Tradition 3
Short form
The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.
Long form
Our membership ought to include all who suffer from alcoholism. Hence we may refuse none who wish to recover. Nor ought A.A. membership ever depend on money or conformity. Any two or three alcoholics gathered together for sobriety may call themselves an A.A. group, provided that, as a group, they have no other affiliation.
Excerpt from the Twelve Steps & Twelve Traditions
This Tradition is packed with meaning. For A.A. is really saying to every serious drinker, “You are an A.A. member if you say so. You can declare yourself in; nobody can keep you out. No matter who you are, no matter how low you've gone, no matter how grave your emotional complications — even your crimes — we still can't deny you A.A. We don't want to keep you out. We aren't a bit afraid you'll harm us, never mind how twisted or violent you may be. We just want to be sure that you get the same great chance for sobriety that we've had. So you're an A.A. member the minute you declare yourself.”
To establish this principle of membership took years of harrowing experience. In our early time, nothing seemed so fragile, so easily breakable as an A.A. group. Hardly an alcoholic we approached paid any attention; most of those who did join us were like flickering candles in a windstorm. Time after time, their uncertain flames blew out and couldn't be relighted. Our unspoken, constant thought was “Which of us may be the next?”
A member gives us a vivid glimpse of those days. “At one time,” he says, “every A.A. group had many membership rules. Everybody was scared witless that something or somebody would capsize the boat and dump us all back into the drink. Our Foundation office* asked each group to send in its list of 'protective' regulations. The total list was a mile long. If all those rules had been in effect everywhere, nobody could have possibly joined A.A. at all, so great was the sum of our anxiety and fear.
“We were resolved to admit nobody to A.A.. but that hypothetical class of people we termed 'pure alcoholics.' Except for their guzzling, and the unfortunate results thereof, they could have no other complications. So beggars, tramps, asylum inmates, prisoners, queers, plain crackpots, and fallen women were definitely out. Yes sir, we'd cater only to pure and respectable alcoholics! Any others would surely destroy us. Besides, if we took in those odd ones, what would decent people say about us? We built a fine mesh fence right around A.A.
“Maybe this sounds comical now. Maybe you think we oldtimers were pretty intolerant. But I can tell you there was nothing funny about the situation then. We were grim because we felt our lives and homes were threatened, and that was no laughing matter. Intolerant, you say? Well, we were frightened. Naturally, we began to act like most everybody does when afraid. After all, isn't fear the true basis of intolerance? Yes, we were intolerant.”
How could we then guess that all those fears were to prove groundless? How could we know that thousands of these sometimes frightening people were to make astonishing recoveries and become our greatest workers and intimate friends? Was it credible that A.A. was to have a divorce rate far lower than average? Could we then foresee that troublesome people were to become our principal teachers of patience and tolerance? Could any then imagine a society which would include every conceivable kind of character, and cut across every barrier of race, creed, politics, and language with ease?
Why did A.A. finally drop all its membership regulations? Why did we leave it to each newcomer to decide himself whether he was an alcoholic and whether he should join us? Why did we dare to say, contrary to the experience of society and government everywhere, that we would neither punish nor deprive any A.A. of membership, that we must never compel anyone to pay anything, believe anything, or conform to anything?
The answer, now seen in Tradition Three, was simplicity itself. At last experience taught us that to take away any alcoholic's full chance was sometimes to pronounce his death sentence, and often to condemn him to endless misery. Who dared to be judge, jury, and executioner of his own sick brother?
As group after group saw these possibilities, they finally abandoned all membership regulations. One dramatic experience after another clinched this determination until it became our universal tradition. Here are two examples:
On the A.A. calendar it was Year Two. In that time nothing could be seen but two struggling, nameless groups of alcoholics trying to hold their faces up to the light.
A newcomer appeared at one of these groups, knocked on the door and asked to be let in. He talked frankly with that group's oldest member. He soon proved that his was a desperate case, and that above all he wanted to get well. “But,” he asked, “will you let me join your group? Since I am the victim of another addiction even worse stigmatized than alcoholism, you may not want me among you. Or will you?”
There was the dilemma. What should the group do? The oldest member summoned two others, and in confidence laid the explosive facts in their laps. Said he, “Well, what about it? If we turn this man away, he'll soon die. If we allow him in, only God knows what trouble he'll brew. What shall the answer be— yes or no?”
At first the elders could look only at the objections. “We deal,” they said, “with alcoholics only. Shouldn't we sacrifice this one for the sake of the many?” So went the discussion while the newcomer's fate hung in the balance. Then one of the three spoke in a very different voice. “What we are really afraid of,” he said, “is our reputation. We are much more afraid of what people might say than the trouble this strange alcoholic might bring. As we've been talking, five short words have been running through my mind. Something keeps repeating to me, 'What would the Master do?'” Not another word was said. What more indeed could be said?
Overjoyed, the newcomer plunged into Twelfth Step work. Tirelessly he laid A.A.'s message before scores of people. Since this was a very early group, those scores have since multiplied themselves into thousands. Never did he trouble anyone with his other difficulty. A.A. had taken its first step in the formation of Tradition Three.
Not long after the man with the double stigma knocked for admission, A.A.'s other group received into its membership a salesman we shall call Ed. A power driver, this one, and brash as any salesman could possibly be. He had at least an idea a minute on how to improve A.A. These ideas he sold to fellow members with the same burning enthusiasm with which he distributed automobile polish. But he had one idea that wasn't so salable. Ed was an atheist. His pet obsession was that A.A. could get along better without its “God nonsense.” He browbeat everybody, and everybody expected that he'd soon get drunk— for at the time, you see, A.A. was on the pious side. There must be a heavy penalty, it was thought, for blasphemy. Distressingly enough, Ed proceeded to stay sober.
At length the time came for him to speak in a meeting. We shivered, for we knew what was coming. He paid a fine tribute to the Fellowship; he told how his family had been reunited; he extolled the virtue of honesty; he recalled the joys of Twelfth Step work; and then he lowered the boom. Cried Ed, “I can't stand this God stuff! It's a lot of malarkey for weak folks. This group doesn't need it, and I won't have it! To hell with it!”
A great wave of outraged resentment engulfed the meeting, sweeping every member to a single resolve: “Out he goes!”
The elders led Ed aside. They said firmly, “You can't talk like this around here. You'll have to quit it or get out.” With great sarcasm Ed came back at them. “Now do tell! Is that so?” He reached over to a bookshelf and took up a sheaf of papers. On top of them lay the foreword to the book “Alcoholics Anonymous” then under preparation. He read aloud, “The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.” Relentlessly, Ed went on, “When you guys wrote that sentence, did you mean it, or didn't you?”
Dismayed, the elders looked at one another, for they knew he had them cold. So Ed stayed.
Ed not only stayed, he stayed sober — month after month. The longer he kept dry, the louder he talked — against God. The group was in anguish so deep that all fraternal charity had vanished. “When, oh when,” groaned members to one another, “will that guy get drunk?”
Quite a while later, Ed got a sales job which took him out of town. At the end of a few days, the news came in. He'd sent a telegram for money, and everybody knew what that meant! Then he got on the phone. In those days, we'd go anywhere on a Twelfth Step job, no matter how unpromising. But this time nobody stirred. “Leave him alone! Let him try it by himself for once; maybe he'll learn a lesson!”
About two weeks later, Ed stole by night into an A.A. member's house and, unknown to the family, went to bed. Daylight found the master of the house and another friend drinking their morning coffee. A noise was heard on the stairs. To their consternation, Ed appeared. A quizzical smile on his lips, he said, “Have you fellows had your morning meditation?” They quickly sensed that he was quite in earnest. In fragments, his story came out.
In a neighboring state, Ed had holed up in a cheap hotel. After all his pleas for help had been rebuffed, these words rang in his fevered mind: “They have deserted me. I have been deserted by my own kind. This is the end . . . nothing is left.” As he tossed on his bed, his hand brushed the bureau near by, touching a book. Opening the book, he read. It was a Gideon Bible. Ed never confided any more of what he saw and felt in that hotel room. It was the year 1938. He hasn't had a drink since.
Nowadays, when oldtimers who know Ed foregather, they exclaim, “What if we had actually succeeded in throwing Ed out for blasphemy? What would have happened to him and all the others he later helped?”
So the hand of Providence early gave us a sign that any alcoholic is a member of our Society when he says so.
*In 1954, the name of the Alcoholic Foundation, Inc., was changed to the General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous, Inc., and the Foundation office is now the General Service Office.
Excerpt from The Twelve Traditions Illustrated
Please click the link below to open the pamphlet The Twelve Traditions Illustrated and read Tradition Three or read the image below.
