Sunday, May 25, 2008

Three Alcoholics Anonymous Christian Women Leaders: By Dick B.


From: "Dick Burns" Email: dickb@dickb.com
To: "Dick Burns" Email: dickb@dickb.com
Subject: Three Christian Women Leaders and Teachers of Bible Study in Alcoholics Anonymous
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 21:03:39 -1000

Three Alcoholics Anonymous Christian Women Leaders:
They Studied, Taught, and Discussed the Bible in A.A.
By Dick B.
© 2008 by Anonymous. All rights reserved

About A.A., the Bible, and Christian Women in Recovery Today

The following sound like simple questions for which there must be simple answers today. And that is the case. The problem is that many women in Alcoholics Anonymous, in Al-Anon, in 12 Step programs, in recovery programs, and in Christian recovery groups just don’t know the real facts that can readily provide them with the answers.

Are there women in recovery groups today? Of course there are. This, despite the fact that the earliest A.A. fellowships consisted of men only. And are there Christian women in recovery groups today? Of course there are. This, in spite of the fact that 12-Step literature pouring out of service offices, treatment programs, and social agencies suggest you don’t have to believe in God or make a decision for Christ in order to recover from alcoholism and other addictions.

Do women have to be or become Christians in order to belong to A.A., receive treatment, or recover from alcoholism. The answer is a very clear “No.” But can women and men believe in God, be a Christian, study the Bible, and read Christian literature today and still be active and in recovery and recovery groups today. The answer is an equally clear “Yes.”

Are there Christian women in recovery and recovery groups who study or wish to study the Bible as part of their recovery effort? Once again, the answer is “Yes.” Of course, there are. This is the case even though women and others are intimidated in today’s fellowships—if they mention the Bible, Jesus Christ, or religion in meetings, groups, conferences, or to their sponsors. Have I personally seen that situation? The answer is “Yes.” All too often.

Are A.A., Al-Anon, most 12 Step fellowships, and treatment programs “Christian” today? They most certainly are not—at least not A.A. or Al-Anon, or even a substantial majority of anonymous fellowships and treatment programs.

Given this strange assortment of facts, is there a place today in A.A., Al-Anon, 12 Step fellowships, and treatment programs for Christian women who want to participate fully in their societies and programs and still study the Bible? A place for Christian women who desire to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ? A place for women who devotedly choose to attend, talk about, and share facts about some Christian church of their choice—be it Roman Catholic, Protestant, or non-denominational? And the answer is most assuredly “Yes.” They can do this freely, openly, and sincerely even in the face of the oft-heard rumbling in recovery halls today about some “higher power” that is not Almighty God, about a supposed “spirituality” that has nothing to do with Christianity or the Bible, and about an alleged difference between A.A. as “spiritual” and A.A. as a society that rests on countless Biblical and Christian words, roots, language, historical principles, and practices. And also a society that regularly studies and quotes a basic text that patently uses Christian language. It refers to God and to Bible verses taken straight from Scripture. It urges concepts about doing God’s will—concepts that definitely necessitate a belief in Almighty God. These truths are firm whether AAs talk about “a” god of their understanding, “a” power greater than themselves, or some great, undefined “Reality.” These curious and often contradictory usages do not make A.A. Christian or Biblical. They simply contract some basic, biblical ideas. But they do plainly point to the religious wellsprings from which A.A. emerged and was constructed.

Those are the facts today.

In brief, today A.A. and many other recovery societies are not, do not purport to be, and do not require members to become, Christian. Nor do they insist on acceptance or mouthing of any Christian creed, statement of Christian faith, Christian literature, or of any association with some particular sect, denomination, or church—Christian or otherwise—as a condition of recovery.

These also are the facts today. But they do not justify close-mindedness, exclusivity, condemnation, criticism, skepticism, atheism, agnosticism, or unbelief. In fact, typifying his own personal belief in, and reliance on, Almighty God, AA Cofounder Dr. Bob wrote at the close of his personal story that follows the basic text:

If you think you are an atheist, an agnostic, a skeptic, or have any other form of intellectual pride which keeps you from accepting what is in this book, I feel sorry for you. If you still think you are strong enough to beat the game alone, that is your affair. But if you really and truly want to quit drinking liquor for good and all, and sincerely feel that you must have some help, we know that we have an answer for you. It never fails, if you go about it with one half the zeal you have been in the habit of showing when you were getting another drink. Your Heavenly Father will never let you down!

What was the answer of which Dr. Bob spoke? The help of Almighty God! Dr. Bob made it plain that God never fails those who believe in Him and diligently seek Him.

One could argue endlessly in meetings today about the irrelevance of God, Jesus Christ, and the Bible. Or that you can stop drinking, get sober, and remain sober without religious affiliation, Christian principles, and Biblical practices. In fact, many many people make these points every day. And that is their affair, as Dr. Bob put it. These doubters and critics are not suppressed, chastised, or expelled because of their views in, for, against, or about God. They are free to hold them and express them.

But my own emails, letters, and phone calls—including hundreds from women in recovery—have emerged from the questions posed above. They ask: Is A.A. is anti-Christian? Is it against religion? Is it non-Christian, and opposed to Bible study, religious literature, and church?. The queries arise largely because of frequent vociferous objections from bleeding deacons, because of some individual’s distaste for churches and Christianity, or because of a widespread misunderstanding of what A.A. is, where it came from, or how it really proposes that people get well.

The best approach I know in dealing with arguments hostile to Christians and Christian ideas and statements in recovery today is to raise clearly the following points: (1) Ask the hostile contender to point to some “rule,” some “law,” some “tradition,” or some authoritative announcement from a General Service Conference that holds one may not be a Christian, may not study the Bible, may not mention Jesus Christ, may not attend a Christian church, and may not—in such situations—claim to be, belong to, and embrace A.A., Al-Anon, or 12-Step fellowship principles and practices today. (2) Ask the hostile contender if he or she has read such A.A. materials as DR. BOB and the Good Oldtimers and the many other “Conference Approved” pieces of literature that talk about the Bible, the early Christian fellowship, the Christian women who taught early AAs, and the importance of the Book of James, Jesus’ sermon on the mount, and 1 Corinthians 13 in every day recovery meetings and language. (3) Ask the hostile contender if he or she has any knowledge of the early A.A. Christian fellowship in Akron; of its regular study of the Book of James, Jesus’ sermon on the mount, and 1 Corinthians 13; and of the widespread desire among the pioneers to call A.A. The James Club because of the popularity of the Book of James. (4) Ask the hostile contender if he or she is at all familiar with the role that three Christian women played in the founding and development of the program; and with their teaching of the Christian principles, literature, and practices. (5) Ask the contender if he or she has studied the actual history of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Dominating the background of my interest in what the early AAs did, what they believed, and how and why they succeeded, is the Bible itself. Why? Because I believe the Bible tells us about our Creator, His son, and His will, and enables us to understand them. And because I believe the original A.A. program called specifically for “finding” God, for “establishing a relationship with God,” for being of maximum service to God, and for trusting God. I found it important to discover the real Biblical ideas, practices, and teachings in early A.A. Yet, almost as soon as my interest in A.A.’s Bible roots developed, my sponsor and his sponsor insisted to me that people who read the Bible get drunk. My sponsor was no Bible student. And his sponsor had never ever read the Bible. Yet each insisted that it was wrong to discuss the Bible with a newcomer and offer him or her the chance to learn from the Bible. Each vociferously and also surreptitiously objected to a huge A.A. history meeting that was held in Mill Valley, California, where I discussed the Book of James and its place in our history. By that time, I had learned what Dr. Bob read in and recommended in the Bible. I knew what Anne Smith had taught AAs and their families from the Bible. And I had begun to see the Bible’s prominent place in the early A.A. practices and recoveries. This, in turn, led me to realize that it was not only appropriate, but immensely practical and valuable, for AAs—particularly women AAs—to learn the forthright way in which the Bible was authoritatively presented by three women in the fellowship itself.

Why Learn About the Christian Women Pioneers and Leaders
in A.A.


Today there are a number of women employed by and paid to serve A.A. offices today. Some of these women write materials that become published by A.A. and embedded in its meeting chatter. AAs themselves really have no part in that process. Yet these employed women even write letters to members defining what they believe is the nature of A.A.—“spiritual, but not religious.” But they do not represent, do not speak for, and are not acting on behalf of A.A. members—individually or as a group. So it seems appropriate to look (for reliable experience, precedent, guidance, and actual historical facts) to the three important Christian women who had founding or experienced roles in the founding, development, and successes of A.A. fellowships themselves. Moreover, each of these three unpaid Christian women served A.A.’s primary purpose—to help the alcoholic who still suffers—and certainly did hands-on work with drunks.

