"Finally I¹ started to write. I set out to draft more than six steps; how
many more I did not know. I relaxed and asked for guidance. With a speed
that was astonishing, considering my jangling emotions, I completed the
first draft. It took perhaps half an hour. The words kept right on coming.
When I reached a stopping point, I numbered the new steps. They added up to
twelve. Somehow this number seemed significant. Without any special rhyme or
reason, I connected them with the twelve apostles. Feeling greatly relieved
now, I commenced to reread the draft.

At this moment a couple of late callers arrived. One of them was my boon
companion of those days, Howard A. With him was a newcomer, dry barely three
months. I was greatly pleased with what I had written, and I read them the
new version of the program, now the "Twelve Steps." Howard and his friend
reacted violently. "_Why twelve steps?_" they demanded. And then, "You've
got too much God in these steps; you will scare people away." And, "What do
you mean by getting those drunks down 'on their knees' when they ask to have
all their shortcomings removed?" And, "Who wants all their shortcomings
removed, anyhow?" As he saw my uneasiness, Howard added, "Well, some of this
stuff does sound pretty good after all. But, Bill, you've got to tone it
down. It's too stiff. The average alcoholic just won't buy it the way it
stands."

I sprang to the defense of the new creation, every single word of it. A
terrific discussion developed which cooled only when Lois turned up a
couple of hours later. "Why don't you forget about it for a while," she
said, "and have a cup of coffee." This we did.

Akronites like Paul and Dick S. liked the new steps very much. As the
remainder of the book text developed, based on the Twelve Steps, they
continued to report their approval. But in New York the hot debate about the
Twelve Steps and the book's contents was doubled and redoubled. There were
conservative, liberal, and radical viewpoints. Fitz M., the Episcopal
minister's son from Maryland and the second man to recover at Towns
Hospital, made constant journeys to New York in order to reinforce the
conservative position. Fitz thought that the book ought to be Christian in
the doctrinal sense of the word and that it should say so. He was in favor
of using Biblical terms and expressions to make this clear. Another early
New York A.A., Paul K., was even more emphatic about this.

The liberals were the largest contingent and they had no objections to the
use of the word "God" throughout the book, but they were dead set against
any other theological proposition. They would have nothing to do with
doctrinal issues. Spirituality, yes. But religion, no _-positively_ no. Most
of our members, they pointed out, believed in some sort of deity. But when
it came to theology we could not possibly agree among ourselves, so how
could we write a book that contained any such matter? There was no such
thing as group opinion in these areas and there never could be. Alcoholics
who had tried the missions were forever complaining about this very thing.
The alcoholics unreasoning rebellion against the specifically religious
approach had severely handicapped the missions. The liberals said they did
not intend to be critical; they only wanted us to remember the hard facts.
These contentions could not be denied. It was true that we could not agree
on a religious basis for our fellowship and that the straight religious
approach had worked in relatively few cases.

Thus the spiritual pitch and tone of our book was greatly influenced by the
liberals. But the atheists and agnostics, our radical left wing, were still
to make a tremendously important contribution. Led by my friend Henry and
obstinately backed by Jim B., a recently arrived salesman, this contingent
proceeded to have its innings. At first they wanted the word "God" deleted
from the book entirely. Henry had come to believe in some sort of "universal
power," but Jimmy still flabbergasted us by denouncing God at our meetings.
Some members had been so angered that they wanted to throw him out of the
group. But most of us thought it would be better to let him talk on,
believing that eventually he would change his mind, which he later did. What
Henry, Jimmy, and company wanted was a _psychological_ book which would
lure the alcoholic in. Once in, the prospect could take God or leave Him
alone as he wished. To the rest of us this was a shocking proposal, but
happily we listened and eventually learned something of great value.
Actually our group conscience was at work to construct the most acceptable
and effective book possible. Every voice in it was playing its appointed
part to create an outcome that was nothing less than providential.

