initial commit of ebook 29899HEADmain

1 files changed, 1422 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/29899.txt b/29899.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..089a7ec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/29899.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1422 @@
+Project Gutenberg's Marriage Enrichment Retreats, by David Mace and Vera Mace
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: Marriage Enrichment Retreats
+       Story of a Quaker Project
+
+Author: David Mace
+        Vera Mace
+
+Release Date: September 3, 2009 [EBook #29899]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT RETREATS ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Mark C. Orton, Tamise Totterdell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Marriage Enrichment Retreats
+
+Story of a Quaker Project
+
+By
+
+David and Vera Mace
+
+Friends General Conference
+1520 Race Street
+Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102
+
+
+
+
+About the Maces
+
+
+David and Vera Mace have spent almost forty years making a vital
+relationship of their own marriage, and, because of their inherent sense
+of purpose, consequently have enriched the lives and marriages of
+innumerable persons in some sixty countries around the world.
+
+David Mace's first degree was in science from the University of London.
+Earlier family influence led him on to Cambridge University, a degree in
+theology, and work in a mission church in the slums of London. Vera,
+already in youth work, joined him after their marriage in the work of
+the mission church. From that point on theirs was a partnership which
+focused on counselling persons in trouble. Later, a PhD. in sociology
+for David and a Masters degree with a thesis on Christian marriage for
+Vera, moved them into full time marriage guidance work. (Two children, a
+war causing forced separation for a time, and a pacifist stand by David
+which also made life more difficult, only strengthened them in their
+life's purpose.) Before leaving Britain permanently in 1949, they had
+set up more than one hundred marriage guidance centers and achieved
+their goal of recognition for the Marriage Guidance Council.
+
+It would be impossible to enumerate specifically here all the activities
+of teaching, published writing, training seminars and travels the Maces
+have shared. Theirs has been a life of richly varied experiences and
+shared responsibilities.
+
+From 1960-67 the Maces served as joint Executive Directors of the
+American Association of Marriage Counsellors. At present they are
+members of Summit Friends Meeting in New Jersey, currently living in
+Winston-Salem, North Carolina, where David Mace is Professor of Family
+Sociology at the Behavioral Sciences Center, Bowman Gray School of
+Medicine. David Mace delivered the 1968 Rufus Jones Lecture, _Marriage
+As Vocation_. This pamphlet and the project it presents is an outgrowth
+of that experience.
+
+
+
+
+"How important is it that Quakers should have good marriages, and what
+should Friends General Conference be doing about it?" This question was
+asked at a gathering of ten married couples, all of them Friends,
+representing both the U.S. and Canada.
+
+What brought these couples together was the common bond that all had
+been leading marriage enrichment retreats at which six to eight
+couples, all with stable marriages, spent an intensive weekend sharing
+marital growth around the theme "communications-in-depth about
+relationship-in-depth."
+
+The project of which they had been a part dates back to the 1968 Rufus
+Jones Lecture, _Marriage as Vocation_.[A] The impact of the Lecture and
+the weekend following resulted in the Religious Education Committee of
+Friends General Conference sponsoring a project to train couples
+selected by Yearly Meetings to lead marriage enrichment programs in
+their own regions. The first group was trained in 1969, the second in
+1971, and, as the majority of them met again the consensus grew that
+this project had been sufficiently tested to provide the basis for a
+more extensive movement within our fellowship.
+
+A number of concerns emerged that can best be expressed as questions:
+
+    Do Friends reaffirm their traditional belief in marriage and
+    the family as the foundation unit of the Meeting?
+
+    Do Friends believe that their mission to spread love and peace
+    in the world begins with the practice of love and peace in
+    their own primary relationships?
+
+    Are our Meetings doing their utmost to make use of modern
+    knowledge and experience in the preparation for marriage of
+    those for whom they accept responsibility?
+
+    Are our Meetings satisfied with what they are doing for the
+    care and support of the marriages of their members, and that
+    divorces that occur could not have been prevented by any means
+    that lay in their power?
+
+    Would Friends in positions of leadership be willing to
+    demonstrate their support for this project by participating in
+    retreats at which they can examine with others the
+    potentialities for growth of their own marriages?
+
+Those who met at Pendle Hill were not in a position to answer any of
+these questions in a definitive way. It is clear that answers would
+vary from one Friend to another and from one Meeting to another. They
+felt, however, that it would be appropriate and timely for these
+questions to be more widely considered. Moreover, their own experiences
+of marital growth, resulting from their sharing with other married
+couples, had been so rich and rewarding that they felt they had "good
+news" to pass on, and were constrained to do so.[B]
+
+
+THE PLAN
+
+Yearly Meetings throughout the United States were invited to select with
+care a married couple for a weekend of training at Pendle Hill, the
+Quaker study center near Philadelphia.
+
+During the six months following the training each couple would have the
+opportunity to conduct a marriage enrichment retreat arranged by their
+Yearly Meeting. Then all the couples would reassemble at Pendle Hill to
+share their experiences. The project would be evaluated, and further
+action would depend on whatever judgment was reached.
+
+We two were asked to lead the two training weekends. Our decision was to
+begin with an actual retreat for the group of couples since this
+experience would, in our judgment, provide the best training we could
+give them.
+
+
+PREMISES FROM EARLIER EXPERIENCES
+
+In 1962 Joe and Edith Platt, a Quaker couple who helped run a retreat
+center called Kirkridge, invited us to conduct a weekend for married
+couples. We were at that time joint Executive Directors of the American
+Association of Marriage Counselors, so this was a challenge we could
+hardly evade. Although we had been involved in many lectures and
+conferences about marriage, and plenty of marriage counseling, a retreat
+for married couples was a new venture. However, we accepted the
+invitation, conducted the retreat to the best of our ability, and
+learned a great deal in the process. There is no need at this point to
+go into detail about the procedures we followed for we improved on them
+considerably later as we gained further experience.