This is not to make a special case for women leaders, or for Christian women, or for Christian activities in today’s A.A. The focus on these Christian leaders, however, may be more than justified on the following basis. AAs and others in recovery today may show more deference to the Christian roots and relevance of early A.A. ideas if it is known that they developed in an all male society but were taught, fostered, and practiced in the fellowship by women who were extraordinary leaders, teachers, and believers. And it was the work of these Christian women which contributed mightily to the astonishing 75 to 93% documented success rate among seemingly hopeless, medically incurable real alcoholics who went to any lengths to establish their relationship with God and get well. They contributed yesterday. And today!

Perhaps too it is easier to understand and study A.A.’s Christian roots by turning to the hands-on service of its Christian women leaders, rather than dwelling on the moral shortcomings, spiritual wanderings, and warped theological thinking of some of the men who helped found, and then substantially changed, the early fellowship. These men included some who were cheating on their wives, grabbing for profit and prestige, and fostering interest in spiritualism and drugs like LSD. Admittedly, these men weren’t perfect. Few of us are. But the track record of the Christian women perhaps offer a better and more substantial picture of honesty, fidelity, love, and service. And in any case, I believe they have earned mention as vital contributors to the fashioning of A.A. successes arising out of reliance on the Creator..

The Fruitfulness of Learning About Three of These Women Leaders

Four men whose writings or ideas caused Bill Wilson to dub them A.A. Co-founders: As the years rolled on from the actual founding of A.A., Bill Wilson began extending the title of “founder” to a number of men who played roles in influencing Wilson’s own Twelve Step program. These men included Dr. Carl Gustav Jung and his conversion cure theory; Professor William James and his voluminous study of actual conversion cures; Dr. William D. Silkworth and his ideas about the disease of alcoholism and the Great Physician’s ability to cure it; and Rev. Samuel M. Shoemaker, Jr., who—according to Bill himself—taught him most of the specifics incorporated in Bill’s Twelve Step program of recovery. All four men were called “founders” by Bill. And the fruits of their ideas can be seen in the A.A. program’s history.

Sister Ignatia, the Roman Catholic nun, acknowledge by Wilson to have “played a considerable part in the founding of A.A.” Ignatia’s biographer called her the “Angel of Alcoholics Anonymous.” Bill Wilson pointed to her close work with Dr. Bob in ministering to some 5000 alcoholics treated at St. Thomas Hospital operated by the Roman Catholic Church. Her biographer said she seldom met Dr. Bob’s wife in person, but stated that Anne Smith and Sister Ignatia conversed regularly on the telephone. And, though Sister Ignatia, was not an alcoholic, was not a “member” of A.A., and was not a participant in the fellowship’s early founding years, she became an inescapable part of the Akron family that ministered with success to hospitalized alcoholics in their early days. Admirers spoke of her as the “Little Angel.”

But we turn to three women who were leaders within the fellowship itself.

The three Christian women leaders and where to find more about them:

Anne Ripley Smith: It is appropriate to start with Anne Ripley Smith (wife of Dr. Bob, founder of A.A., and the woman Bill Wilson called the “Mother of A.A.”). You can read a few details about her in A.A. Conference Approved literature. But you will find much much more in my titles Anne Smith’s Journal, 1933-1939 (http://www.dickb.com/annesm.shtml); The Akron Genesis of Alcoholics Anonymous (http://www.dickb.com/Akron.shtml); and Turning Point: A Histsory of Early A.A.’s Spiritual Roots and Successes (http://www.dickb.com/Turning.shtml).

Henrietta Buckler Seiberling: Henrietta was the Christian non-alcoholic woman who, in Bill Wilson’s own words, worked together with Anne Smith and “infused much needed spirituality into Bob and me” while Bill lived with the Smiths in the summer of 1935. It was Henrietta’s determination to get Bob sober that brought the Christian fellowship and Dr. Bob to prayer on their knees for his recovery. It was she who received the initial call from Bill Wilson that caused her to declare that Bill was “manna from heaven” and quickly recognized a God-given opportunity to help Dr. Bob. It was she who immediately introduced Bob to Bill at her home. It was she who “called the shots” at most of the early, weekly meetings. And here also, you will find much much more in my titles, Henrietta B. Seiberling: Ohio’s Lady with a Cause (http://dickb.com/HenriettaSeiberling.shtml); The Akron Genesis of Alcoholics Anonymous (http://www.dickb.com/Akron.sthml); Turning Point: A History of Early A.A. (http://www.dickb.com/Turning.shml); and my own biographical chapter on Henrietta in the Hazelden title, Women Pioneers.

Grace Moore Snyder: Grace was the woman of God who was steeped in Christian training and upbringing; earned and maintained long-term sobriety as an AA; married A.A. pioneer Clarence H. Snyder; and learned the facts from Clarence about the real, early A.A. program. It was she who joined Clarence Snyder in conducting many many spiritual retreats for AAs and their families. It was she who literally devoted her life to bringing as many kids as possible “to the Lord” (as she put it). You will find the Clarence-Grace details is my title That Amazing Grace: The Role of Clarence and Grace S. in Alcoholics Anonymous (http://dickb.com/AmazGrac.shtml). There is more about their work in the How It Worked title by Mitch K. and in the Our Legacy book edited and compiled by me for its Three A.A. Oldtimer Clarence Snyder Sponsees and their Wives—which can be read and obtained through www.cametobelieve.org.
.
Why These Three Christian Women

As to Anne Ripley Smith: There are so many details about Dr. Bob’s wife and her Bible that I can only summarize them here. Anne began reading the Bible to Dr. Bob and Bill throughout the summer of 1935. She kept a journal from 1933 to 1939 in which she recorded all the facets of the early A.A. program. She shared its contents with, and discussed the subjects therein, with Bill and Bob. Also with early AAs and their families at daily morning quiet times at the Smith Home. She often read from and discussed the Bible in the early and later meetings of Akron Number One—later known as the King School Group. She formed the first women’s group as early as 1936—one year after A.A. was founded. She even counseled Lois Wilson in Lois’s trying times when wives were meeting as a “kitchen group” in the Wilson home. She recommended the reading of all sorts of Christian books. And her most significant statement—recorded in her journal—was:

"Of course the Bible ought to be the main Source Book of all. Not a day should pass without reading it.”

And she made specific suggestions about the portions that should be read, and in what order. I was perhaps the first person in recent years to obtain a copy of her Journal and review it carefully for its 64 pages of spiritual principles and practices taught to and discussed with AAs and their families. Anne was a graduate of Wellesley and had experience as a teacher. She and Dr. Bob attended several churches in Akron and took their children to Sunday school there. All the evidence I saw indicated that Anne was particularly able to make newcomers feel welcome, work with the wives of alcoholics, be a regular fixture at early meetings, and counsel both AAs and their families from her journal, at morning quiet times, and in the Smith home where many lived from time to time. One long-time friend Florence B. wrote that Anne was “evangelist, nurse, salesman, employment bureau all in one” and that “Anne’s personal religion was simple and workable. She never sought to rewrite the Bible nor to explain it. She just accepted it.”

Henrietta Buckler Seiberling: I believe I was the first person to interview each of Henrietta’s three children in depth about Henrietta’s A.A. role and about her statements, reading, teaching, and Bible studies. From her son John Seiberling, who attended early A.A. meetings with his mother, I was told the specific verses she treasured in the teachings of Jesus and in the later portions of the New Testament—such as Corinthians and 1 John. Henrietta’s older daughter Mary Seiberling Huhn wrote me a great many letters about her mother’s Bible remarks, beliefs, and studies. And I visited the Town House in New York where her younger daughter Dorothy lived with her husband. There I was permitted to review Henrietta’s own Bible, look at and copy the dozens of handwritten notes she had placed in it, and hear Dorothy’s comments about how her mother viewed the Bible. Henrietta’s entire family attended a Presbyterian church in Akron. And Henrietta’s voluminous reading of Christian books and pamphlets somewhat closely paralleled the same Christian titles that Dr. Bob read and circulated widely among early AAs and their families. Henrietta, a Vassar Graduate, was particularly capable in her teaching Christian materials and frequently did so in the early meetings. She was forceful, articulate, Bible-oriented, and personally compassionate in dealing with AAs.

Grace Moore Snyder: Though her role in Alcoholics Anonymous came much later in the A.A. timeline (as compared to the Anne Smith—Henrietta Seiberling period), it was highly effective, personal, and Bible-oriented. In a very real sense, it paralleled the outspoken enthusiasm for Bible study so clearly evident in the service of Anne Smith and Henrietta Seiberling years before. From her earliest years, Grace worshipped at, attended, and participated in churches. I heard Grace speak at several of the retreats she and Clarence had founded or led. I saw her bring many newcomers to Christ at those retreats. I saw her pray for individuals in need. I heard her frequently refer to the Bible. And, in preparation for the book I wrote about her, my son Ken and I spent a week at her home in Florida learning what she had received and passed along from Clarence. I carefully examined her several thoroughly marked Bibles, heard her talk about important Scriptural ideas and passages, and interviewed her in depth about how she and Clarence had sponsored so many in Alcoholics Anonymous—always stressing salvation and fidelity to the truth of God’s Word. Grace was an attractive, loving, and dedicated servant of our Heavenly Father and of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Encouraging and Useful News for Christian Women
In Recovery Today

The recovery population and its present-day membership sources: I can’t pretend to be a surveyor or statistician when it comes to how many incoming newcomers, of which gender and from which source, enter recovery fellowships today. Nor what their religious persuasion may or may not be. In fact, there is probably a totally inadequate understanding of the believer, unbeliever, and non-believer recovery numbers today. But what I can report is information gained from having been much involved in a treatment center and its after-care program, from attending thousands of A.A. meetings around the United States, from receiving hundreds and hundreds of letters, emails, and phone calls from all over the world, from connections with the penal and hospital systems, and from wide reading and wide speaking experience in various types of recovery fellowships—religious retreats, Christian recovery conventions and conferences, and congregations of Christian counselors and facilitators. Nonetheless, I make this disclaimer as an “expert” statistician because I simply speak as a male who was a Christian before, during, and after recovery fellowship involvement. I speak also as one who has sponsored more than 100 men, sponsored four women, and often been a speaker at mixed-gender recovery meetings of all kinds. Often, the Bible was discussed, studied, and used.

