Our Greatest Danger: Rigidity

Quote:

“Bob P

Bob P (1917-2008) was General Manager of the General Service Office from 1974 to 1984, and then served as Senior Advisor to the G.S.O. from 1985 until his retirement. His story is in the Big Book as "AA Taught Him to Handle Sobriety," 3rd edit. (1976) pp. 554-561, 4th edit. (2001) pp. 553-559.

(During the 1986 General Service Conference, Bob gave a powerful and inspiring closing talk to the conference at the closing brunch on Saturday morning, April 26. It was an especially significant occasion, because he knew that he was going to retire early the next year, and that this would be his last General Service Conference. The following excerpts are taken from that farewell speech, as published in the Conference's final report: The Thirty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the General Service Conference of Alcoholics Anonymous 1986 (Roosevelt Hotel, New York City, April 20-26, 1986), Final Report).

"This is my 18th General Service Conference -- the first two as a director of the Grapevine and A.A.W.S., followed by four as a general service trustee. In 1972, I rotated out completely, only to be called back two years later as general manager of G.S.O., the service job I held until late 1984. Since the 1985 International Convention, of course, I have been senior adviser. This is also my last Conference, so this is an emotionally charged experience.

I wish I had time to express my thanks to everyone to whom I am indebted for my sobriety and for the joyous life with which I have been blessed for the past nearly 25 years. But since this is obviously impossible, I will fall back on the Arab saying that Bill quoted in his last message, "I thank you for your lives." For without your lives, I most certainly would have no life at all, much less the incredibly rich life I have enjoyed.

Let me offer my thoughts about A.A.'s future. I have no truck with those bleeding deacons who decry every change and view the state of the Fellowship with pessimism and alarm. On the contrary, from my nearly quarter-century's perspective, I see A.A. as larger, healthier, more dynamic, faster growing, more global, more service-minded, more back-to-basics, and more spiritual -- by far -- than when I came through the doors of my first meeting in Greenwich, Connecticut, just one year after the famous [July 1960] Long Beach Convention. A.A. has flourished beyond the wildest dreams of founding members, though perhaps not of Bill himself, for he was truly visionary.

I echo those who feel that if this Fellowship ever falters or fails, it will not be because of any outside cause. No, it will not be because of treatment centers or professionals in the field, or non-Conference-approved literature, or young people, or the dually-addicted, or even the "druggies" trying to come to our closed meetings. If we stick close to our Traditions, Concepts, and Warranties, and if we keep an open mind and an open heart, we can deal with these and any other problems that we have or ever will have. If we ever falter and fail, it will be simply because of us. It will be because we can't control our own egos or get along well enough with each other. It will be because we have too much fear and rigidity and not enough trust and common sense.

If you were to ask me what is the greatest danger facing A.A. today, I would have to answer: the growing rigidity -- the increasing demand for absolute answers to nit-picking questions; pressure for G.S.O. to "enforce" our Traditions; screening alcoholics at closed meetings; prohibiting non-Conference-approved literature, i.e., "banning books"; laying more and more rules on groups and members. And in this trend toward rigidity, we are drifting farther and farther away from our co- founders. Bill, in particular, must be spinning in his grave, for he was perhaps the most permissive person I ever met. One of his favorite sayings was, "Every group has the right to be wrong." He was maddeningly tolerant of his critics, and he had absolute faith that faults in A.A. were self-correcting.

And I believe this, too, so in the final analysis we're not going to fall apart. We won't falter or fail. At the 1970 International Convention in Miami, I was in the audience on that Sunday morning when Bill made his brief last public appearance. He was too ill to take his scheduled part in any other convention event, but now, unannounced, on Sunday morning, he was wheeled up from the back of the stage in a wheelchair, attached with tubes to an oxygen tank. Wearing a ridiculous bright-orange, host committee blazer, he heaved his angular body to his feet and grasped the podium -- and all pandemonium broke loose. I thought the thunderous applause and cheering would never stop, tears streaming down every cheek. Finally, in a firm voice, like his old self, Bill spoke a few gracious sentences about the huge crowd, the outpouring of love, and the many overseas members there, ending (as I remember) with these words: "As I look over this crowd, I know that Alcoholics Anonymous will live a thousand years -- if it is God's will.""

The article above represents an interesting set of observations, and as is usually the case we can discern things with which we agree, and disagree, these being simply a reflection of the partiality of the author, and then further compounded by his readers. Having acknowledged the bias we shall now go on to consider those comments we support, and those that we do not. Firstly we must say that change of itself should neither be opposed nor supported simply for its own sake. The assumption that mankind marches only towards a better future can easily be challenged by reviewing the evidence both of our own direct experience and then observation, for change brings with it both desired and undesired consequences. In either case it will happen, and there is nothing that can oppose it, for it is an inherent part of our reality. We can however "influence" its direction, and here we emphasise the word, because it is quite beyond the scope of "direct" human power to determine generally the precise course of events. We live in a web of causes and conditions, one so complex that it is quite impossible to determine precisely how matters will unfold, or the extent to which a single factor or even set of factors may shift the balance. But this said, we too are a part of that network of conditions, both individually and collectively, and therefore can make also an inevitable contribution to these trends, even if we cannot predict their future shape. Therefore it has to be acknowledged that even that poor lost tribe, "the bleeding deacons", who are forever predicting the imminent demise of AA (this under all sorts of guises, and some of which are indicated in the article above), nevertheless play an important role within the structure of AA, and this in the following fashion. Although they may embody the pessimistic tendency they oblige those of us who are not of a similar temperament to respond to their challenge. They act as an "irritant" which may from time to time serve to bestir the Fellowship from its periodic complacency, and thereby propel it into a reaction, and therefore action. We believe that the "healthier" condition of AA referred to in the article is not simply the result of us "get[ting] along well enough with each other". Indeed, and on occasion, it is absolutely necessary that we don't "get along" at all, and that this conflict is played out to the full, and then to its natural conclusion. In our more humane moments we may well decry war and all its destructive consequences, yet as a species we seem to favour considerably this rather forceful mode of reconciliation. Conflict, it would seem, is built into our natures, and forms in part not only our relationships with ourselves but also those with others. There has been, and in all probability always will be within AA the customary momenta of action and reaction. One side will claim a golden hued past, and moreover one in which only the “real” AA, and the “true” recovery programme ever existed; the "good old days" no less. The other party will insist that it is solely the future which holds the key, and that all must modernise, this injunction accompanied frequently by that much favoured manipulative device, that we shall become "outdated", or get "left behind". Neither side, however, truly represents things as they were, or are, or might be, and each simply exemplifies one or other extreme, that is two equally absurd versions of the same basic tendency, to oversimplify, and then present us with our choices as if they might all be reduced to these two polar positions. However it is by cause of these (largely delusional) tensions that AA actually evolves, and thus transforms to meet the ever changing circumstances. Therefore, whereas we would applaud the notions of flexibility, open-mindedness etc these are unlikely to be preserved unless pursued actively. The position ascribed to Bill Wilson, that "faults in A.A. were self-correcting", immediately begs the question - by what mechanism(s) are these corrections likely to be implemented? In some quarters the view seems to be held that such amendments will occur quite spontaneously, and this without the lifting of a solitary finger. On the other side, that somebody (GSO? Intergroup? Region? AAWS?) will step in and sort the whole thing out (which by the way they won't - because they can't), and come up with a whole set of prohibitions (or rules, or guidelines however these may be framed) all of which are equally and entirely unenforceable. Again the statement attributed to Bill Wilson, that "Every group has the right to be wrong" is sometimes interpreted as being a "permissive" mandate, that any such group may simply continue upon its ill-conceived course, and this regardless of the wrongs it may be doing to its members, and then perhaps to other AA groups (in clear breach of Tradition Four), and this without suffering the least criticism or adverse comment, let alone one iota of corrective action. We would argue rather that this statement simply acknowledges the fact that we are all capable of making mistakes, but does not in itself constitute a licence to persevere within this condition, or that such foolishness should be further indulged, and this beyond the point where the error is fully recognised. It might be said that the getting of wisdom is in part based upon learning from our mistakes. Therefore it would seem to us that to continue to act in such a perverse fashion, and despite the contraindication, would suggest either a form of insanity (and one with which many an alcoholic is easily familiar), or an obtuseness which closely approaches such a malaise - or then again perhaps simple vanity! Finally, and although greatly moved by the writer's description of Bill Wilson's address to the convention, we think it unlikely that this aspiration will be fulfilled other than through the rather more prosaic efforts of certain people. And who might these people be? Fortunately, or unfortunately (and this depending rather upon your own perspective), it's YOU! It will not be GSO, or Intergroup, or Region, or good old Dave over there who's been around for years now, who's going to step in and make it all right! The buck actually stops with you! It is only through the efforts of AA members and their group consciences that the trend towards dogmatism, sponsor-driven dictatorship, authoritarianism, prejudice, discrimination, pseudo-religiosity (and all the other virtues practised by cult members and groups, for we cannot even begin to contemplate here their vices!) may be reversed, and it is by these sole means that we may safeguard those converse principles – of flexibility, open-mindedness, and indeed open-heartedness.

To sum up: such matters are NOT indeed SELF-correcting, but entirely the reverse - that is, to be corrected by oneself, but then in conjunction with OTHERS!

Cheerio

The Fellas