+
+The first Kirkridge retreat was successful enough to encourage the
+Platts to ask us to come again and again. We then began to receive other
+requests as it became known that we were available for this kind of
+leadership, most of them being under religious auspices. The retreats
+generally began on Friday evening and ended with Sunday lunch. One, for
+Methodist ministers and their wives, lasted five days, and proved to be
+the inauguration of a nation-wide program now being run by the United
+Methodist Church under the title "marriage communication labs."
+
+These experiences brought us into close touch with many "normal" married
+couples. Our practice was to insist that the retreats were _not_ for
+couples with problems, but for those who considered they had
+satisfactory marriages and wanted to explore their potential for further
+growth. As counselors, we had previously dealt only with marriages in
+trouble. Now we found that many of these "normal" couples were settling
+for relationships that were far short of their inherent potential. Some
+exhibited the same self-defeating interaction patterns which we were
+accustomed to finding in couples with "problems"--but either they had
+accepted these poor patterns as inevitable, or the conflicts they caused
+had not yet reached crisis proportions.
+
+Matching our observation of these couples with some of the research
+findings on marital interaction, we arrived at four important
+conclusions:
+
+1. Only a small proportion of marriages came anywhere near to realizing
+their full potential. Lederer and Jackson[C] suggest that the proportion
+of "stable-satisfactory" marriages in our culture does not exceed 5-10
+percent.
+
+2. Most married couples desire, and hope for, the achievement we have
+called "relationship-in-depth." Early in their married life, however,
+they find their growth together blocked by interpersonal conflicts which
+they either cannot understand or are not prepared to make the effort to
+resolve. They settle for a series of compromises, resulting in a
+superficial relationship.
+
+3. As time passes, the couple either accepts this unsatisfactory
+situation, or it becomes progressively intolerable. They are usually so
+"locked into" their self-defeating interaction pattern that they are
+quite unable to change it by their own unaided efforts. Some seek
+marriage counseling, but often too late for it to be effective.
+
+4. This tragedy of undeveloped potential could be avoided in many
+instances if married couples had a clearer concept of the task of
+marriage and did not have to struggle in almost total isolation from
+other couples going through the same experiences. The potential of
+married couples for giving each other mutual help and support is very
+great; but it is unable to function because of an unrecognized taboo in
+our culture.
+
+This taboo, hitherto unrecognized as such, prevents married couples from
+sharing their intramarital experiences with other couples. In many
+settings married couples form friendships with each other, enjoy social
+contacts, even work together on projects; but there is always a tacit
+understanding that they do not reveal to each other, further than is
+unavoidable, what is going on in their husband-wife relationships.
+Complex mechanisms for evasion and mutual defense exist. Some of these
+are familiar, strong hostility in one partner when the other appears to
+be revealing too much; making jokes to relieve tension when some inner
+secret of the marriage accidently breaks to the surface; silence or
+withdrawal when "outsiders" appear to be probing too deeply. These
+defense systems work so well that it is not unusual when a couple begins
+divorce proceedings for others in their circle of acquaintance to
+express astonishment in such terms as "We are amazed! We had no idea
+that they were having trouble!"
+
+We could speculate about the reasons for this taboo: a protection
+against public humiliation, since we all want others to feel that we can
+manage competently such a basic undertaking as marriage; a safeguard
+against exploitation, since a discontented marriage partner offers fair
+game to a predatory third person; a link with our sexual taboos, since
+difficulties in marital adjustment often have a sexual component, and
+any suggestion of sexual incompetence is deeply wounding to our pride.
+It could reflect the traditional tendency to regard the family as a
+closed "in-group"--an attitude not without advantages for its strength
+and stability.
+
+What we are concerned about, however, is that this taboo is being
+maintained with a strictness that goes far beyond its usefulness in our
+changing society. It is depriving married couples of help and support
+from each other, at a time when marriage has become much more difficult
+and demanding than it was in the past. Indeed, we believe that with the
+emergence of the nuclear family as the norm in our Western culture, the
+individual marriage has been deprived of the supports derived from the
+extended family of the past precisely at a time when our rising
+expectations of highly rewarding interpersonal relationships are
+subjecting it to demands it is often unable to meet. In the larger
+family groupings of the Orient, despite their hierarchical structure, a
+great deal of help and support can become available to the individual
+couple in times of trouble from those with whom they share a common
+corporate life.
+
+It may well be that the new "life styles" being experimented with
+today--mate-swapping, multilateral marriages, and group marriages, for
+example--represent attempts to enable the individual marriage to break
+out of its isolation and to gain better communication, interaction and
+needed support from other marital units.
+
+A striking illustration of this trend toward deep sharing between
+married couples has come to our notice from an unexpected quarter. Two
+married couples from a conservative Christian background decided to meet
+and talk together, with complete detailed frankness, about their sexual
+experiences. A series of such meetings was held, the conversations
+taped, and subsequently published in book form.[D] The couples, after
+careful consideration, decided not to hide behind a cloak of anonymity,
+but to use their real names and disclose their identity.
+
+Confronted with this new trend, we take the view that the taboo against
+the sharing of husband-wife experiences between one married couple and
+other married couples can with impunity be relaxed in appropriate
+situations with benefit to all concerned. Between such couples the
+development of great warmth, empathy, mutual understanding and support,
+can contribute significantly to the enrichment and growth of the
+individual marriages involved. This is essentially what happens in
+marriage enrichment retreats.