Where the new people seem to come from: Today’s newcomers come from a wide variety of sources—court ordered attendance, treatment center sponsored attendance, referrals by therapists and psychologists and physicians, referrals by government programs and agencies, referrals by churches and clergy and non-profit agencies, interventions, and by walking through the doors. In almost every case, they come encumbered by a variety of disasters that are drinking-related—job loss, divorce, death, physical illness, accident, abuse, abandonment, injury, debt, loss of a companion or relative or relationship, imprisonment, hospitalization, severe health and withdrawal problems, and just plain despair.

Their religious or irreligious convictions: My own experience as an AA “member,” as a sponsor, and as a recovery observer tells me that few enter our rooms for religious reasons. Few enter our rooms intent on pursuing a religious solution. Moreover, few enter intending to oppose religions, churches, Christianity, Bible study, or prayer. In fact, there is so little mention of A.A. in company with religion that they probably don’t even know there is an issue. Their overwhelming burden of rampant drinking gone bad hardly produces an inevitable prejudice about any particular kind of solution.

The changes that confront them. It doesn’t take long for prejudice to rear its ugly head! These same bewildered, sick, confused, fearful, and despondent new people will soon hear phrases like “A.A. is not religious;” or “A.A. is spiritual but not religious;” or “all you need is a willingness to believe in some power greater than yourself,” or that your “higher power” can be anything you like—from a radiator to Santa Claus, from a door knob to a light bulb, from an A.A. group to good-orderly-direction, from a tree to the Great Pumpkin; or that sharing about your reading of the Bible, being a Christian, going to church, or praying in the name of Jesus is contrary to the “Traditions” and introduces “outside issues” not appropriate for an A.A. meeting; or that reading or bringing to a meeting or discussing any literature that is not “Conference Approved” is forbidden. That’s all news to entering persons. They don’t want to be preached to, be admonished, be taught definitions, or be pounded with higher power nonsense. Further, the nonsense material is usually presented dogmatically, critically, and in an intimidating fashion which quickly forces the wary new person into silence about God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Bible, his church, his religion, or his religious beliefs.

Newcomers aren’t looking for a religious battle. The point is that people don’t come to a recovery fellowship looking for a scrap over religious matters. They just hurt. They just suffer. And they just want to believe someone will help them get over and out of their troubles—last, but not least, over their drinking problem yet to be defined in their own minds. I expected and found A.A. to be such a place when I entered the rooms.

The plain language of recovery books, literature, and articles: Strange it is that a newcomer may hear or notice frequent mention of Bible words or verses. Language such as “Creator,” “Maker,” “Father of lights,” “Father,” “Spirit” (all capitalized) and such verses as “Thy will be done,” “Faith without works is dead,” “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” and many more. Then there is that plain, simple, easily understood word “God.” It is always capitalized. It was used in the Third edition of A.A.’s basic text over 400 times, counting the capitalized pronouns and Biblical “names” for God. Then there are plain, simple, frequent references to forgiveness, restitution, confession, prayer, meditation, minister, rabbi, priest, God-sufficiency, God’s will, and many more words commonly derived from the Bible, religion, and churches. These words leave no doubt in the mind of the Judges who are called to rule on the nature of A.A. and 12 Step programs that the program is clearly a religious one, albeit a confused conglomeration of religious chatter. And if reasonable judicial experts, religious leaders, doctors, and Bible students use such ideas, how can any new person conclude that God, the Bible, religion, priests, and God’s will are anything but OK. I quickly reached that conclusion. I felt comfortable with God. I felt comfortable talking about the Bible. And I felt comfortable mentioning the Bible fellowship to which I belonged. In fact, my sponsees and I called our group “the God squad.”

But that lasted only until I saw people chastised for bringing a Bible to a meeting, chastised for mentioning Jesus Christ, chastised for discussing New Thought literature written by Emmet Fox, and chastised for even mentioning early A.A.’s Christian origins, roots, principles, and practices. One good friend said she was going to “bar” her women sponsees from coming to a huge A.A. history meeting where A.A.’s New York Archivist, Dr. Bob’s son, and the writer of Pass It On were scheduled to speak. She saw mention of the word “Christian” in a flyer. And that terminated her support for the ideas that her sponsees could attend. 800 others did!

But consider the facts that were and are at stake in any such denial. Early AAs got completely well. They were cured. They recovered. And they never drank again. Very few did that. But those who totally gave themselves to the early program achieved astonishing success. In that group, a documented 75% succeeded. And that raises the question whether their actions warrant our knowing about them today when it comes to choosing an option for attempted recovery.

One way is to learn about the three Christian women leaders who helped bring about healings by the power of God within the great fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous. That doesn’t make A.A. Christian. But it can and will make AAs wise.

Gloria Deo

Dick B., PO Box 837, Kihei, HI 96753-0837; 808 874 4876; http://www.dickb.com/index.shtml

EDIT: Received by Dick B. via Email in an Attachment that was in Times New Roman Font. I have reproduced the educational information here best I could. ~ PSL

<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>

  • CASA 12-Steps Blog
    http://casa-12steps.blogspot.com/

  • CASA-12-Steps-Program Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CASA-12-Steps-Program/
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • Monday, May 12, 2008

    The Twelve Steps of Co-Dependents Anonymous* and More


    http://www.healthyrelationships.org/CoDA_steps.htm

    1. We admitted we were powerless over others —that our lives had become unmanageable.

    2. Came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

    3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood God.

    4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

    5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

    6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

    7. Humbly asked God to remove our shortcomings.

    8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

    9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

    10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it.

    11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood God, praying only for knowledge of God’s will for us and the power to carry that out.

    12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to other codependents, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

    * The Twelve Steps reprinted for adaptation with permission of
    Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc.

    Passage is taken from the "big book" of CoDependents Anonymous, pg.25-26.

    http://www.healthyrelationships.org/CoDA_patterns.htm

    CHARACTERISTICS

    What is Codependency?

    These patterns and characteristics are offered as a tool to aid in self-evaluation. They may be particularly helpful to newcomers as they begin to understand co-dependency and may aid those who have been in recovery awhile in determining what traits still need attention and transformation.

    DENIAL PATTERNS:

    —Codependents have difficulty identifying what they are feeling.

    —They minimize, alter or deny how they truly feel.

    —They perceive themselves as completely unselfish and dedicated to the wellbeing of others.

    LOW SELF-ESTEEM PATTERNS:

    —Codependents have difficulty making decisions.

    —They judge everything they think, say or do harshly, as never "good enough".

    —They do not ask others to meet their needs or desires.

    —They value others’ approval of their thinking, feelings and behaviors over their own.

    —They do not perceive themselves as lovable or worthwhile persons.

    COMPLIANCE PATTERNS:

    —Codependents compromise their own values and integrity to avoid rejection or others’ anger.

    —They are very sensitive to how others are feeling and feel the same.

    —They are extremely loyal, remaining in harmful situations too long.

    —They value others’ opinions and feelings more than their own and are often afraid to express differing opinions and feelings of their own.

    —They put aside their own interests and hobbies in order to do what others want.

    —They accept sex when they want love.

    CONTROL PATTERNS:

    —Codependents believe most other people are incapable of taking care of themselves.

    —They attempt to convince others of what they "should" think and how they "truly" feel.

    —They become resentful when others will not let them help them.

    —They freely offer others advice and directions without being asked.

    —They lavish gifts and favors on those they care about.

    —They use sex to gain approval and acceptance.

    —They have to be "needed" in order to have a relationship with others.

    Passage is taken from the "big book" of CoDependents Anonymous, pg.4-6.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    http://www.healthyrelationships.org/Codependency.htm

    Official CoDA Website

    Co-Dependents Anonymous Big Book
    Order the CoDA Big Book

    Facing Codependence by Pia Mellody
    Order the BOOK Order the TAPE

    Codependents' Guide to the 12 Steps
    by Melody Beattie

    Order the BOOK Order the TAPE



    How to stop controlling others and start caring for yourself.

