Conference Approved Literature

[Brock]

I respect your passion very much, and I am also passionate about the program that saved my life, I don’t think I have ever read a non AA book that offers a solution to alcoholism with a program of action, etc. Even Hazelden doesn’t claim to have the answer, their books are basically meditations not programs of action, and some like the very 24hr readings offered here often mention AA more times than the approved Daily Reflection does.

I'm not sure who the quoted person was, or why, that section made no sense to me.

I gave his background of being the GM of our GSO for ten years and then serving as senior advisor, if we can’t trust the opinion of our General Service Office as being the best way forward for AA then who should we trust? I showed where he felt that the over-insistence on approved material along with the general “growing rigidity” was one of the greatest dangers facing AA. When the general service conference is held and opinions are considered from inter-group representatives, as being representative of the feelings of the various groups, they can then offer various advisories for all of AA to follow. One of the advisories from the literature committee said this -

 It is suggested that when a local A.A. facility (central office, intergroup, group, etc.) sells non-Conference-approved literature, it be clearly designated as such.

So here we have the majority of groups voicing an opinion which is considered by the conference, and put out as a suggestion by them, saying pretty well there is nothing wrong with AA groups selling non approved literature, but we suggest it be clearly labeled as such, a good middle of the road compromise.

The fellow who I quoted was old enough and long enough in AA to know and understand what the founders had in mind, and at the end of the quoted speech said - "And in this trend toward rigidity, we are drifting farther and farther away from our co-founders."

AA is an evolving institution, (or it should be), I am only suggesting that those who dig in their heels against anything they see as non AA approved are doing more harm than good.

[Pah]

Now I understand Brock. It was the use of the mans full name in context of an AA opinion that lost me. So he is another member of AA just like me. Got it. The opinions posted by Dean C. indicate that the majority of AA conferences did not hold the same idea as that gentleman. That said, it's really not ours to vote on
Referring again to Tradition 6 and highlighting the language of " endorsement" ....If I say, in a meeting, that " such and such' book helped me, what I am really saying is, I didn't find the answer to my problem in AA; so I don't do that. In sponsorship, or one on one, I may share that, but not at group level. I separate what is my personal opinion from that of AA because what has helped me may kill another alcoholic.. AA does not need me to guide another's meditation practice, or direct them to an outside source.
The significance of "endorsement through usage" is heavy; I can't tell you how many times I've heard it said " AA / Hazelden" it's all basically the same...If we remember our sole purpose " Sobriety – freedom from alcohol – through the teaching and practice of the Twelve Steps is the sole purpose of an A.A. group. ... We have to confine our membership to alcoholics, and we have to confine our A.A. groups to a single purpose. "
Much is said about the Bible or other literature used in the early days, that's true; there was no text book yet, when they got the book written they used it. When you " speak as an AA group' you should be sure you are giving sanction to the AA message. I'm enjoying this dialogue and am very grateful this conversation is going on