As the one who had to do all the writing, I was caught squarely in the
middle of all this arguing. The liberals were the larger group, but they
barely outnumbered the combined conservatives and radicals. For a while it
looked as if we would bog down into permanent disagreement. Despairing of
satisfying everyone, I finally asked that I might be the final judge of what
the book said. Seeing that we would get nowhere without such a point of
decision, most of the group agreed. We began to carry on again."

From "Alcoholics Anonymous Comes Of Age - A Brief History Of AA"
¹Bill Wilson.

Copyright © 1957,1985 by Alcoholics Anonymous Publishing. Inc.

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 13:33:24 +1000,
Robert McGregor <robert_mcgregor@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> As the one who had to do all the writing, I was caught squarely in the
> middle of all this arguing.
>
> From "Alcoholics Anonymous Comes Of Age - A Brief History Of AA"
> ¹Bill Wilson.
>
> Copyright © 1957,1985 by Alcoholics Anonymous Publishing. Inc.

No heaven sent stone tablets, but a bickering committee, eh?

It's always amazed me how words on paper can assume import far beyond
their spoken counterparts - probably because they're readily cited.

I don't know why I'm setting myself up for a lashing by the AA faithful,
but I must say, I'm a fair weather friend to AA. I take what I can use,
and leave the rest. I'm not looking for a sponsor; nor do I place any
stock in steps 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, or 12. What's an dyed-in-the-wool
athiest to do? (I'm not trying to start a religious discussion, nor
will I participate in one.) Interestingly, this leaves me with six
steps, which is apparently where Bill was originally headed.

Apparently, it's a lot easier for athiests to address alcoholism.

--
AB5DB9CC

"Ron" <can@the.spam> wrote in message
news:aLnOb.76512$sv6.176491@attbi_s52...
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 13:33:24 +1000,
<snip>

> I don't know why I'm setting myself up for a lashing by the AA
faithful,
> but I must say, I'm a fair weather friend to AA. I take what I can
use,
> and leave the rest. I'm not looking for a sponsor; nor do I place
any
> stock in steps 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, or 12.

<snip>

Hi Ron,

At this time, I want to try and explain what Step 2 means to me.
Firstly, some background info

I believe that I speak the truth when I say that I have made serious
attempts to give up drinking only twice since I began to drink in the
late 1970's.

When I gave up drinking in the early 1990's, I thought that no-one
could help me with the life issues that were then deeply troubling me.
When I asked for help, sometimes I benefited for a short time from
what I received. However, at that time, I did not realise that what
I was doing was not addressing the underlying cause of my problems,
namely, my inability to accept life on it's terms. Inevitably, when
life again became too much for me to bear, I again sought escape from
it through booze.

When I gave up drinking in June 2003 and was deciding how to give
myself the best chance of never drinking again, I quickly became
convinced that relying only on myself was not a good idea. Why ?
Because I'd let myself down once before. I therefore decided to seek
help.

At that time, I could not bring myself to seek help through
face-to-face talking. When I found this NG it seemed like the answer
to my prayers. For a time it was all I relied on. When I found that I
needed more help than it could provide, I followed some of its members
advice and joined AA.

I have learnt very many valuable lessons since joining these two
groups. I've learnt that I have very little control over what happens
in my life and that if I want to live more at ease with myself I need
to always remember that I'm not able to make life always perfect for
me. I've also learnt that if I drink on account of being frustrated
or angered or example, by life, I am giving life a power over me that
could harm me, maybe even kill me.

When I think about Step 2, I think about this NG, my AA groups and my
Sponsor . Why ? Because I'm convinced that by having them on my side
and turning to them for help whenever I've needed to, I've found it
easier to stay sober. I'm also convinced that if it hadn't been for
the lessons I've learnt from them I would never be able to say today
that I see I've changed since this time last year in ways which I
consider to be changes for the better.

As you know, Step 2 says:

"Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us
to sanity".

