Aa history Lovers 2010 moderators Nancy Olson and Glenn F. Chesnut page
Yüklə 25,47 Mb.
|
U2 [22] >http://www.aagrapevine.org/da/article.php?id=107518&tb=2ZGE9ZHQlM0ExOTc4JnB nP\
It discusses the use of the word "rarely" in the phrase "Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path," asking essentially the same question Charlie raises, why didn't he use the word "never"? It records Bill being asked three times at conferences if he would change the wording if he were able to. In all three instances he replied that he wouldn't. There were several reasons given the main one being, "I think the main reason for the use of the word 'rarely' was to avoid anything that would look like a claim of a 100% result."
questions. I think sometimes we lose our view of the forest when we focus on trees. Tommy H in Baton Rouge - - - - "MOST" or "ABSOLUTELY ALL" ??? Original message 8/10/2010 from Charlie Parker: >On page 24 of the Big Book it says that "The fact is that most >alcoholics, for reasons yet obscure, have lost the power of choice in drink." >
> >There are a lot of places where they used absolutes (even in the >paragraph that precedes this one it says that "at a certain point in >the drinking career of every alcoholic, he passes into a state where >the most powerful desire to stop drinking is of absolutely no >avail") but here they tempered the statement with "most." > >This just came up in discussion and I thought I would throw it out there. > >Any thoughts or references? > >Best regards, Charlie P., Austin IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6816. . . . . . . . . . . . Author of Forewords From: Tom Hickcox . . . . . . . . . . . . 8/21/2010 11:46:00 AM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII The Fourth Edition of Alcoholics Anonymous has a preface and four forewords. Are there any hard data that show who the authors of these are? This ties in with the query I posed in message #6749 about describing Bill W. as a stockbroker. I note that the Foreword to the Fourth Edition was immediately changed, presumably as a result of the brouhaha from equating online meetings with face to face meetings. I have no idea what the approval process was for this change, which would be another question. So, please, what do the records show of the authors to the preface and forewords? Tommy H in Baton Rouge IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6817. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Rev. Forrest L. Richeson and Minnesota AA From: Ken Ring . . . . . . . . . . . . 8/21/2010 12:15:00 PM
was ordained). Graduated from Drake University (’31) in Des Moines; the University of Chicago, Illinois and the Union Theological Seminary in New York, New York. Married to Dorothy with his 13-month-old daughter, Linda, became pastor of Portland Avenue Christian Church, located at Grant Street and Portland in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Served there from 1939 to 1975 and during this period led his church with a new name, First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) to its new building and location on a portion of the Pillsbury family estate at East 22nd Street between Stevens Avenue and First Avenue South in Minneapolis in 1954. In 1942 Forrest, in a reaction to the entry of the United States into the World War, nearly made a decision to become a chaplain in the armed forces.
Alcohol Studies in New Haven, Connecticut in June and July of 1945. Forrest was the first person from Minnesota to do so.
might administer receiving Fifth Steps from alcoholics at 2218, Pat C. (a co-founder of The Minneapolis Group and Alano Society of Minneapolis,Inc.) met Forrest at Portland Avenue Church. Forrest achieved the highest position in his denomination in 1966 when he became the president of the 1.9 million member International Convention of Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ).
first in Minnesota. Forrest was the only clergyman to serve as president of four interdenominational agencies: the Minnesota Council of Churches, the Greater Minneapolis Council of Churches, the Minnesota State Pastors Conference and the Minneapolis Ministerial Association.
when it presented him with an honorary doctorate in 1948. Forrest was on the general board of the National Council of Churches, board chairman of trustees of the United Theological Seminary in New Brighton and board chairman of Life and Casualty Union.
