Outside the situation, things seem so much more clear. We read a story, and the details are so contrary to anything that makes sense to us. The narcissists are so cruel, so persistent, and so obvious that we want to grab the writer and help him or her run away.
Dr. David Orrison has been a pastor for over 30 years and is now the Executive Director of "Grace for the Heart," a ministry dedicated to proclaiming the sufficiency of Jesus Christ for all aspects of the Christian life. Dave has served in the Evangelical Free Church and in the United Presbyterian Church, and he holds a Ph.D. in Theology from Trinity Seminary. Dave has unique insights into the struggles of what he calls “performance spirituality,” as he has worked extensively with people who are unsure of their relationship with Jesus because of the burden of legalism and the hopelessness of a “works-based Christian walk.” David has lived in Loveland, CO for 25 years and is happily married to Alice. They have eight sons. David blogs on a regular basis at About the author
More posts by Moderator
-
-
Seen "Shiny Happy People?"
May 31, 2023 // 276 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part Three
February 22, 2019 // 167 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part Two
February 22, 2019 // 0 Comments -
Their Day in Court: Part One
February 22, 2019 // 1 Comment -
Statement from Recovering Grace regarding the lawsuit a ...
March 28, 2018 // 188 Comments -
Rethinking the Nativity
December 25, 2016 // 145 Comments -
Bill Gothard’s Powerless Gospel
March 2, 2016 // 259 Comments -
Plaintiffs Amend Lawsuit Against IBLP, Also Sue Bill Go ...
January 10, 2016 // 1311 Comments -
An ATI Education, Final Chapter: Guilty Silence
January 4, 2016 // 168 Comments -
Introducing our IBYC/IBLP Facebook Recovery Group
December 31, 2015 // 24 Comments
-
Plaintiffs Amend Lawsuit Against IBLP, Also Sue Bill Go ...
January 10, 2016 // 1311 Comments -
Charlotte's Story
February 5, 2014 // 609 Comments -
Bill’s Cabin: Uncovering Sin
May 21, 2014 // 477 Comments -
Sacred Grooming, Part Six: A Secretary's Account of Lif ...
January 31, 2014 // 406 Comments -
Trapped in the Shadow of 'God's Anointed': Breaking fre ...
May 5, 2014 // 379 Comments -
Our Response to Bill Gothard’s Statement
April 22, 2014 // 359 Comments -
A Call to Repentance
June 6, 2013 // 353 Comments -
Bill Gothard Issues Public Statement
April 17, 2014 // 341 Comments -
The Agent of Satan
June 4, 2014 // 337 Comments -
Confident Statements Do Not a Solid Argument Make
November 6, 2014 // 330 Comments
-
Alfred denied directly to me she and Sacred Honor ...
December 4, 2024 -
When did Alfred or Holly deny that she was Mormon? ...
December 4, 2024 -
Facts are this JM, Alfred denied when directly con ...
December 1, 2024 -
Interesting you bring up the Jinger/Jill controver ...
November 25, 2024 -
Here is the facts JM, Holly is a Mormon, part of ...
November 20, 2024 -
Because she isn't a fraud. I'm sorry that bothers ...
November 18, 2024 -
JM, let me be very clear to you. Holly is a fraud. ...
November 13, 2024 -
I don't disagree that that action is what should h ...
November 13, 2024 -
I have a very long-term view of Bill and IBLP whic ...
November 12, 2024 -
Some would say the posts here are just spin and fa ...
November 12, 2024 -
Curious that you would bring up "Charlotte" becaus ...
November 3, 2024 -
I have seen the Amazon series, and I've seen the r ...
October 29, 2024 -
Did you ever watch any of the Amazon series? The s ...
October 25, 2024 -
Yes, it does. Claims must be addressed because the ...
October 24, 2024 -
I never claimed to work in finance, but I do have ...
October 24, 2024 -
July 31, 2024
-
JM, What you're missing is that just because some ...
July 31, 2024 -
Good points Rob. There is also true irony in th ...
