Power and Authority in Spiritual Abuse

This is the third part of a series on spiritual abuse. The first post was a short introduction to the series and the second gave a description of the nature of spiritual abuse.

In this post, we will explore the roles power and authority play in spiritually abusive contexts.

Power and Authority

In order to understand power and authority in the context of spiritual abuse, we must first establish what power and authority are. Power itself is not a bad thing. Power is simply the ability to influence, for better or for worse. Authority is often used synonymously with power, but it is also defined separately as a position in which power is exercised. A parent has authority over a child, a coach has authority over a sports team, and a pastor has some level of authority over a church.

In spiritually abusive contexts, power and authority are routinely misused to harm members and to protect abusers. In spiritually healthy contexts, power and authority are used for the good of the members and of the community, and the leaders are held to account for their actions. Before we get into two main categories that tend to influence power and authority in abusive groups, let's talk a little bit about terminology and "binary" (either/or, all-or-nothing, or black and white) thinking.

Though we have labeled organizations as either "spiritually abusive" or "spiritually healthy," there is actually more of a continuum, ranging from healthy, functional churches on one side to highly abusive and extreme cults on the other. Some people use the term "high demand" or "high pressure group" to describe organizations that are certainly abusive, but perhaps don't seem as "extreme" as cults. Perhaps, the leader does not openly claim to be divine and the belief system seems more "orthodox" than more fringe groups. In high pressure groups, the infallibility of the leader is still present, it just tends to be more subtle - the pastor might not ever say he is "the son of God" but he acts as if he is beyond question.

It is also helpful to note that no organization or person is wholly one way or another (healthy or abusive). Cults, high demand groups, and abusive churches often have good aspects. This is likely what drew members to the organization in the first place. It is also often what makes it hard for members to leave. When members try to leave or when people begin to tell their stories of abuse, many groups will attempt to leverage the "good aspects" of their leader or group to dismiss the shadow side of their organization or to try to pressure people to stay.

We do not need to fall for such group's black and white or binary thinking here - the same communities that inflict mental, emotional, financial, and even physical and sexual abuse on their members may also do genuinely good things for their community and offer services to members that enrich their lives. The good things do not dismiss the bad.

Harvey Weinstein, for instance, helped make many good movies. Does that mean we should overlook the sexual abuse he visited upon dozens of women in Hollywood? Of course not! I can recognize that Weinstein made good movies and that he routinely treated women horribly. He and all others who abuse power for their own gain need to be held accountable. In contrast, in abusive groups, a leader's good deeds are emphasized to dismiss charges of abuse against the leader.

Despite its flawed logic, it is understandable why some are quick to defend abusive leaders when their misdeeds are exposed. When you respect (or even worship or idolize) someone, it can be shocking and disorienting when their abusive behavior comes to the surface. Many will question how a group or leader that seemed to be doing such good things can end up having such a sick underbelly of abuse.

In my research, observations, and experiences, the abuse of power and authority tends to spring from two major categories:

1) a charismatic and abusive central leader (oftentimes a narcissist)

2) a lack of accountability

The Central, Abusive Leader

While it is true that a leader may abuse for a myriad of reasons, many abusive leaders tend to be narcissists. Narcissists tend to have a deep inner well of shame, which they "cover up" through grandiosity and the constant need for the admiration of others.

In his book Traumatic Narcissism, psychotherapist Daniel Shaw describes how people become narcissists:

1. they suffer intergenerational trauma - their parents routinely shamed them or were severely narcissistically disturbed themselves

2. they develop delusional infallibility and entitlement - because of their early chronic shame and trauma, they develop a rigid sense of superiority and perfection; they decide they can only rely on themselves and they can never be wrong

3. they learn to externalize shame - dependency, weakness, and "badness" are only in other people; the traumatizing narcissist essentially "colonizes" other people to offload their own shame

4. they suppress the subjectivity of others - for the traumatizing narcissist, there is only enough room for his/her own needs and view of things; when others express their needs or contrary points of view, they are viewed as "selfish" and bad

For a great interview with Daniel Shaw and Matt Carter (the guitarist from rock band Emery), go here. Matt Carter, who used to attend Mark Driscoll's megachurch Mars Hill asks some questions about cult dynamics even in mainstream and popular megachurches.

