Summary notes for a journal article are offered.

Journal of Psychology and Theology Copyright 2007 by Rosemead School of Psychology
2007, Vol. 35, No. 1, 14-28 Biola University, 0091-6471/410-730




PSYCHOANALYSIS, ATTACHMENT, AND
SPIRITUALITY PART I:
THE EMERGENCE OF TWO
RELATIONAL TRADITIONS
TODD W. HALL
Rosemead School of Psychology
Biola University


Two broad relational traditions emerged in post- entirely new relational metapsychology. Fairbairn's
Freudian psychoanalysis: a broad group of relational theory of object relations, along with several other
theories, represented by Fairbairn's (1952) object key theories, formed the foundation for the develop-
relations theory, that remained within the field of ment of relational psychoanalysis by contemporary
psychoanalysis, and John Bowlby's attachment theo- theorists. This new relational paradigm within psy-
ry, that split off from psychoanalysis. Both of these choanalysis led to new ways of thinking about spiri-
traditions emerged simultaneously, predominantly in tuality, and new ways of "minding" our clients' spiri-
the 1940s, and developed in parallel in virtual isola- tuality (Sorenson, 2004) in the consulting room.
tion from each other. In this article, the first of a At the very same time that Fairbairn was develop-
two-part series in this special issue, I outline the ing his theory in Scotland in the 1940s, John Bowlby
emergence of these two traditions, how each has began developing another relational tradition that
been applied to the psychology of religion and spiri- split off from Freud's drive/structure model--what
tuality, and their implications for "minding" our is now the field of attachment theory. Attachment
clients' spirituality (Sorenson, 2004). In the second theory also led to new perspectives on thinking
article of the two-part series, I discuss the common about and approaching our clients' spirituality. For a
relational metapsychology underlying these converg- myriad of reasons--to which we will return--attach-
ing traditions--a theory of implicit relational mean- ment theory developed along an independent,
ing--and its implications for "minding" the spiritual although in many ways parallel, theoretical trajecto-
stories by which our clients live. ry as that of the relational/structure model. For
years, these relational cousins were estranged from
n the history of psychoanalytic theory, we can each other. They developed in separate socio-politi-

I trace two broad relational traditions that split
off from Freud's "drive/structure model." One
tradition can be traced through the transitions of
cal groups of academicians, each with their own lan-
guage, training programs, journals, and confer-
ences. In recent years, however, we have seen a
rapprochement between these two lines of theory,
ego psychology to the many strands of the "relation-
partly spurred on by major developments in affec-
al/structure model," such as object relations theory, tive neuroscience and narrative psychologies in the
that proliferate today (Greenberg & Mitchell, 1983). past several decades. These turns on the psychoana-
Some theorists in this line of theory, such as Mar- lytic and attachment roads have had significant
garet Mahler and Rene Spitz, struggled to graft new implications for our sensibilities in understanding
relational concepts onto the drive/structure model, and working with our clients' spiritual stories. A syn-
while others, such as W.R.D. Fairbairn, developed an thesis of these theoretical developments forms the
foundation for a common relational metapsychology
Correspondence concerning this issue may be sent to Todd W. --for a theory of implicit relational meaning--that
Hall, PhD, Rosemead School of Psychology, Biola University, has far-reaching implications for our understanding
13800 Biola Ave, La Mirada, California, 90639. of spirituality (Hall, 2004).

14
TODD W. HALL 15


In this article and the second in this two-part mead for 20 years until his untimely death in January
series (Hall, 2007, this issue), I have both a specific of 2005. Randy was a giant of a scholar as you will
and a broad aim. My specific aim in the present arti- quickly discern from reading his first, and tragically
cle is to provide a brief historical context for how last, book Minding Spirituality (Sorenson, 2004).
these two theoretical traditions developed indepen- However, as Randy indicated in several of his writ-
dently, and what each has to offer us in understand- ings, he was first and foremost a clinician at heart
ing our clients' spirituality.1 In the spirit of this spe- (e.g., Sorenson, 2004). It is in the spirit of Randy's
cial issue's focus on case studies, I offer brief case passion for co-authoring and nurturing his clients'
examples to illustrate several points. In the following spiritual stories that we offer this special issue.
article, I will highlight how these two traditions have
converged in recent years, and some recent develop- W. R. D. FAIRBAIRN: FROM
ments in neuroscience and narrative approaches to INSTINCTUAL DRIVES TO
human experience that suggest that we are hard- OBJECT RELATIONS
wired for two fundamentally distinct forms of know- As post-Freudian psychoanalysis unfolded, con-
ing, one of which exists in storied form. In short, our troversy abounded within the British Psychoanalytic
spirituality--and all our relational knowing--is "sto- Society as theorists attempted to claim the right to
ried," and this has significant implications for how
the psychoanalytic patriarch's throne. This theoreti-
we "mind" our clients' spirituality (Sorenson, 2004),
cal and political battle occurred against the back-
and how we learn to mind our clients' spirituality.
drop of the death, dislocation, and genocide of
Both of these processes have their roots in implicit
World War II. Factions developed within the British
relational knowing (Stern et al., 1998), or perhaps in
Psychoanalytic Society between three groups. Anna
this context, what we might think of as "implicit spir-
Freud and her followers focused on the need to
itual knowing."
strengthen the ego, which Holmes (1993) suggests
The nature of this way of knowing suggests the
was in part an effort to hold on to some semblance
importance of learning first-hand from our clinical
of reason in the face of irrational destruction. Anna
experiences, and from the work of our colleagues.
Freud and her followers, of course, claimed the right
Thus, my broader aim for these articles is to articu-
to her father's theoretical throne. Melanie Klein and
late some of the theoretical underpinnings for the
her followers emphasized innate phantasy, aggres-
importance of learning through case studies, to
sion stemming from the death instinct (which Klein
which we have devoted the majority of this special
believed was an elaboration of the theoretical direc-
issue. We have also intentionally focused this special
issue on case studies because we felt there is a dearth tion Freud was heading), and paid little attention to
of such real-life examples of minding our clients' environmental factors. They emphasized the power
spirituality in a way that is informed by contempo- of psychoanalysis to heal people, independent of
rary developments in psychoanalysis. My hope is environmental factors, which can be viewed, at one
that these articles, and this special issue, will encour- level, as an attempt to hold on to some semblance of
age us to share our work with each other--the prima- control in the face of the helplessness of the war
ry playing field where we learn how to co-author our (Holmes, 1993).
clients' unfolding spirituality in ways that bring spiri-
tual vitality. Hats off to our contributors who have Historical Context for the Development of
courageously opened their consulting rooms to us. Object Relations Theory
We owe them a debt of gratitude. The differences between these three groups were
Finally, we have dedicated this special issue to the managed by a "gentlemen's agreement" between
memory of Randy Sorenson, who taught at Rose- Anna Freud and Melanie Klein that established two
lines of training: the "A" group consisting of Anna
1Itis beyond my scope here to provide a detailed account of Freud and her followers, and the "B" group, com-
these theoretical developments. My intent, rather, is to paint a prised of the Kleinians and the "Independents." This
broad portrait of the theoretical landscape. Thus, I assume group of "Independents" were not aligned with
some familiarity with psychoanalysis and attachment theory, yet
I have attempted to write in such a way that those unfamiliar
either the Anna Freud or Kleinian camps, and later
with this terrain will be able to understand the major theoretical split off as a third "middle group," which consisted of
developments. theorists such as Fairbairn, Bowlby, D.W. Winnicott,
16 PSYCHOANALYSIS, ATTACHMENT, AND SPIRITUALITY: PART I


