In my previous blog post, I recommended watching Michael Dowd’s 25-minute YouTube video titled “Serenity Prayer for the 21st Century.” Since watching that video a couple of weeks ago, I have been thinking more about the serenity prayer and I invite you, too, to take a longer look at it.
Looking at the Serenity Prayer
In its shortest form, the serenity prayer consists of three simple petitions, artistically presented as follows:
As you probably know, the serenity prayer is the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) prayer recited at
the end of each AA meeting.
AA.com also has a link to a 12-page
pdf titled “Origin of The
Serenity Prayer: A Historical Paper.” In spite of similar statements made by
various people, the conclusion is that American theologian Reinhold Niebuhr
(1892~1971) penned the prayer in its present form.
Even though Niebuhr’s prayer is universally
known as the serenity prayer, it actually includes petitions for three things: serenity,
courage, and wisdom. It is also noteworthy that serenity is linked to
acceptance. Denying or struggling against the inevitable always destroys
serenity.
This prayer, though, asks God for courage and
wisdom as well as serenity, so perhaps it should be called the
serenity/courage/wisdom prayer. Indeed, Niebuhr’s main intent may well have
been a call to courageous action, rather than a serenity that fails to work for
necessary changes in society.
Looking at the Longer Serenity Prayer
In the above-mentioned video, Dowd emphasizes the
next three lines of the serenity prayer that, he says, a lot of people don’t
know:
Living
one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace,
These are good words. Regardless of what we
have faced in the past or are going to face in the future, living and enjoying
one day/moment at a time is truly the pathway to personal peace.
Those words of
Niebuhr written in the early 1940s are similar to the emphasis on mindfulness
by Thích Nhất Hạnh, the venerable Vietnamese Buddhist monk who died on January 22.
He taught,
When we are mindful, deeply in touch with the present moment, our understanding of what is going on deepens, and we begin to be filled with acceptance, joy, peace and love.
These words by Thích Nhất Hạnh, as well as the
three lines in the serenity prayer that are not widely known, do nothing to
help solve the crisis of global warming or the likely collapse of industrial
civilization. But they do help us to live calmly and at peace in spite of looming
crises.
Looking at the Longer Serenity Prayer
The longest version
of the serenity prayer as given on the website of
Alcoholics Anonymous (and elsewhere) includes all of the lines cited above followed
by these words:
Taking,
as He did, this sinful world
As it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make things right
If I surrender to His will;
So that I may be reasonably happy in this life
And supremely happy with Him
Forever and ever in the next.
Amen.
These final lines of the serenity prayer regularly
spoken by AA members are even less widely known than the three lines mentioned
in the previous section—and are not mentioned by Dowd at all.
What does it mean to be “supremely happy with
Him [God] forever and ever in the “next” life? And how come Dowd, an ordained
Christian minister, didn’t mention these words at all?
From New Testament times on, Christians have
affirmed the reality of a coming “world without end.” Why is that emphasized so
little in so much of contemporary Christianity? This is what I will continue to
ponder as I prepare my next blog posting.
In 1920 my latest big book-mentor, Hans Philipp Ehrenberg, a WWI German war veteran and top university philosopher, published "Tragedy and the Cross". His theme? The Cross of Jesus outdid in effect and importance the whole history of planetary tragedy. On his way at the time from a shining philosophical career to becoming a Lutheran pastor (1925), he talked about being able to share in the sufferings of Christ (and thus the sufferings of the world that Dowd anticipates--I'll quote another's summary here: "All tragedy was focused on the cross of Christ. Following St Chrysostom’s assertion that suffering is inevitable, --the saint must also willingly make it his or her own. Given Ehrenberg’s assertion that the place of suffering in life is the one thing that divides the Christian from the heathen; just as Christ never completely denied his own suffering, so the imitation (= discipleship) of Christ must embrace a tragic sense of destiny, one-part personal will, another the willingness to suffer. The liberty of the disciples even in suffering includes their being included, like an ancient Greek chorus but now Christ’s own chorus who have shared in suffering yet can hover over the darkness with lyrical spirit as his own fellow sufferers, for he has granted them to be with him in another sphere freed from fate." I am still bowled over by all of this, but am prompted to reaffirm my trust in Jesus.