and became a member of the faculty at Yale in 1956. After his retirement from First Christian he worked at Abbot Northwestern Hospital and the Family Treatment Center, in Minneapolis. Having read many histories of localities in A.A., I find that "Courage To Change, The Beginnings, Growth and Influence of Alcoholics Anonymous in Minnesota," to be a very comprehensive volume. It was limited by space and financial considerations along with a personal loyalty to Pat C, yet otherwise without fault. Factually, it stands up today. No single volume could possibly give a complete history, yet this one is a benchmark publication for overall completeness. FROM: Ken R, Archivist/Historian Alano Society of Minneapolis IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6818. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Author of Forewords From: rvnprit . . . . . . . . . . . . 8/22/2010 9:35:00 AM IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII An Advisory Action of the 2001 General Service Conference recommended that in the case of the Fourth Edition of the Big Book, the G.S.O. editors would prepare or coordinate new material such as the cover and jacket design, jacket copy, preface and foreword to the Fourth Edition, as well as make changes to the title
page, contents page, factual material that appears in footnotes and introductions to personal stories. An Advisory Action of the 2002 General Service Conference recommended that the
sentence "Fundamentally, though, the difference between an electronic meeting
and the home group around the corner is only one of format," in the last paragraph of the foreward to the Fourth Edition be deleted in future printings of the Big Book. --- In AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com, Tom Hickcox > > > The Fourth Edition of Alcoholics Anonymous has a preface and four forewords. > > Are there any hard data that show who the authors of these are? > > This ties in with the query I posed in message #6749 about describing > Bill W. as a stockbroker. > > I note that the Foreword to the Fourth Edition was immediately > changed, presumably as a result of the brouhaha from equating online > meetings with face to face meetings. I have no idea what the > approval process was for this change, which would be another question. > > So, please, what do the records show of the authors to the preface > and forewords? > > Tommy H in Baton Rouge > IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6819. . . . . . . . . . . . Fr. John Ford: AA rejection of Oxford Group absolutism, etc. From: Baileygc23@aol.com . . . . . . . . . . . . 8/21/2010 5:23:00 AM
(2) "aggressive evangelism" (3) the idea of group guidance as a source of private divine revelation (4) Oxford Group publicity seeking (5) public confession of sins to the entire group (instead of AA's Fifth Step
private confession) The differences between A.A. and the Oxford groupers, Father John Ford says, was
so pronounced from the very beginning that "there was never a real ideological integration of A.A. into that movement" -- that is, it is a serious mistake to speak of early A.A. ever truly being an integrated "part of the Oxford group." If you try to parrot Oxford group principles and practices in the modern world, Father Ford warned, you will end up with something totally different from anything genuine A.A. ever was -- and in the process you will also drive out all
your good Catholic members. -- Glenn C. (South Bend, Indiana) > Father John C. Ford was an important member of > the small group of Roman Catholic priests, including > Father Edward Dowling, S.J., Father Ralph Pfau > (the "Father John Doe" who wrote the Golden Books), > and Father Joseph Martin, S.S. (whose "Chalk Talk" > was seen all over the world), who were friends of > A.A. and/or alcoholics who had recovered in A.A., > who worked to spread the A.A. message and defend > the new movement in Catholic circles.
N.C.C.A.* "BLUE BOOK," Vol. 10, 1960 MORAL RE-ARMAMENT AND ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS Reverend John C. Ford, S.J. Some of the original inspiration of A.A. came from the Oxford Groups, which are
now called MRA, or Moral Rearmament. It was an Oxford grouper who first came to Bill W., the co-founder of A.A. in November, 1934, to tell him how he had found sobriety with the help of God and the Oxford groups. And when Bill W. went to Akron, Ohio, in May, 1935, and almost had a slip, it was through Oxford group people that he was introduced to Doctor Bob S., the other co-founder. But A.A. severed all connection with the Oxford Groups early in its history. The New York A.A.'s withdrew in 1937, the Akron A.A.'s in 1939 -- at a time when the total membership of A.A. in both cities was about a hundred people. Some of the reasons for this withdrawal are given by Bill W. in Alcoholics Anonymous Comes of Age. He says that the four absolutes of the Oxford groups (absolute honesty, purity, unselfishness, and love) were too much for recovering alcoholics to appreciate, that they rebelled against the "rather aggressive evangelism" of the Oxford groupers, and could not accept the principle of "team guidance" from the group. Furthermore, the Oxford groups sought prestige through publicity for its prominent members, while A.A. was developing a fundamental principle of anonymity. A.A. has always acknowledged the debt it owes to the Oxford groups in its early
days. Fortunately, however, when they parted company, A.A. left behind those elements of Buchmanism which are unacceptable to Catholics. For instance, Catholics would object to open confession within the group practiced by many Buchmanites. But in A.A. the fifth of the Twelve Steps reads, "We admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs." A.A. members often "tell their story" at A.A. meetings, but a group confession, in an objectionable sense of the phrase, is not part of their policy or their practice. There are also to be found still traces of Oxford group terminology in A.A.; for instance, the word group itself. And the phrase "group conscience" which occurs in A.A. literature is reminiscent of a Protestant type of private revelation, or at least of a theological position which does not do justice to the unique place occupied by the Church of Christ. In A.A. however, the phrase group conscience, if it ever had definite theological meaning has long since lost it. It merely means the opinion of the major et sanior pars. And although
it is the hope of all concerned that decisions be arrived at prayerfully, or in a spirit of submission to the will of God, it is not the thought of anyone that God has made A.A. the instrumentality of special, private revelations. Besides, the decisions in question do not have to do with religious or theological matters, but only with the practical measures to be taken to help the sick alcoholic to recover. Apparently the differences between the fundamental attitudes of the early A.A.'s and the Oxford groupers were so pronounced that there was never a real ideological integration of A.A. into that movement. There was initial inspiration and association rather than integration. A.A. sprang from the Oxford groups but almost immediately sprang away from them. =================================================
