¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io

Re: Bill Wilson and Karen Hornet New York early 1940¡¯s

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Barry Thom has made available all the old AAHL posts and messages in a searchable pdf. It is awesome ? and filled with incredible stuff. I forgot how I did it. Send Thom a message Im sure he would gladly tell you how¡­
Gene L.?
Redondo Bch Ca

On Jun 13, 2024, at 7:09?PM, John via groups.io <john6528@...> wrote:

?

Late on this but Horney was of the Alfred Adler school, not Freudian. Also true that Bill's mother was an Adlerian therapist of sorts. I contend there is a lot of the 12x12 that comes from Adlerian psychology back then. Disclaimer... I am a retired Adlerian Psychologist.

John

On 3/21/2024 5:52 PM, Barry Murtaugh wrote:

Some years ago I had a reference that Bill Wilson was linked with noted psychoanalyst Karen Horney.?
Karen had moved from Chicago to New York in 1934.
As I recall it , Karen was his analyst for a while.
It may have been in the old AA HistoryLovers group. Any clues about that ?in the community?

Best Regards,
Barry M.
Chicago, IL


--
Eugene Lane
Redondo Bch Ca


Re: Bill Wilson and Karen Hornet New York early 1940¡¯s

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Late on this but Horney was of the Alfred Adler school, not Freudian. Also true that Bill's mother was an Adlerian therapist of sorts. I contend there is a lot of the 12x12 that comes from Adlerian psychology back then. Disclaimer... I am a retired Adlerian Psychologist.

John

On 3/21/2024 5:52 PM, Barry Murtaugh wrote:

Some years ago I had a reference that Bill Wilson was linked with noted psychoanalyst Karen Horney.?
Karen had moved from Chicago to New York in 1934.
As I recall it , Karen was his analyst for a while.
It may have been in the old AA HistoryLovers group. Any clues about that ?in the community?

Best Regards,
Barry M.
Chicago, IL


Re: Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung conversation

 

I am so sorry to hear that about his site as it has soe pretty great info on it.? SO, is it ok to reference it as long as it goes through you first?

[Moderator comment: Well I don't recommend you hang out on that site (Silkworth) unless you were very well protected or using a virtual machine or a sandbox of some kind, I think that's a workable solution for now. I do have safe ways of getting data off the site and I can refer to the mirror that I have to pull documents which I am then more than happy to post here instead. So yes, I think that would be workable but I would still strongly recommend you try to find a different source or two, instead, for now. -Thom]


Re: Big Book

 

Yes, all first edition printings end chapter 11 on page 179. I asked a friend of mine who has every first edition printing and he confirmed it.

Thom


Re: Big Book

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

I have one of those anniversary first ?edition first printing red big books and it ends on page 179. Does anybody on here have an original for printing they can verify that with? I was always under the impression That all 16 printing of the first edition and it on page 179.?
Gene

On May 15, 2024, at 8:19?AM, Kimberlypoer35@... wrote:

?Because it was originally intentioned to be an introduction, never a chapter. ?
[Moderator comment: I had to jump in and moderate this because you made a statement of fact that is different from the source provided. That content behind the link actually states:

"As an item of AA trivia ¡°The Doctor¡¯s Opinion¡± began as page 1 in the 1st edition and was not changed to Roman numerals until the 2nd edition. The basic text ended at page 174 in the 1st edition, not 164 as it does today. Nobody really knows why Bill W renumbered the pages but there is much entertaining speculation on the matter."

...which does not line up with your "statement of fact" that it was originally intended to be an introduction.

Since the citation doesn't back up the statement, I had to moderate. ?So, to that end, unless someone can come up with documented reason as to why that change was made, I will moderate any future speculation on this as well and we'll consider it as unanswerable. -Thom]

--
Eugene Lane
Redondo Bch Ca


Re: Big Book

 

Good Morning,

One should NEVER read their emails prior to completing their morning meditations!? I had to comment on this thread however, because I have a broken right little finger and am going to the Doctor's in a few minutes. Thank you Thomas for moderating.? I submitted a motion to return "The Doctor's Opinion" to last year's GSC through my Salem, NH noontime group.? Please see our background information at .? The bottom line is Thomas is correct, there is no documented reason for the change and because of this remains "creative speculation" on the reason(s).? I have researched this subject for well over 20 years.? I can argue that it should be returned but because the reason(s) remain a mystery my sense is that it will never be returned.? By the way, the Literature Committee spent over 2 hours debating the merits of the motion and decided not to take any action.? Feel free to contact me privately.

Grateful Dave T
Registrar Area 43
603-870-9060


Re: Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung conversation

 

I found this article among a few others helpful

[Moderator edit: Until a major issue with the security of silkworthDOTnet is resolved, we cannot link to it directly anymore. IF anyone here wants to still browse that site (which has been compromised with adware by a bad actor who has taken over the site against the wishes of its original creator, who, so far, has been unable to get it back yet) I strongly suggest they do it with a virtual machine, with a secure Linux or something similar. Be careful, though, please. It's not worth the security of your computer. In the meantime, though, when I do see these links, since I do have a mirror of the old site, I will, if I can, safely copy the content mentioned and paste it safely here, when possible.

It's the only thing I can think of for now while this is hopefully getting resolved. But please know that the person running the Silkworth site right now is not the original creator. This person has laced the site throughout with some pretty nasty ads, adware and other shady code. Therefore, AAHL sadly cannot trust it at this time as a reliable source.

That being said, below is the content of what was linked to by Kimberly. - Thom]


The Core Of Early A.A.

A.A./Carl Jung/Rowland Hazard/Ebby Thacher
Myths or subjects of Hindsight Quarterbacking

Dick B. ?2005

The Core of Early A.A.

One of A.A.¡¯s core New York underpinnings, as embodied in the Big Book and Twelve Steps, is the ¡°solution¡±¡ªa conversion experience¡ªsaid to have been prescribed in the 1930¡¯s for Rhode Island businessman Rowland Hazard by Swiss psychiatrist Dr. Carl Jung. Jung recommended it as the necessary ingredient for Rowland¡¯s overcoming his alcoholism characterized by Rowland¡¯s having the ¡°mind of a chronic alcoholic.¡± But it¡¯s really under fire!

At this late date, you might wonder at the relevance of the following questions: Did Rowland Hazard ever treat with Dr. Carl Jung at all? If so, did Jung tell Rowland his primary hope lay in a transforming religious conversion? If Rowland was treated by Jung, was it only after the previous, alleged formative A.A. events that had led Rowland from Jung to Ebby Thacher and in turn to Bill Wilson¡ªwho co-founded A.A. thereafter? Finally, if Rowland actually recovered, did whatever success Rowland achieved come from following Jung¡¯s advice, or through his treatment by therapist Courtney Baylor and the Emmanuel Movement, or by his simply undergoing a life-changing experience in the Oxford Group?

I don¡¯t know for sure the answer to any of the foregoing questions.

The Challengers

But I seriously suspect the validity of the evidence presented by those who would answer ¡°no¡± to most of those questions. Those people who today are claiming there is no record of the Jung/Hazard treatments. Those ¡°new thought¡± advocates who are laying Rowland¡¯s successes at the feet of the Emanuel Movement and the therapist Courtney Baylor. Those who seem to reject the fact that a number of alcoholics well known in Oxford Group circles (Rowland Hazard, F. Shepard Cornell, Cebra Graves, Victor Kitchen, Charles Clapp, Jr., and later Jim Houck) attributed their sobriety to their having followed Oxford Group principles and practices.

I question this belated historical challenge, and the adequacy of the evidence on which it rests. For the challenges seem more calculated to lambaste the Oxford Group, the Bible, evangelical Christianity, and ¡°religion¡± than to prove that these vital ingredients were never the heart of early New York¡¯s recovery program. That their historical challenge deserves attention is not disputed by me¨C especially as I look at the secularization in the A.A. atmosphere of today. But these newly presented theories repudiate the foundation stones of A.A.¡¯s Big Book premise. That premise is that you must establish a relationship with God by a conversion experience. That you do so by taking 12 life-changing steps. Many AAs have accepted that premise, and their stories are, in part, related in A.A.¡¯s Came to Believe are neither factually substantiated nor historically reliable.

