dogmatic theology” (Bloesch, 1978, p. 52). A current prevailing methodology of hermeneutics (the study of the Bible) in these churches and in the theological world in general is to begin with empirical experience and then seek to validate the Bible whenever possible. This methodology reflects the cultural bias at large which stresses subjective certainty over objective infallibility. When taken to the extreme, this anthropocentric orientation leads to naturalistic theology “reappearing in a new guise with the emphasis now not on the proofs of the existence of God, but on the discovery of the divine ground of authentic humanity“ (Bloesch,1978, vol.1, p. 1). 

When subjective experience becomes the source of revelation, rather than the medium of revelation, a person’s experience of the gospel can be confused with the gospel itself. Intense personal testimonies then verify a person’s own experience as truth. The outworking of this opens the door for verification of an experience by the intensity of the experience rather than by the doctrinal truth. Intensity of experience can be substituted for the vulnerable intimacy (Nakken,1988) which is incrementally acquired through a growing knowledge of God and of oneself and which is forged through relationships in community. The danger is that self then determines truth, rather than the transcendent and living Word of God, Jesus Christ, who meets us in our experience and at the same time directs our experience and informs it (Bloesch, 1978). This emphasis on experience can also lead to an over zealous focus on the self where one becomes absorbed with “one’s own salvation rather than serving the glory of God and the cause of his kingdom” (Bloesch, 1978, p. 52).

Current ecclesiology in neo-Pietistic churches which is not bound to any historical tradition or higher authority or to any denominational structure may also reflect the narcissism of the culture. Here the mentality can be “its just Jesus and me” with no larger picture than the immediate church experience. When this a-historical perspective combines with the revivalist bent toward individualism and neo-pietism, it is easy to fall into amoeba-like splitting at the event of conflict between individual church factions. So too, the church opens the door for man-oriented, narcissistic spirituality.

Narcissistic spiritually has entered the church when the spiritual goal is self-fulfillment and personal integration, where “sanctity is confused with sanity, holiness with healthfulness... emotional stability is valued more highly than the zeal and madness of faith... and the aim is to be absolved from bad feelings not to repent of sins” ( Bloesch, 1978, vol.2, p. 64). When one confuses psychological health with spiritual truth, there is a danger that “holiness becomes a result of technique and is therefore something within man’s power” (Bloesch, 1978, vol.2, p. 64). The usurping of spiritual truth for psychological truth is ultimately rooted in the Eros piety of Hellenistic philosophy and religion. As Bloesch (1978) describes, “ the goal of the Christian life is seen not as personal integration or wholeness nor as the realization of human potential but rather as the sacrifice of the self to the cause of the Kingdom and the glory of God” (vol. 2, p. 65).

It is in this cultural, religious milieu that clients bring their individual and relational issues into therapy. Here the interaction of narcissism and Christian faith (specifically, the understanding of scripture and its application to life experience) can be investigated from the more idiographic basis of the individual. This study explores the interaction of faith and narcissistic personality structure  from a phenomenological perspective where the general questions are around the meaning, structure, and essence of the lived experience for these individuals. In application to this study, the questions are: What are the person's understandings of scripture and Christian practice that lead to more healthy interaction or keep them stuck in a narcissistic position?  Inherent in this larger question is a sub-category of inquiry: What are the conditions under which a human act took place or a product was produced that makes it possible to interpret its meanings? This question explores context, particularly of the Evangelical Church: What are the viewpoints taught and practiced in the Evangelical Church that interact with this phenomena of narcissistic features in individuals?

For the purposes of this study, two case studies of clients with narcissistic features who also espouse an Evangelical understanding of Christian faith and practice will be delineated. On the theological side, this study is based on the ideological position of Evangelical Christianity. In line with this ideological position, the clients attend Evangelical churches which are off-shoots of Calvary Chapel and the Vineyard Christian Fellowship. On the psychological side, case study #1  is explored from the developmental/ object relations framework of James Masterson, and case study #2 is explored from the object relations orientation of Otto Kernberg. The client in case study # 1 demonstrates straight-forward narcissistic features that are addressed well by Masterson’s theory of narcissism. The client in case study #2 has narcissistic features with an underlying borderline structure. This type of personality is addressed well by Kernberg’s theory because it encompasses both aspects, the narcissistic features and the borderline structure. The client in case study #1 tends to use his faith beneficially, while the client in case study #2 has often used his faith in ways that keep him stuck in narcissistic patterns. Since this study explores the interaction of the theological with the psychological in the context of case studies, it is divided into three sections: the psychological theories, the theological perspectives, and the case studies.

                            

Psychological Perspective of the Therapeutic Setting And Its Approach to Narcissism

Therapeutic Definition of Narcissism

This study will first define narcissism as categorized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, DSM-IV, 1994), as a narcissistic personality disorder, but will then specifically focus on people whose personalities fall somewhere in the lesser gradation of demonstrating narcissistic features or traits. The DSM- IV defines a narcissistic personality disorder as: A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

       1)  has a grandiose sense of self‑importance (i.e., exaggerates achievements and talent,                       

expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

      2)  is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

      3)  believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should                 

associate with, other special or high‑status people (or institutions)

      4)  requires excessive admiration

      5)  has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable                            

treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

      6)  is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own                  

ends

      7)  lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

      8)  is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her                                 

      9)  shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

There is a range of behavior that can be categorized as narcissistic but does not fit the above criteria for a narcissistic personality disorder. Pathological character traits can be seen in a less obvious form when a person is overly dependent on the nurture of others, but at the same time is also fearful of dependence. An inner experience of emptiness, repressed rage, and unsatisfied oral cravings is common for this type of personality (Lasch, 1979). According to Lorna Smith Benjamin (1993), this personality "demonstrates the baseline positions of control, blame, attack, ignore, separateness, active self‑love, plus self‑neglect and self‑blame. This person wishes to receive active love, to protect, and to submit, while fearing being ignored, blamed, or controlled" (p. 115). Though the narcissistic person feels entitled to receiving active love from his partner, he depreciates his partner's own needs for active love. He may meet his own needs extensively by spending money disproportionately or by using resources and time selfishly, unaware of the impact of his behavior on his family or partner. The narcissistic person may insist on his own freedom to do as he wishes at the same that he micro-manages his partner's activities. He is most comfortable with a partner who is submissive and dependent and yet gives active love and protection. If the partner fails at this task the narcissistic person readily blames, attacks, or be‑littles (Benjamin, 1993).

In the church setting, the narcissistic person may be overly involved, using his faith as an addiction and ignoring his family. Here the church becomes an effective ally, since no impacted partner would dare question such a Godly priority. He carries into the church his fear of abandonment by God, his symbiotic relationships with people, and an omnipotent sense that he can please the church. Here, the narcissistic person may seek a new religious experience to fill his emptiness and may mistake an intense religious experience for the intimacy that is missing in his life. Here the narcissistic person, addicted to false hope and disappointed in vicarious living, may seek a religious world view that does not disappoint. Yet he may be constantly disappointed because often the religious world view that he picks does not fit reality. Feeling entitled to good treatment by God, he may feel an exaggerated offense to these disappointments.           

Theorists broadly classify narcissism into two categories, depending on what stage of life is seen as the root source of the narcissism. “Primary narcissism" refers to narcissism that is rooted in pre‑Oedipal stages where the infant's illusion of omnipotence is due to his lack of his awareness of the distinction between self and its surroundings (Freud, 1914 "On Narcissism"). In contrast, from the perspective of psychoanalyst Thomas Freeman, "secondary narcissism" refers to the "attempts to annul the pain of disappointed love", and to defend against incipient rage toward those who do not meet one's needs (Lasch, 1990, p. 514). This type of narcissism has its root in later Oedipal stages. Lasch (1990) theorizes that the goal of primary narcissism is to experience the "complete cessation of tension", the "longing to be free from longing" which is the re‑creation of the "oceanic" contentment of the womb (p. 515). This explains why narcissism displays itself as a disregard for the body's demands rather than an elevation of them seen in the "pleasure principle" orientation of ordinary egoism (Lasch, 1990).

A theorist who explored the source of primary narcissism was Kohut. He proposed that narcissism is created by structural deficits in the self due to developmental deficiencies in the pre‑Oedipal stages of life (Elson, 1987). The child, unable to separate his "self" from the other, the mother, experiences her power, worth and value as his own . When mother is absent, he only knows that he is less than before and longs for the missing part of himself rather than the missing object, his mother. When these developmental deficiencies persist, infantile narcissism is not replaced by adult object love (Elson, 1987).                     

