THE LORD’S PRAYER – OH, LORDY!!

By bob k.

Before There Was AA

The founder of the Oxford Group – a Christian evangelical movement that gave birth to AA – Frank Nathaniel Daniel Buchman began his life in the small town (pop. 1,200) of Pennsburg, Pennsylvania, on June 4th, 1878. That was about fourteen months before Bob Smith was born in St. Johnsbury, Vermont.

Buchman’s mother was a devout Lutheran who had grand ambitions for her son. The family moved to Allentown (pop. 18,000) so that their son could attend high school. No more than an average student, Buchman nevertheless moved on to Muhlenburg College and Mount Airy Seminary and was ordained a Lutheran minister in 1902.

He remained average but fellow students viewed him as ambitious.

A few years into his first posting, he resigned in bitterness over what he viewed as unjust treatment at the hand of bureaucrats. After an extended holiday in Europe, he was hired as Secretary of the Penn State College YMCA (YOUNG MEN’S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION). At the university, Buchman managed to convert and reform two notorious drunkards, “Pop” Golden, the football coach and Bill “Pickle,” a local bootlegger. The redemption of seemingly hopeless alcoholics provided dramatic evidence to those with lesser failings of the limitless power of the Lord.

Eventually, Buchman departed from the Lutherans. Throughout his career, according to his biographer, “conflicts with institutional authorities prompted his departure. In 1921, this history of friction culminated in his decision to quit the church proper and create his own organization.” The new venture was financed by wealthy sponsors and later came to be called the Oxford Group.

In 1931, Buchman associate Samuel Moor Shoemaker (1893-1963) elicited a decision for Christ that stopped the drinking of Russell “Bud” Firestone, a chronic alcoholic and son of rubber magnate Harvey Firestone. Grateful that his son was still sober sixteen months later, the noted industrialist hosted a ten day gala in January, 1933 and Akron. Ohio became an Oxford Group stronghold. Anne Smith attended the January celebration and, shortly thereafter, began dragging her seriously alcoholic husband to local OG meetings. Re-exposure to the Christianity of his youth had no appreciable effect on the physician’s drinking.

The Start of Alcoholics Anonymous

On Mother’s Day of 1935, the doctor had a long conversation with Bill Wilson and the power of one alcoholic talking with another was demonstrated. Following a week-long relapse about a month later, Dr. Bob never again drank alcohol. Smith embraced Wilson’s plan of helping others as a way of helping themselves. Over the summer, Bill D. and Ernie G. joined in the coffee drinking. Many others tried and failed or declined the offer of a religious solution.

To be clear, these early Christian warriors neither were called Alcoholics Anonymous nor were they what later became Alcoholics Anonymous. Members of the “alcoholic squad” of the Oxford Group were carrying William James’s message that “the only cure for dipsomania is religiomania.” When Bill Wilson had asked Ebby, in late November or early December of 1934, how he was staying sober, the reply was “I’ve got religion.”

After exiting Towns Hospital in mid-December, the future AA founder immediately began attending the gatherings of the Christian group as well as trolling the Calvary Mission for conversion prospects. The Akron alcoholics met regularly with other Groupers at the home of T. Henry and Clarace Williams. The Lord’s Prayer was standard fare at these gatherings. Appropriately so. It was a band of Christians getting together for what was essentially a prayer meeting. The bible was read. People testified. Newly sober drunks were taken upstairs to make kneeling surrenders to Jesus Christ. There are no reports of surrenders to “God, as we understood Him,” to Nature, to the Universe, or to doorknobs. The solution was religious and the solution was Christian.

Rabid Evangelistic non-alcoholics such as Henrietta Seiberling played prominent roles in bringing religion to the alcoholic “sinners.” It was less of a case of the alcoholics being rehabilitated as being returned to the flock. The newly sober drunkards were urged to pray many times a day. For his part, Dr. Bob became inflexible. Jim Burwell would have been shown the door in short order in Akron. “Sorry. We cannot help you.”

The Bigga Booka

In his diligently researched 2019 offering, Writing The Big Book : The Creation of AA, the subtitle of William Schaberg’s book tells us the author’s opinion of when AA began. In crafting the Bigga Booka, the AA founder did exactly what AA fundamentalists tell us not to do. He took what he wanted and left the rest, at least in regard to Oxford Group practices.

