One of the most difficult questions faced by survivors of relational abuse is this: “Why didn’t I leave?” An understanding of trauma bonding can bring so much self-compassion! While the term tends to be overused—as this article explains—this doesn’t mean it isn’t real—and painfully difficult to heal. This is in part because we most often blame ourselves for the abuse and shame ourselves for not leaving at the same time.
“Trauma-bonding is a hormonal attachment created by repeated abuse, sprinkled with being “saved” every now and then. The brain latches on to the positive experience of relief rather than the negative impact of the abuser.” For more…
My research on trauma bonding was not prompted by religious abuse, but I was taken aback by how the characteristics fit the strong bonds within toxic church situations. Since it is a physical reaction/bonding trauma bonding can explain how difficult it is for some people to leave. It is much the same in domestic violence situations.
I asked an AI app (Perplexity) the following question: What are the five characteristics of trauma bonding? The main points listed below were provided by the app and my thoughts on the application to religious trauma are in italics. You can check the sources here.
Cyclical nature: Trauma bonding involves a repeated cycle of abuse, devaluation, and positive reinforcement from the abuser. The abuser alternates between hurting and soothing the victim, making it hard for the victim to leave.
Even toxic church situations provide a community. If you follow the rules and dogma, leaders and members will usually show up when tragedy strikes or if life becomes difficult. Toxic harm is often overlooked because of this.
Power imbalance: Trauma bonding occurs when there is an underlying imbalance of power, where the abuser has control over the victim to the point the victim feels unable to resist or break free.
Hierarchal or patriarchal leadership structures are based on an imbalance of power. This imbalance, especially when under the guise of “spiritual” leadership, can be nearly impossible to resist. Power is often confused with authentic spiritual leadership.
Emotional attachment: Despite the abuse, the victim develops a deep emotional attachment and bond with the abuser, often believing the abuser's promises of love and change.
It is possible to be deeply attached to an abuser. The roots of this are in childhood when we depended on adults and were helpless to defend ourselves if being harmed. The emotional attachment in a religious community leaves those who become trapped there with few choices but to believe that the harm is unintentional, that they are loved, and that there will be change.
Justification of abuse: Victims of trauma bonding tend to justify or defend the abuser's actions, make excuses for the abuse, and distance themselves from people trying to help.
Possibly, the most insidious impact of trauma bonding is the defending of abusers. If you or someone you know is being harmed, and you or others defend the abuser, this is exactly what a trauma bond looks like. Those who defend church leaders who have harmed them or others are often exhibiting the impact of trauma bonding.
Difficulty leaving: Even after leaving the abusive situation, victims can have a hard time breaking the trauma bond and may feel incomplete or tempted to return to the familiar abusive cycle.
It is helpful to consider the trauma bond as part of the reason that it is so difficult to leave a toxic church situation. The longing to return is real and this can be confusing.
My analysis of trauma bonding in toxic religious settings was the result of a growing understanding of how the bond affected children who are removed from abusive homes or those who get tapped by traffickers. The child will grieve the loss of the parent because of the cycle of care intermingled with abuse. In the case of trafficking, the cycle is used very effectively in making the victim dependent on the perpetrator.
Toxic churches are no different from other abusive relationships. Abusive practices such as shaming and ostracizing, when mixed with what appears to be genuine care and community, are effective ways to establish a trauma bond. Often the trap isn’t recognized until someone steps out of line. Asking questions is one sure way to illicit the toxicity.
It is essential to realize that a trauma bond is embedded in neural pathways in your brain. The solution isn’t as simple as, “Well, just leave.” This is true in cases of domestic violence and in toxic churches. It most often requires support from a professional therapist. This is another complication because part of the toxicity is to ensure members fear getting help from anyone outside the church circle—much like an abusive husband prevents outside contact.
Understanding the impact of trauma bonding enabled me to understand how I could not remove myself from a toxic relationship as a young adult. It also explained the harm I experienced when trying to escape from toxic religious settings. It was essential to understand that even when the relationship is toxic, the grief and dysregulation caused by the separation upon leaving is real and rarely understood by those who assume you must be grateful to be out. (This is aside from those who continue to defend or ignore abusive behaviors of leaders.)
In my story and in observing how trauma bonds impact others, this is probably one of the most powerful strategies involved in controlling others. For some leaders, it is intentional control, but for many, it is a result of living out unresolved trauma. Healing the trauma-bond wound is challenging because it involves grieving loss even knowing it was an abusive relationship.
If it is a part of your story, be gentle with yourself—and know that healing is difficult but the bond is a normal reaction in relationships with mixed signals that feed on powerlessness. You deserve compassion from yourself and others!