Split: If you are addicted, is it a sin?

[CopticChristian]

Thankyou for the reply, Coptic. I am having a Sunday away from the computer. Monday then is going to be busy, but I hope to make some response. I can’t promise anything, however - but I’ll try to fit it in. I won’t be addressing the effectiveness of AA vs non-AA, as I don’t want to buy into that argument, but will attempt to address (briefly) your argument from Catholic sources (and the US Supreme Court) 12 step programs as a “religion”, and how that affects us as Christians.



Edmundus

Edumdus,

How about keep your friends close and your enemies closer?

 

[CopticChristian]

No I don’t. You can research that. I’m not interested in the scientific data, you are. At least you have something to go with. By the way, the fact that AA is Alcoholics Anonymous may have a lot to do with the lack of studies?

Christ,

Here you might enjoy reading this…

J Addict Dis. 2009; 28(2): 145–157.
doi: 10.1080/10550880902772464PMCID: PMC2746426
NIHMSID: NIHMS143522
Alcoholics Anonymous Effectiveness: Faith Meets Science
Lee Ann Kaskutas, Dr.P.H.

Research on the effectiveness of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) is controversial and is subject to widely divergent interpretations.

At the heart of the debate is the quality of the evidence. AA critics have argued that AA is a cult that relies on God as the mechanism of action [11], and that rigorous experimental studies are necessary in order to convince them of AA’s effectiveness. Their concern is well-founded. As will be evident from this review, experimental studies represent the weakest of the available evidence.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746426/?tool=pubmed

and this

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16856072

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19;(3):CD005032.
Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programmes for alcohol dependence.
Ferri M, Amato L, Davoli M.
SourceAgency of Public Health, Project Unit: EBM and Models of Health Assistance, Via di Santa Costanza 53, Rome, Italy 00198. ferri@asplazio.it

AUTHORS’ CONCLUSIONS: No experimental studies unequivocally demonstrated the effectiveness of AA or TSF approaches for reducing alcohol dependence or problems. One large study focused on the prognostic factors associated with interventions that were assumed to be successful rather than on the effectiveness of interventions themselves, so more efficacy studies are needed.

 

[CopticChristian]

Keep posting the truth.

Johnny,

Your bias is showing here…

 

[clem456]

Johnny,

Your bias is showing here…

If I could paraphrase the immortal Paul Hogan in Crocodile Dundee:
That’s not bias…this is bias!:

We’re talking about addiction and this is the “research” you are espousing:

Wikipedia on Peele:

Quote:
Funding

Lindesmith Center (now the Drug Policy Alliance): grant to write an adolescent drug guide (1996).

The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS), and the Wine Institute provided unrestricted grants.[12

Lindesmith Center(now the Drug Policy Alliance):

Quote:
The Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) is a New York City-based non-profit organization, led by executive director Ethan Nadelmann, with the principal goal of ending the American “War on Drugs”. The stated priorities of the organization are the decriminalization of responsible drug use, the promotion of harm reduction and treatment in response to drug misuse, and the facilitation of open dialog about drugs between youth, parents, and educators.

Mission

"The Drug Policy Alliance envisions a just society in which the use and regulation of drugs are grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights, in which people are no longer punished for what they put into their own bodies but only for crimes committed against others, and in which the fears, prejudices and punitive prohibitions of today are no more.

Our mission is to advance those policies and attitudes that best reduce the harms of both drug misuse and drug prohibition, and to promote the sovereignty of individuals over their minds and bodies."[3]

Quote:
The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS) is a national trade association representing producers and marketers of distilled spirits sold in the United States. DISCUS was formed in 1973 by the merger of three organizations (the Bourbon Institute, the Distilled Spirits Institute, and the Licensed Beverage Industries, Inc.) that had been in existence for decades

Quote:
Peele supported Moderation Management founder Audrey Kishline, who also subscribed to the belief that addiction is not a disease.[13] After giving up her own attempts at moderation to seek help with AA, Kishline was convicted of killing a father and his 12-year-old daughter while driving under the influence of alcohol.[14] This was widely claimed to invalidate Kishline’s position and by association, Peele’s. Peele was one of 34 addiction professionals who published a statement about the Kishline incident [15] stating that “the approach represented by Alcoholics Anonymous and that represented by Moderation Management are both needed.”

Some fine writings by this man directly from his website:

Quote:
The Benefits of Alcohol

Journal Articles and Book Chapters
•Peele, S. (1993), The conflict between public health goals and the temperance mentality. American Journal of Public Health, 83, 805-810.
•Peele, S. & A. Brodsky (1996), The antidote to alcohol abuse: Sensible drinking messages. In Wine in Context: Nutrition, Physiology, Policy, Davis, CA: American Society for Enology and Viticulture, pp. 66-70.
•Peele, S. (1999), Introduction. In S. Peele & M. Grant (Eds.), Alcohol and pleasure: A health perspective, Philadelphia, PA: Brunner/Mazel, pp. 1-7.
•Peele, S. (1999), Promoting positive drinking: Alcohol, necessary evil or positive good? In: S. Peele & M. Grant (Eds.), Alcohol and pleasure: A health perspective, Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel, pp. 375-389.
•Peele, S., & A. Brodsky (2000), Exploring psychological benefits associated with moderate alcohol use: A necessary corrective to assessments of drinking outcomes? Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 60, 221-247.

Magazine Articles
•Peele, S. (1996), Should physicians recommend alcohol to their patients? Priorities, 8(1), 24-29.
•Peele, S. (1999, October), Bottle battle: The latest fight over wine labels is part of the ongoing struggle between wets and drys. Reason, pp. 52-54.

Newspaper Articles
•Peele, S. (1998, July), Alcoholism and the elderly — The new epidemic? The Star Ledger (Newark), July 29, p. A19.
•Peele, S. (2010), Alcohol — the good side. Los Angeles Times, July 21, 2010, A17.
•Peele, S. (2011), A Toast to Your Health. Warning: Alcohol may increase your life expectancy and reduce dementia. Wall Street Journal, February 2, 2011.

