When the word addiction is used, our minds quickly turn to alcohol, drugs or possibly gambling. The more our minds think about the phenomenon, the more we realise that addictions exist in many areas of life. Addiction seems potentially to involve any human activity where the pleasure centres of the brain are stimulated so that we develop a strong craving for a repetition. There are some addictions that I can confess to which are relatively harmless. For example, I am ‘addicted’ to a cup of strong coffee with my breakfast. Fortunately, because of the side-effects, I am put off repeating this experience during the rest of the day. The pleasure centre receives its kick and remains satisfied until the same time the following day.
Many addictions are in fact harmful. If the pleasure people receive from viewing pornography or playing computer games is sufficiently powerful, they might be tempted to put off all other activities that demand their attention. This might include physical self-care, like eating and sleeping. The most serious addictions are those that fill the imagination and attention even when we are not indulging in them. The drug or sex addict may spend much, if not most, of his/her time thinking about the next fix. Whatever else can be said about this physical longing, we can observe that it is unproductive of any worthwhile activity. From a Christian point of view, some of our energy should normally be focussed on others. If we spend all our time thinking about satisfying our brain pleasure receptors, then that that means there is no time or imagination left for thinking about others, let alone supporting or caring for them.
My thinking on the whole area of addictive behaviour that people indulge in has been greatly influenced by some words written by the distinguished psychoanalyst, Heinz Kohut. He is one of the two theorists who, in the 1970s, along with Otto Kernberg, gave shape the emerging concept of the narcissistic personality. Both these writers wrote in dense prose, so their thinking has not penetrated far beyond specialists in this area. Kohut himself did write one accessible piece in a book preface. There, in three pages, he linked the narcissistic personality to the individual with addiction issues. Addiction and narcissism are linked, Kohut declares, because each is attempting to fill the hole caused by a defective ‘self’. The word ‘self’ is being used in a very precise defined way to signify the way the human personality can only flourish when it has inside what he calls ‘self-objects’. These self-objects are what the parent provides for a child in terms of affirmation, so that a secure and coherent sense of identity can be achieved. The self is a kind of co-creation between parent and child which results in the child having a solid sense of self and a firm psychological core. It is an absence of such self-objects (parental attention) which can cause the child, and later the adult, to reach out for substitute objects to make up for what is missing in the construction of a secure personality. In other words, Kohut sees all the addictions as attempts by a damaged or incomplete self to fill up the empty hole of relationships. The lack of these has taken away the possibility of having something solid and secure at the centre of one’s being.
This construct by Kohut, that a damaged or incomplete personality desperately reaches out to extract pleasure, praise and other forms of personal gratification to fill an emptiness inside us, does make a lot of sense. I am not sure that, as a theory, it helps us to describe all that is going on in the cases of what we might refer to as accidental addictions. There must be, among the many manifestations of addiction, some which are purely physical and may not owe their existence to a prior emotional need at all. In other words, some manifestations of addiction, including drugs, sex and alcohol may be originally to do with staving off mild boredom rather than experiencing emotional deprivation. The reason for an addiction being hard to shed may be to do with the way the pleasure centres of the brain are activated, and these are difficult to switch off. Withdrawal symptoms are physically real and painful.
In the last resort, we may suggest that addictions of whatever kind may be a combination of narcissistic needs which may arise from a defective upbringing, together with a simple search for thrills caused by an environment where ‘everybody is doing it’. In this blog we have identified how many of the power games that we encounter in churches have narcissism at their heart. The bully or the abuser is quite likely to be exposing some deeper need in these acts of power abuse. There may also be, as we suggested, the enjoyment of and addiction to power for its own sake. Where one ends and the other begins is never easy to specify. There are likely to be elements of both in anyone who manifests an addiction, such as the compulsion to bully. We come back to that central question which we often ask on this blog. What is going on here? The answer we give may utilise elements of psychologically informed insight alongside a gut feeling about the true motivations of individuals who display abusive behaviour.
