2.01.2005
Neo-Orthodoxy and The 12 Steps
Well, I'm back from the depths of depression (long story - don't ask - maybe I'll write about it later), and I'm ready to start stirring up the muck at the bottom of the pond.
As I've mentioned here on at least a couple of occasions, I consider myself to be a big-time addict and have been attending a weekly 12-step program at my church. Last night, during the discussion period, I realized that our program materials attribute the authorship of the Serenity Prayer to Reinhold Niebuhr. "Wait a minute!" I thought. "Wasn't Niebuhr one of the leading theologians in the school of Neo-Orthodoxy?"
Now for those of you who didn't realize this until just this moment, I have a head stuffed full of such generally useless trivia. However, I tend not to remember all of the pertinent details for such things, so after I put myself out there and described Neo-Orthodoxy for my fellow group members -- most of whom work in the trades and tend not to question what is put in front of them by the 'church leadership' -- I decided that I'd better make sure I wasn't just delivering 'a sharp blast of wind' to quote my newly remembered hero, Martin Luther.
Whew! A quick Google search confirmed my memories of my Humanities lessons at good ol' Geneva College. Neo-Orthodoxy is a system of 'Christian' theology that has produced many wonderful sounding sentiments, such as the Serenity Prayer, but is an insidious evil that seeks to erode the believer's confidence in the veracity and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures.
Among the beliefs attributed to Mr. Niebuhr:
"Creation is a mythical idea which cannot be fully rationalized."
"...we do not believe in the virgin birth, and we have difficulty with the physical resurrection of Christ. We do not believe, in other words, that revelatory events validate themselves by a divine breakthrough in the natural order...This pinnacle of faith has no support from miraculous facts in history."
Moreover, Niebuhr held to the view that Jesus the person embodied an ideal of moral perfection in His Life and road to the Cross, but denied His divinity -- even going so far as to state that Christ must have had a sinful nature, since He was tempted in all points as the rest of us.
What's the point of this? Simply that I have become very concerned about the Church's current embrace of the Recovery Movement as a particular point of ministry within an ever-increasing number of congregations in our country. While AA and various other recovery groups have always had a loose association with Christian churches, the evangelical church has only recently begun to actively appropriate recovery principles into its vision of ministry. The program used at our church is referred to as 'Bible-based' recovery and makes an attempt (poorly, in my opinion) to re-formulate the twelve steps into eight principles based on the Beatitudes.
However, the 12-steps were themselves drawn from an understanding of the Bible in the early part of the 20th century by a loose aggregation of evangelicals in Britain and the US known as the Oxford Group. Bill W. and Dr. Bob, the founders of the original AA fellowship formalized at least 10 of the 12 steps directly from the writings and teachings of this group, but perverted that group's commitment to non-denominationalism to an implicit denial of the Christian faith as the one, true way to a sober and abundant life.
I've printed out about 30 pages of material from the 'Net to study on the origins of AA, the Oxford Group and the adoption of recovery programs by the Christian Church, so I've not completely formulated a position. However, the following concerns about the incorporation of recovery programs into the life of the Church are pre-eminent in my mind:
1. Is sufficiency of Christ's salvation and the Ministry of the Holy Spirit in the lives of those struggling with addiction is being compromised? There seems to be an implicit message that the traditional disciplines, sacraments and fellowship of the Christian life are not enough to bring an addict to a place of healing and lifelong sobriety. Something more is needed, and recovery programs offer it.
2. There are widely accepted assumptions about addiction and co-dependency that offer an addicted believer a refuge from personal responsibility for their actions and choices. Alcoholism/addiction is widely regarded as a disease, both by lay and professional people. This tends to give addiction an increased power over its victim. The message of "choose this day whom you will serve" tends to be replaced by one of forbearance for the ongoing sinful choices of the unrepentant. Furthermore, there seems to be a proliferation of 'new' addictions cropping up every day. Overeating, excessive TV watching, people pleasing, gambling, anger and a host of other behavioral problems are now being brought to the 12-step party. The net effect being to give sinners wiggle room regarding repentance of their vices as they 'recover'.
3. The inclusion of a 12-step 'ministry' into the life of a local church creates a very uncomfortable separation between the 'normals' and the '12-steppers'. It also ceases to be anonymous. Once you are identified as participating in the 'program', you can count on polite, interested and well meaning inquiries into "what it's like" and "how it's going". I speak from experience here. Once in a while, a 'normal' comes to a meeting -- maybe because they are truly struggling with an issue or maybe just to find out who's going. Most of the time, they don't come back. And there is a sense that they are very happy that they don't have to deal with you and your problems -- that there is a place where you can be dealt with out of sight and apart from the typical Sunday morning charade. Sorry, there's a bit of cynicism showing in that last comment.
4. The isolation of people who are willing to confront their demons publicly and share intimately and honestly their struggles to overcome them with others deprives the total church body of the opportunity to do what Christ has called us to do -- bear one another's burdens without compromising on the call to holy living in the lives of each and every Christian. It is also very difficult to overcome the shame often associated with addictions and co-dependency. The message discussed in point 1 hits home hard, and the sense that you are somehow different, more sinful, less acceptable can eat away at the core of hope necessary to sustain healing faith. It feels a bit like being in Special Ed for Christians -- you are separated and can come to feel inferior from those who call themselves your brothers in Christ, but will not walk with you in this pain and shame you feel. We had a psychologist speak to us two weeks ago who referred to addiction as "sin super-sized". Thanks a lot!
The bottom line here for me is that both Neo-Orthodoxy and most -- if not all -- mainstream 12-step programs offer a counterfeit faith that promises relief and freedom to hurting people. While it cannot be denied that many people have been helped by AA and its descendants, I wonder if the Church compromises its place in this society -- its essential mission in our culture -- by so openly embracing the 12 Steps in some of the ways I have witnessed.
Well, I've gone as far as I can tonight. As I study this issue further, I will share whatever God shows me.
In the meantime, comments and insights are always welcome.
Shalom!
- posted by The Drake @ 10:05 PM
