The Intersection of Attachment Theory and Spirituality

Tuesday, February 11, 2025.

Once upon a time, before you had a mortgage and a gluten intolerance, before you spent your days swiping left on potential mates like a deranged Roman emperor, you were a baby.

A small, gooey, screaming mammal, utterly dependent on a few distracted giants to keep you alive. And if you were lucky, one of those giants looked at you with something resembling love. If not, well, that’s where the trouble starts.

John Bowlby, the godfather of attachment theory, suggested that the way those giants treated you would shape how you connected with others for the rest of your life (Bowlby, 1988).

You either grew up feeling that the world was a warm and trustworthy place or that it was an absurdist horror show where love was conditional, unpredictable, or absent altogether. A

That belief system doesn’t just apply to your romantic partners—it applies to God too.

God as the Ultimate Caregiver: A Secure Base or an Absent Parent?

Attachment theorists Kirkpatrick and Shaver (1992) proposed something remarkable: the way we experience God mirrors the way we attach to our parents.

If your mom and dad were there when you cried, fed you before you lost all hope, and generally made life feel safe, you might tend to view God as a loving, present force.

If, on the other hand, your early caregivers were more absent than a responsible billionaire at tax time, your concept of God might be distant, unreliable, or even punitive.

This is what’s called compensation versus correspondence in attachment to the divine.

Some folks develop a relationship with God that compensates for what their parents failed to provide, while others merely transfer their parental attachment patterns onto their spirituality (Granqvist & Kirkpatrick, 2004).

In other words, if Dad was a no-show, you might either imagine a hyper-present God to fill the void or assume God, too, is off playing golf while the world burns.

The Cosmic Orphan’s Dilemma: Anxious, Avoidant, or Secure?

• Attachment theory suggests three main styles of bonding (Ainsworth et al., 1978):

• Secure Attachment: You believe love is reliable. You trust in relationships, human and divine alike.

• Anxious Attachment: You fear abandonment. Every unanswered prayer is a personal betrayal.

• Avoidant Attachment: You expect disappointment. God is just another absentee father, and you’ll handle things yourself, thanks.

These essential attachment styles shape how people engage with spirituality.

Studies show that securely attached souls often experience religion as a source of comfort, while anxiously attached folks tend to approach faith with fervor, hoping for reassurance that they are worthy. Avoidantly attached folks, ever the lone wolves, are more likely to reject religious structures altogether (Kirkpatrick, 1999).

Prayer, Ritual, and the Human Need for Co-Regulation

Let’s pause here.

You, dear reader, are a primate. And like all primates, you regulate your emotions through connection.

When a baby monkey is stressed, it clings to its mother. When a grown human is stressed, it might cling to a rosary, a yoga practice, or a particularly expensive therapist like me.

Prayer, meditation, chanting, and other spiritual practices often mimic Secure Attachment behaviors (Pargament, 1997).

When people talk to God, they are engaging in a neurological process that mirrors speaking to a secure attachment figure.

Their bodies calm down. Cortisol levels drop.

The same way a child feels safer with a loving parent, adults feel safer when they believe a divine presence is listening.

But what about the people whose attachment wounds run deep? Those who never learned to trust?

Research suggests that spiritual experiences can rewire attachment patterns over time. Regular engagement in prayer or mindfulness may increase feelings of security, even for the most avoidant among us (Granqvist, 2020).

In short, even if life started you off with a broken compass, spirituality might just be the north star you need.

Spirituality, Trauma, and Healing

For those who have suffered profound trauma, spirituality often becomes either a refuge or a battleground.

Research suggests that religious frameworks can serve as both a means of coping and a source of distress (Exline & Rose, 2013).

When someone has experienced deep betrayal or abandonment, the idea of an all-loving deity might feel like a cruel joke. Conversely, those same souls may find in spiritual communities a structure that offers predictability and a sense of belonging (Hill & Pargament, 2003).

This paradox leads to the concept of spiritual struggle—a term used to describe the internal conflicts people experience in relation to their faith (Pargament et al., 2005).

It’s no surprise that those with insecure attachment styles often experience heightened spiritual struggles.

But the research also suggests that resolving those struggles, through therapy, meditation, or deep engagement with religious practice, can significantly increase psychological resilience (Desrosiers et al., 2011; Koenig, 2012; McCullough et al., 2003).

The Final Punchline: Love is the Only Exit

If you were lucky enough to grow up securely attached, congratulations! You are among the fortunate few.

If not, well, you’re in good company.

The good news? You can still choose love. You can rewire your brain. You can find comfort in connection, whether in another person, a spiritual practice, or simply in the absurd beauty of existence itself.

Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.

REFERENCES:

Granqvist, P., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2013). Religion, spirituality, and attachment. In K. I. Pargament (Ed.), APA handbook of psychology, religion, and spirituality: Vol. 1. Context, theory, and research (pp. 129–155). American Psychological Association.

Loetz, C., & Juckel, G. (2013). Attachment theory and spirituality: Two threads converging in palliative care. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00747

Hall, T. W. (2009). Attachment to God and implicit spirituality: Clarifying correspondence and compensation models. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 37(4), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164710903700401

Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Attachment theory and religion: Childhood attachments, religious beliefs, and conversion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 29(3), 315–334. https://doi.org/10.2307/1386461

Granqvist, P., Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2010). Religion as attachment: Normative processes and individual differences. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309348618

Koenig, H. G. (2012). Religion, spirituality, and health: The research and clinical implications. ISRN Psychiatry, 2012, 1-33.

McCullough, M. E., Hoyt, W. T., Larson, D. B., Koenig, H. G., & Thoresen, C. E. (2003). Religious involvement and mortality: A meta-analytic review. Health Psychology, 22(5), 521-530.