After 15 years of research into the history of Alcoholics Anonymous, I would challenge the revisionists by pointing to a good deal of evidence they have either ignored, minimized, or inadequately refuted.

The Real Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung Facts

First, the most compelling piece of evidence as to the accuracy of the story Bill Wilson wrote about Rowland Hazard and Carl Jung can be found in the extant correspondence between Bill Wilson and Dr. Carl Jung himself. I personally have copies of the correspondence that I obtained with permission from Bill¡¯s home at Stepping Stones. And see Pass It On. NY: Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., 1984; Francis Hartigan, Bill W.; Lois Wilson. Lois Remembers, p. 93 in a letter to Bill Wilson.

Second, the Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung account has been related by Rowland Hazard personally to many on the New York A.A. scene¡ªpeople such as Bill¡¯s sponsor Ebby Thacher, Rowland¡¯s pastor Dr. Samuel M. Shoemaker, Jr., Rowland¡¯s Oxford Group colleagues¡ªF. Shepard Cornell and Cebra Graves, Bill Wilson himself, Professor Philip Marshall Brown of Princeton, and Shoemaker¡¯s associates Rev. W. Irving Harris and his wife Julia.

Third, many others with no axe to grind have repeated the story. Bill Wilson has written several times on several different occasions of the Rowland/Jung events. So has Rev. Sam Shoemaker who personally knew and worked with Rowland. So has Rev. Irving Harris. And so have Oxford Group friends of Rowland such as James D. Newton, Eleanor Forde Newton, Victor Kitchen, and Hanford Twitchell.

Fourth, as if seeking to enshrine the account in the very foundation of Calvary Church in New York, the story persists to this day as visitors are guided through Calvary and shown the stained glass windows in the church which are dedicated to Rowland Hazard¡ªA.A.¡¯s Rowland Hazard, as their literature remarks.

The Defective Challenges

Those who are known to espouse the rejection of Hazard¡¯s visit are long on their support of the Emanuel Movement and New Thought and clearly deficient in their familiarity with the Oxford Group, with Oxford Group writings, and with Oxford Group members. They make no claim of having read or interviewed or reviewed the works and remarks of the Oxford Group people just mentioned.

They make much of dates, but little of facts. They purport to have reviewed Carl Jung¡¯s records years and years after they were made. But they cannot and do not cite the entirety of Jung¡¯s records or even claim to have examined them.

The detractors reject the very theory that enabled Bill Wilson to sell his whole East Coast version of the Alcoholics Anonymous road to recovery. That version, simply stated, was: (1) That the ¡°medically incurable¡± and seemingly hopeless Rowland Hazard was told by Dr. Carl Jung that medicine could not help Rowland, but that a conversion might. (2) That Rowland sought a conversion via the Oxford Group¡ªwhich happened to prefer the expression ¡°change¡± in its own unique parlance for seeking for persuading ¡°converts.¡± (3) That Rowland was changed and cured; sought out Ebby Thacher; and taught Thacher the Oxford Group life-changing principles. (4) That Ebby then had a conversion¡ªalbeit by accepting Jesus Christ at the altar at Calvary Rescue Mission (a fact seldom mentioned by historians). (5) That Ebby¡¯s witness persuaded Wilson to go to Calvary and himself accept Christ (a fact seldom if ever mentioned by historians). (6) That Wilson then soon checked into Towns Hospital for treatment, was again indoctrinated by Ebby in the Oxford Group life-changing principles, and submitted himself to God as Bill said he then understood God. (7) That Bill had his resultant ¡°hot flash¡± conversion experience in which Bill ¡°found God,¡± and never drank again. (8) That Bill consulted the famous book by Professor William James on Varieties of Religious Experience, concluded that he had validated his own conversion in one of these experiences, and that James¡¯s ¡°deflation in depth¡± was also a necessary condition to conversion, and (9) That deflation in depth, application of Oxford Group principles, receiving a consequent conversion or ¡°spiritual¡± experience as the result, was¡ªwhen coupled with the Oxford Group idea of ¡°sharing for witness¡± and thereby helping others to such an experience¡ªthe essence of a program developed by Bill Wilson himself in company with Rev. Sam Shoemaker and embodied in the language of Bill¡¯s Big Book and Twelve Steps suggested as a program of recovery.