At this time, I believe that this NG, AA, my Sponsor and my HP are
powers greater than myself. Why ? Because I'm convinced that their
collective wisdom has given me - and will continue to give me - the
additional strength I need to be able to not drink and also to be able
to cope with life. And when I don't drink and when I'm able to cope
with life, I have peace of mind. And when I have peace of mind, IMO,
this means that I am restored to sanity.
..
Best regards

JB

"JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com> wrote in message
news:budv5u$uha$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Ron" <can@the.spam> wrote in message
> news:aLnOb.76512$sv6.176491@attbi_s52...
> > On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 13:33:24 +1000,
> <snip>
>
> > I don't know why I'm setting myself up for a lashing by the AA
> faithful,
> > but I must say, I'm a fair weather friend to AA. I take what I can
> use,
> > and leave the rest. I'm not looking for a sponsor; nor do I place
> any
> > stock in steps 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, or 12.
>
> <snip>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
> At this time, I want to try and explain what Step 2 means to me.
> Firstly, some background info
>
> I believe that I speak the truth when I say that I have made serious
> attempts to give up drinking only twice since I began to drink in the
> late 1970's.
>
> When I gave up drinking in the early 1990's, I thought that no-one
> could help me with the life issues that were then deeply troubling me.
> When I asked for help, sometimes I benefited for a short time from
> what I received. However, at that time, I did not realise that what
> I was doing was not addressing the underlying cause of my problems,
> namely, my inability to accept life on it's terms. Inevitably, when
> life again became too much for me to bear, I again sought escape from
> it through booze.
>
> When I gave up drinking in June 2003 and was deciding how to give
> myself the best chance of never drinking again, I quickly became
> convinced that relying only on myself was not a good idea. Why ?
> Because I'd let myself down once before. I therefore decided to seek
> help.
>
> At that time, I could not bring myself to seek help through
> face-to-face talking. When I found this NG it seemed like the answer
> to my prayers. For a time it was all I relied on. When I found that I
> needed more help than it could provide, I followed some of its members
> advice and joined AA.
>
> I have learnt very many valuable lessons since joining these two
> groups. I've learnt that I have very little control over what happens
> in my life and that if I want to live more at ease with myself I need
> to always remember that I'm not able to make life always perfect for
> me. I've also learnt that if I drink on account of being frustrated
> or angered or example, by life, I am giving life a power over me that
> could harm me, maybe even kill me.
>
> When I think about Step 2, I think about this NG, my AA groups and my
> Sponsor . Why ? Because I'm convinced that by having them on my side
> and turning to them for help whenever I've needed to, I've found it
> easier to stay sober. I'm also convinced that if it hadn't been for
> the lessons I've learnt from them I would never be able to say today
> that I see I've changed since this time last year in ways which I
> consider to be changes for the better.
>
> As you know, Step 2 says:
>
> "Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us
> to sanity".
>
> At this time, I believe that this NG, AA, my Sponsor and my HP are
> powers greater than myself. Why ? Because I'm convinced that their
> collective wisdom has given me - and will continue to give me - the
> additional strength I need to be able to not drink and also to be able
> to cope with life. And when I don't drink and when I'm able to cope
> with life, I have peace of mind. And when I have peace of mind, IMO,
> this means that I am restored to sanity.
> .
> Best regards
>
> JB
>

JB, your post reminded me of my own struggles coming to terms with step two.
Having experienced a psychic change from day one, when it dawned on my
alcohol befogged mind that possibly I need never drink again, I temporarily
"rewrote" step two, and changed the word "sanity" to the words "emotional
maturity."

After a little study, I recognised that in context, the "insanity" of step
two referred to the insanity of taking the first drink, repeatedly, despite
disastrous consequences.

Rewriting "insanity" back where it belonged, I then realised the operative
word of the entire step was "could" (possibly) as distinct from "would"
(assuredly.)

I ultimately ruled out the option you chose, collective wisdom, probably on
the grounds that all that supposed collective wisdom, came with an equal and
opposite collective absurdity.