Narcissistic/addictive behaviours are found in a variety of scenarios in the churches. The sexual abuser may well be working out an addictive need for power and domination, while also possessing the narcissist’s giftedness at manipulating others. The bully may well have an identical psychological profile but avoids crossing the boundary into criminality. The sense of gratification through being powerful may be in the context of a life carrying the imprint of past shame and humiliation. Bullying in this setting will often have the signs of addiction about it. This is especially dangerous in any institution run on goodwill like a church congregation. It ought to be possible to identify the would-be ministers who have this tendency to pursue narcissistic gratification before they begin service. Unfortunately, these same individuals are often skilled at making a good impression with selectors. The abusers do, in fact, often get called out and we must be grateful to the anonymous selectors who put a block on John Smyth’s desire to enter the ordained ministry. It is interesting, in passing, to observe the way that Smyth’s compulsion to beat boys became more and more extreme as time went on. There are suggestions in Graystone’s account that Smyth himself recognised that he was in the grip of terrifying addictive compulsion over which he had little control.
Addiction and narcissism being acted out in bullying abusive behaviour, have a further thing in common. They seem to have an obsessive quality about them. Addictions and narcissistic compulsions also do not necessarily lessen with age. If anything, they can become worse. Drug taking, excessive alcohol and gambling often become more severe as time goes on. Also, the self-inflated narcissist in a church may become more outrageous with the passage of time. The people around them have been, over the years, successfully coerced to support them in their self-delusions of fame and control. If these bystanders had wanted to criticise or stand up to the narcissist, they would have found themselves forced off the scene a long time before.
It is a sad fact of life that Christian people, even Christian leaders, can become addicted to forms of behaviour that harm and hurt others. Most addictions do considerable harm to the one suffering from them, but here on this blog, we constantly meet the places where the pursuit of power and gratification spills over to damage others. We have asked the question what is going on here? But the further question needs to be faced. Where is the power in this situation? If we can answer that question, it may be possible to see clearly what is going on and how power is being misused. The Church may need to become better at removing people from leadership positions where they are actively harming others. But before that is possible, there will have to be a far better understanding of the dynamics of power that I have outlined. We may need another generation to arise who can be taught the rudiments of power in institutions and the corruptions caused by narcissistic behaviour. We are, sadly, a long way from this kind of insight!
The vicar stood for the sermon. “Who here likes a tipple, of an evening? Especially after a hard day in the office? Or looking after the children? I know I do! Come on, hands up!” There were murmurs of mirth and gradually hands crept up until, enlivened, most cheerfully admitted that they too did in fact enjoy a tipple. “Next question”, the vicar asked, encouraged by this response “who here is an alcoholic?” Hands rushed down and stayed down. Everyone likes a drink, but no one likes a drunk.
Still fuelled by the earlier response, the vicar asked another question: “who believes in hard work?” Again many hands went up. Indeed come to think of it wasn’t every hand up? “Ok, so who here is a workaholic?” Some hands went down of course, but some stayed up. Some hands initially lowered were raised again and there were looks of pride and satisfaction.
A friend of mine died a workaholic. His family were broken and distraught. Because they’d always been promised that one day the busyness would end and he would have more time with them. We all loved him. He died just before he retired.
Society is ambivalent about addictions. The harm they do is ignored or even socially sanctioned. Alcohol is a structural part of our society. Workaholism is on the up. That’s not to say a newer generation is arising with less interest in the siren pull of these activities. They drink less than their parents and work-life balance is much higher up on the list of wants in a career choice. Good luck with that, but fair play to them.
Addictive patterns are a lot more subtle than people often imagine, but are powerful drivers behind behaviours that on the face of it seem good, like hard work, or winning ways.
To work out what’s going on we cannot just look individually at an addict, but rather we must examine the collective dynamics. Workaholics provide a payoff to others, but with a hidden cost.
In the narcissistic leadership cycle, the payoff is the power the leader brings to the company, the church or even the nation. We want results.
Leadership is about direction, about knowing what to do. These qualities are in short supply. Honestly ask yourself about past politicians you knew in power and how many really knew what they were doing? Ditto vicars.
Few narcissists succeed in leadership. You only have to read this blog to see the occasional one crop up and imagine that they know more than anyone else whose ever written anything here. Initially people engage with them. Sooner or later the practice becomes futile, as the narcissist only wants the focus on themselves.
However, very occasionally, an initially highly effective narcissist appears, one whose magical promise is extremely appealing. Charisma is predominant. Much is promised…
The charm they exude is well honed, carefully cultivated, often like a hair style, dyed and bouffant in the pretence of eternal youth, or ramshackle and Billy Bunter all-good-here kind of thing.
