Not-God (42 page)
Authors: Ernest Kurtz
To expound his ideas, Denys submitted a draft for a proposed official A.A. pamphlet to be aimed at militant non-believers. This draft contained five basic ideas: (1) stress upon faith in and hope of RECOVERY; (2) the chief obstacle to RECOVERY was “False Pride;” (3) the way to remove this obstacle was to learn “True Pride” — portrayed as that taken in A.A. membership; (4) the main secondary hindrance to RECOVERY was “the conviction of abnormality;” and (5) “sanity” came through the realization that this “abnormality” was not “true abnormality,” but, in A.A., “a simple statement of fact.” In conclusion Denys offered a rewording of the Twelve Steps designed to render them more acceptable by “Scientific Humanists,” a faith he explained as “…a practical and positive alternative … the transcendent of all religions. It is simplicity itself (keep it simple) — it teaches that Man matters.” The main change set forth in the draft substituted for the phrase “God as we understand Him” in the Third Step, “the advancement of human dignity and human worth.”
3
The shallowness of this critique, at least for the theme of “not-God,” barely requires comment. A hypostatized “RECOVERY,” “False Pride” as keeping alienated from “RECOVERY,” “True Pride” as the acceptance of limitation in A.A. and as “a simple statement of fact;” such ideas were hardly revolutionary of Alcoholics Anonymous, unless revolutions be located in words rather than ideas — leaving aside the perhaps deeper question whether revolutions be best instituted by ideas or by actions.
Jon R. Weinberg, Ph.D., Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Minnesota, in 1975 published through the Hazelden Foundation
A.A.: An Interpretation For the Nonbeliever
. Weinberg directed his pamphlet to professionals, stating explicitly that his ideas “should in no way be construed as reflecting any A.A. position.” Calling his own viewpoint “secular and psychological,” the Minnesota psychologist wove his interpretation around the suggestion that, since “the word ‘God’ [in Steps Three and Eleven] is followed by the only italicized words in the steps —
‘as we understood Him’”
:
The author proposes that God may be best understood by many as an
appropriate higher power which we consult for advice
, and turning over our will and lives means
following the advice
. With regard to the specific problem of alcoholism, the appropriate higher power may be considered the A.A. program itself.… The common element is the humility involved in allowing selected other people, or a set of principles, or a traditional deity to guide our actions, as opposed to grandiosely assuming that we are the wisest authority on all matters.
4
Here again, clearly, neither Alcoholics Anonymous nor the theme “not-God” as expressing its essence are threatened. The sense of individual human subordination, and of such subordination as essential reality, is evident. That the health of sobriety flows from this acceptance is a patent statement of the wholeness of accepted limitation.
The more significant threat to Alcoholics Anonymous and specifically to its theme of not-God-ness comes from the “right” — the heirs, often literal but at times only spiritual, of early Akron A.A. This position, which some would term “fundamentalist A.A.,” finds several expressions. For purposes of analysis, what follows delineates and explores three of these as most significant in both philosophical and practical impact on the larger fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous. These are: (1)“A.A. of Akron” and the distribution of a pamphlet titled “The Four Absolutes” by the Cleveland District Office of Alcoholics Anonymous; an approach somewhat common in southern and mid-western A.A. but best expressed by the fellowship’s longest sober, currently active member, Clarence S.; and (3) the “Survivors Program” promoted by “The Church of the Way” through its treatment program, East Ridge, and its literature,
24 Magazine
and the book,
The Answer to Addiction
. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the last and most extreme of these “right” positions will be seen to arch full circle to a connection with one expression of the extreme “left” position, Synanon, which in its heyday offered its own telling critique of their common direct parent, Alcoholics Anonymous.
At the 1975 Fortieth Anniversary Convention of Alcoholics Anonymous held in Denver, Colorado, some members attending received a private invitation to participate in one or more meetings of “A.A. of Akron.” Those without such an invitation and unaccompanied by someone having one were not admitted to these meetings — if they could find them. Within the meetings, although in many ways the story-telling format reminded readily of “ordinary” A.A. meetings, a special kind of lamentation was expressed in virtually every presentation. Almost univocally, speakers bemoaned not the ravages of alcoholism but the declension of “so-called Alcoholics Anonymous” from the pristine purity of its original principles, and most specifically from adherence to the “Four Absolutes” and “Five C’s” of the Oxford Group.