And I believe the erroneous hindsight quarterbacking of several detractors of the Oxford Group/Conversion/Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung story (these being Dr. Ernest Kurtz, Dr. Glenn Chesnut, and Dr. Richard Dubiel) demonstrates in content that the analysts just plain missed the boat when it came to thoroughly investigating, describing, analyzing, and critiquing the actual events described above.

What has been demonstrated

There is ample evidence today that as many alcoholics get sober and stay sober outside the rooms of Alcoholics Anonymous as do so within.

There is ample evidence today within the fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous that between one and five percent of today¡¯s members do get sober and stay sober within the rooms of Alcoholics Anonymous.

There is, to my satisfaction, observable evidence that a great many long-time sober AAs today got sober and stayed sober within A.A. whether they were Jews, Protestants, Roman Catholics, agnostics, and possibly even atheists.

There is, to my satisfaction , observable evidence that many sober AAs today came into the fellowship, grabbed a Big Book and a Sponsor, studied the Big Book, ¡°took¡± and endeavored to practice the principles of the Twelve Steps, and remained sober.

There is, to my satisfaction, observable evidence that among those A.A. believers¡ªbe they Jews, Roman Catholics, or Protestants¡ªthere are many who believe in God, pray, study the Scriptures, seek God¡¯s guidance, attempt to find and apply His will, and provide love and service to others within the fellowship. That being true whatever the religious convictions of their neighbors may be. This legion of helpers has helped to make A.A. as famous as it is.

There is, to my satisfaction, observable evidence that far too many AAs, therapists, treatment center people, clergy, physicians, and counselors have little or no knowledge of A.A. history, of its Christian roots, or its early program in Akron, or of the enormous difference in the success rates in early A.A. as compared to those today.

There is, to my satisfaction, irrefutable and abundant evidence that: (1) In early Akron A.A., Bill Wilson¡ªAA number one; Dr. Bob Smith¡ªAA number two; and Bill Dotson¡ªAA number three, all believed and stated they had been cured of alcoholism by Almighty God. (2) The program of recovery that was developed and used in Akron between 1935 and 1938 produced cures of alcoholism among 75% of those members who really tried and completely gave themselves to the program that was specifically described by Rockefeller¡¯s agent Frank Amos after careful investigation in Akron. (3) That the Akron program was far different¡ªdefinitely Christian in character and fellowship¡ªthan the one which Bill Wilson fashioned in New York primarily from Oxford Group life-changing principles taught him by Rev. Sam Shoemaker and embodied in the Big Book and Twelve Steps. (4) That if any AAs today were to hear of, learn, and apply the program developed and used in Akron throughout Dr. Bob¡¯s life, those AAs would achieve the same 75% to 93% success rates that were achieved from the Akron program. (5) That many of us in today¡¯s A.A. (myself included) have been in the trenches, have grabbed the Big Book program with enthusiasm, have dived into fellowship activities, have¡ªwith or without knowing what early AAs did¡ªreceived the same help, healing, guidance, forgiveness, and love of God that is still available to those who want it and seek it. (6) That there is virtually no likelihood that the A.A. of today will, as a fellowship, ever accept, endorse, apply, or return to the A.A. of the pioneers. (7) That there is still a rampant hunger within the ranks of A.A. people today for facts about early A.A.¡¯s Biblical program, Christian fellowship, and astonishing cures. (8) That if the early A.A. facts are widely disseminated within A.A. itself, there can be an enormous difference in the lives lived, the sobriety attained, and the service rendered by those who work within the fellowship and emulate the program which worked so successfully among the Akron pioneers.