and Michael Balint who were pioneers in developing vision of the mind as being structured, not by drive
early object relations theories. forces, but by the subjective experiences of relational
The object relational ego psychology traditions meanings. It is difficult to overestimate the impact of
that grew out of Anna Freud's group (e.g., Margaret Fairbairn's theory in the theoretical developments
Mahler and Rene Spitz) and Klein both paved the that have ensued since the 1940s. For we now take
way for a full relational/structure theory, albeit in for granted basic ideas about relationality that he
radically different ways. The object relational ego first proposed, and he, like those before him,
psychologists developed the profoundly new idea opened doors to research and theory that previously
that the ego is dependent on early (object) relation- would not have appeared on the conceptual radar
ships for its development; however, they retained the screen.
drive-ego model as the metapsychological house in
which to store object relations. Klein, on the other Object Relations and the Psychology of
hand, radically redefined the Freudian notion of Religion and Spirituality
drives as being fundamentally psychological in The shift from the drive/structure model to the
nature, and as having "internal objects" built into to relational/structure model, represented clearly by
them. Thus, Klein developed what many consider to Fairbairn's object relations theory, opened up new
be the first "object relations" theory. And yet, ironi- psychoanalytic vistas for thinking about religion and
cally, the relations in Klein's theory were predomi- spirituality. Moreover, it spawned a body of research
nantly with phantasies of phylogenetically inherited addressing the nature of one's internalized represen-
images stemming from the death instinct. tation of God, and scholarship regarding how we
For Klein, the vicissitudes of mental life, includ- work with clients around spiritual issues (e.g., Jones,
ing internal and external object relations, derived ini- 1991; McDargh, 1983; Sorenson, 2004). Religion,
tially, and predominantly, not from real relationships from this new relational psychoanalytic perspective,
with others, but from endogenous sexual and aggres- was not understood as a universal obsessional neuro-
sive drives. Thus, Klein's theory does not represent a sis, but rather as a relationship with God that reflects
complete move to a relational-structure model. and reenacts an individual's deep structure of inter-
However, she did emphasize object relations, and nalized relationships. Individuals' relationships with
the powerful emotional forces of love and hate, God may be healthy or pathological, to varying
greed and envy. Thus, while the particularities of real degrees, and parallel their object relations maturity,
parents clearly play a secondary role in the develop- according to this perspective (Jones, 1991).
ment of psychopathology and mental health, it is not A substantial literature now exists examining the
difficult to resonate with the themes in the picture association between God representations and object
Klein painted of our internal relational world--one relations development, much of which supports the
of a life-long struggle to integrate the good and bad general object relational perspective on spirituality
aspects in ourselves and others, to protect those we articulated above--that individuals' experiences of
love from our own destructiveness, to repair the rela- God tend to parallel their experiences of emotional-
tionships we have damaged, and to experience grati- ly significant caregivers. In a landmark qualitative
tude rather than envy for the good we have received study, Rizzuto (1979) proposed that an individual's
from others. representation of God is an amalgamation of the
Building on the shell of Klein's theory of "inter- representations of his or her primary early relation-
nalized objects," Fairbairn combined his clinical ships. Furthermore, the God representation, accord-
experience, in which he saw his patients carrying ing to Rizzuto, is continually transformed and
with them the residues of early relationships, with reshaped throughout development as new experi-
the notion that there are structures in the mind with ences are brought into the internal representational
which we relate to develop his central theoretical matrix. In another in depth qualitative study of
principle--that we internalize, not phantasied object relations and God image, McDargh (1986)
images, but experiences of real relationships. He concluded:
was one of the first theorists to develop a theory of
Whether a given individual relates to a particular object repre-
personality and development based on the notion sentation of God with conscious belief, or unbelief, whether
that relational connection is our primary motive and that representation is repressed, rejected, embraced, or cele-
need. His theory is also one of the first to develop a brated has everything to do with the dynamic origins of that
TODD W. HALL 17

