SECCION MEXICO
SECCION MEXICO |
|
|
Report of First International
Meeting
of A.A.
World Service in
Mexico Netzahualcoyotl
City Mexico
June
7 & 8, 1997 Contents
|
||
|
|
||
| By Dr. José Ignacio Guzmán Mejía, A.A. Section Mexico, Chairman General Service Board |
|
|
|
III.-Agenda. |
||
| 1.- To restore Article Two of the Charter to its Original Form, such asit was written “A.A., a Society of Equals” | Presented by Jim H./USA | |
|
2.- That the Six Warranties of Article XII of the Charter be again in full force. |
Presented by Jim T./USA | |
| 3.- To stop any litigation within our Fellowship and out of it. |
Presented by Dennis Mc B./USA |
|
|
4.- That the literature of Alcoholics Anonymous be only a tool to our Primary Purpose, and not a source of wealth. |
Presented by Matthew M./Germany |
|
|
5.- To
restore the Plan of the Conference to be again the Voice of
Alcoholics
Anonymous World Service. |
Presented by Alfredo C./Mexico |
| 6.- Back to Basics, the origin of Section Mexico. |
Presented by Víctor J./Mexico |
|
|||
|
The
Section Mexico of A.A. General Service Conference, invited the A.A.
fellowship all over the world to be a part of this outstanding event. The
invitation read as follows: In
1955 the Fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous assumed the responsibility for
AA World Service. Bill W. made this Legacy in his own name and in Dr.
Bob’s name. At
that time Bill would say that we in AA were together, and that we knew we
were going to stay together. That we were at peace with each other and
with the world around us. That so many of our conflicts had been resolved
that our destiny seemed secure. The problems of yesterday had produced the
blessings of today. In
St. Louis Missouri it was therefore resolved: That the General Service
Conference of Alcoholics Anonymous, should become the guardian of the
Traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous, the perpetuators of the world services
of our society, the voice of the group conscience of our entire
fellowship, and the sole successors of its co-founders, doctor Bob and
Bill. Throughout
his political speculation, the french political scientist, Alexis de
Tocqueville, insisted that the greatest danger to democracy would always
be the «tyranny» of apathetic, self-seeking, uninformed, or angry
majorities. Only a truly dedicated citizenry, quite willing to protect and
conserve minority rights and opinions could, he thought, guarantee the
existence of a free and democratic society. All around us in the world
today we are witnessing the tyranny of majorities and the even worse
tyranny of very small minorities invested with absolute power. De
Tocqueville would have neither, and we AA’s can heartily agree with him. UPDATING THE AA CHARTER Article
2 of the Original Conference Charter-1955, was updated by the 1987
Conference (USA/Canada) to read: «Foreign lands in many cases have
created autonomous General Service Conferences of their own, which rely on
the Steps and Traditions protected by the Conference (USA and Canada) and
in other ways turn to the actions of the Conference for guidance. In
countries where a General Service structure exists, the United
States/Canada Conference will delegate sole right to publish our
Conference-approved literature to the General Service Board of that
structure». A CONFLICT WITHIN AA COMES UP This
last change has been sweeping over the traditions and has then given rise
to an outright conflict concerning all the principles which gave birth to
AA principles. It used to be that any individual, committee service board,
or AA service entity would all operate under an egalitarian assumption;
this way, no group or service was, ever, in no authority position over
another. Currently —as an undesirable outcome of this reform— the
eventual conflict with the original intention is easily recognizable.
First, the updating has placed an AA service entity in a position of
unqualified authority over any other, all over the world. Second: there is
every likelihood that «acts of government» turn into a part of our AA
service structure as a whole. Through
several decades, at least in our country, AA principles protected our
Fellowship from the dangers of power, domination, glory and money, and
their ruinous aftermath. It
was not but until the last decade that a convergence of historic events
within our Fellowship began to come forth, in both Mexico and the
USA/Canada Sections of the General Service Conference. The Mexican
Structure —through several years of service, suddenly became the seat of
perilous power and wealth. This is, the final responsibility for our AA
services was not residing anymore in the collective conscience of our
Mexican Fellowship, this is the AA groups. The Traditions and the Concepts
were not the guidelines of the structure, but the dictatorship of a
powerful manager along with a board of advisers. This way, the «Right of
Decision»; the «Right of Participation», and the «Right of Appeal»,
were irrevocably deserted. The alcoholic service members were often the
object of ostracism and discrimination. «BACK TO BASICS» A FRESH NEW START In
1986, after much praying and asking God for His guidance and His will,
eight areas made the historic decision to split up. This separation was
named the Section Mexico of the General Service Conference, and our
movement has been nicknamed «Back to Basics». We adhere to the
Conference Plan as strictly as possible. The primitive figure has raised,
and we are now twenty-one areas, and our structure keeps growing. Shortly
after the conflict in Mexico, the USA/Canada GS Conference, suddenly came
up subverting the spiritual basis of the AA movement, when they took the
unilateral decision of modifying Article 2 of the Conference Charter. They
thus undoubtedly have placed themselves in authority over ALL OTHER
Sections of the Conference. NO! TO EITHER PERSONALLY PUNITIVE
ACTIONS, NO PUBLIC CONTROVERSY! Maybe
our brotherhood there did this
unintentionally; however, the aftermath has proved calamitous, to say the
least. In 1994, because of a criminal litigation —supported and
encouraged by AA World Services— through the Mexican GS Structure that
we split up from, the federal police confiscated all the printed
literature we had in a small warehouse to carry the AA message to the
still-suffering alcoholic. One of our alcoholic trusted servants was
charged by a criminal court for copyright law infringement, and he was
sentenced to one-year term in prison. We deem fit to say here that we had
asked AA World Services several times for the license to print and
distribute AA literature. AAWS has consistently turned down our petitions,
reportedly for their policy is to only recognize one structure in every
country. This way, our 30,000-recovering alcoholics structure has been
time after time ostracized and pursued. FIRST INTERNATIONAL MEETING FOR AA WORLD
SERVICES IN MEXICO In
remembrance of the date that our beloved Fellowship was born 62 years ago,
we are going to celebrate it with our Third
National Convention next June, 1997. Because of our spritual breack up
from the USA/Canada General Service Conference they have already punished
us with their «acts of government». THE DECLARATION OF MEXICO We
wonder what country is going to be next. If the freedom to grow under God
in His likeness is going to be ever the quest of Alcoholics Anonymous,
then we should all together find a New Conference Plan which becomes an
alternative to recover our cherished liberty. For this purpose, we shall
also mark this occasion with our First
World Service Meeting, in which the DECLARATION
OF MEXICO will be proclaimed, and for this, we do want to extend you
our most cordial invitation to join us in this celebration. AN ENCOUNTER OF FRIENDSHIP The
meeting and the workshops will take place in Mexico City, June 6th through June 8th, 1997. Our reception committee members
will gladly honor any information requirement, through our e-mail, FAX
service, or telephone. ¡Friends
of Bill W.: Welcome!