    Order 2 Books in 1

    Codependent No More
    by Melody Beattie
    Order the BOOK
    Order the TAPE

    Beyond Codependency
    by Melody Beattie
    Order the BOOK Order the TAPE


    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • CASA 12-Steps Blog
    http://casa-12steps.blogspot.com/

  • CASA-12-Steps-Program Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CASA-12-Steps-Program/
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • Sunday, May 11, 2008

    The Secret: A NEW ERA FOR HUMANKIND


    What Is The Secret
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>

  • CASA 12-Steps Blog
    http://casa-12steps.blogspot.com/

  • CASA-12-Steps-Program Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CASA-12-Steps-Program/
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • Saturday, May 10, 2008

    PsychoHeresy: C. G. Jung's Legacy to the Church


    http://www.psychoheresy-aware.org/jungleg.html

    The overwhelming majority of Christians have probably never heard of C. G. Jung, but his influence in the church is vast and affects sermons, books, and activities, such as the prolific use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) by seminaries and missionary organizations. A current, popular example of Jung's legacy can be seen in Robert Hicks's book The Masculine Journey, which was given to each of the 50,000 men whoattended the 1993 Promise Keepers conference. Christians need to learn enough about Jung and his teachings to be warned and wary.

    Jung's legacy to "Christian psychology" is both direct and indirect. Some professing Christians, who have been influenced by Jung's teachings, integrate aspects of Jungian theory into their own practice of psychotherapy. They may incorporate his notions regarding personality types, the personal unconscious, dream analysis, and various archetypes in their own attempt to understand and counsel their clients. Other Christians have been influenced more indirectly as they have engaged in inner healing, followed 12-step programs, or taken the MBTI, which is based on Jung's personality types and incorporates his theories of introversion and extroversion.

    Jung and Freud

    Jung's legacy has not enhanced Christianity. From its inception psychotherapy has undermined the doctrines of Christianity. Sigmund Freud's attitudes towards Christianity were obviously hostile, since he believed that religious doctrines are all illusions and labeled all religion as "the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity."1 His one-time follower and colleague Carl Jung, on the other hand, may not be quite as obvious in his disdain for Christianity. However, his theories have disdainfully diminished Christian doctrines by putting them at the same level as those of all religions.

    While Jung did not call religion a "universal obsessional neurosis," he did view all religions, including Christianity, to be collective mythologies - not real in essence, but having a real effect on the human personality. Dr. Thomas Szasz describes the difference between the psychoanalytic theories of the two men this way: "Thus in Jung's view religions are indispensable spiritual supports, whereas in Freud's they are illusory crutches."2 While Freud argued that religions are delusionary and therefore evil, Jung contended that all religions are imaginary but good. Both positions are anti-Christian; one denies Christianity and the other mythologizes it..

    After reading Freud's Interpretation of Dreams, Jung contacted Freud and a friendship with mutual admiration ensued and lasted about eight years. Even though Jung had served four years as the first president of the International Psychoanalytic Association, the break between Jung and Freud was complete. Jung departed from Freud on a number of points, particularly Freud's sex theory. In addition, Jung had been developing his own theory and methodology, known as analytical psychology.

    The Collective Unconscious

    Jung taught that the psyche consists of various systems including the personal unconscious with its complexes and a collective unconscious with its archetypes. Jung's theory of a personal unconscious is quite similar to Freuds creation of a region containing a person's repressed, forgotten or ignored experiences. However, Jung considered the personal unconscious to be a "more or less superficial layer of the unconscious." Within the personal unconscious are what he called "feeling-toned complexes." He said that "they constitute the personal and private side of psychic life."3 These are feelings and perceptions organized around significant persons or events in the person's life.

    Jung believed that there was a deeper and more significant layer of the unconscious, which he called the collective unconscious, with what he identified as archetypes, which he believed were innate, unconscious, and generally universal. Jung's collective unconscious has been described as a "storehouse of latent memory traces inherited from man's ancestral past, a past that includes not only the racial history of man as a separate species but his pre-human or animal ancestry as well."4 Therefore, Jung's theory incorporates Darwin's theory of evolution as well as ancient mythology. Jung taught that this collective unconscious is shared by all people and is therefore universal. However, since it is unconscious, not all people are able to tap into it. Jung saw the collective unconscious as the foundational structure of personality on which the personal unconscious and the ego are built. Because he believed that the foundations of personality are ancestral and universal, he studied religions, mythology, rituals, symbols, dreams and visions. He says:

    All esoteric teachings seek to apprehend the unseen happenings in the psyche, and all claim supreme authority for themselves. What is true of primitive lore is true in even higher degree of the ruling world religions. They contain a revealed knowledge that was originally hidden, and they set forth the secrets of the soul in glorious images.5

    Jung's View of Christianity

    However, because Jung left room for religion, many Christians felt more comfortable with his ideas. Thus it is important to look at Jung's attitudes towards Christianity. His father was a Protestant minister, and Jung experienced aspects of the Christian faith while growing up. He wrote the following about his early experience with the Holy Communion, which seems to be related to his later ideas about religions being only myths:

    Slowly I came to understand that this communion had been a fatal experience for me. It had proved hollow; more than that, it had proved to be a total loss. I knew that I would never again be able to participate in this ceremony. "Why, that is not religion at all," I thought. "It is the absence of God; the church is a place I should not go to. It is not life which is there, but death."6

    From that one significant incident, Jung could have proceeded to deny all religions, but he didn't. Instead, he evidently saw that religion was very meaningful to many people and that religions could be useful as myths. His choice to consider all religions as myths was further influenced by his view of psychoanalysis. According to Viktor Von Weizsaecker, "C. G. Jung was the first to understand that psychoanalysis belonged in the sphere of religion."7 That Jung's theories constitute a religion can be seen in his view of God as the collective unconscious and thereby present in each person's unconscious. For him religions revealed aspects of the unconscious and could thus tap into a person's psyche. He also used dreams as avenues into the psyche for self-understanding and self-exploration. Religion was only a tool to tap into the self and if a person wanted to use Christian symbols that was fine with him.

    Jung's Spirit Guide

    Because Jung turned psychoanalysis into a type of religion, he is also considered to be a transpersonal psychologist as well as a psychoanalytical theorist. He delved deeply into the occult, practiced necromancy, and had daily contact with disembodied spirits, which he called archetypes. Much of what he wrote was inspired by such entities. Jung had his own familiar spirit whom he called Philemon. At first he thought Philemon was part of his own psyche, but later on he found that Philemon was more than an expression of his own inner self. Jung says:

    Philemon and other figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life. Philemon represented a force which was not myself. In my fantasies I held conversations with him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought. For I observed clearly that it was he who spoke, not I. . . . Psychologically, Philemon represented superior insight. He was a mysterious figure to me. At times he seemed to me quite real, as if he were a living personality. I went walking up and down the garden with him, and to me he was what the Indians call a guru.8

    One can see why Jung is so very popular among New Agers.

    Jung's AA Influence

    Jung also played a role in the development of Alcoholics Anonymous. Cofounder Bill Wilson wrote the following in a letter to Jung in 1961:

    This letter of great appreciation has been very long overdue. . . . Though you have surely heard of us [AA], I doubt if you are aware that a certain conversation you once had with one of your patients, a Mr. Roland H., back in the early 1930's did play a critical role in the founding of our fellowship.9

    Wilson continued the letter by reminding Jung of what he had "frankly told [Roland H.] of his hopelessness," that he was beyond medical or psychiatric help. Wilson wrote: "This candid and humble statement of yours was beyond doubt the first foundation stone upon which our society has since been built." When Roland H. had asked Jung if there was any hope for him Jung "told him that there might be, provided he could become the subject of a spiritual or religious experience - in short, a genuine conversion." Wilson continued in his letter: "You recommended that he place himself in a religious atmosphere and hope for the best."10 As far as Jung was concerned, there was no need for doctrine or creed, only an experience.

    It is important to note that Jung could not have meant conversion to Christianity, because as far as Jung was concerned all religion is simply myth - a symbolic way of interpreting the life of the psyche. To Jung, conversion simply meant a totally dramatic experience that would profoundly alter a person's outlook on life. Jung himself had blatantly rejected Christianity and turned to idolatry. He replaced God with a myriad of mythological archetypes.

    Jung's response to Wilson's letter included the following statement about Roland H.:

    His craving for alcohol was the equivalent, on a low level, of the spiritual thirst of our being for wholeness; expressed in medieval language: the union with God.11

    In his letter Jung mentioned that in Latin the same word is used for alcohol as for "the highest religious experience." Even in English, alcohol is referred to as spirits. But, knowing Jung's theology and privy counsel with a familiar spirit, one must conclude that the spirit he is referring to is not the Holy Spirit, and the god he is talking about is not the God of the Bible, but rather a counterfeit spirit posing as an angel of light and leading many to destruction.

    Jung's Blasphemy

    Jung's neo-paganism and his desire to replace Christianity with his own concept of psychoanalysis can be seen in a letter he wrote to Freud:

    I imagine a far finer and more comprehensive task for [psychoanalysis] than alliance with an ethical fraternity. I think we must give it time to infiltrate into people from many centers, to revivify among intellectuals a feeling for symbol and myth, ever so gently to transform Christ back into the soothsaying god of the vine, which he was, and in this way absorb those ecstatic instinctual forces of Christianity for the one purpose of making the cult and the sacred myth what they once were - a drunken feast of joy where man regained the ethos and holiness of an animal.12

    Thus Jung's goal for psychoanalysis was to be an all-encompassing religion superior to Christianity, reducing its truth to myth and transmogrifying Christ into a "soothsaying god of the vine." God's answer to such blasphemy can be seen in Psalm 2:

    Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
    The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
    Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
    He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
    Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

    Christians dabble in Jung's religion when they incorporate his notions about man and deity through imbibing in his theories, therapies, and notions that have filtered down through other psychotherapies, through 12-step programs, through inner healing, through dream analysis, and through personality types and tests.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    End Notes
    1. Sigmund Freud. The Future of an Illusion, trans. and edited by James Strachey. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., 1961, p. 43.
    2. Thomas Szasz. The Myth of Psychotherapy. Garden City: Doubleday/Anchor Press, 1978, p. 173.
    3. C. G. Jung. The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, 2nd ed., trans. by R.F.C. Hull. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969, p. 4.
    4. Calvin S. Hall and Gardner Lindzey. Theories of Personality. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1957, p. 80.
    5. Jung, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, op. cit., p. 7.
    6. C. G. Jung. Memories, Dreams, Reflections, ed. by Aniela Jaffe, trans. by Richard and Clara Winston. New York: Pantheon, 1963, p. 55.
    7. Victor Von Weizsaecker, "Reminiscences of Freud and Jung." Freud and the Twentieth Century, B. Nelson, ed. New York: Meridian, 1957, p. 72.
    8. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, op. cit., p. 183.
    9. "Spiritus contra Spiritum: The Bill Wilson/C.G. Jung Letters: The roots of the Society of Alcoholics Anonymous." Parabola, Vol. XII, No. 2, May 1987, p. 68.
    10. Ibid., p. 69.
    11. Ibid., p. 71.
    12. C. G. Jung quoted by Richard Noll. The Jung Cult. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994, p. 188.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries, 4137 Primavera Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93110

    Return to: Article Topics | Titles | Top

    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • CASA 12-Steps Blog
    http://casa-12steps.blogspot.com/

  • CASA-12-Steps-Program Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CASA-12-Steps-Program/
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • "No Intimate Relationships During the First Year of Sobriety!" by Daniel Linder MA, MFT,


    http://www.sober.com/blogs/relationship_recovery/archive/2007/11/26/no-intimate-relationships-during-the-first-year-of-sobriety.html

    ~ as featured in March 2007 issue of Recovery Today.

    Recovering addicts hear this all the time in 12-step programs. However, this sound bit of wisdom is rarely heeded. Many have a hard time accepting that a hiatus from intimate relationships is necessary. In their minds, dating and new relationships seem benign. “As long as I’m not using and we’re not using and are in a program, I’m safe.” Not so fast. Getting into an intimate relationship prematurely is, as my mother would say, “Ill-conceived, ill-advised and ill-consummated.”

    Odds are more than fifty percent of marriages will end in divorce for the general population. Want to venture a guess as to the odds for those in early recovery who test this cardinal rule?

    Despite one’s best laid plans or intentions to not re-enact the same dysfunction and failures of previous relationships, the odds are overwhelmingly against the relationship -- doomed to be dysfunctional or have a shortened life expectancy.

    Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule, but assuming that we would not want our emotional and mental well-being to hinge on a miracle, is it worth the risk? But this is not what the recovering addict is thinking about. When it comes to delaying gratification, when it comes to ‘choosing’ between ‘one step at a time’ versus ‘all at once,’ thinking in terms of gradual and taking time to develop and being objective and realistic are not how addicts are wired. There is no point of reference. Most recovering addicts don’t realize that admitting to being out of control and surrendering to their powerlessness, as having done so in Steps I and II, also apply to their emotions when dating and in early stage relationships.

    The problem is not the relationship or the intimacy. It’s the sex. Sex tends to increase one’s level of emotional involvement and intensity of feelings, especially for women. Men tend to cope by splitting off from their feelings; that is, are more likely to engage in sexual relationships while remaining emotionally divorced or superficial. Sex is a trigger for emotional over-involvement or under-involvement relative to the stage of relationship. Either way, each one’s inability to manage his/her own emotional needs and provide self-nourishment will eventually jeopardize the developing relationship.

    What often happens is that sex, exciting enough as it is, often leads to an infusion of romantic feelings, which can further heighten the excitement, which then awakens the “sleeping giant” -- the backlog of unmet emotional needs from previous relationships. The “giant” awakens (emotionally) ravenous and is not aware of the extent his/her hunger drives the relationship. Our unmet emotional needs reside in our unconscious and are sealed off from our awareness.

    It’s during the first year of recovery that the addict is to learn how to break the cycle of addiction. A year of sobriety and ‘relationship abstinence’ are meant to allow a sufficient amount of time to deal with one’s own emotions without having to resort to his/her addiction, to build self-awareness and to become responsible for one’s own emotional care. Rather than relying on an external source for relief or emotional gain, which is what s/he is accustomed to do, s/he begins to look internally, to rely on oneself as a source of emotional nourishment.

    “The most important relationship is with oneself” poses a complete paradigm shift to the recovering addict. If the necessary amount of time to grow the relationship with oneself hasn’t lapsed, chances are the recovering addict will do what they’ve been accustomed to do all of their lives; that is to look outside of oneself for relief or to make up for what is missing emotionally.

    When unmet emotional needs begin to get played out in the relationship, the relationship can become an addictive or dysfunctional one, which further perpetuates the cycle of addiction. There may be excitement and hope at the beginning, but it’s only be a matter of time before increasing strife, stress and dysfunction lead to the relationship’s demise. An additional factor of concern is that dysfunctional and failed relationships dramatically increase the risk of relapse.

    At the 5 month point of a sustained period of ‘relationship abstinence,’ Linda, a recovering alcoholic, proceeded to date a man, Jack, whom she met at a 12-Step meeting. Jack had been sober 10 years.

    After approximately 5 dates during 3 weeks of dating him, the “writing was on the wall.” Linda had sex with him on the third date, which felt like quite an accomplishment that she was able to wait “so long.” When I asked her to assess the level of her emotional involvement, she thought about it awhile before saying in a tone of wonderment, “Not too much I hope. Noticed myself checking my phone messages more frequently than usual. That’s all.” She was referring his anticipated return from being out of town for several days. She didn’t want to fret about whether he would call her upon his return, but she did. She didn’t want to end up calling him before he called her, but she just couldn’t wait.

    There were other indications of emotional over-involvement. When Linda talked about how she reacted when a couple of overtures she had made to him, i.e. expressing a desire to celebrate his birthday together and a dinner invitation, he suggested they “play it by ear,” she noticed herself getting angry and responding sarcastically to him.

    It was apparent that Linda was looking for assurances that he is still interested. When his assurances weren’t forthcoming, she reacted as if he wasn’t being truthful, that he really wasn’t interested in her or the relationship, which wasn’t the case. He might have been taken aback by the edge in her voice. Linda couldn’t see that she was reacting from wounds of past relationships, from a place of insecurity, and the extent her mental and emotional well being hinged on how he responded to her.

    The challenge for Linda remains the same as for any other recovering addict; taking the time -- how ever long the process of self-reclamation takes, before entering into a sexually, intimate relationship.

    “No intimate relationships during the first year of sobriety” is merely a reminder that it takes a year or so of rigorous participation in a program that is sobriety and self-based before one is emotionally ready to get sexually involved. If entering into such a relationship prematurely, the recovering person, and anyone else for that matter, runs the risk of unresolved dependency issues tainting the newly developing relationship.

    Thank you for your email..... Several inquiries have been made to me regarding the above article: Below is an example of one such email and my response. Daniel
    {{Click Weblink}}

    Daniel Linder MFT is a licensed psychotherapist in the San Francisco Bay Area, Relationship Trainer, Addiction Specialist; Author: Demystifying Addiction, Relationship Recovery and numerous related articles.

    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>

  • CASA 12-Steps Blog
    http://casa-12steps.blogspot.com/

  • CASA-12-Steps-Program Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CASA-12-Steps-Program/
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • Introducing… The Relationship Model of Addiction


    http://www.sober.com/blogs/relationship_recovery/archive/2007/11/26/introducing-the-relationship-model-of-addiction.html

    As featured in the June, 2007 issue of Recovery Today

    In inherent limitation of the medical model is ignoring the fact that ‘pathological dependence’ implies that a relationship, one that is emotional and psychological in nature, has formed with the substance or activity (i.e. gambling, porn, etc.) The ‘pathological dependency’ is a pathological relationship, one in which there is continuous and increasing emotional involvement. The relationship with a source of relief that serves primarily to provide relief from emotional pain or frustration by bringing on a rush or high, pleasure, excitement or as an escape, i.e. use of mind/mood altering substances, gambling, pornography, sex.