July 31, 2024
-
Yes, DaveO, and I would add one more difficulty w/respect to separation from a narcissist. And that is surrounding friends and/or family who are being conned by the narcissist themselves, or else they don't have all the facts about the narcissist's behavior. If the victim becomes courageous enough to set boundaries, they may find themselves subject to judgment and ostracism from a wide circle of people, and may need to make a bigger separation than they had originally envisioned. And this may prove to be a deal breaker. It is my impression that narcissists are often leader types and their victims do not have as strong leadership abilities, and this compounds the difficulties, because one needs to have talent for leadership to make a healthy separation from a stronger, and often more popular person.
I'm not sure if the term narcissist is used correctly in the context of unhealthy friendship. Since narcissist is defined by excessive self love and importance, usually people that are "stuck" on themselves are not going to have too many friends to begin with. I think what the author is talking about is how people end up in controlling unhealthy friendships and like he pointed out, it usually is one step at a time. While unhealthy or controlling friendships may not start out that way, it develops over time and usually becomes imbalanced when one person is too needy for a friend and the other sensing that takes advantage of the needy person. This fits in with Gothardism which taught people not to trust their instincts and insight about others and that their authorities (usually parents) were suppose to pick out your friends for you. It would seem like to develop healthy friendships, boundaries within oneself need to be set first.
Rob, I like your insights on this. My response to the article is that it seems utilitarian, rooted in the emotional utility of the friendship. If I am "needy", I may not be abiding in Jesus. But if I know that "God be for me, [then] what can man do to me?"
Friends can be idols. But if they are objects of agape love, there are no reasonable expectations of health, mutuality or peace. Look how we treat Jesus! Healthy benefits, when they are present, are a blessing of the Spirit. But if we are in a friendship to attain these things, I fear we may be looking in the wrong place. Friendship should never be bondage, regardless of how our friend treats us. Sometimes I fear the mere category of "friend" imposes burdens and bondage that can injure our love for the other and our service to Christ.
Paul seems to have had a lot of relationships. Many let him down. Many upheld and sustained him. But he kept free from domination by any relationship but Christ, consistent with this from I Cor. 6:12: “All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything.
Does any of this make sense? Am I too defensive or protective? Does that keep me from being a true friend?
Don, I saw the article more rooted in helping people wake up to the fact that they are being abused by false friends. We are called to agape love toward those in the church, but we do not owe anybody friendship. Setting boundaries with a narcissist would be the first step to protecting our own selves, yes. But it is also necessary for agape love. This is so hard to know - where does laying down one's life cross into needlessly enabling an abuser to stomp all over you? It is this line that a users love to blur, unfortunately. I guess the question to answer would be whether I am helping or hindering a narcissist in his or her spiritual progress. And it seems to me in these cases that firm boundaries need to be in place in order for a friendship to exist at all,and friendship is not necessary. Firm boundaries are also required to keep from being hurt. But firm boundaries are also needed to help hold the narcissist accountable, which is also the loving thing to do.
I agree, Lynn. I was expressing my own resistance to 'friend'ship of any kind! I am a rock, I am an island. I am alone! And yet, can I love anyone they way 'they want' me to? Isn't doing that becoming a false friend? I feel that I must discover how GOD loves them and participate.
Don, some musings spring boarding from what you said -- I think CS Lewis' The Four Loves is an excellent way to understand the three forms of human attachments (one of which is friendship), and the fourth and highest form of love, which is agape, of course. Regarding his views on friendship, there are common interests and points of view which are the basis for such relationships. This makes perfect sense to me, especially when contrasted to affection (think snuggling puppies or kittens near each other and their mother), or romantic love.
Lewis points out that affection, friendship, and romantic attachments, good things, can become idols. It is our devotion to God, and His call to agape above all the other loves, which stops the idolatry. This should also be the motivation, not selfishness, which helps a person set boundaries toward any kind of unhealthy or sinful interactions in friendships.
I don't believe God created anybody to be a rock or an island. It's OK to be a sheep. ;-)
Even Jesus had an inner circle among the apostles. He asked them to be with Him during his agony in Gesthemane, and they fell asleep.
I think you are more of a friend to many people than you realize. There are different kinds of friends and friendships, different levels of closeness and distance. The interactions on this web site among the regular posters in essence is a form of friendship, an internet type of one where I think most people have a give or take of thoughts and ideas and even encouragement. I know you try to help out former ATI students find education and employment, That is being a friend. Maybe you haven't seen yourself in that light but I really don't think you are a rock at all. That really has been the advantage of the internet, people that maybe feel socially isolated can reach out and interact with others. I also think that we narrowly define friendship in that is has to be some close bosom buddy thing but positive, cordial "friendly" interaction we have with regular people in our lives in work, school, the store, church are forms of friendships that everyone can and should have with the people around them. Jesus called his disciples friends. Even in the perfect Garden of Eden, God saw that Adam needed a companion and gave him Eve. Most all of us are designed and need social interactions and others in our lives and that is the basis of friendships.
Thanks Rob. I try to stop reasoning and just express raw feelings and you all get logical on me!
I agree what you say about friendship. I was reacting to the kind of total commitment that the article exposes as dangerous. All love is risky.
We do have a good fellowship here, but I do withhold and I am sure most do as well (most don't even use their full names! ;-) ). I am afraid to engage my wife in this discussion and I would be less forthcoming than I am if she were. It is that hesitation, self-protection, wall building, all of which is real, that I was feeling when I made your comments.
I do greatly appreciate the positive feedback I receive here. It is an experiment for me to press into some circumstances that involve such real long-term hurts, learning how to speak truth into pain and how to let the truth be framed by the realities that make it so difficult. The truth often hurts, but I'm trying to learn to make sure it is healing. This community is helping me by example, patience and responsiveness. In that you are true friends to me.
Rob, may I steal from you to express part of how I feel?
The interactions on this web site among the regular posters (who seem to all have a specialized and unique background) are to some, a form of "church fellowship." This is where sisters and brothers in Christ can minister to one another in a give and take interaction of thoughts, ideas, encouragement and even experience various gifting in the Body of Christ they have missed for years. Because of the rarity of the specialized and unique backgrounds, it is for many, impractical to get much help from "normal Christians" who have never been in BG's cult. Therefore, they have no idea of the complexities and devastation involved. These wounded who might feel socially and spiritually isolated, can now easily reach out and interact with others.(I am not saying this site should take the place of a local Church)
Don,
I also would be less forthcoming than I am if (my ex wife) were here on this site :-)
"This community is helping me by example, patience and responsiveness. In that you are true friends to me." Ahem.
Hi rob war! I have several articles on my blog about narcissistic friendships and many commenters have written about them. Contrary to popular thought, narcissists are not technically "defined by excessive self love" but rather by their fear of exposure. They hide behind an image of importance and popularity in order to distract others from their incompetence and weakness. There are many types of behavior associated with narcissism, but a very common one is manipulative relationships. The narcissists you and I will meet will almost always be people who make and discard friends easily. That might not meet our definitions of friendship, but victims usually don't realize what is happening until they have been abused and/or discarded. This is why narcissists are often found in professions that require the ability to connect with people: politicians, clergy, salespeople, community leaders, etc.
Interestingly, it was my association with IBLP that led me to see the powerful connection between legalism and narcissism, something I write about often on my blog. We saw a great deal of deception, manipulation, and abuse. One of the more challenging things we saw, but struggled to understand, was the adoration of those who abused. In other words, the more a teacher condemned and the more a friend humiliated, the more the people seemed to love. The abusers were surrounded by sycophants and "friends." So narcissists do win elections and build big churches and win sales contests... on the basis of their relationships.
My husband's employer has shown strong NPD traits. He sees everyone around him as extensions of himself. Their only purpose for being is to serve his organization, thus serve him. The biggest of many ethical problems DH faces is how this person wants to profit off our church relationships. He paints a picture of DH as anti-social, and having trust issues. He gets others to question my husbands loyalty. Yet because the driving force behind growth and profits can be directly attributed to the work DH does this employer knows the impact of losing him. When DH's boundaries stand firm the abuse escalates. The employer knows he isn't able to run his own company yet he holds DH in contempt because he is capable.
How did we get here? We were lied to. Plain and simple. We believed the lie. All the opportunities we were told about concerning corporate contributions to the local Christian Charitable Organizations had nothing to do with loving one's neighbor. It has been about photo ops, self promotion, and using the Church to expand business. Before accepting the job those contributions were described very differently.