+
+
+COMPARISON WITH THERAPY AND ENCOUNTER GROUPS
+
+"How do our marriage enrichment groups differ from group marital therapy
+on the one hand, and from encounter groups on the other?" These
+questions are raised by many people. What are the answers?
+
+Group therapy for married couples is now widely available, and its
+effectiveness has been established. Our marriage enrichment groups
+differ from therapy groups in three important respects.
+
+First, marital therapy is undertaken with couples who have serious
+problems, often because the individuals concerned suffer from
+personality disorders. When marriages are not stable a good deal of
+pathology may emerge in the course of group interaction. Severe
+conflict between husband and wife may have to be permitted to surface
+and be handled openly by the therapist.
+
+The second important difference is that therapy groups generally
+continue meeting, on a weekly or bi-weekly basis, over a long period of
+time--as long as a year in some cases. Moreover, individual couples may
+also undergo counseling (individually, conjointly, or both) in
+association with the group therapy either before being admitted to the
+group or concurrently with the group experience.
+
+The third difference is in the leadership pattern. Therapy groups are
+led by professionally qualified persons--psychiatrists, clinical
+psychologists, social workers, marriage counselors. They play a fairly
+directive role. The leaders are often male and female co-therapists, but
+are seldom husband and wife. The role model aspect of the enrichment
+group, as well as the participatory aspect, are therefore much less
+pronounced and the group is less free to find and follow its own
+direction.
+
+An enrichment group consists of several married couples not in need of
+therapy meeting on an intensive basis but for a limited time period. In
+our opinion such groups need not be led by professional therapists;
+although, other things being equal, that is of course a decided
+advantage. We have come to the conclusion, however, that effective
+leadership can be given by lay couples if they are carefully selected
+and trained.
+
+The encounter group, a general descriptive term, is intended to include
+many variants. We have participated in such groups, studied their
+procedures, and adapted some of these to our marriage enrichment
+retreats. Couples who have been involved in encounter groups adjust
+quickly and easily to the methods we use in marriage enrichment, are
+generally very cooperative, and an asset to our groups.
+
+There are two significant respects in which our marriage enrichment
+retreats differ from encounter groups. First, encounter groups are
+composed of individuals, while our groups are confined to, and led by,
+married couples. This distinction calls for different approaches. There
+is a greater complexity in the leadership, and a greater complexity in
+the group itself. The encounter group is confined to interactions
+between separate individuals and usually these individuals have not
+known each other before joining the group and probably will not continue
+association afterwards. By contrast, we have at least three kinds of
+interaction: between individuals within the group, between couples
+(including the leading couple) within the group, and between husband and
+wife within the marital unit.
+
+This multidimensional aspect of the enrichment group not only makes it
+more complex, but also increases its potential. This is particularly
+true after the experience is over. From our knowledge of encounter
+groups we are aware of the problems encountered by the individual who,
+after experiencing a new and invigorating openness and warmth in
+interaction with others returns home to an atmosphere in which a similar
+quality of relationship cannot be sustained unless there are already
+friends and associates at home who have had the benefit of earlier
+encounter experiences. In the case of our marriage enrichment retreats,
+the experience is not gained by an isolated individual, but by a
+preexisting social unit, so that new levels of openness and warmth which
+the couple have experienced in the group can continue to be maintained
+after their return home. This would suggest that the "casualty rates"
+for couples would not be nearly so high as for individuals. We know of
+no precise study that has investigated this, but our general impressions
+would seem to confirm it.
+
+The second significant difference between encounter and marriage
+enrichment groups raises a somewhat controversial question. Encounter
+groups are more ready to evoke negative interaction between
+participants, while we place major emphasis upon positive interaction.
+
+If our judgment of encounter groups is in this respect inaccurate we are
+open to correction. We have, however, gained the impression from many
+sources that an important technique used in these groups is to provide
+opportunities for the participants to secure cathartic release of their
+pent-up hostilities, including hostilities engendered by, or projected
+upon the group leader or one or more of its members. We recognize that
+many people in our culture are pregnant with suppressed hostility or
+rage, and that the provision of properly controlled opportunities for
+its release may constitute a commendable service; and since the group
+members are generally strangers who will not be personally and socially
+involved later, no entangling complications are likely to follow.
+
+For our married couples, the situation is different. We do not mean that
+they do not have hostile feelings toward each other. They often do, and
+this comes out clearly and unmistakably. We do not mean, either, that
+healthy discharge of these feelings might not be good for them--in our
+therapeutic work with individual couples in conjoint interviews, we make
+full use of such controlled opportunity for cathartic release with
+ensuing interpretation. It is our considered opinion, however, that in
+the particular context of our enrichment retreats, unrestrained
+discharge of hostile feelings should in general not be encouraged.
+
+Our reasons? One, the shortness of the available time might not permit
+the proper resolution of such episodes. Two, a couple who have openly
+discharged rage against each other may well react later with deep
+feelings of humiliation that are not easily assuaged. Three, coping with
+this kind of explosive emotional discharge could be alarming for lay
+leaders not accustomed, as the therapist is, to the expression of deep
+feelings which normally are not displayed in public. Four, other members
+of the group could be similarly disturbed and diverted from full
+participation in the main purpose of the retreat. This complaint has
+actually been made, and we think justly, by participating couples in a
+group where a violent and prolonged emotional episode took place.
+
+We have been criticized for taking this position, but have not been
+persuaded to change our considered opinion. That opinion is reinforced
+by another conclusion, namely, that when genuine positive interaction is
+promoted, negative emotion, even when it is strong and intense, tends to
+dissolve and wither away. Couples have told us how their fierce hate
+melted in the atmosphere of warm and loving support engendered in the
+group, and with the stirring of compassion within them, they began to
+see each other in a new light. We are inclined to the view, after
+hearing such testimonies, that in deploying our therapeutic armament we
+have given short shrift to the power of love not only to cast out fear,
+but also to turn away wrath.
+
+
+LAY LEADERSHIP
+
+Our decision to train lay couples for leadership was not hastily made.
+In fact in the early years during which we were leading retreats we knew
+of no other couples who were doing so. After seven years we felt that we
+knew what we were doing. Although we expected criticism from some of our
+professional colleagues this has not developed to any significant
+degree, and we are now entirely satisfied that we were justified in
+taking such a calculated risk. We know of no case where our lay couples
+have encountered crisis situations which they were unable to handle with
+wisdom and skill.
+
+
+STRUCTURING THE RETREAT
+
+These retreats require a minimum of organization and structure, but that
+minimum must be firmly insisted upon. We strongly favor the residential
+weekend retreat, although we have met with groups of couples for
+separate evening sessions spaced out over four to six weeks. This
+approach was found to be less effective, but decidedly better than
+nothing for couples who cannot get away from their homes.
+
+We would regard five or six couples as the optimum number, but seldom
+have we enjoyed this luxury. Usually we have had to accept our upper
+limit of nine couples, in addition to ourselves, making a total group of
+twenty. Often more couples apply than we can take, and the organizers
+plead with us to accept the maximum number because family crises can
+compel couples to drop out at the last moment. Two couples short at a
+retreat planned for five couples would leave only three. Therefore our
+normal procedure has been to ask for six to eight couples.
+
+Although the selection of the couples has been left to the organizers we
+insist that husband and wife both undertake to come together, which
+means that if one has to drop out, both do so; we insist that they come
+only on condition that they both continuously participate in the entire
+retreat, from beginning to end.
+
+No requirements regarding age, race, vocation, education, or
+socio-economic status are made. There are advantages in having a
+homogeneous group of couples, but there are also advantages in a
+heterogenous group. Our groups have included one engaged couple and one
+honeymooning couple who came straight from their wedding as well as
+couples old enough to be retired. They have included highly qualified
+professionals and blue-collar workers, PhD.s. and high school drop-outs.
+
+Couples coming to our retreats should have what they consider to be
+reasonably good and stable marriages since our purpose is not to provide
+group therapy, but to foster marital growth. The reason for this
+requirement is that we do not believe that group marital therapy can be
+attempted on a short-term basis, and it is not the purpose in these
+retreats. Many couples come to these retreats with a good deal of
+apprehension, and some have told us that they would not have come at all
+had they not been assured that it was definitely not for "problem
+couples." Despite all our efforts, couples with severe marital problems
+do get in occasionally under the wire and we found no way of avoiding
+this.
+
+We are often asked to provide preparatory material for the participants,
+including books to read, but we do not think there is any way to
+"prepare" for this kind of experience; and recommending books to read
+might convey the impression that we are going to engage in intellectual
+discussion, which is not the case.
+
+We ourselves do not "prepare" for the retreats and do not ask the
+couples to do so either. It is an adventure in sharing into which we all
+move together, ready to take it as it comes.[E]
+
+This does not mean, however, that our sessions are totally
+"unstructured." A timetable is worked out by the group, not imposed upon
+it. Obviously it has to be planned in relation to the place and the
+circumstances of our meeting.
+
+
+INTRODUCTION TO THE FRIENDS' EXPERIENCE
+
+In the living room of "Waysmeet," the house at Pendle Hill in which we
+held our first training retreat, there was just room for ten couples to
+sit in a wide circle.
+
+"What we are going to do here," we explained, "is to experience together
+a marriage enrichment retreat. We hope this experience will be
+meaningful to you all personally, quite apart from the fact that you
+will be learning how to conduct a retreat yourselves after you return
+home. We know of no better way to train you than to let you go through
+first what others will later go through under your leadership.
+
+"However, we shall be working together at two levels. At any point we
+can break off and examine together, objectively, what has been happening
+to us subjectively. You can ask us as your leaders any questions you
+wish, about what we are doing, or why we are doing it.
+
+"Our goal is very simple and very clear. As married couples we are here
+to engage together in communication-in-depth about relationship-in-depth.
+Everything we do will be done with the intention of sharing with each
+other the directions in which we want our marriages to grow. How far we
+travel will be decided not by us as leaders, but by you as a group. No
+one will be put under pressure to do anything he does not wish to do,
+or to say anything he does not wish to say.
+
+"Our function as leaders is to be 'participant facilitators.' We are in
+every sense members of the group, and will fully share all the group's
+experiences. We do not wish to be treated as experts or authorities. The
+only way in which we shall exercise our role as leaders is to help the
+group to achieve its goal, or to tell it if we think it is not taking
+the best direction toward that goal. We make no claim to be infallible.
+If at any point you don't agree with us, it is your duty to say so. If
+in any situation we don't know what to do next we shall say so frankly
+and ask you to help us.
+
+"Now we are ready to begin. The first thing we must do is to get to know
+each other as couples. The sooner we get well acquainted, the faster we
+can move toward our goal."