    Etiology & Pre-disposing Conditions

    The etiology of addiction may be accounted for as being the result of non-emotionally nourishing relationships. The Relationship Model of Addiction is based on the premise that a relationship with a source of relief is driven by the need to relieve pain from unmet emotional needs. Emotionally based pain comes from unmet emotional needs, and leaves one in a dysphoric state thirsting for euphoria, or the most easily accessible, effective means of relief possible.

    What happens when we’re deprived of emotional nourishment? When we are unloved, don’t receive the affection, attention, acknowledgment and appreciation we require? When we don’t feel heard and understood? When we don’t feel like we belong, or are special in anyway? When we don’t feel connected to someone? There is a build-up of hunger, shame and emptiness and the need to relieve this pain takes over. At some point, desperation sets in. One way or another, we’ll find relief. We’ll either find external sources of relief in the form of substances, activities or other relationships, and rely on tried and proven defense mechanisms at our disposal in the form of denial, delusion and deception.

    The Relationship Model of Addiction establishes a new standard for understanding and treating addiction. It expands the disease concept by re-defining addiction as a relationship. The model accounts for the cause of addiction as related to the preponderance of non-emotionally nourishing relationships, unmet emotional needs, the resultant pain and need to relieve that pain. It identifies pre-disposing conditions as a backlog of pain, general state of dysphoria that goes beyond past and current relationships and includes the much larger social context. We know that despite the fact that this pain is subjective in nature, it is no less real or consequential that physical pain. Therefore we may assume that the greater the emotional deprivation, the greater the pain, the greater the need to relieve that pain and the more susceptible one is to becoming addicted.

    The Relationship Model brings forth phenomenological or experiential, humanistic and existential perspectives; sheds light on the psychological dynamics of addiction; and holds profound treatment implications. We know that recovering addicts must eventually make the transition from “pathologically” dependent relationships based on the need for relief to sober healthy, intimate, emotionally nourishing relationships. Regardless of one’s experience in past and current relationships, learning some basic principles, pitfalls, challenges and skills, can be an empowering turning point and unleash one’s creative potential.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Daniel - A lot of what you're saying rings true to me. I know that when I was getting sober the big AHA! moment came when I realized that continued success wasn't about maintaining a negative relationship with alcohol, but starting to develop and deepen a positive relationship with life. And that's played out in my coaching career as well - when I can get clients to focus on being in a relationship with themselves and with life they tend to sustain growth and progress. Thank you for your insight.

    StephenC
    ++++++++
    Daniel Linder is a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist, Addiction Specialist and Relationship Trainer in the San Francisco Bay Area. Author: Demystifying Addiction (The Relationship Model of Addiction) Relational Recovery, just released: Intimacy, The Essence of True Love, and numerous related articles.

    Website: http://www.RelationshipVision.com

    Addiction, Recovery, Relationship Blog: http://www.sober.com/blogs/relationship_recovery/

    To order Books: http://www.relationshipvision.com/books.html

    E-mail: Daniel@RelationshipVision.com

    Published Monday, November 26, 2007 5:00 AM by RelationshipVision
    Filed under: substance abuse, addiction, recovery, recovery coaching, Introducing...The Relationship Model of Addiction

    From Peta51=
    I appreciate your sharing with us all. I advocate the concept of quality progressive recovery that sees the recovering addict as a triune being of ‘mind-body-soul’. I believe many recovering addicts lack a strong spiritual component in their recovery that makes them more susceptible to suffering a slip that can easily lead to a relapse back into the perils of active addiction. The primary relationship should be with the Creator God as a true higher power, that is, a communion with the Creator via prayer, meditation and spiritual enlightenment. This may seem like mere New Ageism, but such humility helps the recovering addict actually achieve a real cure from the ailments of his or her addiction. The concepts embedded in the 12-Steps of the Big Book came from the Holy Bible. Plus, we need to avoid the individualism typical of the addict, the me-first mentality and put more of an emphasis on helping others. Naturally we need to understand ourselves deeper than ever and process the pain that goes along with that self-understanding, plus, remember the elements involved in our family-of-origin, but we must also address our ‘conscious contact with God’ in order to see ourselves with a humble perspective for our continued progressive recovery and spiritual growth.

    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>

  • CASA 12-Steps Blog
    http://casa-12steps.blogspot.com/

  • CASA-12-Steps-Program Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CASA-12-Steps-Program/
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • Tuesday, May 06, 2008

    The Christian Recovery Movement: A Brief Introduction:
    by Dale Ryan


    http://www.nacronline.com/dox/library/daler/survey.shtml

    This is an edited transcript of a talk presented by Dale Ryan at the ISAAC convention in Madrid, Spain in May, 2003. It is intended to provide a general overview of the Christian recovery movement in the US for people working in other parts of the world.

    The particular task I've been given for today is to talk about how the Christian Recovery movement has developed in the United States. This is a very large subject and we have only a little time so I will necessarily skip a lot of material. I want to emphasize at the beginning that the sorts of developments that have taken place in the United States may or may not represent a useful model for other cultural situations. I suspect that there are things to be learned from our experience in the United States but there are many unique features to our experience as well. What has worked here needs careful examination before it is adapted to other situations.

    It is not possible to talk about the Christian Recovery movement in the United States without talking first about Alcoholics Anonymous. In the 1930s, if you look at what was available for alcoholics who wanted help--there was almost nothing. The most common way of understanding addictions at that time was that if you were an addict or an alcoholic you were just a bad person. That was about as sophisticated as it got. There were good people and there were bad people and if you were an addict you were a bad person. This is really not an observation that is very helpful to recovering addicts. Most addicts already know--or suspect--that they are bad people and having you emphasize this fact doesn't really seem to help at all. To make a long story very short, God chose a couple of hopeless addicts to start a ministry called Alcoholics Anonymous that offered an entirely different--and dramatically more helpful--perspective on addictions.

    It probably should not surprise us that God chose a couple of hopeless drunks to start something important--rather than picking a couple of professors at a seminary or a couple of respected pastors. God did in this case what he has done many times throughout history--he picked people who did not have the respect of their communities to head up major advances in his Kingdom. Moses is the first example that comes to mind--he certainly did not have the credibility he thought he needed.

    In the mid 1930s, these two hopeless drunks developed a programme that seemed to be helpful. What they did was this: they looked at the Christian discipleship programmes available at the time, took what seemed to be the best of those programmes and adapted them so that they had a discipleship programme that was optimised for alcoholics. This developed into the Twelve Step Programme. One of the core principles of the Programme was that it required people to recover in community. It wasn"t possible, they decided, to recover by yourself. You could try to not drink by yourself. But this does not appear to be a successful strategy for alcoholics--trying to not drink. Every alcoholic I have ever known has decided not to drink. They have typically made this decision not to drink many times--but always unsuccessfully. So, merely encouraging alcoholics not to drink is not a very helpful programme for recovery. It just doesn't work. You need, or so the founders of A.A. were convinced, a supportive community. And in addition to a supportive community, the founders of Alcoholics Anonymous believed that you needed a spiritual transformation. Their conviction was that a successful programme involved not a self-help programme--not even just a mutual-help programme--but a God-help programme. You needed God's help. There is a lot of work for recovering alcoholics to do in Twelve Step Programmes, but when it comes down to the fundamental changes that need to be made, the most that we can do in recovery is to be ready for God to make the changes that need to be made. As a result, many of the spiritual disciplines which you find in the Twelve Step programme are focused on becoming ready for God to do the things that need to be done.

    Developments in the Twelve Step Movement

    In the early years Alcoholics Anonymous was intended for hopeless drunks--people who had lost everything. The people who became involved in the programme were typically long-term, late-stage alcoholics. They were not 'problem drinkers' or people who had other kinds of problems. Several factors have, however, profoundly changed the character of A.A. since it"s founding. First, it has grown. In the 1930s and 40s there were only dozens of Alcoholics Anonymous groups in the US. In the 50s and 60s there was a dramatic expansion in the numbers of groups--well into the thousands. I don't remember when they broke the 10,000 mark, but thousands and thousands of groups started, because people found it to be a practical help in staying sober. If it was not a practical help these groups would not have been sustainable.

    The second change began when people observed that the spiritual disciplines that are practised in the Twelve Step Programme were helpful to people who were not alcoholics. Drug addicts, for example, were also helped by the social support and spiritual disciplines of the Twelve Step Programme. As a result, a parallel programme to Alcoholics Anonymous emerged for people struggling with different kinds of drug abuse--Narcotics Anonymous. In fact a number of different networks of Twelve Step groups were formed including Cocaine Anonymous, Sexaholics Anonymous, Nicotine Anonymous, Gamblers Anonymous and several others.