Isn't every organization in the world entitled to have rules for membership? Why did AA decide to forgo this privilege, to be "inclusive...never exclusive"? That's easy. Early members tried it the other way, and it just didn't work. As the Fellowship was nearing its ten-year mark, the office that served as headquarters "asked the groups to list their membership rules and send them in." Bill W. recalled. "If all of these edicts had been in force everywhere at once, it would have been practically impossible for any alcoholic to have ever joined AA. About nine-tenths of our oldest and best members could never have got by!" So the rule books went out the window and were replaced by one uncomplicated sentence: Tradition Three.
But, somebody may ask, isn't this Tradition itself a rule? It does state one requirement for membership. Let's read it again, and ask another question: Who determines whether or not newcomers qualify, whether they do want to stop drinking? Obviously, nobody except the newcomers themselves; everybody else simply has to take their word for it. In fact, they don't even have to say it aloud. And that's fortunate for many of us who arrived at AA with only a half-hearted desire to stay sober. We are alive because the AA road stayed open to us.
The problem faced by this Tradition isn't just past AA history. It keeps coming up–for instance, when a group debates whether to exclude alcoholics who have problems other than alcohol or have differing lifestyles. The Tradition mentions no such additional requirements, no demand that prospective members must not have a history of drug abuse, a certain lifestyle, or an institutional background. All alcoholics are welcome.
What about the group that seems to impose extra requirements beyond "a desire to stop drinking"? This might be a "special interest" group or collection of groups in which, for example, each member must be a physician–or a young person, a man, a woman, a priest, or a law-enforcement officer. By their own account, those attending special interest groups consider themselves AA members first. They attend general-membership meetings as well as those that fill their other individual needs, and they remain devoted to AA's primary purpose.
These "special interest" groups offer only one instance of the diverse and inclusive membership within our Fellowship. Our Traditions allow unparalleled freedom, not only to every AA member, but to every AA group.
Tradition Three Discussion Questions
In my mind, do I judge the sincerity of some new AA members?
Is there some kind of alcoholic whom I privately do not want in my AA group?
Do I show prejudice against those who have other problems?
Do I let language, religion, race, gender, sexuality, education, age, fear or other such things interfere with my carrying the message?
Am I over impressed by a celebrity? By a doctor, a clergyman or an ex-prisoner? Or can I just treat this new member simply and naturally as one more sick human?
Thoughts on Tradition Three
This tradition has an old pedigree and can be seen in the foreword to the first edition of the 'Big Book', Alcoholics Anonymous.
There are two stories that are frequently intermingled in AA lore. The first, and perhaps the most pertinent as it is mentioned in both the The Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions but also Doctor Bob and the Good Oldtimers, is the story of the man with another addiction even worse stigmatised than alcoholism'. The group was frightened, after all these were the early days of AA and an AA group was a very precious and rare thing. So they approached Doctor Bob to ask for guidance. His answer was simple; what would the Master do?
The second story can be found in Pass It On and is of a guy who turned up at the 41st street clubhouse in New York who was a black, ex-con with bleach-blonde hair wearing women's make up and admitted to being a 'dope fiend'. And to think so many of us had fears of being rejected when we finally found our way to AA! The group was deeply perturbed by this guy but Bill managed to persuade them that as he was a drunk, he was welcome.
When Bill was writing the Twelve Traditions he asked the groups to send in their lists of rules. A large number of them were about who could attend. This tradition clears them up and opens us up. Put simply, you are a member when you say you are and AA can't keep you out. There are plenty of members of AA I've met who don't believe in God, who refuse to do the steps then just as stubbornly refuse to get drunk again, many who think that the whole program is nonsense. We cannot and should not stop them from attending meetings and calling themselves members.
It's also a challenge to us as individuals within our groups of who we make welcome at our meetings. I admit to being more inclined to talk to man of roughly my age who I have things in common with than a seventy year old woman who carries all her possession in one bag and smells! I have to be aware of that. It's not alcoholic, it's human. But carrying the message does not and should not depend on money or conformity, after all, I am responsible.
The second part of tradition three that is sadly omitted from the short form. It gives guidance on what can constitute an AA group. It's incredibly simple. Any two or more gathered together for sobriety MAY call themselves an AA group.
And what about affiliation? The answer to this actually lies in the tradition four essay. It's because of this tradition that we don't have Labour groups, Conservative groups, Christian or Muslim groups. These are things which have the potential to divide us and perhaps prevent a person from joining their local group. It is worth considering the value in groups who currently either discriminate by gender, sexuality or profession. Are these truly unifying? It's a difficult question to answer and it's worth noting that Bill never had a problem with them. He called them 'special interest groups'.