Perhaps the most frequently asked question Christian leaders ask is, “Why?”
* Why do people act the way they do?
* Why does anxiety play such an important role in the success of the church?
* Why do people suddenly turn away from relationships and betray?
* Why can’t organizations and leaders ever seem to move beyond the status quo?
* Why is it that if we’ve never done it that way before, they’ll likely never be able to ever do it?The reason for these and other mystifying quandaries may be simple. It’s simply addictive emotional process at work. The Key: Emotional Process Perhaps the most important perspective for leaders to understand organizational behavior is emotional process. Over the past decades church leaders have been directed to go from a “program” perspective to a “process” perspective. This was a first step. A second step was the introduction of Bowen family systems theory. Of all the things that Bowen theory espouses, one of the key contributions is to recognize the importance of emotional processes in families and organizations. Rabbi Friedman’s insights in From Generation to Generation took this one step further by applying it to ecclesiastical organizations. This article suggests a more specific third step: identifying and describing the nature of the emotional process all too often found in dysfunctional churches. That process is an emotional process fueled, fostered and foisted by a specific emotional process: Addictive Emotional Process. Indicators of Addictive Emotional Process Counselors, consultants and conflict mediators specializing in addiction-related counseling deal with indicators of addictive process regularly. What many pastors and church leaders don’t know—or recognize—is that they do to! Without an understanding of the indicators and behaviors signs of addictive process, one can experience remarkably mystifying pain and a conundrum of apparently conflicting phenomenon. Frustrated, the unmistakable indicator of the presence of emotional process is often the painful “Why?” of conflict. In order to gain insight into the kinds of behaviors indicating emotional process, perhaps the best paradigm is the alcoholic family. Those families characterized and influenced by alcohol demonstrate several predictable roles, each role having a particular set of behaviors typical of addictive emotional process. ACoA and ACDF literatures have referred to anywhere from 4-6 (or more) family roles in families. At its simplest level and for the sake of understanding addictive emotional process, these roles can be reduce to two basic family roles: active and passive. Regardless of how many different roles can be identified, emotional family systems all have—and require—active roles (“The Dominant Addict”) and passive roles (“The Passive Codependent”). The Dominant Addict
Sometimes referred to as the “Hero” in Adult Child of Alcoholic literature, perhaps the key indicators of the Dominant Addict emotional process include: 1) Dominant Addict. These members, typically a parent (though not necessarily so), is the one who “calls the shots.” He or she often demonstrates the presence of one or more addictions or compulsive behaviors. These behaviors, as in any addictive family, necessitate other family members to alter their personal preferences, behaviors and values…or else face rejection. and 2) Passive Codependents. These family members, whatever their family role (e.g. scapegoat, loner, mascot et al), are marked by their essential dependence on the Dominant Addict. Passive codependents, like Dominant Addicts, are driven by fear. The main difference, however, is that the Dominant Addict uses the fearful threats to control passive codependents. Passive codependents, overwhelmed by the fear, attenuate the fear by giving up their own identities and fusing to the will of the Dominant Addict.
Part I: The Dominant Addict
Dominant Addicts include individuals from every walk of life. Whether the addictive agent is a substance (alcohol, drugs, etc) or an activity (work, hobbies, etc), the dominant addict will be marked by the following behaviors:* Narcissism (“I am the best”)
* Lack of self-differentiation from what they do
* Instant-gratification oriented
* Extremely dominant, pushy and demanding
* Insensitivity to individual needs
* Impulsive and unpredictable in their needs, wants and demands
* Given to irrational outbursts of anger
* Relationship messages vacillating between extremes: One moment they can be the most caring individual; the next moment they may go to the exact polar opposite and possibly abusive extreme
* The are extremely controlling, distrustful, insensitive, and demanding perfection from everyone
* Will hardly ever give commendation or approval to others for their hard-earned efforts. After all, whatever someone else does is never perfect.
* Require that everyone else give up their identities, values, and preferences to help them get whatever they want for themselves.
* Disavowal and/or destruction of those who would deny them of what they require, demand, or need to maintain their addictive emotional process.
