diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 29899-h.zip | bin | 0 -> 49412 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 29899-h/29899-h.htm | 1555 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 29899-h/images/fcover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 19925 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 29899.txt | 1422 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 29899.zip | bin | 0 -> 27706 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 |
8 files changed, 2993 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/29899-h.zip b/29899-h.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..58fb6fe --- /dev/null +++ b/29899-h.zip diff --git a/29899-h/29899-h.htm b/29899-h/29899-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..07dc8b0 --- /dev/null +++ b/29899-h/29899-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,1555 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> + <head> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> + <title> + The Project Gutenberg eBook of Marriage Enrichment Retreats, by David and Vera Mace. + </title> + <style type="text/css"> + + body {margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%;} + + h1,h2 {text-align: center; + clear: both;} + + .quote {margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%;} + + .hanging {margin-left: 5%; + text-indent: -3%;} + + h2.first {margin-top: 5em;} + + .centerspaced {text-align: center; + margin-top: 5em;} + + .spaced {margin-top: 5em;} + + p {margin-top: .75em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .75em;} + + .centerbold {text-align: center; + font-weight: bold;} + + .smaller {font-size: 80%;} + + .pagenum {position: absolute; + right: 2%; + font-size: 80%; + text-align: right; + color: #5a5a5a;} + + .center {text-align: center;} + + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + + .footnotes {border: dashed 1px;} + + .footnote {margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + font-size: 0.9em;} + + .footnote .label {position: absolute; + right: 84%; + text-align: right;} + + .fnanchor {vertical-align: super; + font-size: .8em; + text-decoration: none;} + + </style> + </head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +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: ISO-8859-1 + +*** 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 + + + + + + +</pre> + + +<p class="center"><img src="images/fcover.jpg" height="596" width="384" +alt="Cover" /></p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p> + +<h1>Marriage Enrichment Retreats<br /> +<span class="smaller"><br />Story of a Quaker Project</span></h1> + +<p class="centerbold">By<br /> +David and Vera Mace</p> + +<p class="centerspaced">Friends General Conference<br /> +1520 Race Street<br /> +Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span></p> + +<h2 class="first">About the Maces</h2> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span></p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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, <i>Marriage As Vocation</i>. This pamphlet and the project +it presents is an outgrowth of that experience.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span></p> + +<p class="spaced">"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.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span></p> + +<p>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."</p> + +<p>The project of which they had been a part dates back to the 1968 +Rufus Jones Lecture, <i>Marriage as Vocation</i>.<a name="FNanchor_A_1" id="FNanchor_A_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_A_1" class="fnanchor">[A]</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.</p> + +<p>A number of concerns emerged that can best be expressed as +questions:</p> + +<div class="quote"> + +<p>Do Friends reaffirm their traditional belief in marriage and the +family as the foundation unit of the Meeting?</p> + +<p>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?</p> + +<p>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?</p> + +<p>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?</p> + +<p>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?</p> + +</div> + +<p>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 +<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span> +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.<a name="FNanchor_B_2" id="FNanchor_B_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_B_2" class="fnanchor">[B]</a></p> + +<h2>THE PLAN</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<h2>PREMISES FROM EARLIER EXPERIENCES</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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 +<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span> +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."</p> + +<p>These experiences brought us into close touch with many "normal" +married couples. Our practice was to insist that the retreats +were <i>not</i> 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.</p> + +<p>Matching our observation of these couples with some of the +research findings on marital interaction, we arrived at four important +conclusions:</p> + +<p>1. Only a small proportion of marriages came anywhere near to +realizing their full potential. Lederer and Jackson<a name="FNanchor_C_3" id="FNanchor_C_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_C_3" class="fnanchor">[C]</a> suggest that the +proportion of "stable-satisfactory" marriages in our culture does not +exceed 5-10 percent.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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 poten<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span>tial +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.</p> + +<p>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!"</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span> +available to the individual couple in times of trouble from those with +whom they share a common corporate life.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.