+
+Most of the first evening is devoted to the process of getting to know
+each other. Our favorite method is to ask the couples to volunteer in
+turn to be freely questioned by the group. We usually volunteer first,
+and make it clear that we are prepared to answer the most personal
+questions. We indicate at this point that we would like to be called by
+our first names, and we hope the others will agree to do the same. The
+questions then begin, and when there are no more, we ask another couple
+to volunteer. We prefer not to go round the circle in order, or take
+names alphabetically. Everything is done voluntarily as far as possible,
+to encourage spontaneity.
+
+Time goes quickly as the questions come thick and fast, and it is
+usually necessary to limit the questioning, or to ask for brief answers.
+It should be emphasized that the participants are free at any time to
+ask each other personal questions; this understanding creates a climate
+of openness which emphasizes the goal of communication-in-depth.
+
+
+THE GROUP IN ACTION
+
+Assembled again on Saturday morning, we begin by preparing our "rolling
+agenda," as one of the trainee couples called it, in order to keep a
+record of what the group members want to talk about. The aspects of
+marriage they want to include for discussion before the weekend is over
+gives us clues to the issues that are important to them. The list with
+which one of our trainee couples started their retreat was:
+
+    What is the state of our marriage now? How have things changed
+    as our relationship has grown?
+
+    What are the memorable experiences in our lives that have
+    enriched our marriage?
+
+    What have we found to be the most effective ways of handling
+    conflict?
+
+    What do we feel about a depth relationship between one of us
+    and another person outside the marriage?
+
+    Have we found ways of sharing that have contributed to our
+    spiritual growth?
+
+We ask the group members if they have any "concerns" explaining that if
+members of the group feel unhappy, or anxious, or angry, about anything
+that has happened, they have a duty to share their feelings with us all
+otherwise the fellowship will be broken. Situations have occurred in
+which someone had a concern that another member of the group also had
+and neither was expressing.
+
+As a group cannot function effectively without openness to each other on
+the part of its members, neither can a marriage grow without the same
+kind of openness between its partners. This is what every married couple
+should be doing every day--raising issues that need to be discussed, and
+being honest about disturbed or negative feelings.
+
+There is a sequence of events that is typical of most retreats. Nearly
+always, we begin with general discussion of some aspect of married life.
+At this stage we are testing each other, so we take refuge in
+generalizations. A common theme is the difficulties of raising children.
+We can all commiserate with each other about the problems of the
+generation gap for it is "safer" to talk about parenthood than about
+marriage. If the talk _does_ focus on marriage, such topics as working
+wives or overworked husbands or the sharing of household tasks can be
+discussed without risk.
+
+The group will move at its own pace from the superficial testing stage
+to the deeper sharing. The leaders can facilitate this process, but it
+isn't helpful if they try to hurry it. "Personalizing" the discussion by
+using such questions as "Mary, did you raise that subject because it's
+an issue between you and Tom?" or "I wonder if any couple could give us
+an example from their own experience of what Harold has been talking
+about?" is helpful.
+
+Once a couple have shared some situation in their own relationship, one
+of the leaders can ask "Did any of the rest of you identify with Peg and
+Larry as they were talking?" This will help other couples to share
+rather than discuss, and move the communication to a deeper level. A
+phrase we often use is "making yourself vulnerable"--an act of trust by
+sharing a problem about which the couple feels some embarrassment. The
+group's response to this is invariably warm and supportive with an
+effort to help by sharing similar problems which others have experienced
+or are experiencing. Sometimes a major breakthrough is achieved when the
+_leaders_ are willing to be vulnerable.
+
+This process of deep sharing must not be seen as an orgy of humiliating
+confessions. Not at all. The areas where the growth of a marriage is
+blocked are almost always sensitive ones which we tend to keep hidden
+because they make us feel inadequate or defeated. It may well be that a
+way out is not really difficult to achieve, but as long as we are
+avoiding the whole problem we are not likely to find a solution.
+Bringing the issue out in the open, in the presence of other couples
+eager to help because of similar problems may suddenly break the log-jam
+and move the relationship along the path to enrichment. This happens
+quite often during retreats, and the results are usually decisive and
+lasting. The resolution may come for a particular couple when they are
+alone together later reporting it to the others; or it may actually come
+in the supportive atmosphere that the group is able to generate. Such
+experiences are deeply reassuring and rewarding for all the
+participating couples.
+
+
+FACILITATING EXERCISES
+
+The use of simple "exercises" in these retreats has been found to
+be very helpful. What they do is to break up our stereotyped and
+often rather sterile patterns of interaction when people get
+together. They are simply devices designed to bring about _couple_
+interaction--sometimes for all the couples in the group together,
+sometimes for one couple at a time.
+
+A good example is asking each couple to draw a picture of their
+marriage. Paper and crayons are made available, and the couples scatter
+about the room and work on their pictures. They may choose to do this
+verbally (discussing the drawing together as they go along) or
+non-verbally (working at it together in silence). When all have
+finished, we come back to the circle of chairs, and each couple in turn
+lays their picture on the floor and explains it to the group. This is an
+activity the couples always seem to enjoy; and it enables us to learn a
+good deal about each other. The leaders, of course, also draw their
+picture, and display it with the others. We have accumulated quite a
+collection!
+
+One of our trainee couples introduced dancing. Lights are dimmed in the
+room, a record is played, and all the couples dance, each couple
+improvising whatever movements express their mood. They then sit round
+and report on what the experiment meant to them.
+
+Occasionally when we are faced with a controversial subject (for
+example, "How far are you prepared to allow your partner to go in
+friendships with the opposite sex?"), we might ask all the couples to
+discuss this privately together for ten minutes, and then report to the
+whole group what conclusions they have reached.
+
+Another kind of exercise is what we call "dialogues." A volunteer couple
+sit in the center on chairs or on the floor facing each other, and talk
+back and forth on a subject chosen by the group but accepted by them.