No profit in ignorance

For years, perhaps at least 50, AAs have drifted farther and farther from any knowledge of, or resources about, their early program and its successes. For years, perhaps at least 50, AAs have been fed an idolatrous diet about higher powers and spirituality and good deeds that supposedly represent the real program of recovery. For years, perhaps at least 40, AAs have increasingly grown boisterous in their condemnation of religion, Christianity, the Bible, and even God¡ªthe number of such activists may well be few, but the sound of their voices is deafening and intimidating. For years, perhaps as many as 65, AAs have been spoon fed myths that detract from the Jung/Hazard/Thacher conversion beliefs, the Oxford Group program of the 1920¡¯s and 1930¡¯s, the vital importance of Rev. Samuel M. Shoemaker, Jr. in New York, the supposed failures of churches and of clergy and of religion, and New Age pap about strange gods, pseudo-Christianity, and outright unbelief. For at least 40 years, the spotlight has been focused on an irrelevant Washingtonian Movement, an unsuccessful Emanuel and New Thought movement (the latter being unsuccessful in penetrating A.A. ranks), and the shortcomings and supposed traitorous beliefs of Oxford Group Founder Dr. Frank N. D. Buchman.

All these tides have washed away valuable history, vilified sound reports, and produced increasing ignorance of what A.A. is really about. In fact, the less that is known, the less A.A. has to offer except for meetings and abstinence¡ªneither of which have had everlasting success within or without A.A.

If A.A. is a spiritual program of recovery¡ªand it is; and if A.A. distinguished itself originally in its reliance on the Creator, the truths in the Bible, the power received in a new birth, and the outreach of love and service by ordinary drunks, then those are the facts which should be made known. This is true whether you believe in the Creator, Jesus Christ, the Bible, the new birth, and conversions or not. That is the history that is missing in too many of today¡¯s ¡°Bill W.¡± biographies, irrelevant studies of tangential alcoholism movements, and the long temperance events of past centuries.

Using A.A.¡¯s Real Early A.A. History to Compare other present-day contenders

If we are going to talk about the Washingtonians, let¡¯s start with the fact that God was not part of their program. If we are going to talk about New Thought, let¡¯s start with the fact that it rejected the born-again faith found in early A.A. If we are going to talk about conversion, Rowland Hazard, Ebby Thacher, Carl Jung, and William James, let¡¯s start with the nature of the Oxford Group, the religious beliefs of Carl Jung, and the New Thought orientation of William James. But if we are going to talk about A.A., let¡¯s start with the Book of James, the Sermon on the Mount, and 1 Corinthians 13, and find just what ideas therein were proclaimed by Dr. Bob to be absolutely essential to the early A.A.¡¯s basic program. Yet I don¡¯t see these discussed at all by the quarterbacks. A few, however, are finally beginning to recognize that they have never really looked into, reported on, or accurately summarized the real early A.A. history, particularly the whole program in Akron, the program as reported by Frank Amos to Rockefeller, the United Christian Endeavor roots of the Akron program, and the significance of James, the Sermon, and 1 Corinthians. I suggest contrasting and looking at the materials in three of my latest titles: When Early AAs Were Cured and Why; Twelve Steps for You; and The James Club and The Early A.A. Program¡¯s Absolute Essentials.


Re: Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung conversation

 

When Bill first wrote the first version of "There Is A Solution" in early June, 1938, that 'quote' [sic] read: "Sporadically, here and there, once in a while, alcoholics have had what are called vital religious experiences..."

Any comparison of this with the similar 'quote' in the Big Book will easily confirm the impossibility of this being a real quote.?

?


Re: Big Book

 

Because it was originally intentioned to be an introduction, never a chapter. ?
[Moderator comment: I had to jump in and moderate this because you made a statement of fact that is different from the source provided. That content behind the link actually states:

"As an item of AA trivia ¡°The Doctor¡¯s Opinion¡± began as page 1 in the 1st edition and was not changed to Roman numerals until the 2nd edition. The basic text ended at page 174 in the 1st edition, not 164 as it does today. Nobody really knows why Bill W renumbered the pages but there is much entertaining speculation on the matter."

...which does not line up with your "statement of fact" that it was originally intended to be an introduction.