Why do we stay? We have been looking for a way out. Nothing has materialized. We are three years from retirement, and praying The Lord helps us escape sooner. Until then DH is a buffer between those who work for him and this abuser. For now my husband is excercising very strong boundaries. (Accepting greater personal abuse as not to be a part of the prevailing lie). If this were a "friendship" we would have severed the relationship within a few weeks of meeting this person.
What helped us believe the lie? Easy! He has many people who are happy to promote his agenda. Since we have be here many of those promoting his agenda have also been the first to bad mouth the ones who have left. Just recently an employee left because they have a Graves' disease and cannot continue working the 60 hour weeks. They thanked the owner for the opportunity given and quietly moved on after their notice was up. Never said a bad word to anyone about the owner. Very next day the owner's wife was in to tell the other employees how lazy that person was and how hurtful it was for them to just resign like that. Next thing you know a huge number of employees hopped on the band wagon to spread the ill report. They want the job now vacant. They know not what they ask?
Why is that Person your Friend? Because you have something they want, and they do not mind deceiving you to get it.
Thanks for your reply. The standard definition in the dictionary or even with DSM is that of an extreme self love or self-inflated self importance. From what you are calling in terms for friendships in you blog and work are abusive and controlling types of friendships which Gothard's teaching would lead to. From the different testimonies given in articles and posts, people were lead to not to trust their own intuition of others which made them easy targets. Likewise, people were not encouraged to have outside friendships of either the family (for children) or adults. What is particularly damaging for children is that would lead them to social isolation as well as social incompetence. I like your thoughts but I am quite familiar with my husbands work in therapy to disagree (respectfully) with the use of the term narcissist.
Keep in mind that while the DSM-IV criteria for NPD diagnosis is focused on the grandiose side of narcissism, many authors, practitioners, and researchers consider a wider field than seems implied by those criteria.
For example,
(emphasis mine)
Skodol, A. E., Bender, D. S., & Morey, L. C. (2014). Narcissistic personality disorder in DSM-5. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, And Treatment, 5(4), 422-427. doi:10.1037/per0000023
I suspect the label is overused in popular usage, and also that the DSM-V will not forever be the final say on the matter. However, there is warrant for considering narcissism as a multifaceted phenomenon with at least two mirroring expressions of covert/overt or vulnerable/invulnerable, whichever terms you prefer.
Empirically, it is my belief that a number of people I have interacted with that were influenced by Gothardism and similar systems have behaviors and attitudes that appear less contradictory and confusing when viewed through the lens of covert narcissism. A sort of narcissistic inferiority amalgamation.
The DSM version sounds like an American. I fear we mix up a lot of concepts. It seems more clear when we don't just use "narcissist" as a label, but are precise about how a narcissist takes advantage of teaching like Gothard's or advantage of those under such teaching. In Gothard's IBLP/ATI system (which we are recovering from) it seems like there could only be room for one true narcissist: the one on top of the authority pyramid, ultimate head of the chain of command. Everyone else is but a tool or trapped between hammer and anvil.
How coincidental, that very question has been going through my mind. Using my own life I can only reason that it is because the person gets something out of the "friendship". People cling to BG and others legalistic organizations, churches or friends because they get a need met or security or some benefit.
Dr. Orrison, I just want to take this time to thank you for the information you have shared on the subject of narcissism. You have mentioned an author Dr. Nina Brown several months ago, and her books have really helped my husband with a workplace relationship.
By my husband first acknowledging his own weaknesses and stress points he was able to more clearly see the ways the NPD in his life was attempting to manipulate him. He has managed to set very firm boundaries and the NPD has moved on to others.
You have been a real God Send for us.
Thank you so very much.
[…] Why is that Person your Friend? […]
Dr David, thank you for another great article. Your articles about narcissism have helped me so much. When I first learned about your perspective on narcissism through the many articles you have written here, it was eye opening. It explained so much about the various relationships of my life, especially family members. I now have a very descriptive word to define an uprightness thing.
It is interesting to see how this fits into general spiritual abuse. For instance, a line came to mind from the article,"The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse: Overview." (Aug 16, 2014) "If the victim wishes to escape and stay out of the painful (narcissism) traps for good, he or she must take a clear-eyed look in the mirror at some point, probably with the help of a trusted friend or counselor, to figure out what it is about the prey that was attracted to the bait."
There might be some reading this that are new to your other articles and blog. It looks like this article came from your blog (Oct 10) however missing one important phrase in the title, " It's Narcissist Friday!" Good to know. I am sure you do not want others to think that you view all friendships as narcissist :-)
Mistake, end of first paragraph should be, "define an unrighteous thing."
To the degree that Bill Gothard [narcissist]overstepped his "messianic" importance,"need" to subtly apply under the surface pressure for dominance,adherrance to almost a worshipful loyalty,...to that degree and no less will the recipient feel exploited,void of inner worth,intrinsically inferior,and the threat of rejection always towers over one's inferiority.He used Natural Religion..."you get out of it what you put into it","this principle" works 100 percent of the time,"gauranteed success",to funnel his followers into a spiritual wasteland.The resulting influence vaunts deception in either pride or worthlessness,driving us away from the person we desperately need the most.Jesus.His ministry by all means should have been stopped 40 years ago.Appreciate Guy S comment and the articles potential for spiritual healing.
David Pigg, excellent description of the IBLP system and the resulting spiritual wasteland many of us lived in! "you get out of it what you put into it", "this principle" works 100 percent of the time,” "guaranteed success", to funnel his followers into a spiritual wasteland. The resulting influence vaunts deception in either pride or worthlessness, driving us away from the person we desperately need the most. Jesus.”
That description caused me to reflect on the difference between Bill’s equations (You get out of it what you put into it) and Jesus’ and the gift of salvation. What did we put into salvation? NOTHING! And what did we get out of it? EVERYTHING! So very different from Bill’s reckonings. And oh, the wasted years trying to “put more effort” into being “spiritual” thinking it all depended on me. So glad for God’s grace now!
One of BG’s famous quotes was “God’s ways are exactly opposite of our natural inclinations.” It really should be, “God’s ways are exactly opposite from BG’s teachings!
"He used Natural Religion..."you get out of it what you put into it","this principle" works 100 percent of the time,"gauranteed success",to funnel his followers into a spiritual wasteland.The resulting influence vaunts deception in either pride or worthlessness,driving us away from the person we desperately need the most.Jesus."
So very well put David.
Those who keep talking about not throwing the baby out with the bathwater and about how much good they received from the teachings miss this very important point. Great harm was done and will continue to be done, because at its core it is fundamentally flawed. It is works based- our efforts = success and blessings from God. Even now, with his re-branding himself and his new ministry for men, its all about works. He attributes his failure to the fact that he did not meditate on Scripture enough, only in the morning, as he stopped doing it at night. Oh, if he had only meditated on it at night too, (worked harder) God would not have punished him by taking it all away.
Brother David, "...to funnel his followers into a spiritual wasteland." I like this. You said it kinder than I would have. I would have left off the qualifier "spiritual." From my perspective, it was a brutal wasteland which effected all of me, and all that I had. I trust there will be full redemption in eternity. But it is also OK to be honest about the economic destitution of that wasteland. May God bless with prosperity here on earth those recovering.
I only know a little about what you went through;may God heal you and encourage you in every way.Always.
thanks to Matthew and Don for their replies and comments.
Dr. Orrison,
If you are going to make reference to my "challenge" to your use of the word narcissist, I would appreciate that you do so correctly on your blog. When I stated narcissists have excessive "self love" that is a standard definition if one were to look it up in a regular dictionary. I didn't make up this definition. That is true of DSM definition as a personality disorder. I didn't say that these sorts of people would not have friends but not have "many". I felt you misquoted me and used it for more creative definitions on if "narcissits" really have self-love. I again disagree with the use of the terminology. I understand you are trying to help people make better choices in friendship and be willing to brake off unhealthy ones. It seems though you misquoted me and used a "challenge" for further points. I don't appreciate it.
rob war, are you doing ok? I've appreciated many of your comments in the past; this one seems rather grumpy. Suggestion: if you have a problem with his blog, perhaps his blog would be a better place to take that concern.
It's none of my business so I really shouldn't intrude, but I quickly scanned his blog to see what you were referring to, wondering how he might have incorrectly made reference to your challenge. My read of what he said was not "boy, was that person ever dumb!" but rather "the common perception of this is mistaken." It's boring to say "the dictionary says... but I say..." It's a more effective way to communicate if a writer gives a recent real-life example of someone expressing a commonly held perception and then discusses that perception. I took his point to be that those people whom we commonly call narcissists are not usually truly in love with themselves but rather are using that mask as a tactic to hide deep insecurities and longings. Instead of just telling Orrison what terms you don't want him to use, perhaps it would be more constructive to suggest what you think the better terminology would be? But apologies for intruding into a conversation.
Matt,
You are right, I should have taken my concern to his blog or even emailed him privately. I think I reacted out of shock and maybe taken back a little bit. I probably should have taken a deep breath and stepped back and reconsidered. I didn't expect to be mentioned (not directly) but Dr. Orrison was referring to my comment on RG. Maybe it was more of a compliment in that Dr. Orrison rethought and rewrote about it. Yes, probably in some cases a grandious, self-inflated importance covers up a lack of real self love. I probably wouldn't want to say that in every case because I don't think anyone can make a blanket statement for everyone with this type of personality disorder. I know that what Dr. Orrison blogs and writes about is very helpful to a number of ex-Gothard followers and I respect that and wouldn't want his help to others here be diminshed or belittled. I know for me, I have some difficulty with terms and their use and wanted to respectfully disagree or have a counterpoint. thank again, I appreciate your comments.
Hey, thanks for the thoughtful response!
Taking a step back, as a genuine question: what term would you prefer, and do you see that term in use, either in clinical or popular settings?
Just working with it a little, would there be a person in history you would point to (real or fiction) who was the "overt narcissist", that is, the grandiose, self important, self-loving person? (I think of someone like Alexander the Great). If I understand you, this is the sort of person you would reserve the use of the term "narcissist" for, correct?
Conversely, what some have termed the "covert narcissist", any thoughts about who would be an example of that? From the outside, I think people would have seen the Queen in "Snow White" as a self-loving narcissist who was always admiring herself in the mirror. Yet, she was doing so in fear and insecurity. And the minute that the mirror revealed that her fear had come true, namely, that someone was fairer than her, she went on the attack in defense of her insecure position as queen-of-the-hill. I'd be curious to know if you would have any characters you would point to who are examples of that sort of phenomenon, and what term you would prefer for it?
No pressure to respond, just wondering.
Hi Matt!
I think you ask a great question and took some time to think about it. I think one good example of a narcissist would be Hilter. However, I don't think Hilter suffered from a lack of self worth and this is how he coped with it. I think Hilter is an example of someone that totally gave himself over to evil so his narcissism could be seen as a result of his evil. Bill Gothard is likewise an example. He would be more complex because he had obviously suffered as a child from some kind of learning disability. Now maybe he developed his narcissism because of it. I'm not sure if one can safely say either. I think the wikipedia article on it stated that both total lack of or either too much praise while growing up can contribute to narcissism. Does someone that totally lacks self-worth or love develop marcissim to cover it up. Yes, that is true for some but I don't think anyone can say that about everyone that has developed this personality disorder. I appreciate your question because I like challenging questions that make me think and examine.
I hope that is true for all of us.
I have a question. I have seen a lot of the red flags also, and indeed I really believe most if not all applies to a friend I have.
What is interesting and puzzling me is, Does the narcissist know he or she is one? And even if someone has that kind of personality, can they still maybe have even a small part of them that not so much cares a lot, but at least is not an evil person . That is to say, they may not care a lot about others, but that along with there huge ego, etc; they also have a set of morals that they integrate and follow, (as for someone who is religious let's say).
For someone who is a Christian ,let's say. Would his or her ways be monitored a little or a lot by the person themselves, would he or she not break certain rules or codes of conduct. I am not certain now myself after writing this, if it would make a big difference. In the long run, is it just a No-Go Relationship, or if now that I am very aware, he or she won't run my life, or my emotions like before. I can see how in a true way the person reflects the other person, so if I do become more stronger in ming and spirit etc, I will need that person less and less, and hopefully that person will (may still need me?) move on slowly or just hang around anyhow.
I guess I am really wondering if it's possible to maintain a friendship with a narcissist? even though it can never be a really close one, since if it gets close, I lose out! Not to take things lightly, but I know in all certainty , probably this goes two ways.. 1. Just end it, and never talk again. 2. Slow exit, maybe too slow..and never exit?? !!!