discusses the steps. Dated 1959. I'll look
for earlier ones.
From: Shane . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/13/2009 12:36:00 AM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I live in Upland, California, which is 40 miles east of
Los Angeles. On June 27,2009 we are having a birthday party
for Dick C. of Ontario, Ca. He is 95 yrs old and has 60 yrs
of sobriety. We were told that he is the oldest living
member of AA with 60 yrs of sobriety.
Does anyone know of any other AA member still living who
From: marionoredstone . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/9/2009 8:46:00 PM
(MarionORedstone at aol.com)
Footnotes from my upcoming book Inside
these Rooms
From E. Kurtz, PhD, Monograph Alcoholics Anonymous
and the Disease Concept of Alcoholism (2000)
In 1938, while preparing the manuscript of the
A.A. Big Book, Bill Wilson asked Dr. Bob Smith
(a proctologist) about the accuracy of referring
to alcoholism as a disease or one of its synonyms.
Bob's reply, scribbled in a large hand on a
small sheet of his letterhead, read: "Have to
use disease -- sick -- only way to get across
hopelessness," the final word doubly underlined
and written in even larger letters.
(Smith in Akron to Wilson)
The answer William Griffith Wilson gave when specifically asked about
alcoholism
as disease after he had addressed the annual meeting of the National
Catholic
Clergy Conference of Alcoholism in 1961:
âWe have never called alcoholism a disease because, technically speaking,
it
is not a disease entity. For example, there is no such thing as heart
disease.
Instead there are many separate heart ailments, or combinations of them. It
is
something like that with alcoholism. Therefore we did not wish to get in
wrong
with the medical profession by pronouncing alcoholism a disease entity.
Therefore we always called it an illness, or a malady --â“ far safer
term for
us to use.â
In A.A.âs pamphlet, 44 Questions, the answer to the question What is
Alcoholism? It is said:
There are many different ideas about what alcoholism really is. The
explanation
that seems to make sense to most A.A. members is that alcoholism is an
illness,
a progressive illness, which can never be cured but which, like some other
illnesses, can be arrested. Going one step further, many A.A.s feel that the
illness represents the combination of a physical sensitivity to alcohol and
a
mental obsession with drinking, which, regardless of consequences, cannot be
broken by will power alone.
- - - -
From GFC: what does the Big Book actually say?
3 TIMES:
The word "disease" appears three times
in the A.A. Big Book. It is said
explicitly (in the first instance) or implied
by context (in the other two usages) that
alcoholism is a "spiritual disease."
It is mentioned first on page 64 in
discussing alcoholism:
"Resentment is the 'number one' offender.
It destroys more alcoholics than anything
else. From it stem all forms of spiritual
disease, for we have been not only
mentally and physically ill, we have been
spiritually sick. When the spiritual malady
is overcome, we straighten out mentally
and physically."
Note that the words disease, ill, sick,
and malady are treated by Bill Wilson
here as exact synonyms. All four words
meant exactly the same thing in the Big
Book when it was published in 1939.
Then again at the beginning of the second part
of the book in the story of Bill Dotson, the
Akron lawyer who was Alcoholics Anonymous
Number Three, the word disease is also used.
When Bill Wilson and Dr. Bob visited
Dotson in the hospital, they told him he had
"a disease," and when he explained his spiritual
conversion to his wife, he told her he felt
that God had cured him "of this terrible
disease."
So the word disease may only appear 3 times
in the Big Book, but in each instance, it was
a vitally important time, where Bill Wilson
was talking about the very heart and core of
the AA program.
19 TIMES:
Sick, sick person, or sickness on pages
18, 64, 67, 90, 92, 100, 101, 106, 107,
108, 115, 139, 140, 141, 147, 149, 153,
157, and 164.
14 TIMES:
Ill or illness on pages 7, 18, 20, 30, 44, 92,
107, 108, 115, 118, 122, 139, 140, and 142.
ONLY 6 TIMES:
Malady appears on pages 23, 64, 92, 138, 139,
and 165.
ONLY 3 TIMES:
The words ail or ailment are used on pages 135,
139, 140.
- - - -
From: Laurie Andrews
(jennylaurie1 at hotmail.com)
Friends,
I don't recall using the phrase "what early
AA people believed"; I quoted Bill W and the
Big Book.