 

 

 

Psychology of Religion

W.W. Meissner writes extensively on the impact of faith on the psychological nature of the believer. He (1987) focus’s particularly on the psychology of grace, where grace is defined theologically as “God’s loving initiative, his self-communication, and self-disclosure where man is called in history to share in God’s own intimate life- which is totally gratuitous because of our sin” (p. 9). In this initiative, grace not only addresses our theological condition, but also impacts our very nature by making contact with the very depths of our psychic reality. Meissner (1987) states that grace induces a dynamizing activation of the energy resources within the ego so that the ego is reinforced, supported, and energized in the exercise of proper ego functions” (p. 23). This activation energizes the reintegration of our nature which was wounded at the fall of man.  While grace is limited by the current capacity of the ego to receive it and  function autonomously, it can  make ego function operative where it would not normally be psychologically possible due to developmental deficits.  Grace can not force this functioning magically but instead empowers the ego to actively participate in the transformation. Through the impact of grace, there is an increasing ability for the higher nature to control the energies of the instinctual drives, an increasing degree of ego and superego autonomy and integration, a synthesis and elaboration of a progressively deepening sense of personal and spiritual identity, and a greater freedom and maturity of function. Spiritual identity is built upon and limited by the degree of personal identity that is achieved. Penultimately, grace “enlarges on and elaborates the mature capacity of the soul for loving relationships” and makes possible “the free realization and expression of... (one’s) own reality and capacity” (Meissner, 1987, p. 52, p. 205). In summary, grace works to heal the distortions inherent in our fallen natures and the pathology of narcissism on the most basic level of psychic structure.

As a person progresses through the developmental stages, he develops a spiritual identity as well as a personal identity. According to Meissner, spiritual identity is the expansion of own’s sense of personal identity and is acquired by the same ego functions as the personal identity. Meissner (1987) defines a spiritual identity as, “an awareness of one’s spiritual existence as a son or daughter of God and a sense of solidarity and oneness with a set of supernatural, divinely revealed values” (p. 54). This spiritual identity operates  from a value system which is developed from the early psychic structures. Meissner (1987) sees values as “complex psychic structures which involve and operate in terms of ego-capacities and functions” (p. 227). These values are derived from the ego ideal. When early narcissistic issues are resolved, the ego ideal is progressively modified in the “direction of less extreme, more realistic, and less potentially pathological expression” (Meissner, 1987, p. 229). As this integration takes place, the superego becomes more autonomous and able to operate more closely to a value system that matches reality. The value system, according to Meissner (1987),

provides an internalized regulatory and directive way for individual personality to organize and direct its activity. It is thus the repository of narcissism but a narcissism purged and modulated so as to find its place in the limits and constraints of reality and thus become a vital force in achieving mature personality functioning. (p. 229)     

 Since the value system has its roots in the basic driving forces of narcissism, aggression, and libido, understanding these interrelationships will help the formulation of a mature value system.

Meissner explores faith as a psychological experience from a developmental perspective.  Here he is looking for the context and derivatives of faith elements that can be related to developmental stages. In order to do this, he combines Kolberg’s six stages of moral development with Fowler’s observations on faith development. Fowler builds his observations on Piaget’s stages of logical and cognitive development. Meissner’s approach is particularly interesting because he adds a psychoanalytic perspective to the works of the other three men. For the purpose of this study, his psychoanalytic observations are helpful.

In stage o: Undifferentiated, the individual has not yet achieved self-object differentiation, and his relationships are fundamentally symbiotic in nature. This earliest mode of religious experience is based upon early archaic narcissism which is developmentally primitive or significantly regressive. Here experience is often nonverbal and tactile and supports the developmental attainment of basic trust, autonomy, hope, and will or, in contrast, creates doubt, shame, dread, and terror. Religious experience at this stage is typified by unconditional omnipotence and absolute dependence where there is a merging of self and God that signifies extreme regression, or severe fragmentation. Meissner defines this as primarily a narcissistic psychotic process. He distinguishes this from the merging which happens during a  mystical experience where a person goes beyond the boundaries of the self, immersing themselves in the love object.

Stage 1: Intuitive-Projective, address the child at an age range of four years to seven years. Here the child focuses on one aspect of an experience at a time so that the larger picture of his thinking looks incomplete, or erroneous or fragmented. His conclusions have a magical element, where fact and fantasy blend with an ego-centric orientation. The narrative of his thinking is episodic and disconnected. When explored in terms of narcissistic development, the child is normally differentiating the grandiose self from the idealized parental imago. The self still maintains some of the narcissistic qualities of omnipotence and grandiosity or the parent is seen in that way. In suit with this developmental stage, relationship to God is inundated with a sense of complete dependence on and fear of His divine omnipotence. This is manifested by a need to placate God by superstitious rituals and magical ceremonials. Meissner says that the God relationship is influenced by projective mechanisms that contain intense unresolved ambivalence (derived from parental figures) and fears of abandonment and separation. This conflicted relationship to God is often resolved by “masochistic submission or superstitious subjugation”  (Meissner, 1987, p.127). Boundaries between the natural and supernatural world may be blurred due to the weaker self boundaries and the preponderance of projective mechanisms. The religious experience is highly dominated by affective qualities.

Stage 2: Mythic-Literal describes development between the ages of six to eleven. At this stage, thinking patterns are mostly connected to concrete sensory experience rather than abstraction. A gradual loosening of  the limitations of  perception and feelings, allows reasoning powers to develop. Concepts of time and causality add a flow to perception that creates a sense of connected narrative. It is possible to understand experience from the position of another person with empathy. A sense of a cohesive self lessens the fear of self fragmentation. A predominant developmental task is maintaining self-esteem. Some projection and introjection is used to protect remnants of infantile narcissism. Images of God tend to be anthropomorphic.

Stage 3: Synthetic-Conventional covers adolescence, although some people stay in this stage into their adult lives. At this stage a person has reached formal-operational thinking so that a more objective view of their relationships is possible. Values, beliefs, and codes of behavior begin to formulate a sense of self-identity. These beliefs tend to be based on authority figures and group consensus. Compartmentalization or dissociation of frames of reference can provide a consistent picture when there is conflicting input. On the faith level, images of God tend to be less anthropomorphic and more based on His personal qualities. There is a greater flexibility in thinking between the symbol and what is symbolized so that it no longer seems to have the same literal-correspondence as in the earlier stage. There is a capacity for metaphor and a more flexible affective experience of symbolic meaning.

At the earliest, Stage 4: Individuating-Reflexive, begins at around age seventeen or somewhere in the early twenties. At this time there is more of an independent self formed and faith understanding is more based on personal conclusions than group consensus. Authority is accepted once it is validated by internal processing. Abstract conceptualizations that are more internally differentiated are more apparent than before. However, thinking can have an either/or dichotomizing quality. While thinking at this stage is more in touch with limits and interconnections, it also attempts to create a comprehensive belief system. Self-cohesion and integration of drive derivatives, makes it possible for anxiety to mobilize ego resources. Therefore, there is more tolerance of ambiguities and inner tensions without needing an immediate resolution in a faith stance. There is a greater acceptance of differences of opinion and a broader participation in divergent activities. Faith becomes a deeply fulfilling, lived -out experience.

Rather than an emphasis on consolidating and delineating self, Stage 5: Paradoxical-Consolidative, focuses on extending boundaries of self-awareness and deepening self identity so that it becomes more complex and multidimensional. A greater awareness of personal subjectivity is included in the thinking process, where there is a willingness to put aside personal views in order to fully understand another’s view. Truth is regarded  from many viewpoints and experienced as incorporating contradictions, paradoxes, and ambiguities as part and parcel of its nature. Due to an expanded reference of authority, an openness exists to adjust personal convictions. References extend to identifications with race, tribes, economic or ideological groupings. Faith embraces a more conflicted viewpoint and includes a sense of the painfulness of the human condition.

Stage 6: Universalizing is rarely reached. This stage moves from paradoxes and contradictions to ideals and values that are vitally motivating forces. The former tensions between polarities are integrated and placed in the perspective of transcendent actuality and value. The self finds its meaning in its identification with the source of ultimate value, God Himself.

Christian experience reflects the interaction between a person’s emotional/ developmental struggle and his theological/faith tenants. A client's use of scripture and Christian faith and practice can be studied  in relationship to his object world. Hood (1995) describes the relationship between a person's understanding of religion and his psychological object world from the perspective of Fairbairn. In Fairbairn's view a person's internal object world will be reflected in the object world of his sacred world.  In other words, a person will understand the sacred in ways that are similar to the ways that he has internalized his parents and his self concept. Dichotomies between the internal and external objects reflect dichotomies between the sacred and profane. More explicitly, "the splitting of the maternal object and the ego is the prototype of the sacred and profane dichotomy ¼ the closedness of the internal object world is the prototype of the inviolability of the sacred"  (Hood, 1995, p. 265). Fairbairn’s point is further explained and illustrated in both of the case studies. A closed cognitive style or undifferentiated thinking that is emphatic and unable or unwilling to discriminate in a more refined way is also evidence of a psychological dysfunction  (Paloutzian, 1996). According to Pruyser, displacement to the body, magic, ritual, symbolism, dissociation and disavowal and the encouragement of continued negative character traits are evidence of a psychologically constricted use of religion (Malony & Spilka, 1991).

In general, healthy religion enables a person to live out psychological truth and religious truth. To describe what the "lived out" looks like, Paul Pruyser (1995) takes the Bible verse "the truth shall set you free" (Jn. 8:32) and applies it to his criteria for psychological health; "I regard an enlarged sense of freedom as a sign of psychological, moral, and spiritual health" (Malony & Spilka, 1991, p. 65). This is also one criterion for healthy religion; "healthy religion is a search demanding the greatest curiosity, the full use of all human functions, talents, and gifts, and the belief that the search, long and arduous as it may be, holds a promise" (Malony  & Spilka, 1991,  p. 65).  

