I find his work down to earth, approachable, undogmatic and tender
Most valuable to me is his for lack of a better term non-violence. I've never read or heard him say negative things about other schools or teachings. He simply puts out his approach to things and lets you free to take, pick, choose, whatever. For example he gives _criteria_ for a practice, a teaching, a community.
The other extremely valuable aspect is his explicit approach to trauma, to overcoming deep rooted early onset trauma, little by little.
He fluently moves between traditions, if he is teaching a Christian audience then he'll use Christinesian lingo, if he is in a neutral settings (like training therapists) he'll "translate" concepts, like "contemplative church" or "sangha" or Ashram"; or "blind" and "see" vs "unknowing" and "awakened". Like a stream enterer would know that rituals are valuable (to some or many) but interchangeable or not useful to some. Which leads me to the third valuable thing: I'm rooted in a very liberal Catholicism and it's rituals, noises, smell and lingo feel "home" to me while the Zen noises, smells and lingo confused me, while not being _substantially_ different.
so in summary I was happy to find someone in the intersection of being trauma sensitive (healing even), being open minded and seeing Jesus-as-Zen-teacher-not-mage.
:-)
on the cac.org site they host some podcast, teaching series, really, with nice transcripts even:
