October 17 in A.A. History

			In 1935, Edwin “Ebby” T. [far left], the man Bill W. [near left, 1937] called his sponsor, moved in with Bill and his wife, Lois [middle left, 1937], at 182 Clinton Street [right: c. 1940, 2009] in Brooklyn.

In 1940, Toledo, Ohio’s first meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous took place at the home of Ruth T., located at 2222 River Rd. [left] in Maumee Township. The attendees included Ruth, “Duke” P., who led the meeting, Charlie “CJ” K., Walter C., Chet M., Bill W.,^* Pete B., Ed B., and Ernie G.,^† one of the first 100 members of A.A. All nine had previously traveled to Akron, Ohio, to learn firsthand about A.A.

---

^*Not A.A.’s co-founder. 
^†Not the Ernie G. who married Dr. Bob and Anne S.’s daughter, Sue.

October 16 in A.A. History

In 1937, Bill and Lois W. left Akron, Ohio, at 4:30 p.m. and traveled with Sterling P. (who drove) and his wife, arriving in Newark, New Jersey, at 5:30 a.m. on the 17th. The four of them had breakfast at a local restaurant before the W——s took the subway home to 182 Clinton St. in Brooklyn, where they presumably collapsed into bed.

In 1943, nearly 200 people attended the 3rd anniversary of Alcoholics Anonymous in Toledo, Ohio, at the A.A. clubrooms on Superior St. Among them were six of the nine founding members. [Right: article from the Toledo Blade, 18 Oct 1943, p. 20.]

			In 1962, Earle Treat [far left], 62, died in Sarasota, Florida. He would be buried in Oakwood Cemetery in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio [middle left: obituary; near left, gravestone].

In 1971,^* the North Rustico Group, located in North Rustico, Prince Edward Island, Canada, presented Louis H. with an engraved coin [right] to commemorate his one-year anniversary.

In 1976,^* the North Rustico Group, located in North Rustico, Prince Edward Island, Canada, presented Louis H. with an engraved coin [left] to commemorate his five-year anniversary.

---

^*One of three things occurred: either (1) Louis H. slipped on the day of his 1st anniversary, (2) at least one of the years reported is incorrect, or (3) at least one of the anniversary numbers is wrong. The period 1971–1976 is 5 years, while a 5th anniversary would come 4 years after the 1st, if without slips.

In 2012, the U.S. National Park Service designated Stepping Stones, the home of Bill and Lois W. from 1941 until their respective deaths, as a National Historic Landmark. The official marker [right] says,

    Bill and Lois W—– lived here from 1941 until their deaths. Bill co-founded Alcoholics Anonymous, and Lois co-founded Al-Anon Family Groups. Their pioneering work advanced the treatment of alcoholism and inspired addiction recovery programs throughout the world.

    The State of New York also erected a similar historical marker outside Stepping Stones [left].

October 15 in A.A. History

In 1904, Margaret “Marty” M. [right, as a debutante, c. 1925] was born to Lillian Christy and William Henry M. in her maternal grandparents’ home on Magnolia Avenue in Sheridan Park, a new upscale neighborhood on the North Shore of Chicago, Illinois. Her family lived just down Magnolia Street. Marty was the oldest of five children. A sister, Christy, was born in 1906 but died within 36 hours. Lillian Christy “Chris” was born in 1910, and twins Mary Elizabeth “Betty” and William Henry arrived in 1918. Young Marty led an upper-middle-class life, attending private schools, traveling extensively, and making her social debut.

October 14 in A.A. History

In 1939, The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published a brief and unfavorable review [right] of the book Alcoholics Anonymous, which concluded with:

    The book under review is a curious combination of organizing propaganda and religious exhortation. It is in no sense a scientific book, although it is introduced by a letter from a physician who claims to know some of the anonymous contributors who have been “cured” of addiction to alcohol and have joined together in an organization which would save other addicts by a kind of religious conversion. The book contains instructions as to how to intrigue the alcoholic addict into the acceptance of divine guidance in place of alcohol in terms strongly reminiscent of Dale Carnegie and the adherents of the Buchman (“Oxford”) movement. The one valid thing in the book is the recognition of the seriousness of addiction to alcohol. Other than this; the book has no scientific merit or interest.