representation, its subsequent life history, and hence if and than the God images held by those without symp-
how it may be available to help the person sustain some sense toms or those with positive attachments (see Noffke,
of being a self-in-relationship. (p. 256).
2006 for a review).
A number of quantitative studies have also investi- These results suggest the possibility that individu-
gated the association between object relations devel- als' God images may be independent of, and more
opment and God image. For example, research has positive than their maladaptive relational matrices.
shown that higher levels of object relations develop- However, in a thorough review of this literature,
ment in current relationships are associated with per- Noffke (2006) suggests an alternate interpretation:
ceptions of God, and/or one's relationship with God that these individuals' positive God images represent
as a) more loving, stable, and emotionally close attempts to use God as an emotion-regulation func-
(Brokaw & Edwards, 1994; Hall & Edwards, 2002); tion that they could not provide for themselves due
b) less distant, controlling, and wrathful (Brokaw & to negative models of the self and/or others. Thus, it
Edwards, 1994; Hall, Brokaw, Edwards, & Pike, may well be that when emotion regulation is a cen-
1998; Tisdale et al., 1997); and c) less defensive tral characteristic of an individual's relationship with
(Wootton, 1991). There is evidence that representa- God, it is an indicator of a more conscious, defen-
tions of God tend to be more similar to idealized sive layer to the God image that is created for the
parental images than to non-idealized parental purpose of emotion regulation. This has been tested
images, and more similar to a composite image of more thoroughly in the context of attachment to
both parents than to either parent considered sepa- God research, which will be reviewed below.
rately (Birky & Ball, 1988). In addition, research find-
ings tentatively support the notion that higher levels Minding Spirituality Through an
of object relations development are positively associ- Object Relations Theory Lens
ated with greater congruence between pre-conscious
and conscious God representations (Spear, 1994). This relational shift within psychoanalysis raises
The above research clearly suggests that the God several interesting issues for "minding" spirituality in
image forms part of an individual's internal object the consulting room. In broad strokes, the relational
world, and is positively related to level of object rela- tradition within psychoanalysis would suggest two
tions development. Moreover, these findings suggest considerations about our clients' spirituality, and a
that the emotional tone and patterns of interaction Christian perspective would suggest a third. First,
that characterize important relationships form the clients' spirituality is a manifestation of their deep
structure of the internal filter through which relation- structure of internalized relationships with emotion-
ships with God are experienced (Noffke, 2006). ally significant others. In other words, their subjec-
However, there is some research suggesting that tive experiences of God provide a mirror of their gut
individuals' God representations are unrelated, or level experiences of early relationships. Further-
negatively related to their parental images (Noffke, more, when clients (particularly those with an ongo-
2006). For example, greater insecure attachment (a ing relationship with God) talk about their experi-
subscale in the Bell Object Relations Inventory, ences of God, it gives us and them a window into not
BORI; Bell, 1991) was found to be positively associ- only their past, but also their current gut level expec-
ated with experiences of God as more relevant to tations of emotionally significant relationships. Sec-
individuals' lives (Bauman, 1995). In another study, ond, in my clinical experience, I have found that the
Earnest (1982) found positive correlations between simple act of looking into this window with my
a measure of perceived family authoritarianism and clients can be a profound experience of "being with"
views of God as benevolent and kind. However, fur- them that can change their experience of themselves
ther analysis revealed that the authoritarianism scale and God. As Mitchell (1988) notes, our representa-
measured the degree to which parents reinforced tions of ourselves, others, and the space between
participants' dependency, suggesting that authority them are not neatly separable. Our clients' experi-
figures were perceived as protective and generous. ences of God are but one entry point into a com-
Finally, several studies appear to suggest that some plex, interconnected relational matrix that can bring
individuals from maladaptive home environments or about change throughout the entire matrix.
those experiencing psychiatric symptoms form par- Third, as Christians, we take seriously the "Other-
ticularly positive God images, even more positive ness" of God--that He can and does break into our
18 PSYCHOANALYSIS, ATTACHMENT, AND SPIRITUALITY: PART I