+Some topics have been "How do we deal with conflict in our marriage?";
+"How do we overcome fears of intimacy?"; "What are our procedures in
+decision-making?"; "How do we meet each other's dependency needs?" The
+subject should of course focus on husband-wife interaction.
+
+It is best for the interchange between the couple to be slow and
+deliberate. Indeed, it is helpful for each to allow a period of silence
+before replying to the other (learning to pause in this way is a very
+helpful means of making husband-wife discussions more effective).
+Sometimes two or three couples may volunteer; all sit in the center of
+the circle (the "fishbowl," as it is sometimes called) and the dialogue
+is taken up by each in turn. While the dialogue is going on, other
+members of the group should not intervene or in any way act as an
+"audience." The general discussion comes afterwards, and provides an
+opportunity for others who identified with the couples in dialogue to
+share what they felt.
+
+An interesting variant is to ask if another couple will volunteer to sit
+with the couple involved in dialogue, and to function as _alter egos_
+(Latin for "other selves"). The _alter ego_ on each side listens
+carefully to what is going on, and intervenes from time to time to
+verbalize deeper levels of communication and interaction that are not
+being expressed in words. Playing the _alter ego_ role requires some
+insight and skill, but it is highly effective when well done.
+
+Another exercise for individual couples is "positive interaction." A
+very simple device, it is usually highly effective and often deeply
+moving. For this reason we often make it the last activity on Saturday
+evening. It can either be carried out by about three volunteer couples,
+or all couples may agree to take turns. The couple sit facing each
+other, holding hands, and are asked to tell each other, simply and
+directly, what they specially like about each other, being as specific
+as possible. Surprisingly, it turns out that very few couples have ever
+done this before, and everyone finds it a heartwarming experience. We
+think we have encountered here another taboo in our society--married
+couples spend infinitely more time telling each other what they _don't_
+like about each other than what they _do_ like. Most of us have a
+strangely inhibited self-consciousness about spelling out in detail what
+we mean by "I love you."
+
+We generally conclude the retreat with a short session of perhaps half
+an hour in which we share with each other new insights and the rewarding
+experiences we have had together. This may appropriately be followed by
+a Quaker meeting for worship.
+
+These exercises are no more than illustrations. Leading couples are
+inventing new ones all the time, and there seems to be no limit to their
+ingenuity. The books by Herbert Otto and Gerald Smith, listed in the
+bibliography, are full of good ideas.
+
+In essence, these were the experiences in which we and our nine trainee
+couples were involved during the crowded hours we spent together at
+Pendle Hill. Before they took their departure, we enjoined them not to
+try to repeat anything we had done unless they could do so entirely
+naturally and comfortably. They would develop their own patterns of
+leadership, and these would be more effective than anything we had
+taught them.
+
+
+EVALUATION AND REAFFIRMATION
+
+The follow-up retreat at Pendle Hill was much more than a reunion or
+season of rejoicing. We undertook together an intensive evaluation of
+what had been experienced. One couple, for example, had had to cope with
+a marriage in serious conflict so we set up a role-playing re-enactment
+of the situation to serve as a learning experience for the whole group.
+
+We also tried to pool our ideas about the best way to plan and lead
+marriage enrichment retreats. Our agenda covered the following areas:
+
+    _Organizing the Retreat._ Time, place, cost, recruitment of
+    couples, size of group, preparatory materials.
+
+    _Methods and Techniques._ Introductions, agenda, directing
+    discussion, dividing up, special exercises, crisis situations,
+    evaluation.
+
+    _Leadership Roles._ Qualifications, goals, training, couple
+    teamwork, preparation, vulnerability, follow-up.
+
+    _Future Plans._ Further retreats, training new leaders,
+    cooperation with other groups, books and materials.
+
+    _Other Areas for Enrichment._ Retreats for youth, premarital
+    couples, parents and teen-agers, solo parents, senior citizens,
+    Meeting members.
+
+A number of issues of particular concern to the group were extensively
+discussed. One was the distinction between our retreats and group
+marriage counseling on the one hand, sensitivity training and encounter
+groups on the other. Another issue concerned our emphasis on positive
+interaction, and the discouragement, though not avoidance, of overt
+expression of negative feelings between members of the group. We also
+discussed what causes marriages to get "stuck" so that they cease to
+grow. This led us naturally to consider the limitations of lay leaders
+without training in marriage counseling, and how to make effective
+referrals to professionals when this seems to be indicated. We also
+talked about the use of silence, so natural to Friends, and how far
+non-Quakers could accept this.
+
+In all our discussions we were looking forward. There was a confident
+assurance that we had found something of great importance that must be
+communicated to others--to the Society of Friends generally, but to the
+wider world as well.
+
+
+THE SECOND ROUND
+
+Another training program was organized and a second group of couples
+were invited to Pendle Hill. On a Friday evening in November 1971,
+therefore, another wide circle of married couples assembled in the
+familiar living room at Pendle Hill; later went forth to conduct
+retreats arranged by their Yearly Meetings; and returned triumphantly in
+April 1972 to report to one another what had happened.
+
+Six of these couples were new. With them we invited two experienced
+couples from the first group of trainees. Our idea was that they might
+help in the training of the other six, and be ready then to graduate as
+trainers in later regional programs.
+
+We have used this method in training couples before, encouraging a
+couple conducting a retreat for the first time to team up with another
+trained couple, each supporting and helping the other in shared
+leadership. This is a good learning process; and now we were applying it
+at the level of training potential leaders, in the expectation of making
+ourselves dispensable. A movement of this kind should not be allowed to
+focus on personalities. It will prosper best by involving many couples
+in a broad sharing of leadership responsibility.