October 13 in A.A. History

In 1937, at an “alcoholic squadron” meeting^* in T. Henry and Clarace Williams’ living [right] in Akron, Ohio, Bill proposed expanding the movement with hospitals for alcoholics, paid missionaries, and a book.
    Later, Bill said that after “counting noses” with Dr. Bob and realizing the success they were having, he made this proposal to Bob. While Bob was initially cool to the idea, he found the notion of a book somewhat appealing. Together, Bill and Bob decided to call a meeting of the Ohio members, along with the New York City members Bill had brought with him, to thoroughly discuss Bill’s ideas and take a vote.
    Eighteen voting members attended the meeting. Bill presented his proposal, suggesting that the rich would be willing to fund these plans. But as he made his case, it became clear that the Ohio contingent was not impressed. They preferred to keep things simple, believing that money would create a professional class and ruin everything. Active alcoholics wouldn’t trust paid missionaries any more than early Christians would have trusted paid apostles. Jesus, they noted, did not rely on pamphlets or books; his program was word-of-mouth. Moreover, the publicity surrounding a book would overwhelm them as they tried to answer all the inquiries. After passionate arguments and counterarguments, the group seemed angrily deadlocked, but they reluctantly agreed to take a vote.
    Bill’s proposal narrowly passed with a vote of 10–8 (noting that a two-thirds majority would have required 12 votes in favor). Dr. Bob likely gave his reluctant approval. No one knows for certain who else was there, who voted, or how anyone voted. Bill was in Akron with three members from New York City: Bill R., Sterling P., and Fitz M. If they were present and voted, that would account for 5 votes in favor. If they weren’t there or didn’t vote, 8 more votes would have been needed from the Ohio members. The other New York City members would have been much more enthusiastic.

---

^*Note the 13th is only the most likely date, as Schaberg deduces in a footnote to Writing the Big Book on page 27, partly because that was the regular night for the “alcoholic squadron” of the Oxford Group meeting at the Williams’ home; however, it could have been any day between the 11th and 15th.

In 1947, the first permanent Alcoholics Anonymous group in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, held its initial meeting in the deacons’ room of the Independent Hall on Collins Street.

		Attendees included Lillian R. [far left, 1947], a Hollywood movie star on tour in Australia; her husband, Burt McG. [near right, 1968]; Harold J., a local drunk; and Jack O’H. [far right, with his wife], a composer and playwright who chaired the meeting. Two non-alcoholics also attended: Rev. Dr. Gordon Powell [near left, 1947], the Presbyterian minister of the Collins Street Independent Church [below left] (now St. Michael’s Uniting Church), broadcaster, and author; and Norman Ley, secretary of the Independent Church. Harold was elected secretary. This group, known as the Melbourne Group of A.A., met at least once a week for the next two years in Powell’s room in the Independent Hall.

	Three additional weekly meetings soon followed: one on High Street in St. Kilda [near right, 1957]; another near Brighton railway station [middle right]; and one at Talbot House [far right: interior, 1928], better known as “Toc H,” a soldiers’ rest and recreation centre located at 476 Collins Street in Melbourne.

October 12 in A.A. History

In 1911, Ruth Miller [right] was born in Newark, New Jersey, to Fredric and Sophie Kraemer Muller. 
    She would marry George Hock in 1929, but they would separate in 1935 and divorce in 1941. In January 1936, she would be hired as a secretary at Honor Dealers by Hank P. In 1940, she would become the first National Secretary of Alcoholics Anonymous.

In 1948, Paul H. [left, 1956] wrote a memo titled “BILL’S STORY OF THE EVOLUTION OF THE ‘TWELVE STEPS.’” In this memo, he recounted a story shared by Bill W. during a train ride from New York City to Washington, DC, on 1 January 1948. They were traveling to a regional banquet where Paul was scheduled to speak about the late Fitz M.
    Later, Paul wrote to Bill, mentioning that upon arriving in Washington, he had dictated Bill’s story to Eileen Barrett, who had also been on the train and who confirmed the accuracy of Paul’s recollection. It was from these dictated notes that Paul composed the memo, which included the following:

    Bill said that Fitz himself had no actual part in the writing of the “Twelve Steps” but that his spiritual perception and influence were a definite factor in their formulation.
    Bill went on to explain how the pioneers in A.A. fought, thought—and prayed—their way through to recovery. In his effort to rehabilitate himself the alcoholic was obliged:

1. To admit he was powerless over alcohol.
2. To make an inventory of his own character.
3. To put trust in God.
4. To work with other alcoholics.

    As it stood, this program needed clarification. Bill sat down and began to figure out the various phases of his own recovery. Setting them down on paper, he found there were twelve separate and distinct steps.

    The significance of this account lies in the fact that, despite occurring more than nine years after the event, it was the first known account Bill provided about the writing of the Twelve Steps. His later accounts would introduce important variations. Notably, this account identifies only four steps instead of the later six, and Paul’s account indicates that Bill based the steps on “the various phases of his own recovery” rather than, as Bill later said, that “the words kept right on coming”^* and that “Why the Steps were written down in the order in which they appear today and just why they were worded as they are, I had no idea whatever.”^†

---

^*Alcoholics Anonymous Comes of Age, p. 161.
^†The “Blue Book”, Vol. XII, “National Clergy Conference on Alcoholism: Alcoholics Anonymous,” pp. 179–210, 1960.

October 11 in A.A. History

In 1917, J. Frederick “Fred” Seiberling, Sr. and Henrietta Buckler [right: c. 1917] were married in Akron, Ohio. The couple would have three children but would separate in early 1935, though they would never divorce. Henrietta would move from the huge Manor House of Stan Hywet (pronounced “stan HEE-wit”), the Seiberling estate in Akron, to the much smaller Gate Lodge [below left], located on the edge of the estate.

    Shortly after the Oxford Group came to Akron, in January 1933, Henrietta would become involved with them. In May 1935, she would introduce Bill W. to Dr. Bob S. at her home, playing a crucial role in the founding of Alcoholics Anonymous. Both Henrietta and Fred would become devoted supporters of A.A.

	In 1937, [12th?] In Akron, Ohio, Bill W., Dr. Bob S., and Bob’s wife Anne [right, respectively] sat in the couple’s living room [left] discussing the two-year-old fellowship they had started. Taking stock of its achievements so far, they counted 35 to 40 people who had sobered up, with more than 20 having maintained sobriety for at least a year. This conversation would come to be known as the “counting noses” meeting.

     In Alcoholics Anonymous Comes of Age, written after the 1955 International Convention in St. Louis, Missouri, and published in 1957, Bill would write:

    It was on a November^* day in that year [1937] when Dr. Bob and I sat in his living room, counting the noses of our recoveries. There had been failures galore, but now we could see some startling successes too. A hard core of very grim last-gasp cases had by then been sober a couple of years, an unheard-of development. There were twenty or more such people. All told we figured that upwards of forty alcoholics were staying bone dry.
    As we carefully rechecked this score, it suddenly burst upon us that a new light was shining into the dark world of the alcoholic. Despite the fact that Ebby had slipped, a benign chain reaction, one alcoholic carrying the good news to the next, had started outward from Dr. Bob and me. Conceivably, it could one day circle the whole world. What a tremendous realization that was! At last we were sure. There would be no more flying totally blind. We actually wept for joy, and Bob and Anne and I bowed our heads in silent thanks.

Bill would also write about this meeting in the October 1945 issue of the A.A. Grapevine,

The realization that we “had found something” began to take hold of us. No longer were we a dubious experiment. Alcoholics could stay sober. Great numbers perhaps! While some of us had always clung to this possibility, the dream now had real substance. If 40 alcoholics could recover, why not four hundred, four thousand—even forty thousand?

And on 12 June 1954, speaking at the Texas State Convention in Fort Worth, Texas, Bill would say:

Bob and I saw for the first time that this thing was going to succeed. That God in his providence and mercy had thrown a new light into the dark caves where we and our kind had been and were still by the millions dwelling. I can never forget the elation and ecstasy that seized us both.

---

^*Not only was this date incorrect—despite his repeated assertions over the years that the meeting had taken place in November—but he was also conflating this trip with another one he made in search of work in Detroit, Michigan, and Cleveland, Ohio, which included a visit to Akron by himself.

October 10 in A.A. History

In 1937, after spending the night in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, with Bill and Lois W., Bill and Kathleen R. picked up Fitz Mayo just outside Pittsburgh. The five of them then continued on to Akron, Ohio, arriving around 5 PM. They received a warm welcome and were entertained by the large crowd gathered for dinner at Paul Stanley’s home. Sterling P. and his wife, also from New York City, arrived separately and were presumably welcomed as well. Bill and Kathleen stayed with T. Henry and Clarace Williams, while Bill and Lois would spend the next 5½ days with Dr. Bob and Anne S. [left: Bob S., Anne S., Lois W., Bill W., respectively, c. 1937].

In 1970, in New York City, Bill W.’s widow, Lois, read “Bill’s Last Message” [right] at the annual dinner hosted by the New York Intergroup Association in honor of Bill’s 36th anniversary of sobriety. It read, in part,

    My thoughts are much occupied these days with gratitude to our Fellowship and for the myriad blessings bestowed upon us by God’s Grace. If I were asked which of these blessings I felt was most responsible for our growth as a fellowship and most vital to our continuity, I would say, the “Concept of Anonymity.”

In 1988, Lois W. was buried next to her husband, Bill, in the East Dorset Cemetery in East Dorset, Vermont [left: Lois’ headstone].

In 2002, the second Gulf Conference began in Bahrain’s American Mission Hospital [right]. Under the title “A.A. Primary Purpose in Full Throttle in Arabian Gulf,” Bahrain’s central office would later report,

    October 10 witnessed a miracle for us; we experienced A.A.’s altruistic movement ripple its way through the atmosphere, deep into our souls. The second 
Gulf Conference started at 4:30 p.m. with a recovery meeting in Bahrain’s American Mission Hospital and ended past midnight with everyone boogying in a member’s home.
    There was mingling, sharing and bonding. There was fellowship from Oman, Riyadh, Kuwait, Daharan, Dammam and even Bournemouth. Attendance was quite overwhelming. To be honest, the organizing committee had expected 35-45 people, but almost double that number came. Some were in A.A., while others were from the medical body. Overall the message of recovery was carried effectively.
    No committee, no human power, absolutely nothing but God can take credit for such success.… 
    God bless your trudge along the Road of Happy Destiny.

Supporting A.A. in Ukraine

[Note that this post was written in March 2022, shortly after the full-scale invasion of the Ukraine by the Russian Federation.]

An A.A. friend sent me a very well-done flyer for an online A.A. meeting in Kyiv, Ukraine. It's shown to the left, but I've removed the Meeting ID and Passcode; I don't want to make it that  easy to attend. When I first saw it, I thought, "I only wish that we could do something similar for all the Russian alcoholics, who must also be terribly distressed at this time" (especially those in the Russian military).

This flyer was immediately followed by a less well-done message, shown below, purporting to be from "Ukrainian AA Service Center and the Ukrainian AA Service Board" to "the AA World Community." I was skeptical. This looked so much like a myth that I expected to find it debunked at Snopes ("the internet’s definitive fact-checking resource"). I did not. But I did find an article titled, "UKRAINE: New Crisis, Grimly Familiar Disinformation Trends", which said, in part, 

It is a grim measure of the frequency of crisis events in recent years, and the ubiquity of online disinformation, that when a major story breaks — a terrorist attack, a mass shooting, or an act of war — the writers and editors at Snopes can typically predict what comes next. Recycled videos and photographs, stripped from their proper context, and the same old tropes, all designed to inflame or confuse, or even amuse, the reader.

This is followed by a "grim overview of the familiar disinformation trends and recurring memes… in the opening days of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine."