* Demand that others around them maintain the fantasy-based façade which enables, supports, perpetuates and escalates the level of influence of their addictive emotional process.Dominant Addicts are in a chronic state of denial. In their view there is nothing wrong with their behaviors, attitudes and emotional process. Common denial behaviors include scapegoating, projection, fight/flight, passive-aggressiveness, etc. Dominant Addict In The Family Within a family, the Dominant Addict can be male or female, head of the family, a child or sibling. Within other larger social systems (including the church), the dominant addict can be the pastor, staff, or lay leaders, elected or non-elected. Dominant Addicts may exert “positive” influence or “negative’ influence depending on the specific bent of their addictive emotional process. “Super-Pastors,” antagonists, individual “movers and shakers,” and extremely high commitment personalities in the church are some of the personalities which can exemplify dominant addict emotional process. The Common Denominators Whatever the addictive agent or agents (addictions tend to be multiple in nature), there are at least two unmistakable common denominators in virtually all dominant addict emotional process.1) The first common denominator is a lack of self-differentiation. Unable to nurture an autonomous sense of self-esteem, they strive to find a sense of self-worth from their environment—people, tasks and things. 2) Closely related to this first common denomination is a second common denominator: multiple goal confusion.Multiple Goal Confusion Multiple goal confusion is a phenomenon which describes the state of individuals who are unable to separate their self-esteem from their social goals and their task goals. Dominant addicts are unable to maintain a healthy, autonomous sense of self-esteem. Instead they confuse these external social and task goal achievements in unhealthy, undifferentiated ways. The resulting self-esteem is based almost exclusively on externals. If they are successful in tasks and relationships, they erroneously believe they are “good.” If they fail in either—or any—of these areas, they erroneously and automatically believe they are failures. Multiple goal confusion perpetuates two key elements of addictive emotional process.First,
it results in an ever-increasing insatiably addictive need for external affirmation for themselves from others; and
it results in—and necessitates—an insatiable, obsessive perfectionism.
Jesus addressed this unhealthy self-esteem base. “But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal” (Matthew 6:20 NIV). Those who put their trust in externals and base their self-esteem as described by unhealthy addictive emotional process have two options:
1) Steal the self-esteem of others for themselves or,
2) Change the base of their self-esteem toward God.In this sense addictive emotional process truly is a spiritual issue in the most profound sense. Combined Effects The combined effect of a lack of self-differentiation and multiple goal confusion results in a woefully unhealthy lack of self-definition. Combined with a tendency to confuse goals and relationships, this results in the dominant addict’s tendency to seek, by any means possible, fulfillment of their addictive emotional process. Since their own efforts and achievements do not satisfy, they seek fulfillment of their insatiable, addictive need for approval from others. This requires that they habitually disregard others’ personal boundaries. Prying for information, pushiness, being controlling, perfectionistic judgmentalism, busybody-ness, and habitual triangling are but some of the indicators of addictive emotional process at work. The more intense the level of the dominant addict’s emotional addictive process, the more demanding, controlling and perfectionistic they will be toward others…irrespective of the cost or consequences. Authority Figures: Are They Vulnerable? Since those in positions of authority and esteem are perceived to have higher levels of self-esteem needed to perpetuate the dominant addict’s emotional process, they direct their energies towards such individuals. For dominant addicts, to have self-esteem is to have someone else’s self-esteem. The catch however is that in order to get this self-esteem they have to “suck” the self-esteem from another and make it their own. To the extent that esteemed leaders are not well-differentiated and also prone toward participating in addictive emotional process is the extent to which they may be vulnerable to the dominant addict emotional process. The Real Problem: Not The Dominant Addict This means that the problem with antagonists is not the antagonist in and of themselves. Instead, the problem is that the esteemed leader—whether pastor, staff member, lay leader et al—is participating in the dominant addict’s emotional process. The anxiety, fear, feeling threatened, etc. which leaders feel when antagonism takes hold is an indication that they are participating in this emotional process. Well-differentiated leaders, on the other hand, find that as long as they distance themselves from the addictive emotional process, they are able to maintain a non-anxious stance, their self-esteem, and the fulfillment of God’s calling and vision through them. Things may not go as planned. But, whatever happens, the healthily well-differentiated leader