             Theological Perspective of Therapeutic Setting and its Approach to Narcissism    

The Theological Context of the Evangelical Church

The theological perspective of this study is informed by the Evangelical tradition. The theological meaning of evangelical is derived from the Greek word, evangelion, referring to the message of salvation through the atoning sacrifice of Christ (Bloesch, 1978). The word emphasizes the necessity of proclaiming the good news of salvation and an appeal to conversion and decision on the basis of the free grace of God.  According to Bloesch (1978),

The divine authority of Scripture will always be fundamental in evangelical theology, but the formal norm of faith (Scripture) must continually be subordinated to and interpreted by the material norm, the Gospel of reconciliation and redemption. This Gospel is the very heart and soul of evangelical theology. (p. 4)

Historically, the Evangelical tradition is founded on Protestant Reformation thinkers such as Calvin and Luther. Yet, it also draws from earlier Reformed Evangelical trends seen in Catholic thinkers such as Irenaeus, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, and Pascal. It embraces thinkers  following the Reformation who were part of the spiritual movements of purification, Pietism, Puritanism, and the Anabaptists. Thinkers of the revival movements within 18^th and 19^th century Protestantism are included in the Evangelical tradition, men such as Wesley, Edwards, Spencer, and Whitfield.  Enlightenment and Neo-Reformation theologians such as Barth and Brunner, and neo-Calvinistic thinkers, such as Hodge and Warfield, inform the Evangelical tradition. Evangelical existentialists such as Kierkegaard  have contributed to this tradition as well (Bloesch, 1978).

The Reformation instills in Evangelicalism a firm belief in justification by grace alone, and an emphasis on faith alone, Scripture alone, and Christ alone. Pietism offers Evangelical theology a reformation of life-style as well as doctrine and a stress on fellowship and mission. Evangelical theology embraces the Puritan purification of life-style and emphasis on worship.  All of the above movements contribute an urgent call to new birth, a faith experience of the heart, and a reality of regeneration that springs forth from the Reformation foundation of justification by grace alone.  Thought in 17^th century Calvinism conceived of the knowledge of God as consisting of an intimacy that involved all aspects of the psyche, not just the intellectual. Likewise, 18^th and 19^th century open air preaching and American frontier religion focused on personal experience, rather than Scripture, church, doctrine and sacraments. Their emphasis on intense emotional response in small groups and revival meetings was a response to the dry intellectual environment of the Protestant Orthodoxy, Lutherans and Anglicans (Vitz, p. 104). Protestant Orthodoxy based in the 17^th and 18^th century combined right living with right doctrine (Bloesch, 1978).

Modern Evangelicalism stands in tension between Reformation theology and Pietism.  (Bloesch,1978). While the more reformed Protestant Orthodoxy tends to devalue mystical religious experience, modern neo-Pietism heads more toward an emphasis on religious experience and interpersonal relationships where doctrine is relegated below practical matters of faith. More Pentecostal forms of Evangelical faith have become popular with people in the current cultural environment and  “ like increasing numbers of school teachers, leaders of therapeutic communities, mental-health professionals, and even occasional academics who live in secular worlds- they seek authenticity through experience rather than through ideas” (Wolfe, 2003, p. 80). Summarily, in Wolfe’s (2003) opinion,

these churches attract their huge numbers of members not by complicating their lives with theological conundrums and complex moral reasoning but by offering them down-to-earth interpretations of scripture meant to convey the simplicity and directness of the teachings of Jesus. (p. 76)

One client in this study attends a Calvary Chapel and another a Vineyard Church.  According to Wolfe (2003), Calvary Chapels and Vineyard Churches are a part of this Pentecostal movement that “in many ways... resemble Pietistic and heartfelt facets of earlier religious awakenings” (p. 75). Here, the practical piety which accompanies sanctification and mystical awareness are emphasized (Bloesch, 1978). Bloesch defines this emphasis on religious experience over doctrine as Neo-Pietism. Calvary Chapel was founded in the 1970's by Pastor Chuck Smith and the Vineyard Christian Fellowship split off from that in 1982 under the leadership of John Wimber. The Vineyard became even more expressive of the “signs and wonders” of the spiritual charismatic gifts than its precedent church, Calvary Chapel. Wolfe (2003) thinks that an appeal of these churches is found in the religious ecstasy of “being transported to a state of oneness with the Holy Spirit” (p. 77).

Evangelical Theology as Related to Narcissism                    

In the beginning of creation, God made Adam and Eve in His image and declared all that He made “very good” (Gen. 1:26, 31). The fact that human beings are made in God's image is the starting point of understanding ourselves (Macaulay & Barrs, 1978).  It is from the position of the affirmation of human nature as made in God's image and “very good” that we understand the New Testament's message. According to Boice (1986), “We are made in God’s image and are therefore valuable to God and others” (p. 153).  Eve is also said to be created in Adam’s image and that similar image made them fit companions for one another. Boice (1986) suggests that, “It is not wrong to say that men and women are to God somewhat as a woman is to a man. They are God’s unique and valued companions” (p. 153). This point further adds to the sense of value and “goodness” that is bestowed on man at his creation. Even subsequent to the fall of man, Calvin (1975) asserts that,

Should any one object that this divine image has been obliterated, the solution is easy; first, there yet exists some remnant of it so that man is possessed of no small dignity; and, secondly, the celestial Creator himself, however corrupted man may be, still keeps in view the end of his original creation; and according to his example, we ought to consider for what end he created men, and what excellence he has bestowed upon them above the rest of living things. (p. 296) 

Though man has fallen, “We are not sinful by the very nature of things” and “true vestiges of the image remain” (Boice, 1986, p. 198, p. 156). Scripture assumes this basis of thought and then moves from there to address the result of the fall of man.

 A grasping for human God‑likeness or a merging with His Likeness led to the fall.  Satan tempted Adam and Eve when he promised them, "Ye shall be like God" (Genesis 3:5). This flies in the face of God's declaration that He alone is God and there is none like Him (Isa.46:9). There is a fundamental relation between God and man that is eternal, where man is by nature dependent on God and existentially limited. Pride originally led to the fall, and now still impacts us as we want to reach beyond the limits of our creation as God’s creatures. Of this grasping for God-likeness, Boice (1986) states, “It makes us all want to be more than we are or can be and, consequently, causes us to fall short of the great destiny for which we were created” ( p. 198).  Adam and Eve wanted the knowledge of good and evil for themselves, rather than subjecting themselves to God for His truth.  “But as soon as Adam sought to know (make interpretation) apart from subjection to God’s word (Gen.3:6), he was lost, and wholly in error” (Williamson, 1964, p. 54).

Sin, therefore, can be “comprehensively defined as a lack of conformity to the law of God in act, habit, attitude, outlook, disposition, motivation, and mode of existence” (Packer, 1993, p. 82).  In essence, sin is a “forgetfulness of man’s place in creation”, forgetting that his living is an act of grace from beyond himself (La Valle, 1986, p. 177). Boice (1986) defines sin as “apostasy... a falling away from something that existed formerly and was good” (p. 194). It is also unfaithfulness, expressed as “doubt of God’s good will and truthfulness leading inevitably to an act of outright rejection” (Boice, 1986, p. 194).

“We are fallen human beings and the effects of the fall are seen in our body, soul, and spirit”  (Boice, 1986, p. 156). The Reformed position of Calvin states that as a result of the fall, “The depraved condition reaches out over his (man’s) whole nature” (Meeter, 1990, p. 30). In Calvin’s concept of total depravity the word “total” refers to the extent of the damage, not to the degree  (Williamson, 1964). This condition can be compared to a glass of water that has been poisoned. Just as poison pervades the whole glass of water, so sin poisons the whole of human nature. Williamson declares, that “by and by the lost will become totally evil in degree, as they are now totally depraved in extent” (p. 55). The Calvinist believes that one can not even trust one’s own insight apart from trusting God’s special grace for both thought and walk (Meeter, 1990). In contemporary terminology, “we are dealing with moral and psychological decay” as well as decay of the  intellect, will, soul, body, and spirit (Boice,1986, p. 204). J.I. Packer (1993) summarizes well, “Total depravity entails total inability, that is, the state of not having it in oneself to respond to God and His word in a sincere and wholehearted way” (p. 84).

In the face of our total depravity, Jesus Christ died for us on the cross and thus ensured salvation for those who believe. This great Reformation truth declares us justified before God by grace alone, by faith alone, in the saving work of Christ on the cross. This is the pivotal belief of Evangelicals. “Once grace comes to a person, he is made active in accepting and believing”  (Bloesch, vol.2, 1978, p. 256). It is from this starting point of justification that our Christian life begins. Just so, our sanctification begins and continues by grace as well. Calvin believed that, “ justification can no more be separated from sanctification than the heat of the sun can be divorced from its light.... Sanctification signifies the personal or interior appropriation of the fruits of justification” (Bloesch, 1978, p. 45). The Westminister Confession declares that depravity remains in the believer and that this corruption as well as what it produces are truly sin and rightly bring us under God’s wrath and curse unless grace secures our release (Williamson, 1964). Despite the presence of depravity in believers, their regenerate nature is enabled to develop by God’s Word and Spirit. Though never perfect in this life, never complete in victory, the believer dies more and more to sin and sanctification pervades the whole man. Genuine progress is made.

In the process of justification, according to Barth, “There is an exchange of status between Him and us: His righteousness and holiness are ours, our sin is His; He is lost for us, and we for His sake are saved” (Bloesch, vol.2, 1978,  p. 251). Regeneration, the imparted new nature, is the subjective pole of justification. Our nature is regenerated as we proceed through the process of sanctification. Of this exchange, “justification signifies the imputation of righteousness of God, regeneration means to be engrafted into this righteousness” (Bloesch, vol.2, 1987,  p. 7). Though regeneration continues throughout life, its commencement signifies a radical and decisive break with old habits of life (Ezek 36:26, Jere.31:33, Col.2:13, 2Cor.1:17, Jn.1:3).

Concerning sanctification, Pietism brought to Reformed theology an emphasis on the already aspect of victory over sin and attainment of righteousness, rather than a not yet stance (Bloesch, 1978). Later, when Wesley  defined sin as a conscious act of wrong-doing, he opened the door “for a surface view of sin which does not consider that sin (as defined by the Reformation) is essentially a state of being out of which proceed wrong actions” (Bloesch, 1978, p. 50). Wesley instituted a method for attaining spirituality that mimicked the belief of the Enlightenment period in  the success of the rational approach. The Holiness Movement, inspired by Wesley, tended to de-emphasize the struggle against sin by stressing the second blessing of the Spirit as total purification. This vein of Christianity undergirds much of the theology of the non-denominational movements of Calvary Chapel and the Vineyard.

The Reformation principle of justification where there is an utterly paradoxical imputation of righteousness to the sinner, apart from his moral condition, is in stark contrast to the error of works-righteousness and its corollary, faith-moralism. Our justification is by grace alone, by faith, not by anything that we do. Once righteousness is understood as imparted, there is also a temptation to equate Christ’s imparted righteousness with the personal holiness of the believer.  (Bloesch, 1978). This is also error because our righteousness is the fruit of his righteousness in us.  When this error is made, there is a false self-reliance rather than dependence on Christ. This error may drive a person to validate one’s righteousness through intense religious experience. Even when Jesus lives within us, His righteousness is alien to us like a pacemaker is alien to a person’s body while directing his heart. “The pacemaker never becomes an organic part of the believer, but is the ground for new behavior. The new man is Jesus Christ, who is both our spiritual basis and our future” (Bloesch, 1978, p. 251). We are completely dependent on Christ for our justification, regeneration, and sanctification.

We are still sinners even though we are in right standing before God because of our justification and regeneration by faith in Christ’s complete work. The process of sanctification is designed by God to close  the gap between our positional standing in God and our actual thoughts and behavior (Boice, 1986). This work of sanctification is a process initiated and completed by God as we walk in his Spirit (I Thes.5:23-24, Gal.5:16). God does the work and we obey and walk in what He has prepared (Phil.2:12-13, Eph.2:10).

The problems of perfectionism proceed from a non-Biblical picture of sanctification.  Perfectionism teaches that only some believers attain freedom from the reign of sin and that one can obtain complete victory over sin in this life (Williamson, 1964). Whether seen from the theological position of the Holiness movement or from a more secular position of the perfectability of self, this view denies the role of grace as sole source of our justification and sanctification. In contrast to the definition of perfection as “sinless”, the Greek word for perfect, can be translated as “mature”.  Paul, in Phil.3:12, says that he has not obtained this perfection.

The concept of depravity applies to a believer’s understanding of self in that his old nature is fallen and thereby misses the mark. The old nature is identified by Paul as “flesh”. The concept of the “flesh” is associated with self-reliance and the old nature, rather than dependence on God’s spirit to walk in newness of life (Rom.8). Scripture uses the phrases "the desires of the flesh" (Gal.5:19‑21), "the deeds of the body" (Rom.5:13), and " loving the world" (1Jn.2:15) to refer to sin rather than to refer to the self and our natural body. John makes this clear in I John 2:16 when he defines what loving the world means: "the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life". Colin Brown notes that fleshly, as seen in Gal.3:9 & Rom.8:4-9, can also refer to the man who “puts himself at the center, trusting in his own ability to secure life even, if need be, by cultivating ‘religion’” (vol. 1,1975, p. 680).

However, when contrasting the old nature (flesh) with the new nature, Paul makes a distinction between self (as a new nature) and sin. This distinction can be clearly seen in Rom.7:23.  Paul says that he serves the law of God with his understanding (Greek= nous), but with his flesh he serves the law of sin. According to Colin Brown (1976), the nous is the ego or the real self, the inner man which can tell the difference between good and bad. In contrast, the “flesh” does not desire what the nous desires. In verse 20, Paul concludes then, “I am no longer the one doing it (the desires of the flesh), but sin which dwells in me”. Of this battle, Williamson (1964) states, “Yet, while it is ‘the new man’ alone which is the ‘real’ Paul, the remnants of the ‘old’ are present, and able to lash out furiously against the ‘new’” (p.50, v. 2-6). Here, Paul as, “I”,  is declared separate from “sin”. It is the same “I” who puts off the old man and puts on the new man. Yet, we are to identify with the new man, as Christ within us.

With a foundational understanding of the concepts of the “image”, “sin”, and “self as a new creation”, we can understand how to apply verses that exhort believers to die to themselves and pick up their crosses and follow Christ (Matt.10:38-39). This application of the cross must be seen as restorative to the affirmation of the self as made in God's image (Macaulay & Barrs, 1978). It is the fall of man and its curse on the self that calls for the work of the cross, the gospel. God is saying that He wants to restore to us the “image” by setting us free from sin. We are not called to obliterate self but rather to address in increments the sin in one’s self. Sin (the flesh) is to be crucified so that self can be healed and developed freely. Believers depend on the guidance and empowerment of the Spirit to work this process out in us. Paul refers to this process in Col.3:9‑10, " Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old nature with its practices and have put on the new nature, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator". Again in Ephesians 4:24, Paul encourages us to "Put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness." It is from this position of affirmation of self that we are called "to love others as ourselves” (Luke10:27). Man can't love another if he does not love himself. And he cannot love himself if he has no self to affirm. 

God calls us into existence as unique selves, empowering us as new creations to develop our "beings as a self". Without His power and the provisions of the gospel, the believer is doomed to share in the futility of the fall, attempting to live righteously but unable to do so. Dr. Stanley Jones (1973) describes the out‑working of this dynamic interaction between self and the Holy Spirit well,

 when surrendered to the Spirit we become inwardly harmonized and hence outwardly effective¼ When you are Spirit‑possessed, then you are self‑possessed.  For there is an affinity between the Spirit and the self. When we most belong to the Spirit, we most belong to ourselves¼ It is life reduced to the natural because it is life raised to the Supernatural.  All extraneous inhibitions, fears, self‑consciousness, complexes are cleansed away, and life is now normal and natural and unaffected. (p. 277) 

If a person subjects himself to the operation of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit can speak harmony and co‑ordination to every part of his inmost being. The human and the Spirit can flow together as an integral unit, both valuable; yet the human is dependent on the Spirit to operate in that integrated way (Rom.7& 8).

 Correlation of Theological and Psychological

On a theoretical level the theological and psychological can be correlated by a theory developed by Deborah Hunsinger (1995). Hunsinger correlates the two fields by way of Barth's theological perspective of the Chalcedonian pattern, which describes the inter‑relationship between Jesus' humanity and divinity as without separation or division, without confusion or change, where his divine nature supercedes his humanity. From the Chalcedonian pattern, Hunsinger derives some general concepts about the interrelationship between theology and psychology. She (1995) concludes that while these two fields of study are "logically diverse, having different aims, subject matters, methods and linguistic conventions" (p. 6), yet they  "could be 'existentially connected'  ('both in you') ¼ They could be integrated in oneself as a person without needing to be integrated in a unified theoretical scheme" (p. x). In this integration, theological truth leads psychological truth, just as Jesus' divine nature directs the expression of His human nature. Therefore the counselor who desires to address a client from both perspectives, according to Hunsinger, needs to be fluent in the separate fields in such a way to keep them distinct theoretically while fully represented and expressed in the personhood of the counselor. The therapist's role is to support the person in learning to live out the fully human under the submission, yet of equal value, of the fully spiritual. The therapist helps the client to have a healthier soul so that the affinity between the spirit and self  is less fettered by fears, jealousies, rage, and so on. Both perspectives, the psychological and spiritual, must be fully explored and addressed in the counseling environment in order to provide for the consummate possibility of healing.