There has been a tremendous amount of study on narcissists and narcissism. A couple things will be helpful to this post. First, some psychologists identify a "healthy narcissism" - this is what grounds you in your own perspective and is an ingredient of self-esteem and being able to appreciate what you like about yourself. This is normal, needed, and healthy.

The "other kind" of narcissism is pathological, dysfunctional, or, to use Shaw's language, traumatic. Traumatic narcissism is characterized by abusive and manipulative behavior that inevitably leads to a string of broken relationships. As long as others play by the rules of the narcissist, they might not face additional abuse, but if they attempt to express their "subjectivity" too much, then they are abused or dismissed.

This sort of personality is often found in cults, high pressure groups, and abusive churches. It might not at first be clear, because there is often a "honeymoon" period to relationships with narcissists where they love-bomb, flatter, and gift-give. However, after the "honeymoon phase," it can get quite stormy as narcissists are known to manipulate and abuse others in their ongoing quest to buoy their own fragile self-esteem.

Dr. Darrell Puls, a conflict resolution expert, has seen the damage narcissists can cause in the church. His book, Let Us Prey (the second, revised edition is soon to be released), covers the results of a recent study that found an abnormally high rate of narcissistic personality disorder in the pastorate. You can find a helpful slideshow that describes some of the patterns and characteristics of narcissists here.

According to Puls, narcissists:

- avoid responsibility

- take credit for other people's work

- are unable to reflect on their own behavior

- know the damage they cause, but don't care

- have underlying emotions of fear of abandonment, rage, and grief

- have zero empathy

- lack a sense of humor (they often do not understand what is humorous; they will laugh at others, but will not tolerate anyone laughing at him/her)

- never forgive, always seek revenge

- are "name droppers"

- must be the brightest intellect in the room

- are condescending

- use verbal and psychological abuse to control

- project images of success (often exaggerate/lie about their accomplishments)

According to Puls, all of these behaviors are designed to "hide the self from others." Sadly, narcissists are almost completely absorbed with projecting a persona that is grandiose, powerful, even perfect, that they can't truly engage in authentic relationships with others. They're simply too busy trying to control and use people to prop up their ego.

Those who have worked extensively with narcissists typically advise others to run the other way if they can. This is because it can be very difficult for a narcissist to change, because they either don't think they need to change (everyone else is the problem) or if they finally do embrace some level of change, it can quickly become another tool in the narcissist tool belt. If a narcissist goes to therapy, for instance, rather than genuine change and repentance from their manipulative and abusive behaviors, they might just gain more language and skills to manipulate others for their own ends.

Though experts call pathological narcissism one of the hardest personality disorders to treat, narcissists can change if they take the hard road of repenting of their abusive and manipulative behaviors, seek healing for their underlying shame, and learn to acknowledge and care for their needs instead of trying to control and "colonize" others.

I don't share this information to scare people who are in healthy churches. Of course, there are many pastors who are not traumatic narcissists! Despite higher rates of narcissism in certain professions, there are still far more "normal" pastors than there are narcissistic ones!

Rather than making people paranoid, I hope this is helpful for those of us who have experienced abuse from a narcissist pastor or leader and perhaps don't have the language to understand what happened. I want to affirm that such leaders are out there and that they have seriously flawed ways of seeing others. This can be tremendously harmful if you find yourself in their war path.

Though not exclusively tied to narcissists, the cycle of abuse is often at play in relationships with narcissists. This cycle tends to be very disorienting and confusing. Those in its grip may feel like they are in the dark and can't find a way out. However, once they see the steps involved, it becomes easier to spot abuse and hopefully get out of the cycle.

The Cycle of Abuse

I believe it was forensic psychologist Dr. Lenore Walker who coined the phrase, "the cycle of abuse." It goes something like this:

The abuser feels threatened.

The abuser lashes out by abusing others.

The abuser becomes the victim.

The abuser feels empowered.

The cycle begins again.

