There are many pathways to substance abuse.. and some of them are like a growing sapling. When they are young, they can be snapped..but as they grow, it becomes more difficult.

Pericles, welcome to the thread, but this is not about goodness or badness. It is about substance abuse and the triggers thereof and ways out of it.

I don't see what unrepentant priests have to do with it. But you make one important contribution in showing that 'knowing' is not the answer, it must be translated into the will for the knowledge to be of value. That a priest can 'know' about child sexual abuse being absoulutely wrong...and yet carry it out repeatedly, should tell you something about the type of training and selection methods for priests.

When a person is in a state of depression, and has an accompanying dependance, it seems to me important to recognize the triggers.
If one of the triggers is "lack of hope... lack of meaning" then clearly that need must be dealt with.

In some cases the trigger is from a complex situation which the person cannot recognize themselves. Counselling of course can help in this.

The point I was trying to make though in the last post, was that brain chemistry is definitely changed through a repentance and faith experience. It is a change of huge and dramatic proportions.

If you pull someone back from the brink of suicide, they need much more than the 'rich tapestry' of life as you sometimes put it.

Dear Faustino
I had a look at that Vipassana idea. I can see how such an approach might help a person who simply wants a physical solution to the problem.
It seems to be like a 'detoxification' avenue.

The problems I see with it are as follows:

The only hope it offers is a this worldly one. It relies on your own inner workings to succeed. I was discussing this issue of suicide with some young blokes at gym last night, and once (all pretty rough blokey types) they got past the non serious stuff, it came out that they agreed about trying to tell the person that there is hope.. and filling their mind with positive thoughts. We all agreed that being with the person through the most difficult first few nights alone would be beneificial.
I think once that most dangerous phase is passed, then things like meditation might offer some glimmer of self help.

But consider this. Meditating (praying) on/to a real resurrected Lord who assures us of His unfailing abiding presense in our hearts, and providing us with a lifelong framework of fellowship and love...all of which reinforces that glorious hope of John 14:1ff "In my Fathers house are many rooms..if it were not so I would have told you" all backed up by the resurrection of Jesus..the conversion of Paul, the great promises and assurances "In Him the fullness of deity dwells bodily"
"And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus."

33"I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.

You mentioned a strict moral code. But the difficulty I have with this is that apart from Gautama Buddah's version of 'moral code' it has no other foundation. He died... the end. Why would his code be better than Bill Hensons? This is the difference between Christ and all contenders.

"We serve a risen savior, he is in the world today" as the_hymn goes.

Boaz, you have a very selective memory.

>>this is not about goodness or badness. It is about substance abuse and the triggers thereof and ways out of it. I don't see what unrepentant priests have to do with it.<<

it was you yourself who introduced the concept that some form of "repentance" is a factor in addressing the problem:

>>(Repentance) After, or proceeding from, that change of direction (an act of the will) our brain chemistry will alter in a positive way.<<

I was merely pointing out that "repentance" is an empty word in this context, hence my reference to priests - who, I believe, in all probability, given their calling, would have in fact been "repentant" of their deeds.

You inserted the word "unrepentant" yourself, simply in order to distance yourself from the unpleasant fact, that your religion offers repentance as some manner of formal self-excusing, self-healing process.

It is a highly self-indulgent process, where the "forgiveness" is of a kind they believe to be far superior to that - if it were offered - of the people whose lives they destroyed.

Most of the people I know who deal directly with drug problems on a daily, as opposed to a casual basis, are Salvos. All of those of my acquaintance keep - deliberately - their religion well separate from their attempts to bring constructive self-awareness to those they are helping.

They believe that direct moral and physical support is the first order of business. As do most of those they have helped, when they in turn try to encourage others to break the dependence cycle.

While some addicts do indeed use religion as some form of spiritual methadone, actually helping people taking control themselves tends to be of more certain, and longer-lasting, benefit.

Pericles: << Boaz, you have a very selective memory. >>

Indeed. He seems to be avoiding answering my question about why, if the solution to substance abuse lies in acceptance of the "Word of God", his son is apparently abusing alcohol.

Has Porky Jr strayed from the Word and therefore in need of repentance? Or could it be that there are other factors in play here that have little to do with Porky's hypothesis that addiction is caused by godlessness?

Whether it be sons or priests/clergy.... each individual is responsible for their own actions.

Pericles... the law is still the law..and there is no amount of self excusing that can run roughshod over criminal acts. On reflection, people caught doing illegal things might well regret.. but regret what? that they were caught? that is for sure.. but regret the mindset which caused the behavior.. let's hope so..but even if this is the case, the law is still applicable.
So..again..I don't see what your reference has to do with it all. If a priest/clergy person allows themselves to develop attitudes which are 180 degrees opposed to the specific and clear teaching of Christ.. then they are in sin.... absolutely.

I don't want the thread to be sidetracked or hijacked. I think most of what needed to be said has been..unless you can offer something about the pathway...the triggers and the way out?

A very long time ago a young man came to my door to talk to me about God (I think he was a Baptist).

I got chatting to him on the doorstep, being young and wanting to push my own barrow about why God could not exist.

It turned out the young man had been a drug addict and had found his way out via God. Considering the Church he had chosen, from my understanding of it, was one of those "hell-fire and holy water, speaking in tongues types". I couldn't help thinking that he had just replaced one addiction for another and how his condition had been exploited by others for some missionary purpose.

He was a nice lad but the fervour and extremism that had been fuelled in him disturbed me and I could see how this fervour could easily turn into fanatacism with rose coloured glasses. It is this sort of fanaticism that enables terrorism when the conditions are ripe enough.