    A third major change began when people started to pay attention for the first time to the fact that addiction is not just about the person who is drinking. The alcoholic is not the only person in an alcoholic family who has a problem. The whole family is profoundly engaged in the addictive process. It is not just about the alcohol. If you take away the alcohol from an alcoholic what do you get? You get an alcoholic that has no alcohol to drink! So alcohol is not the problem. Taking away the alcohol does not solve the problem. You just get a "dry drunk" instead of a "wet drunk". But nothing fundamental has changed. The same kind of thing is true of the whole alcoholic family. If you take the alcoholic out of the family system, what do you get? Do you get a healthy family? No, you get an alcoholic family that just doesn't have the alcoholic in it. All the problems remain. This observation--that the whole family system is impacted by one person's addiction--leads rapidly to the conclusion that the kind of intervention that people need is systemic. The practical consequence of this observation was the development of organizations like Alanon and groups for adult children of alcoholics--there are even some groups for grandchildren of alcoholics.

    A fourth thing that has had an effect on the development of the Twelve Step movement, is that people started to get involved in Alcoholics Anonymous who had not lost everything. In the beginning, if you went to an A.A. meeting they might ask you: "Have you lost your job?" or "Have you lost your family?" If your answer was "No" they would often suggest that you probably needed some more experience before you could be helped by the Programme. The thinking was that--because the spiritual disciplines involved in Twelve Step Programmes are so demanding--people will not have the motivation to work the programme unless they have come to the end, unless they've hit bottom, unless the pain is powerful enough to motivate them to do the hard work that will be needed. There is now, of course, a lot of evidence to suggest that it is possible to recover from alcoholism and other addictions without first losing everything. Pain is still the great motivator for recovery. Nobody gets into recovery saying: "I have some extra time this Summer so I think I will either learn how to Scuba dive or get into recovery"! Recovery is not just an optional activity for life-enrichment or a kind of life-style choice. It's almost always something that we feel forced into. We're facing some kind of pain that we simply can't live with. But that is not the same as losing everything. This openness to participation by people who had not lost everything greatly expanded the pool of potential participants in the programme. And it has also led to a dramatic increase in the number of group participants who are not even present voluntarily but who attend meetings as a condition of their parole or by mandate of the legal system.

    All of these factors have resulted in a dramatic expansion of the Twelve Step movement. There are now tens of thousands of groups meeting weekly. Tens of millions of people have participated in recovery groups of one kind or another. And, as a result, some significant changes have taken place in how the average person in the U.S. thinks and feels about addictions.

    Recovery Ministry in the Church

    So where has the church been in all of this? The church has always been an important part of the Twelve Step movement. Alcoholics Anonymous began as a kind of Christian discipleship programme. All of the spiritual disciplines found in the Twelve Steps were disciplines which the founders of A.A. learned from the Rev. Sam Shoemaker, an Episcopal priest who was the head of the Oxford Group movement in the United States. The Oxford Group movement was an evangelical movement in the early part of the twentieth century that emphasized the same kinds of spiritual disciplines that you find today in the Twelve Step movement. And, of course, churches have from the beginning supported A.A. and other Twelve Step movements by providing facilities for group meetings. There has, however, been a lot of criticism of A.A. and other Twelve Step groups--some from the Christian community and some from the culture as a whole.

    The most common current criticism of Alcoholics Anonymous, both within A.A. and in American culture as a whole, is that Alcoholics Anonymous is entirely too Christian. According to many, it is just a thinly disguised Christian evangelical programme. That is the most common criticism. It is an understandable criticism. Just look at the stuff such programmes ask you to do. They ask you to repent, they ask you to make amends, they ask you to do a searching moral inventory of your life, to practice prayer and meditation. All the language is Christian language, all the spiritual disciplines are Christian spiritual disciplines.

    Within the Christian community, however, the most common criticism of A.A. and similar programmes is just the opposite. There the criticism is that A.A. and similar programs are not Christian enough. I do not have time today to explore this particular issue in depth. My own view, briefly, is that the Twelve Steps are a kind of spiritual kindergarten. Bill W., one of the founders of Alcoholics Anonymous often referred to the Twelve Step programme in this way. It was never intended to provide people with "everything you need to know about God." It was, rather, a starting point. The principle was: "keep it simple." And that is what it is--a very simple, but very powerful way to restart life after an addiction has done its damage. To criticise it for not being "Christian enough" seems to me to miss the point entirely. Addicts and alcoholics need a discipleship program that is incredibly basic. Anything more than kindergarten needs to wait for later.

    Because the Twelve Step programme is so deeply rooted in Christian principles, you might think that it is relatively easy for Christian alcoholics to feel comfortable within the programme. Many did. And still do. But others face two frustrating realities. First, because Alcoholics Anonymous was intended to be a kind of spiritual kindergarten--a place to learn the basics--it is often not possible to be as direct about faith as participants would like. The commitment to focus only on the most basic and fundamental of truths--while very helpful to many people early in the recovery process--can become frustrating for many Christian alcoholics. They long for places where they can be both "in recovery" and also be fully open about their Christian faith.

    The second frustration is the church. At church you can be fully Christian. But the church has been, and continues to be, a difficult place for people in recovery to feel safe. You can be a Christian at church. But can you be a person in recovery? Why does it feel so much safer to tell the truth at an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting on Thursday night than it does in a Sunday School class meeting on Sunday morning? Why is A.A. helping me to change my life--to experience the power of God in practical and tangible ways--but church doesn"t seem to have a similar impact? Let me illustrate this frustration with a story.

    I have a friend who is an addict. At the time of this story we had known her for probably 20 years. She was raised in a very abusive Christian home. She left God and Christianity in her early 20s. Over the years we watched as she went about as far away from God as you can get, started to come to her senses, and gradually started to turn back to God. It was a kind of a prodigal daughter story, I guess. I remember sitting in our living room once and she asked me about some verse in the Bible and I literally fell off my chair! It was such a startling thing that she would be asking me a question about anything to do with spirituality. It was such a wonderful thing to see her growing sobriety and interest in seeking God"s will for her life. Here was this person coming all the way back to God. To make a long story short, we finally got the courage to invite her to come to church with us. And she came. At the time, I was working in a church in Southern California at the top of a hill, across the street from a country club--a golf club. It was a very nice church, full of nice people. And we had one of those 'performance-oriented' services where each song leads in a smooth sequence to the next thing and there's never any silence to interrupt the performance, you know, very high performance values! So it was very smooth, and well done, and a very polished sermon that morning by the senior pastor. I was hoping that maybe our friend had a good time, but I didn't know, so I asked her afterwards "So, how did you like it?" She said: "This is the nicest church I have ever been to in my entire life." She couldn't believe how nice it was, how functional it was--things seemed to work. She was particularly struck by watching parents hold hands with their children as they walked out to the parking lot. I thought, "Well, God has really done something in my dear friend's life--think of all the years when she was gone from faith, and now she's come back and she's had a great experience". So I said: "We would be happy to come by and pick you up, if you want to come back next week." She said: "Oh, no! I can't come to this church! Where did these people go before they came to this church? There's got to be a remedial church some place. I want to come here. But I can't come here. At least not yet. I don't even have clothes like these people have clothes. My kids aren't nice kids like these kids. They would make a mess of the Sunday School. There's got to be a church where you can start off with the basics and gradually get healthy enough to come to this church."

    She needed the basics. Not the advanced Christian stuff. Just the basics for now. There is no way that she could get started spiritually at our church. And she certainly could not have started her sobriety at our church. For that, she needed to go to A.A. So, like a large number of Christians in the United States, she started her sobriety in AA. That"s where she learned that shame was not the solution, but part of the problem.

    Bringing Recovery to Church

    There are a variety of ways in which the local church has been involved in the recovery movement. Let me briefly talk about seven different strategies for congregational involvement. I first I call "A.A. in the basement".

    AA In The Basement Strategy

    Historically the most common way for local churches to be involved in recovery ministry is for the church to allow AA or NA or some other organization to meet in church facilities. It is difficult to imagine where AA would be today if it were not for this kind of participation by local churches over the years. Literally hundreds of thousands of people have begun their sobriety in AA meetings in church basements. This is a wonderful kind of ministry for a local church. Even though most of us are very supportive AA and other 'secular' programs, however, something makes us anxious about congregations whose commitment to recovery is limited to this strategy. Why is it that the power for personal transformation is facilitated by an organization external to the local church while the local church contributes only space? Why is recovery ministry at the margins of congregational life rather than at the center? Don't misread me here--I am not suggesting that the church become more entangled with AA. What I am suggesting is that if recovery ministry remains at the margins of congregational life, we will miss enormous opportunities.

    Bridge Strategies

    One way local congregations have attempted to integrate recovery more fully into the life of the congregation is to develop what I call 'bridge' strategies. Most Christians in recovery want a way to 'bridge' the 'recovery' world with the 'Christian' world. Typically local congregations have responded to this need by developing distinctively Christian support groups. These groups are not usually intended to replace A.A. or other Twelve Step groups but rather to 'bridge' to them. Thousands of congregations have established such 'bridge' groups. These safe places are a wonderful resource. In most cases, however, these groups remain marginalized within a congregation. People within the 'bridge' group find help, but the life of the congregation as a whole is only rarely impacted by the ministry.