Letters to the Editor
•Peele, S. (2001), American Heart Association advisory, “Wine and Your Heart,” is not science-based. Circulation, 104, e73.

Stanton’s Blog
•We Don’t Believe Alcohol’s Good For You! August 19, 2010.
•The Hidden Health Benefits of Alcohol? August 16, 2010.

 

[CopticChristian]

If I could paraphrase the immortal Paul Hogan in Crocodile Dundee:
That’s not bias…this is bias!:

We’re talking about addiction and this is the “research” you are espousing:

Wikipedia on Peele:

Quote:
Funding

Lindesmith Center (now the Drug Policy Alliance): grant to write an adolescent drug guide (1996).

The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS), and the Wine Institute provided unrestricted grants.[12

Lindesmith Center(now the Drug Policy Alliance):

Quote:
The Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) is a New York City-based non-profit organization, led by executive director Ethan Nadelmann, with the principal goal of ending the American “War on Drugs”. The stated priorities of the organization are the decriminalization of responsible drug use, the promotion of harm reduction and treatment in response to drug misuse, and the facilitation of open dialog about drugs between youth, parents, and educators.

Mission

"The Drug Policy Alliance envisions a just society in which the use and regulation of drugs are grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights, in which people are no longer punished for what they put into their own bodies but only for crimes committed against others, and in which the fears, prejudices and punitive prohibitions of today are no more.

Our mission is to advance those policies and attitudes that best reduce the harms of both drug misuse and drug prohibition, and to promote the sovereignty of individuals over their minds and bodies."[3]

Quote:
The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS) is a national trade association representing producers and marketers of distilled spirits sold in the United States. DISCUS was formed in 1973 by the merger of three organizations (the Bourbon Institute, the Distilled Spirits Institute, and the Licensed Beverage Industries, Inc.) that had been in existence for decades

Quote:
Peele supported Moderation Management founder Audrey Kishline, who also subscribed to the belief that addiction is not a disease.[13] After giving up her own attempts at moderation to seek help with AA, Kishline was convicted of killing a father and his 12-year-old daughter while driving under the influence of alcohol.[14] This was widely claimed to invalidate Kishline’s position and by association, Peele’s. Peele was one of 34 addiction professionals who published a statement about the Kishline incident [15] stating that “the approach represented by Alcoholics Anonymous and that represented by Moderation Management are both needed.”

Some fine writings by this man directly from his website:

Quote:
The Benefits of Alcohol

Journal Articles and Book Chapters
•Peele, S. (1993), The conflict between public health goals and the temperance mentality. American Journal of Public Health, 83, 805-810.
•Peele, S. & A. Brodsky (1996), The antidote to alcohol abuse: Sensible drinking messages. In Wine in Context: Nutrition, Physiology, Policy, Davis, CA: American Society for Enology and Viticulture, pp. 66-70.
•Peele, S. (1999), Introduction. In S. Peele & M. Grant (Eds.), Alcohol and pleasure: A health perspective, Philadelphia, PA: Brunner/Mazel, pp. 1-7.
•Peele, S. (1999), Promoting positive drinking: Alcohol, necessary evil or positive good? In: S. Peele & M. Grant (Eds.), Alcohol and pleasure: A health perspective, Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel, pp. 375-389.
•Peele, S., & A. Brodsky (2000), Exploring psychological benefits associated with moderate alcohol use: A necessary corrective to assessments of drinking outcomes? Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 60, 221-247.

Magazine Articles
•Peele, S. (1996), Should physicians recommend alcohol to their patients? Priorities, 8(1), 24-29.
•Peele, S. (1999, October), Bottle battle: The latest fight over wine labels is part of the ongoing struggle between wets and drys. Reason, pp. 52-54.

Newspaper Articles
•Peele, S. (1998, July), Alcoholism and the elderly — The new epidemic? The Star Ledger (Newark), July 29, p. A19.
•Peele, S. (2010), Alcohol — the good side. Los Angeles Times, July 21, 2010, A17.
•Peele, S. (2011), A Toast to Your Health. Warning: Alcohol may increase your life expectancy and reduce dementia. Wall Street Journal, February 2, 2011.

Letters to the Editor
•Peele, S. (2001), American Heart Association advisory, “Wine and Your Heart,” is not science-based. Circulation, 104, e73.

Stanton’s Blog
•We Don’t Believe Alcohol’s Good For You! August 19, 2010.
•The Hidden Health Benefits of Alcohol? August 16, 2010.

Clem,

Have you looked at the titles here…

temperance mentality…there is a temperance mentality that is part and parcel of the AA 12 step religion…

Sensible drinking messages.…do you think that perhaps it would be Ok to have a drinking message that was sensible?

Alcohol and pleasure: A health perspective,…Alcohol is not illegal, it is drunk for pleasure and there are some that say it is healthy…is this so wrong?

Promoting positive drinking: Alcohol, necessary evil or positive good?…People drink…is it good or bad?

Exploring psychological benefits associated with moderate alcohol use:…this is a question…is it beneficial or not?

Should physicians recommend alcohol to their patients?…I am sure that some Physicians recommend alcohol in various parts of the world…should they?

Alcoholism and the elderly — The new epidemic?…are you opposed to gerentology?

**
A Toast to Your Health. Warning: Alcohol may increase your life expectancy and reduce dementia.…alcohol is not illegal, may be beneficial and this is just a look at that, is this so wrong?
**
“Wine and Your Heart,” is not science-based…so you know that people drink because they say it is heart healthy…here Stanton says that it may not be science based…what is it you are driving at…

What in the world do you believe that you are proving here?

In my opinion the Harrison Act was a travesty, criminalizing behavior and creating this so called war on drugs. How many people have to be killed for this. Pablo Escobar is gone but someone else has taken the place of Pablo…now what?

