But recently, with my husband working an another state for the past many months, I’ve come to realize how much I depended on him.  He would jokingly say that I just miss his cooking.  But of course it’s much more than that.  It’s companionship, having someone to talk to when I get home from a stressful day at work.  I miss just being able to snuggle on the couch with him, getting a goodbye kiss, etc.

I have struggled with depression for decades, trying many different medications.  Sometimes I would be fine for many months, and I would stop taking the pills.  Eventually, slowly, I would drift back into sadness and ennui.  Then after many months I would reluctantly look for a new counselor, new pills, and start to drag myself up.  Shortly after I met my husband, I was able to get off the antidepressants.  I was “drug free” and doing well.  But since I started school, I’ve been slipping down that slope into darkness again.  And without him here to catch me, I’ve really fallen far in the past few months.  So I finally went to the doctor and got back on the meds.

And, I finally reached out for help.  I asked the women in an online ‘modesty’ group to pray for me.  And I think it is helping!  I do feel better.  I know it will take a long time for me to get fully out of this darkness, but just knowing that someone out there is thinking of me sure helps.

I’ve also been trying to do more things with my friends, instead of being such a hermit all the time.  And they have really been beyond wonderful.  It’s nice to know that they care for me.  Sometimes in the dark pit of depression, it is easy to forget that “I’m a good person and doggone it, people like me!”

Yahoo News headline “NYC ultra-Orthodox Jews give Amish walking tour.“

I think they should try an exchange program, sending their teens to a different “black hat” society for a month.  What a great sociology experiment that would be!

I’ve been thinking a lot about light and darkness. Of course they are powerful metaphors, based on the primeval fear of darkness. Good = light = daytime, when predators can be seen from a distance. Evil = dark = night-time, when predators can sneak up on us.

It seems that so much of my life has occurred in the night-time. This is a natural result of growing up in the North, where very long nights spanned many winter months. And it didn’t help that my parents often worked late, so I was home alone in the darkness (and afraid…)  But even in my adult years, my dreams often depict night scenes.

I would like more of my life to occur in the daytime. But where I currently live, for much of the year, the sun is too powerful for my fragile skin to spend much time outdoors. So I have become an “indoor gal.” And that’s not who I want to be! I want to be an “outdoor gal” spending time in nature.

And I want to bring more light into the world, in whatever small ways I can. There’s enough people bringing darkness into the world.  I want to be one of the “good guys.”

I ran across an article on the Chabad website recently about “Mitzvot and Customs.” And it says:

Illuminating the home with the glow of Torah and mitzvot is primarily the role of the woman — the tone-setter of the household. This is reflected in the woman’s obligation and privilege to light the Shabbat and Jewish holiday candles.

That’s what I want to do, the person I want to be.  One who brings light and happiness into the home.  Having a clean home, with a festive candle-lit dinner on Friday night, is a wonderful step towards encouraging an atmosphere of happiness.  And it’s something I used to do, long ago.  I even baked Challah bread.

What is so special about Sabbath candles?  In today’s electric world, they merely seem quaint.  But not long ago, light in the evening was scarce, and expensive.  Most homes had very little light after dark, unless there was a roaring fire in an open fireplace (which frankly is not that efficient compared to a closed stove.  But I digress.)  So on the Sabbath, when extra special food was provided, extra special lighting was provided in the form of multiple candles — two special ones in addition to what is needed for regular light.

While animals are afraid of fire, humans have a special connection to it.  How many times have you been mesmerized, staring into the flames of a fireplace, campfire, or candle?

Many cultures have myths about how mankind “discovered” or “created” fire.  On the website “My Jewish Learning” we find this interesting thought about fire:

Fire is universally recognized as one of the basic elements of the world. It is mysterious, frightening, mesmerizing. Its attraction is almost irresistible. In the Kabbalah, the image of a multicolored flame emanating from a candle is taken as a metaphor for God’s relation to the world and man. The flame is a single entity, yet it appears to be undergoing constant change. The flame adheres to, relies on, and appears to emanate from the candle, yet is a distinct and separate entity. The white interior of the flame is constant, but its exterior is always in motion and changes color.