 Hunsinger's position is important to this study not only in its larger theoretical framework but also in that it offers a method to examine the health of a particular faith expression. She (1995) examines this from four positions: #1 the psychological functional combined with the theological functional,  #2 the psychological functional combined with the theological dysfunctional,  #3 the psychological dysfunctional combined with theological adequate, #4 and the psychological dysfunctional with the theological inadequate. By way of interpretation, according to the Chalcedonian pattern, the psychological concept of health would be subordinated to the theological norm of "abundant life". It is my position theologically that theological truth and psychological health go hand in hand, one promotes the other.     

                                          

The Interaction of Faith and Narcissism             

                                                      As Seen in Case Study #1

Theoretical Approach of James Masterson

Masterson's theory combines ideas from two theories, self‑psychology and object relations.  Masterson’s (1985) view of self comes from self-psychology and his view of  relationships comes from object relations theory. It is his belief that the combination of the two theories brings a more whole perspective to the therapeutic endeavor. He then applies these concepts to an understanding of developmental stages. From Masterson's (1985) perspective,

the self is the sum total of the individual's intra‑psychic images of the self and of significant others, as well as the feelings associated with those images. Moreover, it is the capacity of the individual for action in the world guided by those images. The real self exists as a parallel partner of the ego and has its own development, its own capacities, and its own psychopathology. The self and the ego develop and function together in tandem, like two horses in the same harness.  If the ego is arrested in development, so is the self.  (pp. 22-23) 

According to this theory the self is the "operational arm" of the ego, the subjective experience of "I", expressed as a single, unique individual consistently over time. The ego is the "executant arm" of the self that performs reality testing, impulse control, and other ego functions and defenses. The self and the ego work together.

Ego functions and self and object representations develop simultaneously, propelling the evolving, separate, real self towards the capacity for autonomous action. These capacities of the real self involve an ability to feel spontaneity and an aliveness of affect. A sense of self-entitlement grows when the child experiences mastery and  his parents’ acknowledgment and support of the forming self. A confidence builds that the self is “entitled to appropriate experiences of mastery and pleasure, as well as to the environmental input necessary to achieve these objectives” (Masterson, 1985, p. 27). There is an ability to self-activate and to identify one’s own desires, to use autonomous initiative and assertion to express them, and to defend them when they are challenged. There is an acknowledgment of self-activation where one recognizes and supports assertive, adaptive behavior. This capacity, in turn, fuels adequate self-esteem. There is an ability to soothe painful affects and a sense of continuity of self. A capacity to commit to goals and achieve them is part of the real self. Finally, there is a capacity for creative change from old maladaptive patterns to new uniquely self-directed patterns.

In order to understand development of the self, Masterson (1989) makes use of Mahler's developmental theory where the child in the first three years of life separates and individuates from the mother in three main stages: 1) separation of the internalized self representations from internalized object representations 2) integration of contradictory, opposite, affect states 3) the unfolding capacities of the emerging, individuated self. It is the primary caretaker who ideally supports the child's self‑activation, reinforcing separation and the emergence of the child's real self.   The real self develops under the guidance of genetic drives, pleasure in the mastery of new challenges, and the mother’s appropriate response to mirroring and matching the child’s individuation (Masterson, 1981). In the separation individuation process, the child separates out self-representations from object- representations. His sense of self first emerges in two part images, a good self representation and a bad self representation. Later, these two merge to form a whole self representation.

According to Mahler (1968), the infant’s development moves from normal autism to normal symbiosis in the second month of life. The name of this stage, symbiosis, is taken from a biological term referring to a close functional association between two organisms that is to their mutual benefit. In this symbiosis, the infant acts as though he is in an omnipotent dual unity with the mother within one common boundary. The word symbiotic is used metaphorically to describe the state of fusion with the mother in which the “I” and the “not I” are not yet separated. The ramifications of the gratification and frustration of drives promote structuralization in the infant. When there is enough pleasure coming from interactions with the outer environment as well as pressure from the maturational process, the infant becomes outwardly oriented. If this is also coupled with an optimal level of inward pleasure and safe anchorage to the symbiotic unit, then expansion beyond the symbiotic unit can take place smoothly. At about four to five months the process of separation-individuation begins. This process is made up of four stages: 1) differentiation 2) practicing 3) rapprochement 4) ‘on the way to libidinal object constancy’. In differentiation, the infant makes its first physical moves toward breaking away from the mother. He is enough individuated to recognize mother and begin to distinguish her from others. 

      This stage is overlapped with the next subphase of practicing. Early practicing begins at about seven to ten months when the infant begins his initial forms of moving away from mother by crawling, climbing and righting himself but still holding onto her. Later, when upright locomotion takes place, the subphase of practicing period proper begins. At the time of the practicing subphases a large amount of the cathexis (energy) of the child moves from the symbiotic unit to investment in the autonomous apparatuses of the self and functions of the ego in the activities of locomotion, perception, and learning. Leaving the mother and returning to her continues promoting the development of the ego. At this time the infant engages in an activity of “checking back” to the mother where he compares her features point by point as pre-object or part-object representations in comparison with “not-mother’s” features. The self representations and the object representations are not yet integrated into whole object or whole self representations. 

During the sub-phase of practicing, the child is so completely absorbed in experimenting with his body and its functions that he is not terribly phased by inevitable bumps and hard knocks. According to Mahler (1968), “He appears to be at the peak point of his belief in his own magic omnipotence, which is still to a considerable extent derived from his sense of sharing in his mother’s magic powers” (p. 210).  It is at this stage that a mother may have difficulty finding a balance between giving support at the right time or just being available and watching from a distance. A mother gives up the “symbiotic holding behavior” and begins supporting on a higher emotional and verbal level so that the child can optimally try out his new autonomy. When the mother does not strike a balance between these behaviors, narcissistic wounding may occur that leaves him in the developmental state of omnipotence and fusion. A defense of affectlessness can develop “against his anxiety- to ward off the feeling of emptiness at the loss of a part of himself, at a time when the loss of the symbiotic mother was still equivalent to losing part of the self” (Mahler, 1968, p. 217).

 Following the imperviousness of this stage, the rapprochement subphase begins at approximately 15-22 months. Normally, during this phase the child has mastered walking, has developed more cognitive awareness, and has an increasing sense of differentiation of his emotions.  During the stage of  rapprochement, the child becomes more susceptible to frustration and begins to notice mother’s whereabouts. This awareness signals a heightened sense of his separateness. When he demands that she be involved with every aspect of his activities, she may not respond in the old symbiotic manner of constant keyed-in attention. This  loss of symbiotic response decreases the child’s sense of grandiosity and omnipotence because he becomes aware that the outside world has a will of its own that he cannot determine. He must rely on his own resources. He also has more of an awareness of the obstacles in the way of achieving his desires so that he cannot maintain the sense of sharing his parent’s omnipotence. This loss may illicit emotional tantrums in the disillusioned toddler.

 In Masterson's theory (1989) narcissistic tendencies result from an arrest in development during the practicing subphase of separation‑individuation. At this time, the mother may not enjoy the child’s  autonomy or she may not support her infant's attempts to use her to soothe himself when he is frustrated. The mother may need  certain behavior from the child to feel good herself, which creates a sense of fusion between the mother and child. The mother may reward clinging, regressive behavior, while withholding approval for independent behavior. Or the mother may require excessive independence from the child. In either case, mother's defective mirroring and excessive idealized attention on the infant contribute to the arrest. If the child feels that the mother’s approval and continued attention depend on his individuation attempts or his clinging behavior, then the child becomes endlessly focused on the need to impress the mother so that he can maintain relatedness to her (Masterson, 1981). This dynamic between the mother and child creates a grandiose fantasy in the child that he can please mother. The child begins to confuse the sense of “fusion” with mom with maintaining a continuity of relationship with her. In the fusion, the child begins to merge his grandiose self with his idealized image of mother, fantasizing that he can do anything. This alignment plants the seed  for the endless motivation to seek perfection and thereby impress mother and maintain relationship with her.

According to Masterson, at this point the male child in particular may turn prematurely to the father to avoid abandonment depression with the mother. If the male child is experiencing abandonment depression as a result of his relationship with his mother, he may make the natural turn towards his father even earlier. With that transition, he may project the already symbiotic relationship with the mother onto the father in an attempt to deal with the abandonment depression.  If the father is a narcissistic personality disorder and the transfer begins before the rapprochement stage has a chance to modify the grandiosity, then the child’s grandiosity is reinforced through identification with the father. If the transfer occurs after the rapprochement phase, then identification with the narcissistic father may create a narcissistic defense against the borderline psychic structure of split object relations which was established earlier with the mother (Masterson, 1985).

The child defends against abandonment depression by the defense mechanisms of avoidance, denial, clinging, acting-out, splitting, and projection (Masterson, 1981). In summary, the child deals with abandonment depression through a sense of fused relations and a omnipotent sense that he can please mother. His sense of self continues resonating with the projected image of the mother rather than being deflated by the normal disappointments of the rapprochement. A sense of the relativity of the self, where he discovers his limitations, is not attained because of  fusion with mother. The individuation process becomes threatening to the child’s position with mother. Necessary self‑activation is sacrificed for the sake of maintaining relationship.

From object relations point of view, the arrest in the developmental process of separation-individuation impacts the formation of the internalized object relations in the psychic structure of the child. Two split object relations are internalized in the child’s psychic structure: one rewarding mother image and another opposing split object relations unit, the withdrawing mother image. The interaction between these two complementary units and the defensive system around them forms the basis for the development of the false self (the self who simply wants to please). The development of his true self through separating the mother image from the self image through self-assertion and support by the mother’s appropriate responses, does not happen. The false self is formulated by an identification with the regressive, compulsive behaviors associated with the ego alliance with the adaptive, regressive split object relations. The motivating force behind all of this regression is the avoidance of abandonment depression and a corollary acknowledgment of mother’s failures. 

As an adult, when a narcissistic person attempts to self activate, he feels abandonment depression related to the fear of losing relationship. He fends off these fears with certain characteristic defensive patterns that are manifestations of the split object relations. From these defensive patterns, the narcissistic person displaces the empty self (associated with the withdrawing unit) on the other person, and then accuses them of attacking or devaluing. At the same time, the person defends with a grandiose, superior position of faultlessness (associated with the rewarding unit). In this manner, the childhood fantasy of the grandiose omnipotent self where the world revolves around him is maintained. The defenses of avoidance, denial and devaluation help maintain the grandiose omnipotent self whenever reality threatens to break into the fantasy. Feelings of emptiness, a fear of fragmentation, and a lack of creative, spontaneous functioning haunt the person suffering under the weight of the false self. There are difficulties in functioning as a self in the areas of self-image, self-acknowledgment, self-soothing, self-entitlement, and self-assertion (Masterson, 1985). According to Masterson (1985), “There was as much an arrest of development of the self as there was of the ego” (p. 18).

The goal of therapy is to help the client discover the false self and its defenses, and to uncover the abandonment depression behind it, so that the real self can resume growing and developing its normal capacities along side of the maturing ego functions, defenses and object relations. Evidence of the false self is seen by its content, its motives and the denial of the reality that contradicts it. The false self seeks to gain a  narcissistic supply of uniqueness, specialness in beauty, wealth, prestige. There is a denial attached to anything that would contradict these qualities. The illusory nature of the perfection is demonstrated when the person needs to self activate and has difficulty.  An abandonment depression ensues. It is particularly helpful to point out to the client when his depression results from attempts to self-activate. When the client works through the rage and depression of abandonment, he begins to separate and individuate and a self gradually emerges and consolidates (Masterson, 1981).

In this case study #1, Masterson’s theory is utilized in order to understand and address the narcissistic features of this client. However, in accordance with his strong Christian commitment, this client requested as much integration of Christianity and therapy as possible. This case study illustrates well the client’s beneficial use of his Evangelical faith to help liberate himself from  narcissistic features. It is important to note the healthy use of his faith and the predominately positive impact of his church background and current church setting on his therapeutic process. This client’s more healthy use of faith will contrast with some of the ways that the client in case study #2 uses his faith. Case study #2 illustrates a use of faith which at times, instead, results in reinforcing his narcissistic features.

    

                                       The Interaction of Faith and Narcissism

                                                   As Seen in Case Study #2

Theoretical Approach of Otto Kernberg                                                       

             Otto Kernberg’s theories address the type of personality structure illustrated in this case study #2. In Kernberg’s developmental model there are two early tasks of the ego. The first task of the ego involves differenciating self images from object images. The second task involves integrating the self and object images that are connected with libidinal derivatives with those self and object images derived from aggressive derivatives (Kernberg, 1975). This process of differenciating and integrating formulates a sense of self in the normal individual. In Kernberg’s  (1975) own words:          

The self is an intrapsychic structure consisting of multiple self representations and their related affect dispositions.  Self representations are affective-cognitive structures reflecting the person’s perception of himself in real interactions with significant others and in fantasied interactions with internal representations of significant others, that is with object representations.  The self is part of the ego, which contains, in addition, the object representations mentioned before, and also ideal self-images and ideal object images at various stages of depersonification, abstraction and integration.  The normal self is integrated, in that its component self representations are dynamically organized into a comprehensive whole.  The self relates to integrated object representations, that is, to object representations which have incorporated the “good” and “bad” primitive object representations into integrative images of others in depth; by the same token, the self represents an integration of contradictory, “all good” and “all bad” self-images derived from libidinally invested and aggressively invested early self-images.  (pp.315-316)          

           Otto Kernberg (1975) makes a distinction between normal narcissism and pathological narcissism in terms of underlying intrapsychic structure. Normal narcissism is the libidinal investment of the self. Normal narcissism is evidenced when there is a relative predominance of libidinal over aggressive investment represented in the psychic structures. In pathological narcissism there is a predominance of aggressive investment in the intrapsychic structures. Kernberg hypothesizes that this occurs when there is a predisposition toward excessive aggression and a constitutionally determined lack of anxiety tolerance in the infant. Severe frustrations are met with intense aggression in the first few years of life. In consequence, the excessive pregenital oral aggression is projected out onto the parental image which causes a paranoid distortion of them and intense feelings of love and hatred toward them. These distortions are then reintrojected as self and object images. These images become predominately “bad” and overwhelm the “good” self and object images. The all “good” images are too weak to neutralize the anxiety producing and disorganizing effects of the excessive frustration and its related, fused self-object images. In defense, the child splits the “bad” from the “good” to prevent the contamination of the “good” and protect the ego from the unbearable conflicts between love and hatred. This splitting makes it even more difficult to integrate self and object images that are built up under the influence of libidinal drive derivatives and related affects with their corresponding self and object images built up under the influence of aggressive drive derivatives and affects. Unbearable conflicts are avoided at the expense of ego integration and a vicious cycle of splitting the “good” and “bad” is perpetuated.    This vicious cycle then leads to ego weakness because it takes less strength for the ego to split than for it to defend with the more developed defense of repression. In other words, the ego needs to use more strength, “countercathexis”,  to defend with repression than it does with splitting. Kernberg concludes his hypothesis by saying that there is therefore not just an absence of certain structures, but a pathological development of earlier structures so that normal development cannot proceed.

When integration of the “good” and “bad” is impeded, the individual does not develop object constancy, or an ongoing, consistent, internalized model of others on which he can rely. A lack of object constancy, impedes perception of others and the formulation of self identity.  Immediate perceptions of others determine the child’s behavior instead of a consistent internalized model of others. The child learns to live with  moment to moment perceptions, “actively cutting off the emotional links between what would otherwise become chaotic, contradictory, frightening emotional experiences” (Kernberg, 1975, p. 165). Cutting these emotional links, or splitting, allows contradictory ego states to be alternately activated so that they are kept separate and thereby prevents anxiety. Contradictory self images are also kept apart, so that self identity is weakened, creating identity diffusion. According to Kernberg (1980), the phenomena of identity diffusion, first identified by Erikson (1950, 1956), is exhibited by a “chronic sense of emptiness, contradictory self perceptions and behavior, and a flat perception of others that lacks understanding and empathy” (p. 8). As time proceeds, this individual’s relationships become more chaotic, shallow, and distorted with pregenital and genital conflicts and unmet needs (Kernberg, 1975).

Otto Kernberg’s theory postulates that the pathological development described above applies to both the borderline personality and the narcissistic personality. He places the narcissistic personality as a subcategory of borderline personality. In contrast to the borderline, the narcissistic personality seems to have a more solid identity where the subtle grandiosity hides the identity diffusion and nonspecific manifestations of ego weakness of the underlying borderline structure.  (Kernberg, 1980). The narcissistic personality utilizes the defensive operations of omnipotence and devaluation in a way that the internal grandiose, omnipotent, inflated self interacts with the internal depreciated, devalued, emotionally demolished  representations of others (Kernberg, 1977). These defenses protect the person from the rage resulting from unmet narcissistic needs, and also from “ his deep convictions of unworthiness, his frightening image of the world as being devoid of food and love, and his self-concept of the hungry wolf out to kill, eat, and survive” (Kernberg, 1975, p. 26).

The defense of omnipotence operates in such a way that the narcissistic person identifies with the idealized, powerful object so that he does not have to feel his vulnerability and need for others. This denial of dependence on significant others allows him to avoid consciousness of destructive forces within him directed toward those very people (Kernberg, 1980). Omnipotence can operate through projective identification, where the narcissist projects his threatening aggression on the other and then omnipotently subdues the “aggression” through externally controlling the other. This reassures the narcissistic person that they are not dangerous and neither is the one controlled. Obsessive traits may also provide a secondary defense against the threat of aggression. When identified with the idealized object, the narcissistic person does not have to feel the contamination of the ever-present and overwhelming internalized bad self object. Instead, contempt is expressed toward the devalued other. Often the narcissistic person has no real regard for the idealized person; rather, he treats that person possessively as an extension of himself to be used for self protection against dangerous objects in the world (Kernberg, 1975). He may seek the destruction of the idealized object if frustration becomes overwhelming, or to prevent the idealized object from becoming a “persecutor” of himself (a projection identification of his own revengeful self).

Projective identification is another defense often used by the narcissistic person. This occurs when the person experiences an impulse which he has simultaneously projected onto another. Then there is a fear of that person under the influence of the projection and an attempt to control them. In the case of projected aggression, there is a need to attack and control before being attacked and controlled (Kernberg, 1975). Besides aggression, this is also the projection of the unintegrated superego, where demanding and prohibitive voices of the superego are projected onto the external world.

Kernberg (1976) delineates three levels of organization of character pathology. The higher level is characterized by an excessively severe superego, a tendency to use the defense mechanisms  of repression, intellectualization, rationalization, undoing, and higher levels of projection. Inhibitory and reactive character traits predominate. Instinctual fixation is at genital primacy and deep, stable object relations are possible.

On the intermediate level, the superego is less integrated, more punitive,  and has more sadistic tendencies. Pregenital, oral needs are present and the person has fewer inhibitory character defenses, and a “structured impulsivity” in certain areas. Repression, intellectualization, undoing, and rationalization are still used predominately along with some defensive ego splitting, projection, and denial. There is a decreased capacity for guilt, some evidence of paranoid perceptions, an inconsistent expression of values, and severe moodiness. This person has more conflictual object relations. Many narcissistic personalities are organized at this level (Kernberg, 1976).

The lower level of pathology is characterized by a predominance of more primitive defense mechanisms, such as projective identification, primitive dissociation and splitting, denial, primitive idealization, devaluation and omnipotence. There is minimal superego integration, and a strong impairment of ability to experience guilt and concern. Severe ego weakness exists and a lack of anxiety tolerance, impulse control, and developed sublimatory activities such as creative outlets. They experience chronic failure at work. There are partial, rather than total object relations, and a lack of object constancy . Object constancy is the child’s capacity to retain his attachment to a loved person and to his internal representation of that person even when frustration and hostility are profuse (Kernberg, 1976).

In order to further understand the anxiety and health issues of this client, Otto Fenichel’s work (1945), The Psychoanalytic Theory of Neurosis, has been used as a reference. Fenichel describes anxiety neurosis as a constant free floating anxiety or readiness for anxiety. When a diffuse readiness to experience anxiety exists in a person, and then an event happens that brings about intrapsychic conflict, the anxiety becomes tied to the event. The result is a secondary binding of the primary diffuse anxiety to the specific content of the event. When a person becomes dammed up without adequate discharge and reacts with narcissistic withdrawal, certain organic changes can occur in the body that then create hypochondriacal sensations. The organic process that happen in the body strengthen the tension in certain organs and this becomes painful. A withdrawal of object cathexes changes the mental processes so that the libido that was connected to the idea of objects now becomes connected to one’s own organs. In the hypochondriac, hostile and sadistic impulses that were once object related turn inward toward the ego and function as a gratification of guilt. Often the dammed up impulses and emotions are reflected in the muscular system, where mobility to the impulses has been prohibited by blocking certain movements. “Spasms paralyzing skeletal muscles are one of the physical signs of anxiety; they may appear as an anxiety equivalent”  (Fenichel, 1945,  p. 247).

According to Kernberg’s theory, the client in Case Study 2 could be diagnosed as a narcissistic personality functioning on a borderline level. This client demonstrates an intermediate level of pathology. Fenichel’s theory of hypochondriasis applies well to his state of narcissistic withdrawal and free floating anxiety. Kernberg (1975) recommends long-term, intensive exploratory psychoanalytic psychotherapy for this kind of client rather than classic psychoanalysis or supportive therapy. He thinks that this type of therapy will improve the personality structure enough so that the patient will not have a psychotic breakdown under life stresses. The psychotherapy in this situation should be focused on the “ here and now” interaction between the client and therapist where negative transference is interpreted without looking into an intricate reconstruction of  family of origin dynamics. The therapist should interpret the defensive constellations that are seen in the transference and not interpret the less primitively modulated positive transferences in order to facilitate the therapeutic alliance. If there is any negative acting out, the therapist initiates some limit setting.

Kernberg delineates some important interview techniques that can guide the session: clarification, confrontation, interpretation, and transference interpretation. In clarification, the therapist draws out the preconscious or conscious material in a non-challenging manner through asking questions. In the confrontation phase, the therapist points out contradiction inherent in the various split ego states. During the interpretation phase the therapist explores the conflictual origins that led to the dissociation of the split ego states (split self-object representations). A hypothesis as to the causality is put forth. Finally, in the transference interpretation, the connection to the patient’s inner world is made, where he is given the explanation that he sees the other in a certain way in lieu of seeing that part in himself. This happens because he has experienced that kind of interaction, those self-object representations, in the past with a parental figure (Kernberg, 1977).

The above methods allow for the gradual working through of the grandiose, narcissistic self and expose the underlying conflicting object relations of the borderline structure (Kernberg, 1988).  During this process, the therapist may experience a sense of boredom, a lack of emotional meaning in the sessions, a disengagement from the client, and a sense of guilt over these reactions. These reactions are due to the narcissistic pseudo-presence of the client in the room, where the split off parts of the underlying borderline structure of the client are not being brought into the therapy session (Kernberg, 1975). The therapist’s use of  clarifications, confrontations, and interpretations help the client bring split off parts into human interaction with the therapist. The client is then able to use his interactions with the therapist constructively in order to reorganize and improve his functioning in realistic manner (Kernberg, 1977).

The therapist can use the transference to help the client become aware of his need to devalue and depreciate the analyst so that he can avoid seeing the therapist as an autonomous person. It is as if the client is saying, “either you are as I want you, or you cease to exist”  (Kernberg, 1975, p. 287). Thereby, he enforces his unconsciousness need for omnipotent control of the object (the therapist) and avoids expression of his aggression toward that object. In this way, he protects himself from acknowledging his oral rage and envy toward the therapist and his related fears of retaliation from the therapist. Kernberg thinks that at some point the client needs to become aware that the hated and loved object (ultimately the mother figure) are one and the same, and that the fear of being attacked  is a projection of his own aggression that is connected to his intense frustration toward the object. 

 

 

                                                                  Conclusion

In order to draw some conclusions from case study #1 and case study #2, some characteristics of each client stand out that factor into understanding their use of faith in their healing process. First, there were some similarities between them. Both clients were intelligent men who at the midpoints of their lives maintained a fairly affluent life style. Both men worshiped in similar church settings. Both men displayed narcissistic features of denial, idealizing and devaluing, omnipotence, fantasies related to the ideal, and entitlement. Both men displayed the developmental arrest of narcissism where separation is incomplete and there is a tendency to see others as extensions of self, as projections of self, rather than independent beings with their own characteristics. In both men, these projections bolstered the narcissism and helped create a closed self-reinforcing system. Both men gravitated toward addictions that replaced intimacy with intensity and trance-like behavior. Both men came into therapy to relieve their suffering, supported by their belief in God.

However, while these two clients suffered from narcissistic features, their personality structures were different. P.F. manifested narcissistic features whereas L.J. had narcissistic features with an underlying borderline personality structure. Due to the preponderance of splitting present in borderline structure, L.J. tended to polarize in his thinking and was more restricted in perceptions and feelings than P.F.. As a result, his  reasoning was more concrete than P.F.’s more integrated and abstract reasoning. In addition, the fragmentation due to the splitting created a loss in P.F.’s sense of identification with his history and a resulting loss in identity formation. His difficulty in connecting “here and now” experiences with his history made it harder to separate current emotions from stockpiled emotions of the past.

These differences of personality structure stood out between the two cases, and were demonstrated in L.J.’s much less satisfactory use of scripture. Due to L.J.’s underlying borderline structure, his interpretations of scripture were emotion-laden with a larger amounts of undigested content from his past. He tended to align scripture in oppositional camps along an either/or, good/bad paradigm, illustrated by juxtapositions between weakness versus strength, performance versus failure, legalism versus licentiousness, and accepted and loved versus rejected and contemptible. From this vantage point, he often created Gnostic labels of superior versus inferior value that directed him toward an even greater dichotomy between his good/bad splits. His tendency toward concrete thinking made it difficult for him to see the pervasiveness of his oppositional interpretations and understand their impact on him.

Though L.J. was inclined toward splitting in a more serious way than P.F., both men often used the defense mechanism of projection. When they projected their parental images onto God, it was important to sift the projections out and redefine language and concepts. For example, when P.F. saw God as the withholder of good things (like his mother), he needed not only to redefine God but also redefine “good things” in terms of scripture. It was especially difficult to sort and redefine with L.J. because the extent of his splits led him to see God in polarities, as sadistic or completely gratifying. Whenever he attempted to integrate nurturing images of God with images of judgement and discipline, he would fail. Instead, he would see God as a punishing sadist and respond with a concept of suffering that entailed a martyring masochism. This splitting compounded the difficulty of dealing with the already closed system of thought that is characteristic of narcissism.