The states decriminalizing marijuana is the first step in reversing the Federal Government imposing the Fed Laws on drugs…States are realizing that criminalizing drugs is expensive and money can be spent elsewhere.

This whole notion of making drugs illegal is nonsense. Alcohol is not illegal. People drink. Alcohol is taxed and when made illegal look at Al Capone and those glory days of Prohibition.

Do you want to believe that Portugal and Amsterdam are worse off for creating a non-criminal look at drugs…

People are going to use drugs legal or not. The best thing to do is get them the help they need if they go off the deep end and let them know, they are not diseased, it is a bad habit, build their values or help them understand that with human effort they can strengthen their cardinal virtues and turn sin into salvation…

Is that asking to much for the sin of addiction?

 

[johnnyjones]

Clem,

Have you looked at the titles here…

temperance mentality…there is a temperance mentality that is part and parcel of the AA 12 step religion…

Sensible drinking messages.…do you think that perhaps it would be Ok to have a drinking message that was sensible?

Alcohol and pleasure: A health perspective,…Alcohol is not illegal, it is drunk for pleasure and there are some that say it is healthy…is this so wrong?

Promoting positive drinking: Alcohol, necessary evil or positive good?…People drink…is it good or bad?

Exploring psychological benefits associated with moderate alcohol use:…this is a question…is it beneficial or not?

Should physicians recommend alcohol to their patients?…I am sure that some Physicians recommend alcohol in various parts of the world…should they?

Alcoholism and the elderly — The new epidemic?…are you opposed to gerentology?

**
A Toast to Your Health. Warning: Alcohol may increase your life expectancy and reduce dementia.…alcohol is not illegal, may be beneficial and this is just a look at that, is this so wrong?
**
“Wine and Your Heart,” is not science-based…so you know that people drink because they say it is heart healthy…here Stanton says that it may not be science based…what is it you are driving at…

What in the world do you believe that you are proving here?

In my opinion the Harrison Act was a travesty, criminalizing behavior and creating this so called war on drugs. How many people have to be killed for this. Pablo Escobar is gone but someone else has taken the place of Pablo…now what?

The states decriminalizing marijuana is the first step in reversing the Federal Government imposing the Fed Laws on drugs…States are realizing that criminalizing drugs is expensive and money can be spent elsewhere.

This whole notion of making drugs illegal is nonsense. Alcohol is not illegal. People drink. Alcohol is taxed and when made illegal look at Al Capone and those glory days of Prohibition.

Do you want to believe that Portugal and Amsterdam are worse off for creating a non-criminal look at drugs…

People are going to use drugs legal or not. The best thing to do is get them the help they need if they go off the deep end and let them know, they are not diseased, it is a bad habit, build their values or help them understand that with human effort they can strengthen their cardinal virtues and turn sin into salvation…

Is that asking to much for the sin of addiction?

“The antidote for alcohol:sensible drinking” by Peele. You find nothing wrong with picking up alcohol after the substance has been abused and gone out of control, that is why you wrap yourself around Peele and his predilection to salivate over all things positive about alcohol.

There may well be people who can return to alcohol or drugs but I have seen it tried and tried again with death or misery following shortly thereafter.

“Promoting positive drinking”. Again, not for everyone. Addiction may be sinful, but if sin is mastering your life, returning to it is folly. “As a dog returns to his vomit, so a fool repeats his folly” (Proverbs 26:11).

 

[clem456]

“The antidote for alcohol:sensible drinking” by Peele. You find nothing wrong with picking up alcohol after the substance has been abused and gone out of control, that is why you wrap yourself around Peele and his predilection to salivate over all things positive about alcohol.

There may well be people who can return to alcohol or drugs but I have seen it tried and tried again with death or misery following shortly thereafter.

Right. So if a person has any knowlege whatsoever about addiction, and if a person gives even a small flying flip about the welfare of addicts, he would not post paid-for trash from a liqour company shill that goes against the experience of most addicts.
I suppose the operative word here is IF. Previous posts demonstrate otherwise. (Yes I am indeed questioning the poster motivations here).

 

[CopticChristian]

“The antidote for alcohol:sensible drinking” by Peele. You find nothing wrong with picking up alcohol after the substance has been abused and gone out of control, that is why you wrap yourself around Peele and his predilection to salivate over all things positive about alcohol.

There may well be people who can return to alcohol or drugs but I have seen it tried and tried again with death or misery following shortly thereafter.

“Promoting positive drinking”. Again, not for everyone. Addiction may be sinful, but if sin is mastering your life, returning to it is folly. “As a dog returns to his vomit, so a fool repeats his folly” (Proverbs 26:11).

Johnny,

Ok. For you this does not work. Your experience is not the world experience. Empiricism is not the only source of truth and reality. Don’t drink. Quoting the Bible for this sounds good…

19So is the man who deceives his neighbor,
And says, “Was I not joking?”

24He who hates disguises it with his lips,
But he lays up deceit in his heart.

25When he speaks graciously, do not believe him,
For there are seven abominations in his heart.

26Though his hatred covers itself with guile,
His wickedness will be revealed before the assembly.

27He who digs a pit will fall into it,
And he who rolls a stone, it will come back on him.

28A lying tongue hates those it crushes,
And a flattering mouth works ruin.

Proverbs 26 goes on to to say that the truth is important. To spin a tale is wrong. Addiction is not a disease. What is true for you is not true for everyone else. The world is not based on your experience…Lying about a habit/sin and saying that it is a disease is also wrong when in reality it is not, and if recovery we seek for the sin of addiction is missing the mark for the sin of addiction when we should be seeking…

Salvation…

 

[CopticChristian]

Right. So if a person has any knowlege whatsoever about addiction, and if a person gives even a small flying flip about the welfare of addicts, he would not post paid-for trash from a liqour company shill that goes against the experience of most addicts.
I suppose the operative word here is IF. Previous posts demonstrate otherwise. (Yes I am indeed questioning the poster motivations here).

