Aa history Lovers 2004 moderators Nancy Olson and Glenn F. Chesnut page
Yüklə 1,35 Mb.
|
|
aware that such forces must never be ruling among us, lest we perish altogether. The Tradition of personal anonymity and no honors at the public level is our protective shield. We dare not meet the power temptation naked. Of course, we quite understand the high value of honors outside our Fellowship. We always find inspiration when these are deservedly bestowed and humbly received as the hallmarks of distinguished attainment or service. We say only that in our special circumstances it would be imprudent for us to accept them for AA achievement. For example: My own life story gathered for years around an implacable pursuit of money, fame, and power, anti-climaxed by my near sinking in a sea of alcohol. Though I survived that grim misadventure, I well understand that the dread neurotic germ of the power contagion has survived in me also. It is only dormant, and it can again multiply and rend me - and AA, too. Tens of thousands of my fellow AAs are temperamentally just like me. Fortunately, they know it, and I know it. Hence our Tradition of anonymity, and hence my clear obligation to decline this signal honor with all the immediate satisfaction and benefit it could have yielded. True, the splendid citation you propose, which describes me as "W. W.," does protect my anonymity for the time being. Nevertheless, it would surely appear on the later historical record that I had taken an LL.D. The public would then know the fact. So, while I might accept the degree within the letter of AA's Tradition as of today, I would surely be setting the stage for a violation of its spirit tomorrow. This would be, I am certain, a perilous precedent to set. Though it might be a novel departure, I'm wondering if the Yale Corporation could consider giving AA itself the entire citation, omitting the degree to me. In such an event, I will gladly appear at any time to receive it on behalf of our Society. Should a discussion of this possibility seem desirable to you, I'll come to New Haven at once. Gratefully yours, William G. W Six days later, Mr. Holden replied: Dear Mr. W : I have waited to respond to your letter, of February 2 until we had a meeting of the Committee on Honorary Degrees, which has now taken place, and I want to report to you on behalf of the committee that after hearing your magnificent letter, they all wish more than ever they could award you the degree - though it probably in our opinion isn't half good enough for you. The entire committee begged me to tell you in as genuine a way as I can how very deeply they appreciated your considering this invitation as thoroughly and thoughtfully and unselfishly as you have. We understand completely your feelings in the matter, and we only wish there were some way we could show you our deep sense of respect for you and AA. Some day, the opportunity will surely come. Meanwhile, I should say that it was also the feeling of the committee that honorary degrees are, like knighthoods, bestowed on individuals, and that being the tradition, it would seem logical that we look in other ways than an honorary-degree award for the type of recognition that we should like to give the organization in accordance with the suggestion you made in your last paragraph. I hope this may be possible. I send you the warmest greetings of the president of Yale University and of the entire corporation and assure you of our sincere admiration and good wishes for the continued contribution you are making to the welfare of this country. Cordially yours, Reuben A. Holden
March 1, 1954 Dear Mr. Holden, Your letter of February 8th, in which you record the feelings of the Yale Corporation respecting my declination of the degree of Doctor of Laws, has been read with great relief and gratitude. I shall treasure it always. Your quick and moving insight into AA's vital need to curb its future aspirants to power, the good thought you hold of me, and your hope that the Yale Corporation might presently find the means of giving Alcoholics Anonymous a suitable public recognition, are something for the greatest satisfaction. Please carry to the president of Yale and to every member of the board my lasting appreciation. Devotedly yours, Bill W
the AA General Service Board at the time of this offer to Bill. The former trustee, Cliff W. of California, recalls talking to Bill at the board meeting following the ex-change of correspondence. "I suggested that we make a pamphlet of these letters, as his refusal letter was truly magnificent. Bill grinned and replied, 'Not while I'm alive. I don't want to capitalize on humility.'" Cliff suggested to the Grapevine that it would now be proper to print the letters. During Bill's lifetime, copies of the Yale correspondence were privately circulated within the Fellowship, with Bill's knowledge and consent. Jim A., who in 1965 was AA public information chairman for a central office in a large West Coast city, wrote to Bill, asking permission to show the letters to anonymity-breakers "...as an example that AA probably does not need their individual names to keep it going or to make it more effective." In reply, Bill wrote, "Certainly, you may show that Yale correspondence in a limited way. But I see you agree that it would not be exactly right on my part to consent to its general publication at this time. Actually, I'm not so damn noble as you suppose. In reality, I rather wanted that degree...However, I think the principle of anonymity will be so invaluable to us, especially in future time, that one in my position should really fall over backwards in trying to demonstrate the principle. By way of example, it might help in the years to come." Ten years before this, just one year after the Yale correspondence had ended and less than two weeks before the Twentieth Anniversary AA Convention in St. Louis in 1955, Bill replied to a Canadian AA friend who felt that publishing the letters at that time would "help consolidate AA and fortify the anonymity Tradition." "I agree with you in part," Bill answered, "that publication now could help temporarily. But I do think that publication would imply my permission and would therefore be not a little ego manifestation on my part. "Actually, when I declined the degree, I did it with the long future in mind. I could picture a possible time when AA might find itself in some great contention and crisis. At that time, this letter, though bearing the dead hand, might have a marked, even a deciding, effect...Anyhow, I would be disinclined to have it generally published at present - that is, published under circumstances which will surely indicate to the reader that I have given my consent." Under present circumstances - seven years after Bill's death - there is clearly no possibility of the consent that he called an "ego manifestation." The Grapevine feels that AA members, now numbering around eight times as many as were sober in 1954, have a right to know of Bill's example of both courage and humility. This correspondence may help all of us appreciate the sacrifice Bill made for us, and for the countless alcoholics yet to come to our Fellowship for help. February 1978 AA Grapevine IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 1652. . . . . . . . . . . . GV March 94 -- Nicollet Group, Minn From: t . . . . . . . . . . . . 2/10/2004 12:15:00 PM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Grapevine, March 1994 [from column/series What We Were Like] Minneapolis: the Nicollet Chapter Most AA members in these parts know the story of Pat C., the drunken newspaperman who borrowed the Big Book from the Minneapolis Library, read it, and wrote to the
Alcoholic Foundation [forerunner of the General Service Office] asking for help
on August 9, 1940. The Alcoholic Foundation replied to Pat and sent his name on to the
Chicago Group. Two members of that group came to see Pat in November of 1940.
Pat took his last drink on November 11, 1940, and began working with others, and the first AA meeting in Minneapolis occurred shortly afterward. That is the history and
the founding that we hear about most in the Twin Cities, and many AA groups all
over the state can trace their beginnings back to Pat C. and 2218 First Avenue South, the
first (and still operating) Alano Society in this part of the country. We had other beginnings and other pioneers, however, and this is the story of another
Twelve-Step call, another pioneer, and another longstanding AA foundation stone
in Minneapolis: There is a group that meets in Minneapolis, at 6301 Penn Avenue South, which celebrated its fiftieth anniversary in October 1993. The name of the group is the Nicollet Chapter and it began in 1943 when Barry C. left 2218 to start a new group, styled after the groups of his friend and AA's co-founder, Dr. Bob of Akron, Ohio. It was a big deal when the Nicollet Chapter left 2218. Until that time, 2218 was the hub of all of the AA activity in this area. 2218 was mother and mentor to many AA groups, and most early groups asked for and got a lot of help in starting. But the
Nicollet Chapter started, autonomous from 2218 and clearly wanted to stay that
way, and it shook a lot of AA members up. Was this a fight? Was there a problem? Was somebody going to get drunk? Barry and Pat both said no, but a rift was created between 2218 and the Nicollet Chapter that never quite healed. Barry C. had quietly gotten sober in April of 1940, a few months before Pat, after a
visit from a sober Chicago friend, Chan F. (who was also one of the two AAs who
visited Pat in November). But Barry was chronically ill most of his life, and
spent much of the first months of his sobriety incapacitated. Barry was in the hospital when Pat got sober and began working with others. He always had a much "lower profile" than Pat, and did not contend Pat's status as the founder of AA in Minnesota. Pat, however, made certain that Barry's part in our history was known, as witnessed in this 1941 letter to his fellow Minneapolis AAs: "Many of you, perhaps,
don't know it but Barry C. was the first practicing AA in Minneapolis . . . Only
the fact that he was hopelessly invalided for a long time prevented Barry from getting out and organizing. You all know what he has accomplished since he has been able to get around. That guy has more ideas in five minutes than I have in five weeks, and we
all owe him a note of thanks ..." Barry C. corresponded with Bob and others in Akron, Cleveland and Chicago, and the
Nicollet Chapter resembled in many ways the early meetings in Akron. Barry believed
that all of the alcoholics' solutions were in the Big Book. He believed that alcoholism was a family problem and that recovery must include the entire family -
unusual characteristic was its intolerance of "slippers." Prospective members were asked if
they were
asked to do their drinking outside of AA. Faith in the program was considered paramount, and once a member lost their faith, it was felt that it could not be easily regained. These were the principles that the Nicollet Chapter started with, and stayed with.
They hung with each other, did Twelfth Step work, helped start AA in Sioux Falls,
South Dakota, and Winnipeg and Manitoba, Canada, which still have groups modeled
on the Nicollet Group. Those groups still correspond today, and still believe that their
way of practicing the teachings of the Big Book are the best way. In their ideology, the Nicollet Group members stayed to themselves. The growth of AA in Minnesota and nationwide did not change them. The adoption of the Traditions did not change their
meetings, and the General Service structure did not concern them. And, fifty years later, the Nicollet Groups' 100 or so members still stick to the
original. Stepping into the meeting is sort of like stepping back in time. There
is coffee, yes, and more food than usual at a meeting place. Folks know each other, and
have no trouble spotting outsiders and greeting them. The Twelve Steps and the
Serenity Prayer are prominently displayed everywhere, but the Traditions are not.
Don't look for notices of upcoming conventions or roundups - you won't find Nicollet
Group members at these events. They have their own social gatherings. There also
won't be notices of upcoming general service assemblies or district meetings, or notices of intergroup happenings. They do not participate in these events. When I was newly sober, I asked an older AA member about our cofounders, Dr. Bob and Bill W. She told me about Dr. Bob wishing to keep AA simple, and about Bill the super
AA promoter. She told me an old AA joke: that if Dr. Bob had his way, AA would
never have made it out of the midwest, and if Bill had his way, it would be set up as an
the balance between simple service and service organization that we needed to function and carry out our primary purpose. I don't know if this is what Dr. Bob had in mind, but I thought of this when I visited the Nicollet Group. There was love there, and Twelfth Step work, and newcomers, and talk of the Steps, and families, and sharing, and picnics, and announcements to visit
members in the hospital. I met a man and his wife, in their late twenties, who
were celebrating their one year membership in the group. I met couples who were 20 or 25
of historical materials - correspondence, articles, photographs - all telling of the
miracles and the timelessness of alcoholics working together. As a group, Nicollet is recognizing that in order to survive AA groups need to work
together. For the first time in many years, the Nicollet Group is listed in our
local intergroup directory. They know they need to work with others, as do we all. Autonomy is a valued possession, and we cannot deny the Nicollet Group theirs. There is a lesson in autonomy here for me as an AA member. I see our autonomy must end when others are affected, as it states in the Fourth Tradition. The Nicollet Group will be
richer for interaction with the rest of us, and we will be richer for our interaction with them. The Nicollet Group deserves recognition for their fifty years of meeting together, growing together, and staying sober together. They have contributed much to the fabric of AA. Anonymous, Minneapolis, Minn. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 1653. . . . . . . . . . . . 10th General Service Conference - 1960 (Part One of Two) From: NMOlson@aol.com . . . . . . . . . . . . 2/11/2004 3:19:00 AM
Service Conference, is of great historical significance as it was the first time that Bill had spoken to the Fellowship on the subject of the Twelve Concepts. The transcript has been verified against the original voice recording. _________ The last of the sand in the hourglass of our time together is about to run its course. And you have asked me, as of old, to conclude this conference, our tenth.
year succeeding itself, I have found increasing gratitude beyond measure, because of the increasing sureness that AA is safe at last for God, so long as he may wish this society to endure. So I stand here among you and feel as you do a sense of security and gratitude such as we have never known before. There is not a little regret, too, that the other side of the coin -- that we cannot turn back the clock and renew these hours. Soon they will become a part of our history. The three legacies of AA - recovery, unity and service -- in a sense represent three utter impossibilities, impossibilities that we know became possible, and possibilities that now have borne this unbelievable fruit. Old Fitz Mayo, one of the early AAs and I visited the Surgeon General of the United States in the third year of this society, told him of our beginnings. He was a gentle man, Dr. Lawrence Kolb, since become a great friend of AA, and he said: "I wish you well. Even the sobriety of such a few is almost a miracle. The government knows that this is one of the greatest health problems we have, one of the greatest moral problems, one of the greatest spiritual problems. But we here have considered recovery of alcoholics so impossible that we have given up and have instead concluded that rehabilitation of narcotic addicts would be the easier job to tackle." Such was the devastating impossibility of our situation. Now, what had been brought to bear upon this impossibility that it has become possible? First, the Grace of Him who presides over all of us. Next, the cruel lash of John Barleycorn who said, "This you must do, or die." Next, the intervention of God through friends, at first a few, and now legion, who opened to us, who in the early days were uncommitted, the whole field of human ideas, morality and religion, from which we could choose. These have been the wellsprings of the forces and ideas and emotions and spirit which were first fused into our Twelve Steps for recovery. And some of us got well. But no sooner had a few got sober then the old forces began to come into play. In us rather frail people, they were fearsome: the old forces, the drives, money, acclaim, prestige.
we had begun to be a cross section of all men and women, all differently conditioned, all so different and yet happily so alike in our kinship of suffering. Could we hold in unity? To those few who remain who lived in those earlier times when the Traditions were being forged in the school of hard experience on its thousands of anvils, we had our very, very dark moments.
Or how could recovery endure if we were to fall into controversy and so into dissolution and decay? Well, the spirit of the Twelve Steps, which has brought us release, from one of the grimmest obsessions known -- obviously, this spirit and these principles of retaining Grace had to be the fundamentals of our unity. But in order to become fundamental to our unity, these principles had to be spelled out as they applied to the most prominent and the most grievous of our problems. So, out of experience, the need to apply the spirit of our steps to our lives of working and living together, these were the forces that generated the Traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous.
this message. We had to function. In fact, that had become evident in the Twelve Steps themselves for the last one enjoins us to carry the message. But just how would we carry this message? How would we communicate, we few, with those myriad's who still didn't know? And how would this communication be handled? And how could we do these things, how could we authorize these things in such a way that in this new hot focus of effort and ego we were not again to be shattered by the forces that had once ruined our lives? This was the problem of the Third Legacy. From the vital Twelfth Step call right up through our society to its culmination today. And, again, many of us said: This can't be done. It's all very well for Bill and Bob and a few friends to set up a Board of Trustees and to provide us with some literature, and look after our public relations, and do all of those chores for us we can't do for ourselves. This is fine, but we can't go any further than that. This is a job for our elders. This is a job for our parents. In this direction only can there be simplicity and security. And then we came to the day when it was seen that the parents were both fallible and perishable (although this seems to be a token they are not). And Dr. Bob's hour struck. And we suddenly realized that this ganglion, this vital nerve center of World Service, would lose its sensation the day the communication between an increasingly unknown Board of Trustees and you was broken.
is impossible. This is too hard. Even in transacting the simplest business, providing the simplest of services, raising the minimum amounts of money, these excitements to us, in this society so bent on survival have been almost too much locally. Look at our club brawls. My God, if we have Yüklə 1,35 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|