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."