In a domestic scenario, this could play out like this:

A husband comes home and finds that his wife has not made dinner and the house is not clean. He feels disrespected (threatened) by this and so he berates his wife (the abuse). His wife, busy with other projects during the day, did not have enough time to get dinner and cleaning done. She expresses this to her husband, but he cannot see her point of view and tells her that she's a terrible wife, that she doesn't care about him, and how much better he could do with someone else (becoming the victim). For a myriad of reasons, including the fact that he is growing louder and more physically aggressive, the wife feels scared, guilty, and apologizes (empowerment of the abuser). It is a matter of time before the cycle will begin again when the husband feels "threatened" by his wife again.

Please forgive the stereotypes, but they help to drive home how the abuse cycle works. The roles could of course be reversed (the wife and the husband) or be in different settings altogether. This can happen in close friendships, in workplaces, and, it can happen in churches and spiritual communities.

An innocent comment or friendly joke might quickly turn into the leader berating or humiliating a church member as retaliation. Or, the pastor might be offended by something a person said and so they feature that person or what they said in the weekly sermon, using scripture and their position to condemn the person. It could happen in a small group, while shaking hands on Sunday morning, or in a meeting led by the pastor.

In the cycle of abuse, the church member will often feel guilty and apologize for their actions and the pastor is only further empowered by their apology. This now becomes more ammo for the pastor to use against the member in future conflicts. The pastor's "victimhood" and sense of empowerment grows as he continues to cut down the church member's self esteem and reputation. If the church member were to leave the church, an abusive pastor could move to destroy the relationships the member had with others and to tarnish the person's reputation. Unfortunately, I have seen this dynamic play out, have experienced it myself, and have heard stories from many others of this being the case. It can be bewildering to be on the receiving end of such an attack, but, when you can understand the cycle of abuse, you can start to put some of the pieces together on how and why abusive leaders do the things they do.

So, we have covered the difficult and often power-abusing personality of the narcissist as well as the cycle of abuse. Let's now turn to how a lack of accountability can enable the abuse of power and authority.

A Lack of Accountability

In her article "Spiritual Abuse: When Good People Do Bad Things," therapist Demaris Wehr asserts that the poor structuring of an organization can enable otherwise decent leaders to act on their worst impulses, causing devastation in their congregants.

A look, then, at a church's organizational structure can reveal if a church is in the "danger zone" for spiritual abuse:

1. Does power seem to be balanced in the church or spiritual community? Or is it more of a "pyramid model" with one leader or a small group of leaders at the top?

2. Does the organization's leadership have oversight? Does it have a board, denominational connections and/or accountability through other people who have power to enforce consequences?

3. What kind of relationship does the leadership have with its oversight? (Are the board members hand-picked "buddies" of the lead pastor? Are the board members subservient to the pastor?)

4. Are board members qualified and objective enough to call decisions made by the leadership into question?

The well-known proverb “absolute power corrupts absolutely” often rings true. Even if the pastors of a church are "decent people," the lack of structural restraint can give rise to the abuse of power and authority.

For Christians, the restraint of evil (through structural accountability) has been a theological theme for the past two millennia, including in the letters of Paul, the works of Augustine in the 4th century, Thomas Aquinas' thought in the 13th century, and for modern theologians and ethicists today, including ethicist Reinhold Niebuhr.

In traditional Christian theology, this need for the restraint of evil has arisen from an understanding that humans are "bent" toward selfish motives and behaviors. This "bentness" has traditionally been called sin. The idea is simply that we sometimes do not do what is right. We have impulses and desires and we follow them even when it harms others.

Some cults and abusive churches have leveraged teachings on sin to convince their followers that they are evil and that they need the enlightened or purified leaders to guide them. The message is that the leader (oftentimes a narcissist) is the only one who knows what is right and that the follower must submit to the leader or they are in sin, out of God's will, won't be "enlightened," or worse.

What often happens is that leaders use a little bit of something true and gain "buy-in" from followers. Everyone can relate to doing something they wish they hadn't - it's a part of being human - we make mistakes. That humanness, in abusive settings, is leveraged against the followers. Over time, the leaders require more and more "buy-in" from the followers, until the followers find they have given far more than they wanted. This is how people give away money, time, possessions, cars, even houses and relationships with loved ones to stay in the good graces of the abusive leader. Over time, their self esteem and self-trust is chipped away at by the spiritual leader while they become more and more dependent on the leader for guidance.