Bill cautioned against describing alcoholism
as a disease entity and went so far as to say
AA didn't use the term, preferring malady,
sickness etc. Disease is only mentioned once
in the first part of the book, where the
program is outlined; here the reference is to
"spiritual" disease, and I'm not sure how a
physician would be qualified to diagnose that
condition.
Bill D mentions disease in the stories section
and others might do in later editions, but
that's their personal opinion, not AA "policy".
I've read "Mrs Marty Mann: the first lady of
Alcoholics Anonymous"; she had own agenda.
Seems to me Glenn makes the same error as the
Grapevine in conflating disease with illness
(malady, ailment etc). They are not the same;
I can be ill or sick but not necessarily have
a disease. That many AA's lazily use the term
disease to describe their (and my!) condition
doesn't make it right. Ringwald (op cit)
writes: "William Miller and Ernest Kurtz, two
respected researchers and observers, compiled
various outside conceptions of alcoholism
mistakenly attributed to Alcoholics Anonymous.
AA literature, they write, does not assert
that there is only one form of alcoholism
or only one way to recover; that alcoholics
are responsible for their condition;
that moderate drinking is impossible
for every problem drinker;
that alcoholics suffer from denial and should
be bullied into treatment; or that alcoholism
is purely a physical or hereditary disorder.
AA's core beliefs do, however, resonate with
or resemble those of other fields from which
it has often borrowed or which it has influenced."
In meeting after meeting I hear AA's making
these and other claims; these opinions are
also often voiced at public information
gatherings by those who simply haven't studied
the sources.
Till the shadows flee away,
laurie A.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
++++Message 5696. . . . . . . . . . . . Change to foreword, 4th ed. of Big
Book
From: buckjohnson41686 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/8/2009 2:28:00 AM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Foreward to 4th edition was changed, page xxiv,
line 10. First printing has "Fundamentally,
though, the difference between an electronic
meeting and the home group around the corner
is only one of format."
This was deleted, not sure which printing.
- - - -
Message #5670 from "Charlie Parker"
(charlieparker at prodigy.net)
What were the changes to Dr Bob's Nightmare
and which foreword was changed??
Charlie Parker
- - - -
Original Message #5668
From: momaria33772
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009
I'd like to share one other thought I have had
every time anyone has brought up publishing of
any materials like these. Would the people who
love and use the 24 Hour book be prepared to
have it changed at some future Delegate
Conference based on some objection that
someone in my home group had and got submitted
to the Conference Agenda?
For those who don't believe that could happen,
I would point out that both the fourth edition
versions of the Foreword and Dr. Bob's Nightmare
have been changed based on submissions by
members and groups in the US and Canada. I
could easily see today's version of the 24 Hour
Book being radically different from the one
originally published.
Jim H.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
++++Message 5697. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: profits from 24 Hour Book sent
to New York AA
From: grault . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/10/2009 12:35:00 AM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
No 7th Tradition problem: If the money
contributed to the GSO came from an AA member
or an AA group, it wouldn't matter how the
donor(s) earned the money (i.e., whether
through selling books, practicing law, winning
the lottery, etc.)
--- In AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com,
Laurie Andrews wrote:
>
> Since the 24 Hour book (like the Bible!)
> is not Conference-approved, how did sending
> profits from its sale to GSO (between 1948
> and 1954, when it was being printed under
> the sponsorship of the Daytona Beach AA
> Group) square with Tradition Seven?
>
> Laurie A.
>
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
++++Message 5698. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: the 24 Hour book and
spirituality vs. religion
From: Lynn Sawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/9/2009 3:04:00 AM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
From: Lynn Sawyer
(sawyer7952 at yahoo.com)
For our information, 'Bill's Story' refers to
Christ on pg. 11:
"To Christ I conceded the certainty of a great
man, not too closely followed by those who
claimed Him. His moral teaching -- most excellent.
For myself, I had adopted those parts which
seemed convenient and not too difficult; the
rest I disregarded."
Lynn S
Sacramento, California
- - - -
From: Baileygc23@aol.com (Baileygc23 at aol.com)
We quote Bill W to support the religious or so
called spiritual aspect of AA, but ignore Bill
W's statements, " is not a religious organization.