But, as I said, I only later looked on Snopes. First I searched the Internet. To my surprise, I immediately got a hit that looked very promising. It was on the aa.lviv.ua website and looked like this:

Since I don't know what I presumed was Ukrainian, and not having much patience, I immediately had the page automatically translated into English. It is indeed Ukrainian, and here's the English translation I got:

It was only later that I noticed that an English translation of the message follows the Ukrainian on the original, one click further down. I felt stupid and impatient for not looking.

Ultimately, I decided I'd check into the Kyiv online meeting and see if there was some way I could be helpful. I tried to log in a few minutes before it was to start. Due to the meeting having reached capacity, it was impossible to get in. It then occurred to me, If I'm having this much trouble getting in, there are probably Ukrainians who are also unable to get in. It horrified me to think that I could have had a part in disrupting their meeting. If, by some miracle, I had been able to get in, I sure hope I would have realized that the meeting was at capacity and left. But even if I had, my spot would have been filled by a non-Ukrainian.

I tried joining after the meeting was over. It was bedlam. It appeared that most people were unmuted and there were multiple conversations going on at the same time. I saw one man, who appeared to be that single Ukrainian member. He appeared to be quite stressed out. I also saw some A.A.friends of mine, which was disappointing. I only stayed a minute. The last thing they needed at that point was yet one more non-Ukrainian A.A. to join the fray.

Tonight, I learned from a reliable source that only one of the seven or eight regular Ukrainian group members was able to get into the meeting (presumably, the Zoom host). No doubt, many of the attendees had good intentions, although I'm also pretty sure some did not. Clearly, many also didn't think through the consequences of their actions.

And then, very late last night, My friend said that another friend of hers had found a Facebook post about the A.A. meeting in Kyiv earlier, shown at the left. It was so disheartening to read. Yes, many non-Ukrainians—maybe hundreds of them—got to feel good for a minute. Meanwhile, seven or eight locals never got to their meeting.

God As We Understand Him?

 I recently read Bill W.'s essay, “God As We Understand Him: The Dilemma of No Faith”, in The Language of the Heart (originally published as “The Dilemma of No Faith” in the April 1961 issue of the A.A. Grapevine). He begins this essay by saying, “The phrase ‛God As We Understand Him’ is perhaps the most important expression to be found in our whole AA vocabulary.”

For a long time, I've been vaguely uncomfortable with this wording, even though I knew what it meant the first time I heard it. In the last few years, but not in my early sobriety, I've sometimes heard newcomers asking about this expression, “How can anyone understand God?”  in a way that led me to think that perhaps this was an impediment for them. I realized my discomfort is just that. Perhaps understanding is not the best word. I think “God As We Conceive of God” is closer to the intended meaning. It will be interesting to see how the proposed plain language Big Book^* (i.e., Alcoholics Anonymous) will deal with this phrase. If at all.

---

^* If you don't know what this is or what it means, check out Advisory Action #28 (on p 7) in this document: Conference Advisory Actions of the 71st General Service Conference, a list of all such actions adopted at the 71st General Service Conference last April.

19,560 days

Yes, I am still sober, still above ground. My posts slowed down drastically and then stopped altogether because I feared it would become too easy to identify who I was from my posts, due to circumstances of my life. Already, my brother had figured out this was me. For those who don't realize it, I was doing my best to respect Tradition 12. My brother already knew I was a deeply involved member of A.A.

Future posts will probably be less personal, on the whole. I hope this is, at least in part, because I have less interest in myself and more interest in others [v. Alcoholics Anonymous, p 84].

A.A. in these times of pandemic has been a great experience for me personally. Since mid-March 2020, I've attended online meetings on every continent that has them (Antarctica does not, due to insufficient bandwidth). I've been regularly attending meetings all over the US and Canada, as well as in Australia and South Africa. It has also become much easier to find workshops, conventions, conferences, and meetings that focus on topics like Traditions, Concepts, The A.A. Service Manual, and A.A. history. These are topics that I love learning about. I've been sober almost 29 years, been involved in General Service for 25½ of those years, but I sometimes think I've learned more about General Service in the last 16 months than in all the time before. Maybe not. Maybe it just feels that way.

Eighteen years

Still here, still sober, even if I'm not posting. Yesterday I celebrated 18 years of continuous sobriety.

Seventeen years

Yesterday was the 17th anniversary of my first A.A. meeting, which marked the beginning of my current spell of continuous sobriety. I can't say I celebrated, because I was too busy doing things that are little more than the blessings of a sober life:

• Took my car in to have the oil changed and the engine light checked—I not only have a driver's license, I also have a car
• Worked—I am employable today
• Chaired a meeting of the local chapter of a professional organization—not only employed, but on the Board of Directors and also Program Chair
• Attended a funeral

The funeral, ironically enough, was for Bumblebee, someone I sponsored for a while. I suspect I was his last sponsor. I hadn't seem him in at least a year, and sometimes wondered if he named me when asked if he had a sponsor. Then I would wonder if he was even making meetings.

Apparently not. He was definitely out there. He committed suicide by stabbing himself to death in the parking lot of the apartment complex where he lived. In the femoral artery. Thank you, Bumblebee, for keeping it green for me on my anniversary.

Tonight I will celebrate with dinner and a meeting! Praise HP, from whom all blessings flow!

Is A.A. a religion?

On 17 March 2009, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued an opinion in an appeal of the case of Glenside Center, Inc. [a clubhouse hosting meetings of various twelve-step programs] v. Abington Township. A lower court had found that the Glenside Center violated local zoning laws, after the Township received numerous complaints regarding an "adverse parking situation" that "made driving difficult and dangerous and prevented emergency traffic from getting through." There were also complaints about "urinating in public, using obscene language and trash which had been left by members attending meetings." Excessive noise and loitering are also mentioned in the opinion. (Clearly demonstrating the danger of these kinds of totally inappropriate, inconsiderate and non-sober behavior at any A.A. meeting.)

The appeal was on the basis of four issues, namely that the Zoning Board:

1. had incorrectly found that the use of the building did not meet the requirement of being primarily used as an "office,"
2. had denied the clubhouse its rights under RLUIPA¹,
3. had violated the clubhouse's right to free exercise of religion by determining that the clubhouse was a "Community Center," and
   
4. had failed to prove a compelling governmental interest and had failed to use the least restrictive means to further that interest.
   

My interest is only in the 2^nd and 3^rd issues insofar as they relate to whether or not A.A. can legally be considered a religion. In its opinion, the Court essentially determined that Alcoholics Anonymous is not a religion:

Glenside argues... it is a protected entity under RLUIPA because its activities are a religious exercise.... Glenside argues that AA is not a religion, but its activities and programs constitute a free exercise of religion under RLUIPA. It contends that the 12-step program that AA follows is certainly based upon a belief in a higher power, and various AA members testified that they found a connection with God by attending AA meetings. Glenside directs our attention to a New York Court of Appeals case, Griffin v. Coughlin,... which held that an AA meeting constituted an exercise of religion.

The Board, however, argues and we agree that Glenside presents no binding authority for its proposition that an AA meeting is a religious exercise as that term is used in RLUIPA.² Glenside failed to prove that any of the meetings are administered by a religious leader, i.e., a minister, priest, rabbi or other spiritual leader. Glenside does not hold any religious services or have any religious affiliations. Its Articles of Incorporation state nothing about being incorporated for a religious purpose, but only to assist people in recovering from addiction. Similarly, Glenside’s printed materials state that Glenside is not a religious organization and do not require that members possess any religious belief to participate. While Glenside argues that members have found a connection with God at its meetings, clearly, the primary purpose of the group meetings, whether they be for AA, NA or DA, is to support individuals who are recovering from alcohol, drug, gambling and debtor addictions, not to advance religion. Particularly where AA and NA meetings are concerned, the primary concern of those meetings is to treat substance abuse. Moreover, Glenside and others on its behalf testified that members come from all religious walks of life whether they be Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim or non-believers in a higher power. The fact that the 12-step program is used and it contains references to “God” and a “Higher Power” does not mean that all members believe that they are partaking in a religious experience when they are attending an AA or NA meeting.

Good for the Court, bad for Glenside Center, Inc. Bad, not because they lost their appeal, but for (1) encouraging the courts to consider A.A. a religion, (2) giving the appearance of violating A.A. tradition of having no opinion on outside issues, and (3) for providing a forum for a number of members of A.A. to violate A.A.'s tradition of anonymity at the level of press, radio and film (not to mention on television and on the Internet).

Glenside Center is not in any sense A.A. or part of A.A. It is a separately organized enterprise with the [presumable] purpose of providing meeting space for various twelve-step organizations. From the point of view of A.A. groups, it is in no respect different from a church, municipal building or community center providing space for meetings—all these entities are nothing more than landlords.

However, I suspect that all the principals of the Glenside Center are members of A.A. As stated in the opinion, many of those who testified on behalf of the Glenside Center are also members of A.A. One was identified by full name as a member of A.A. for 53 years (you'd think he'd know better after that long). The Center's argument included the following:

While AA or its related organizations do not claim to be an established religion, the constituent groups can and have been viewed as engaging in an exercise of religion. The Act broadly defines religious exercise to include "any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious beliefs."

I became aware of this ruling when a friend in A.A. sent me a link to an entry about it in a Washington Post blog named "Under God." In it, David Waters argues that the Court made a mistake on the basis of four objections. After each objection, I'll give my objections to Mr Waters' objections.

Objection 1: Any person of faith can be a spiritual leader.

Actually, I would go even further than Mr Waters. Lack of "a religious leader, i.e., a minister, priest, rabbi or other spiritual leader" should not preclude a gathering from being religious. A prime example would be an unprogrammed meeting for worship of the Religious Society of Friends, commonly known as Quakers.

Objection 2: Assisting people in recovering from any addiction is a religious (and spiritual) purpose.

Accepting this argument would make every rehab and detox in the U.S. a religious organization. It would also make seeing any health-care practitioner for help with an addiction into a religious activity.

Objection 3: Any group that advances the healing of bodies and souls (and the forgiveness of debts and debtors) also advances religion.

By this argument, entering into any course of psychiatric or psychological therapy, participating in any of numerous self-help organizations or classes, going to see the doctor, going to the gym to work out, or seeking credit counseling would be considered a religious activity. This is patently absurd.

Objection 4: Clearly the court is unaware of the history and purpose of AA.

Clearly Mr Waters is not fully aware of the history and purpose of A.A. Let me address each of the facts he cites in support of his objection.

Alcoholics Anonymous was founded as a spiritual program, direct outgrowth of the Oxford Group at Calvary Episcopal Church in New York.

True. But it's also true that the Oxford Group (known since 2001 as Initiatives of Change) considered itself non-religious. Furthermore A.A. separated from the Oxford Group at least in part due to the latter's belief that alcoholism was a sin rather than a disease, and to sever what might appear as ties to a Christian organization.

AA meetings include recitations of The Lord's Prayer and the Serenity Prayer.

Actually, this seems to me to be a reasonably good argument. It's one reason I do not participate in saying the Lord's Prayer at meetings. Not all meetings use the Lord's Prayer, though I'd have to say that most in the U.S.³ do. As for the Serenity Prayer, so far as I know, it is not perceived to be associated with Christianity, despite its purported author being a Christian theologian. As insightful as it may be to us drunks, the idea would seem to be quite universal in thought and application among those who consider and practice such things. Indeed, the essential idea can be found in a Mother Goose rhyme:

For every ailment under the sun

There is a remedy, or there is none;

If there be one, try to find it;

If there be none, never mind it.

Back to Mr Waters' argument:

"AA indirectly derived much of its inspiration from the Church," Rev. Samuel M. Shoemaker, Rector of Calvary Church, said in 1955.