Can I get my messy house in order in time for a nice candle-lit dinner this Friday?  We’ll see!

Can I avoid the temptation to say mean things behind someone’s back (de-luminating the world) and be kinder and more understanding (illuminating the world)?  This is a daily struggle for me, and old habits are hard to break.  This is one I really want to get rid of, so I’m certainly going to try harder!

Modesty is such a fundamental concept in Judaism, and modesty in dress is only one small area of this dominant theme. A broader definition of modesty, and the charge to incorporate modesty as an underlying character trait, is found in the book of Micha, chapter 6, verse 8: “…what is good, and what does the Lord demand of you; but to do justice, to love loving-kindness, and hatzneah lechet im Elokecha, walk humbly, modestly, discreetly with your G-d.”

My first husband’s father had been raised in a culturally Jewish family, but they were never what anyone might “religious.”  But in his secular lifestyle he retained this one bit of scripture: Micah 6:8. He quoted it often. I remember, the same week I officially became engaged to his son, I happened upon a beautiful handwritten calligraphy version of this scripture. I framed it for him, and it hung in his dining room for many years. For all I know it is there still, though he is nearly 9 years gone, and my marriage to his son long ago dissolved.

My point is, I find it funny that so many years later, this quote should come back to my attention again, when I am studying the subject of modesty, which has become so very important to me. While I have been concentrating on the outward appearance of modesty (clothing & headcovering) I still have a long way to go in my observance of modesty of speech… a long way to go!

Michah 6:8 (Jewish version)

He has told you, O man, what is good, and what the Lord demands of you; but to do justice, to love loving-kindness, and to walk discreetly with your God.

Micah 6:8 (New International Version)

He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8 (New International Reader’s Version)

The Lord has shown you what is good.
He has told you what he requires of you.
You must treat people fairly.
You must love others faithfully.
And you must be very careful to live
the way your God wants you to.

Here are a few things I have read recently, on the Puritan perspective of marriage roles.  They were written from the late 1500s to the mid 1600s, but were still influential even in the late 1800s.

Several early Puritan leaders wrote about marriage as a covenant, similar to the covenant between a government and its people, or the covenant between God and the Israelites.  In the book “Covenant Marriage in Comparative Perspective” (edited by John Witte Jr. and Eliza Ellison, published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005)  there is a chapter by James Turner Johnson called “Marriage as covenant in early Protestant thought: Its development and implications.”  Johnson writes:

“The relation of husband and wife is mutual and reciprocal, but not equal, because husbands and wives are of different natures as man and woman as well as of different offices in marriage.  But such difference does not diminish their fundamental equality in grace; nor does it in any way impair their ability to function as true partners in their common enterprise.” (page 137)

Johnson quotes the 1598 writings of Puritan leader Robert Cleaver (“A Godlie Form of Household Government”):

“A house hold is as it were a little common wealth, by the good government thereof, Gods glorie my be advaunced, the common wealth which standeth of several families benefitted, and al that live in that familie may recieve much benefit and commoditie.” (page 132)

and:

“The governours of families… upon whom the charge of government lyeth, though unequally, are first the Cheefe governour, which is the Husband, secondly a fellow helper, which is the Wife. ” (page 133)

Johnson explains three major points on page 133:

1. “…the order is one that is defined by office, not by personal qualities; the wife is not inherently inferior to the husband, or woman to man.”
2. “…the order of precedence is defined by order of responsibility.”
3. “…the wife’s strong second place is secured in detail:  she has the authority of the husband within the household when he is absent, and near equal authority when he is present; indeed in some respects within the household her authority is superior to his.”

Johnson quotes many Puritan writers who state again and again that the marriage relationship should be one of love and friendship and mutual helpfulness — not one where the husband is a tyrant.  Love and friendship definitely characterize our marriage, for which I am very very grateful!  And though my husband is a very large man, I have never feared him as I might fear a tyrannosaur.  

If ever two were one, then surely we,

If ever man were loved by wife, then thee.

If ever wife were happy in a man,

Compare with me, ye women, if ye can.

I prize thy love more than whole mines of gold,

Or all the riches that the East can hold.

My love is such that rivers cannot quench,

Nor aught but love from thee give recompense.

Thy love is such I can no way repay;

The heavens reward thee manifold, I pray.

Then, while we live, in love let’s so persevere,

That when we live no more, we may live ever.

Quoted in: Johnson, James Turner.  Marriage as covenant in early Protestant thought:  Its development and implications.  A chapter in the book “Covenant marriage in comparative perspective” edited by John Witte Jr. and Eliza Ellison, published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005.  Pages 142-143.

Well, now I’m looking at it with new eyes… And I see that I was wrong, oh so wrong. I should have submitted to his wishes to have fun. Recognizing his Headship is the right thing to do. And logically, it would simply have made the weekend more enjoyable if there was less nagging, less work, and more fun.

Why am I so strong-willed? Why do I PUSH, when I should hold out my hand to my husband and let him PULL?

I’m crying as I type this. I wish I could just call him up right now and apologize to him, tell him how much I love him and honor him. But I can’t. In the time zone where he works now, he’s asleep. And I need to hurry up and leave my office, go home — it’s getting quite late in my time zone too!

So rather than looking at the house/garage-cleaning as “we didn’t accomplish much” I am now seeing all that we did accomplish:

1. two very large garbage bins and one smaller garbage can filled with junk
2. two very large boxes and one small box filled with things to donate to charity
3. all his too-small or damaged clothes are in the boxes & bins above
4. putting labels on a bunch of boxes in the garage that were a mystery, and re-arranging so the similar things are together
5. coming to an understanding on the movies & books
6. he gave me very clear directions for how to proceed packing up our household, so that hopefully I can join him in a few more months
7. and most important of all, we laughed and held hands and talked and snuggled and shared our precious moments together

Sometimes in my loneliness I forget that I am not the only one who is suffering by this separation. He didn’t want to leave, he chose to because he needed to earn money, for US. To hopefully find a new home, for US, so we can be closer to our families and so we can start a family of our own. To get both of us out of this icky place we’ve been in. To make OUR future better.

“My Lord goeth ahead of me, to prepare a place for me.” Where have I heard that before?

So here’s a few of the many things I love about my husband:

1. He makes me laugh.
2. He loves me wholeheartedly, even despite my many faults.
3. He tries very hard to provide for us, even going so far as to move to another state to get work.
4. He calls me on my lunch break every day (this used to be just a nice treat, but now that he’s in another time zone, this is vital!)
5. He is gentle and loving when I need extra care, and firm and in charge when I need guidance and direction.

Here’s why I changed to wearing fewer pants and more skirts, around 1990:

• my legs are too long, so most pants look like “floods” on me (and at that time, few stores carried “Talls” sizes)
• I lived in a place where winters were cold and rainy, and I found that wet pants stayed damp and chilling for hours, but wet tights dried quickly once I got indoors
• short pleated skirts were in style, and I liked they way they looked on me
• I was trying to cultivate an “ivy league girl” image

A few years later, when I got married, I switched to longer skirts and more “mature” looking outfits. I wanted to signal that I was a married woman, not the typical co-ed on the campus where I worked.

At some point I discovered “skorts” and wore those in the summers for a while — the comfort of long shorts, but the modesty of a skirt (well, in the front anyways!)

Somehow I got back into wearing pants around the turn of the millennium… but I was wearing mostly capri pants. I guess I was still having trouble finding them long enough! One day while passing a building with mirrored windows, I saw my distorted full-length reflection and realized how the capri pants just cut my legs off, making me look shorter (and fatter.) This was about the same time I realized that almost all my pants were capris, which are not exactly practical in the winter winds!

So about 2003 I started wearing skirts & dresses again, almost exclusively. I still have some pants in my closet, for very specific purposes:

• 8-10 pairs of lightweight cotton capri pajama bottoms for wearing underneath all skirts & dresses (for modesty and to avoid chafing)
• 2 pairs of flannel pajama bottoms for lounging around the house in the cool weather
• 3 pairs of sweatpants for lounging around the house in the cold weather (and theoretically, for exercising…)
• 1 pair of sturdy blue jeans for those rare few trips to go camping, hiking, romping in the park, etc.
• 3 pairs of lightweight cotton pants hemmed to below the knee, for occasional wear in the summertime (instead of shorts)
• and then there’s all the other pants hanging in the back of the closet, or in a box in the garage, that are in good condition so I keep saying I’ll sell them on ebay someday… I need to just drop them off at the thrift store!

I hardly ever wear pants or shorts in public anymore. Why? I think my backside looks too big! A skirt blurs the contours. And I think a skirt is just more feminine. I have a large frame and I fear I look a bit “manly” sometimes — and skirts / dresses telegraph the message “I am woman” pretty well. (This is also why I don’t like to wear “menswear-inspired” button-down dress shirts, either…)

But today, I went out in public in pants. Sweatpants! Ack!

I was just planning to take the dog down to the neighborhood park. It’s a tiny little patch of grass with a playground. Mostly just kids there, if anyone at all. So I figured the navy blue sweatpants I saw draped over the back of the chair would be fine. Well, as soon as we set foot out the front door I saw all those weeds along the edges of the driveway, and I just couldn’t let them go any longer… Each week I tell myself I’ll get to them, and each week they get taller. So I finally decided to pull them. After wandering around the yard waiting for me for the better part of an hour, I decided the dog deserved a better treat than just wandering around the park, so we hopped in the car and went to the pet store (PetCo or PetSmart, I never remember which is which.) And before I knew it, there I was, wandering the aisles looking for treats, in my sweatpants, short sleeved T-shirt (ack!) and bright red bandana, probably with leaves stuck to me…. Some man looked at me funny (he was just the kind of man I’ve always found cute, too!) — I wonder if it was because the bandana looked weird, or because my sweats are a little clingy…?

A few weeks ago when I was in Macy’s, I was in line behind a woman wearing light gray sweatpants, which were very clingy on her 350+ pound frame, and showed every lump and bump. Plus, they were stained, and had several small holes in the seat!!! And I said to my mother “I would never leave go out in public looking like that!” Well, except for ~100 pounds and a few holes, I just did!

As another Friend wrote in 1989: “When you filter the Light through different cultures you have a human prism where the Light is broken into colors and expressed in different ways. But behind all the colors you still have the same light.” For her, a consistent Quaker accepts that “it is up to each individual to discover what God is.”

As a Philadelphia Friend put it, “Quakerism can be a beautiful multi-colored shawl…. The disparate threads contained are, in the cloth of a religious society, ready to revolutionize the world and bring the Kingdom of Heaven into its full reality on earth.”

From the “Notes” section of the book we can hope to find who originally said those lovely words. It appears that the first quote is from Karen Reynolds, in an article entitled “What is God, anyway?” published in Friends Journal 35 (July 1989.) This article does not appear to be available online. I hope I can obtain it via InterLibrary Loan (ILL.)

I will expand later on how that first quote relates to my beliefs, after I read the entire article.

The second quote comes from Sally Rickerman, who wrote it in the pamphlet “Growing up Quaker and Universalist too” published by Quaker Universalist Fellowship in 1999. The whole pamphlet is available online, at http://www.universalistfriends.org/rickerman.html. Here is the quote in full, with part of a later paragraph added:

Quakerism can be a beautiful multi-colored shawl. It has grades and shades of color for interest. Its richness and strength are shown through its weaving. The disparate threads contained are, in the cloth of a religious society, ready to revolutionize the world and bring the Kingdom of Heaven into its full reality on earth…. That which we share, universally, with all religions is the wish to implement our divine interconnectedness. This goal, to be neither divisive nor exclusive, but to wear proudly the beautiful Quaker shawl, is our human and Quaker responsibility.

This “beautiful multi-colored shawl” is an image that certainly speaks to me. Especially given my love of textiles, and my love of Noah’s Ark and its associated rainbow. A rainbow is composed of light, beautiful light in its many wavelengths, each travelling at its own speed, separate yet together… I could go on and on about rainbows, but I’ll save that for later.

Terry H. Wallace wrote an article “Misunderstanding Quaker faith and practice” in “Friends Journal” (January 2007). It is available online at http://www.friendsjournal.org/misunderstanding-quaker-faith-and-practice. He disputes the idea of a common light, saying that the only Light is Jesus Christ. That part I’m still thinking about. But he says some other things that I agree with:

…the struggle to find God leads to discoveries about ourselves that are uncomfortable and disconcerting, and will demand changes in our behavior that will draw us away from, and into conflict with, shallow, self-centered, destructive, and unsustainable popular cultures.

I have definitely been struggling with some uncomfortable and disconcerting spiritual ideas in the past 2 years! And for the past 15 years I’ve tried, with more or less success depending on which year you are talking about, to pull away from the destructiveness of popular culture. It’s not an easy task, and I’ve slipped a lot. Just a few hours ago I found myself casually cursing – WHY? Is that method of expression really how I want to be heard, the kind of person I want to be? NO.

Okay, back to Terry H. Wallace. When discussing the “postmodernist political slurry so popular in university classrooms” he says:

…the postmodernist deconstruction of belief systems does not lead to a more tolerant and positive society. It simply strips citizens of life-saving and life-sustaining beliefs and values, leaving them confused and defenseless against those who would exploit them.

He also discusses community at length. And I guess that is really what I am searching for: a life-giving, life-sustaining, life-saving community. A place where I can belong, where I can feel cared for, where I can show caring for others. A family.

I thought I had that for a while in a secular organization, but I find myself distancing myself more and more from them every year. Many of their values I hold dear, such as personal honor and graciousness, but in one large way I disagree with their actions: virtue. A woman’s virtue means nothing to them. I took part in that sexual licentiousness for a time, and it damaged me emotionally and spiritually. Their path holds too much darkness for me.

I am searching for the light. Is the Religious Society of Friends the right path for me? I’ve explored the Bnei Noach (Children of Noah), or Noachides, movement online for a few years. I agree with their beliefs. But Noachides are a small movement — they don’t seem to have the sort of large organization or community I’m looking for. So unless I want to attend Jewish synagogues as a ger toshav (“resident alien”) for the rest of my life, I have to find something else. I thought about Unitarian Universalism for a while, but my husband doesn’t seem favorable toward UU. So I’ll see how he feels about Universalist Quakers….

Thomas H. Jeavons wrote an article “So what can we say now? Suggestions for explaining Quakerism” in “Friends Journal” (February 2006). It is available online at http://www.friendsjournal.org/so-what-can-we-say-now-suggestions-explaining.

Quakerism had its origins in the experience of one person, George Fox, who was a religious seeker. It then set its roots in a movement of people who called themselves “Seekers.” What they all sought was authentic spiritual experience, the kind that answered the deep spiritual hunger they felt. Many people still feel that hunger today.

I certainly feel the hunger! And I’m seeking. I’ve been seeking ever since I could think for myself. First I thought I “found it” in a tiny Southern Baptist church (as a pre-teen), then in a small Conservative Jewish synagogue (my college years). Then I gravitated toward Orthodox Judaism in my mid-thirties, but found that was too difficult a path for me. Now as 40 approaches rapidly, I am still seeking. Perhaps I will always be “seeking” and never feel finished; perhaps it is a journey that will never end. And I’m okay with that. I like to travel.

Jeavons suggests these five statements as a summary of Quaker belief:

1. God is real
2. God is accessible and knowable directly and immediately
3. There is a spark of the Divine, “that of God,” in every person
4. Jesus Christ has some very special, uniquely important role in revealing the nature of God to humankind
5. Being “faithful”—literally “full of faith”—requires and creates a genuine community

I won’t try to paraphrase what he says about #4 (you can read it yourself.) His way of talking about “The Christ” makes sense to me. Even when I rejected organized Christianity in my teen years, I still recognized that he was probably a real person who said many of the things attributed to him by later writers (the apostles.) And I have long believed that those were wise sayings which we can certainly learn from (just as I believe Confucius and Martin Luther and Martin Luther King, Jr and countless others had some great things to say.) And I agree that many people have been touched by the teachings of Jesus. So if that’s all I need to believe in order to be a Quaker, it’s looking really good so far! Time to study some more, and find a Meeting to attend.