Clem,

We are back to the religion of AA 12 step think speak that only an addict can help an addict. Only an addict knows about addiction. Only a sinner knows about sin? Huh…are we all not sinners?

Motivation. You imply that writing about something you oppose has a motivation? Your inference is that you can read the mind of he who writes. Stanton is a prolific writer. There is nothing immoral, unethical, or wrong about writing about something that is legal.

My concern for someone with a bad habit is that they first know that they don’t have a disease, never have and never will. My concern for the person whose habits have gone beyond the ability to have a meaningufl life is that while there is a belief that the religion of 12 step/AA is the only way it is not and there are ways to get help.

Jesus Christ the Bearer of the Water of Life, written for the New Age, A preliminary document says

Addiction and Recovery is exchaged for sin and salvation

Protestants have figured this out too…found here…

mefchurch.org/faithathome/addictions.html

Addictions - A Banquet in the Grave: Finding Hope in the Power of the Gospel
By Edward T. Welch

In Addictions: **A Banquet in the Grave Welch teaches that the hopelessness of the “sickness, recovery, relapse” cycle needs to be replaced with the biblical view of sin, salvation, and sanctification. **The addict must face the fact that what and who he worships will control his life and that true freedom can only come through the cross. Paperback.

If the OHCAC is Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic East and West and all Baptized in the trinitarian formula as I believe and if Protestants are truly Christian, seeking the truth…then by the grace of God they too have found the folly in the disease model…

I suggest that as you have been on the wagon, you and others get on the wagon of the reality that the world is changing…it has been figured out…

AA/12 steps is a religion
Addiction is not a disease
You are not now or ever been powerless
True Freedom is freedom from fear/through the cross, Veritatis Splendor

I pray that anyone wondering what to do with their bad habits can breathe a sigh of relief and know that they don’t have to end up like the hateful, uniformed, ignorant of fact, disciples of the 12 step religion/AA and see that Stanton Peele, Phd has stumbled upon…the truth from a secular point of view…and the truth if suppressed has it’s own rewards…

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

Peele says addiction is habit that can be resolved with VALUES, because the addict in their habit is selfish and has lost VALUE of self, family, job, community and can replace bad values with good values and resolve the bad habit.

The Church says that through human effort you can strengthen your cardinal virtues that allow you to resist sin and Gluttony is the sin of Addiction, so by the grace of God you can through Fatih working in love please God and align your will with the Willl of God and that is Veritatis Splendor.

Protestants have realized this as noted above.

You as a disciple of the 12 step religion of AA spew your experience and I would hope that any viewer sees what this religion does to people as they analyze the truth, reality and what is true and are guided into resolution that there is and can be help on their own without the need to believe that they are diseased…diseased? No…just a troubled sinner and sinners need help…and that help is available

not in a circle of people saying “I am a sinner”…hello sinner
not in a circle where it takes 5 years to learn what a Book written by a man that was a salesman, a man that toyed with LSD, a man that toyed with the occult…wrote as if true
not in a circle where someone guides you into the false thinking of the 12 step religion…

Time would be better served in daily mass, Sunday mass, the confessional, study of the Catechism, realizing that every Mass attended has not one individual that is without sin and feeling at home with that…knowing that all service to the Church is as good if not better than service to the 12 step religion…

help is available and help for the bad habit is through values

help for those that realize their addiction is sin…

is salvation…

Preach your religion for those that want to believe that forever and a day they have a disease that has no proof that it is a disease, no science behind the notion that it is a disease, a disease that you cannot catch, a disease for which there is no cure, that does not show up on any list of diseases that can’t be cured, a disease that becomes a spiritual disease and fixing the disease is resolving your character defects=sin…takes a long time to get there…DISEASED FOREVER…and forever linked to the 12 step religion…people need to know that this is what is ahead of acceptance of the notion that addiction is disease…

or they just might want to go the road of

sin and salvation…forever a sinner like you and me…while on earth, then we are all in the same boat…

St Paul in his life said…

I am the least of the Apostles
I am the least of the Saints
I am the greatest of Sinners

pretty good company to accept yourself as you are…a sinner…

and the only normy is Christ and through Christ

sin can be turned into salvation…

Powerless? Oh, by no means…

For in God all things are possible, yes the power is not of your own…but He gives you all the tools you need through HUMAN EFFORT with the grace of God…

Disease?..go to the Protestant based religion of 12steps/AA

Sin/Habit?

wow another choice

 

[Jessup]

I don’t believe in addiction. Except for the chemical addiction that the body gets from absorption of foreign substance introduced, to function.
In instances of steroids and testosterone, for example.
But I do believe all mental addiction is a product of weakness in a person and a poor excuse not to put any effort into refusing to be mastered by one thing.
I’ve grown up in a house full of Marijuana addicts and Alcoholics. They all use problems as poor selfish excuses to keep doing to themselves what they think is awesome.

 

[CopticChristian]

I don’t believe in addiction. Except for the chemical addiction that the body gets from absorption of foreign substance introduced, to function.
In instances of steroids and testosterone, for example.
But I do believe all mental addiction is a product of weakness in a person and a poor excuse not to put any effort into refusing to be mastered by one thing.
I’ve grown up in a house full of Marijuana addicts and Alcoholics. They all use problems as poor selfish excuses to keep doing to themselves what they think is awesome.

Jess,

This would require some defintion of “ADDICTION”…one has to know what you believe addiction to be to understand your lack of belief. What is it you believe addiction to be?

Foreign substances are a source of addiction, however there are people that are addicted to Pleasure and that would not be considered an introduced foreign substance or to another person.

You are going to make the 12 step religion people angry with your notion of lack of will power…because they reject this…

If you reframe weakness of mind as improperly valued mind then this would make more sense…

If you value doing nothing, if you value self above others, if you value other’s belongings as equally yours, if you value stealing as OK, if you value ignoring laws that are for everyone but you…well then that is a formula for addiction…

Those values once changed is a formula for success and avoidance. If someon values others, values others belongings as much as their own, values obeying laws, etc then that person probably isn’t going to value using cocaine/alcohol/heroin…more than self, family, job and probably won’t get addicted…

You are correct that addicts are selfish and the draw back of the notion of the disease model like all man made paradigms is that it backfires into…

“I can’t help it…don’t you understand…I have a disease…it is not my fault”…culpability is lost…

sin requires culpability

salvation requires an understanding of the consequences of sin…

 

[Christmastwin]

Clem,

I pray that anyone wondering what to do with their bad habits can breathe a sigh of relief and know that they don’t have to end up like the hateful, uniformed, ignorant of fact, disciples of the 12 step religion/AA and see that Stanton Peele, Phd has stumbled upon…the truth from a secular point of view…and the truth if suppressed has it’s own rewards…

You have taken this too far now, and I hope the moderators do something to close this. Resorting to name calling? Really? You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[CopticChristian]

You have taken this too far now, and I hope the moderators do something to close this. Resorting to name calling? Really? You should be ashamed of yourself.

Clem,

hateful, uniformed, ignorant of fact, disciples of the 12 step religion/AA

12 steps/AA is a religion. Those that adhere to it are disciples.

I find some of what you write as somewhat hateful, uninformed and ignorant of facts. Here is what you posted.

Ok fine, but respecfully, your posts indicate that you are not knowlegeable about addiction and 12 step.

I read the Big Book, The Twelve and Twelve, and more…I studied this paradigm and others and know more about addiction than the average bear. You don’t understand. In college you study to get grades. In Medical School you study to pass/fail/honor and in doing so you learn that you know nothing unless you can teach…so I learn everything to teach and what I learned about the religion of AA I could not teach so I learned more to try to figure out what it is there is to know and you say I am not knowledgeable. I studied it like Aquinas. I know what AA/12 steps followers are taught and believe better than they do.

Aquinas knew more about what others thought than those that practiced that thought and was never of that thought…is this such a new idea to you…I can understand how it may drive you crazy that I know more about this stuff than most of the disciples…it would drive me nuts too…I have the same approach to Protestant thought…I know how they think too…

Ok, if you say so. I have never read the Big Book.

You admit ignorance of what it is you espouse. Correct this and read it so you can know that what you espouse came from a book.

Fact: The “expert” you cling to is compromised to the point of quackery.

Fact: The “expert” you cling to does not even agree with your position on the sinfullness of addiction!!

You have no credibility, and continue to throw misinformation out that can lead addicts astray. Shame on you.

You call people quacks, tell me I have no credibility and accuse me of throwing misinformation and shame me. This is hateful.

Your arrogance is very distressing.

No I don’t. You can research that. I’m not interested in the scientific data, you are.

I present solid information and you accuse me of arrogance and choose to be uninformed. Your own writings and postings are proof of what I say…

Facts are facts
Truth is truth

The religion of AA/12 steps is based on Protestant thought, the Oxford Groupers, Moral Rearmament and Frank Buchman.

The Disease model has no evidence that it is a valid model. There is no such thing as the disease of addiction based on scientific evidence. lt is based on faulty medical studies by a guy named Jellenick who later denied his work.

The entry for the disciple of AA religion is to accept that you are powerless, but you have to stop your addiction/habit to join and relinquish the notion that you have will power. That will power you relinquish is what you use to attend meetings, read the book, the twlelve and twelve, work the steps and call your sponsor…and 30 years later you are still diseased if you want to believe that.

The religion of AA/12 steps says that correction of character defects is how you spiritual disease is resolved and you “came to believe” that these character defects are SIN…and here is the bait and switch…Disease becomes soul sickness becomes resolve your sin and when you do you are still diseased.

You don’t have to like this, you don’t have to accept this, but please don’t say I am not knoweldgeable, please don’t say I know nothing, please read the Big Book so you understand where it is you got your ideas from so that you too can be informed as I am…on the sin of addiction…

 

[johnnyjones]

Johnny,

Ok. For you this does not work. Your experience is not the world experience. Empiricism is not the only source of truth and reality. Don’t drink. Quoting the Bible for this sounds good…

Proverbs 26 goes on to to say that the truth is important. To spin a tale is wrong. Addiction is not a disease. What is true for you is not true for everyone else. The world is not based on your experience…Lying about a habit/sin and saying that it is a disease is also wrong when in reality it is not, and if recovery we seek for the sin of addiction is missing the mark for the sin of addiction when we should be seeking…

Salvation…

Quoting the bible “sounds good”? You KNOW that a dog returns to his vomit and what is being said in this verse about folly.

It is not my experience alone. Many have fallen returning to the chemicals that ravaged them. Even a recent poster on this thread who said he went back to moderate drinking (that worked for him) does not recommend that action be taken. Yes drunkenness is a sin, I don’t dispute that. Does that remove the fact that people need help? Should they return to what brought them into sin? This is foolish talk, and sacred scripture reminds us of that.

Peele and his cohorts are not the beginning and end all you make them out to be. There are other life experiences.

 

[Christmastwin]

Clem,

hateful, uniformed, ignorant of fact, disciples of the 12 step religion/AA

12 steps/AA is a religion. Those that adhere to it are disciples.

I find some of what you write as somewhat hateful, uninformed and ignorant of facts. Here is what you posted.

I read the Big Book, The Twelve and Twelve, and more…I studied this paradigm and others and know more about addiction than the average bear. You don’t understand. In college you study to get grades. In Medical School you study to pass/fail/honor and in doing so you learn that you know nothing unless you can teach…so I learn everything to teach and what I learned about the religion of AA I could not teach so I learned more to try to figure out what it is there is to know and you say I am not knowledgeable. I studied it like Aquinas. I know what AA/12 steps followers are taught and believe better than they do.

Aquinas knew more about what others thought than those that practiced that thought and was never of that thought…is this such a new idea to you…I can understand how it may drive you crazy that I know more about this stuff than most of the disciples…it would drive me nuts too…I have the same approach to Protestant thought…I know how they think too…

You admit ignorance of what it is you espouse. Correct this and read it so you can know that what you espouse came from a book.

You call people quacks, tell me I have no credibility and accuse me of throwing misinformation and shame me. This is hateful.

I present solid information and you accuse me of arrogance and choose to be uninformed. Your own writings and postings are proof of what I say…

Facts are facts
Truth is truth

The religion of AA/12 steps is based on Protestant thought, the Oxford Groupers, Moral Rearmament and Frank Buchman.

The Disease model has no evidence that it is a valid model. There is no such thing as the disease of addiction based on scientific evidence. lt is based on faulty medical studies by a guy named Jellenick who later denied his work.

The entry for the disciple of AA religion is to accept that you are powerless, but you have to stop your addiction/habit to join and relinquish the notion that you have will power. That will power you relinquish is what you use to attend meetings, read the book, the twlelve and twelve, work the steps and call your sponsor…and 30 years later you are still diseased if you want to believe that.

The religion of AA/12 steps says that correction of character defects is how you spiritual disease is resolved and you “came to believe” that these character defects are SIN…and here is the bait and switch…Disease becomes soul sickness becomes resolve your sin and when you do you are still diseased.

You don’t have to like this, you don’t have to accept this, but please don’t say I am not knoweldgeable, please don’t say I know nothing, please read the Big Book so you understand where it is you got your ideas from so that you too can be informed as I am…on the sin of addiction…

I am not Clem

 

[CopticChristian]

I am not Clem

Christ,

You are correct. You are not Clem…I suggest you read what other supporters of the religion of AA say including yours…

this is what you said…

hateful, uniformed, ignorant of fact, disciples of the 12 step religion/AA

12 steps/AA is a religion. Those that adhere to it are disciples.

I find some of what you write as somewhat hateful, uninformed and ignorant of facts. Here is what you posted.

Quote:
Ok fine, but respecfully, your posts indicate that you are not knowlegeable about addiction and 12 step.

I read the Big Book, The Twelve and Twelve, and more…I studied this paradigm and others and know more about addiction than the average bear. You don’t understand. In college you study to get grades. In Medical School you study to pass/fail/honor and in doing so you learn that you know nothing unless you can teach…so I learn everything to teach and what I learned about the religion of AA I could not teach so I learned more to try to figure out what it is there is to know and you say I am not knowledgeable. I studied it like Aquinas. I know what AA/12 steps followers are taught and believe better than they do.

Aquinas knew more about what others thought than those that practiced that thought and was never of that thought…is this such a new idea to you…I can understand how it may drive you crazy that I know more about this stuff than most of the disciples…it would drive me nuts too…I have the same approach to Protestant thought…I know how they think too…

Quote:
Ok, if you say so. I have never read the Big Book.

You admit ignorance of what it is you espouse. Correct this and read it so you can know that what you espouse came from a book.

Quote:
Fact: The “expert” you cling to is compromised to the point of quackery.

Fact: The “expert” you cling to does not even agree with your position on the sinfullness of addiction!!

You have no credibility, and continue to throw misinformation out that can lead addicts astray. Shame on you.

You call people quacks, tell me I have no credibility and accuse me of throwing misinformation and shame me. This is hateful.

Quote:
Your arrogance is very distressing.

No I don’t. You can research that. I’m not interested in the scientific data, you are.

I present solid information and you accuse me of arrogance and choose to be uninformed. Your own writings and postings are proof of what I say…

Facts are facts
Truth is truth

The religion of AA/12 steps is based on Protestant thought, the Oxford Groupers, Moral Rearmament and Frank Buchman.

The Disease model has no evidence that it is a valid model. There is no such thing as the disease of addiction based on scientific evidence. lt is based on faulty medical studies by a guy named Jellenick who later denied his work.

The entry for the disciple of AA religion is to accept that you are powerless, but you have to stop your addiction/habit to join and relinquish the notion that you have will power. That will power you relinquish is what you use to attend meetings, read the book, the twlelve and twelve, work the steps and call your sponsor…and 30 years later you are still diseased if you want to believe that.

The religion of AA/12 steps says that correction of character defects is how you spiritual disease is resolved and you “came to believe” that these character defects are SIN…and here is the bait and switch…Disease becomes soul sickness becomes resolve your sin and when you do you are still diseased.

You don’t have to like this, you don’t have to accept this, but please don’t say I am not knoweldgeable, please don’t say I know nothing, please read the Big Book so you understand where it is you got your ideas from so that you too can be informed as I am…on the sin of addiction…

 

[CopticChristian]

Quoting the bible “sounds good”? You KNOW that a dog returns to his vomit and what is being said in this verse about folly.

It is not my experience alone. Many have fallen returning to the chemicals that ravaged them. Even a recent poster on this thread who said he went back to moderate drinking (that worked for him) does not recommend that action be taken. Yes drunkenness is a sin, I don’t dispute that. Does that remove the fact that people need help? Should they return to what brought them into sin? This is foolish talk, and sacred scripture reminds us of that.

Peele and his cohorts are not the beginning and end all you make them out to be. There are other life experiences.

Johnny,

You focus on yourself, what someone else has done and all that is not helpful to what is helpful. Perhaps you and others are at the end of the spectrum, I don’t know, but it is not the world experience. Anyone reading from a distance would think “Oh my, drinking is so bad, just look at these people that shun drinking and tell others to do so”…I said that Peele stumbled on the notion that values are important in resovling addiction and paralleled that with “human effort” towards strengthening our virtues and habits…rather than the end of the spectrum what about what could be learned…

Peele, The Truth About Addiction…

Where Do Anti-addiction Values Come From?

Children learn values from the people around them. Most importantly, they learn values from their parents or the people who raise them. But people also learn many values from their peers and the groups that they belong to. The process by which people learn values is called “social learning.”

And these values sometimes have a remarkable impact on people’s lives—particularly when it comes to alcohol, drugs, and addiction.

Research regularly demonstrates the power of shared values in relation to alcohol. In the 1950s a sociologist noted that he had never seen anyone drunk in New York’s Chinatown. Intrigued, he undertook a study of this community.2 The sociologist perused the arrest records in the local precinct between the years 1933 and 1949. He discovered that 15,515 arrests had been recorded in Chinatown, but not one of these arrests included an observation of drunkenness. After further examining drinking styles, attitudes, and social occasions in Chinatown, the sociologist, Milton Barnett, wrote:

The children drank, and they soon learned a set of attitudes that attended the practice. While drinking was socially sanctioned, becoming drunk was not. The individual who lost control of himself under the influence of liquor was ridiculed and, if he persisted in his defection, ostracized. His lack of continued moderation was regarded not only as a personal shortcoming, but as a deficiency of the family as a whole.3

Pretty powerful stuff! In this day and age, social shaming might seem outdated, ludicrous, even psychologically damaging. Nonetheless, within Chinese culture—a very large group worldwide—it has been a very effective technique for training children.

1. M.L. Barnett, “Alcoholism in the Cantonese of New York City: An Anthropological Study,” in O. Diethelm, ed., Etiology of Chronic Alcoholism (Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1955), 179–227.
2. Ibid., 186–7.

So what can we learn from this?

As Catholics we can have our children read the Catechism, instruct them that there are such things as virtues, explain that there is such a thing as human effort to make them stronger to have the means to resist temptation and then we can model the behavior as noted in the Chinese community and not tolerate people that drink heavily in the community and explain that this is error in habit that is seen with someone that lacks the necessary values and virtues…for the

sin of addiction…

 

[CopticChristian]

Quoting the bible “sounds good”? You KNOW that a dog returns to his vomit and what is being said in this verse about folly.

It is not my experience alone. Many have fallen returning to the chemicals that ravaged them. Even a recent poster on this thread who said he went back to moderate drinking (that worked for him) does not recommend that action be taken. Yes drunkenness is a sin, I don’t dispute that. Does that remove the fact that people need help? Should they return to what brought them into sin? This is foolish talk, and sacred scripture reminds us of that.

Peele and his cohorts are not the beginning and end all you make them out to be. There are other life experiences.

Johnny,

Peele, that is so disliked also points out another community, the Jews…

Few other communities are as unified in their values as Chinatown was in the 1950s. However, ethnic and religious groups still convey strong values about substance use and abuse. One group long noted for its distinctive drinking style is the Jews. In 2000 an exhibit entitled “Drink and Be Merry: Wine and Beer in Ancient Times” came to the Jewish Museum of New York. The exhibit pointed out that Jews had, since antiquity, developed a ritualistic, moderate approach to alcohol consumption that contrasted with the periodic, orgiastic use of alcohol by neighboring tribes.

When the claim is made that Jews have historically been moderate drinkers, objections are always raised that this is no longer true. For example, whenever I mention this fact to an AA member in Los Angeles or New York, the person starts listing Jewish alcoholics he or she knows who attend their AA group.

Two upstate New York researchers, Barry Glassner and Bruce Berg, heard the same claims—and believed them. Both reported that they personally knew an alcoholic Jew who hid his drinking.

Both had read accounts that traditionally low Jewish alcoholism rates were rising. They consulted with experts, one of whom claimed that the Jewish alcoholism rate was growing alarmingly. However, after conducting intensive interviews designed to elicit hidden alcohol problems, the researchers failed to uncover a single Jewish alcohol abuser among a random sample of Jewish respondents.4 Not one respondent they questioned had been intoxicated more than a few times. Only a quarter of the sample had even heard rumors of Jews with drinking problems—generally stories about distant relatives. The accuracy of these self-reports, ironically, was upheld by the very alcoholism expert who had issued an alarm on Jewish alcoholism to the investigators.

The so-called expert on Jewish alcoholism reported that in a city of about ten thousand Jews, he knew of five Jewish alcoholics. Even this microscopic number was questioned by the other experts the researchers consulted, who said they knew at most of one or two Jews with a drinking problem.

All in all, the Jews and the Chinese are striking examples of how groups around the world determine behavior toward powerful intoxicants such as alcohol.5 And although it may be true that these groups do not exercise the control that they did in earlier decades in America, they nonetheless demonstrate how powerful, enduring, and decisive socialization by family, religious, and cultural groups can be in insulating people throughout their lives against addiction.

1. B. Glassner and B. Berg, “How Jews Avoid Alcohol Problems,” American Sociological Review 45 (August 1980): 647–64.
2. See N.E. Zinberg and W.M. Harding, eds., Control over Intoxicant Use (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982).

So if the Jews and Chinese culturally determine the acceptable behavior is it too late for Catholics to do as much and if we failed in the past should we not try to carry this message of prevention.

I am a physician and as a physician believe in prevention…if there is anything that prevents sin that it is virtue and if virtue comes by human effort someone has to tell everyone and get that message out too…

so that you may come to believe that a Power greater than yourself provided you all the means by which you might find all that you need to address temptation and avoid the

sin of addiction…

Is that asking too much?

 

[Edmundus1581]

CopticChristian,

Yes, we do agree on much. We do agree that Christianity is the true religion, and that sin and salvation cannot be replaced by addiction and recovery, however I must take issue with some of your key assumptions and arguments about 12-step programs, and, particularly, whether they (your assumptions and arguments) have any greater weight than being just your opinion.

You think A.A. is a religion. Fine. The Supreme Court thinks AA is a religion? I doubt it, but even if it’s so then that’s also fine by me. You and (possibly) the supreme court are both wrong. A.A. is not “a religion” in any normal understanding of the term - it is, in it’s own words, a “spiritual” program. It is a spiritual program with a purpose, namely to help alcoholics stop drinking. It does not have any religious purpose, nor any religious doctrines, other than this.

Statistics about the success rate of A.A are not relevant. It does work for many people - many people who credit it with saving their life. That’s enough.

The core of the spiritual program is admitting powerlessness, and turning one’s life and will over to the “God of our understanding”. This is not 'a religion" which is incompatible with Catholicism. A Catholic attends and his “God of his understanding” is God as revealed through Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church. He does not have to compromise any of this in working the 12-steps, nor subscribe to any non-Catholic beliefs or fellowship. He is a Catholic first, and an A.A member second.

You personally seem to have the opinion that this admission of “powerlessness” is not compatible with Catholicism. Again, fine. However, it’s just your opinion. In the meantime, A.A has been around for 70 years. Numerous members of the clergy have been and are members and are members and numerous others have endorsed it for the Catholic Alcoholics in their pastoral care. The Church has never condemned it, nor commented on the “powerlessness”" admission, or any of the other twelve steps.

As a brief aside, you compare A.A with other non-Catholic religions, such as JW’s, noting that silence by the Church is not endorsement. The big difference is that no Catholic clergy publicly endorse JW, or recommend it for those in their pastoral care. A.A is in the Catholic church, significantly, in a way that JW’s are not. So, the silence to date is significant.

So, you can keep your opinions. I think they are wrong. But, I don’t particularly care.You should however have the restraint to admit that they are just your opinions, and not direct Church teaching. I say “direct” to acknowledge that your argument is derived, in part, from sound Catholic teaching, however it is still only an argument. It is not infallible, and the conclusions are not binding on anyone else until they are embodied in direct Church teaching, in the form of a document from the Bishops with a statement such as “No individual is ever powerless over addiction”, or, “12 step programs are a religion” or, even, to paraphrase the one you like “12-step programs involve a rejection of the language of sin and salvation, replacing it with the morally neutral language of addiction and recovery” .

 

[CopticChristian]

CopticChristian,

Yes, we do agree on much. We do agree that Christianity is the true religion, and that sin and salvation cannot be replaced by addiction and recovery, however I must take issue with some of your key assumptions and arguments about 12-step programs, and, particularly, whether they (your assumptions and arguments) have any greater weight than being just your opinion.

You think A.A. is a religion. Fine. The Supreme Court thinks AA is a religion? I doubt it, but even if it’s so then that’s also fine by me. You and (possibly) the supreme court are both wrong. A.A. is not “a religion” in any normal understanding of the term - it is, in it’s own words, a “spiritual” program. It is a spiritual program with a purpose, namely to help alcoholics stop drinking. It does not have any religious purpose, nor any religious doctrines, other than this.

Statistics about the success rate of A.A are not relevant. It does work for many people - many people who credit it with saving their life. That’s enough.

The core of the spiritual program is admitting powerlessness, and turning one’s life and will over to the “God of our understanding”. This is not 'a religion" which is incompatible with Catholicism. A Catholic attends and his “God of his understanding” is God as revealed through Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church. He does not have to compromise any of this in working the 12-steps, nor subscribe to any non-Catholic beliefs or fellowship. He is a Catholic first, and an A.A member second.

You personally seem to have the opinion that this admission of “powerlessness” is not compatible with Catholicism. **Again, fine. However, it’s just your opinion. In the meantime, A.A has been around for 70 years. **Numerous members of the clergy have been and are members and are members and numerous others have endorsed it for the Catholic Alcoholics in their pastoral care. The Church has never condemned it, nor commented on the “powerlessness”" admission, or any of the other twelve steps.

As a brief aside, you compare A.A with other non-Catholic religions, such as JW’s, noting that silence by the Church is not endorsement. The big difference is that no Catholic clergy publicly endorse JW, or recommend it for those in their pastoral care. A.A is in the Catholic church, significantly, in a way that JW’s are not. So, the silence to date is significant.

So, you can keep your opinions. I think they are wrong. But, I don’t particularly care.You should however have the restraint to admit that they are just your opinions, and not direct Church teaching. I say “direct” to acknowledge that your argument is derived, in part, from sound Catholic teaching, however it is still only an argument. It is not infallible, and the conclusions are not binding on anyone else until they are embodied in direct Church teaching, in the form of a document from the Bishops with a statement such as “No individual is ever powerless over addiction”, or, “12 step programs are a religion” or, even, to paraphrase the one you like “12-step programs involve a rejection of the language of sin and salvation, replacing it with the morally neutral language of addiction and recovery” .

Edmundus,

It is my opinion that AA is a religion however you disagree because you state the reasons you state. Not all religions are as tightly bound as other religions, there is a spectrum. The University of Virginia used to have a site that categorized religions and it is gone. AA was one of the religions there as well.

Success rates are ultraimportant when something is labeled a disease. It works if you work it. It is not now and never will be a disease. If it is a disease then you have to imply some sort of success rate with “treatment” whatever that means in the jargon of whoever is explaining it.

You are correct that AA has been around for about 70 years and everything you say is true today. In that 70 years the Big Book and the philosophy has not changed much. I say that everything you believe about AA is true “today”…just look at the thoughts of the Reformation 500 years down the road…who knows what time will bring in understanding. Perhaps I am ahead of my time and the resistance that is felt will be less in the future. The facts will not change as facts cannot change as they are what they are.

Church teaching is correct concerning Gluttony, virtue, sin and salvation and if you disagree with this then that is your perogative. I can’t keep them to myself. When I find something of value I share it. Some like it. Some don’t. Some can attempt to dismiss facts with fancy and other do not. Some realize that testimonial is not science and others don’t. We agree then that

addiction is sin…