Tradition Two reads: "For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority -- a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience. Our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern."

First, a little trivia.

Just prior to the AA's adoption of the Traditions at the 1950 International AA Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, there was only what's now known as the "Long Form" of the Traditions. An AA member, who was also a New York writer and editor, went to Bill W. and suggested they be shortened because (paraphrasing here) "AAs need small, bite-sized chunks of information or they won't pay any attention to what you're giving them." Bill agreed and the "Short Form" -- the version you hear at meetings and see hanging on meeting room walls -- was developed and subsequently adopted by the Fellowship at the 1950 convention.

Eleven of the 12 Traditions are shorter than in the Long Form, most of them significantly shorter. Only one, Tradition 2, became longer. The last sentence, "Our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern," was pulled over from Tradition 9 of the Long Form.

Also, in meetings and around campus, we often hear "sayings" that we recognize as being from AA writings, somewhere. In this chapter in the "12&12," as the book is often called, are several well-known tidbits, such as:

" ... sometimes the good is the enemy of the best. ..."

This is also the chapter where you can find the description and difference between an AA "elder statesman" and a "bleeding deacon":

"The elder statesman is the one who sees the wisdom of the group's decision, who holds no resentment over his reduced status, whose judgment, fortified by considerable experience, is sound, and who is willing to sit quietly on the sidelines patiently awaiting developments. The bleeding deacon is one who is just as surely convinced that the group cannot get along without him, who constantly connives for reelection to office, and who continues to be consumed with self-pity."

Within the last sentence in Tradition 2, you'll see the source of one of the most misquoted statements in meetings, though not as often heard as "Our stories disclose in a general way what IT was like, what happened, and what IT is like now." (The Big Book doesn't say that; it reads, " ... what WE were like, what happened, and what WE are like now.") But back to Tradition 2. It's not uncommon to hear someone say, "There are no leaders in AA," in spite of the fact that the Tradition makes clear that there are leaders in AA. (In AA, all of our trusted servants, or service workers if you prefer, are "leaders," including and perhaps especially the coffee person, set-up person, and so on. For more information on leadership in AA, see the essay in Concept IX, "Twelve Concepts for World Service.")

Part of the point to mentioning the above is how important it is to actually read our literature -- and to not solely rely on what is heard in meetings. (I once heard a guy with 40 years of sobriety say out loud in a meeting that the Steps could cure AIDS. How stupid, and potentially deadly, is that?)

Tradition 2, as the other 11, was born from experience. There's an experiential example in the 12&12, which I'm not going to repeat here because I don't want to be too wordy, and there's another point I want to make about the group conscience. Let's leave this angle with ... Many of the topics and discussions in business meetings are topics and situations that have arisen before, some of them or perhaps most of them many times dating back to our very beginnings as a society. (Another reason for reading our literature.)

To the meat of the thing ... the group conscience.

While the words are simple, the concept is often misunderstood. Thus, in numerous places in our literature you'll find "group conscience" preceded by the word "informed" -- as in "informed group conscience." That word -- "informed" -- wasn't put there to suggest there are ill-informed or non-informed group consciences. There are no such things. "informed group conscience" is synonymous with "group conscience." The extra word is a reminder that the process may take some time to complete.

How often do we speed up or cut short discussions because participants are used to yes-or-no votes and want to quickly dispose of the matter before them? How many understand that a group conscience is not simply a yes-or-no vote? It's a process during which all sides are heard, all available information presented. And, during that process, when it's working properly, we are to go to great lengths to listen to those who may be in the minority, or who may be angry or resentful or "not getting the point," or whom everyone else in the room may know beyond any doubt to be dead wrong.

For AA as a whole, the terminology changes a bit; but the concept and the general process is the same. For AA as a whole, we don't refer to the "group" conscience. Instead, it's called our "collective conscience" (see our literature on "General Service" for more info). Groups, committees, and AA as a whole all have consciences. All AA entities are spiritual in nature, relying on a loving God (of our various understandings) to help the alcoholic who still suffers, rather than on powerful, convincing speakers or a strong-willed majority or simple yes-or-no votes.

In addition to those who would hurry things along and get them over with in group business meetings, there are those who flee at the slightest sign of disagreement or passion, or those important folks whose time is "too valuable" to be bothered. They are the ones you hear in meetings the next day, or a week or a year later, saying things such as "Oh! I don't go to those business meetings. They're all politics and bickering."

Proof that this group-conscience thing works -- and works well -- can be found in our history. In our groups, we are people who "normally would not mix." Consider AA as a whole! Yet, rarely do we see an AA-wide controversy. That's because a sufficient number of people, who either have or are willing to learn a little patience, stay in the room, stick it out, see the process through, each in turn sharing their opinions, ideas, and information, until that "informed" group conscience is discovered.

In my opinion, the primary reason groups fall apart is because they either do not understand, or do not listen to, this beautiful thing we have in AA -- the group conscience.

I love this AA stuff.