Another factor that enabled P.F. to use his faith to move away from narcissism more effectively than L.J. was his strong familiarity with Reformed doctrine. Reformed doctrine holds the tensions inherent in reality together without sacrificing one polarity for another. For example, total depravity is held in tension with the invaluable worth of being made in God’s image. Performance of the faith is held in tension with total acceptance by faith. The tension between the “flesh” and “spirit” is held together by learning to “walk in the spirit”. We carry the tension as we pick up our crosses daily, refusing to succumb to the desires of the “flesh”. Weakness is strength when it is used as a venue for dependence on Jesus. We remain in the tension of not yet sanctified, but already judicially sanctified. As soon as the believer attempts to remove himself from these tensions, so powerfully symbolized by the on-going work of the cross in our lives, and seeks instead some form of “oceanic” freedom from tension, he leaves the Reformed position. Of these tensions in the Reformed position, Meeter (1990) declares, “...the Calvinist does not hesitate to include in his theological beliefs ideas which are logical opposites, that is, ideas which seem to be in direct conflict, paradoxes... This fact is of great importance. It keeps the Calvinist from becoming a one-sided extremist” (pp. 40-41).

Acceptance of the tensions in the Reformed faith acknowledges human limitations and requires dependence on God.  Personal incorporation of these realities addresses the developmental arrest at the root of narcissism described so cogently by Lasch (1990), “The reason the child finds it so difficult to acknowledge the union of gratification and suffering in a common source (his primary care giver) is that he thereby acknowledges his own dependence and limitations” (pp. 519-520). Faith in a God who both nurtures and disciplines, rewards and punishes, enhances the integration of good and bad splits, and sets limitations firmly in place. Limitations on power and freedom work against the omnipotence and entitlement of narcissism and encourage the believer to adopt a more healthy, psychologically sound position.  Lasch (1990) summarizes this well, “Psychoanalysis confirms the ancient religious insight that the only way to achieve happiness is to accept limitations in a spirit of gratitude and contrition instead of attempting to annul those limitations or bitterly resenting them” (p. 517).               

Grace, rather than obliterating tension, offers the opportunity for complete reliance on God’s provision in the midst of tension. In one stroke, grace acknowledges on-going utter depravity, and simultaneously pardons through God’s actions on mankind’s behalf. Grace, as a radical, absolutely unearned gift, sustains and contains all tension in the strength of the force behind it, God’s love. It is the existence of tension plus the radical bridging of tension through the holding power of God’s grace and love that promotes the healing of narcissism. The narcissist’s worst fears that he is a ravenous predator ready to devour and destroy is confirmed in his depravity and then transformed by complete love and acceptance. Instead of eternal condemnation, he is offered a new identity as God’s own child. Herein, God offers the possibility of moving from a narcissistic definition of self to a definition of self as God’s (Abba’s) child. Of this Brennan Manning states,

My dignity as Abba’s child is my most coherent sense of self. When I seek to fashion a self-image from the adulation of others and the inner voice whispers, “You’ve arrived; you’re a player in the kingdom enterprise”, there is no truth in that self-concept. When I sink into despondency and the inner voice whispers, “you are no good, a fraud, a hypocrite, and a dilettante”, there is no truth in any image shaped from that message. (p. 62).

As a result, in the psychological realm, becoming God’s child facilitates integration of divergent self images and the split object relations that form that self image. Here, “Grace is the action of God that is directed toward a reintegration of human nature” (Meissner, 1987, p. 4). Hebrews 13:9 declares “It is good for our hearts to be strengthened by grace” rather than by performance of rituals that give one the false and omnipotent feeling that “You’ve arrived; you’re a player in kingdom enterprise”! Rather than ideal players, believers are lowly children, albeit God’s children.           

The church settings of both clients factored into their use of faith in addressing their narcissism. In both cases, the Pietism in their church setting encouraged practical aspects of piety and supported limits that kept them from acting out in more detrimental ways. The values of the pietistic setting and of the Christian faith at large figured into the healing process. According to Kernberg (1975), “the more awareness borderline patients (and narcissistic patients) have of values other than their own satisfactions, the more of an abstracted, depersonified superego structure is presumably present and the better the prognosis” (p. 138). In the case of P.F., his Reformed background prevented him from heading towards sanctimonious moralism and legalism, whereas L.J. had a tendency in that direction. P.F.’s knowledge of God also helped him resist soaring off into fantasy with the intensity of the charismatic experience, but instead, provided a framework for the experience to be based in reality and intensely intimate. This combination of knowledge and intimacy with the Holy Spirit created a wonderfully powerful setting for healing.

Beyond the simply intellectual realm, both men experienced God on an emotional and physical plane that satisfied and deeply met some of their  cravings for unconditional love. God’s often tangible presence bridged the gap between soma and psyche that was so needed to reach those early childhood needs. This was especially profound in addressing the hypochondrias of L.J. since God often calmed him by His tangible presence on the emotional and physical plane. However, both men, though to very different degrees, used the charismatic setting to promote expectations from God that were magical in nature. This propensity for the magical or idealized decreased with therapy.

If narcissism is the “revolt against the reality of our dependence on forces external to ourselves” (Lasch, 1990, p. 518), then the Christian world view and the essence of faith as reliance on a God who Himself defines reality, counteracts its deleterious self-sufficiency and expectations of symbiotic union. When faith is used as an avenue for self-atonement, self-crucifixion, and self-glorification, it becomes a venue controlled by the narcissism of the self. When faith is burdened with emotion laden projections, it can be used to reinforce the closed world of narcissism. When faith offers a Gnostic escape from the realities of the fall and responsibilities of earthly existence, it becomes a safe retreat for narcissism. Learning instead to trust Him in the midst of the painful tensions inherent in every day life, walks the believer through the abandonment depression and dread of loss that are at the roots of narcissism. In this way, narcissism when understood and embraced can act as a driving force towards a relationship with Abba God.

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                                                    

                                                    References

Benjamin, L. S. (1993). Interpersonal diagnosis and treatment of personality disorders.

            New York: The Gilford Press.

Bloesch, D. G. (1978).  Essentials of Evangelical theology (Vols. 1-2). New York: Harper & Row.

Boice, J. M. (1986).  Foundations of the Christian faith.  Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press.

Brown, C. (Ed.). (1975-1978). Dictionary of New Testament theology (Vols.1-3). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.        

Calvin, J. (1975). Commentary on Genesis. London: Banner of Truth Trust.

Elson, M. (Ed.). (1987). The Kohut seminars. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

Fenichel, O. (1945). The psychoanalytic theory of neurosis. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

Freud, S. (1914). On narcissism: an introduction. Standard Edition 14: 69-102.

Hood, R. W., Jr. (Ed.). (1995). Handbook of religious experience. Birmingham, Al.: Religious

Education Press.

Hunsinger, D. van D. (1995). Theology & pastoral counseling. Grand Rapids, MI: William B.

Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Jones, E. S. (1973). The way. Nashville, TN: The United Methodist Publishing House.

Kernberg, O. F. (1975). Borderline conditions and pathological narcissism. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, Inc.

Kernberg, O. F. (1980). Internal world and external reality. New York: Jason Aronson, Inc.

Kernberg, O. F. (1976). Object relations theory and clinical psycho-analysis. New York: Jason Aronson, Inc.

Kernberg, O. F. (1977). The structural diagnosis of borderline personality organization. In P. Hartocollis (Ed.), Borderline personality disorders (pp.87-121). New York: International Universities Press, Inc.

La Valle, M. R. (1986). Facing the mirror: Narcissism & the psychological recovery of faith. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Dallas, Texas.

Lasch, C. (1979). The culture of narcissism. New York: Warner Books Edition.

Lasch, C. (1990). The culture of narcissism revisited. [Electronic version]. The World And I, 5, 511-523.

Macaulay, R., & Barrs, J. (1978). Being human: The nature of spiritual experience. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Mahler, M. S. (1968). On human symbiosis and the vicissitudes of individuation.  In P. Buckley (Ed.), Essential papers on object relations (pp.200-221). New York: New York University Press.

Mahler, M. S. (1968). On the first three subphases of the separation-individuation process. In P. Buckley (Ed.), Essential papers on object relations (pp.222-232). New York: New York University Press.

Malony, H. N., & Spilka, B. (Eds.). (1991). Religion in psychodynamic perspective: The contributions of Paul W. Pruyser. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Manning, B. (1994). Abba’s child. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.

Masterson, J. F. (1981). The narcissistic and borderline disorders: An integrated developmental approach. New York: Brunner/Mazel, Inc.

Masterson, J. F. (1988). The search for the real self: Unmasking the personality disorders of our age. New York: The Free Press.

Masterson, J. F., & Klein, R. (1989). Psychotherapy of the disorders of the self. New York: Brunner/Mazel, Inc.

Meeter, H. H. (1990). The basic ideas of Calvinism. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

Meissner, W. W. (1987). Life and faith: Psychological perspectives of religious experience.

Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Nakken, C. (1988). The Addictive Personality. Center City, MI: Hazelden Foundation.

Packer, J. I. (1993). Concise theology. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.

Paloutzian, R. F. (1996). Invitation to the psychology of religion. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Vitz, P. C. (1977). Psychology as religion. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Williamson, G.I. (1964). The Westminster Confession of faith. Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.

Wolfe, A. (2003). The transformation of American religion. New York: Free Press.