The name “Jesus” does not appear in the 1939 publication and “Christ” appears only once. That is an historical reference to Wilson’s church exposure as a youngster. Oxford Group practices such as the 4 Absolutes—honesty, unselfishness, purity, and love—were jettisoned. Not big on absolute purity, Bill W.? I think I’m with you on that. Wilson wisely lobbied against the pushing of “absolutes” at alcoholics. The 5 C’s—conviction, confession, contribution, conversion, and continuance—can be found, in part, but formally are gone. This is not to say that on April 10, 1935, when the Bigga Booka rolled off the presses, that which had been left on the cutting room floor ceased playing a role in the sobriety of the pioneers.

Quite to the contrary.

The New Yorkers’ book did not stop the Akronites from continuing to do what they had been doing in the pre-book era. Bibles were not shelved, mention of Jesus Christ did not become verboten, and Absolutes and C’s remained at the core of sober strategies. That continued for decades, according to Ohioans, and lingers into the 21st century.

Things were different in New York. One thing was consistent—the use of Christianity’s most famous prayer in AA meeting formats. That was a good deal more understandable in America of the 1930s than it is in today’s more secular world.

Excuses

In 1991, I was told that the Lord’s Prayer was generic, notwithstanding its Christian roots. Bill Wilson had said the same in letters written before the U.S. Supreme Court ruled differently. Thank you Madalyn Murray O’Hair.

That Christianity’s Numero Uno prayer is generic is laughable.

Currently, I’m told that using the LP is purely a group conscience decision. So would serving champagne at medallion celebrations, I suppose. Groups are autonomous and can vote to do wrong things but those things are still wrong.

A classic excuse that gets dusted off and trotted out is that “We’ve always closed our meetings that way.” The “We’ve always” defence is one we encounter frequently in the traditional groups of Alcoholics Anonymous. There is a powerful sentiment opposing change in general and, most especially, any alteration to the Bigga Booka 86 years after its 1939 release.

Before I get accused of being a basher – going too negative – I’ll acknowledge that AA has helped many, many people. Not the least of those was Maury K., my late father who recently passed the 64 year mark since his last drink. Add my time to that and my immediate family has strong reasons to be grateful to Alcoholics Anonymous.

Nevertheless, one might wonder how many hundreds of thousands, or even millions, more came and went because of the silliness they found in chapters like “TO WIVES” or “WE AGNOSTICS?” How many left because they encountered traces of the Christianity of their childhood — a religion long ago abandoned?

There have been hundreds of thousands of women alcoholics helped by AA. And yet, even in the most recent production of our book, the alcoholic is male and the problem drinker’s spouse is a “wife.” In some camps, there was outrage that the chapter was titled “TO PARTNERS” in the recently released Plain Language Big Book. The term “partners” is “woke,” apparently.

AA has no exit polls, but many exit quite quickly. Are some driven away when the hear that AA is “spiritual not religious,” and then see evidence to the contrary?

The time has come to ditch the Lord’s Prayer. It’s terrible outreach.

Amen.


Daily Reflections for Modern Twelve Step Recovery written by bob k. and published by AA Agnostica on January 1, 2025 is being well-received. Many secular groups are using readings as meeting topics. Other books by bob k. are Key Players in AA History and The Secret Diaries of Bill W.


For a PDF of today’s article, click here: THE LORD’S PRAYER – OH, LORDY!!


28 Responses

  1. Chip B. says:

    Sorry you feel that way about the Lord’s Prayer. It’s kind of like I’ve heard in many secular and nonsecular meetings, “I’d give you a rainbow but you would probably moan about the colors”. I was following right along with you until you made the mention about the group conscience being wrong if they voted to have their meeting in with the Lord’s Prayer. I’m trying to figure out who are you to say whether it’s right or wrong? Just a question it seems like you have made yourself an authority, and I can see how that could happen when you have written books that are being sold,… like making a profit on your opinion I guess.

    So even though it may possibly disturb you, I will recite the Lord’s Prayer and asking for your prosperity. I will enjoy reading the further responses, because like they say everybody has an opinion. And yours is yours and mine is mine, until you make mention that mine is wrong. Blessings to you whether secular or not.

    • bob k. says:

      AA professes non-alliance and non-affiliation. Closing AA meetings with Christianity’s Number One prayer creates an affiliation and alliance with one group and thus discriminates against others.

      That Christians have no objection is not shocking.

    • Bill says:

      Hey patience and tolerance is our code. I love our preamble only if we would practice it literally. We live in a world now where your opinion is your opinion and my opinion is my opinion, but when we get to the point where we’re looking at your opinion is 1+2 is four I’m sorry I can’t go with the flow. Let’s really practice our preamble thank you Bill Greene born again cosmic naturalist/gnostic.

  2. Richard J. says:

    Thank You Roger for the article and thank you for AA Agnostica and starting The We Agnostics Group.

  3. Mike R. says:

    Many groups here in the Washington DC area have dispensed with the Lord’s Prayer. After all, it’s not “Conference Approved,” as I understand it, which is to say, it’s not from recognized AA literature anyway. Strangely, in one group I attended, we had one member leave the group after the decision was made to no longer recite the prayer, and that one person was Jewish. Go figure.

  4. Marina R. says:

    I’ve also come across a comment by Bill W that tolerating and participating in the Lord’s Prayer was an act of necessary humility [submission?] for newcomers. I’ve often wanted to raise the topic of its removal at our group’s Business Meetings but have always decided against it, realizing that it had the potential to sow unreconcilable divisions within the group [basic principle that personal recovery depends on unity, eh] and could jeopardize its very survival. The issue is now among my “it is what it is” things, and my own convictions are simply not that important, overall. Especially here in the boonies where meetings are sparse, unlike the wealth of options available in metropolitan areas.

  5. Daniel N C. says:

    Amen

  6. Judi says:

    The Big Book thumpers of AA and Alanon with their insistence on using the Lord’s Prayer are the opposite of the purpose of recovery.

  7. robert says:

    You have my vote.

  8. Olivier D. says:

    Thank you for your article. Truth has nothing to do with the numbers. I agree. And the false argument “who you are” is also inadequate.

    If you can’t find a tree in a forest, or if you need to be an “expert” for that, get yourself a brain.

  9. Jonathan says:

    As an atheist the lords prayer was always kinda hypocritical being said at AA meetings which claims to be a non religious organization. Considering it all started from the Oxford group. At the end meetings we hold hands and say many different prayers which I really don’t know why we have to say any prayers at all. Even though I do hold hands but not say the lords prayer and pretty much ignore the religious parts of the big book, I still have been able to stay sober now over 35 years. So I take what I need and leave the rest.

  10. Sherman L. says:

    I had read that Emmet Fox, “Sermon on the Mount”, is the source of the lord’s prayer in AA. Several old timers I’ve spoken with agree.

  11. John M. says:

    Thanks for the history, Bob. Wonder how they will end the main sessions at the International in Vancouver this summer?

    • bob k. says:

      No “Lord’s Prayer” is what I’m hearing.

      • John M. says:

        When the Very Reverend Ward Ewing was Chair of the AA Trustees he said he was shocked that The Lord’s Prayer was the closer for The AA International Convention (after having attended it for the first time). He said that because he is in the God business, it’s an appropriate closer at Christian events but he didn’t think it had any business being in an AA event. Most of us agree with the good Reverend.

        • bob k. says:

          BOOM!!! Similar thoughts were expressed in an article in the Grapevine, a Protestant minister said he LOVED the LP and uttered it several times daily. Nonetheless, he saw it as totally inappropriate in AA meetings.

  12. Richard Clark says:

    This article appears to be yet another subtly camouflaged diatribe against religion that does nothing to promote recovery for atheists or legitimate agnostics. It generates conflict. I see no point in complaining about or analyzing the failings and religious prejudices of what was going on 90 or 100 years ago. It is certainly fascinating that articles that “explain history” are so often barbed with blaming and righteous criticism of religion or religious types. Hiding or harbouring resentment or blame underneath what is presented as “fair-minded” historical analysis is common. A similar nonacceptance and criticism of atheists and agnostics by religious members is what was done to us, now we get to do it to them? Stooping to that level only generates defensive conflict which is evident in the posted responses by religious persons. Marching to the beat of disagreement does not advance the parade. But then… there is a reciprocal irresponsibility that religious people who read this atheist/agnostic website are looking for things to argue about. It is impossible to move ahead into compassionate harmony or serenity of mind when we are minding other people’s business. It is wise to guard against having one eye identifying other people’s questionable behaviour that we disapprove of—whether that’s last week or a century ago. Resentment and blame are reflections of each other. We must drop the word blame from our speech and thought… even when we can slyly rationalize it.

    • bob k. says:

      There is no attack on religion but you cannot have it both ways. The very Christian Oxford Group was fully justified in using the Lord’s Prayer. The essay states that. However, AA stepped away from Christianity to some broader, more inclusive spirituality. AA claims non affiliation and non alliance.