clients' relational matrices. That is, our clients' rela- Around the same time Fairbairn was writing,
tionships with God are not the sum total of their early another British psychiatrist, John Bowlby, began his
human relationships, or the internalization of those own reformulation of drive theory. While Fairbairn's
relationships. While seemingly obvious from a theo- work has continued to be developed within the psy-
retical perspective, extensive training in psychoanalyt- choanalytic tradition by others, such as Stephen
ic psychotherapy, without complementary experi- Mitchell (1988, 2000), Bowlby, in borrowing from
ence in the spiritual disciplines and spiritual neighboring disciplines, went outside the psychoana-
direction, likely biases us toward reducing our client's lytic epistemology, and developed what came to be
"God" to the internalized mother or father. Without an independent tradition of relational theory--that
intentional training, experience, and dialogue with of attachment theory.
our colleagues, this becomes the implicit lens
through which we view the clinical, spiritual world. JOHN BOWLBY: FROM INSTINCTUAL
To consider God breaking into our clients lives DRIVES TO ATTACHMENT BONDS
can feel as if we are supposed to ratify a particular In 1944, the president of the British Psychoanalyt-
experience of, or communication from God. This ic Society, Sylvia Payne, a member of the indepen-
can push us to the boundaries of what we perceive to dent group, nominated John Bowlby as Training Sec-
be our role, and feeling uncomfortable, we may retary. Despite the fact that he was not a training
rather steer far away from the perceived boundary in analyst, and despite strong opposition from Melanie
one direction by not giving spiritual experiences or Klein, the recognition of Bowlby's administrative
implications their full psychoanalytic due. Or, skills led to his being elected. Bowlby was supervised
depending on the particular dynamics with a client,
by Melanie Klein, and analyzed by Joan Riviere, a
we may steer away in the other direction, and ratify
close associate of Klein's. Despite Klein's strong per-
our clients' experiences of God, failing to bring the
sonality and her influence, Bowlby, a determined
psychoanalytic lens to bear on the relational mean-
and independent personality himself, refused to go
ing of our clients' experiences.
along with what he viewed as the fundamentally
In writing to a broad secular audience in his book
flawed metapsychology of psychoanalytic theories,
Minding Spirituality, Randy (Sorenson, 2004)
particularly the drive-ego model and Klein's drive-
invites clinical psychoanalysts to "... take an interest
based object relations theory. Moreover, he felt that
in our patients' spirituality that is respectful but not
object relations theory did not provide an adequate
diffident, curious but not reductionistic, welcoming
alternative to Freud's instinct theory (Bowlby, 1982).
but not indoctrinating" (p. 1). As Christians, we can
This notwithstanding, Bowlby resonated most with
be unwittingly reductionistic of our clients' spirituali-
object relations theories and hoped to make a contri-
ty. The underlying dynamic reasons for this may mas-
bution to the object relations tradition, by putting it
querade under the notion (often times implicit) that
on solid scientific footing. In the opening volume of
we know the very same God our Christian clients are
his trilogy, he states that his "frame of reference has
in relationship with and are discussing with us. We
been that of psychoanalysis" (Bowlby, 1982, p. xxxi).
may find ourselves thinking, "God doesn't communi-
cate that way with me, so this must be a defensive
Historical Context for the Development of
fantasy based on my client's internalized relation-
Attachment Theory
ships." Or, "This experience doesn't fit the God I
know. . . ." Perhaps there may be some truth to this In Bowlby's effort to contribute to the develop-
worth exploring; however, my point here is that ing object relations branch of psychoanalysis, he was
because of this unique situation in which we and our active in the administration of the society, and he
clients are both in relationship with a third Other, I read several of his early theoretical papers at society
believe Randy's invitation applies as much, if not meetings between 1957 and 1959. The responses of
even more, to Christians engaging in psychoanalytic his psychoanalytic colleagues ranged from indiffer-
psychotherapy. I think Randy was encouraging us to ence to hostile rejection, particularly by the Kleini-
find ways to be with our clients' spirituality that take ans. This may have been due in part to the introduc-
seriously and hold in tension the Otherness of God, tion of what amounted to a new paradigm. His views
and the profound impact of their closest human rela- did not fit within the confines of his colleagues'
tionships on their experiences of God. metapsychology. His theoretical assumptions and
TODD W. HALL 19


epistemological commitments were viewed as essential for mental health is that the infant and
incompatible with the psychoanalytic theory of his young child should experience a warm, intimate and
day. He was viewed as ignoring defining psychoana- continuous relationship with his mother (or perma-
lytic concepts such as unconscious processes, drives, nent mother-substitute) in which both find satisfac-
and complex internal dynamics involving internal tion and enjoyment" (cited in Bowlby, 1982).
conflict and compromise solutions, among other Bowlby's observations of maternal deprivation
things (Fonagy, 2001). Harry Guntrip, for example, and its consequences would serve as a launching pad
quipped, ". . . my impression is that he succeeds in for future theorizing because of the connections he
using it [ethology] to explain everything in human saw between the responses and processes stemming
behavior except what is of vital importance for psy- from maternal deprivation among children, and
choanalysis." (cited in Holmes, 1993). What Guntrip those of older individuals still suffering from the
was alluding to is that Bowlby emphasized behavior, effects of maternal separation in early life. He
observation, scientific research, and "the representa- observed two distinct patterns of relational distur-
tion of the real rather than the reality of the represen- bances: one group of individuals who made exces-
tation," in stark contrast to the psychoanalytic ethos sive demands on others and tended to be anxious
of his day (Fonagy, 2001, p. 4). Some have argued and angry when the demands were not met, as is
that a factor in Bowlby being shunned by the psycho- often seen in dependent-type personalities; and a
analytic community was that, in contrast to some of second group who seemed incapable of developing
his colleagues who were also suggesting radical revi- deep relationships, which is present in psychopathic
sions to Freudian drive theory (e.g., Fairbairn, Loe- and "affectionless" personalities, as Bowlby called
wald, Sullivan), Bowlby wrote in a clear and uncom- them (Bowlby, 1944). These two patterns, which
promising manner (Mitchell, 2000). covered a wide spectrum of psychopathology,
The theory Bowlby so clearly articulated was seemed to mirror the patterns he had observed in
forged in the context of his work on maternal depri- children who had been separated from their moth-
vation. After completing his adult psychiatric train- ers. Bowlby saw continuity in the effects of maternal
ing, Bowlby took a position in 1936 at the London deprivation, an insight that would lead to his con-
Child Guidance Clinic. His experiences in the Child cept of "internal working models" which has been
Guidance Clinic would prove to be influential in the corroborated by contemporary research in multiple
development of his theory. Based on his experiences fields. Moreover, the effects of maternal deprivation
at the Child Guidance Clinic, Bowlby conducted an were so clear and devastating in Bowlby's mind, that
investigation of the history of 44 juvenile thieves, he was compelled to devote his energies to better
and further developed his view that separation or understanding these effects in the hopes of prevent-
disruption of the mother-child relationship was a key ing them on a wide-spread scale.
causal factor in psychopathology (Bowlby, 1944). In From this context, in the first volume of his clas-
1950, the World Health Organization was looking sic trilogy on attachment, Bowlby laid the ground-
for an expert to report on the mental health status of work for an alternative theory of instinctive behav-
homeless children, and Bowlby's work and research ior based on the notion of a behavioral type of
background made him the clear choice. He traveled control system, and then used this framework to
throughout Europe and the United States meeting develop the concept of an attachment behavioral
with the leading experts in child development, and system in which behavioral control systems are
conducted an extensive literature review on the applied to the infant-mother relationship (Bowlby,
topic. The result was the publication of the mono- 1982). In his second volume, Separation, Bowlby
graph Maternal Care and Mental Health in 1951 (1973) developed an alternative theory of signal anx-
(Bowlby, 1951). A popular version was later pub- iety, revised Freud's motivational theories, and
lished with the title Child Care and the Growth of developed the idea of an epigenetic model of devel-
Love (Bowlby, 1965), which became an instant best opmental pathways. In his third volume, Loss,
seller. Bowlby concluded from this work that chil- Bowlby (1980) drew on information-processing the-
dren who had experienced severe privation of mater- ories to understand the stability of internal working
nal care tended to develop the same symptoms he models, and posited an alternative theory of
discovered in his affectionless thieves. He stated in defense--defensive exclusion--modeled after the
the first part of his report: "What is believed to be notion of selective exclusion.
20 PSYCHOANALYSIS, ATTACHMENT, AND SPIRITUALITY: PART I


As I mentioned earlier, attachment theory was ini- correspond to their internal working models of
tially rejected by psychoanalysis. As a result, Bowlby's human attachment figures, or, in contrast, whether
theory did not lead to a new school within psycho- religious beliefs and experiences compensate, or sub-
analysis. Consequently, while there is an Attachment stitute for the lack of secure attachment relationships
Theory today, currently there is no widely accepted with primary caregivers. This question raises a myriad
modality of Attachment Therapy, although there is of fundamental issues about whether and how emo-
discussion of "attachment-based psychoanalytic ther- tional information processing in human relationships
apy." The fate of Bowlby's theory within the psycho- applies to experiences in relationship with God. It
analytic community is well-captured by Holmes' also points out that the object relations tradition has
observation that "Bowlby's theory and its tremen- been wrestling with these very same issues--although
dous ramifications for clinical work were for decades using different terminology--and, like the broader
virtually airbrushed out of the psychoanalytic fields from which they stem, these two subfields did
record--rather like some dissident in Stalinist times" their work in parallel process without interacting with
(cited in Goldberg, Muir, & Kerr, 2000, p. 20). one another until recently.
Although Bowlby retained his membership in the On the surface, it appears that the empirical liter-
society, he distanced himself from it, and developed ature to date presents a rather inconsistent picture.
his work independently of psychoanalysis. Because of On the one hand, a number of studies in the areas of
his bent toward systematic observation and empirical attachment and religiosity suggest correspondence.
research, attachment theory caught on in the empiri- For example, two recent studies found evidence
cally oriented academic community, and has become directly supporting correspondence between anx-
a major theoretical paradigm within the field of devel- ious attachment in romantic relationships and anx-
opmental psychology. ious attachment to God (Beck & McDonald, 2004;
Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002). Furthermore, a longi-
Attachment Theory and the Psychology of tudinal study found that an insecure attachment his-
Religion and Spirituality tory with mother was positively associated with a
decrease in religiosity over a year time period, con-
Attachment theory has become a leading theoret- tradicting Kirkpatrick's (1998) earlier finding of an
ical lens within the psychology of religion and spiri- increase in religiosity over time among insecure indi-
tuality. A substantive research literature has devel- viduals (Granqvist, 2002). On the other hand, several
oped that applies attachment theory to religion in studies have provided partial support for some form
general, and to individual's experiences of God in of compensation. For example, individuals with his-
particular. This has in turn led to some nascent, yet tories of avoidant attachment were found to be
growing clinical considerations for approaching spir- more likely to have experienced a sudden religious
ituality from an attachment perspective. The basic conversion during adolescence or adulthood
idea behind applying attachment theory to religion (Granqvist, 1998; Granqvist & Hagekull, 1999; Kirk-
and spiritual experience is quite straightforward: partrick, 1997 Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1990). In addi-
God, at least from a Christian perspective, qualifies tion, longitudinal studies have found that insecurely
as an attachment figure, par excellence (see Kirk- attached individuals have a higher likelihood of find-
patrick, 2004). Thus, we may appropriately think ing "a new relationship with God" (Kirkpatrick,
about our clients' relationships with God as "attach- 1997), and a greater increase in self-reported religios-
ment relationships" and apply all the insights we ity over time, relative to securely attachment individ-
have garnered from attachment theory in general to uals (Kirkpatrick, 1998), referred to as "longitudinal
our clients' "attachment to God." Or can we? compensation" by the authors.
Attachment and religion research in the past 15 However, results of research using other religiosi-
years has put this idea to the test. It has focused on the ty variables have been less uniformly supportive of
question of continuities and discontinuities between the compensation model. Kirkpatrick and Shaver
attachment patterns in close human relationships and (1990) found that maternal religiosity moderated the
patterns of attachment with respect to religious/spiri- association between attachment history and (a)
tual beliefs and experiences. The conceptual question intrinsic religiousness; (b) church attendance; (c)
at issue, proposed by Kirkpatrick and Shaver (1990), is self-report of being a "born again" Christian; (d)
whether people's religious beliefs and experiences belief in a personal God; and (e) experience of having
TODD W. HALL 21


a personal relationship with God. Among those who correspondence, in which IWMs of self and others
reported low maternal religiosity, avoidant individu- correspond to IWMs of God. Granqvist also con-
als reported higher levels of religiousness than either cluded that individuals with insecure attachment
secure or anxious/ambivalent individuals. In con- histories engage in emotional compensation more
trast, there was no effect of attachment status at the than those with secure histories.
high maternal religiosity level. Granqvist (2002) To address the mixed findings and conceptual
replicated the essence of this finding; however, he confusion in this literature, my colleagues and I
found that paternal religiosity moderated the associ- argued that implicit relational knowledge on which
ation between attachment history with father and human attachment patterns are based operates in
religiosity. While he also found evidence for com- and influences the implicit (i.e., experiential) dimen-
pensation at low levels of paternal religiosity, in con- sions of spirituality, but is relatively independent of
trast to Kirkpatrick and Shaver (1990), high paternal explicit forms of religious/spiritual behavior or
religiosity demonstrated some evidence for corre- knowledge (see Hall, Halcrow, Hill, & Delaney,
spondence, in that a secure history with father was 2005). In other words, we suggested that a conceptu-
associated with higher levels of religiosity. al distinction needs to be made between implicit
Based on these findings, Granqvist (2002) spiritual functioning and explicit spiritual function-
revised the correspondence and compensation ing. This distinction draws on robust research find-
hypotheses to what he called "socialized correspon- ings from multiple fields delineating two separate
dence" and "emotional compensation." The social- ways of knowing and processing emotional informa-
ized correspondence hypothesis suggests that tion: explicit and implicit relational knowledge (e.g.,
among individuals with secure attachment histories, Bucci, 1997; Stern et al., 1998). Implicit spiritual
level of religiosity corresponds to parents' level of functioning focuses more on automatic, presymbol-
religiosity. Among individuals with insecure attach- ic, emotional information processing, whereas
ment histories, however, religious involvement is explicit spiritual functioning focuses more on sym-
primarily used to regulate affect (interactive affect bolized beliefs and behaviors.
regulation) and to maintain a sense of felt security Based on this distinction, we proposed and test-
(emotional compensation). ed two mutually exclusive and competing models:
In testing these hypotheses in a second study, implicit IWM correspondence and explicit reli-
Granqvist (2002) found that avoidant attachment his- gious compensation. We argued that "emotional
tory was weakly, but positively, associated with turn- compensation" and "longitudinal compensation"
ing to and maintaining contact with God in order to are better understood as reflections of the underly-
regulate one's affect--evidence for emotional com- ing dynamics of internal working models, and thus
pensation. The correlations were slightly strength- represent correspondence at their core (the implicit
ened at low levels of parental religiosity, and disap- IWM correspondence model). In addition, we con-
peared at high levels of parental religiosity. Granqvist ceptualized a compensation model, explicit reli-
(2002) also found that participants who experienced gious compensation, in such a way as to be orthog-
a sudden religious conversion scored significantly onal to IWM correspondence (i.e., concurrent
higher on ambivalent history with mother than those positive association between insecure attachment
who had experienced a gradual religious conversion. and positive God image). Our overall results provid-
Among those who reported religious change, two ed strong support for this theoretical model distin-
clusters were identified. Cluster one was high on sud- guishing between implicit IWM correspondence
denness of change, age, compensation themes, and and explicit religious compensation. We found
avoidant and ambivalent history with mother, and group differences on three of the four measures of
cluster two showed the opposite pattern. implicit religious-spiritual (RS) functioning, and as
Integrating these various findings, Granqvist predicted, no differences between attachment
(2002) proposed a "two-level correspondence" groups on explicit religious functioning. Further-
model. The first level is "socialized correspondence" more, the specific hypothesized group differences
in which one's religious beliefs and values are simi- on the three measures of implicit RS functioning
lar to parents, but only for secure individuals. The were supported. In short, we found predictable dif-
second level or component, referred to as a "sec- ferences between attachment groups on indicators
ondary effect," is internal working model (IWM) of RS functioning that assess implicit relational and
22 PSYCHOANALYSIS, ATTACHMENT, AND SPIRITUALITY: PART I


spiritual knowledge, but no differences on explicit represent God by providing direct care that is ulti-
indicators of RS functioning. mately a reflection of God's love for our clients.
Thus, while our clients need a secure base and haven
Minding Spirituality Through an of safety from God, they also need this directly from
Attachment Theory Lens us as therapists. The only way we can provide this is
From a clinical psychoanalytic lens, it certainly through the process of becoming attached--our
appears that attachment theory has much to offer us clients becoming attached to us, and we to our
in how we think about, and intervene in, our clients' clients. There is mutual impact in such an attach-
ment relationship, although the impact is qualitative-
spirituality. It seems reasonable to assume that a
ly different for caregiver and care-receiver. It is only
client's relationship with God represents some type
through this process of opening ourselves to becom-
of an attachment relationship, most similar to the
ing attached as caregivers that we can be genuinely
parent-child relationship. This provides a framework
impacted by our clients, fostering what Stern et al.
for understanding, not only that experience of God
(1998) refer to as "moments of meeting." Such
is influenced by the residues of early relationships,
moments of genuine human connection may repre-
but also that relationship with God--as an attach-
sent the clearest expression of what causes "everyday
ment relationship--has a particular purpose and set
breakthroughs" in our clients' experiences of them-
of functions.
selves and God.
The attachment system is a system in our brains
Second, becoming attached as a caregiver may be
that influences and organizes our memory, motiva-
a prerequisite for the incarnational role of taking on
tions, and emotions with respect to important care-
our clients' suffering and detoxifying it. From a con-
givers, in this case God (Siegel, 1999). God designed temporary neuroscience perspective, attachment cre-
this system to motivate infants to stay physically close ates a brain-to-brain bridge, a "neural WiFi" connec-
to their caregivers, and to establish communication tion (Goleman, 2006). The two brains of therapist
with them. This system operates throughout our and client become functionally linked--or "cou-
lives, but the need for physical closeness in infancy pled"--crossing the barrier of skin-and-skull. Each
transitions into the need for emotional closeness or brain is then online with respect to the other as they
"felt security" as we become adults. In other words, actively communicate and mutually influence each
our clients need from God both a secure base from other. In a very real sense, the two brains become
which to explore their worlds (internal and external), "wirelessly" connected, forming a feedback loop in
and a haven of safety to comfort and soothe in times which the output of the therapist's brain becomes the
of distress or trauma. Moreover, it could be argued input of the client's brain, and vice versa. In neural
that relationship with God is not just any attachment WiFi, the client's brain has access to the resources of
relationship--it is the Attachment Relationship, the therapist's--the information it processes, and the
which is the source, in some ontological and experi- way it processes information. Becoming attached to
ential sense, for all emotional security, even if indi- our clients means, in part, that their emotional com-
rectly. While we strive to provide this sense of emo- munications are received by our brains, and translat-
tional security for our clients, there is also something ed into relational meanings through our own subsym-
here that must come directly from God. We can fos- bolic (gut level) processing (Bucci, 1997). This is,
ter it, facilitate it, encourage it, and incarnate it to neurobiologically speaking, how we take on our
some extent, but ultimately, this is where we tread on clients' suffering. In other words, we enter into our
sacred ground. While there is no clinical formula for clients' emotional range and subjective experiences,
how to intervene when it comes to these issues, we yet without losing ourselves and our own emotional
must struggle to find ways to enter this sacred territo- range. Furthermore, as caregivers, our brains ideally
ry with a sense of awe at the mystery of how God have more influence on our clients' brains in the
works, and strive to open ourselves to being impact- sense that, through our emotional communications
ed by our clients in this process. to them, we bring our clients into our emotional
Having stated this, attachment theory also pro- range. In short, attachment creates a brain linkup that
vides a frame of reference for understanding the in turn creates a "therapeutic brain circuit" across two
incarnational role of the psychotherapist, in two dif- brains, which is the mechanism for suffering with our
ferent senses (Benner, 1983). First, as therapists, we clients, and thereby transforming their suffering.
TODD W. HALL 23


What does it look like to be attached as a caregiv- specifically with me. They have--in attachment par-
er to a client, and how do we foster this? Let me illus- lance--become attached to me. This is the care-
trate with a brief case example. I had seen a client I receiving side of an attachment therapeutic coin, and
will call Annika for about three years, dealing pre- it usually co-occurs with the caregiving side. In fact,
dominantly with issues of loss and anxiety, when she my experience suggests that there is an intricate
encountered a particularly difficult bump in the ther- dance between caregiving and care-receiving as we
apeutic road. She was experiencing severe anxiety at develop attachment relationships with our clients.
work and in several of her closest relationships. On Let me illustrate again with a clinical example.
occasion, when she was experiencing profound anxi- I had been seeing Lauren for about 6 months and
ety, she would have me contacted to request an extra we had discussed quite a bit about her father not
session. At one point in a session during this time being emotionally available to her in a number of
period, we got around to discussing how this was for ways. One day, she left a message saying she was
her to have me contacted and to request an extra ses- quite upset, and asked if I could see her that day. I
sion. I knew these incidents impacted me and I felt a was beginning to become an attachment figure to
great deal of compassion and concern for her when I Lauren. I worked my schedule out, called her back,
would get a call. I was curious how she expected me and we agreed to meet a few hours later in the late
to feel and react to these calls. As we explored this, afternoon. When Lauren came in, she was very upset
Annika indicated that she feared I would be both- about an incident that had occurred with her father.
ered and would not want to respond. She tearfully expressed a deep sense of pain over the
As I pondered how to express to Annika how I ways her father had wounded and failed her. I did
was impacted by her distress, I realized that when I not say much that session--I listened and became
would get a call, knowing the many layers of mean- tearful as I felt with her. She told me in the next ses-
ing behind the call, I would become focused on get- sion with a big smile on her face that she told her
ting in contact with her as soon as possible. For the husband that she had "got to me"--in other words,
moment, everything else would recede into the back- that she had impacted me as she had noticed my
ground. I realized that my caregiving system had facial expressions and particularly my tears. In the
been activated and I experienced these crises much words of Daniel Siegel, she was "feeling felt" by me.
like when I would become aware that one of my chil- A deeply contingent, or "in synch" communication
dren had gotten hurt, but I did not yet know exactly had occurred between us (Siegel, 1999). I was begin-
what had happened. A strong desire would pull me ning to become attached as a caregiver. She saw this
to get to my child, comfort him, and make sure he on my face, in my nonverbal, emotional communica-
was safe. This is the caregiving side of the attach- tion, and this in turn fostered her becoming more
ment relationship coin. I expressed this sentiment to attached to me. She had not expressed even close to
Annika, and it proved to be a significant shift in our this much emotion with me previously, so this repre-
therapeutic relationship, as well as her experience of sented a turning point toward the development of an
herself and God. attachment between us.
Over the years in my clinical work, I began to
identify a phenomenon that I first thought of as In spite of this turning point, in the weeks to
"becoming a significant person" to my clients. The come, Lauren became more guarded in a very subtle
time frame varies as to when this occurs; however, at way that I could not put my finger on. She would
some point, usually between 6 months and one year report that everything was going well and she was not
of therapy, something noticeably shifts such that it sure what to talk about. For weeks I was mulling over
feels like I become an emotionally significant person this gut level feeling in the back of my mind--this feel-
in a client's life. I am no longer "the doctor" to them, ing that Lauren was there in the room with me in a
or their "Wednesday at 6:00." What appears to be all very real way, and yet somehow not there at the same
of a sudden, they are now keenly interested in what I time. We talked about her anticipating having to ter-
think about them. They often express surprise at a minate therapy in about five months due to her hus-
newly emerging sentiment of missing me when one band changing jobs. I knew this was part of what I
of us has to miss a regular session. They no longer was sensing, but there was more to it than that. I
want to talk with any number of people when they began to fear that I would not be able to articulate
are distressed, they now need and desire to talk and get to this issue before Lauren moved. Then one
24 PSYCHOANALYSIS, ATTACHMENT, AND SPIRITUALITY: PART I