Pfau,
author of the Golden Books) held its first gathering in August at Saint Joseph's
College in Rensselaer, Indiana. 1971: name change to National Clergy "Council" on Alcoholism 1974: the phrase "and Related Drug Problems" was added to the name 1985: name changed to National "Catholic" Council on Alcoholism and Related Drug Problems to indicate that laity were welcome as members http://www.nccatoday.org/ http://www.aabibliography.com/ralphpfau2.htm IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6820. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Most alcoholics ... have lost the power of choice From: Jerry Trowbridge . . . . . . . . . . . . 8/21/2010 4:44:00 PM
writing process, such as changing 2nd person phrases to first person plurals. So for example, in the manuscript version, the first sentence of Chapter 5 reads:
directions." In the printed version, the word "directions" (which is authoritarian) was altered to "path": "Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path." - - - - From: Ben Hammond In the final editing of the Big Book, it seems that the conservatives convinced Bill to "pull out some nails" that were in the first drafts. Jim B, Fitz M, Hank
P. and others were going back and fourth with Bill removing "God," "on our knees" and other powerful words. Nell Wing mentions this in her book, Jim B. talks about it on a recording, etc. Whatever the motives were, it could not have
made better than it is. God bless you all, Old Ben
Tulsa, Oklahoma - - - - From: bruceken@aol.com (bruceken at aol.com) I consider myself one of three million alcoholics, worldwide, who have not "lost
the power of choice in drink." I found it, 24 years ago. Bruce K. San Francisco IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6821. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Most alcoholics ... have lost the power of choice From: Charles Knapp . . . . . . . . . . . . 8/21/2010 5:23:00 PM
alcoholic? He may start off as a moderate drinker; he may or may not become a continuous hard drinker; but at some stage of his drinking career he begins to lose all control of his liquor consumption, once he starts to drink." Is it possible that a person could be alcoholic that has not lost the "power of choice
in drink"? Could they wake up one day and realize they have begun to lose control and if they continue drinking the way they have been they might become a real alcoholic? It is the individual that makes the diagnoses they are alcoholic, not any of us. Maybe Bill left a way in for the person who truly believed they were alcoholic but had not lost the power of choice in drink. Charles from Wisconsin IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ++++Message 6822. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Fr. John Ford: AA rejection of Oxford Group absolutism, etc. From: jax760 . . . . . . . . . . . . 8/24/2010 5:36:00 PM
private confession)" The Oxford Group advocated "sharing for witness" and "sharing for confession". In Sam Shoemaker's writings he always insisted that sharing for confession be done with a single person only. Can someone clarify the comment, was it a quote attributable to Father John Ford or some other source? God Bless John B. ********************************************** John,
his article at one point: "Catholics would object to open confession within the group practiced by many
Buchmanites. But in A.A. the fifth of the Twelve Steps reads, 'We admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.' A.A. members often 'tell their story' at A.A. meetings, but a group confession, in an objectionable sense of the phrase, is not part of their policy or their practice." (You can read the whole of his article in the NCCA Blue Book down at the bottom
of this page.) My intention was to sum up Father Ford's arguments, not to argue either for or against them. But I agree with you, that Father Ford's argument on this issue was not the best
way to express the fundamental problem, and probably involved a misunderstanding and misstatement of the Oxford Group's teaching.
believed
that people could be forgiven for their sins without having to confess them to an ordained Catholic priest. Father Ford would have believed that you couldn't be forgiven until you received the formal words of absolution from a Catholic priest.
diversity in A.A. belief and practice, and Father John Ford followed the principle of anonymity to an extreme. He was instructed by his ecclesiastical superiors, I have been told, to keep the fact that he was a recovering alcoholic a total secret, so as not to bring the Roman Catholic Church into disrepute. As a result, I was unable to determine when he actually got sober in A.A., and he only publicly revealed that he himself was a recovering alcoholic (to the best
of my knowledge) at the very end of his life, when he talked about it (for example) when he was interviewed by Mary Darrah in 1985. I think Ernie Kurtz was aware of it at an earlier point, but I'm not sure when. And Father Ford may have believed that talking too much in AA meetings about our
sins would involve making things public which were intensely personal and should
be kept private, and that attempting to make people talk about all of their worst sins in the public context of a group meeting was bad moral theology and the worst kind of "let it all hang out" modern pop psychology, and that suggesting that this kind of public confession would somehow free you from the
power of your past sins ran totally against good Catholic moral theology. This would involve a gross (and dangerous) confusion between discussions appropriate only to the privacy of the confessional booth, and less sensitive personal matters that were all right to talk about in public. I feel sure that Father Ford believed that members of the Oxford Group on many
occasions talked about personal matters during group meetings, that should only
be talked about between a layperson and that person's priest. (This is Father Ford I'm talking about here -- I'm a Methodist minister, and we Methodists don't believe that you have to confess your sins to a member of the clergy in order to be forgiven by God. Like Anglicans and Lutherans, we believe that you are allowed to do so, and laypeople sometimes do it, but you don't have to do it, and most parishioners don't.) But some of this is supposition on my part. I do agree with you that, on this
issue, Father Ford does not seem to have been aware of details of how the Oxford
Group system actually worked. Glenn C. (South Bend, Indiana) ********************************************** --- In AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com, Baileygc23@... wrote: > > A.A. REJECTION OF FIVE MAJOR OXFORD GROUP PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES > > (1) absolutism > (2) "aggressive evangelism" > (3) the idea of group guidance as a source of private divine revelation > (4) Oxford Group publicity seeking > (5) public confession of sins to the entire group (instead of AA's Fifth Step private confession) > > The differences between A.A. and the Oxford groupers, Father John Ford says, was so pronounced from the very beginning that "there was never a real Yüklə 25,47 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|