<a name="FNanchor_D_4" id="FNanchor_D_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_D_4" class="fnanchor">[D]</a> +The couples, after careful consideration, decided not to hide behind +a cloak of anonymity, but to use their real names and disclose their +identity.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<h2>COMPARISON WITH THERAPY AND ENCOUNTER GROUPS</h2> + +<p>"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?</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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 +<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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 indi<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span>viduals +within the group, between couples (including the leading +couple) within the group, and between husband and wife within the +marital unit.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span> +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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<h2>LAY LEADERSHIP</h2> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span> +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.</p> + +<h2>STRUCTURING THE RETREAT</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span> +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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.<a name="FNanchor_E_5" id="FNanchor_E_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_E_5" class="fnanchor">[E]</a></p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<h2>INTRODUCTION TO THE FRIENDS' EXPERIENCE</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>"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.</p> + +<p>"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.</p> + +<p>"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 inten<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span>tion 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.</p> + +<p>"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.</p> + +<p>"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."</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<h2>THE GROUP IN ACTION</h2> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span> +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:</p> + +<div class="quote"> + +<p>What is the state of our marriage now? How have things +changed as our relationship has grown?</p> + +<p>What are the memorable experiences in our lives that have +enriched our marriage?</p> + +<p>What have we found to be the most effective ways of handling +conflict?</p> + +<p>What do we feel about a depth relationship between one of us +and another person outside the marriage?</p> + +<p>Have we found ways of sharing that have contributed to our +spiritual growth?</p> + +</div> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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 <i>does</i> focus on marriage, +such topics as working wives or overworked husbands or the sharing +of household tasks can be discussed without risk.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span></p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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 <i>leaders</i> are +willing to be vulnerable.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<h2>FACILITATING EXERCISES</h2> + +<p>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 <i>couple</i> interaction<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span>—sometimes +for all the couples in the group together, sometimes for +one couple at a time.</p> + +<p>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!</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span> +provides an opportunity for others who identified with the couples +in dialogue to share what they felt.</p> + +<p>An interesting variant is to ask if another couple will volunteer to +sit with the couple involved in dialogue, and to function as <i>alter egos</i> +(Latin for "other selves"). The <i>alter ego</i> 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 <i>alter ego</i> role requires some insight +and skill, but it is highly effective when well done.</p> + +<p>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 <i>don't</i> like about each other than what +they <i>do</i> like. Most of us have a strangely inhibited self-consciousness +about spelling out in detail what we mean by "I love you."</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span></p> + +<h2>EVALUATION AND REAFFIRMATION</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>We also tried to pool our ideas about the best way to plan and +lead marriage enrichment retreats. Our agenda covered the following +areas:</p> + +<div class="quote"> + +<p><i>Organizing the Retreat.</i> Time, place, cost, recruitment of couples, +size of group, preparatory materials.</p> + +<p><i>Methods and Techniques.</i> Introductions, agenda, directing discussion, +dividing up, special exercises, crisis situations, evaluation.</p> + +<p><i>Leadership Roles.</i> Qualifications, goals, training, couple teamwork, +preparation, vulnerability, follow-up.</p> + +<p><i>Future Plans.</i> Further retreats, training new leaders, cooperation +with other groups, books and materials.</p> + +<p><i>Other Areas for Enrichment.</i> Retreats for youth, premarital +couples, parents and teen-agers, solo parents, senior citizens, +Meeting members.</p> + +</div> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span> +silence, so natural to Friends, and how far non-Quakers could accept +this.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<h2>THE SECOND ROUND</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span> +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.</p> + +<p>Quoting from the group:</p> + +<p>"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 ..."</p> + +<p>"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."</p> + +<p>"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."</p> + +<p>"We were quite relaxed. We tried to be perceptive of the needs of +individual couples. We hope we didn't talk too much."</p> + +<p>"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."</p> + +<h2>THE PROBLEM OF UNFELT NEED</h2> + +<p>"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."</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span></p> + +<p>A number of theories were developed to explain this resistance to +our project. In general, it is true that it takes <i>problems</i> 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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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."</p> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span> +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.</p> + +<p>"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."</p> + +<h2>CONCLUSION</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>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<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span> +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?</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>In such an hour, what can we do?</p> + +<p>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.</p> + +<p>Yes, there <i>is</i> something we can do to witness to the power of love +and peace. We can make a beginning. Marriage enrichment is such a +beginning.</p> + +<h2 class="first"><a name="FOOTNOTES" id="FOOTNOTES"></a>FOOTNOTES:</h2> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_A_1" id="Footnote_A_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_A_1"><span class="label">[A]</span></a> Mace, David R., <i>Marriage As Vocation</i>, F.G.C. 1969.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_B_2" id="Footnote_B_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_B_2"><span class="label">[B]</span></a> Reprinted in slightly revised form from Friends Journal, December 15, 1972.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_C_3" id="Footnote_C_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_C_3"><span class="label">[C]</span></a> Lederer and Jackson—<i>The Mirages of Marriage</i>, Norton, 1968, page 129.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_D_4" id="Footnote_D_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_D_4"><span class="label">[D]</span></a> Cicero and Fahs—<i>Conversations on Sex and Love in Marriage</i>, Word Books, +1972.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_E_5" id="Footnote_E_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_E_5"><span class="label">[E]</span></a> We have capitulated at times and have prepared a brief book list. A larger list +appears in the appendix.</p></div> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span></p> + +<h2 class="first">BOOKS FOR FURTHER READING</h2> + +<p>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.</p> + +<div class="quote"> + +<p class="hanging"> +Bach, G. R. and Wyden, P., <i>The Intimate Enemy</i>. Morrow, 1969, +(available in paperback). A belligerent but challenging book +about marital conflict.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Clinebell, H. J. and C. H., <i>The Intimate Marriage</i>. Harper and +Row, 1970. Perhaps the best book available on marriage enrichment.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Hastings, D. W., <i>A Doctor Speaks on Sexual Expression in Marriage</i>. +Little, Brown, 1966. A reliable guide written by a psychiatrist and +marriage counselor.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Lederer, W. J. and Jackson, Don D., <i>The Mirages of Marriage</i>. +Norton, 1968. A challenging and unusual book on contemporary +marriage.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Mace, D. R., <i>Success in Marriage</i>. Abingdon, 1958. An easily read +paperback on the areas of marital adjustment.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Mace, D. R., <i>Getting Ready for Marriage</i>. Abingdon, 1972. A +practical guide for the couple preparing for marriage.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Mace, D. R., <i>Sexual Difficulties in Marriage</i>. Fortress Press, 1972. +A short and simple explanation of sexual inadequacy and the new +approaches to its treatment.</p> + +<p class="hanging">McGinnes, T., <i>Your First Year of Marriage</i>. A very helpful guide +for the recently married couple.</p> + +<p class="hanging">O'Neill, G. and N., <i>The Open Marriage</i>. A best-seller on some of +today's new concepts of marriage.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Otto, H., <i>More Joy in Your Marriage</i>. Cornerstone Library 1969.> +A book full of practical ideas for increasing marital potential.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span></p> + +<p class="hanging">Peterson, J. A., <i>Married Love in the Middle Years</i>. Association +Press, 1968. An excellent book on a neglected subject.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Rubin, T. I., <i>The Angry Book</i>, Macmillan, 1969.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Samuel, Dorothy, <i>The Fun and Games of Marriage</i>. Word Books, +1973. Thoughts on marriage as a depth relationship, written +by one of our Quaker trainees.</p> + +<p class="hanging">Smith, G. W. and A. I., <i>Me and You and Us</i>. 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.</p> + +<p class="hanging">West, Jessamyn, <i>Love is Not What You Think</i>. Harcourt, Brace, +1959. Written by a distinguished Quaker novelist.</p> + +</div> + + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +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-h.htm or 29899-h.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. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> diff --git a/29899-h/images/fcover.jpg b/29899-h/images/fcover.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..965fbbc --- /dev/null +++ b/29899-h/images/fcover.jpg 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. diff --git a/29899.zip b/29899.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..ab90870 --- /dev/null +++ b/29899.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..147ca98 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #29899 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29899) |