session, Lauren expressed regret at having to end opening ourselves up to being impacted by our
therapy in several months; that she wished she could clients, and letting them see this impact in appropri-
continue to see me so she could tell me about the big ate and timely ways.
events and accomplishments in her life. She anticipat- Attachment theory also provides a framework
ed that I would be proud of her. She walked out of for understanding typical patterns through which
the session, and a wave of sadness hit me like a ton of our clients may attach to God at various times, and
bricks. I remember clearly that it took me by surprise, the underlying strategies these patterns represent.
and I sat back down in my chair to let myself feel and Each client's attachment "filter" is unique to some
to sort through the meaning of it all. My mulling degree because each has a unique relational history.
became more focused now. I could not yet put it all However, two separate research literatures (self-
into words, but I knew I was sensing a deep sadness report and interview traditions) have identified four
in Lauren about her father, and that this had some- common attachment filters: secure, preoccupied,
thing to do with becoming attached to me and then dismissing and fearful. Clients with secure attach-
leaving. This sadness I experienced for Lauren deep- ment filters expect, at an implicit level, that emo-
ened my sense of attachment to her as a caregiver, tionally significant others will be available and
and heightened my desire to help her let go and responsive when they need them. Clients with a
attach to me, and to have a healing experience of say- secure filter have experienced this enough in the
ing goodbye. past that they expect it of attachment figures with-
A few sessions later, Lauren mentioned some- out consciously thinking about it. They have devel-
thing related to how she was feeling about therapy. It oped a particular set of ways to regulate their own
seemed like an opportunity to address this issue I emotions: they consciously acknowledge emotional
had been sensing, yet I could not find the words to distress, they display their distress to others in close
bring all of my mulling, all of this meaning--a life's relationships, they tend to solve problems actively
worth of hope, disappointment, and sadness--into a and effectively, and they actively seek support from
few sentences. And the clock was ticking. We mean- others when they need it (e.g., Mikulincer &
dered onto a few other topics, and my anxiety grew Nachshon, 1991; Mikulincer & Orbach, 1995).
that we would not get to the essence of things. Final- This is what clients with secure attachment filters
ly, toward the end of the session, I managed to say bring to their relationship with God. Their experi-
something like "Lauren, I get the sense that you have ences of God are biased toward a sense of felt securi-
a lot of mixed feelings about ending therapy, and ty. This does not mean there will not be difficult and
wanting to still have contact with me afterwards." painful times in their relationship with God. Rather, it
She resonated with this and commented on it. Then means that they tend to expect God to be available
I said something like "I wonder, Lauren, if you feel and responsive, to genuinely care about them, and to
you are just beginning to get some things from me welcome the expression of emotion, including nega-
that you didn't get from your father, and you don't tive emotions. My colleagues and I found strong sup-
want that to end." The response on her face told me port for this in the empirical study I mentioned previ-
immediately that this hit home. She quickly began to ously. We found that secure individuals showed a
cry as she elaborated on these feelings. I became stronger sense of connection to a spiritual community
tearful as I sat with her, and I am sure she noticed than any of the other three attachment groups (Hall et
this and was "feeling felt," further fostering her al., 2005). In addition, we found that they experi-
attachment to me. She paused, and I got the sense enced less anxiety in their relationship with God than
that she was surprised by the power of her feelings, preoccupied and dismissing individuals. This allows
much as I had been several weeks before. The attach- secure individuals to process difficult experiences in
ment solidified in that session. Each of us deeply relationship with God, and to stay connected to God
impacted the other, albeit in different, nonsymmetri- even in the midst of dark and difficult times. While
cal ways, which mutually facilitated an attachment these patterns will vary within an individual client over
bond. I am not sure exactly when it occurred, but time, they give us a framework for exploring our
somewhere along the way, Lauren and I became clients' experiences of God, and broad relational
attached. Becoming attached looks different with goals to foster as we "mind" our clients' spirituality.
each client, and there is no formula for it, however, I Clients with a preoccupied attachment filter
believe it fundamentally has to do with intentionally expect others to be unreliable. Since they have
TODD W. HALL 25


learned implicitly that they cannot predict when Dismissing clients tend to play this same pattern
attachment figures will be there for them, they devel- out in their relationship with God. They may con-
op a strategy of hyperactivating their attachment sys- sciously acknowledge needing God, but they rarely
tem, which is manifested by attempting to minimize actually rely on Him in difficult times. When they are
distance from attachment figures and to elicit their distressed, they generally continue their self-reliant
support and comfort (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2002). coping strategies, keeping God and their spiritual
The strategy here is to try to pull attachment figures community on the periphery, while focusing on
into providing comfort and care through clinging and explicit knowledge about God. For example, my col-
controlling responses. There is a tendency for clients leagues