APPENDIX 4
Preprogram Background
Questionnaire
The Preprogram Background
Questionnaire (PBQ) was constructed by the director and approved by
the director's committee chairman prior to implementation of the project. The PBQ was designed to gather some
sociological data and to give the men interested in the program an opportunity
to state their Christian convictions.
The data
gathered were used to help the director determine who had a good enough
disciplinary record to participate.
Next, the data were used to develop a criteria for constructing the
control and experimental groups, and that criteria was explained in chapter 2.
Preprogram Background
Questionnaire
Name: ___________________________ TDCJ#: _______________ House: _________
Age: ______ Height: __________
Weight: _______ Years of
Sentence: ____________
Race: ________________ Your class is (circle
one) L3
L2 L1 S4 S3 S2
S1.
This is your (check one)
1st___, 2nd___, 3rd___, 4th___, 5th___ time down.
How long have you been incarcerated this
time (including jail time)? _________________
How long in TDCJ including other units?
__________. On Gib Lewis?
______________
Your sentence is non-Aggravated ___
Aggravated ___. Education level?
_____________
How long have you been a Christian?
__________. Years of sincerity?
______________
I consider myself (check one)
____ very social ____ somewhat social ____ a loner.
Have you served aggravated time before? ....... Yes No How many times? ________
Is this time a parole violation? .......................... Yes
No.
Have you read the whole Bible? ........................ Yes
No.
Do you try to read the Bible everyday? ............ Yes No.
Did you grow up in a church? ............................. Yes
No What faith? _____________
Do you like to learn and grow? .......................... Yes
No.
Do you receive one family letter each
month? . Yes No.
Two or more family letters each month? ........... Yes No.
Are you a father? ............................................... Yes
No How many? _____________
If yes, do you see your children
regularly? ....... Yes
No How often? _____________
Do you see anyone at least once a month? ....... Yes No.
If
yes, what is your relationship with that person?
________________________________
Who was the most important person to you
while growing up? _____________________
Each week, I attend chapel activities at
least
(check one) ___ once ___ twice ___ more.
*
* *
Thanks for your help and
participation * * *
APPENDIX 5
Counselor Response
Questionnaire
Background Information on
Assessment Instrument
History
The Counselor
Response Questionnaire (CRQ) was designed to measure beginning counseling
skills and was constructed as a 15-item paper-and-pencil instrument. The CRQ was influenced by a reflective
orientation to counseling in general and by microcounseling in particular. The model underlying the development of the
CRQ assumed that counselors should remain nonjudgmental and should refrain from
giving advice.
The
questionnaire initially consisted of 16 client statements, each of which was
followed by 3 counselor responses of varying quality. One response was always a good reflective response: i.e., an accurate reflection of feeling or
paraphrase in Ivey's taxonomy, and at least a level 3 on Carkhuff's
empathy scale.
One response was not facilitative and was either advice-giving,
judgmental, a distorted reflection or an interpretation which would not
facilitate exploration of the problem.
The third response was of intermediate quality and was either a slightly
distorted paraphrase or reflection of feeling or a question.
A preliminary
form of the instrument was administered to a group of 15 doctoral-level
practicing counselors and clinical psychologists who were asked to rank order
the three counselor responses to the client statements. If more than three of the these
professionals offered rankings that differed from our a priori "correct"
ranks, the item was rewritten. Four of
the original 16 items fell into this category and were rewritten and
resubmitted to the professionals for ranking.
One item failed to meet the criterion on the second ranking and was
therefore dropped from the instrument.
The remaining 15 items constitute the Counselor Response Questionnaire.
The Sample
Initial data
on the CRQ were obtained from respondents selected to represent varying levels
of counseling skills: 157 undergraduate
students enrolled in introductory psychology courses whose participation
fulfilled part of a course requirement, 17 professional drug abuse counselors,
19 students in a introduction to clinical psychology course for graduate and
advanced undergraduate students which included counseling and interviewing
training, and 15 doctoral-level practicing counselors/clinical
psychologists.
Validation Studies
The first
validation study tested the ability of the CRQ to discriminate a group of
subjects trained in counseling and interviewing skills from an untrained
sample. The trained group consisted of
the 15 professional counselors and the 19 advanced undergraduate and beginning
graduate students who received training in a course. The untrained group (N=157) was students taking the introductory
psychology course. A simple t-test revealed significant differences
between the means CRQ scores for trained (
= 44.71) and
untrained (
= 28.41)
respondents (t = 12.4, p <.001).
Scoring
The
participants were asked to place a plus sign ("+") by the response
which seemed best to them or closest to how they would respond. Then they were asked to place a minus sign
("-") by the response that seemed worst or was the farthest removed
from how they would respond.
To score the
CRQ, each response to each item was assigned a value as follows: "1" for the least appropriate
response, "2" for the intermediate response, and "3" for
the most appropriate response as determined by the a priori rankings of the
responses. A respondent's score for
each item was determined by subtracting the value of the response that he or
she ranked as least appropriate from the value of the response he or she
thought most appropriate in response to the client statement. Thus, if a respondent completely agreed with
the a priori ranking on an item, his or her score on that item would be 2
(3 - 1 = 2). If one gave a ranking
completely opposite to the a priori rankings, the score for that item would be
-2 (1 - 3 = -2). Scores of 1 and -1
were also possible. Total scores on the
CRQ were computed by summing the item scores and adding a constant of 20 to
eliminate any negative scores.
Counselor Response
Questionnaire and Key
Introduction
The Counselor
Response Questionnaire (CRQ) was given as a pretest and posttest instrument
to both the control and experimental groups in conjunction with the Responding
Questionnaire. The following was
the form of the questionnaire given to both groups with one exception: the expert ratings for each response were
noted next to the response blanks and placed in bold underlined type. Before each questionnaire was administered,
it was explained and any questions were answered.
The CRQ Questionnaire and
Key
Print
Name:_____________________________________ TDCJ#:_________________
Play the role of a pastoral
counselor. Near the beginning of a
first visit, a person makes a statement.
Three responses follow each person's statement. Place a "+" in front of the most
appropriate or best response, and place a "-" in front of the least
or worst appropriate. Of each three
responses, one response remains blank.
Person 1:
"I ain't got no problems."
(silence)
___(2) A:
"What do you mean?
Everybody has problems."
___(1) B:
"Then maybe you could help me with some of my problems."
___(3) C:
"There's nothing going on in your life that worries you."
Person 2:
"Sometimes I get a lump in my throat for no good reason and it
stays there until I cry it away. "
___(3) A:
"There are some things which build up that you can't put your
finger on."
___(1) B:
"It's best to keep busy when things like that happen."
___(2) C:
"What happens after you cry?"
Person 3:
"Gee, those people! Who do
they think they are? I just can't stand
them anymore. Such a bunch of
phonies. I don't want to be bothered
with them anymore. And I get angry with
myself. I wish I could be honest with
then and tell them all to go to hell!
But I guess I just can't do it."
___(2) A:
"They make you angry. You
wish you could handle them better."
___(3) B:
"Damn, they make you furious!
But it's not just them. It's
with yourself, tool because you don't act on how you feel."
___(1) C:
"Maybe society itself is at fault--making you feel--inadequate and
causing you to be unable to interact successfully with others."
Person 4:
"There are times when I feel high school is not important to
me. Since I'm not going to college,
maybe there's no need for me to waste time in high school."
___(3) A:
"You really don't know what to do.
Perhaps you'd like to graduate, but right now you are leaning toward
dropping out."
___(2) B:
"You have a tough decision to make. You don't want to decide this too quickly."
___(1) C:
"You know the first thing an employer will want to know to if you
are a high school graduate."
Person 5:
"I just hate to go home after work. If I'm not fighting with my wife, one of us is fighting with the
kids. It's so uncomfortable at
home."
___(1) A:
"Fighting with your children doesn't accomplish anything."
___(3) B:
"You're tired of being greeted at home by harsh words and an
unpleasant atmosphere. You'd just like to feel that you could go home, relax,
and be comfortable."
___(2) C:
"You are dissatisfied with your home life in comparison with
work."
Person 6:
"I have to decide by next week whether or not I am going to move
out of my apartment. I would like to
move to a better place where I'd feel safer, but I can't really afford it. It's a tough decision. I wish I knew what to do. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad staying
"where I am for one more year.
Then I'd have enough money to move."
___(3) A:
"So you've got a decision to make.
You'd like to move but you're not sure you can afford to. It sounds like you're leaning toward staying
where you are for a while."
___(2) B:
"Would you tell me why you feel your neighborhood is unsafe?"
___(1) C:
"Your safety is very important.
I don't see how you can afford not to move."
Person 7:
"Things are really looking up.
I finally got a job a good one, too.
If I stick with it, in a couple of years I'll be the head of work
crew. Getting and going to work is not
easy for me, though."
___(2) A:
"You sound elated and confident.
Your life is at a turning point and now you're going to be
someone."
___(3) B:
"You sound excited about your new job and at the same time a little
worried about your ability to handle the responsibility of holding a job."
___(1) C:
"Holding a job is not so hard.
Getting up every morning and going to work is something you'll get used
to."
Person 8:
"I am 2,000 miles from home and my mother just had a heart
attack. I'd like to take care of her,
but things are just getting started for me here."
___(1) A:
"You'd like to forget your responsibilities to your mother."
___(2) B:
"You feel like you should go take care of your mother."
___(3) C:
"You're torn between your desire to help your mother and wanting to
live your own life here."
Person 9:
"I get so mad at my daughter.
Boy, can she be stubborn! Sometimes
I scream and yell at her and feel like slapping her. Sometimes I even do it. I
don't like to feel this way, but I just can't help it."
___(1) A:
"Why don't you give her some precise limitations. Tell her exactly what you expect and accept
no excuses."
___(3) B:
"Sounds like your daughter really gets to you, and it bothers you a
lot to lose your temper with her."
___(2) C:
"Sometimes your daughter irritates you, but you really care about
her."
Person 10:
"When 1 am alone I can play the piano pretty well, but I always
goof up when I know other people are not listening."
___(3) A:
"It makes you uncomfortable and anxious when other people
listen."
___(1) B:
"Just because someone is listening to you is no reason to goof
up. You've got to learn to be your own
person."
___(2) C:
"You can play well for your own enjoyment--that's what
counts."
Person 11:
"I'm determined to make good on my new job. I'm going to work hard and really show them
how much I can do. And I'm not afraid
to take on extra duties or work long hours if that's what it takes. I am going to be somebody."
___(2) A:
"What is your new job like?"
___(3) B:
"You're going to climb to the top this time. You really sound determined to be successful
with this new job."
___(1) C:
"It sounds to me like you are trying to compensate for some
weakness. Is there some area in your life in which you feel really weak or
inadequate?"
Person 12:
"I'm not sure how I'm going to do in counseling. I don't really like to talk about myself."
___(3) A:
"Sounds like you're a little uncomfortable here. Maybe you're wondering what these sessions
will be like."
___(1) B:
"You've got to talk about yourself, it is going to help you with
your problems."
___(2) C:
"Are there any situations where you do like to talk about
yourself?"
Person 13:
"I find myself withdrawing from people--I don't want to socialize
or play their stupid games. There was a
time when I got along with everyone and everyone liked me. I was whatever the crowd wanted me to
be. I used to be proud of that."
___(2) A:
"It sounds like you're having some interpersonal difficulties with
others."
___(1) B:
"You have to be your own person, even if it involves telling other
people off. You can't let other people
control your existence."
___(3) C:
"You have changed a lot.
You know who you used to be, but you're wondering about who you are
now."
Person 14:
"1 can understand how women were discriminated against in the past,
but I think women have it good now. I
get really confused when my friends tell me I should work for women's
liberation."
___(2) A:
"Women's lib is a very powerful social force and lot of people feel
it is a good thing. It can be very
confusing, though."
___(1) B:
"Your friends see society's attitudes as threatening to their
career goals. Maybe you don't see any
threats because you have set your goals lower."
___(3) C:
"You don't feel discriminated against personally, so you're
wondering if you should work for women's liberation. You're also wondering how to relate to your friends who do."
Person 15:
"You don't know what it is like to have people talking about you
and laughing at you behind your back."
___(3) A:
"It's pretty painful to have people make fun of you."
___(2) B:
"There are some cruel people in this world."
___(1) C:
"Yes, I do. When I was a
teenager I had acne and some of the guys were constantly making fun of me. But I didn't let it get me down."
APPENDIX 6
Responding Questionnaire
Background Information on
Assessment Instrument
History
The basic
elements of this assessment came from Robert Carkhuff and Don Benoit's
"Responding: Knowledge and Skills
Assessments" test in Art of Helping VI: Trainer's Guide (Amherst,
MA: Human Resources Development Press, 1987: 65-67). Several elements were removed, because the deleted elements would
not be a part of the program. Carkhuff
and Benoit continued to use this instrument throughout the revisions of the Art
of Helping. The test was approved
by the director's committee chairman prior to implementation of the
project. For the purposes of continuity
and clarity in the presentation of the project report, the title was changed to
Responding Questionnaire (RQ) and that was the title used throughout the
project report.
Scoring
In the
multiple choice section, the participants were asked to select any number of
choices under each of the nine multiple choice questions. In the short answer section, the
participants were asked to answer the questions as best as they were able.
In the
multiple choice section, there were thirteen correct choices among the nine
questions. Each participant was given
one point for each correct selection, and one point was deducted for each wrong
selection. One point was also deducted
if the participant did not choose any available choice.
In the short
answer section under number "1," there were two correct answers: "feeling" and
"content." One point was
given for each correct answer (or very close approximation), and one point was
deducted for each incorrect answer (and one point was deducted if there was no
response).
In the short
answer section under number "2," two points were given if the
participant's answer closely reflected the correct answer. A "close reflection" needed two
elements: one, mention of the word
"feeling/s" in the context of a sentence that indicated the
importance of a focus on general feelings;
and two, a type of personal reference that eluded to an attempt to walk
in another's shoes. Two points were
deducted if the participant gave no answer or gave an answer that did not
approximate these.
The positive
and negative sums of both sections were added.
This sum was then added to a constant of twenty to eliminate negative
scores, and this became the total score for this assessment. The total possible score was twenty-seven.
Responding Questionnaire
Introduction
The Responding
Questionnaire (RQ) was given as a pretest and posttest instrument to both
the control and experimental groups in conjunction with the Counselor Response
Questionnaire. The following was
the form of the questionnaire given to both groups with one exception: the answers to each question were noted in
bold underlined type. Before each
questionnaire was administered, it was explained and any questions were
answered.
RQ Questionnaire and Key
Print
Name:____________________________ TDCJ#:____________ Assigned #:____
Multiple Choice
Circle
the correct answer or answers for each question.
1.
We respond to meaning by:
a. communicating sympathy c. asking questions
b.
communicating empathy
2.
Empathy means:
a. understanding another person's frame of
reference
b. understanding how a person is feeling and
why
c. crawling inside another person's skin and
seeing the world through his/her eyes
d.
all of the above
3.
Responding to content emphasizes:
a. parroting
b. rephrasing the helpee's expressions in a new
way
c. questioning using the basic interrogatives -
the 5WH
4.
Responding to meaning (AE-II):
a. captures the content
b. is a verbatim recall of what the helpee said
c. asks a meaningful question
d.
includes the helpee's feelings
5.
Helpee exploration can lead to helpee:
a. growth c.
warmth
b.
understanding d.
boredom
6.
Identify the format (formula) for responding to meaning:
a. "Why do you feel that way?"
b. "Tell me more about it."
c. "You're saying that
___________________."
d. "Don't worry about it. It will be
better tomorrow."
e.
"You feel ___________ because ___________."
7. The empathy question used in responding is:
a. "What happened to the helpee during
childhood?"
b. "How would I feel if I looked and
sounded like the helpee?"
c. "Why does the helpee do those
things?"
8.
Feeling categories are important to use because:
a. they facilitate the helper's understanding
of the helpee's feelings
b. they enable the helper to find an expert to
join the helping process
c. they clarify the helpee's problems
9.
Responding:
a. is a helper skill
b. questions the helpee as to why he/she
behaves a certain way
c. leads to exploration and action
d.
enables the helper to be empathic
Short Answer
Directions: Fill in the correct answers.
1. Responding involves two types of responses:
a. responding
to ______________________________________
b. responding
to _______________________________________
Content,
Feeling, or Meaning
2. Paraphrase the empathy
question:_________________________________________
"If I were the helpee
and I were doing and saying these things,
how would I
feel?"
APPENDIX 7
Interpersonal Check
List Background
Introduction
The
Interpersonal Check List (ICL) was part of the program overheads and handouts
which were made available to each of the participants. The ICL was used in session four on day four
of the program. The ICL was enumerated
as overheads #4.2a-4.2e and placed in appendix 3. The following history and descriptions were condensed from the
background of the checklist written by the ICL creators.
History
The ICL was
developed by LaForge and Suczek as part of a larger effort to conceptualize
interpersonal processes in small groups.
Through empirical studies, the researchers arrived at a set of sixteen
interpersonal categories arrayed in a circular pattern around two axes of
Dominance-Submission and Love-Hate.
Modifications and alternative circular systems of interpersonal
variables were developed over a period of two decades, many of which were
reviewed by Wiggins.
The ICL items
were chosen so that every intensity classification was equally
represented in every interpersonal classification. Essentially, each of the sixteen
interpersonal categories was represented in the ICL by eight words or
phrases: one was an "Intensity
One" item, three were "Intensity Two" items, three were
"Intensity Three" items, and one was an "Intensity Four"
item. In this sense, the intensity
classification was orthogonal to the interpersonal classification.
Description
The ICL was a
134-item list of words or phrases that may be used to obtain self-descriptions
or descriptions of others with respect to an interpersonal domain. Several uses were found appropriate: studying small-group phenomena, studying
family dynamics, and research on assessment and diagnosis.
The ICL was
intended to be regarded as a structured channel for communication and not as an
instrument for "measuring" personality or general social
phenomena. The list could be modified
to meet specific requirements and purposes.
The ICL was written in nontechnical language that was deemed immediately
comprehensible to decision makers with no training in psychology or the social
sciences. The ICL's theoretical
interpretation was designed to be a communication about a real or imaginary
person, and that interpretation was designed to be from an individual to
another person in a specified
situation.
The check
list was considered a convenient device for objectively obtaining and
quantifying much of the information about interpersonal relationships commonly
obtained in a first interview. The
interpersonal categories were deemed to belong to our common linguistic
heritage: therefore, understanding the
categories did not require specialized knowledge, such as of psychoanalytic
theory or of psychiatric terminology.
Interpretation Cautions
The authors
encouraged interpreters to be careful to not view the ICL as an analysis of
personality, but only as communication of interpersonal tendencies. The choice of items and the scoring, which
operationally defined the questionnaire, imposed arbitrary limits and a
structure on the participant's communication.
The participant's temporary and enduring motivations, perceptions, and
values affected the responses as well as the perceived observations. For these reasons the check list was deemed
to be an "effective and flexible observational device" for
researchers or participants.
Adjustments of ICL for
the Helping Skills Program
The entire
check list and all of the calculations were done by all of the
participants. The detailed analysis of
the NIC and AIN scores were omitted as were their lengthy and detailed
interpretations. The limited time
allotted for the lesson and the complication of the scales themselves seemed to
justify the omission.
The general
goals of the lesson sought to provide information and practice in
self-disclosure. Since the participants
were using the ICL on themselves, the basic charting of the ICL seemed to
provide the participants with a basic understanding their styles of
interpersonal relating.
APPENDIX 8
Pastoral Observations and Reflections
on Implementation
Day 1: August 10, 1996: 12:00-3:00 P.M.
Objective: To help students understand the entire
program and to develop their ability to use attending skills set #1 of body
language through instruction, observation, and use in class
Twenty-seven
men arrived on time. One man was over a
half hour late because of his work assignment.
Five men were absent for a variety of reasons. In all twenty-eight men participated in the first session.
The overhead
#1.1: Title was showing on the overhead screen as
the men arrived. Some men appeared
apprehensive; others appeared to be
skeptical.
As the class
waited for the others, the quotes about love on the cover page were
discussed. After the last man arrived,
both the presentation of overhead #1.2:
Devotion #1: Biblical Love and
the devotion did not seem to be very interesting to many of the participants. Several men were obviously bored. The director proceeded with the devotion.
When overhead
#1.3: Love, Listening, Liberating
Principle was presented, the boredom began to spread. Some were tired. Others
seemed to be wondering where all of the devotion was going.
The director
proceeded forward to present #1.4:
Listening Self-Knowledge, a listening self-knowledge assessment. After a brief discussion and when the
participants were told that all of the answers were false, most of the men
became curious and began to look over the questions again and at how they had
answered the questions.
There were
some light moments, and most of the men seemed ready to either defend their
answers or engage in further discussions.
One man made reference to the confusion of taking an assessment over
"stuff they had not studied."
They were told that most of assessment questions would become clear
later in the program and that there would be opportunity at a later session to
discuss the assessment.
The
presentation of #1.5: Program Outline
seemed to stir a small amount of interest, but there continued to be some
apprehension. A few others seemed bored
and ready to go to sleep. The men did
not have much of an idea of what they wanted to learn from the program,
excepting two men who said they wanted to learn what the term
"empathy" itself meant.
Since #1.5: Program Outline was an abbreviated outline of
the program, and the numbers in the outline did not correspond exactly with the
numbers in the table of contents given later (placed at the front of this
appendix). But #1.5 did serve its
purpose in giving a beginning overview of the program.
In
retrospect, the overview may not have been needed, for it did not seem to have
much affect on the men. The time spent
in the overview could have been spent elsewhere. None of the men noticed the inconsistency between overhead #1.5
and the table of contents. The removal
of the overhead would have removed an inconsistency in the program.
When the
director realized that he had forgotten the beginning exercise in the lesson
plan, he flipped back through his program notes and located the blank
overhead. Then he asked the men to give
their reasons for being in the program.
The men readily responded. The
responses ranged from wanting to follow God better to knowing how to love
better. Some simply wanted to learn
more about what the title of the program meant. A couple said they just wanted to help the director with his
school project. With this exercise,
almost all of the men livened up.
In
retrospect, this seemed to be the better place for this exercise. Having already struggled with the
preliminary parts of the program, they seemed to be more able to define why
they were in the program. So this
exercise not only piqued interest as it was intended to do, the exercise also
helped the men think through the parts of the program that had been presented
thus far.
When
#1.6: Allen Ivey's Principles was
presented and discussed, there was full participation. Many were ready to read and comment.
Considerable
time was taken by the men in filling out #1.7a: Who Has Been Heard?.
About six men took an extra long period of time, well beyond the rest of
the group. As the men finished the
exercise, they were allowed to take a break.
(Not until the director was writing the program notes did he remember
that he had forgotten to follow-up on #1.7a:
Who Has Been Heard? after the break.)
After the
break and when everyone was ready, #1.7b:
What the Professionals Say About Empathy was presented. There seemed to be an appropriate amount of
struggling with the definitions, and the men thoughtfully discussed the meaning
of empathy. A few men seemed to
understand all of the definitions. Most
of the men appeared to struggle with the more complicated definitions. As the director read Rogers' definition,
most of the participants seemed surprised at the reading, as though this was a
grand insight. Thinking about empathy
in this manner seemed to be novel to them.
When the
director and volunteer participant presented the contrived interaction relating
to poor attending skills, there was a little confusion at the start. As the director feigned very poor attending
skills with a talkative participant, most did not seem to know what to do. Two participants were talking and not paying
attention at all. A few concentrated on
the poor attending of the director. As
the director continued to feign poor attending skills, even the volunteer
participant became embarrassed and struggled to keep up the act of talking to
the director.
When the
director began to explain what was happening, there was some humor and
attention increased. Even the volunteer
participant was shocked at how the director's poor attending affected him: he was embarrassed and turned red even
though he knew what was happening.
Several others expressed a mixture of feelings.
When the
director presented #1.9: S-O-L-E-R, the
participants followed the explanations.
Most of them contributed to the discussions with great interest.
So much
discussion ensued that the program session almost got sidetracked. The director and several participants began
to discuss the nature of personal barriers, proxemics, culturally appropriate
touching, and the ethics of when to listen and when to take a stand.
What became
clear was that several men were attempting to defend what they perceived to be
culturally appropriate touching and hugging without respect to the cultural
differences of others different than themselves. Some of them felt that it was culturally appropriate for them to
hug strangers. Others thought that a
close relationship should usually precede hugging. Some participants confused the ability to touch with the ability
to get interpersonally close in general.
A couple of
participants speculated about the utility or health of withholding their
feelings, as though such was dishonest.
One man thought the Christian obligation to tell the truth was almost
equal to correcting the errors or offenses of others whenever the errors were
encountered. A few men exhibited
obvious hostility and defensiveness. To
a couple of the men, honesty and truth-telling were used to counter an attack
or a perceived attack of some sort.
With regard
to the general health of being completely open emotionally, the director
forwarded that restraint and control was a "vocational asset." The director also noted that many times a
person needed to restrain his or her emotions not only to keep one's job but
also to avoid "throwing your pearls before swine" (where your
"pearls" were the tender issues of your heart and where "swine"
were those who have contempt for the tender and human issues of the
heart). The thoughts went over well.
One man felt
he needed to take a stand on every truth and questioned the appropriateness of
withholding any feeling. He felt
withholding was lying. The director
pointed out that while a Christian needed to speak the truth, Christians were
first to be known by their love (Jn. 13:35).
The decision was ultimately his to make: he needed to choose in each circumstance whether to speak truth
or to preserve the relationship in love.
Most of the times, the director pointed out, the two went
hand-in-hand. A lot of the time,