has an endurance and resiliency which markedly raises the anxiety of dominant addicts. This may result in resistance and attacks on the well-differentiated leader which are virtually totally unsolicited. The problem is not what the well-differentiated leader does that causes increased anxiety in dominant addictive process; it’s the dominant addict’s insatiable demand for self-esteem from external sources which must, to be attained, target and destroy others whom they believe can provide even temporary fulfillment. Are There “Good” Dominant Addicts? Whether protagonist or antagonist, “helpful” or “destructive” to the organization’s goals or values, the important thing to mark about this process is this. The dominant addict has such an insatiably addictive need for affirmation that they will stop at virtually nothing to fill their “black hole” of need. Dominant addict emotional process is almost invariably locked in this emotionally painful and unhealthy state. Recovery from this addictive emotional process requires facing the fear, giving up control, humbling oneself and, in spiritual brokenness, discovering the profundity of God’s unconditional grace for them. It is this grace which makes them children of God. This grace also makes them aware of what Jesus really meant when He said, “The Kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:11). Confronting the Dominant Addict Confronting the dominant addict is virtually always difficult. It can also be dangerous. Yet this confrontation is the “stuff” of a ministry in the prophetic tradition of Scripture. Denial mechanisms are often virtually impenetrable and the highly-perfected result of a life-long process of refinement. Whether the individual is “positive” or “negative”, neither will readily admit their addictive process. This is especially true in religious contexts. “Super-Pastors” and “hyper-dedicated leaders” may turn a deaf ear and give a harsh word to those who compassionately try to address their addictive emotional process. So do their negative, antagonistic counterparts.
Part II: The Passive Codependent
Equally unhealthy and damaging are passive codependents. Because they are passive, they are not immediately seen as “damaging.” Indeed, congregational members and leaders frequently confuse “love” with “unhealthily enabling codependency.” This is how conflicted churches—and specifically conflicted churches with a long history of serial pastoral removals—see themselves: as “loving churches.” They are anxiously “stuck” in an addictive emotional process perpetuated and enabled by passive codependents. Passive codependents participate in this emotional process for much the same reason as the dominant addict. They lack self-esteem. They are marked by multiple goal confusion. They compulsively seek validation outside of themselves. Unlike the dominant addict who aggressively maintains addictive emotional process by wresting it from others, the passive codependent maintains their addictive process by willingly sacrificing all their goals, relationships, vision and themselves to satisfy their addictive need for affirmation. In this way they complement—and feed on—each other’s addictive emotional entanglement. Whatever the dominant addict’s means of control—intimidation, interrogation, “poor me,” or remaining aloof—the passive codependent’s insatiable addictive need for affirmation and validation for self responds in the affirmative. They give their all to the dominant addict at virtually any and all costs. This virtually irresistible compulsion for self-sacrifice–to the point of annihilation—is demonstrated in unhealthy relationships in marriages, in families and, of course, in organizations including the church. Organizational Results Though these dynamics are always present as long as addictive emotional processes are present, they are more obvious at higher levels of conflict. Speed Leas, noted for his “Five Levels of Conflict,” noted how conflict dynamics qualitatively change between Level III and Level IV. Whereas at Level III conflict dynamics still have a “rational” component, at Level IV, rampant emotionalism virtually drowns out any possibility for the rational. Thus it is at Levels IV and V that one comes face-to-face with the ugly dragon of addictive emotional process. In what ways does this mutually-sustaining emotional dynamic “play out” in organizations? Below is a listing of some of the ways in which this occurs. 1) Resistance to change
“We’ve never done it that way before” is not merely a “maintenance” mindset. It’s one of the key indicators of unhealthy addictive emotional process at work. The addictive nature of the emotional process is such that it requires a steady—and predictable—flow of dominant and passive codependent energies. Any perceived disruption of that process threatens both the process and its primary raison d’etre: to provide an unhealthy illusory substitute for healthy autonomy. To those entrenched in addictive emotional process, introducing change is like taking a pacifier from a baby or, more appropriately, the regular, predictable source and enjoyment of alcohol from an alcoholic. 2) “Yes-Man” Compliant Behaviors