ReplyDeleteChrysostom lived in an age surprisingly similar to our own. His sermons and letters surge with the theme of suffering and what the Christ-followers must accept as divine will. How far, oh, how far we are from accepting that truth, serenely or otherwise.
Thanks, Dr. Summers, for your thought-provoking comments--and for introducing me (and my other blog readers) to Ehrenberg (1883~1958). I just read the Wikipedia article about him and was impressed by his influential life.
DeleteI think your emphasis on Christians sharing in Christ's sufferings is an important one, even though that is something that we find hard to do willingly. But that is something we are probably going to be called upon to do more and more in the critical days/decades ahead.
And, yes, most of us probably need to pray more for courage to face what is coming and to respond as faithful Christ-followers than to pray for serenity.
Thanks for this article on the serenity prayer. It has special meaning for me because of my own restless soul but also because of my distant links to Niebuhr. Niebuhr grew up in what would become the E&R church in southeast Missouri and attended the same seminary as I, now known as Eden Theological Seminary. He also died the same year I started seminary. His brother, H.Richard had earlier been the president of the seminary if I remember correctly. My professors knew them.
ReplyDeleteI and several other students edited a "newspaper" on campus called "Ivory Ghettos." As you can imagine from the title, we were quite the rebellious bunch. In my research in the library's archives, I discovered Reinhold, who was called "Reinie," had edited a campus paper early in the 20th century.
In seminary I read a lot of Niebuhr and wrote a paper from the perspective, at that time, of an anti-war pacifist critical of his "Realpolitik." Later, I changed my mind for various reasons, among which I read even more of his stuff, and in many ways he convinced me of his views.
It is curious that in my UCC circles Reinhold Niebuhr was often cited by conservative-leaning people for politically conservative reasons. When I got into him much more, I realized they didn't know what they were talking about. His most cited book, Moral Man and Immoral Society, which is must reading, and is largely an argument against applying personal morality principles to collectives such as nations, ends with a paragraph I think they never got around to reading. It follows this statement: "...the social intelligence of the general community, or rather of all classes in the community, can rise higher than its present level, even if there are limits beyond which it cannot rise." The final paragraph:
“In the task of that redemption the most effective agents will be men who have substituted some new illusions for the abandoned ones. The most important of these illusions is that the collective life of mankind can achieve perfect justice. It is a very valuable illusion for the moment; for justice cannot be approximated if the hope of its perfect realization does not generate a sublime madness in the soul. Nothing but such madness will do battle with malignant power and ‘spiritual wickedness in high places.’ The illusion is dangerous because it encourages terrible fanaticisms. It must therefore be brought under the control of reason. One can only hope that reason will not destroy it before its work is done.”
Thanks, Anton, for your substantial comments on Reinhold Niebuhr and for sharing your personal connection with him and his brother because of being a student at Eden Seminary.
DeleteI have long been an admirer, and critic, of Niebuhr, and you and other readers may (or may not) recall that by 6/19/17 blog post was titled "Remembering Reinie." I also referred to him in my 3/25/20 post about "The Limits of Liberalism." I wrote in that article, and in my book, "Reinhold Niebuhr was an American theologian who early began to question theological liberalism. His 'Moral Man and Immoral Society' (1932) struck a blow at the optimistic view of humanity long held by liberalism."
On the matter of war, though, I agree with Mennonite John Howard Yoder who directly rejected Niebuhr's rejection of Christian pacifism.
In my "Introduction to Theology" classes in Japan, I used to tell my students that Reinhold Niebuhr was the most famous theologian born in Missouri. (They knew I was a Missourian.) He and his brother were both born in Wright City, which now is on I-70, about 50 miles west of downtown St. Louis.
What you wrote about younger brother H. Richard, of whom I have also been an admirer, spurred me to look him up on Wikipedia. It says that he taught at Eden Seminary from 1919~24 and from 1927~31, but from 1924~27 he was president of Elmhurst College in Illinois. He left Eden in 1931 to become a professor at Yale.
UCC clergy in the Midwest used to jest that life is a matter of "Elmhurst, Eden, and Eternity!"
