“4. Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or AA as a whole.” (Tradition IV)
A while ago, I went to a meeting a long way away where the speaker and the first few sharers, all of whom had long relapse histories, ranted unhappily or angrily. This took up the first three-quarters of the meeting. No one mentioned anything to do with alcoholism or the solution.
Was this a terrible meeting? Had I made a mistake?
By the time the meeting was over, a couple of members with something to offer had shared, a visitor had shared, and a couple of good things had been said. The meeting was in a clubhouse, and there were lots of pictures on the walls of people who had died sober. There was a lot of Mexican food for people, and people had served themselves before the meeting; this appeared to be a weekly fixture. There were maybe fifty people in the room, in various stages of disintegration.
What this meeting had was cohesion, loyalty, and reliance, in a framework created by some of the older, placid members. It appeared to be a place where people who are done drinking but are not ready for the programme as we might understand it. They could hang out, be with other people, get things off their chests, and maybe stay sober another day. Most importantly, no one reacted to any of the rants, the outbursts, the tearful litanies. No one tried to fix, change, or control the sharers. They simply said ‘thank you’. I suspect this has great value.
There’s more than one type of group, and, if a group is surviving, there’s a reason, and the group is fulfilling a role in God’s plan.