One of the most common challenges for divorced codependents leaving an abusive relationship with a dominant addict is to develop and healthy, autonomous self-esteem. For years—and sometimes decades—these individuals have been compliant to the demands of the abusive spouse. Amazingly, they often note that they “didn’t know” they had the power to say “yes” or “no.” This is true even when they experienced extreme physical abuse. It is only after a healthy intentional recovery process has begun to take root that they begin to escape the blindness of the addictive emotional process from which they came. Resultantly they begin to evaluate their painful past on the basis of more rational criteria…not on an addictive dysfunctional emotional process marked, among others things, by denial. 3) The “sudden” eruption of conflict
Codependent process is marked by an inability to talk, trust and feel for itself. When combined with the ever-present addictive need to have their existential anxiety satisfied by fusion to a dominant addict, the result is that they feel whatever the dominant addict wants them to feel. It is said, “When momma ain’t happy, no one’s happy.” In much the same way, when the dominant addict is anxious, everyone is anxious. Codependent passivity then fuses codependents to the dominant addict. They ride the same roller coaster. Wherever the dominant addict goes, they will go. This dynamic will remain constant until there is a change in the addictive emotional process and/or any individual within that process. In long-established churches, this codependent passivity can be entrenched and persist over multiple generations. Once firmly ensconced in the organization system, it can be virtually impossible for God—and human intervention—to remove. 4) The proliferation of “non-issue” issues in conflict
A curious and strangely irrational dynamic of higher levels of congregational conflict is the emergence of non-issues. Pastors in congregational conflict frequently experience this. Nit-picky criticisms such as “The pastor doesn’t smile enough,” “The pastor’s shoes weren’t polished,” “The pastor’s sleeve on the preaching robe was dirty,” “The pastor isn’t friendly enough with children,” “The pastor came to the hospital in the afternoon instead of the morning to visit my mother” are just a sampling of “non-issues” criticisms. The reason for these criticisms is not the stated issue. The reason is to vent—and maintain—addictive emotional process. (cf. Ministry Health #20 “The Issue Is Not The Issue.” 5) Unfair Projection of Blame To The Pastor
Blaming others for issues which are not “really” issues and other such unwarranted, exaggerated accusations are specifically part of the addictive complex. It is a form of denial, specifically, projection. Projection maintains addictive behavior and the required equilibrium by directing anxious energies which threaten the system toward an external object of blame. The content of the blame is not really important. What is important is that the addict’s anxious energies are effectively removed from the addict. Projecting blame on authority figures and specifically pastors serves at least two functions.First,
as a denial mechanism it prevents outside energies from disrupting the addictive interplay of roles.
it serves as a source of additional external source of self-esteem “capital” for the dominant addict. This gives an added “rush” to the addictive experience.
Since dominant addicts and passive codependents share the same ultimate self-esteem base, they will readily fuse together as common forces. As partners in addictive fusion, they will seek one main goal: continued affirmation. This affirmation is the “capital” or fuel needed to maintain the addictive system. 6) Painful Exposure Of Pastoral Vulnerability
In general, authority figures have the highest levels of affirmation “capital.” In the church, the best and most abundant source is the pastor. This plays out in two ways: Pastors en route to experiencing remarkable ministry success and those ministering in a declining setting are both very vulnerable prey. Either extreme is marked by anxiety. By means of attacking—and destroying—this pastor the addicts gain affirmation capital needed to maintain the equilibrium of their addictive system. The most vulnerable pastors, of course, are those who are also enmeshed in an unhealthy addictive emotional process. This includes those who lack healthy self-differentiation, who are anxiously attached to their church, workaholics, and those perfectionists driven to get affirmation, acceptance and recognition to support their self-esteem via their achievements. Those pastors who exhibit the above characteristics will be vulnerable to face deep pain as they experience the emptiness and futility of ministry efforts directed to satisfying one’s own weak, unhealthy, and misdirected self-esteem. A dedicated, sixty-ish parishioner was asked, “Why didn’t you enter the pastoral ministry?” “Because I didn’t want to have to face my issues,” he responded. The ministry does require that sooner or later, we face our issues. Experiencing the ever-present dynamics of addictive emotional process virtually guarantees that every pastor will have this experience. 7) Individuals inexplicably transferring to “contrarian” congregations
