[Transcriptions of correspondence between David B, (founder of the Visions cult), Michael K ((ex Chair Chelsea Intergroup) and Tony M (one of David B’s ‘lieutenants’ – all emphases are made by the correspondents.
The letter below is not so much interesting in terms of the matters under discussion – Mike K has in some way failed to maintain the party line and is being rebuked for it – what is more fascinating is the almost continuous emotional manipulation that is sustained unceasingly throughout the whole missive – finally degenerating into petulance and a last bid to try and control the errant sponsee. The elevation of the sponsor to an almost God like status – who must be consulted on all matters (including apparently pre-marital sex which according to David B and all other seers is a BAD thing) is evident as well as the underlying message that to fail to do so will end in tears. A psychiatrist would have a field day with this one – so much material to work with! Herein lie significant clues to the cult’s ethos]
The letter below is not so much interesting in terms of the matters under discussion – Mike K has in some way failed to maintain the party line and is being rebuked for it – what is more fascinating is the almost continuous emotional manipulation that is sustained unceasingly throughout the whole missive – finally degenerating into petulance and a last bid to try and control the errant sponsee. The elevation of the sponsor to an almost God like status – who must be consulted on all matters (including apparently pre-marital sex which according to David B and all other seers is a BAD thing) is evident as well as the underlying message that to fail to do so will end in tears. A psychiatrist would have a field day with this one – so much material to work with! Herein lie significant clues to the cult’s ethos]
1
Address (withheld – anonymity) Tel (withheld – anonymity)
Rec’d ------8th August 1995
My dear Mike,
I should have written this letter months ago as and when the matters arose. Forgive my lack of courage, honesty and sloth please. However I hope this is better late than never.
For me, my sponsor is my spiritual guide and much loved adviser on all matters in my life. Needless to say first and foremost come all things related to our Fellowship. Why is he my sponsor? Because of his long experience and integrity. A member whom I know practices these principles in all his affairs. Most important of all I know he knows better than I do. His service record in A.A is second to none.
Our telephone conversation regarding the situation at the Kensington Friday meeting has been the final shove that I need to share with you honestly. I have been very concerned about you for some considerable time now. Because of my fondness for you I have hoped that you would see your situation without any prompting from me.
As I understand it, what you did for the Kensington Friday is what you did at the last election at the ‘Vision’ meeting. You got some of the facts from some ‘new’ members, jumped to a conclusion and then pronounced! Your interjection at the Vision meeting, in as many words accused me and the other old timers of some sort of slight of hand whereby we were not adhering to the guidelines and Traditions. Tom R and I, and others including Tony M set up the Vision meeting when you were still deciding whether you were an alcoholic or not. The procedures with a steering committee and format have never been changed. So at that ‘Vision’ meeting in May you in fact challenged the integrity of both your sponsors, and other members with much longer sobriety than yourself.
Mike, if you think that there is little difference between asking committee members to stand down and a vote of no confidence then you amaze me. Mike it was you and your sponsees and the very new ignorant members who in fact failed in following the procedures suggested in Tradition 2. Surely you recall Bill talking about the necessity of having an informed group conscience. Not an ignorant one. Religions talk about this as you know. “Be quick to see where religious are right”. Tom and I saw eye to eye on most things but we were unanimous about the Steps and Traditions and Concepts.
You have mentioned to me some time ago that you needed ‘a good Step meeting’. You have never really had a home group. Why do you keep doing geographicals with your meetings? You tell me that you do not get anything out of such and such a meeting. If we go to a meeting to get there is something sadly wrong with our sobriety. We are told time and time again in different words that it is by giving that we receive or get. Where in the big book does it suggest that we go to meetings? Where in Tradition 5 does it say we go to meetings to get. This coupled with your action over the Friday and Visions meeting leads me to believe that the Traditions are very much as MIKE K(….) SEES THEM! Mike, we take the Traditions as a whole. We don’t just take the bits which we happen to like.
As you have never asked me, as far as I can recall, for the benefit of my experience on the Steps, the Traditions or the Twelve Concepts or for that matter Intergroup which covers a period of twenty two years almost to the day starting as Prison rep. So would I be right in thinking that you never asked Tom either. Your attitude certainly suggests this in certain areas
As you now all you have really shared with me is the misconduct of members of your family. One could say, when they refuse to do your will. I have suggested a whole hearted approach to F.A. and/or Alanon. This you have refused to do.
You have told me many times how much you dislike ‘politics’ in A. A. However when I asked you to explain you have so far been unable to explain clearly what you mean. Is it sanity to dislike or resent something so strongly but not to really know what it is? I will share my experience on ‘Politics’ as Mike see it. It is members talking about things we know are not the real issues, members spending time on things which we know are low on the priority list. Just as we have not needed to check things out with our sponsor or any old timer WE KNOW WHAT IS BEST AND WE DON’T WANT ANYONE TO DISAGREE – IT IS THEY WHO ARE THE TROUBLE MAKERS. Get the message Mike? You are as good an AA politician as the rest of us. Do you remember, “You learn a lot about the accuser but little about the accused”. At School we used to say it takes one to tell one!
From what your sponsees seem to believe it would appear that that you consider that premarital sex is in order. Some would call it irresponsible sex. Which of the truly great worlds religions advocate this? I looked very hard for this when I first came into recovery. Which truly great spiritual teacher, holy man ghuru has advocated this? In my experience they ALL say that pre-marital or irresponsible sex inhibits spiritual growth. We cannot be INNOCENT witnesses.
Finally, not only did you not bother to share with me that you were dating Susan, You just told me you were getting married. I was not even invited to the wedding and with no explanation! The reception, yes. But not the important part. If I were to do this with my sponsor not only would it indicate a poor opinion of him, it would be just plain RUDE.
To be honest Mike I have never been your sponsor in the A.A meaning of the word. I have been dishonest in this respect just as you have. I have been a useful trustworthy (I hope) shoulder to cry on. “The common characteristic of every alcoholic is defiance, he will brook no control from man or God. He will fight to the end to preserve that position”.
In conclusion, unless there is a radical change in your attitude and an A.A. sponsorship relationship is established our non sponsorship situation will have to end. If on reflection you would like me to be a proper A.A sponsor I would insist that we go through the Traditions properly the A.A. way. Also that you would make it clear to your sponsees that pre-marital sex inhibits spiritual growth – this is of course if you have not already done so (which I sincerely hope you have).
If you decide that I am not the right sponsor for you needless to say I wish you all the luck in the world and trust that we shall remain good friends (inspite of your trouble with Constable) and glass pyramids.
But please Mike don’t tell him, your new sponsor, either directly or indirectly that you are a more zealous custodian of the Traditions and Guidelines that he is. Most people would construe this as downright impertinence.
Yours in the fellowship of the Spirit
David B. Please forgive
my typing
Original below
[Mike K having failed to take the hint is now openly encouraged by David B to do the honourable thing and fall upon his sword - letter sent a week after previous one]
2
Michael,
From a number of different sources over the past couple of weeks I have been deeply saddened to learn of your quite outrageous and dishonest accusation of sabotage at the last Chelsea Intergroup meeting. Just who do you think you are? That does not sound to me the outpourings of 'a trusted servant'. For those who came and thanked you afterwards, I do not know for whom I should feel the most sorry, them or you. It has to be because of your ten years and your public abuse of your position as Chairman. Just what do you think Tom R(....) would have thought of such unsober behaviour? Can you imagine him of making such a disgraceful an accusation?
If there is a saboteur anywhere it has to be you, Mike. And your apparent paranoia? All you told me about the Intergroup is that you nearly lost your temper. Once again, as over the years you have been economical with the truth when sharing with me.
It would appear that my concern regarding you and our Twelve Traditions referred to in my previous letter was well founded. Your accusation that some GSRs were trying to sabotage the Meeting was made either in complete ignorance of our First Tradition or flagrant defiance.
I sincerely trust that now at least you will behave like a gentleman and resign the Chairmanship. I do hope that you have the honesty to see that this is the only way in which you can really make amends. As you know this is what Tom would have advised I feel sure. He was always so kind and loving and was always the gentleman.
So in fact I overheard the truth in the lavatory in PLYMOUTH. Not from you! Other members of Intergroup tell me that your cowardly accusation was aimed at my nephew among others. Thanks Mike, great to have a friend like you. Your sponsees tell me that the reason why you do not come to the Vision meeting is because we tell lies. Thanks once again Mike. Please re-read Traditions 1 & 4. Please also do not try and interfere again with the workings of our steering committee, now of some twelve years standing.
Regarding my nephew whom you publicly abused, how would you react if I had gone around giving my views on members of your family at AA meetings. So Michael I expect you to be man enough to make a public apology to him and the others whom you slandered.
Yours with sadness and great disappointment
David B
[Mike K still failing to respond to this personal invitation to do the honourable thing is now approached from a different angle. David B. acolyte Tony M. tries the structure/service tack - a frequent follow up tactic used by the Visions cult]
3
Tony M
(address and phone number - anonymity)
Michael K
(address - anonymity)
14th August 1995
Dear Mike,
With regard to our last intergroup meeting. It was outrageous that you accused Dominic and myself of 'sabotaging' the meeting. Just consider for a moment how perverse that accusation is. When a chairman has lost control of himself and the meeting - and it is the chairman's primary function to control the meeting - to the point where he abuses its members it is time for him to reconsider his position. I remind you that at that meeting were members whom I have known for many years and for you, as Chairman of Intergroup, to malign us in this manner in front of these friends was a violation of your privileged position as a trusted servant.
Your open hostility towards some members and their ideas made a mockery of Unity and your determination to run Intergroup according to your own views makes a sham of the principle of a group conscience. You have ceased to be impartial and to faciliate full and free discussion of the agenda - you take decisions arbitrarily and present your own opinions and views from the Chair quite freely, even critically commenting on the views of others from that position. The Chair's position is perhaps epitomised in the role of having the casting vote - being the broker between different views and enabling the meeting to move on to other business - but I have noted that you vote quite freely on all issues thus making known your personal views, which disqualifies you from being impartial and having a casting vote.
In your drive to sort out the problems of Chelsea Intergroup, as you perceive them, you have introduced the tyranny of the self-appointed arbiter of what is best for Intergroup. Benign dictatorship is just as great a danger to our fellowship as an autocratic one. When the Chair foists his own will on the meeting, however palatably presented, we all lose; he becomes the enemy of a free group conscience. The means are the end. For a fellowship that depends for its very existence on adhering to the principles of our programme and Traditions it is imperative that we follow them assiduously, for we are lost if we do not. Above all else, a chairman of Intergroup should promote our Traditions, but at our last two meetings you paid lip service only to Traditions 1 & 2.
Recently, to help us run our meetings in a proper manner, Chelsea Intergroup decided to adhere to Robert's Rules, as does the Fellowship for its World Service conferences, and I suggest that you ask the Intergroup secretary to furnish you with a copy of them from previous minutes, or obtain a copy direct from the World Service Office.
I trust that you will take the necessary action to ensure that our Intergroup meetings are run in accordance with our Traditions.
Yours in Fellowship
Tony M
THE END
[Don't you just love a guy with no sense of irony]
