The Group Conscience

I don’t know if a Group Conscience is a “principle” or not - probably the relevant principle is democracy, generosity, trust or some combination of the like.   However, it does conjure in one’s mind something that is most definitely held to be unique to the Alcoholics Anonymous style of organization.

Few “institutions” in Alcoholics Anonymous, particularly in AA service, get as much time and attention as the “Group Conscience”.  Is the Group Conscience:

1. a group’s business meeting?
2. a means of resolving disputes and coming to acceptable consensus around issues or potential conflicts?
3. places where the political interests can use their skills to direct people to accomplish things?
4. the expression of God’s will for those engaged?

Truth is, the group conscience is probably much more and much less than any and all of these.

Some Personal Experience

I was elected GSR of my group one week when I wasn’t there.  It was not the “railroad” that I’ve sometimes heard others get placed on because they’d asked in advance if I’d be willing and I said yes.  In retrospect, a couple of decades later, I realized that God had saved AA from my service for over 3 years of my early sobriety.  I’ve always done well in group meetings  and, as Bill W., often fancied myself a leader of some note.  Thank God that the group conscience kept me away from danger for those early years while I applied my Ego in every misdirected way of avoiding my eventual spiritual awakening.

After a few months as GSR, our Area 10 Delegate sent us some questions that he said needed to be discussed with my group before I came to the Area Assembly.  With some misgivings, I trotted out these questions at our monthly business meeting and was even more disappointed in what happened than I was prepared to be:

1. We spent as much time debating the quality and relevance of the questions as we did the substance of what was being asked of us.
2. Much of what was shared seemed to be irrelevant to the questions at hand.
3. Few members seemed to see the reason for what was being asked of us in our group - much sentiment was expressed about “…letting those guys in New York do whatever they damn well pleased…”.
4. While I agreed with some of the perspectives, I was embarrassed to expose the opinions of some of the folks because their thinking seemed to be not as evolved as what I had thought they “should be”.

I was afraid to go the Area Assembly but had agreed to do a job, so I showed up with m0re misgivings.  I was concerned that I’d be placed on the spot and be exposed for not only what a poor leader I was but would also expose this lame AA group’s answers to the Delegate’s questions.  We split into round tables and discussed our questions and answers with about 10-15 other GSRs.  This is not my favorite sort of AA sharing (trying to hear and be heard in general pandemonium) but, as we strained to hear each others experiences, something started to change in me.

1. I heard other GSR’s who’d had similar experiences to mine with their groups.
2. I heard where other groups had wrestled to some of the same conclusions we had - amazingly, when it was expressed by others, I could see the brilliance of the idea and perspective I’d thought lame earlier.
3. As I shared my group’s opinion, others appreciated our unique contributions to the answers we were all seeking.
4. I saw how my group’s opinions were, in almost every case, better than my own ideas.

As each table reported out to the whole assembly the consensus on the questions they dealt with, an amazing sensation happened to me.  I felt light headed and the hair on the back of my neck stood up tingling as I realized what I was blessed to observe was the coalescence of the conscience of AA in the state of Colorado.  Perhaps for the first time, I felt truly a part of a much larger whole - from my lame little group (which now seemed much smarter) to all of Colorado and, eventually all those other lame little groups represented at the General Service Conference.  I was in awe of what I had become a part of.

When our Delegate gave his report in June, I listened with rapt attention to the business that was conducted at the General Service Conference.  I almost exclaimed when the delegate reported on some small piece of business that my little group had discussed some months before.  After his report, I got together with the Delegate and asked many questions about other items my group had discussed or expressed an opinion about.  He kindly assured me that, if something wasn’t discussed at the General Service Conference directly, it informed other aspects of the discussion and, if my group wished, they could submit specific items for action at next year’s Conference.

I couldn’t wait to get back to my group and let them know the excitement of belonging to something much larger than what was happening in our little church basement.  As I remember, they listened (or didn’t) with quiet bemusement as they realized they’d created yet another little AA service zealot.

I was hooked - not only on the whole idea of a group conscience, but on the wondrous miracle of how we, in our groups, are responsible for AA as a whole.

How to Arrive at a Group Conscience

Many AA members, sober for long periods of time, can’t help the inevitable roll of the eyes when a Group Conscience meeting is mentioned.  Most will relate meetings where fights broke out, chairs were thrown, people yelled at each other or other less than fully enlightened behavior was exhibited.  Most of us that have been around for a longer time can tell of times when we played all the roles: arbitrator, peacemaker as well as jerk.

There is a distinct difference in my experience between the group conscience and the typical AA business meeting.

I came across the following article from Box 459:

In A.A.’s “Benign Anarchy” Informed Group Conscience Is Our Ultimate Anthority
Box 459, News&Notes From the General Service Office of A.A. VOL 35, NO 1, FEB/MARCH 1989

Co-founder Bill W. liked to call A.A. a “benign anarchy,” and for good reason. A.A. is a spiritual movement, and as Tradition Two clearly states, our sole authority “is a loving God as He may express Himself in the group conscience.”  But what exactly is the group conscience? How does it differ from a group opinion or a majority vote? And what is the best way to get there?

It is generally agreed that the group conscience strives for unanimity through enlightenment, spirituality and adherence to our Steps, Traditions and Concepts. On sensitive issues, the group works slowly - discouraging formal motions until a clear sense of its collective view emerges. Placing principles before personalities, the group is wary of dominant opinions. Its voice is heard when a well-informed group arrives at a decision. The result rests on more than a “yes” or “no” count - precisely because it is the spiritual expression of the group conscience.

The late Dean K., who served a term as delegate, California/Northern Interior, and then managed the Seattle Central Office for a time, said that there are two ways to arrive at a group conscience: “The competitive way permits the person with the loudest voice to push his idea across, take a vote and come up with a majority decision. This is not informed group conscience. In the cooperative way, group members come together in mutual trust to arrive at a group decision, not one individual’s personal triumph .

Dean’s formula for a cooperative and informed group conscience calls for facts (or presentations) on both sides of a question. “The meeting is not thrown open for general discussion,” he stressed. “This would allow the more vocal members to set the debate. It is suggested that the chairperson call on each member in turn, allowing two minutes for each to speak. No member should speak a second time until all have had their turns; this gives even the quietest person an equal chance.

The chairperson expresses his or her opinions only after all the others have spoken.”

“It is important,” Dean noted,”that the minority voice always be heard; but it should be born in mind that while the minority voice sometime is right, it is just as often wrong. Unless the minority voice is decidedly persuasive, it should be considered in its proper light - as a minority voice. To permit the minority always to influence the majority is to permit the tail to wag the dog.”

Beyond the group level, the A.A. General Service Conference has the responsibility of acting as the collective group conscience of the Fellowship. About the closest thing to a collective voice that A.A.has, the Conference produces statements on important matters of policy that affect A.A. as a whole; approves the choice of some trustee nominees for the General Service Board and directly elects others. But neither the Conference nor the board can dictate to any A.A. group or member.

Not always understood, group conscience as expressed in Tradition Two is a powerful spiritual concept that makes it possible for people of diverse backgrounds and temperament to rise above personal ambition and unite in our common purpose: to stay sober and extend the hand of A.A. to the alcoholic who still suffers.

After I’d been sober and GSR for a number of years, my zeal waned and I became concerned as my group became more apathetic and members chose to not attend our business meetings where much of the time was given toward my collection of the group conscience by discussion and vote.  I asked my service sponsor about this and was surprised by his response.

He chastised me somewhat for not knowing the difference between the group conscience and a business meeting.  If your job is to understand and represent your group at an Area Assembly or communicate what’s going on in AA outside your group to your group, do you only do that at the few minutes given at your business meeting?

With that enlightenment, I realized that I could accomplish as much or more by going to coffee or having discussions with many of the group members socially than by forcing them to sit in a circle and respond in turn.  Instantly, I became a much better informed GSR and was able to inspire a few of them into AA service instead of only taking up their precious time after meetings.

The Responsibility of the Minority…

(This will likely become its own article but  for now…)

There is something precious about the minority opinion in the development of the group conscience in AA.

At my very first Area Assembly, I arrived late and the business meeting was well under way.  A GSR made a motion, it was seconded, there was little or no discussion and a vote was taken.  This was some time ago so I don’t really remember the exact numbers but the vote was something like 147 to 1.  I remember the 1 vote against part because the chair asked that person for a minority opinion - something I’d never heard of before.

The person as the minority went to the microphone and briefly spoke to the question.  The chair asked for a re-vote (something else I’d never heard of) and to my astonishment, the vote was 148 against the motion.  I suddenly knew well that I was in a business meeting much different than I’d ever been in before.

It was pointed out to me that, in the Box 459 article referenced above, the very important part of the minority opinion is not amplified.  Clearly, in the development of our Group Conscience, all members, whether they are on the majority or the minority side, have a responsibility to participate in and speak to their perspectives so that the best possible outcome can be realized.

The minority should not control our fellowship (we’ve seen people vote against their convictions so that they can get a time at the microphone and attempt blatant manipulation), but they should always have a voice that is heard and respected.