(warning: description of violent abuse in below paragraph)

In a fascinating and disturbing podcast series, cult survivors from a group called NXIVM (pronounced "nex-ee-um") describe how they were coerced to be branded by leaders of the group. They were told it would be a small tattoo and that they needed to do it to show their commitment to their own growth and to set an example for others. When they arrived blindfolded to the site, they found it was actually a cauterizing pen that the "tattoo artist" used to carve and burn the initiate's skin. Later, they discovered that the stylized symbol that was carved into them was actually the initials of the cult's leaders.

If you listen to the series, you'll discover that these were well-adjusted, successful people who were slowly broken down over time. And they were recruited at vulnerable moments of their lives, like the end of a dating relationship, a transition to a new place, a death of a loved one, or while struggling in their career.

What is typical in abusive cults like NXIVM and toxic churches is a lack of accountability. Most churches and spiritual communities establish systems of accountability. They do so through a church board, denominational oversight, etc. Most of us take this for granted since America's government itself is built on the idea of checks and balances. The argument goes that the founding members of our nation did not form a monarchy because a monarchy can too easily become a tyranny. Power should be shared and those who are in leadership positions should be checked by consequences and systems of accountability that keep them from abusing their position.

Toxic churches do not follow this model. They may outright reject accountability and insist on an authoritarian model, because the pastor/leader is too good (or even perfect or infallible) to have any need for accountability. Others may attempt to market their organization as "beyond hierarchy," emphasizing friendship, egalitarianism, or enlightenment, but, upon closer inspection, it becomes clear that there really are people in charge and they are not subject to consequences for their actions.

Abusive churches tend to resemble a "pyramid" or, even more dramatically, an "inverted T" structure (cult expert Margaret Singer's phrase), where the leader is on top and the followers or members are on the bottom. In her book Cults in Our Midst, the psychologist describes the typical structure of a cult:

"Cults are authoritarian in structure. The leader is regarded as the supreme authority although he may delegate certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing that members adhere to his wishes and rules. There is no appeal outside of the leader's system to greater systems of justice. For example, if a schoolteacher feels unjustly treated by a principal, he or she can appeal to another authority. In a cult, the leader has the only and final ruling on all matters."

In many cases, this authoritarianism is "slipped in" and happens over time. If spiritually abusive organizations announced themselves as such at the outset, no one would join them! Like in the case of NXIVM, the organization turns out to be very different than what it first appeared to be. Over time, leaders and recruiters gain trust, learn secrets and soft spots, and then employ authoritarian power plays.

Some leaders may feel stifled by accountability structures like church boards and supervisory hierarchies. However, research shows that accountability benefits community members and leaders alike. For instance, in a study from 2016, researchers found that churches with active and robust church boards tended to be healthier, more successful, and more sustainable.

Because the risk of abuse greatly increases if there is a lack of accountability and because research shows that robust accountability makes groups stronger, it is my belief that leaders shoot themselves in the foot by keeping power in their own hands. Leaders who want to serve the church should trust all of God's people to help govern and sustain it.

---

It is encouraging that many cults, high demand groups, and abusive churches fail in the end. Eventually, when the money, resources, and cover-ups run out, they find themselves facing the consequences of their actions. However, a lot of damage can be done along the way and some followers will stay loyal even when all kinds of abuse have been exposed.

This "Stockholm syndrome" type behavior is due to what psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton calls "thought reform." Lifton identifies 8 patterns of thought reform in his classic work examining Chinese Communist brainwashing techniques. Therapist and author Steven Hassan has built upon Lifton's work with his phrase "undue influence" and subsequent BITE model and has dedicated his life's work to helping people maintain "freedom of mind."

We will explore both in next week's article about manipulation and control.

---

Series Directory:

1) Introduction

2) The Nature of Spiritual Abuse

3) Power & Authority

4) Manipulation & Control

5) Elitism & Persecution

6) Lifestyles & Experiences

7) Dissent & Discipline

8) Exit & Adjustment (forthcoming)

9) What Now? Healing from Spiritual Abuse (forthcoming)

10) How to Deal with a Spiritual Abuser (forthcoming)