Key word: indirectly. I'd say that a huge number of institutions of Western civilization were indirectly derived from Christianity, not the least of which is the United States of America. Furthermore, citing a single person—a non-A.A. member at that—saying this in a single speech is not much of an argument. Bill W., co-founder of A.A. and a much better source to cite, said of the phrase God as we understood him that it was "tremendously important," "a ten-strike," enabling "thousands to join AA who would have otherwise gone away," opening the door to "those of fine religious training and those of none at all," making "one’s religion the business of the AA member himself and not that of his society."⁴

AA's Twelve Traditions includes No. 2: "For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority -- a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience." Seven of AA's famous Twelve Steps reference God, including:

• 2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
• 3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
• 11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.
• 12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

Newcomers to A.A. are commonly encourage to find a power greater than themselves even if that power is nothing more than a doorknob or an ashtray. Many A.A. members attain long-term sobriety using A.A. itself as a higher power (God is sometimes identified as an acronym, standing for "Group of Drunks"). Even casual acquaintance with A.A.'s program makes it clear that this higher power can be of whatever conception one so chooses. See also the quote of Bill W.'s referred to above.

"Would that the Church were like this," Shoemaker said in 1955, "ordinary men and women with great need who have found a great Answer, and do not hesitate to make it known wherever they can - a trained army of enthusiastic, humble, human workers whose efforts make life a different thing for other people!"

Is Mr Waters saying that a non-religious group of people cannot exhibit these same characteristics? I suspect that any number of political activists would be happy with such a description.

If a group that meets under spiritual precepts, performs rituals, and seeks to heal its members isn't religious, what else is it?

Rituals? To what rituals does Mr Waters refer? He hasn't mentioned any up to this point in the article and doesn't mention any after this either. And without rituals, all that's left is a group that uses spiritual precepts and seeks to heal its members. In at least one sense of the word spiritual, a vast number of groups satisfy this description.

Indeed, much of the argument comes down to whether or not there is a difference between spirituality and religion, and what that difference might be. From the American Heritage Dictionary:

spir·i·tu·al
ADJECTIVE:1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material. See synonyms at immaterial. 2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul. 3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific. 4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred. 5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural.

As will be clear to anyone who is familiar with A.A. and its program of recovery, A.A. itself would not accept any definition other than one with the broadest possible meaning. The meaning of A.A. being a spiritual program could be that it is religious to the member who is herself religious. That meaning could be only that it is intangible or immaterial to the member who is himself not religious. A.A. itself doesn't care. A.A. is areligious.

---

¹Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act—a federal statute passed in 2000 to provide stronger protection for religious freedom in the land-use and prison contexts.

²The opinion footnotes this sentence with the following:

RLUIPA defines “Religious exercise” as follows:

(A) In general. The term “religious exercise” includes any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.

(B) Rule. The use, building, or conversion of real property for the purpose of religious exercise shall be considered to be religious exercise of the person or entity that uses or intends to use the property for that purpose.

³I know from personal experience that the Lord's Prayer is rarely used in Australia, and that because of this Australian members of A.A. pride themselves on being more consistent with A.A. principles than A.A. in the U.S. is.

⁴Full quote, from A Conversation with Bill W., A Synopsis of the Question-Answer Period following Bill W.'s talk at the NCCA Syposium in New York in 1960:

When these Steps were shown to my friends, their reactions were mixed indeed. Some argued that six steps had worked fine, so why twelve? From our agnostic contingent there were loud cries of too much “God.” Others objected to an expression which I had included which suggested getting on one’s knees while in prayer. I heavily resisted these objections for months. But I finally did my statement about a suitable prayerful posture and finally went along with that now tremendously important expression, “God as we understand Him” — this expression having been coined, I think, by one of our former atheist members. This was indeed a ten-strike. That one has since enabled thousands to join AA who would have otherwise gone away. It enabled people of fine religious training and those of none at all to associate freely and to work together. It made one’s religion the business of the AA member himself and not that of his society.

Still above ground and sober

For anyone who's wondering, I'm doing okay. I got elected to another Area office and expect to continue in General Service for another two years. Nimue is divorcing me after nearly three years of separation. Despite that, I feel as good as I have in a long time. Despite some heavy bouts of depression over the last nine months, I recently thought to myself, "Ah, so this is what it feels like not to be depressed! I had forgotten."

Despite the fact that I haven't posted for over nine months, every now and then, someone adds a comment to an old post. This, if nothing else, sporadically reminds me that I'd like to taking up at least semi-regular posting again. Absolutely no promises, we'll see.