There is no dogma. The one Theological proposition
is a power greater than one's self. Even that concept is forced on no one."
"Additionally, he said, AA is a benign anarchy
and democracy." As far as spirituality is concerned,
it is not mine to decide if I am spiritual or not.
But I can try not to be unspiritual, and hope I
make the right guesses.
- - - -
From: "J. Lobdell"
(jlobdell54 at hotmail.com)
But A. J. Russell was a leading OG writer and
known as such (FOR SINNERS ONLY which is a kind
of model for the revelations of GOD CALLING),
and GOD CALLING was unquestionably an OG book
in Bill's mind (and I think the public mind) --
and the doctrine of private revelation was
recognizably an OG doctrine. And of course,
tho' God Calling didn't have the four A's and
the five C's, Rich Walker's little black book
did, so was twice or thrice an OG book. At
least that's my interpretation of the reasons
behind the turn-down. Not that the little
black book was too religious but that it was
too Oxford Group "religious" -- I think.
- - - -
From: Tom Hickcox
(cometkazie1 at cox.net)
I would like to note that what is not said is often more interesting
than what is said,
I can imagine the storm that could have erupted had religiosity been
given as the reason for turning down the 24 Hour Book. In my opinion
they took the easier, softer way and followed that by rejecting the
Little Red Book, which to me, at least, has much less religious
imagery, for the same reason.
I would also note that we are looking at the 24 Hour Book with 21st
century eyes. The criteria for what may be considered religious
today have shifted from what they were fifty-five years ago. I use
Emmet Fox's _Around the Year with Emmet Fox_ in my daily
meditations. To me it is less religious than _The Upper Room_ was,
but more religious than the 24 Hour Book. Post-modernism has changed
the ball game.
My point is that for its time the 24 Hour Book was not very
religious, but applying today's standards it is more so.
Tommy H in Baton Rouge
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
++++Message 5699. . . . . . . . . . . . RE: Publishing the 24 Hour book and
Little Red Book (and Harper publishers)
From: Arthur S . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/11/2009 10:11:00 AM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Hi Glenn
The written evidence on Harper & Brothers role in AA publishing (for both
the 12&12 and AA Comes of Age) points to them simply being the channel for
releasing books to the public through commercial outlets and not as an
additional source of income. In fact the board of trustees declined to
accept royalty payments from Harpers (reported to the 1954 Conference).
The 1951 Conference raised Bill W's royalties from 10% to 15%. The 1952
Conference approved a large list of publishing projects suggested by a
committee of board of trustees for future publications and approved six (6)
publishing projects proposed by Bill and then added ten (10) publishing
projects proposed by the Delegates themselves. These kind of actions do not
sustain the notion of any kind of cash crunch for publishing in the 1950s.
From what I can glean from final Conference reports, it appears that
Harper's & Brothers was brought in primarily to be the channel of
distribution of books to non-AAs through commercial channels (the key link
to them as a distribution channel was Eugene Exman of pre-publication Big
Book fame). The publishing relationship between AA and Harpers lasted well
into the 1970s.
It's a bit odd that the Conference declined to accept publication rights to
"24 Hours a Day" because, approximately two decades later there was actually
a case where a book wwas sold through GSO that was not published by AA and
whose independent authorship was clearly acknowledged. Harper was involved
in this as well. It involved the book "Bill W" by Robert Thompsen. It was
sold through GSO from 1971-1976 at which point the Conference stopped it.
That book was distributed through Harper (Harper & Row).
Back to the notion of whether there was any kind of cash crunch. The final
report of the 1953 Conference states:"After long and careful consideration,
and following a poll of Conference members, the Trustees approved the
publishing firm of Harper & Bros. as distributors of Bill's new book to
non-A.A. outlets. The Society retains full ownership of the copyright and
remains the actual publisher. The new arrangement will benefit the movement
by getting increased attention for a basic document on fundamental
principles of the Society, and through certain printing and distribution
economies. Within ten days after announcement of the new book had been sent
to the groups, orders for nearly 6,000 copies had been received at General
Service Headquarters.
In 1954, the board of trustees reported to the Conference that it "Decided
not to accept, a royalty of $.25 per copy on sales of a book on The Twelve
Steps, which had been offered by the publishers." The 1954 PI Conference
Committee recommended: "That, in connection with publication of Bill's book
"A.A. Comes of Age" we augment Harper's review list, and that no aggressive
radio or television publicity efforts for the book be made."