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
t
the opening of this First International Meeting, which starts today,
simultaneously with our 3rd. National Convention, I will express how
beautiful it is to see how that seed, which was planted in 1986 by 8 areas
and the AA leaders at those times, has now grown into what it is today: a
spiritually thriving fellowship whose example goes beyond our country’s
geographic borders. This
Encounter of Friendship, made now a reality, means for our Mexican
Fellowship a historic fact, by which we all can share our experience with
our own members and with fellows from foreign countries like Guatemala,
Israel, Germany and the United States. The
dramatic growth of our Section Mexico of the General Service Conference,
due to its back to basics, has made a reality that dream of Bill W.’s
—a society of equals, a fellowship which stands UNITED with its only
primary purpose of carrying the message of hope to the still suffering
alcoholic. Since
the beginning of its over 60 years of life, the Alcoholics Anonymous
fellowship has dramatically burgeoned worldwide. However, the perspective
of a multi-million business implied by the AA literature selling, as well
as the unqualified power held by the Senior Section of the General Service
Conference, assuming the leadership of the international AA fellowship, in
altering Article Two of our Conference Charter has given rise to a
deviation of the very purpose of AA as whole, as it was originally
envisioned. This
very alteration has brought about the misuse and transgression to
Traditions, Concepts and Warranties, so as to transform this spiritual
entity into a moneymaking business which is also taking over the fate of
the AA Fellowship at the world level. There
was a group of courageous AA members who, as they watched this breaching
of principles, made the decision to go on and create a new service
structure, like another Section of the World General Service Conference.
Under the auspices of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Central
Mexicana infringed our spiritual principles, since their financial
wellbeing, their personal prestige and the exercise of power came first
than the fellowship’s common welfare. AAWS has consistently committed
acts of government, and they have also placed themselves in unqualified
authority over all the service structures at the world level. They have
been disrespectful of our AA groups autonomy according to Tradition Four.
On its part, Central Mexicana has changed over our primary purpose into
mere financial pursuit. In disagreement to both Traditions Six and Ten,
they have affiliated themselves to government entities, and have engaged
in infamous litigation, which in the final analysis is nothing but public
controversy. The
Warranties as expressed in the XII Concept for World Service, have not
been observed, since AAWS and Central have turned out to be that perilous
seat of MONEY, PRESTIGE and POWER; they have overlooked the advise of
financial prudence. AAWS has already placed itself in a position of
unqualified authority over other traditional service structures; has
become personally punitive and has incited to public controversy. Our
right to appeal has been heard but never listened to. If
Bill W. raised from the dead to life, would he acknowledge such structure?
Or because of its deformities, would he disapprove it and dismiss it, same
as he, in its moment, did with the Oxford Group? To
go back to the principles, he taught us, is now our responsibility and of
those ones who believe in the Back to Basics. We
were attacked and through litigation our literature was carried off; the
fact that we have been deprived of everything material is an indication of
love from our Higher Power. If we live abiding to principles our own
identity will never be carried off us. Tradition Three stands for says
that the only requirement for A.A. membership is the desire to stop
drinking, as well as to admit ourselves as alcoholics. I mean, the
membership for our Fellowship is nothing which could depend upon the
Senior Section’s approval. Having
gone through this is when we can find a sense in the Beatitudes which say:
«Blessed are the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven».
