From THE CHRISTIAN CENTURY,
February 22, 1950
How many churchmen noticed an inconspicuous item in the press
the other day which reported that Alcoholic Anonymous of New
York had turned down a bequest? A "grateful woman
member," according to the story in the New York Times, had
bequeathed the organization $10,000. A spokesman for A.A.,
in explaining why it refused the money, said that "members
have discovered they cannot mix money and its management with
the spiritual nature of the work they are trying to do."
The newspaper added that "acquisition of property or
money other than that raised by passing the hat at their own
meetings" is feared by A.A. because it "tends to
divert members from their primary task of helping
drunkards."
This will probably sound quixotic to many a hard-pressed parson
or finance committee chairman. Yet there is something
involved in this A.A. decision which churches and church
organizations can wisely ponder. Endowments always look
good at the start, but the late Julius Rosenwald knew their
stultifying long-range effects when he provided that his great
Rosenwald Fund must be liquidated, principal and income, in less
than a generation. Nothing can take the crusading zeal out
of a congregation or an organization faster than knowing that
all the bills have been paid in advance and will continue to be
paid whether or not anyone lifts a finger. Endowments can
do as much damage to the vitality of churches and reform bodies
as doting parents generally do the sons and daughters of the
rich.
Alcoholics Anonymous undoubtedly could have made good use of
that $10,000. But we have far more confidence in its
future now that it has showed wisdom enough to turn it down.
Back to AA History
|