    Alternative to AA Strategies

    A third approach is rather like 'bridge' strategies in practice but includes an intention to 'replace' secular programs rather than 'bridging' to them. There are several networks of Christian 12 step groups with this intention. Although the intention is different, in practice these groups often serve many of the same functions as 'bridge' groups. In congregations which are overtly hostile to "secular" resources this may be the only kind of recovery ministry which is possible.

    Recovery Department Strategies

    A fourth approach to recovery ministry is for a local congregation to develop a recovery ministry in parallel with it's other ministry 'departments' such as the music ministry 'department' or children's ministry 'department.' In this model, recovery ministry becomes one of the mainstream elements of congregational life. Recovery would not be the central feature of the congregation but it would be fully integrated into the life of the congregation. Congregations which take this approach often develop a wide range of services in addition to 'bridge' support groups. These might include educational programs, long-term 12 Step study groups, retreats and other ministries. Connections with counseling ministries might be part of this strategy as well as employment of pastoral staff members to supervise and coordinate the ministry. The strength of this approach is usually the range of resources that are developed and the impact of the ministry on the congregation as a whole.

    Treatment-related Strategies

    A fifth, and less common, approach to recovery ministry is for a local congregation to operate or identify with a long-term residential treatment program. The Salvation Army has a number of congregations which are connected with half-way houses or other facilities for long term care. Many rescue missions have developed special relationships with local congregations that also serve this function. A lot of good work remains to be done to adapt this kind of strategy to congregations in a variety of social and cultural settings but it can be a particular effective way for a local church to invest in recovery.

    The Recovery-friendly Church

    It is important to emphasize that congregations need not have 'recovery programs' to be actively supportive of recovery. A congregation that 'does grace' instead of shame in all of its affairs will be profoundly helpful to people in recovery even though it lacks support groups or other elements of recovery programming. I once encouraged a pastor who did not think it was possible to develop a recovery ministry in his congregation to change the way he did the 'welcome' at the beginning of each worship service. This was the smallest part of the worship service and the part he thought would be easiest to change. His assignment was to welcome the people who actually came to church. One Sunday, for example, he said "I know that many people who come to this church experienced very abusive childhoods and that sometimes an experience like that makes it difficult to come to church later on in life. If that fits your situation, I want to particularly thank you for coming today. I appreciate your trust and value your participation." That's all he did. The effect was profound. Without inventing new programs he was soon well on his way to reshaping the congregation into a place both safe for and helpful to people in recovery. Learning to tell the truth was the key. It is the heart of all recovery. And it will be at the heart of any local church that wishes to be involved in recovery ministry.

    Another approach to being a "recovery-friendly" congregation without developing recovery programming is to become an information resource for people who need recovery resources. If when you walk into a church you get a list of all of the resources available in the community for people who are recovering from addiction, abuse or trauma--people will notice that. It sends a powerful message: You don"t have to be "well" to be a part of this congregation. We are all struggling. And that"s okay. This is a safe place to seek progress not perfection."

    The Church in Recovery

    In the United States there are increasing numbers of people who are not satisfied with having a church with a couple of "bridge" Twelve Step groups or even a Recovery Department. They want everything about the congregation to be about recovery. The worship. The missions program. The children"s educational program. Everything. There are not yet many examples of congregations who have taken this approach. In this model, 'recovery' becomes the central paradigm of the congregation. Participation in recovery becomes as much a part of 'doing church' as participation in worship services--in some cases (following Wesley!) participation in recovery groups may be a prerequisite for participation in large group meetings. A good example of this might be several Salvation Army treatment programmes that have recently planted churches for the graduates of their programme. They just could not find appropriate churches to send their graduate to, so they have started to build their own. It is still too early, or so it seems to me, to know how effective this approach to recovery ministry will be. I suspect we may need to make more mistakes in this direction before we know how to do it well! This is a kind of strategy that it works best, of course, in church planting situtations rather than trying to subvert the strategy of an existing church.

    I hope this very brief overview has been helpful. May God grant you the serenity you need this day.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After you know it all, it's what you learn that counts.
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>

  • CASA 12-Steps Blog
    http://casa-12steps.blogspot.com/

  • CASA-12-Steps-Program Group
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CASA-12-Steps-Program/
    <>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>+<>
  • Sunday, May 04, 2008

    On Spiritual Sobriety in Recovery:
    By Peter S. Lopez aka Peta


    http://prorecovery.blogspot.com/2008/05/on-spiritual-sobriety-in-recovery-by.html


    Sunday, May 04, 2008

    ~ Introduction ~

    Main Entry: com•mu•nion
    Pronunciation: \kə-ˈmyü-nyən\
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English, from Latin communion-, communio mutual participation, from communis
    Date: 14th century
    1: an act or instance of sharing
    2 a capitalized : a Christian sacrament in which consecrated bread and wine are consumed as memorials of Christ's death or as symbols for the realization of a spiritual union between Christ and communicant or as the body and blood of Christ b: the act of receiving Communion c capitalized : the part of a Communion service in which the sacrament is received
    3: intimate fellowship or rapport : communication
    4: a body of Christians having a common faith and discipline [the Anglican communion]

    Spiritual sobriety in recovery is the highest form of sobriety wherein one is in conscious communion with the Creator of the cosmos in a balanced state of serenity that is sane and sober. We must develop a well-rounded wholistic treatment program that treats the entire human being as a three-dimensional being of mind, body and soul striving to be in harmony with the Creator. Sometimes life may disturb our serenity, but when we focus on our spiritual sobriety we can recover.

    ~ Sanity is Security ~

    Main Entry: san•i•ty
    Pronunciation: \ˈsa-nə-tē\
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English sanite, from Anglo-French sanité, from Latin sanitat-, sanitas health, sanity, from sanus healthy, sane
    Date: 15th century
    : the quality or state of being sane; especially : soundness or health of mind

    Sanity is security, mental stability, emotional balance, common sense and governs the mind, as opposed to the insecure insanity of indulgence in drug addiction. To be sane is to be natural, rational and in possession of a sound mind ~ the throne of thought ~ that is capable of helping us think, function and cope in our social environment so we can meet our basic survival needs and manifest our infinite potential to stay alive, prosper and succeed in life. Sanity gives us a balanced equilibrium essential for us to be relatively normal intelligent mature adults.

    Think in terms of being ‘sane and sober’. Evolve beyond only being ‘clean and sober’, which came from the positive influences of N.A. and A.A. Our mental processes, behavior patterns and spiritual practices should be sane, stable and sensible so that we are rehabilitated or equipped to cope with life on life’s terms and have the wise courage to even change the terms of life that block or hinder our spiritual growth as humane beings. Working on our wholistic health and addressing the many mental, physical and spiritual health issues that originally got us caught up in the whole life-style of drug addiction will help us heal. We should accept nothing less than the best for our health, happiness and humane dignity.

    True functional sanity involves meeting our personal responsibilities because we have the ability to respond to the challenges of life, the response ability to cope with life as it comes. We need to be wise in all our ways, be open minded to learning new ways of living sane and sober, developing and evolving in our spiritual growth all along the way and integrating ourselves into the larger society as world citizens with humane values, morals and principles.

    When we meet our responsibilities we receive tangible real rewards that reflect our continued progress: establishing homes as safe sanctuaries for our families; providing ourselves with proper diet, nutrition and daily exercise; maintaining healthy personal relationships; and becoming community activists in our local communities in order to help others, help ourselves and raise our own humane consciousness all at the same time.

    Advanced sanity involves a high level of self-esteem that involves self-love, self-respect and self-confidence so we can function in harmony with today’s society with all its social stressors, complexities and contradictions. We should develop and progress from being addicted and abnormal to being healthy and normal. We need to restore our sanity, maintain the brain and live creative, healthy and productive lives liberated from the dangers and demons of drug addiction.

    Active drug addiction is a brain disease that exhibits insane behavior whose hallmark is the mental illness of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). There is a constant obsession on ‘the dope’ and at the first opportunity the out-of-control compulsion to do ‘the dope’. The demented hard-core ‘dope fiend’ is terribly sick! He is self-destructive to the extreme as he wavers and wanders between suicidal (self-killing) and homicidal tendencies in a never ending search for the elusive perfect high. The distorted warped state of addiction never lasts long enough to satisfy the crazed craving brain. It gets the addict caught up in the vicious circle of drug addiction, the up-and-down see-saw between the brain’s neurotransmitters of dopamine, the drive of ‘gotta get it’ and the ‘got it’ of a temporary serotonin high over and over again. It is a fruitless vain escape from Earthly existence that always leaves the craving brain wanting more of the same original poison. Always living on the edge between life and death, the drug addict is never satisfied with his catch for long. The stash always melts away and runs out. The ‘dope’ always wears off and off he goes again back out into the wild