For it is only being poor in spirit; this is, when get rid of the mistakes
of our past, and humbly admitting our character defects and handing over
our wills to our Higher Power we are capable to accept and become aware of
that beautiful life our Recovery, Unity and Service offers to us all. The
insensibility caused to us by a inflated ego concerning our individual
truth blocked us from this beautiful life; thus, we can understand why «Blessed
are the pure in heart; for they shall see God», for their hearts are not
loaded with material interest and, only an empty heart will be big enough
to let our High Power live in it. Our
Higher Power expresses Itself in our Fellowship releasing us from the
obsession and craving for material goods, it makes us an invitation to
work with others to strengthen our unity and to share our experience. Someone
has just told me that our Fellowship is hungry, and that the General
Service Board, which I chair, is responsible to feed this hunger. This
hunger, however, can easily be distorted. The kind of nourishment that our
Fellowship needs is of the spiritual kind. It is, from this meeting where
all us shall be nourished through your shared experience. We shall then
nourish our Fellowship and strengthen its spirit and Unity. I
would like to welcome you all friends from abroad and from our country, to
welcome you to our Back to Basics, so to live it with us intensely and, if
you wish, to add up your efforts to our Back to Basic’s movement. I urge
you all to share the best of yourselves at this International Meeting,
which has now just begun. Thank you. |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
By
Jim H. USA-Canada Conference Hello!,
my name is Jim H. and I’m an alcoholic. My Home Group is the Back to
Basics Group of Thousand Oaks in Southern California. I want to thank
Alberto and the other members of the committee for inviting me to share
with you today. I am very grateful for the opportunity and will always
remember the event of this First International Service Meeting. My
topic this morning is the “updates” to Article Two of the Conference
Charter that were made by the U.S./Canada General Service Conferences of
1987 and 1988. In exploring materials for this presentation I have found
very many questions and very few answers! But I suspect that fact
surprises almost no one here, does it? Please
let me point out that I found God and sobriety through Alcoholics
Anonymous over sixteen years ago. My debt to the Spiritual Fellowship of
Alcoholics Anonymous is profound. It is only with much discomfort that I
have been forced to be critical of the practices of those who are called
the “Guardians of Our Tradition” and the “effective voice” of A.A. My
analysis of the problem falls into three major areas: 1) Linguistic
Considerations. 2) The impact of the “Section” concept in
interpretation of A.A. Principles. 3) The problems of the “sole right to
publish our Conference-approved literature.” Permit
me to read the original language of Article Two so we may all orient
ourselves. Article Two originally read: “2. Composition: The Conference
(North American Section) shall be composed of State and Provincial
Delegates, the Trustees of the General Service Board, Directors and staff
members of the New York Headquarters and such ex-Trustees or foreign
Delegates as the Conference may wish to invite. “Other
Sections of the Conference may sometimes be created in foreign lands as
the need arises out of language or geographical considerations. The North
American Section of the General Service Conference will then become the
Senior Section, related to the other Sections by ties of mutual
consultation and a cross linking of Delegates. “But
no Conference Section shall ever be placed in authority over another. All
joint action shall be taken only upon two-thirds vote of the combined
Sections. Within its boundaries each Conference ought to be autonomous.
Only matters seriously affecting A.A.’s world-wide needs shall be the
subject of joint consideration.” The
first change to Article Two of the Charter was actually made in 1979. It
formerly read, “The Conference (North American Section) shall be
composed of State and Provincial Delegates, the Trustees of the General
Service Board, Directors and staff members of the New York Headquarters
and such ex-Trustees or foreign Delegates as the Conference may wish to
invite.” The
1979 Conference changed that language to: “The Conference (U.S. and
Canada) shall be composed of area delegates, the trustees of the General
Service Board, directors of A.A. World Services and A.A. Grapevine, and
staff members of the Grapevine and General Service Office.” These
changes reflect a growing international presence within A.A. and
apparently an attempt on the part of the Conference to acknowledge that
fact and to direct the Conference to a more domestic orientation. Even the
definition of the Conference, appearing only as a parenthetical remark, is
changed from a geographical definition to a geo-political definition. The
words “North American Section” are replaced by “U.S. and Canada.”
The New York conference, originally a section among sections, became a
Conference apart. For my own convenience, I want to use a combination of
the older and newer terminology, referring to the U.S/Canada Conference as
the “North American Conference.” Furthermore,
the exclusion of the words, “such ex-Trustees or foreign Delegates as
the Conference may wish to invite,” seems to indicate a move away from
international “authority” and toward a more domestically oriented set
of concerns. These changes are subtle, but major change often results from
a series of subtle changes. Every change must be viewed with utmost
caution. Every change in language represents a change, sometimes not very
subtle, in the possible interpretation of a document, especially a legal
or para-legal document. I
think that any careful observer of the North American Conference will
agree that the Conference is not set up to force or promote the kind of
meticulous attention to language that any changes to our basic documents
require. Given the atmosphere of the Conference and the rapid rotation of
Delegates, little serious attention can be given to such matters unless
the Conference committee has previously provided the background materials
or the reasons for such close attention. In
most cases, the Conference is at the mercy of those who distribute
information, and Delegates have little choice but to “trust their
trusted servants.” The need for restructuring the North American
Conference, however, is a separate topic, and one that we really cannot go
into here, today. After
the changes by the 1979, 1986, and 1987 Conferences, Article Two now
reads: “Composition: The Conference (U.S. and Canada) shall be composed
of area delegates, the trustees of the General Service Board, directors of
A.A. World Services and A.A. Grapevine, and staff members of the Grapevine
and General Service Office. “Other
countries have created autonomous General Service Conferences of their
own, which rely on the Steps and Traditions that are protected by the
United States/Canada Conference. In addition, these other Conferences
often turn to the actions of the United States/Canada Conference for
guidance. “Consultation
between Conferences is encouraged, and a World Service Meeting of
delegates from the various Conferences is held once every two years. The
United States/Canada delegates to the World Service Meeting are chosen
from the General Service Board. “In
countries where a General Service Structure exists, the United
States/Canada Conference will delegate sole right to publish our
Conference-approved literature to the General Service Board of the
structure. “Only
matters seriously affecting A.A.’s worldwide needs shall be the subject
of joint consideration.” What
is at first striking about the 1986-87 changes is that they strip out the
reasoning behind the creation of the several General Service Structures.