At the heart of it are lies. Lies, like adultery are becoming socially normalised. At one time a resignation matter (upon discovery) but now people don’t even blink.
Making up your own truth seems the order of the day, and the problem is that many, perhaps most of us want the dishonesty to be true. Sometimes it even ends up becoming true, but usually the flawed logic ends up being self-limiting. It begins to fail. Reality catches up. For an invasion based on the lie that the country invaded wants to be “liberated” quickly becomes unstuck when the people resist. Hard.
At the centre of the narcissistic leader’s life, there’s little doubt of the addiction to unreality and the delight in the world around them succumbing to their version, at least initially. That elation of the “hit” they get is also strangely attractive to others. A person on an adrenaline high has dilated pupils. The mystical self belief is compelling to others.
Acts of evil seem to have their own momentum. The relentless and increasingly pointless pursuit of vendettas against Percy was a case in point. Failure at each attempt only seemed to reinforce a more bizarre repeat. “We can do what we like”. The land of make believe is an enchanted place, as long as it lasts.
A Narcissist leader is nowhere without the rest of us, but we’re not letting go of our dreams too easily. We’re in his mix. We have an all too often seen propensity to overlook just about anything if the dream can be maintained. Bullying, abuse, greed, awarding himself another huge pay rise.
I believe we are in the phase of beginning to discern these things as a society. We’re nowhere near prevention and cure. Partly this is because, despite much being understood by a few and written about in specialist reading, as a nation, as a Church, we’re still caught up in the phantasy ourselves. But I do believe progress is being made.
“Failure at each attempt only seemed to reinforce a more bizarre repeat.” That is certainly true for me. How else to explain why I am filing cdm against one Archbishop because he disregarded my complaint about my Bishop who in turn disregarded my complaint about my Rector. An absurd merry go round because those in power decide to abuse their position and authority. It all began with two DSAs refusing to deal with my allegation of sexual assault. After further complaints one did make a written agreement. When this was breached I became a suspect interviewed by police for reporting breaches because of Diocesan threats to take legal action if I complain, even about my abusers. Or if I used words such as abuse to describe “incidents”. As Diocesan threats if I complain are still in force I probably should be packing a bag for the local nick. I have asked the Diocesan Registrar and Bishop and Archbishop to remove the threats and guarantee my safety from prosecution. No one has done so. I wonder what the sentence is for filing cdm. A fine? Three months, six? Will this blog be given as evidence in court. As was my confiding my situation to a vicar in the next town? I was even done for emailing my parish safeguarding advisor once the threats had been made. And oh yes, also told in writing I could make a complaint to my parish safeguarding advisor. All so they could gather more evidence to take me to court I suppose.
Just received a letter saying national safeguarding would not review my case because it was reviewed by my Diocese. I pointed out that this blatant marking of its own homework was a review which never as much as mentions my most serious complaints, nor substantiating testimony from the suffragan let alone investigated them so not exactly a review then. Pointed out too that the Diocesan Secretary must have known it was not a criminal offence for me to report breaches yet the Diocese claims he has done nothing wrong. Etc etc. Interesting that they do not say national safeguarding cannot review my case but would not. I would not want the national case worker who bullied me in an attempt to stop me filing cdm against my Bishop to investigate, but hopefully they may find one person in safeguarding who actually believes safeguarding means protecting abuse survivors not guilty clergy and Diocesan officers. Just one perhaps? I also pointed out there was no review of our curate who claimed in court my husband had threatened almost half our pcc and had to be restrained by several others whilst our pcc Secretary on oath could not think of a single act or word of threat of my husband and definitely had not seen the riot our curate described. Not heard that this has been reviewed nor The Diocesan threats currently in force if I need to complain if two abusers breach their restrictions again. My cdm was mentioned so I pointed out that after six months I was still unable to file it. I did ask what boundary had to be crossed before action would be taken. Very sadly, those who have suffered abuse far worse than mine, know that there is no boundary which cannot be crossed because safeguarding is all about protecting the church, not us.
So sorry, Mary. It just goes on, doesn’t it?
Yep. BUT to my surprise, someone within the system nationally is helping me to challenge a decision that my case does not need a review because my Diocese have “reviewed” my case. Having received a knockback I wrote back saying an early review did not even mention my complaints and listed the major misconduct talking place after. The kickback ended by saying I see you are filing cdm so I wrote caustically that after six months I still had not been able to file cdm. To my surprise someone took note and instead of the usual cover up said they would take it up. Well there is one person in the system who believes safeguarding is protecting us not perpertrators. Just hope they don’t lose their job by standing up to the system.