5
Both before and after 1975, at some meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous, a member would quote from one of four pamphlets — “A Manual for Alcoholics Anonymous,” “A Guide to the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous,” “Spiritual Milestones in Alcoholics Anonymous,” “Second Reader for Alcoholics Anonymous.” Almost always, a challenge was raised: “But that’s not ‘Conference-approved literature,’ is it?” It was not, nor did it pretend to be, despite the words “Alcoholics Anonymous” in each title. These pamphlets, each informed, were published by “A.A. of Akron,” and available directly from a New Jersey post office box number.
6
The differences between the “A.A. of Akron” approach and that of more ordinary Alcoholics Anonymous are evident in each pamphlet. The “Manual,” for example, offers as its “definition of an Alcoholics Anonymous … an alcoholic who, through application of and
adherence to rules laid down by the organization
, has completely foresworn the use of any and all alcoholic beverages. The moment he wittingly drinks so much as a drop of beer, wine, spirits, or any other alcoholic drink he automatically loses all status as a member of Alcoholics Anonymous.”
7
“Spiritual Milestones” offers “a simple, step-by-step religious guide” to supplement “the Ten Commandments and Twelve Steps”:
- Eliminate sin from our lives.
- Develop humility.
- Constantly pray to God for guidance.
- Practice charity.
- Meditate frequently on our newly found blessings, giving honest thanks for them.
- Take God into our confidence in all our acts.
- Seek the companionship of others who are seeking a spiritual life.
8
“Second Reader” bluntly asserts that “a fully rounded life is divided into four classifications, all of them being equal: WORK, PLAY, LOVE, AND RELIGION. Translating into terms of the alcoholic, we substitute ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS for RELIGION.”
9
In its explanation of the “Four Absolutes,” after acknowledging that they “were borrowed from the Oxford Group Movement” and “are not a formal part of our A.A. philosophy of life,” the Cleveland pamphlet proposes that while “The Twelve Steps represent our philosophy[,] the Absolutes represent our objectives in self-help, and the means to attain them.” Yet its concluding reminder is that: “The real value is in our striving for these Absolutes. It is a never-ending journey, and our joy and happiness must come each step of the way, not at the end because it is endless.”
10
Thus, both “A.A. of Akron” and the Cleveland District Office’s promotion of “The Four Absolutes” are less challenges to any understanding of the core proclamation of Alcoholics Anonymous as “not-God” than reinforcement of this very message from the “more spiritual” point of view that permeated Akron and Cleveland A. A. from their origins. One portrayal of Akron’s formalized “surrender” has been offered in Chapter Two, and another will follow shortly. From early Cleveland, despite the dominance of the Oxford Group-rejecting personality of Clarence S., note the following two descriptions. The first is by Warren C, who was “Twelve-Stepped” by Clarence himself in July 1939; the second, by Dick P., who contacted A.A. as a result of the Hemsley publicity.
11
Clarence felt the Oxford Group had no regard for “the ordinary drunk” and was too religious — “Bible-waving,” he used to say, and they were. But his main concern was to keep A.A. open for Catholics. I’d really messed up when I was drinking— the whole thing was bad companionship [and it got worse when I was drunk]. Well, “surrender” was based on the four absolutes — it meant throw away your old lifestyle,
change
your lifestyle — that’s all. Clarence gave me a copy of this manuscript of the Big Book — we had to read it, then,
before
we could go to a meeting. In order to go to a meeting, you had to qualify — your sponsor judged whether you were sincere or not, and Clarence insisted two things were necessary: you had to want A.A. above everything else in the world, and you had to know something about it. No, Clarence didn’t make me kneel down — he didn’t have to — God, I wanted the program! I had to — it didn’t come easy — it doesn’t come easy; and well, in the early days especially, the companionship was so important — the new, sober friends — we had to be
sure
. Yeah, we were “fixing” other drunks, but only because we had to fix ourselves, so we made sure everybody wanted what we wanted. Now that might sound harsh, or it might sound like “humility” — all I know is we wanted to be sober, and we were scared, and so we did what we were told. That was “surrender”: you did what your sponsor told you to do. No arguments, no questions, you
did
it, or you got drunk again, so by God we did it!