The words, “Other Sections of the Conference may sometimes be created in
foreign lands as the need arises out of language or geographical
considerations,” are cut out. Originally
the reasons for acknowledging new General Service Structures were to be on
the basis of language and/or geography. Neither of these criteria is
clearly defined in and of itself, and each is itself capable of widely
diverse interpretation, but the general intent here seems to be to keep
unity through the establishment of common language conventions and perhaps
geographical convenience. The
British GSO probably used a geographical rationale for its creation, since
English is common to both North America and Britain. In spite of
differences in spelling conventions, the language is the same. But
linguistic differences are a complicated matter in and of themselves. Not
only spelling conventions, but differences in meaning and polite usage
occur within larger language families. Dialect
differences within the U.S., for example, render the dialects of some
geographical areas nearly incomprehensible to other dialect areas. I know
that similar language differences exist in French, German, Spanish, and so
forth. Sometimes those differences can be expressed in geo-political
terms, but sometimes not. Variations within a country may be as great as
variations between countries professing to use the same language. So the
simple criterion of “the same language” is often misleading or false. Even
without dialect differences, the same terms may be understood differently
by people with different points of view. Such was apparently the case when
the 1986 North American Conference “updated” Article Two. I have heard
it said that at least some of the delegates had a very different
interpretation of the exclusive nature of the publishing copyrights that
were used in pursuing the litigation here in Mexico. The same words do not
necessarily mean the same things to different people. The
term “country” is also a difficult one to define apart from the
geo-political realities of the world. Did Yugoslavia, for example, deserve
only one GSO Conference, but now the new entities deserve several? Or can
we recognize cultural differences, which are most often related to
linguistic differences, in determining how many General Service Structures
belong in a given geographical area? Keeping politics and religion out of
Alcoholics Anonymous may not be as simple as it looks at first. How many
GSO’s should take the place of the GSO in the old Soviet Union? Should
Germany have two GSO’s because it used to be two countries? Those
who favor the issuance of “exclusive rights” to publish our literature
say that they do so in order to prevent the dilution of our message as
well as to provide a “historical” source of income for the service
structures which are licensed. What seems to me to be their worst fear is
that the A.A. message may become divided by what I am calling
“doctrinal” differences —that is, differences in interpretation of
the text of the book “Alcoholics Anonymous.” The North American
Conferences saw no danger in geo-political divisions or in linguistic
needs, but to tell the truth, those differences may be worse than any
possible doctrinal differences! Language
differences lead to differences in translations of the Big Book of
Alcoholics Anonymous. AAWS, Incorporated, and the New York GSO were taught
this lesson recently when a German member of A.A. explained to the GSO
General Manager that the currently “authorized” German version of our
Big Book leaves out any translation of the term “moral” in the Fourth
Step. Granting licenses, then, clearly does not insure the integrity of
our spiritual message. Perhaps
we can arrange it so that those who believe that the original text of our
spiritual message should be followed could belong to the Belfast
Conference in Ireland, perhaps, while those who wish to see the social
model of alcohol recovery stressed could adopt a future edition of the
text with stories included for political correctness and only muted
references to any spiritual terms or concepts. That might be, let’s say,
the North American version. Those with an aversion to moral terms might
accept the German Conference’s literature, and so forth. No one would
have to call these different interpretations of the message, just
different translations or different editions of the book. It
is conceivable that the North American Conference might have developed
with racially segregated fellowships. In that case there might well have
developed two separate Conferences for North America. It didn’t happen
that way, of course, but it could have. Thus racial or ethnic
considerations could play a part in the separation of Conferences within a
single nation-state. Cultural
diversity is a greater or lesser problem in all large, modern nations. It
is very closely allied to linguistic and/or ethnic differences. The lines
of separation blur here and are no longer so sharply drawn. Today’s
ethnic differences, after all, may be tomorrow’s national boundaries.
Should the structure of A.A. services change because of such political
changes? The
fact is, doctrinal differences do exist. They exist within the North
American Conference just as surely as they do between Central Mexico and
Section Mexico. Pretending that they don’t exist is pointless. There is
very little in the way of unity —especially unity in carrying the single
message of Alcoholics Anonymous— among A.A. groups in my local area.
There are even agnostic and atheistic groups in the Los Angeles area!
Unity simply does not exist with regard to what I am calling
“doctrine.” The
problem here is that doctrinal differences would break up the economic
base of world services. Section Mexico proved that a General Service
Structure could and would be supported entirely by the voluntary
contributions of its own members — the principle of self-support in
action! The fear is that, in so doing, power would be restored to the
groups and the membership of A.A. rather than residing in the corporate
office. The monopoly of money and the distribution of information would
change radically. And that, I believe, is the real fear of those who see
what has happened here in Mexico in the past ten years. In
truth, publishing has long been a revenue source for World Services. This
is its main function, from a business viewpoint. For the alcoholic who
still suffers, its main function is to show the way to hope and life. That
difference is the difference between the business of A.A. and the message
of A.A. When the business of A.A. gets in the way of the message of A.A.,
then we have a profound spiritual problem such as the one we are
discussing here. The question is whether we trust in God or in our own
finite fears, which are sometimes called “common sense.” In
the long run the only language in which the Big Book of Alcoholics
Anonymous may be understood is in the Language of the Heart. That language
belongs to no country or language group, but only to those who have
participated in the miracle of sobriety through a spiritual experience as
the result of practicing the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous as set
out in our basic text, “Alcoholics Anonymous,” our beloved Big Book.
Those who do not or cannot understand that language will forever be living
in a world of fear, rules and litigation. God help them!
|
|||
|
|||
|
By
Jim T. USA-Canada Conference Former Delegate My
regrets for not getting to be with my heroes in AA this weekend. I got as
far as Nuevo Laredo on Thursday, but couldn’t proceed due to not having
my car title with me. I
hope this small presentation will compensate for my absence. Article
XII of the Conference Charter and Concept XII both contain the Warranties
of our General Service Conference. Bill W. also referred to these as the
Conference ‘Bill of
Rights’. They are considered to be so spiritually sound, that our
Fellowship declared (in the 1955 Resolution at the St. Louis Missouri
International Convention) that at least 3/4 of all the registered groups
in the world would have to respond in writing to allow ANY CHANGE in them.
Six months deliberation would be required preceding this massive
deliberation... So strict adherence of these guaranties must be of
paramount importance. My intent here, is to elaborate on some of
deviations from the original intent of these warranties; and to formulate
some plan for a return to the spirit of these Principles. PROBLEMS: Warranty
I -The Conference shall never
become the seat of perilous wealth or power. Bill W. assures us here that
perilous wealth is doubtful due to slim group contributions. This is
possibly true of group contributions, however our other source of income,
profits from literature, is another thing altogether. (See Warranty II).
The protection against too much power, Bill states, lies in rotation,
voting participation and careful chartering. As far as rotation and voting
participation, our World Service Meeting set a troubling precedent in
1988. They assumed authority to limit voting participation (Concept IV),
by blocking attendance of Mexican Section. The WSM was never to have been
a decision-making body. Its only function was to gather bi-annually, to
share experience, strength, hope and solutions, regarding our
message-carrying endeavors throughout the world. Currently Mexican Section
cannot participate, so the world of AA cannot benefit from this
experience, -or vice versa. And if you’re not participating, you can’t
rotate, -you’re ALREADY OUT! Pertaining
to careful chartering, I’ll delay my comments until discussion under
Warranty VI. Warranty
II-Sufficient operating funds,
plus an ample reserve, be its Prudent financial Principle. As
stated above, we’re relatively safe from accumulating any wealth from
group contributions. Though it’s been noted by your fine example, that
when a need is expressed to the groups, the donations are forth-coming. But
when we consider our other source of income, literature profits, we are
presented with quite another dilemma. As has been witnessed here in
Mexico, the US/Canada structure and Germany, serious squabbles over money
can develop pertaining to publishing income. For eight years now, the WSM
agenda has been saturated with this topic. I’ve often wondered what John
D. Rockefeller would say, if he could observe the atrocity which happened
in here, and in Germany. He might retort I warned you. Money WILL SPOIL
THIS THING! In
Bill W.’s comments regarding Warranty II, he is referring to book
profits as a great many contributions. What he was inferring, was that
literature revenue be used to fill a small shortfall, when group
contributions occasionally fell a little short of operational expenses. Though
the ideal is to be fully self-supporting through voluntary contributions,
there should be some lee-way to compensate for a small shortfall. But
when literature profits are used to undermine the Power of the Purse
(Concept VII), we have become imprudent and yielded to the counsel of
fear. Then problems of money, property and prestige divert us from our
primary purpose, money becomes the sole objective; literature becomes the
property for generating revenue. This
situation occurred when a group of AA members observed that money,
property and prestige had become too important to their Conference. As a
result, they attempted to apply the power of the purse. Literature prices
were escalated to fill the gap. The concerned faction of groups was then
ridiculed, accused of not trusting their trusted servants, —and then
branded as renegades. These areas were further reprimanded by requiring
them to fund all their delegate’s expenses for participating in the
Conference. This
entity, Mexican Section, exercised their autonomy, and separated from
Mexican Central so that they may return to basics, publish literature at a
reasonable price and rely on voluntary self-support from their groups. Mexican
Central literature sales were consequently threatened, prompting them to
enlist US/Canada’s assistance, to legally cancel Section’s publishing rights. This courtroom battle was also used to defend
the distinction and prestige of being the only real AA in Mexico,
—therefore the only one qualified to print AA literature. So
in the heat of debate, Section was dis-allowed to publish our literature.
But a friend emerged, (a fellow AA group called I.W.S.), who offered to
supply Section with literature. They were promptly threatened with
litigation due to copyright laws preventing them from providing this for
Section. So one faction of AA prevented another faction of AA from helping
still another faction of AA from using our literature for carrying the AA
message. This was all done so the original AA faction could continue its
unrestrained pursuit of money, wealth and power. The
extent of the court battle to regain control of literature sales was
appalling. Dishonest efforts were used to produce a living author of our
books. This was necessitated due to Mexican copyright law. Warranty
III -None of the Conference
members shall ever placed in a position of unqualified authority over any
of the others. It
seems that at the World Service Meeting this has happened. Section has
been ostracized and denied participation in the biennial meetings. (This
happened in 1988, as previously stated) This is unqualified authority. Bill
W. stated ... “we will not tolerate absolute human authority of any
sort”. However, this is precisely what happened, when Central Mexicana
in concert with US/Canada, reduced our message-carrying to a legal battle
against Section. (The one entity who was following the very principles
stated in the literature that they were being prevented from publishing)
It might be wise for the plaintiffs to read the literature they are trying
to protect! Warranty
IV -That all decisions be
reached by discussion, vote and, whenever possible, by substantial
unanimity. When
Central Mexicana and US/Canada perceived problems with Section printing AA
literature, when was Section invited to the tables for a full discussion
leading to an informed group conscience on literature licensing? When
all the other countries decided that Section could not participate in
their biennial meetings, was Section allowed to be present to share their
side of the group conscience? obviously not. In
1995, a US/Canada Conference floor Action motion was introduced. It called
for a response to Seccion’s General Service Board Chairman, Dr. Ignacio
Guzman’s letter of appeal. This response was to have been issued from
our US/Canada Conference. The floor action was voted to not even be
considered, let alone be discussed and voted upon. And the conference even
attempted, unsuccessfully, to ban this action from showing up in our Final
Conference Report. Fortunately,
a minority opinion (issued by me) turned that vote around, and allowed
this ludicrous display of irresponsibility to be shown to our Fellowship,
in the Conference Report. If
ever there is a need to poll all the registered groups in the world,
regarding a change in these blessed Warranties, or our treasured
Traditions, the Section groups would be ignored, since they are not
acknowledged as real AA registered groups, (and Section groups have
illustrated a greater understanding of these Warranties and our Traditions
than most of the groups in the world) A sad predicament, indeed! Warranty
V -That no Conference action
ever be personally punitive, or an incitement to public controversy. The
legal actions brought upon Section by Central (with US/Canada’s
assistance and approval) has caused public controversy “... something in
which our Tradition says we may not engage”, (from Bill W.’s writings
on Warranty V). It cannot be stated any simpler. This legal entanglement
has been defended as NOT originating from a Conference action. Please note
the 1997 Conference Advisory Action which changed Article II of our
Conference Charter, to empower U.S./Canada’s Conference to delegate sole
right to publish our literature to the General Service Board of that
structure, thus endorsing our licensing policy to REQUIRE LEGAL PROTECTION
against additional structures in a country (with the same language) from
printing our literature. This Article II change replaced its previous
assurance of country autonomy, and lack of any conference authority over
any other. Another
defense of these legal pursuits is to prevent distortion of the integrity
of our message. Thirty thousand drunks, in Section, had scrutinized their
message text before it went to the press
it was the original message. They, Section, also want an
undiluted message too. But, more than that, they wanted to adhere to what
the undiluted message says, and follow its principles; something in which
the plaintiff seems to have conveniently overlooked! Warranty
VI -That though the conference
may act for the service of Alcoholics Anonymous, it shall never perform
any acts of government; and that, like the society of Alcoholics Anonymous
which it serves, the conference itself will always remain democratic in
thought and action. Here
we need not look far for an act of government, which set an alarming
precedent, which has proved to have far-reaching implications. The nearby
perception of good, was sacrificed for the permanent best. The
1987 Article II change, ratified by the 1988 Conference, stripped all
other countries autonomy, and place US/Canada Conference IN CHARGE of the
international literature licensing. This is an ACT OF GOVERNMENT! Three
or four consecutive conferences have tried to remove the governing action
of litigation, or such threats from the AAWS’s arsenal, only to be
almost unanimously defeated. SOLUTIONS: As
may be noted, the problems are complex. However, happily we may
acknowledge that the solutions are simple. Warranty
I-Implore the World Service
Meeting to represent all Conferences. If this fails, consider starting our
own WSM. Warranty
II -Continue spreading message
of full voluntary self-support. Reduce literature prices to cost. Trust
God. Continue to conduct conferences, discussing these issues, becoming
fully informed. Follow your groups sense on printing any original OR new
literature. Warranty
III -World Service Meeting
solution stated above. As to Conference ganging up on other Conferences,
continue to discuss at our own Conference, remembering that we do have
sympathetic members from other geographic areas who still believe in REAL
A.A. Principles. Enlist their help (we are willing to go all the way with
you). Continue with appeals. Warranty
IV -It appears that the
U.S./Canada Conference learned from its 1995 session’s mistake on
refusing to consider floor action motions, and have rectified that
situation. But we still need to educate our group membership on the
desirability of full debate on each issue, —even if it gets lively!
That’s how God expresses Himself in our group conscience. Warranty
V -There are no litigation
threats pending right now, as far as we know. But we must be on guard for
the temptation of some to lash out in fear, to protect the integrity of
our message. As stated previously, trust our own Conferences. Continue our
policy of the best defense is no defense whatsoever. (From Bill W. on
Warranty V.) Warranty
VI.- Continue to pursue
restoration of Article II to its previous spiritual boundaries. Continue
to educate, write and appeal. CONCLUSION: When
all is said and done, there may be many structures within AA, but there is
only one set of principles. Those of us who rest in Principles, instead of
Personalities, WILL REMAIN ONE! We
will unite together, despite our geographic or language differences. If
this means those of us in other countries join with Section to maintain
our spiritual roots. Then so be it. Thank
you for the privilege of sharing with someone who understands the basics
so much better than I. (His presentation was read to the audience by John G.,
also from the United States of America).
|
|||
|
|||
|
By
Dennis Mc B. USA/Canada Conference Former Delegate My
name is Dennis and I am an alcoholic. My home group is the “Rock Bottom
Group”, from Simi Valley, California, USA. I want to thank you for
allowing me to be a part of this wonderful event. Why
should Alcoholics Anonymous never engage in any legal litigation? Why is a
public lawsuit a danger to Alcoholics Anonymous? To
answer these questions we must consider the reasons for taking legal
actions in the first place. As it is with our own recoveries from
alcoholism, through taking the 12-Steps, we have to get to the root of the
problem. As it states on page 64 in the Big Book: “So we had to get down
to causes and conditions”. First
of all there are only a few reasons for bringing a public lawsuit that I
can understand. One
reason is to punish some person or group that you are angry with. In most
cases where someone is suing another, one party has a resentment toward
another party. I do not ever recall hearing of a loving lawsuit. Again
from page 64 of the Big Book: “Resentment is the ‘number one’
offender. It destroys more alcoholics than anything else. From it stems
all forms of spiritual disease...”. To quote a little further down on
page 64: “In most cases it was found that our self-esteem, our
pocketbooks, our ambitions, our personal relationships (including sex)
were hurt or threatened”. On
page 66 of our Big Book it states: “But with the alcoholic, whose hope
is the maintenance and growth of a spiritual experience, this business of
resentment is infinitely grave. We found that it is fatal”. When
we feel threatened our motivation for action is based in fear which page
67 of the Big Book calls: “...an evil and corroding thread”. When A.A.
begins to take actions grounded in fear we have allowed an “evil and
corroding thread” to enter our fellowship. When we experience anger,
resentment, and fear in our life “we shut ourselves off from the
sunlight of the spirit”, and we separate ourselves from the “great
whole” of Tradition one, and the group conscience in which a loving God
expresses Himself in Tradition two, and the healing power from God as it
flows through the unity of the “fellowship of the spirit”. This
alone is a good enough reason why our spiritual fellowship should not
litigate, but if we follow spiritual principles because we are afraid of
the consequences of not following them —then we are still being
motivated by fear and we must move beyond fear to the motive of love and
service. Another
reason for a public lawsuit, that also ties in with resentment and fear,
is to protect something. What is it that needs to be protected? It is most
likely money, property (which includes intellectual property) and
authority, which Traditions six and seven may divert us from our primary
spiritual aim and disputes over can destroy our spiritual heritage. If it
is God’s loving message to hopeless alcoholics we don’t need to
protect it —we need to give it away. Almost
every Tradition in Alcoholics Anonymous is diverted from with a public
lawsuit against members of our fellowship including our personal and
spiritual anonymity of the Eleventh and Twelfth Traditions. To
me the Twelve Traditions are the principles that protect the loving and
healing power of God flowing into our fellowship, where His power can be
safely used by us as a freely given gift. Only when these principles are
utilized will God permit such an awesome power to enter our lives. The
healing power of God, which we alcoholics need to recover from a hopeless
state of mind and body and our spiritual malady, would be dangerous if
possessed by individuals whom are centered in greed and selfishness.
Therefore it is an act of love by God that the power is withheld from me
whenever I separate myself from the group, and the power is also withheld
from the group if it separates itself from the unifying principles of our
Traditions, and His power is also withheld from the whole when it is no
longer whole. That seems to me to be another real good reason why our
fellowship should not engage in a public lawsuit. The
A.A. message was freely given to me and I pass it on for free, and a
miracle happens. When I am going to a jail or other institution to carry
the A.A. message a miracle happens which helps me to stay sober. If I were
to get paid for carrying that same message into the same jail, I might get
some money but I would not receive the miracle. Tradition eight states:
“Our usual A.A. Twelfth Step work is never to be paid for”. When
I give a Big Book to some new person I am passing on the message of
Alcoholics Anonymous and doing basic Twelfth Step Work. I disagree with
some people in A.A. including some people at our General Service Office in
New York who have said, “it doesn’t matter how the A.A. message is
carried”. It does matter according to the Eighth Tradition —our
message is a freely given gift from God and it should never be carried for
money— whether you call it profit, royalties, or salaries. Our
Big Books should be bought and sold at cost or freely given, because it
carries our message. Is this what the people who are bringing the
copyright litigation are afraid of? What is threatening about A.A. groups
buying or printing Big Books and selling them at cost or giving them away
for free? My
home group gives away free Big Books to new people and it feels real good
to do so. We buy the Big Books at cost from an entity, other than
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services Incorporated. This other entity from
whom we buy our books is made up of A.A. people who use the same printing
company as AAWS Inc. Our group buys the pocket edition for $1.25 U.S.
Currency. If we buy the AAWS pocket edition from our local A.A. intergroup
office it would cost $4.00. This
is not a new issue as many alcoholics in the early years of A.A.
intuitively knew that money from Big Book sales could bring problems into
our spiritual fellowship. For
an example I would like to read to you a portion of a letter from Clarence
Snyder who was the Chairman of the Cleveland Central Committee of
Alcoholics Anonymous written to Leonard Harrison who was Chairman of the
Alcoholic Foundation: “When
the book was published it was an understanding that no one was ever to
draw any financial benefit from A.A. on the proceeds of the book. It was
the understanding that after the debts of the book were paid there would
be a dollar copy of the book published for wide distribution in order that
the plan of A.A. might spread and be helpful in guiding other unfortunates
to a new way of life and sobriety. Several
years ago, the fact came to light that royalties were being paid and
needless to say, such information came as a distinct shock to a person who
was operating under the ideas originally accepted, and teaching this plan
in that vein.” That
letter was written in 1944 and clearly demonstrates that this is not a new
concern. Warranty
Five of the Twelfth Concept states: “That no Conference action ever be
personally punitive or an incitement to public controversy”. Under
Warranty Five it also states: “Those early Conferences believed that the
power to sue would be a dangerous thing for us to possess. It was
recognized that a public lawsuit is a public controversy, something in
which our Tradition says we may not engage”. So
a public lawsuit is not only an opposing force to our Concepts, our
Traditions, and our own recovery principles of the Twelve Steps, but also
a threat to our future members whose very lives depend on finding a power
greater than themselves that will solve their problem. So a public lawsuit
is a threat to the A.A. message itself. We
must stand together in unity and follow our hearts. We must continue to
carry the message for love and for free to the Alcoholic who reaches out
for help. We must hold to the God given principles of our Twelve Steps and
Twelve Traditions. We must try with our hearts and souls to maintain a
spirit of love and tolerance in the face of adversity. The
saddest thing that I have experienced in our fellowship in recent years
was not the lawsuits our brothers and sisters were going through here in
Mexico, and in Germany, and elsewhere. For I knew they had God with them
because their motives were for love and service. But the saddest thing for
me that hurt my heart was the large numbers of drunks in my country that
could not see the danger to our primary spiritual aim that these lawsuits
have brought among us, or the members who just didn’t care or who were
afraid to hear the truth. They are not bad people they are just afraid to
let go of the ways of the world around them. Because of fear some people
change the spiritual principles to fit their daily life, and because of
faith some people change their daily life to be in harmony with the
spiritual principles. Fortunately
I have met many who do care and many who are waking up to see the
spiritual illness created by these lawsuits. Through work and
self-sacrifice for others we will continue to learn and grow along
spiritual lines. Alone we are but tiny flames and at the mercy of a little
breeze, but together we are a blazing fire lighting the way for a drunk to
find his way home. Even in a hurricane our united light will shine
brightly for the hopeless alcoholic. It
has been an honor sharing this time with you, and your faith and courage
has been an inspiration to us all. Many things might be given and taken
from us as we walk through life, many changes, and many experiences. But
if we stick to the program of recovery and the principles of Alcoholics
Anonymous we will grow and learn from them and always be together in the
fellowship of the spirit, and be given a gift from God, the tools to stay
sober one day at a time, and for that I am truly grateful to God and
Alcoholics Anonymous. Thank You. |
|||
|
|||
|
By
Matthew M. Germany I
am Matthew, a grateful sober alcoholic from Germany. The
tremendous fact for every one of us is that we have discovered a common
solution. We have a way out on which we can absolutely agree, and upon
which we can join in brotherly an harmonious action. This is the great
news this book carries to those who suffer from alcoholism. [p.17] “We
absolutely insist on enjoying life” [p.132] Why
then is there such a lot of suffering before we sober up and afterwards as
well? A wise man in ancient times said: “Suffering were the fastest
horse to carry him towards perfection”. This is true, but just one side
of the coin. I heard some people in the AA meetings say: “No pain, no
gain”. But I tell you: Pain is optional only. To be lucky we need not
get all we want, but we need to want all we get. Let
me give you an example: Last
days I was sitting at my computer and typed in the draft for this speech.
It was full of historical facts about AA literature, who, when and why did
what. But my Higher Power had other plans. He shut the door and closed
this path for me. The hard disk of my computer crashed, 1,4 Gigabit data
were lost within a second and I had to make a new beginning. He told me, I
should share my experience of the principles in the book with you. So here
I am. Have
you ever listened to God’s small silent voice within you? I have to calm
down and push out the noise of this busy, busy world in the on board
computer between my ears to adjust my soul to this divine broadcasting
station. Have
you ever received a message from Him? He first knocks softly on the door
of our heart. If I do not respond He knocks louder. And if I still decline
to let Him have me His way, a certain catastrophe breaks into my life to
change my course. Everybody has an antenna to listen and to enjoy His
guidance. That’s really great! We
are not God’s robots. I am totally free to have things my way ....and
suffer from the results of my ignorance. He is no policeman or judge and
does not punish me or anybody. He just wants me to learn how to be lucky.
I will learn His lessons anyhow sooner or later, as it says after the
promises in the Big Book of AA “sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly”
[p.84]. But the decision is up to me, if I will grow at free will along
His spiritual guidelines. Alcoholics as me rarely do that. Otherwise I
grow either, but the hard way. “We thought we could find an easier,
softer way. But we could not. With all the earnestness at our command, we
beg of you to be fearless and thorough from the very start”. [p.58] What
counts is thoroughness, not the speed. I
am a grateful recovered alcoholic. In Germany you will seldom hear
somebody say in the past tense he or she were ‘recovered’. The
foreword of the first edition of “Alcoholics Anonymous” starts up with
the words: “We are more than one hundred men and women who have
recovered.” [p. xiii] This
was back in 1939. But today most people say: “My name is so and so and I
am a recovering alcoholic”. It seems they like to be ill and powerless.
In 1987, I was of the same variety. Because I had not taken this course of
action outlined in the Steps I was still in my old nature. And under this
condition it was true. I was not recovered. I was just looking for excuses
to stay the way I was. For
an alcoholic like me this means death. “How dark it is before the dawn!
In reality that was the beginning of my last debauch. I was soon to be
catapulted into what I like to call the fourth dimension of existence. I
was to know happiness, peace, and usefulness, in a way of life that is
incredibly more wonderful as time passes”. [p.8] The
Big Book talks a second time about this 4th dimension and says: “...we
saw that it really worked in others, and we had come to believe in the
hopelessness and futility of life as we had been living it. When,
therefore, we were approached by those in whom the problem had been
solved, there was nothing left for us but to pick up the simple kit of
spiritual tools laid at our feet. We have found much of heaven and we have
been rocketed into a fourth dimension of existence of which we had not
even dreamed. The
great fact is just this, and nothing less: That we have had deep and
effective spiritual experiences which have revolutionized our whole
attitude toward life, toward our fellows and toward God’s universe. The
central fact of our lives today is the absolute certainty that our Creator
has entered into our hearts and lives in a way which is indeed miraculous.
He has commenced to accomplish those things for us which we could never do
by ourselves. [p.23] A
drinking alcoholic is like a caterpillar —always on the run for more and
more and more ...Have you ever sensed this aspiration of your soul to try
higher and reach heaven? But even climbing a tree will not make this
creature fly. It has to undergo a total transformation to become a
butterfly. This is what the AA principles can do for us: They transform
our sick and hungry soul, this greedy caterpillar, into a beautiful
butterfly. It is not just by accident, that the Greek word for soul is «psyche».
And this word has the meaning butterfly as well. Dr.
Bob said, our slogan “First things first” [p.135] came through the
Oxford groups from the Sermon on the mount. “First seek the kingdom of
God and all other things will follow. If you pray then be aware that your
heavenly father already knows all you might need. Don’t care for
tomorrow, He will do. Just care for today, that’s difficult enough.”
[Matthew 6,32] your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these
things. [33] But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness;
and all these things shall be added unto you. [34] Take therefore no
thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things
of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. This
is the source of the so called 24-hour-concept. It also says in the Big
Book in step three, that we should change our minds and make a decision.
God would become our Principal and we his agents. Then, if we try to carry
out His will to the best of our ability, he would supply us with all we
need. But we ought to put Him first. My life proves this verbatim true. When I worked through th | |||
