Reconsidering Religious Trauma: The Critical Need for Betrayal-Related Research in Religious Communities

By Aubrie Patterson, MS, and Laura Noll, PhD
Northern Arizona University, Department of Psychological Sciences

For many, religious and spiritual practices are interwoven with psychological well-being and meaning making. But what happens when representatives of religious institutions sexually abuse their members, fail to protect them, or even condone perpetrators of sexual violence? Responding to the need for systematic research in this understudied area, we have begun conducting a mixed-methods study, funded by the Center for Institutional Courage, on religious trauma and betrayals related to sexual abuse in religious communities.

Our research builds on recent work describing the unique harms of trauma in religious settings. In 2022, Heidi Ellis and colleagues developed a synthesized definition of religious abuse/trauma which includes three core elements: misuse of power (e.g., using hierarchical power or God for control and manipulation), psychological harm (e.g., damage to sense of self, disoriented worldview), and spiritual harm (e.g., harm to spirituality or faith; damaged sense of meaning, ethics, or purpose). Victims of sexual misconduct in religious settings, such as by a clergy member, may be experiencing what researcher Fiona Gardner refers to as a “double betrayal”: both interpersonal betrayal and institutional betrayal. A double betrayal might also be felt when a trusted family member or friend commits sexual abuse and the church does nothing to prevent it from happening again. What’s more, there may be another felt layer to sexual abuse in religious settings that goes beyond impacts of sexual or psychological abuse. According to Ellis et al.’s systematic review, when people are sexually abused within a religion, they often describe mental health impacts that they directly connect to religious trauma. This includes not just psychological and physical health symptoms, but also the effects of what has also been called “spiritual violence:” their connection to a higher power and spirituality is wrapped up in, and damaged by, the abuse.

This research is important and timely for multiple reasons. First, there is limited data on sexual violence in religious settings, and survivors’ experiences deserve to be shared. Second, religious institutions tend to be insulated environments with pronounced power hierarchies, which, as researchers of institutional betrayal, flags for us a need for accountability and transparency. Carly Smith and Jennifer Freyd illustrated this in 2014 when they wrote about how religious figures are often seen as directly connected to God, a type of prestige that is “associated with an uneven distribution of power” which might increase the challenge with holding them accountable. Finally, news stories continue to emerge (such as this, for example) detailing reports of sexual abuse in religions that may have previously flown under the radar.  

As researchers respond to the need to support survivors and shed light on religious betrayal and trauma, we will need to work together to explore the kinds of changes that may be most impactful. What are the best ways to prevent sexual abuse in religious communities, and how can we empower religions that aim to become more institutionally courageous when abuse is reported? We hope that this research will help to answer these critical questions.