Since the citation doesn't back up the statement, I had to moderate. ?So, to that end, unless someone can come up with documented reason as to why that change was made, I will moderate any future speculation on this as well and we'll consider it as unanswerable. -Thom]


Re: Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung conversation

 

The Language of the Heart, reprints from Bill's writings in Grapevine, contains Dr. Jung's letter to Bill agreeing that the summary on page 27 was accurate. Given Bill Schaberg's research, and Bill's tendency to retell stories (compare his summary of his conversation with Dr. Silkworth just before his visit to Akron in AA Comes of Age to the one in Three Talks to Medical Societies, and the insertion of "Why don't you choose your own conception of God?", added at Hank's insistence, into the conversation between Ebby and Bill)), it is highly probable that the quotation is not entirely accurate. Besides, even if Bill was quoting Rowland accurately, Rowland's account would have been given a number of years after the actual conversation, and Dr. Jung's agreement to the summary was given many many years after the conversation.


Rowland Hazard/Carl Jung conversation

 

Greetings,
On page 27 in the Big Book, Bill quotes a dialogue that took place between "A certain American business man"" (who we know to be Rowland Hazard) and "a celebrated physician" (Dr. Carl Jung). To me, the use of quotation marks indicates a repeating of a conversation, verbatim, for the purpose of not misquoting the participants.? Is there historic reference to this conversation that would present the need for quotations? Did Bill and Rowland sit down and discuss the matter, in which Rowland repeated this conversation? I am not sure how close, if at all, Bill and Rowland were, or became. The large paragraph in the middle of the page is very specific, and includes pointed language on the vital spiritual experience that needs to take place.?
Inquiring minds want to know.

Brian?


Re: speechesofflying00hanl.pdf

 

If you have any problems opening this link, please just Google search "the speeches of the Fying Squadron of America."
And you will find it..
Sincerly Dano B. SD 8-16-06


Re: speechesofflying00hanl.pdf

 

Hi everybody this is Dano B.
I wish I could recall when I stumbled across. That's very interesting campaign. I do believe I was exposed to it through all the readings of Glen Chestnut years ago.
? I can hardly fathom that are founders. Bill and bob, we're not aware of this movement.
And its impact on the upcoming prohibition, from 1920 to 1933. Bill W. would be about 19-20 years of age.?
DR. Bob would be 35-35 years of age.?
? This campaign lasted 235 days in 255 U.S. cities between September 30, 1914 thru June 6, 1915.
? This campaign of temperance was particularly aggressive towards the trafficking of alcohol as well as its effects on mankind and America.?
? I highly recommend y all reading some of these campaign speeches, as it seems to have many earmarks of the washingtonians, as well as the oxford group to come..
It is very informative on the effects of society with regards to alcoholism..
In all my readings of history regarding drinking, this one seems to have been buried, so please enjoy...Dano B.from The Mojave Desert in California.
?


Re: File /Audio/PLBB_Panel_and_AAs_Future_2024.05.06 [TRM1].m4a uploaded #file-notice

 

Editor: this is a very long response from NY on the changes to the AA group pamphlet. Feel free to edit if it is too long...
?

Hi Doris,

?

Warm greetings from the General Service Office Archives! Your inquiry about the ¡°A.A. Group¡± pamphlet was forwarded to me for response. Specifically, your question addressed a sentence in the pamphlet that says, ¡°Nonalcoholics may attend and participate in the discussion.¡± You also referenced a ¡°Box 4-5-9¡± article that quoted the sentence above. Your question is interesting and I attempted to provide a concise response based on primary source materials in our collection.

?

The quote extracted from the ¡°Box 4-5-9¡± article read in its entirety:

?

¡°¡®The A.A. Group¡¯ pamphlet says open meetings are ¡®for anyone interested.¡¯ Among types of meetings, it also lists ¡®open discussion,¡¯ noting that ¡®nonalcoholics may attend and participate in the discussion.¡±?[Edition: August ¨CSeptember 1976].

?

In the First Printing of the ¡°A.A. Group¡± pamphlet (Printing date: 8/65) and in the section titled,?¡°What Kinds of Meeting Programs Can a Group Have?¡±?only the following five (5) types of meeting formats were described:

?

????????????????????????1. Closed

??????????????????????? 2. Open

??????????????????????? 3. Public

??????????????????????? 4. Beginners

??????????????????????? 5. Business

?

In the?¡°°¿±è±ð²Ô¡±?sub-section, the sentence read, ¡°Open.?For anyone interested¡±;?this is consistent with the 1976 ¡°Box 4-5-9¡± article. The 1965 edition of the pamphlet did?not?include a description of an ¡°Open discussion¡± meeting.

?

In a later printing of the pamphlet (Printing date: 7/72) a new meeting type named?¡°Step Meetings,¡±?along with a brief description was added to the sub-section. Therefore, there were now six (6) distinct?types of meeting formats described.??In a following printing dated 11/73, the?¡°Open Discussion¡±?meeting type was added to the pamphlet, increasing the number of distinct meeting formats to seven (7). The description of the ¡°Open Discussion¡± meeting as it appeared in the pamphlet then (Printing date: 11/73) read:

?

????????????????????????¡°Open Discussion. Nonalcoholics may attend and participate in the discussion.¡±

?

In my search to provide you with background information that may elucidate the need for the meeting types later added, I scoured through?Literature?committee minutes, A.A.W.S. minutes and other relevant sources but to no avail! However, I am certain that the additions were approved by the?Literature?Committee as it has to before any additions or changes are made in A.A. literature.

?

It is interesting that the wording in the description of an ¡°Open Discussion¡± meeting changed slightly to read,?¡°Nonalcoholics may attend and may participate if the group approves.¡±?This change appeared in a January 1977 printing of the pamphlet; I searched preceding printings to determine when the change occurred and it appears that the January 1977 printing first carried the revised text.

?

As I continue to search through the various printings, I discovered that in 1979, the sub-section on ¡°Open Discussion¡± meetings was once again revised, the wording expanded to read, ¡°Open Discussion meetings are held in many places. At these, nonalcoholics are free to take part in the discussion with the approval of the group conscience.¡±?[Printing date: 1/79]

?

As you know, the ¡°A.A. Group¡± pamphlet was revised considerably in 1990 (The revised pamphlet was printed 8/90), reflecting actions of the 1989?Conference:

?

??????????????????????? ¡°The pamphlet ¡°The A.A. Group¡± be thoroughly revised to address the many issues and concerns related to A.A. groups which come before the committee year after year such as:

a.??????The difference between a group and a meeting;

b.??????Meeting formats;

c.???????How to obtain a group conscience;

d.??????The duties of trusted servants and their alternatives;

And others, as described in an outline of contents submitted by the trustees¡¯?Literature?Committee.¡± ?[Advisory Actions relevant to the?Conference?Literature?Committee: 1989]

?

As such, the newly revised pamphlet included these changes and particularly, the section titled, ¡°What kinds of meetings do groups hold?¡±?was significantly revised. There was also a separate section describing the difference between an open and closed A.A. meeting. These were the various meeting types listed in the newly revised pamphlet:

?

??????????? ??????????? 1. Discussion

??????????????????????? 2. Speaker

??????????????????????? 3. Beginners

????????????????????????4. Step or Big Book

????????????????????????5. Business

??????????????????????? 6. Group Inventory

?

The description that followed?¡°¶Ù¾±²õ³¦³Ü²õ²õ¾±´Ç²Ô¡± read, ¡°Whether closed or open, an A.A. member serving as ¡®leader¡¯ or ¡®chair¡¯ opens the meeting in the usual way and selects a topic for discussion.¡± And, in the segment titled, ¡°The difference between open and closed meetings,¡±?an excerpt from that piece read, ¡°Whether open or closed, A.A. group meetings are conducted by A.A. members. At open meetings, non-A.A.s may be invited to share, depending upon the conscience of the group.¡±?Though this specific text appears in another section, it seems that the language is somewhat similar to that used in earlier printings, particularly the 1/79 printing referenced above.

?

I hope this information is not too confusing; I thought a thorough report on my findings might be somewhat helpful. If you have any question, please do no not hesitate to contact me.

?

?

?

Yours sincerely,

?