There are a few good people out there. Many, who start with good intentions to help others are quickly cowed into submission by the bullying forces they meet, but thank God for the solitary warrior types who at least for a time can take a stand against the powerful. I recall the lady in Wells who took a stand in the Ball case. Her name escapes me, but her strength led to much, including his ultimate conviction. There are a few out there.
Fiona Gardner. She’s written an excellent book, ‘Sex, Power, Control.’ And she sometimes comments here, as you’ll probably know.
Thanks Janet, of course! Somehow this huge connection has dropped through the sieve of my memory. Grey moments
I have lots of those!
I’m so sorry Mary that this still drags on for you. I’m glad at least one person is trying to help a little.
Forgive me, I’ve not visited this blog for a while, but have you approached the Independent Safeguarding Board yet? They are reviewing cases, and their opinion should carry weight, even though their powers are limited.
Thank you Jane. I did not know they were reviewing cases, but as you know I do try to write to everybody but I could not find an email address to write to. As I cannot write a letter it has to be email. Can anyone help with an email address please?
Hi Mary,
I won’t put link because of spam, but the survivor advocate is
jasvinderDOTsangheraATindependentHYPHENsafeguarding.org
Replacing the words in capitals with the symbols
That’s really great, I am most thankful. I may be wrong but I have a feeling that the weight of my evidence is having an effect so hopefully this will help tip the balance.
Thanks Stephen, and Steve.
When I was a curate at a large charismatic church, I eventually concluded that some of the people there were addicted to spiritual highs. These followed the pattern of needing to be continually fed with more and more extreme phenomena. So the gentler ways of early charismatic leaders like David Watson were succeeded by the Power Healing, Power Evangelism methods of John Wimber; and then by the exaggerated claims of Paul Cain and the Kansas City Prophets; and finally the absurdities of the Toronto Blessing. Which is where I left the scene, for good.
After the highly charged scenes at this church, the inner city mildly Anglo-Catholic church I went to seemed like a desert. I was profoundly disillusioned with the part of the charismatic scene I had just come from, where it was said that God hadn’t ‘showed up’ unless people were fainting or laughing hysterically. I wrote my first book, To Be Honest, as a result of the questions I was asking about evangelical and charismatic culture and traditions. Nevertheless, it wasn’t easy to be weaned off the spiritual and emotional highs cold turkey.
The whole experience fostered what has become a lifelong interest in the intersection between the spiritual, the emotional, and the psychological. I think that interest is common to many of the people who follow this blog.
Thanks Janet and I agree about the “addiction to spiritual highs” idea. May I ask what if anything has remained as still valuable from that world you once worked in? I recall similar experiences but it was hard to discern in hindsight what was of God and what was faked or ephemeral.
Hi Steve. I’ve taken some time to think about that. I agree that it’s hard to tell what’s real, what’s faked, what’s the result of manipulation, illusion, or hypnosis (the power of suggestion).
What is real tends to last, and to change people for the better. A couple of visions I had during that time gave me the strength to speak out when senior leaders wanted me to be silent, and to carry on despite opposition. Of course, not everyone would agree that was a change for the better! But I remain convinced that those visions were real and have had a defining effect on my life and ministry.
Another thing that has stayed with me is that I am still open to the idea that God sometimes acts directly and in ways that might seem unusual or miraculous. I’ve seen genuine instances of that amid the fluff and hysteria. So I’m a little impatient with people who assume that any account of a miracle in the Bible or life of a saint must be a narrative invention. That doesn’t make it any easier to explain when God doesn’t intervene….
Yes, integrity lasts and has lasting effects for the good. And yes God does speak to us now and is with us now. As you say hysteria and emotional manipulation do exist, but so does the word of God, whether in a vision, or a dream or some other way. I have found that being around people with integrity does help you discern the fake, but not always. And of course, genuinely good people have done shocking things. But I find narcissists very tiring to be around, and also the fake who seem to try so hard. Whereas people of truth and integrity don’t give me that feeling. I suspect it is the power mad who find people like yourself, who speak truth to power difficult. It’s natural to try to hold on to spiritual highs, but better to resist doing so. God so frequently comes to us in the ordinary, I’ve had it happen when peeling potatoes! interestingly studies show that people in hospital recover better and more quickly when prayed for, even when they don’t know they are prayed for. of course many people who have been prayed for have died. and I always remember my mother saying one morning that her father came to her in the night. A couple of weeks later she had a letter from behind the iron curtain telling her her father had died that very night. We can’t and probably shouldn’t try to explain everything and sometimes must live with the puzzling. however the genuine is never something striven for in my experience.
Thanks for this. I found it faith-building and am grateful you did what you did.
I think that the impulse to seek entertainment is widespread, and because entertainment is so ubiquitous and full-on in today’s society, people will understand that this high level is attainable for them and will therefore not want it to be absent from church where, after all, they spend a good amount of time.
Damian Thompson, Waiting for the End concludes that entertainment is a good proportion of why people attend church or choose a particular congregation.
Where it is absent, there will be a human impulse to introduce it, e.g. in the form of gossip.
Yes. If there’s a good choir, that’s what everyone comes for. Attendance drops drastically when the choir is off.
As soon as the announcements start being of the form ‘Don’t miss XYZ future worship-service, because we’ve got artist ABC ”for you”’, then we know the whole thing has deteriorated into a competition for numbers and for who can entertain the most.
Jesus did not come to be served, but to serve. I wonder if the desire to be served, or to serve oneself, is fertile ground for addiction. I am also interested in the link between addiction and demonisation. Notice the role of lies and where they come from (John 8:44).
Good point. Yet narcissists are self serving. As to narcissists and leadership. I agree with much that is written, but think that such leaders almost inevitably lead us to disaster, given time. Personally I look for maturity and integrity, not charisma. I notice how the Labour leader is consistently portrayed as a man of integrity but dull. Give me ordinary or “dull” any time. I am not looking to be entertained either by the leader of my country or my church.
Many of us were programmed to serve others from an early age. Some are even looking for a narcissist to serve, unconsciously usually, but it can initially feel “right”, because that’s the model we received in childhood.
Integrity is not necessarily easy to judge in others. I was brought up to believe that clergy were the bee’s knee’s. Sometimes obviously that’s proved not to be the case.
People are looking for a sense of purpose and direction from a leader, and at least initially, will be drawn to one who appears to exude it, and be put off by the quietly spoken and innocuous seeming, how ever much integrity they may quietly possess.
Church appointments, especially senior ones, face a paucity of candidates which have the apparent ability to “hit the ground running”. Indeed I have come across many senior leaders who have hardly any direction at all. The ability to know in what direction to take an organisation is a gift. You can teach them that they need it, but you can’t teach it, itself. Of course many don’t agree with this and just want to maintain the status quo. But that doesn’t sit well with the growth police. And this is why, as a substitute for actual leadership ability, which I argue is a rare quality, they go for charismatic narcissistic bullies instead, hoping they’ll still be able to get things “done”. They do of course, but the side effects of their brand of ministry are destructive to many, as we are seeing.
Amen to that – though if he were indeed a man of integrity (as opposed to being subject to lobby groups) he would not backtrack in his support for large black congregations or have his arm twisted by woke activists to the point of incoherence and self-contradiction.
It seems that you (and I) are in the minority. Too many people seem to prefer a “character”.
P.S. That was actually a reply to Mary’s post above.
Re addiction and demonisation, these are my current thoughts. Jesus said the greatest commands were to love God and your neighbour, so to forget about God and other people and focus on yourself is a serious sin. No wonder it gives the devil a field day in a person’s life. It follows therefore that to get free of a bad addiction, after acknowledging that you have it (“I am an alcoholic” people say at their first AA meeting so helpfully) saying a heartfelt sorry to God and others is a key first step.
I once had the privilege of attending an AA meeting as a guest, and every member said ‘I’m N, and I’m an alcoholic’ when they spoke – even if it was the treasurer reporting on the accounts. It’s not just their first meeting when they do it.
I might add that the meeting was an inspiration, and I left regretting that you normally have to be an alcoholic to attend! I commented, ‘I wish church was more like this,’ and a Catholic priest who was there agreed with me.
Thank you David. Put like that I can see how that gives rise to evil. And of course the more you give yourself over to evil …
Thanks Mary