I signed up for a college course, Social Disorganization, because I loved the title of it. It promised stimulation—something different. The professor Mr. Neal DeNood didn’t stride in and slowly approach the podium with professorial dignity, but rather bounced in and hopped upon the dais. I liked him instantly. He had zip, was extraordinarily handsome, and sported a small upper-lip mustache. Most all the other male professors were clean shaven. I’d heard someone in the religion department use the word charisma—sparkling with charm, maybe from God. Mr. De Nood was that.
“There are no rights without duties,” DeNood began the first class, paused, then repeated his dictum. I wrote it down twice. De Nood elaborated on his premise until it was embarrassing—humiliating. I had never thought of this equation. I had assumed my rights were legal, eternally guaranteed, personal, and secured by our constitution. I never thought of them as dependent on someone else’s duty to honor them.
Social DISorganization happened as a result of too much unevenness. It meant revolution, sometimes war, sometimes riots and crimes, even assassinations. It happened when basic human rights to things like housing, education, healthcare, and economic security were not supported by appropriate legal, economic, medical, and economic structures and policies, accessible to all members of that society. In a democratic society the people have a say in such policies, and politicians work to assure them.
I pondered about private schools and public schools. I’d started in private and switched to public. I was glad, thinking it would be less snobby/preppy. Smith was private and costly. Students earned their place by academic merit—and money. Wealth or merit? Which?
Was my privilege my right? my duty? both? neither? How much did it depend on money? This might have been the first time my own color—white—dimly occurred to me as a factor.
Neal De Nood was a full professor in 1958. He’d started his teaching career at Smith in 1937-38, the year I was born. Safe to say he was too old for me, but you can see how handsome he was in this archival photo. He is in the right hand photo, second from left. Perky, huh? The archivist wrote: De Nood “startled his colleagues and undergraduates with his prowess as a lecturer, his unorthodox views, and his penchant for the sensational.”

I never forgot that no rights without duties wisdom. It was inspirational—meant to tantalize us smart young people to go out into the world and take up our duty: make sure that every American is able at least to exercise her or his right to a good education of their choice.
De Nood’s equation floundered in American society. The duty half of it too often crashed like a seesaw.
Chapter XIX. The Chaplain
I gave a glancing thought to God, the one I’d met under a table as a young child, the one in my book, the one sitting in a garden listening and loving every sight and sound on earth, the one who listened to me when I chattered on and on about the injustice of my parent’s nasty cocktail hour, the God I’d lost track of. But I remembered the Bible and bits about Jesus—all into rights and duties and justice and peace, but they killed him.
The next best option was the college chaplain, the Rev. Mr. Richard Unsworth—another crushingly handsome object for my affection. Still, I thought he might have some ideas about my rights and duty questions. He agreed about Jesus. He also listened to my yearnings for religious ritual—sort of Catholic but not. Listening was God-like. He suggested I try the Episcopal church—the very last thing I thought would help.
I’d grown up in the Presbyterian Church which in the 1940’s and ’50’s was dry as parchment. I had tried those Catholics that Betty Singer sang about and discovered at Mass, a Mystery called Eucharist which held me in its grip, even in Latin. BUT, the Roman Catholic priest I talked to was a bust. He did okay about racism (not a godly thing) but he failed at sexism (women were ungodly, except Mary-in-concrete). So now I would try this Episcopal Church, thanks to this gorgeous chaplain who wasn’t even an Episcopalian.
While driving my mind nuts thinking about rights, I found a rite—a ritual, a sacramental meal that required no thinking at all and engaged my body—kneel, bow, cross my chest with Christ, eat, bend a knee but not in protest. What struck me about this holy meal was that everyone was welcome at the altar table. No one was turned away. Of course you had to be Christian, but I brushed that requirement aside, because it looked like everyone had a right to come and be fed. This church fulfilled its duty. This Eucharist was a meal my mind could not comprehend but could love.
Intuitively, I realized that this meal could not be racist if it tried—unless of course the Church and its control issues mucked it up.
The Episcopal Church and I bonded. While still in college I was confirmed.
Chapter XX. A Psych. Test
I thought to major in English, because I love literature. I thought to major in Religion, because I love God. I thought to major in Spanish, because I love languages, could roll my R’s, and my favorite Spanish professor, a poet from Spain, no less, was one of my crushees. I thought to major in Psychology, because I needed clues to the inner workings of, well, everyone. Spanish poetry won out, in large part because the department was small and I thought I could shine.
While I was cogitating all this I took several psychology courses. One of them included some kind of a personality test, not Myers Briggs or MMPI. It was designed to identify personality types. I answered everything, hid nothing. I had a lot to hide, but I didn’t know it yet. The test revealed my personality type: RELIGIOUS. I was astonished. I’d hoped for something like adored-by-all or destined for literary fame. But religious?
Curiously, what the religious personality type defined was someone who tended to see things in wholes, who looked for and saw the larger picture, valuing it, in spite of contradictory details. I already knew I wasn’t practical, and now I knew I’d always be doomed to seek balance, this equity that is impossibly possible, dependent as it is on rights and duties.