I wasn’t working in ‘forty — was living in a flophouse with just one extra pair of pants to my name. So Tom V. showed me this newspaper story and gave me the number. Three days later, Harry R. came to see me — right into the flophouse. He asked for me by name, then he started right in in front of the others: “Are you a drunkard?” And he talked about the allergy and the first drink. He asked me if I could stop drinking, lying, mooching for a week. I said, “How?” and he told me I had to get down on my knees and ask God to help me. He said if I didn’t want to do it right there with all the other bums — he said that,
“other
bums” — watching, I could go into the john in the corner to kneel down, but to leave the door open so
he
could see me. Well, I did, and he wrote the address of the Orchard Grove group and told me if I could kneel down every morning, and not take a drink, and kneel down every night to thank God, and didn’t lie or mooch, then I could come to the meeting. By God, a week later I did, and I felt something I never felt before — surrounded by clean, wholesome, friendly people. The raffle seller took me home that night, and he gave me a bag of donuts, and so I forgot and started to mooch — told him I only had one other pair of trousers. God, he jumped all over me! “Mex,” he said, “you want too much: you only have to do three things to get everything you want, because everything you want is being sober: Don’t ever take a drink again — if you do, Mex, slit your throat, you’d be better off. And don’t ever miss your meeting; and anytime you’re asked to do something in A.A.
do it
— never say ‘No’ to A.A.” And, God, I got scared, but I did those three things, and here I am.
The point: The difference in the way those deriving from Akron and Cleveland lived their Alcoholics Anonymous lies not so much in any specific clinging to “absolutes,” but in the greater emphasis on “the spiritual” and especially “surrender” that derived from historical circumstance. In New York, Bill Wilson was influenced especially by the pressure of those who feared “too much religion” — they, and he, had been such. Meanwhile Dr. Bob and his Akron-Cleveland followers and even Clarence S. found themselves threatened and pressured especially by those who felt that in separating from the Oxford Group they had jettisoned “the spiritual” altogether.
For those in Akron-Cleveland so conditioned, clinging to “the Four Absolutes” did not contradict “not-God,” for there were “four absolutes” only because at root there was but One Absolute — the God who was ultimate reality. The four as the One remained beyond human control: as always to be striven for, they reinforced the core sense of not-God-ness. To Dr. Bob Smith, “those four absolutes” were “the only yardsticks we had in the early days.” As he said of “absolute love,” “I don’t think any of us will ever get it.…” The key, for Dr. Bob Smith as for “A.A. of Akron” and Cleveland’s “Four Absolutes,” lay not in the absoluteness of rigidity that they historically had special reason to fear, but in the not-God-ness of “simplicity” and “tolerance” that they also, because of their history, implemented in their own “different” way.
12
Clarence S., formerly of Cleveland but at the time of this writing residing in Florida between extensive jaunts to serve those who respect him as the longest continuously sober member of Alcoholics Anonymous, offers in his presentations an interpretation of Alcoholics Anonymous that currently seems to be in a moment of cultural ascendency. It may well be termed an approach from the “right,” although of course that term is used in its religious rather than political or economic sense.
13
Openly theistic and a conservative Christian by any objective norm, Clarence explicitly takes as his text explaining Alcoholics Anonymous the words of Paul in Second Corinthians, Chapter Five, verse seventeen: “Therefore, if any man be in Christ he is a new creature. Old things are passed away. Behold all things are become new.” The key to his understanding and presentation of A.A. is that it is first and foremost “a life-changing program,” “a program that teaches us how to live,” and so “not a sobriety program but a living program.” Also central to Clarence’s appreciation of Alcoholics Anonymous, as
fellowship
as well as program, is his insistence that “alcoholics are different from people”: they are a “Chosen People.” The alcoholic is a “type,” and “it is a privilege to be an alcoholic.” He presents the “whole [A.A.] program” as derived from “two sources in the Bible: the Sermon on the Mount and Saint James on faith without works being dead and the healing ministry.” “Carrying this message to other alcoholics
is
our ministry,” says Clarence, stressing that “every alcoholic can have a terrific effect on another human being.”