+
+We might have asked ourselves whether what had happened in 1969-70 could
+happen again in 1971-72. Would the high caliber of the earlier group of
+couples be sustained? Would they again learn quickly enough through the
+experience of one retreat to function as successful leaders? Would they
+come back with the same enthusiasm and delight? The answers to these
+questions would do a great deal to validate the plan we had adopted.
+
+When our couples returned in April 1972, the answers were resoundingly
+in the affirmative. In one case, it was true, the local arrangements had
+broken down and they had not had the opportunity yet to conduct a
+retreat--but they came to the reunion just the same. (Their opportunity
+for leadership came later.) Reports from all the others, including the
+two "veteran" couples, had the same authentic ring of success that had
+been sounded so unmistakably a year earlier.
+
+Quoting from the group:
+
+"We felt our job was to provide some structure to help the experience
+develop, and then let people sort it out for themselves. Both of us felt
+it was most important to ride with the tone of the developing situation,
+and avoid any use of the more aggressive techniques of confrontation.
+Stan was worried on Saturday that the talk was too general. Then one of
+the wives broke through by asking if we could discuss something "...
+down here, where I am ... like SEX?" So we got there ..."
+
+"We viewed our task as leaders to be one of creating and sustaining an
+atmosphere in which each couple could speak personally concerning their
+marriage. We felt we best accomplished this task when we participated as
+a couple in the same way as we urged the others to participate."
+
+"We regarded ourselves as facilitators. We tried to be creative
+listeners; to put questions to the group that would help them to share
+personal experiences; to bring about a change of pace when we sensed
+this to be necessary."
+
+"We were quite relaxed. We tried to be perceptive of the needs of
+individual couples. We hope we didn't talk too much."
+
+"We saw ourselves as equal participants with the others, and
+facilitators of a process which started well with frank, meaningful
+conversation. We did agenda-building at several points. Our aim was to
+create an atmosphere in which defensiveness could be replaced with
+tolerant acceptance, and trust and confidence could grow as we heard
+each other and learned from each other."
+
+
+THE PROBLEM OF UNFELT NEED
+
+"The underlying problem is the fact that the marriage enrichment retreat
+meets unfelt needs. People don't feel keenly that they need it. If you
+think your marriage is sound, you aren't strongly motivated to spend a
+weekend making it even sounder. To get the tingle of a potential
+deepening and enriching takes emotional impact. This means hearing from
+someone obviously sensible who is warmly convinced about it."
+
+A number of theories were developed to explain this resistance to our
+project. In general, it is true that it takes _problems_ to motivate
+married couples to seek help, just as it takes pain to induce many
+people to visit a doctor; and in both cases, action may prove to be too
+late to be effective. On the other hand, many couples with basically
+stable marriages are wistfully aware that their relationship falls short
+of their expectations. But it takes a strong stimulus, in the form of a
+cordial personal invitation, to get them to take the necessary steps to
+enroll for a retreat.
+
+Whatever the cause of this reticence, expressing itself on occasions as
+resistance, it seems an inappropriate response to the needs and
+opportunities of our day and age and one of the many factors responsible
+for the alienation between young and old which is popularly termed the
+"generation gap." Our trainees were themselves mainly in the second half
+of life, and they well understood the "privatism" that is a legacy of
+our past. They themselves, however, had lost nothing, and gained a great
+deal by the efforts they had made to cultivate greater openness to
+others, both in their marriages and in their wider relationships, and
+they would lovingly invite other Friends to make the same venture. They
+would also plead with Friends to give stronger support to, and undertake
+more active participation in, a project to provide marriage enrichment
+retreats for the couples in the care of our Meetings.
+
+Some views were expressed suggesting a special reticence among Friends.
+There seemed to be some foundation for two theories--first, that Quakers
+tend to be very heavily involved in social projects, sometimes to the
+neglect of their own family relationships; and second, that they tend to
+be somewhat puritanical in the sense that they consider it improper to
+open their private lives to others. There may be a deep dichotomy in
+attitudes of Friends here such as reported by one couple: "vivid
+impressions of honest encounters between those who regard the worship of
+God as a private affair, and those who feel the need to reach out to
+their Meeting community for personal support and a sense of communion
+which includes closer relationships with other Friends."
+
+Like other Friends, we are finding that these experiences can release
+hitherto unrealized and untapped resources of spiritual strength and
+power. As expressed by one couple: "For two years we passed through a
+dark time in our family, trying to find resources to deal with a
+seemingly insurmountable problem. At our first retreat, with the loving
+support of the group, we were able as a couple to recover our
+self-confidence, sense of worth, and well-being, and reaffirm our
+strengths to each other.
+
+"The family problem has now been happily resolved, and we have found
+extra strength to participate fully in the expression of our Quaker
+concerns in the larger community. Our Meeting did much to sustain us
+through the bleakest times, and bring us back into clearness and light;
+but what helped us the most to help ourselves was our activities with
+the marriage enrichment project. We continue to nurture at home the new
+openness and depth we have discovered, and have committed ourselves to
+maintain the healthy growth that has been made possible for us."
+
+
+CONCLUSION
+
+What has been described in this booklet could easily be dismissed as a
+new fad that will gain limited attention for a short time and then be
+forgotten, but it may instead be the discovery of vast untapped
+resources that can raise primary human relationships to new and higher
+levels of richness and creativity. If this should be the case the loss
+of this great opportunity would be tragic.
+
+The need of men and women today, as in all ages, is to learn to live
+together in love and peace--to build up rather than to tear down, to
+cooperate rather than to compete, to find meaning in life through open
+sharing with others rather than through narrow self-seeking.
+
+Religion has always striven to further these goals, because they
+represent the spiritual development of man. But again and again the
+simple truths spoken by great religious leaders have been lost in the
+complexity of elaborate institutions and the lust for power.
+
+Friends have been distinctive in their stubborn resistance to these
+diversions and distortions of the simple truth that we must learn to
+love God and man, and that there is no other path to redemption. In each
+new age, Quakers have found ways to witness to the way of love and the
+way of peace.
+
+May it be that a central calling for Friends today is to respond to the
+disintegration of marriages and the alienation of the generations by
+finding in their own marriages, and in their family relationships, a new
+quality of creativeness based on a deep and honest sharing of life? Can
+love be spread abroad in the earth, if it cannot be nurtured in the
+close and intimate relationship between man and woman, the nuclear
+relationship where love begins and where life begins? Can one proclaim
+peace among the nations if unable to contrive to live in harmony with
+those under one's own roof?
+
+The mood of our age is compounded of hope and despair. We have achieved
+so much, in terms of technological skill and power; and we have achieved
+so little, in terms of harmonious human relationships. We have created
+the power to make this world, compared with what it has been, a paradise
+for man to enjoy, but we have failed to make it possible for man to
+enjoy what has been achieved. With the threat of an atomic holocaust
+hanging like the sword of Damocles over our heads, we know beyond doubt
+that we must learn the art of living together in love and peace or lose
+all we have.
+
+In such an hour, what can we do?
+
+We can make a beginning. We can begin at home--with ourselves, and those
+nearest and dearest to us. We can strive to learn the great art of
+living in the school that has been provided for us. We can build
+relationship-in-depth at the foundations of human society: for in the
+last resort the quality of relationships in any community cannot rise to
+any higher levels than the quality of relationships in the families that
+make up the community; and the quality of relationships in any family
+cannot rise any higher than the quality of relationships in the marriage
+that has brought it into being.
+
+Yes, there _is_ something we can do to witness to the power of love and
+peace. We can make a beginning. Marriage enrichment is such a beginning.
+
+
+
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+
+[Footnote A: Mace, David R., _Marriage As Vocation_, F.G.C. 1969.]
+
+[Footnote B: Reprinted in slightly revised form from Friends Journal,
+December 15, 1972.]
+
+[Footnote C: Lederer and Jackson--_The Mirages of Marriage_, Norton,
+1968, page 129.]
+
+[Footnote D: Cicero and Fahs--_Conversations on Sex and Love in
+Marriage_, Word Books, 1972.]
+
+[Footnote E: We have capitulated at times and have prepared a brief book
+list. A larger list appears in the appendix.]
+
+
+
+
+BOOKS FOR FURTHER READING
+
+
+There is as yet little in the way of literature about marriage
+enrichment. Here are a few books which have been found useful by leaders
+of retreats.
+
+Bach, G. R. and Wyden, P., _The Intimate Enemy_. Morrow, 1969,
+  (available in paperback). A belligerent but challenging book
+  about marital conflict.
+
+Clinebell, H. J. and C. H., _The Intimate Marriage_. Harper and
+  Row, 1970. Perhaps the best book available on marriage enrichment.
+
+Hastings, D. W., _A Doctor Speaks on Sexual Expression in Marriage_.
+  Little, Brown, 1966. A reliable guide written by a psychiatrist and
+  marriage counselor.
+
+Lederer, W. J. and Jackson, Don D., _The Mirages of Marriage_.
+  Norton, 1968. A challenging and unusual book on contemporary
+  marriage.
+
+Mace, D. R., _Success in Marriage_. Abingdon, 1958. An easily read
+  paperback on the areas of marital adjustment.
+
+Mace, D. R., _Getting Ready for Marriage_. Abingdon, 1972. A
+  practical guide for the couple preparing for marriage.
+
+Mace, D. R., _Sexual Difficulties in Marriage_. Fortress Press, 1972.
+  A short and simple explanation of sexual inadequacy and the new
+  approaches to its treatment.
+
+McGinnes, T., _Your First Year of Marriage_. A very helpful guide
+  for the recently married couple.
+
+O'Neill, G. and N., _The Open Marriage_. A best-seller on some of
+  today's new concepts of marriage.
+
+Otto, H., _More Joy in Your Marriage_. Cornerstone Library 1969.
+  A book full of practical ideas for increasing marital potential.
+
+Peterson, J. A., _Married Love in the Middle Years_. Association
+  Press, 1968. An excellent book on a neglected subject.
+
+Rubin, T. I., _The Angry Book_, Macmillan, 1969.
+
+Samuel, Dorothy, _The Fun and Games of Marriage_. Word Books,
+  1973. Thoughts on marriage as a depth relationship, written
+  by one of our Quaker trainees.
+
+Smith, G. W. and A. I., _Me and You and Us_. Wyden, 1971. A
+  book of exercises (47 in all) for couples seeking marriage
+  enrichment. Written by a couple who participated in one of
+  our earliest retreats at Kirkridge, then went into the field as
+  full-time family therapists.
+
+West, Jessamyn, _Love is Not What You Think_. Harcourt, Brace,
+  1959. Written by a distinguished Quaker novelist.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Marriage Enrichment Retreats, by 
+David Mace and Vera Mace
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT RETREATS ***
+
+***** This file should be named 29899.txt or 29899.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/2/9/8/9/29899/
+
+Produced by Mark C. Orton, Tamise Totterdell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.