DeleteI have known very little about Elmhurst, but I just now read that what is now Elmhurst University was originally Elmhurst Proseminary and that the first students were all male. All classes were taught in German, and it wasn't until 1917 that the catalog was published in English.
DeleteAlso, "Niebuhr Hall was dedicated in 1962 in honor of theologian Helmut Richard Niebuhr, the university's sixth president and 1912 graduate of the Elmhurst Proseminary, and his brother Reinhold Niebuhr, theologian and 1910 graduate of the Proseminary."
Thinking Friend Glenn Hinson in Kentucky comments,
ReplyDelete"Leroy, but I have given the prayer a different slant:
God, grant me the ability to change the things that can be changed, the serenity to accept those that cannot be changed, and the wisdom to know the difference.
It seems to me that we should begin with the positive.
Thanks, Dr. Hinson, for sharing your revision of Niebuhr's famous prayer. I think you have a point in beginning with the positive--but I wonder which we need most to change the things that need to be changed, the ability or the courage to do that.
DeleteI have had some question about praying for the courage (or ability) "to change the things that can be changed," for certainly not everything needs to be changed. Perhaps that is also why we need to pray for wisdom, to see what needs to be changed and what doesn't.
The ethical backbone of Abrahamic religions is expressed through the Hebrew prophets who died fighting to protect the poor, exploited by royalty and priesthood. Biblical religion becomes "Good against Evil." Buddhism is criticized for being weak on social justice--lacking a basic Good vs Evil dualistic structure.
ReplyDeleteJesus joins Buddhists in radical monotheism, evil being redeemed through absorption by agape love. "Love your enemies, pray for your enemies, forgive your enemies." Jesus died for his enemies.
Job also refuses dualism: "Naked I came from my mothers womb and naked shall I return. The Lord gave and the Lord (not Satan) has taken away. Blessed be the name the Lord."
The Serenity Prayer is the healing of the fake dualism promoted by popular Christianity and a return to the monotheist Yin Yang of Jesus in redemptive reconciliation of Good and Evil.
Good to hear from you again, Dickson, and I appreciate your thought-provoking comments.
DeleteRather than radical "monotheism," I wonder if you mean "non-dualism." Some contemporary Christian thinkers--and I am thinking particularly of Fr. Richard Rohr--emphasize the importance of non-dual thinking and link such thinking to Asian spirituality. But as Buddhists generally do not speak about God, I find it hard to refer to them as "monotheists." But certainly they, and especially those who ae Zen Buddhists, are non-dualists.
I am one who has been critical of traditional Buddhism for being weak on social justice and because of that was quite positive about Thích Nhất Hạnh's emphasis on "engaged Buddhism." So while I greatly appreciate the emphasis on non-duality--and paradoxical thinking is directly linked to such an emphasis--I also think there is not only an important place for prophets, such as those in the Old Testament, but that there is also a definite prophetic aspect to some of Jesus' words and actions.
Here are more thought-provoking comments, these from local Thinking Friend (and good personal friend) Debra Sapp-Yarwood.
ReplyDelete"Ah, Leroy, I agree that your last blog post was your most important out of close to 1,000. I have watched, pausing frequently to reflect, both of Dowd's 'predicament description videos. He's pricked my conscience, set me into grief, which is complicated by moral injury -- since I can think of so many ways I have contributed to the predicament we're in, often capriciously. . . .
"Returning to my once Unitarian Universalist mindset, I can tell you that these lines are troubling on many grounds. They take universal concern for the interdependent web of all existence and its salvation/redemption, and they turn it personal, which many find selfish and sinful. In other words, many progressive Christians and others see this language as cheapening grace. It's all about ME being supremely happy with HIM (also problematic for those who don't anthropomorphize or male-ify the Creator). The line 'Trusting that He will make things right' evokes a Santa Claus God and his magic-wand son, Jesus, who ask nothing of us but to praise their names and accept their greatness, with no need to trouble ourselves to help them realize any of their Love-in-action objectives on earth, beyond getting other people to praise their names. "
"Of course, this is not the only way to 'hear' these lines, but it is a legitimate way, especially for those who have escaped religious abuse as it is perpetrated by Fundamentalism. Moreover, these lines are highly appropriate in the context of AA, where people are earnestly dealing with a personal demon that gets in the way of them being active participants in Love-in-action.