      The Lord’s Prayer creates such an alliance and this hypocrisy is under attack, not religion.

      There is no telling how many thousands have left AA because they viewed it as a Christian group.

      • Larry K says:

        “This universality of religion is recognized by the Alcoholics Anonymous. Their meetings are attended by Catholics, Protestants, Jews, near-agnostics, and near-atheists. There is the utmost tolerance. It seems of no concern to the group with what religious bodies non-church-going members eventually identify themselves; indeed there is no pressure to join any church whatever. What particularly impresses me is the fact that each individual can conceive of the Power-not-himself in whatever terms he pleases.”

        Rev.Dilworth Lupton’s sermon was turned into one of the first pamphlets about AA. It was titled Mr. X and alcoholics anonymous. He recognized that one of AA’s strengths in 1939, was that it functioned pluralisticly. He mentions Catholics, Protestants, near agnostics and near atheists as well as Jews.

        86 years later I think we can strive for language all find acceptable.

  13. Teresa J. says:

    Agree. Terrible outreach, especially in these times AND for quite some time. Thanks for great article. Teresa, Monterey CA

  14. Jay says:

    A frustration I have with all forms of AA I have tried is the consistent pre-occupation with form over substance and protocol over effectiveness.

    By that I mean the discussion tends to revolve around whether this prayer or that one is best, is this literature or that approved and whose steps are most proper?

    Perhaps the question should be are we an open-minded enough organization to maintain a big tent with everyone seeking recovery welcome? Or are we so myopic that simply is not who we are?

  15. Lance B. says:

    As a member of small groups in small towns which must cater to all demographics, I think the lord’s prayer is wrong and should not be encouraged. It excludes a large portion of the population and drilling “and god could and would if he were sought” for example, into my brain at every meeting is similar to the propaganda I was fed every Sunday morning, Wed choir, Sunday night Luther League, and grace at home with a prayer before bedtime. No wonder it took me 50 years to clear up my thinking. But once over the hump, what a joy to not need to be right all the time. Or as Marya Hornbacher wrote from this mornings reflection, to be able to simply not expect an answer and still function well.

  16. John L. says:

    If AA is not “religious” as claimed TLP clearly does not belong. By declaring itself non-religious AA is shedding it’s origins in Christian groups. The AA Preamble clearly states this. Anyone is free to pray in their hearts at any time to anything. AA is about getting sober even though the Great Big Book says otherwise.

    Many AA members really want AA to be a cult or a church or some kind of mystery religion or secret society because that is what makes them feel comfortable – and oh so specially spiritual!

    That is fine – just do not do it around me and expect my participation.

    It has always seemed apparent to me that AA is not about telling people do stuff or making them do stuff. The codification of the Steps – while beneficial to many – was a step backwards in my idea of treating ethanol addiction. It seems the Steps become the objective instead of sobriety and Peace of Mind.

    If you believe that God can grant you sobriety then go and bother Him about it all the whole day and all night and leave me alone.

    I shall be outside howling at the Moon.

  17. Lance B. says:

    “I’d give you a rainbow but you would probably moan about the colors”. What, Chip? My experience with Bob K. and other nonbelievers is that they are open minded and will allow you to believe as you wish. It is the Christians in the crowd who are troubled by and complain about us. It makes sense in that believing one knows who created them, etc. will complain about ideas which do not conform to their confident idea of reality. To them we are wrong. To us you simply are brainwashed but we don’t need to change that. Or the colors of the rainbow or much of anything beyond our control.

  18. Jeb B. says:

    What we call The Lord’s Prayer is really a poor translation of what writers of the gospels penned. It is simply one more piece of the myth built around an early cult. Furthermore, it enforces the idea of a codependent dependance upon an imaginary being from a pre-scientific, flat earth cosmology, world view. We know better today!

  19. Allan C. says:

    The only reason I stayed was because of Jim Burwell’s the vicious cycle.

    In my opinion as I come in to my 58th year Jim Saved AA.

  20. Hilary J. says:

    Amen to that! The Lord’s Prayer is a deal-breaker for me. I’m very grateful to have finally found a meeting in Montreal that doesn’t conclude with “Our Father.” The idea that it’s “generic” is absurd. (I would grant that status to the Serenity Prayer, however.)

    I’m agnostic. If there is a god, it sure as hell is not my father!

  21. Brendan M. says:

    Hi… I just wanted to say, I really really enjoyed this reading…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Translate »

Discover more from AA Agnostica

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading