Aa history Lovers 2010 moderators Nancy Olson and Glenn F. Chesnut page
Yüklə 25,47 Mb.
|
(hartsell at etex.net) In my experience over the past 43 yrs I have never seen nor heard of "Charges
being pressed against an A.A. Member" except in the well documented cases related to the printing and distribution of the early, "In The Public Domain", editions of our book, Alcoholics Anonymous; when there were instances of trusted Group servants (Sec/Treas) absconding with or misappropriating funds, the Group usually accepted the responsibility for having placed an individual in a position to "do wrong", in other words the group accepted responsibility for THEIR poor judgment. Respectfully, Sherry C.H. - - - - From: Tom Hickcox (cometkazie1 at cox.net) I am not a lawyer, but it would surprise me if any local A.A. group would have
the legal standing to sue. I don't think many if any groups are considered a legal entity and that would have to be satisfied in order to file a complaint.
several
years ago. The aggrieved individual put a peace bond on him and the home group
told the offending party that his presence would be disruptive. The peace bond
prevented him from being around the member and we didn't see him any more. We have a veritable plethora of local meetings, so the individual's recovery wasn't compromised by not attending our meeting. Tommy H in Baton Rouge - - - - From: an AA member from Stockholm in Sweden My understanding of the 7th Tradition is that groups should not be sitting on large sums of money. The money should move down the service structure to central offices, area or region committees, and throughout AA as a whole. If a group needs a high prudent reserve -- one that would make it a felony if stolen -- it is possible to open a club bank account that requires two signatures. At one of my groups where I got sober they had two treasurers, alternating months, for one-year terms. That way if one ran off with the money, the other half was safe. Only once did someone take the money and it was on a relapse and the group conscience said he would, likely, pay it back if he made it back and got to his 9th step. Oh, and we elected a new Treasurer. While it was before my time in AA, I have heard many oldtimers say "in [their]
day, when they would pass the hat, they would say 'if you got a buck, put it in the hat; if you need a buck, take one out.'" And then there are AA's who have forgotten to pay for that first book they were given with the liberal credit arrangements of "nothing done, nothing a month" until they could afford it. Or regulars who, more often than not, have no cash on them when the hat goes around. I know of two large-scale events that had their money stolen. In both cases the
planning committees accepted immediate repayment and did not prosecute. But, had
the money not been promptly returned, it would have been necessary to file charges so the insurance on the events would cover the contractual obligations.
at the time to tell them I was an alcoholic and staying sober thanks to AA's twelve steps. Part of that was to make amends and I needed to make right the money I had been reimbursed for my generously padded expense account. It was enough money that it was certainly more than a misdemeanor. In the end the money was
donated to charity -- the company exec explained it would otherwise be too cumbersome to redo years of corporate accounting -- and they didn't even note it in my personnel file. He didn't want that because it would prevent me from being eligible for future promotions in the company. On the other hand, when I went to make amends to my father & stepmom and pay back the money I had stolen in my active years, my father slapped his hand on the table, exclaimed, "Let sleeping dogs lie," and walked out of the room. Then, my stepmom turned back to me and gently asked, "Are you sure that's all you owe?"
counted
and reported (or logged) after every meeting, and then a treasurer's report each
business meeting. Those members that want to keep a close eye have the opportunity, or people can rely on their trusted servants. (Personally, I prefer "trust, but verify" as a financial motto.) By the way, in regard to a previous post about AA World Services suing someone
in Germany for "'stealing' the copyright on the 1st edition Big Book that AAWS
didn't own and was in the public domain." You may not realize, public domain rights exist only for the text of the 1st edition of Alcoholics Anonymous and only in North America. AAWS still holds the international copyright on all the literature, including the big book. Thanks for letting me share. - - - - From: "Kimball Rowe" (roweke at msn.com) I also do not know of any instance of personal prosecution by AA members or groups (see the 12 concepts for world service on punitive actions) Prudence is always stressed. When it comes to money, prudent reserve is the fundamental guiding principle. If a "large sum of money" was embezzled, they he should be applauded (for keeping the group humble) and the group should be scolded for living above the prudent reserve. Big pockets almost always bring big problems. Why on earth wasn't this large sum of money not dispersed? Was the group planning a vacation, perhaps in Hawaii? AA has always been a self-supporting organization, and never a charity (service manual, pg 67)
(Baileygc23 at aol.com) We had a person identify himself as a con man, so they elected him secretary, the group dissolved and what small amount of books and money went the way he wanted with no accounting. Now he is the secretary of another group. That's AA. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6996. . . . . . . . . . . . A traditions question: using non-AA speakers
From: Mike . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/8/2010 7:26:00 AM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I have a traditions question. I believe that meditation is one of the most misunderstood tools in our AA toolbox, so, I'd like to put on a one hour 'meditation workshop.' I have a non-alcoholic workshop trainer who is a Ph.D. in theology and teaches at a local seminary. He's also worked with alcoholics over the years.
approved by AA, and that he is volunteering his help. A couple of people have said that doing this is against our AA traditions, I'd like to hear what this group has to say. Mike IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6997. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Big Book radio talk on BBC Radio 4 on November 3 From: Jeff Bruce . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/4/2010 3:10:00 PM
Dov W., Tom White, and MarionORedstone - - - - From: Jeff Bruce It wasn't very good. It had no relationship to the manuscript. It was filled with errors, but it did both begin and conclude with "it works," so it is not a catastrophe. - - - - > > Bill Lash had written: This show was the > > biggest pile of crap I have ever heard! - - - - From: "Larry Tooley" Thanks, Bill, for saving me the time and money!!! ha - - - - From: Jenny or Laurie Andrews Agreed; and for a professor of English, careless research, e.g. Bill was not a travelling salesman. - - - - From: Dov W I find it fascinating that strangely enough whenever popular media outlets cover
stories with which I am intimately familiar they often seem to do a poor job...
if I were an expert in everything I might detect a bigger picture... ;) - - - - From: Tom White Suggest we not bother getting fed up with major media. They get nearly everything wrong or more or less so. Tom W. - - - - > > Mike Margetis had written: This was almost > > painful to listen to. Filled with inaccuracies. > > It seemed as if it was someone who knew little > > to nothing about AA and/or AA history. More than > > disappointing, I would say more like, disturbing!)
Michiana Conference in 2008 when Ernie K. was there. The Book that Started it All is a true treat, though, isn't it? I liken it to being able to directly view the Dead Sea Scrolls but being able to read most of the glyphs. It is fascinating. What a treat and what a gift to AA!
Marion
++++Message 6998. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Have AA groups ever pressed charges against a member? From: Bob McK. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/8/2010 12:08:00 PM
copyright attorney) to enter in on this but, lacking that, I will.
editions of the Big Book within the USA, it remains in effect in many foreign countries. The governing law is called the Berne Convention and is complicated. What applies in some countries is that the copyright of a work created in another country is treated as if it had been copyrighted within that country.
Thus while the main body of the Big Book (pgs. 1-164) is "in the public domain"
in the USA, this is not also true in Canada, Mexico, Germany and many other countries. It has long been the policy of the General Service Board to license one and only
one service entity per foreign country to publish our literature. When a second
entity in Mexico and an individual in Germany started doing this also without
license, the licensed entities in those countries sued and our GSB furnished the
needed legal support to aid them. Another situation in the early '90s involved our circle-triangle trademark being
co-opted by medallion vendors. We eventually decided that enforcing this trademark was too expensive (and likely not winnable) so we dropped our registration of these trademarks.
action which could well be interpreted as a lawsuit; however, these actions were taken not by the Conference but by the General Service Board which has the unenviable role of protecting our property both tangible and intellectual. While
some have proposed that a Conference action take away the right of the Board to file suit, this would mean that anyone could then start using even our name ("Alcoholics Anonymous") without fear of reprisal. I do not know whether a group can sue an individual. Ohio supposedly does recognize unincorporated, undocumented organizations so I would think they would have standing here; but, a cursory search of Ohio case law revealed no such suit. Many groups follow the suggestions in the pamphlet "The AA Group" and "the
AA Group Treasurer" and have a two-signature bank account. Perhaps even more importantly they take notice of the long form of tradition 7 where it states "we view with much concern those A.A. treasuries which continue, beyond prudent reserves, to accumulate funds for no stated A.A. purpose" and make periodic donations to the other service entities. These days it's also wise and possible at many banks to give a member besides the treasurer read-only access to the bank account and statements. If a group does not practice these stewardship principles then they may well consider themselves morally culpable in part should a loss occur.
controversial; the person taking the money likely could not then pay it back even if the suit
is successful; those treasurers who have "borrowed" from the group's funds without their knowledge have been known to pay it back when their circumstances improved; it's something the group may wish to not involve itself in. - - - - From: "tsirish1" Hello all, I am sorry to say that Area 44, Northern NJ, was forced to press charges against
its one time Treasurer for embezzling $40,000 from the treasury. At the time of the embezzlement, there was no Alternate Treasurer so there was not two signatures on the checks for ANY expense during that time. The lesson here is that ALL members of AA are human, and some still have, after many years of abstinence, those character defects that we humbly ask god to remove. Furthermore, because every Area in AA is supposedly a registered non-profit 501c3 corporation, they are businesses, and in ANY business if an "employee," in our case "trusted servant," steals from the company, it is the duty of the other
trusted servants to go to the appropriate authorities to handle the matter, because in the 12 Concepts it states that servants are responsible and accountable to those they serve, and must keep the common welfare in the forefront. I hope this post was helpful to everyone. Yours in service, BB Tim
From: Patrick Murphy About 25 yrs ago there was a case on the east coast involving a murder. The prosecution used a witness that had information that he had heard at a meeting
where the defendant admitted he did it. It went to the State's Supreme Court. In the end it was ruled that "the witness's testimony could be used ... AA is not
above the law"... the man was prosecuted. --Pat IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6999. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: A traditions question: using non-AA speakers From: Charley Bill . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/9/2010 10:38:00 PM
Approved" virus. These folks hold that anything not conference approved is not fit to be read by an AA member, etc. It would be interesting to get at the origins of this awful twisting of our Traditions and the directions in the Big Book. I believe it is mostly based on ignorance, fear and superstition. Ignorance of AA. Fear and superstition are probably carry overs from a childhood religion, some of which ban books, movies, etc. AA is not a religion and must not appear as if it is is one. See below
All" page 72, Manuscript page 44, at the top. "There are many helpful books also."
gave us for meditation, now on page 87, paragraph 2 in the Fourth Edition of the BB. Looks to me to be clear, unequivocal instruction that we are to find material for meditation in books. He did not say 'Conference Approved" books. There was no conference at the time. Please read that whole section on meditation and see if you can interpret it any other way. Today, in consideration of our younger members, we must include all forms of media as many of these new members are not oriented towards print.
conference has many times attempted to get some kind of a restriction to 'conference approved literature.' The Conference itself has always wisely decided against the committee's proposals. Now for the Traditions: Tradition One: I see nothing here about restricting us to use of conference approved stuff only. Do you see anything? Bill says, We believe there isn't a fellowship on earth which lavishes more devoted care upon its individual members; surely there is none which more jealously guards the individual's right to think, act, talk as he wishes." That sounds to me like the opposite of a requirement for approval of literature. Can you agree, so far?
General Service Conference. The sole authority is outside the Program - "A loving God as he may express Himself in the group conscience." Nothing about conference approval that I can see. Tradition three: The only requirement for membership . . . Nothing here about conference approved. Tradition Four: Each Group should be autonomous-I guess a group could ban all but conference approved stuff, but it would be cutting itself off from the collected wisdom of all history. Is that reasonable or appropriate? What would be the purpose of such a restriction? A restriction to conference approved materials would cause the Fellowship to more closely resemble a religion, some of which do restrict their members use of the written word to materials approved by the religion. AA is in serious trouble as a consequence of too closely resembling a religion in the eyes of many, including the high courts in several states. We need to examine everything we do and pull back from this precipice. AA is a spiritual program, not a religious one.
message to the alcoholic who still suffers" Note the _'its_ message.' Would a group, by group conscience method determine that it would restrict access to only "conference approved" stuff? Perhaps, but doubtful. It would be a warped and restricted message, wouldn't it? Remember, the Grapevine is not "Conference Approved," and never will be if the editorial freedom Bill Wilson intended is maintained. The Grapevine's dozens of publications are also not conference approved. These include many valuable and much loved resources.
Study, learn, appreciate the writings of all as relates to recovery from addiction, but endorse, finance of lend the A.A. name to none. (My interpretation of how to apply Six in this question.) Tradition Seven: Every group should be self supporting. . . Nothing about banning non conference approved materials.I was once told that the 'only conference approved' business started because some Central Offices wanted to lock up the market for Group purchases of literature. They tend to handle conference approved stuff only, but they could engage in general book selling, I suppose. They would have a great advantage over the bookseller down the street who must pay taxes, rent, licenses, and make a profit. If they sell other than conference approved stuff, the members who are for restriction are doing the Central Offices a disfavor, perhaps reducing their sales of non conference approved stuff and reducing the revenue from sales.. Literature sales can be an important source of income for Central Offices. Tradition Eight: AA should forever remain unprofessional. . . This may be another place where we are cutting ourselves off from the most highly qualified leader and staff for the GSO, but so far it has worked very well.. Nothing on conference approved literature that i see. Tradition Nine: AA, as such should never be organized. Bill lived to rue the day he relented and allowed this sentence. He seems to have just ignored it and gone ahead and completely organized AA, but he never to my knowledge excluded non conference approved books. Look at the Grapevine's Catalog of unapproved books and such http://store.aagrapevine.org/ Tradition Ten: AA has no opinion on outside issues.. . . Certainly so. Since AA itself cannot speak and no one is designated to speak for it, no opinion could be expressed, except possibly by actions such as suing someone. If A.A. has no opinion on outside issues, doesn't that mean that non conference approved material is not to be banned or excluded, but is included if we want it? Bill points out how important it is to not judge outside issues with his very short history of the Washingtonians. So let's use non conference approved stuff, but never offer 'an A.A. opinion' of it. Our own opinion is fine, but we cannot speak for the Fellowship. Of course, that goes for me, too. Tradition Eleven: Our public relations policy is based on attraction rather than promotion. . . . Anonymity and all that. Nothing banning any books here, is there?
Fellowship. i can't find book banning here, either. Can you? I could find numerous other places in the BB where I could justify use of non conference approved stuff, such as page 84 "We have ceased fighting anything or anyone --" even non conference approved books. Some of these would be an amusing strretch, so I'll leave them out for now. I think you have enough to take care of those infected with the "Conference Approved virus There is another place where Bill tells us to consult professionals, doctors, lawyers, but I cannot find it right now. Good luck on your meditation workshop. I tried one once and it flopped. Be sure your local expert does not start with no explanation but a five minute period of silent meditation!
> > I have a traditions question. I believe that meditation is one of the > most misunderstood tools in our AA toolbox, so, I'd like to put on a one > hour 'meditation workshop.' I have a non-alcoholic workshop trainer > who is a Ph.D. in theology and teaches at a local seminary. He's also > worked with alcoholics over the years. > > On the flyer I have a disclaimer stating that he is not endorsed or > approved by AA, and that he is volunteering his help. A couple of > people have said that doing this is against our AA traditions, I'd like > to hear what this group has to say. > > Mike IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 7000. . . . . . . . . . . . 11th step meditation From: Glenn Chesnut . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/10/2010 10:10:00 PM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII The original question from message No. 6996 said in part: "I believe that meditation is one of the most misunderstood tools in our AA toolbox, so, I'd like to put on a one hour 'meditation workshop.'" THE FOLLOWING THREE ARTICLES TALK ABOUT MEDITATION IN A.A. "Twelve-Step Meditation in the A.A. Big Book and the 12 & 12" http://hindsfoot.org/medit11.doc "Practicing the Presence of God: the path to soul-balance and inner calm" http://hindsfoot.org/hp5rw.html "The God-Shaped Hole in the Human Soul" http://hindsfoot.org/godsha.html IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 7001. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: A traditions question: using non-AA speakers From: gadgetsdad . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/8/2010 8:38:00 PM
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax, Bill Walker, Dougbert, john wikelius, Jim L in Columbus, Lynn Sawyer, John Kenney, Jared Lobdell, Elisabeth D, and Laurie Andrews - - - - From: gadgetsdad My Area has had Class A Trustees and non-Alcoholic board Chairs at Area Workshops. We, as an Area, felt it was appropriate and not a break with the Traditions.
under the Traditions. They may be put together by people who are AA members, but that does not qualify them as affiliated under AA. Just like conventions and other gatherings, like club-houses, for example. And, if we look at our history, there were a lot of people involved with AA in an advisory role, who were not alcoholics. Doctors and preachers and other community leaders. Hugs for the trudge. Jon M (Raleigh) 9/9/82
From: "Mike Cullen" Hi Mike, If you are putting on a meditation class , in your home or someplace else and
you aren't claiming to be Alcoholics Anonymous then there is no reason not to hold it. If the attendants happen to be recovering alcoholics that's cool. I go to 12 step retreats that have nothing to do with Alcoholics Anonymous yet
everyone there is from AA ............. as long as you aren't claiming this is an AA meditation group..... shalom Mike
From: Baileygc23@aol.com As long as you do not claim it as an AA workshop, it should not be any problem. Our traditions contain no "You musts" "Plenty of we oughts, but no you musts". Tying mediation and religious mediation is kind of tricky, but, "Our quarrels haven't hurt us one bit". - - - - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax Whether this is a violation of traditions or not depends on details you have not disclosed! You are putting on the workshop. If you are claiming that AA is putting on the workshop, you would be, indeed, violating the traditions. Don't use the AA name on the flyer, don't imply that AA is sponsoring this. You are putting it on. You can suggest that it might be useful to alcoholics. You can even suggest that it might be useful for "working the 12 steps." (Which have become generic, lots of people follow that as a general program.)
members about it, individually. You can even mention it in a share, that you are going to attend it, or you organized it, or the like, but here you are pushing the edges. If you are going to mention it in a meeting, keep it to a minimum. Let people ask you about it if they are curious. Don't use the AA meeting to *promote* the workshop. My suggestions. There is another possibility. AA *can* sponsor an open workshop on some aspect of the steps. Can a non-alcoholic speak at such a workshop? I'm not an alcoholic, I cut my teeth in other 12-step fellowships, but I did at one time choose a sponsor who was active in AA, and I used to go to an *open* AA daily lunchtime meeting that was convenient to me. And once my sponsor suggested that I speak. So I did. I introduced myself as a "dry drunk," that I was qualified for membership in AA because I had a desire to stop drinking (your drinking! -- my first program was Al-Anon), but I was quite clear that my primary addiction wasn't to alcohol, and, in fact, I never did drink. I wasn't going to say what program had become my main program, but ... I did say that it could be found in the phone book under "sex."
said "Boo!" about tradition violations. Whether or not a local group or intergroup approaches the edges of the traditions, or even crosses them, is up to group conscience, my opinion, *unless it affects other groups or AA as a whole.*
certainly have great experience, worthy of respect. "For our group purpose there is but one authority ...." That's the authority to respect! Ask your local group or intergroup. - - - - From: Bill Walker I think we need more information. You ought not seek to affiliate your AA group with a private practitioner. If the flyer states the workshop/class is "sponsored" or a similar word or thought, then that's affiliation. There are often workshops, seminars, round-ups, retreats, etc., that are "promoted," and they meet with little resistance. But they're clearly not seeking to affiliate themselves with AA as a whole, or any particular AA group.