This external validation can be powerful. It helps to explain why those apparently disagreeing with a philosophy of ministry in congregation will transfer to another congregation which specifically practices the philosophy of ministry which they had opposed. When this occurs, it may be an indicator of addictive emotional process. These passive codependent individuals have simply moved the source of their addictive process from one congregation to another. Having found another dominant addict in a pastor, staff member, or lay leaders (whether protagonist or antagonist), the “issues” become irrelevant. Once the emotional process is restored to equilibrium, nothing—nothing—else matters. 8) Unwillingness/Inability To “Own Up” To One’s Actions
It is virtually axiomatic that those who start trouble are the last ones to acknowledge responsibility for it. Again, denial mechanisms are at work. They deny the obvious, the factual, the essential and undeniable. On the other hand, they affirm, invent, twist and even fabricate “fantasies” to affirm their own position. Again, as irrational as it may appear, this process is readily explicable. The explanation is found in the dynamics of addictive process. 9) Highly Reactive And Unstable Relationships
Extreme conflict often re-arranges relationships in some very strange ways. Some are predictable. Others are, to say the least, surprising. What also happens is that these relationships are inherently unstable. Those whom have befriended the pastor in very close ways will sometimes flee to the opposition or betray the pastor. Sometimes this represents a complete reversal of stated positions. A possible reason for this is that the pastoral support was based on unhealthy connections purposed to reduce anxiety. When the pastor becomes the focus of anxiety, the pastor is no longer able to serve the anxiety relief function. Instead, the pastor may even increase the anxiety to intolerable levels. Thus the friendship breaks…suddenly, inexplicably…all because of anxious emotional process. A word of warning: Watch out for fused relationships, including those which are presently supportive. Driven by the need to reduce anxiety, these relationships live and die depending on the unpredictable changing winds of anxiety. Count on it! It’s characteristic of fusion-based relationships. 10) Clergy Sexual Misconduct
This tendency toward unstable relationships also may lead to a loneliness which may be related toward seeking inappropriate intimate relationships. In this context clergy sexual misconduct is an indicator that the offending pastor is enmeshed in addictive emotional process. In this role the clergy either fulfills the addictive codependency of the partner as a dominant addict or seeks fulfillment of passive codependence through another. 11) Short-Term Focused
The nature of addiction is that it is highly resistant to long-term consequences. Indeed, blindness to long-term consequences is a form of denial. This type of denial blocks the awareness of the long-term consequences—and hence the pain—of any of the addict’s actions. Even if the consequences are clearly explained and outlined in black and white—and repeatedly—the outcome will remain the same. They simply don’t understand. Indeed, they can’t…until they gain awareness of and desire recovery from their addictive emotional process. 12) Inability To Build Spiritual Momentum
Whether one is trying to get the congregation to be directed toward a vision, working to create a momentum for ministry growth, or trying to get individuals spiritually involved in the congregation, those dealing with congregations plagued by addictive emotional processes will find the going difficult if not virtually impossible. The resistance experienced can give rise to chronic pastoral ministry frustration, spiritual depression and, perhaps most significantly, a pervasive sense of self-doubt.Recognizing the addictive emotional process can not only help give possible reasons for the ministry challenges one faces. It can also help one to avoid unnecessary self-doubt and loss of ministry passion. Most important, perhaps, is that the recognition of addictive emotional process can lead one to get a healthy perspective by which to evaluate, plan, and lead the people of God.Societal Regression Unless recognized and confronted, the combination of dominant addict and passive codependent addictive behavior escalates a destructive emotional process which ultimately leads to what Bowen calls “societal regression.” The greater the dependency on the dominant addict (whether “Hero” or “Villain”), the greater the propensity for an increasingly anxious emotional process. This increase anxiety will result in a higher degree of unhealthy fusion. Unstopped, this unhealthy fusion becomes the seed of organizational self-sabotage. Perpetuated over time, anxiety-based fusion perpetuates all kinds of destructive dynamics found in dysfunctional, conflicted churches. It is this fusion which stops growth Implications For Your Ministry First, the “bad” news. Given the presence of emotional processes in congregational life and the emotional systems which maintain and undergird the organization, congregational leadership is, at best, precarious. At worst, it’s hazardous. It’s most hazardous for change agents. Organizations don’t change their emotional systems overnight. The more entrenched they are, the greater the likelihood of highly developed and successful defense mechanisms to maintain the system. Whenever one tries to change the entire organization at once, one might feel “successful” for a time. That is, until all hell breaks out. Multitudes of remarkably successful and effective ministry growth initiatives have been decimated by anxious addictive emotional processes. Endeavors to bring individuals into recovery from dominant addict or passive codependent behaviors are equally precarious. In either case, recovery can only happen if their unhealthy anxious base of self-esteem can be replaced with a non-anxious, autonomous self-esteem. This renewed sense of healthy self-esteem cannot—and must not—be based on some short of shallow positive “feel good-ism” philosophy. Such philosophies simply substitute the external bases of self-esteem from one dominant addictive practitioner to another. The final result is that the addictive dynamics are perpetuated with the same, unhealthy end: I can be happy because of some external event or person to provide this external sense of validation. The best—and only—source of this healthy self-esteem is in a proper Biblical, evangelical understanding of “grace.” The “Good” News The “good” news is that the prescription for recovery is specifically in the Gospel, the “Good News” of grace. Scripture is given for “doctrine, reproof, correction…and instructing one in righteous living (II Timothy 3:15). As such, it is directed specifically to those enmeshed in the addictive, sinful emotional process inherited from Adam and Eve. Shame, fear, denial, and the unhealthy yielding of self-esteem for externalities are root evidences of original sin. They are also key pillars of addictive emotional process. This emotional process leads to those things found in Romans 1, the works of the flesh in Galatians 5, and other sinful excesses found in Scripture. A Broken Heart One might suggest that David, in Psalm 51, reflects on his own recovery from addictive emotional process. As dominant addict he succumbed to sexual addiction with Bathsheba. He sought the fulfillment of his self-esteem through externals. His affair with Bathsheba and his murderous abuse of her husband, Uriah, may well be indicators of his addictive emotional process. David’s confession and recognition, “A broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise” (Psalm 51) are words of one who is broken. David’s addictively driven emotional process result in the inevitable legacy of both dominant addict and passive codependent: self-sabotage and self-destruction. When this occurs, those who open their hearts to God begin a process of recovery, rooted in a penitent confession of brokenness before God and others. This, and this alone, is the specific focus of intervention in individuals and congregations dominated by addictive emotional process. (Note: Ministry Health has numerous articles dealing with spiritual “brokenness.” Please check the site search engine). Brokenness: A Scriptural Key This intervention requires an authoritative view of Scripture. It requires a Gospel not watered down by unhealthy intrusions or adaptations made by those trying to shape God and His Word to their sinful, addictive process. It requires a preaching of the Law and will of God which stirs hearts into recognition, contrition and confession. By the same token, it requires the preaching of the plenary profundity of the unconditional immeasurable grace of Jesus Christ. This understanding goes far beyond a simply “academic” perfunctory confession, “I love Jesus.” Instead, it goes to the very heart of experiencing the “new treasures” of grace (Matthew 13:44) which characterize the hearts and confidence of those who recognize “the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21 NIV). Christian Ministry: A Tilt Toward Recovery What’s needed? A new paradigm for the church which showcases the entire Scriptures–Law and Gospel—as essential tools for healthy, spiritual recovery. Some organizations are, alas, recognizing the necessity of a “recovery-oriented” ministry. It can appear in an informal pattern such as Willow Creek et al. Historically, it has occurred—and still occurs—in the traditional liturgy of the Church. However it is found, the focus of worship and ministry must always be on recovery—spiritual recovery…personal spiritual recovery. The focus is on recovery is essentially the “stuff” of revivalism. This focus on spiritual recovery must consistently preach deliverance from the bonds of the rampant dysfunctional, anxious, addictive process in our world and in Christ’s Body, the Church through Jesus Christ alone. What’s The Goal Of Your Ministry? Given this goal of ministry it is apparent that any other focus of ministry is not only unhealthy; it is sinking sand. Attempts to simply relocate a church, add new programs, increase ministry staff, engage in fundraising et al without the central, predominant focus of recovery may have within them the seeds of self-sabotage and self-destruction. What’s the focus of your ministry?* Is it oriented to programs or to hearts?
* Is it dependent on and driven by a dominant addict or to it’s real Head, Jesus Christ?
* Is it directed to a specific vision or goal or to changing the hearts of individuals?
* Is it driven by increasing the externalities or by a passionate, unquenchable (“addictive”) passion to conduct a ministry of personal recovery?God gives all His ministers the “keys” to the Kingdom of God. Perhaps its time for us to use these Scriptural keys in the way God intended: to bring about broken and contrite hearts to the goal of Kingdom recovery. That’s the kind of healthy, spiritual emotional process that God does not despise! Thomas F. Fischer