Finally, the 1976 Conference recommended: "That G.S.O. discontinue
distribution of the "Bill W." book [the biography published by Harper &
Row], dispose of the present supply in the most feasible manner, and notify
the Fellowship through Box 4-5-9 when the "Bill W." book is no longer
available through G.S.O. Sense of the meeting was taken that the deletion of
the listing in the catalog should be handled by overprinting or other method
as G.S.O. sees fit."
If this doesn't alter your viewpoint then I surrender.
Cheers
Arthur
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
++++Message 5700. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Publishing the 24 Hour book (and
comments on Conferences)
From: Arthur S . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/12/2009 12:23:00 PM
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
There are numerous errors in the posting about
Conferences and advisory actions in
Message #5682 from Jim H.
(jhoffma6 at tampabay.rr.com).
Comments on this are embedded in the original
message:
===================================
Hi Charlie,
Each year Delegates are assigned to various committees within the
Conference. Those committees are comprised of Delegates, Trustees and the
GSO
Staff.
===================================
[Comments on the above]: There are Trustees Committees and there are
Conference Committees. Trustees Committees meet four (4) times a year.
Conference Committees meet one time each year at the Conference and consist
of
Delegates (only) with a member of the GSO staff acting as a non-voting
committee
Secretary. There is almost (but not quite) a one-for-one correspondence
between
the Trustees Committees and the Conference Committees each of which is
explained
in the Service Manual.
===================================
When the 4th Edition was being prepared, it was decided to keep working
copies
down to as few people as possible. There were fears that if everyone
reviewed
the work in process some stories might get out and our Copyright might get
compromised. Therefore the Literature Committee members were the ones who
saw
the final copy and sent a recommendation to approve it to the full
Conference.
The 2001 Conference approved and it was sent to publication. I was fortunate
to
know the Delegate from my Area who was on that literature Committee and I
know
that she took her responsibility very seriously and did the very best she
could
in the review and approval process.
===================================
[Comments on the above]: The bit about copyrights being compromised if the
stories got out is bogus. However, it was stated by AAWS/GSO (who also
managed
to lose the copyrights for the 1st/2nd edition Big Books as well as the
Twelve
Concepts in 2007). The 1999 Conference approved a Conference Literature
Committee recommendation that: "Based on precedent in regard to previous
editions of Alcoholics Anonymous, the A.A. history book, and Daily
Reflections,
any draft copy of the Fourth Edition of Alcoholics Anonymous be
considered a work-in-progress, and as such, is confidential; the operating
principle being that any story material brought forward to the Conference
Literature Committee will be done on a "for-their-eyes-only" basis adhering
to
the principle of the "right of decision," and not brought forward for any
other
general distribution until publication."
===================================
Once the book came out, the fellowship found some things they didn't like.
In
2002, some members objected to the sentence in the Forward to the Fourth
Edition
that said "Fundamentally, though, the differnce between an electronic
meeting
and the home group around the corner is only one of format". Many of our
members
disagreed with this assesment. The Literature Committee recommended that the
sentence be deleted. The 2002 Conference agreed and the Forward was changed.
===================================
[Comments on the above]: It went well beyond "some members" objecting and
raised
quite a wide-spread negative reaction. The recommendation of the 2002
Conference
Literature Committee stated "Although the committee acknowledged the
importance
of electronic meetings to some A.A. members, 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 Foreword to
the
Fourth Edition, be deleted in future printings of the Big Book, Alcoholics
Anonymous."
===================================
One of the goals for the Fourth Edition was to keep it roughly the same size
while introducing new stories to help new people relate. In the process,
some
existing stories were edited and punctuation was updated. As people read the
book, some noticed the differences in their favorite stories. At the 2003
Conference, the Literature Committee recommended against restoring "The
Housewife Who Drank At Home", Me, An Alcoholic?", "Another Chance", and
"Freedom
From Bondage" to the Third Edition version.
===================================
[Comments on the above]: The 2003 Conference Literature Committee did not
recommend against restoring the story changes. It "agreed to take no
action." In
Conference Committee protocol this means that the committee discussed the
Dostları ilə paylaş: