Initial reactions to my new book, "Survivor's Guide to Grief"

I seem to be driven by compulsions of different kinds in selecting what I am going to write. Perhaps most creative people have equally little choice over what they want to create.


With this book, I found the experience of living, of just being, after the sudden unanticipated death of my true blue, my one-and-only, excruciatingly painful. I began to observe myself stumbling through one day after another and realized that it was as though I were watching myself from outside myself getting guillotined. The actual physical pain and the progress of the grief fascinated me; and I began to take notes.


I also found that there was almost nothing to read which was simple and honest enough for me. My brains were in a shambles and my confusion not possible to describe except to someone who has been there. Most books dealt with a years-long anticipated death caused by long-term diseases such as cancer, where the grieving went on and on before the actual death. I wished that I had had the book to read that I was beginning to write, about sudden death such as massive heart attack or car accident or gun shot; and so, the notes slowly became this book.

There are three kinds of people who have read the pre-pub book, and there are three kinds of reactions.

1. Grief professionals. They are unanimous in serious praise for the book.

2. The newly bereaved. They find the book very, very helpful in sorting out their own emotional and mental needs and responses; they like comparing their experriences with mine in the book; they are grateful to me for having written it; it has been a valuable help to them.

3. Those who had been bereaved several years earlier and had grown some tough skin: they can't read the book. Friends read twenty pages, thirty, then quit. It throws them back into the emotional state they'd been in before; and of course, they don't want to become quivering lumps of open, exposed nerves again.

All groups love the Starfish theme: be like a starfish and grow new legs. There IS one funny part of the book: getting back in shape and trying to start dating again.

I am relieved that this book is finally out in the world where it can do some good; and I can turn to other interests in addition to helping the grieving.

Freedom of Religion

Today is Sunday, August 17th. It seems the right day to begin my blog and the right day to introduce a discussion on freedom of religion. In these days of world-wide brutal attacks by people of one faith on people of a different faith, it seems good to reflect on this aspect of the blessings of living in religious freedom.

I believe that very few Americans know about the extremely hard times the first settlers suffered through in their search for a homeland in which people would have the right to express individual religious convictions publicly, nor do we realize that America is the birthplace of freedom to worship without fear of reprisals, imprisonment, beheading, or war. Europe in the 1600's was in a turmoil of Protestant vs. Catholic. Every one of my ancestors escaped from Europe and Great Britain to find freedom in the wilderness across the ocean--Swiss Palatinate, Dutch Reformed Church, French Huguenots, Scottish Reformers, English Puritans.

The Catholic Calvert family was caught in the religious upheavals. When Protestant King James I was in power, they lost homes, ranking positions, and fortunes. When Catholic Charles I followed him, they gained status, elegant homes, and high rank. Lord Baltimore (George, then Cecil Calvert) determined that there should be a place where Catholics could celebrate Mass and Protestants could worship in their simpler manner, living side by side without harm to each other. They were granted lands in what became Maryland. Cecil selected a specific group of settlers to make the journey across the ocean: the sons of Catholic and Protestant families and their families set sail on two ships, the "Ark" and the "Dove," in 1633. The settlers were given a document called "Instructions to the Colonists by Lord Baltimore" which emphasized that Catholics and Protestants were to be treated fairly and allowed to practice their own religion in peace under the new government.

It was the late Ambassador Louise Gore of Maryland who first drew my attention to St.Mary's City, Maryland. The first capital of that future State was founded by the Calvert settlers in 1634. As a Maryland State Senator she had been seeking funding for restoration of historic town which had been left to crumble for 300 years, concealed under fields of crops, after the capital moved to Annapolis. Louise told me about the "Province of Maryland's" 1649 "Toleration Act" which was the first statute by a legislative body of an organized colonial government to grant freedom of religion to all Christians. This Act reinforced the earlier Instructions and is the first instance of a law providing for punishment of intolerant behaviour:

"..no person in this province professing to believe in Jesus Christ shall be in any ways troubled, molested, or discountenanced for his or her religion...so that they be not unfaithful to the lord proprietary or molest or conspire against the civil government established..."

and,

"...whatsoever person or persons shall from henceforth upon any occasion of offence otherwise in a reproachfull manner or way declare call or denominate any person or persons whatsoever inhabiting, residing, traficking, trading or comercing within this province or within any ports, harbours, creeks or havens to the same belonging, an Heretick, Schismatick, Idolator, Puritan, Independent Presbyterian, Antenomian, Barrowist, Roundhead, Seperatist, Popish Priest, Jesuit, Jesuited Papist, Lutheran, Calvenist, Anabaptist, Brownist or any other name or term in a reproachful manner relating to matters of Religion shall for every such offence forfeit and lose the sum of ten shillings Sterling or the value thereof to be levied on the goods and chattels of every such offender and offenders..."

and if they could not pay, they were to be "publicly whipt and imprisoned without bail" until "he, she, or they shall satisfy the party so offended or grieved by such reproachful language..."

At the time, there were very few Jews in Maryland. In 1818, a Thomas Kennedy, member of the House of Delegates, stated that he had never met a Jew but he felt that the 150 or so Jews in Maryland should also be granted freedom of religion. It took Kennedy years of repudiation and scorn and defeat until finally in 1826 his bill to extend to the Jewish people the same rights as enjoyed by Christians became law.