doesn't let any "non-AA-related" material get posted on its bulletin boards, and
they police that to keep the group "clean" of outside issues. However, 20 of the
200 members just voted 16-4 to hang an American flag outside the front door. So as with anything else in AA, opinions vary. I think many participating in this group would be inclined to agree meditation should be more widely discussed during meetings. That same fellowship I mentioned has had an "11th-Step" meeting for at least 15 years. I came 'round in 2000 and not once have they meditated: it's a candlelight meeting discussing the essay on the 11th step in the 12&12, "or anything else you have on your mind." I no longer attend regularly, having memorized the essay and no longer needing to hide in the dark at an AA meeting! Good Luck, my friend, you're no doubt doing good work! Bill - - - - From: Dougbert Mike, The use of the word meditation was originally used in a Christian context, e.g.,
reciting a passage in the Bible. Or repeat the Serenity Prayer as a western style mantra. If you really want to help the Fellowship embrace meditation, you need to go to the source of true meditation . . . that would be Buddhism. That won't fly in our evangelical Christian A.A. dogma. You will get the idea by reading page 223 of as Bill Sees It, to understand how Buddhists were talking to Bill W. But, he was trolling for an answer that was not there and as usual would
not validate his preconceived answer, thereby not validating his narcissistic need for ego inflation! Your approach will go over as well as public denial that
alcoholism is not a disease, but a behavioral disorder. Metta, Deep Bows, Dougbert - - - - From: john wikelius If it is a non AA function, there is no problem. - - - - From: Sober186@aol.com To me, this whole question would be more appropriate or an AA discussion group.
In the past, I have been told by the moderator that we try to stay away from that format, because there are already so many of them, even though the questions which are debated and discussed are often very interesting.
forever non-professional ...' Have you asked these individuals which Trad. they think it's violating? Lynn S. Easy does it Sacramento, CA
applies
is number 5. The group must carry its message to the Alcoholic. It sounds like a
good aid to recovery. After thirty years of Sobriety I still attend retreats to help with Step 11. We have two non AA retreats each year and they are booked solid. Your local AA's do not have to attend if they wish. I presume you are not
holding this at a designated time and place of a usual AA meeting but as a supplemental meeting either before or after or a wholly separate function. Keep up the good work! It is always a success if you stay sober. Take this from one who has been on the firing line! YIS, John - - - - From: "J. Lobdell" Fwiw anyone can put on a Meditation Workshop provided A.A. doesn't come into it.
But as soon as A.A. is in anyway linked with an outside enterprise -- as I understand it, that becomes in violation of the Traditions against affiliation etc. There is no such thing as an A.A. Retreat or an A.A. Dance or an A.A. Meditation Workshop led by non-AAs. As I understand it, your flyer should make
no mention of A.A. nor should the workshop be sponsored by any A.A. entity or entities. It is true that in the area of the history of A.A., in the Multi-District History and Archives Gatherings in Central PA from 2003, there
has been adopted the almost forgotten format of the Public Meeting (not Open or Closed but Public) so that historians in attendance who are not AAs and who have questions can have them answered -- though the speakers and panelists are all AAs. It is also true that at International Conventions non-alcoholic experts (judges for example, speaking on Courts and A.A.) take part in specialized panels, and of course non-alcoholic Trustees speak at the GS Conference and at the General Sharing Session on Trustees' Weekends -- but they have legal responsibilities at AAWS and the AAGrapevine. I don't know if they can speak at the Trustees' Weekend "1728" meetings -- those may also be Public Meetings since they are at least partly held for the Class A Trustees' benefit. - - - - From: "Elisabeth D" It is no different than having an Alanon or Alateen speaker speak at an AA dinner, which happens all the time. - - - - From: Laurie Andrews "If individual AA's wish to gather together for retreats, Communion breakfasts, or indeed any undertaking at all, we will say 'Fine. Only we hope you won't designate your efforts as an AA group or enterprise'." (Bill W's essay on Concept 12, warranty five).
Group
quiet times? "The technique and system followed (by the original Akron AA's) ...
No 4: He must have devotions every morning - a 'quiet time' of prayer and some
reading from the Bible and other religious literature. Unless this is faithfully followed, there is grave danger of backsliding." (Frank Amos's report on the Akron AA group; Dr Bob and the Good Oldtimers, page 131). - - - - ORIGINAL QUESTION On 11/8/2010 4:26 AM, Mike wrote: > > I have a traditions question. I believe that meditation is one of the > most misunderstood tools in our AA toolbox, so, I'd like to put on a one > hour 'meditation workshop.' I have a non-alcoholic workshop trainer > who is a Ph.D. in theology and teaches at a local seminary. He's also > worked with alcoholics over the years. > > On the flyer I have a disclaimer stating that he is not endorsed or > approved by AA, and that he is volunteering his help. A couple of > people have said that doing this is against our AA traditions, I'd like > to hear what this group has to say. > > Mike IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 7002. . . . . . . . . . . . 15th National AA Archives Workshop From: gerrynmt . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/9/2010 2:10:00 PM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII September 22-25, 2011 in Helena, Montana 15th National AA Archives Workshop Their website at http://www.aanationalarchivesworkshop.com/ has a conference flyer, registration information, etc. Additional features will be added as time goes on so keep checking back.
From: Tom V . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/9/2010 2:16:00 PM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII A follow up question: was a publication like "Living Sober" vetted throughout the fellowship? Or are decisions to publish books made by a committee? IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 7004. . . . . . . . . . . . RE: Who wrote Living Sober? From: Chris Budnick . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/9/2010 1:06:00 AM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I read an exchange of letters contained in Dr. Bob's collection at Brown University. Here are highlights from these correspondence. MARCH 7, 1982 Barry L. writes George Dorsey, Chairperson A.A.W.S., Inc. (cc: Robert Pearson)
continue to not pay royalties on Living Sober as they do on other books."
royalty
in lieu of a lump sum. But I received only $4,000, half of what it cost to write
the book, with no agreement on royalties." "It is hard to believe that past and present Conference members would ever want
A.A.W.S. to take advantage of A.A. members this way." "Who would say, for example, that Niles P. did not deserve as good treatment from A.A. as Bill W. did? If it is just and fair for one member to be paid royalties for writing, it seems equitable for other writers to receive similar
compensation. On that basis, it is hard to justify one author's receiving royalties on books when three others do not. What do you think?" MARCH 25, 1982 John K. Bragg, Chairperson of A.A.W.S. Board responds to Barry He apologizes for not responding sooner, but needed to become familiar with the
circumstances surrounding Barry's work on "Living Sober." "I am sorry you feel exploited or that A.A.W.S. has taken advantage of you by not paying you royalties on continuing sales of Living Sober. I really don't see any analogy between the agreement to pay royalties to Bill Wilson to support him for his lifelong work with Alcoholics Anonymous as its cofounder and agreements made with you, Ralph B., Niles P., Mel B. or many other writers engaged by A.A.W.S. for specific jobs. And I daresay the General Service Board and the General Service Conference would have this same view, perhaps even more strong."
directly
with the General Service Board. I believe that no other persons have received
royalties for A.A. writing and I doubt strongly that anyone will in the future."
draft of the booklet which became Living Sober and turned over to you the unsatisfactory first draft by another writer together with other research material. Surely your acceptance at that time must be regarded as agreement that
the payment was satisfactory." "Please don't take any of the above as diminishing my admiration (and that of thousands of A.A. members) of your good work in carrying the message through speaking, and you Grapevine articles, and for your devotion to the Fellowship." FEBRUARY 14, 1983 Letter to General Service Board Members from Barry L. "Just before I completed the manuscript of Living Sober, the Next-to-last letter
I had from the president of A.A. World Services, Inc., dated 17 November 1972,
indicated the royalty arrangement we had been negotiating could not be worked
out at the present time." "Under pressure to complete Living Sober quickly, naturally I took the A.A.W.S.
letter in good faith and finished it well before the deadline." "I never agreed to any lack-of-royalty arrangement and never hesitated to express to members at G.S.O and elsewhere my dissatisfaction with the token payment I was given."
last
year." "As of the end of 1981, Conference Reports show A.A.W.S. has distributed 584,017
copies of the book, raking in something like $1,022,000.00 on Living Sober. A.A.W.S. is now trying to get away with paying the author only $4,000. Is this really right?" "But I do ask myself: reputedly the Board safeguards A.A.'s Traditions and Concepts. Does it now renege on honoring the principle of its own policy thrice re-affirmed (1952, 1957, and 1967) that the worker is worthy of his hire (Concept XI) - that the fair way for A.A. to pay the author of a book on which
it makes money is royalties at the commercial publishing world's standard rate
of 15 per cent of the retail price?" "I am left no choice. Therefore I hereby formally file this claim for $153,304.45 in retroactive royalties due me on Living Sober plus interest compounded annually each April 2 beginning in 1976 at 6 per cent ($38,112.09 as of April 1, 1983), for a total of $191,416.54." "I also ask that A.A.W.S., Inc., as indication of good faith and honest intentions, cease and desist immediately any publication, sale, distribution or advertising on Living Sober, Came to Believe, Dr. Bob and the Good Old-Timers," and the forthcoming biography of Bill, until a less exploitative, more equitable, and non-discriminatory.agreement has been made with each of the respective authors." "I should like the sum past due to me, with the interest, paid to me over a period of six years, which can be negotiated with my attorney. She will also represent me in arranging a contract for the future concerning Living Sober."
Raleigh, North Carolina IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 7005. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Have AA groups ever pressed charges against a member? From: lee . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/11/2010 11:14:00 PM
Alexander, from Lee Nickerson and Charlie Bishop, Jr. - - - - From: Lee Nickerson (snowlilly12 at yahoo.com) THE ATTACK ON NEW YORK A.A. ARCHIVIST FRANK M. I am not a lawyer but I closely followed the German and Mexican situation that
was an assault on AA members and on the minority opinion that was large, organized and vocal. We had past trustees, GSO service workers, delegates and many knowledgeable folks trying to get AAWS's hands off these two countries. My understanding was that AAWS was covertly in the direct background of these two shameful pages of our recent history. The point for me is that GSO and AAWS will eventually get us into a public controversy at the level of Press, Radio, TV and the internet and a Tradition will be broken. I had weekly meetings with AAWS staff and felt very close to the veil. I once
had a GSO manager tell me that "If every group and member stopped donating, GSO
would not be affected because we control the literature." Short-sighted vision
of corporate agenda? I was very close to the late Frank M., Past Archivist (the only alcoholic Archivist) who took over from Nell Wing. We met once a month for a year spending time in the office researching Maine history, going out for late dinners and even later meetings. Frank was forced to resign as the result of his involvement with Joe and Charlie's workshop and other movements that disturbed AAWS. That
was the reason given by AAWS. Most in the minority felt that AAWS wanted a non-alcoholic archivist who would be more amenable or malleable to the tricks forthcoming. The next trick was when AAWS requested a payment of $150,000 from the city of San Diego to hold the 1995 Convention there (which they got). An uproar erupted but when every salaried staff worker, director and Grapevine staff is clicked down to submission to a larger will, things get murky and undone. Frank M. started a movement for every AA member to send $5 and we could pay San
Diego back. It made AAWS retaliate and Frank was soon gone after 30 years of service to GSO. We have people at our New York office that wrestle all day between 'fudiciary responsibility, morality, and sprituality.'If one stacks up the Tradition/Concept incursions in the last 20 years, one would clearly see that they are ready to do anything to protect the bureaucracy they have become. The system has taken on a life of its own and will do anything to assure its survival.
(Bishopbk at comcast.net) MICHAEL ALEXANDER QUOTE SHEER HYPOCRISY Message #6995 said < the Twelve Concepts (and loaned him a copy of Tocqueville's Democracy in America in the process), ideally "in AA we don't go to law, we go to prayer.">> Lawyer Michael Alexander said what? "in AA we don't go to law, we go to prayer."
Chairman Alexander was the primary instigator of the lawsuits against the German
man who was ruined financially and the Mexican group that Spent over $400,000. defending themselves against the charge they reprinted the Big Book because the
other Mexican group was overcharging for it. I have an article called Spirituality vs. Legalism SHORT version.doc (109KB) which I will send to anybody who contacts me. My e-mail address is Servus, Charlie Bishop, Jr. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 7006. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: A traditions question: using non-AA speakers From: Glenn Chesnut . . . . . . . . . . . . 11/13/2010 3:29:00 PM
Yüklə 25,47 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|