"Nevertheless, these words are not so easily applied directly to the social sin of global warming, nor are they comforting in the presence of the depth of grief and moral injury that accepting global warming, and one's part in it, imposes."
Thanks for your comments, Debra, and I was impressed that you actually watched/listened to some of Dowd's videos. (You are the first person to indicate having done so.) But did you listen to his video on the Serenity Prayer? I found it interesting that he, being the one who speaks so convincingly of the coming collapse of TEOTWAWKI, also is the one who made a video about the Serenity Prayer, which is, as you point out, about individuals finding personal serenity rather it being more inclusive of other people.
DeleteAs to Niebuhr's use of masculine pronouns for God, that was the universal way God was spoken of 80 years ago when he wrote the prayer, but from what I know about Niebuhr, I am quite sure that had he lived longer he would have ceased speaking of God in masculine terms--and perhaps would even have revised the Serenity Prayer.
And then I received these comments from Thinking Friend Larry Riedinger in Wisconsin:
ReplyDelete"There is a strong parallel between calmly facing major societal problems and a thesis in Karen Armstrong’s "The Great Transformation: The Beginnings of Our Religious Traditions." Our living traditions began during times when old structures were collapsing and inner peace was discovered that could replace fear/despair with more useful responses."
Thanks for sharing your comments, Larry. It was good to hear from you again.
DeleteI have read some of Karen Armstrong's work and even heard her speak in person once, but I have not read any of The Great Transformation. I think what you wrote in your last sentence is most probably true--but the difference between then and now, according to Dowd and others, is that it is not just "old structures" that are collapsing but the whole civilized world as we know it.
I just read a Bloomberg Opinion by Andreas Kluth, titled "'Sapiens'? Humans Aren't Wise. Just Too Smart for Our Good." He channels Hamlet as he tries to figure out what kind of a piece of work is man. He compares launching the new Webb telescope to probe the birth of the universe with the current dance of death over the future of Ukraine. You can read his take here: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-01-29/sapiens-is-too-wise-a-designation-for-humans-try-homo-stultum-instead
ReplyDeleteSerenity makes a late appearance in the movie we discussed in the last blog, "Don't Look Up!" Well, at least for the scientists who only find it when they accept that it is too late to save the world, so they gather with friends and family for a Last Supper. Of course, the POTUS seemed to have serenity throughout the movie, right up until she said "...feathers?"
Courage seems to be the divine discontent that sometimes drives us to seek change, even if it costs us both serenity and wisdom. Think about John Brown, the ardent abolitionist, whose rebellion against slavery lead to his arrest and execution. At his trial he never plead for his life, he only condemned slavery. After his execution he seemed a fool and a failure. Then, months later, Union soldiers around their campfires were singing "John Brown's body lies a-moldering in the grave..." How can one measure it? He was arrested by none other than General Robert E. Lee. Did Lee see the blood that was to come? Brown's song continued, "He's gone to be a soldier in the army of our Lord..." His "Glory Hally, Hallelujah!" still echos through the reworking of his song, The Battle Hymn of the Republic. What is our wisdom to make of all of that?
Wisdom comes by recognizing that our scientific theories and religious doctrines are just as approximate and fallible as our personal opinions. As the scientists discussed in "Don't Look Up!" we need peer review. We all need peer review. Really, that is the basic argument for democracy. We are wiser together than we are individually, even if history does need a occasional John Brown. Unfortunately, just as a rich patron can slant peer review, so wealthy donors can skew democracy. Plenty of both happen today. Fortunately, on this blog, we only have words and ideas, so hopefully we have a chance to be wiser together!
Craig, thanks, as always, for your thoughtful comments, and I was especially interested in what you wrote about John Brown, as I have long been interested in him--and especially since visiting the Harper's Ferry area several years ago--and seeing the huge painting of him on the second floor of the Kansas Capitol. While far too many people were basking in the serenity of accepting what they thought couldn't be changed about the slave system, Brown had the courage to try to change the system. Perhaps what he did was not very wise, but I have more appreciation for his courage than for all those at that time who were interested only in their own serenity.
Delete