?

?

?

Michelle Mirza

Assistant Archivist

?

.




?


From:?Doris Ringbloom [mailto:dringbloom@...]
Sent:?Friday, September 15, 2006 12:52 PM
To:?Literature
Subject:?Changes to "The AA Group" pamphlet in 1990

?

Our local archivist included an article in our local intergroup newsletter that quoted an article from an old Box 4-5-9 (pre Sept-1976).? The Box 4-5-9 article quoted the AA Group pamphlet as saying ¡°Non-alcoholics may attend and participate in the discussion,¡± in the section about open AA meetings and types of meetings.?

?

I see that the ¡°AA Group¡± pamphlet no longer says this, but I also see that the pamphlet was revised in 1990.?

?

Do you have any information on the contents of the old (1965 version) ¡°AA Group¡± pamphlet or on the decision of the?Conference?to change the pamphlet.?

?

This is obviously very confusing to people who are not clear on open and closed meetings and I was very dismayed to see this quote which is no longer accurate in our newsletter.? I am surprised if this was ever a valid quote.

?

Any information you can provide as to whether the old AA group pamphlet ever said this quote would be appreciated..

?

Thank you for your service

?

Doris

?

?


Re: File /Audio/PLBB_Panel_and_AAs_Future_2024.05.06 [TRM1].m4a uploaded #file-notice

 

Hi Doris,

What are the date of your pamphlets?

My "Group" pamphlet states "Updated June 2019" and my "Sponsorship" pamphlet states "Revised June 2022."
Are yours more current than this?

Just wanted to check because I didn't see in mine the changes you noted.
Thank you.

--
Best,

Ana oM


speechesofflying00hanl.pdf

 

Flying Squadron of America speeches sept1914- june 1915


Re: File /Audio/PLBB_Panel_and_AAs_Future_2024.05.06 [TRM1].m4a uploaded #file-notice

 

Hi,

The changes to the pamphlet "The AA group" in the definitions of open and closed meetings have been controversial.? Some editions have non-alcoholics sharing, sometimes the word is participating, sometimes the phrase is "attending as a visitor ".

The changes to the "Sponsorship " pamphlet have been controversial.? The original said roughly that after the pair go through the steps,? the sponsee continues by working the steps with a new person. The relationship either becomes a friendship or is completed. Then it changed to being an ongoing relationship.?

In service?

Doris R
DOS 6/7/83


Big Book

 

Why did Bill Wilson demote the doctor's opinion to its present location in big book when it had been chapter 1?
I've been sober for 42 years and the more I read the doctor's opinion the more I think it's original positioning as chapter 1 was more helpful to a newcomer.


Re: File /Audio/PLBB_Panel_and_AAs_Future_2024.05.06 [TRM1].m4a uploaded #file-notice

 

Rodney,

I thank you for that reply. I agree with you that the recording is slanted. Most assembly panels are. But the recording wasn't my point. I am wondering (and this does keep it on point in a history sense) is there is any precedent to the way the PLBB was created? What I mean is, has anything been produced in the past that caused a bit of internal controversy? Of course the answer to that is "yes" (Dr. Paul's "Doctor, Alcoholic, Addict" in the 3rd Edition being one good example) and I was thinking, how many times has something like this happened? How did it affect and effect the fellowship as a whole? Did any of it cause anything that we can source and look at, to maybe find a pattern or two... or to simply just learn from??

I may not have been clear in the description of the recording or the recording itself may have derailed what I was getting at-- or maybe I wasn't clear. I'm trying to be more specific now.?

I am looking for other examples of AAWS literature production (or let's just say anything that any of the corporations have done in terms of literature) in the past that caused a ruckus in the Fellowship.

There. That should put this squarely in the realm of an historic focus. I agree that the recording probably wasn't the best lead for this topic but it's too late now to unsend it. I just thought that it was interesting because it was slanted. These are past delegates, etcetera and yet their minds are snapped shut. That is what got me thinking, is that typical?

The only way I can think of to know that is to look backwards and see if there's anything documented in our past that we can learn from and compare.

That's why I asked.

Thanks for reading,

Thom