The end result of all those mental gymnastics, for me, was that in taking,
as fearlessly and thoroughly as possible, the most positive steps I was
aware of to continue my newfound abstinence, my spark of hope was nurtured.
Coincidental with that continued hope, my mind remained open to the
possibility I could access an as yet unrealised resource. The resource that
others choose to call "God"

By practicing the principles I discovered in the steps, I learned how to
access that previously neglected resource, and hope became reality.

"Trust that resource, ("God") then clean house, (steps four through ten.)
Then, open my psyche to all options, including options previously rejected
due to unresolved guilts, insane resentments and fears (prayer), and query
that inner resource, (meditation - step eleven.)

In other words, trust "God" clean house, open house, ask "God." Trust "God,"
clean house, open house, ask "God." Trust "God," clean house, open house,
ask "God," ad infinitum.

Bob

> From "Alcoholics Anonymous Comes Of Age - A Brief History Of AA"
> ¹Bill Wilson.


>......................... I read them the
> new version of the program, now the "Twelve Steps." Howard and his
friend
> reacted violently. "_Why twelve steps?_" they demanded. And then,
"You've
> got too much God in these steps; you will scare people away." And,
"What do
> you mean by getting those drunks down 'on their knees' when they
ask to have
> all their shortcomings removed?" And, "Who wants all their
shortcomings
> removed, anyhow?"


its good to read that we alcoholics haven't changed
much...........................


still dragging some down the happy road of destiny!

"Robert McGregor" <robert_mcgregor@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:bue403$gilo1$1@ID-49289.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> "JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com> wrote in message
> news:budv5u$uha$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
<snip>
> > At this time, I want to try and explain what Step 2 means to me.
<snip>

> > As you know, Step 2 says:
> >
> > "Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore
us
> > to sanity".
> >
> > At this time, I believe that this NG, AA, my Sponsor and my HP
are
> > powers greater than myself. Why ? Because I'm convinced that
their
> > collective wisdom has given me - and will continue to give me -
the
> > additional strength I need to be able to not drink and also to be
able
> > to cope with life. And when I don't drink and when I'm able to
cope
> > with life, I have peace of mind. And when I have peace of mind,
IMO,
> > this means that I am restored to sanity.
> > .
> > Best regards
> >
> > JB
> >
>
> JB, your post reminded me of my own struggles coming to terms with
step two.
> Having experienced a psychic change from day one, when it dawned on
my
> alcohol befogged mind that possibly I need never drink again, I
temporarily
> "rewrote" step two, and changed the word "sanity" to the words
"emotional
> maturity."
>
> After a little study, I recognised that in context, the "insanity"
of step
> two referred to the insanity of taking the first drink, repeatedly,
despite
> disastrous consequences.

I do not disagree that Step 2 could be interpreted as you suggest. I
take a broader view of it because I know that irrespective of
whether or not I am drinking I still try at times to make life
perfect for me. I know that this will never happen and yet, I know
that I sometimes do the same things over and over again in the hope of
eventually producing the outcome I desire. What I'm doing is, IMO,
evidence of me acting insanely; it disturbs the balance of my mind
(ie it causes me to get angry, for example).

<snip>

> I ultimately ruled out the option you chose, collective wisdom,
probably on
> the grounds that all that supposed collective wisdom, came with an
equal and
> opposite collective absurdity.

(smiling). I wondered whether you might reply to this post and, if
so, whether you would comment on my use of the word "collective".
FWIW, almost immediately after posting my message, I regretted having
used that word. It suggests that I believe that all those whom I
mentioned speak as one. I know that is not true :^) I'm not
beating myself up about having chosen an inappropriate word. I don't
consider it's worth it :^)

> The end result of all those mental gymnastics, for me, was that in
taking,
> as fearlessly and thoroughly as possible, the most positive steps I
was
> aware of to continue my new-found abstinence, my spark of hope was
nurtured.
> Coincidental with that continued hope, my mind remained open to the
> possibility I could access an as yet unrealised resource. The
resource that
> others choose to call "God"
>
> By practising the principles I discovered in the steps, I learned
how to
> access that previously neglected resource, and hope became reality.
>
> "Trust that resource, ("God") then clean house, (steps four through
ten.)
> Then, open my psyche to all options, including options previously
rejected
> due to unresolved guilts, insane resentments and fears (prayer), and
query
> that inner resource, (meditation - step eleven.)
>
> In other words, trust "God" clean house, open house, ask "God."
Trust "God,"
> clean house, open house, ask "God." Trust "God," clean house, open
house,
> ask "God," ad infinitum.
>
I see no where in what you've said above any need to put trust in any
human being. At this stage of my recovery, I do not think I would
make much progress if I did not trust certain individuals to help me
see where I'm going wrong and what I need to do to right those wrongs.

Wishing you well.

JB

"JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com> wrote in message
news:bue86q$5rn$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Robert McGregor" <robert_mcgregor@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:bue403$gilo1$1@ID-49289.news.uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > "JB" <JBCatRB@coldman.com> wrote in message
> > news:budv5u$uha$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> <snip>
> > > At this time, I want to try and explain what Step 2 means to me.
> <snip>
>
> > > As you know, Step 2 says:
> > >
> > > "Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore
> us
> > > to sanity".
> > >
> > > At this time, I believe that this NG, AA, my Sponsor and my HP
> are
> > > powers greater than myself. Why ? Because I'm convinced that
> their
> > > collective wisdom has given me - and will continue to give me -
> the
> > > additional strength I need to be able to not drink and also to be
> able
> > > to cope with life. And when I don't drink and when I'm able to
> cope
> > > with life, I have peace of mind. And when I have peace of mind,
> IMO,
> > > this means that I am restored to sanity.
> > > .
> > > Best regards
> > >
> > > JB
> > >
> >
> > JB, your post reminded me of my own struggles coming to terms with
> step two.
> > Having experienced a psychic change from day one, when it dawned on
> my
> > alcohol befogged mind that possibly I need never drink again, I
> temporarily
> > "rewrote" step two, and changed the word "sanity" to the words
> "emotional
> > maturity."
> >
> > After a little study, I recognised that in context, the "insanity"
> of step
> > two referred to the insanity of taking the first drink, repeatedly,
> despite
> > disastrous consequences.
>
> I do not disagree that Step 2 could be interpreted as you suggest. I
> take a broader view of it because I know that irrespective of
> whether or not I am drinking I still try at times to make life
> perfect for me. I know that this will never happen and yet, I know
> that I sometimes do the same things over and over again in the hope of
> eventually producing the outcome I desire. What I'm doing is, IMO,
> evidence of me acting insanely; it disturbs the balance of my mind
> (ie it causes me to get angry, for example).
>
> <snip>
>
> > I ultimately ruled out the option you chose, collective wisdom,
> probably on
> > the grounds that all that supposed collective wisdom, came with an
> equal and
> > opposite collective absurdity.
>
> (smiling). I wondered whether you might reply to this post and, if
> so, whether you would comment on my use of the word "collective".
> FWIW, almost immediately after posting my message, I regretted having
> used that word. It suggests that I believe that all those whom I
> mentioned speak as one. I know that is not true :^) I'm not
> beating myself up about having chosen an inappropriate word. I don't
> consider it's worth it :^)
>
> > The end result of all those mental gymnastics, for me, was that in
> taking,
> > as fearlessly and thoroughly as possible, the most positive steps I
> was
> > aware of to continue my new-found abstinence, my spark of hope was
> nurtured.
> > Coincidental with that continued hope, my mind remained open to the
> > possibility I could access an as yet unrealised resource. The
> resource that
> > others choose to call "God"
> >
> > By practising the principles I discovered in the steps, I learned
> how to
> > access that previously neglected resource, and hope became reality.
> >
> > "Trust that resource, ("God") then clean house, (steps four through
> ten.)
> > Then, open my psyche to all options, including options previously
> rejected
> > due to unresolved guilts, insane resentments and fears (prayer), and
> query
> > that inner resource, (meditation - step eleven.)
> >
> > In other words, trust "God" clean house, open house, ask "God."
> Trust "God,"
> > clean house, open house, ask "God." Trust "God," clean house, open
> house,
> > ask "God," ad infinitum.
> >
> I see no where in what you've said above any need to put trust in any
> human being. At this stage of my recovery, I do not think I would
> make much progress if I did not trust certain individuals to help me
> see where I'm going wrong and what I need to do to right those wrongs.
>
> Wishing you well.
>
> JB
>


http://anonpress.org/bb/Page_60.htm
"(a) That we were alcoholic and could not manage our own lives.
(b) That probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism.
(c) That God could and would if He were sought."

I bet the sponsor/meetings cultists wish that was never written, for it
threatens their justification for a captive audience;-)

Bob

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:15:02 GMT, Ron <can@the.spam> wrote:

>I take what I can use, and leave the rest.

That's fine.

>nor do I place any stock in steps 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, or 12.

Has it occurred to you that you might be working Steps 2 and 12 just
by being there? Possibly even 3 as well. A difficulty many have is
"reading between the lines". This is probably not helped by so many
others doing the same thing.

Step 2: Came to believe that there is a solution (why the hell else
would I keep coming back? Just for fellowship?? Certainly not, in my
case.)

For the early days:
Step 12: I found it helpful to see regular faces, whether I spoke to
them or not.

>Interestingly, this leaves me with six
>steps, which is apparently where Bill was originally headed.

Right, but the 6 Steps he had are not the same as the 6 Steps you may
have come up with by process of elimination of those that seem
inconvenient.

>Apparently, it's a lot easier for athiests to address alcoholism.

As an agnostic I demonstrably found it much more straightforward than
most religious newcomers I encounter.

--
Blue Moon

"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2f8fde0538448ebaeda14ec6e488394d@news.teranew s.com...
> >Apparently, it's a lot easier for athiests to address alcoholism.
>
> As an agnostic I demonstrably found it much more straightforward than
> most religious newcomers I encounter.
>

Really?

I'd be interested in you expanding on this, please.

Living in the Bible belt, I see the opposite. Demographics, I guess?

Thanks......

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:08:11 -0500, "Moonraker" <notnow@noway.nev>
wrote:

>"Blue Moon" <mfoco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:2f8fde0538448ebaeda14ec6e488394d@news.terane ws.com...
>> >Apparently, it's a lot easier for athiests to address alcoholism.
>>
>> As an agnostic I demonstrably found it much more straightforward than
>> most religious newcomers I encounter.
>>
>
>Really?
>
>I'd be interested in you expanding on this, please.
>
>Living in the Bible belt, I see the opposite. Demographics, I guess?

One of the first times I realised that perhaps religion had little to
do with alcoholic recovery was when I encountered someone in an AA
meeting who had been struggling for some time. He referred to
attending church. Seemed to be in the mindset almost of "God will do
for me what I won't do for myself". Last I heard of him was when the
police helicopters were out hunting him to return him to the local
mental institution.

I once sponsored a guy who was an active member of the Church of
Scotland. He also was unwilling to do what was suggested. He
approached me because he was struggling to work Step 4. He then
decided to do Step 4 his own way, perhaps with some kind of Hazelden
guide. He was also mentally locked into some treatment centre, so was
pretty much hooked up on Step 1. I just let go - I can't show anyone
what I've not done. The last I saw him, he said he'd done "half" of
Step 5. I guess he just left out those bits that need to not be left
out. "Half measures availed us nothing".

In my observations generally, it seems that those who are agnostically
inclined seem more able to be open-minded about the Higher Power
concept. "Some of us have tried to hold on to our old ideas and the
result was nil until we let go absolutely" could apply just as much
with old notions about "God" as anything else. Others struggle and
seem to get stuck at Step 2 because they THINK they've not developed
enough belief in "God" to recover, so are unwilling to take the
necessary actions.

Seems to me there's a bit missing from the book, which would read "God
will not do for us what we can do for ourselves". I think in AA's
pioneering days that was a given - there was far more emphasis on the
actions, thus a far higher success rate.

--
Blue Moon