Yesterday, Sheri (Sheryl Anne Huffor Nemelka, my wife) traded in her car and purchased a 2011 Toyota Camry.
If I had had it my way, she wouldn’t have bought the car. She would have sold the one she had and learned to take public transportation. From where she usually lives in Orem, Utah, she could easily take the UTA bus 850 on State Street, transfer in American Fork to the 811, which would take her to the Sandy Trax station, which would drop her off within one block of her work. All for only $2!
When not traveling in the RV (which consumes gas at an unbelievable rate), I take public transportation. Then why can’t Sheri? A 2011 Toyota Camry! For God’s sake (literally)! Why not something less expensive? Why not a Ford Fiesta?
Here’s why not:
A couple of Christmases ago, Sheri’s purse was old, worn, and desperately needed to be replaced. Being the considerate husband that I am, I bought her a purse that I thought was reasonable, practical, and a good bargain. It only cost $10 from Wal-Mart. (This was discussed in the past in one of the public Internet discussion groups.[1]) Needless to say, my female peers censured me and some sent Sheri a purse of their own choosing.
I learned a lot from that Christmas lesson. A lot about what men really don’t know about women. I learned a lot about my own hypocrisy. I wanted Sheri to become who I wanted her to be, not who she wanted to be. In my defense, I knew her human essence beyond her flesh, and I often (in the past) wanted her to be who I knew she could become, not who she is in this present flesh.
The HUMAN REALITY book’s Introduction describes our individuality as a “crown”:
- Our mind is ours to control. It is our individual kingdom, surrounded by high walls and secure gates. Our kingdom is governed by its own crowned ruler, a powerful dictator of one. It is a city of refuge and peace where no person or thought is allowed inside its gates unless the king or queen within permits entrance. When a threat to our personal security (or better, our individuality) arises from without the walls of our kingdom, we shut and fortify the gates to ensure that the ruler within reigns supreme and gives up no power to the other kings and queens of the earth.
Yesterday, I was the one who convinced Sheri to trade in her car for a Toyota Camry. I knew she has always wanted one, but would never consider one because she didn’t want to disappoint me. I knew Sheri could not wear my crown, nor should I expect her to. She has her own crown.
And why did I suggest a Camry? Because “Camry” in Japanese means “crown.”
It’s her crown, not mine.
Here are some personal facts that led to the purchase of this car that will probably last Sheri 20 years, as long as I don’t drive it too often:
Sheri makes a little over $2000 per month from her job. She gives $800 per month to benefit the MWAW, a sum more than any other. What is left supports us, pays the rest of our bills, pays for our food, our (usually my) entertainment, child support for her daughter, and other various sundries. After what she contributes to this work and after paying for our necessities, we have no money left for rent or utilities.
Luckily, someone (who would rather not be named, but shall be anyway because of my determination to give a full disclosure of truth—Ida Smith) donated a small unused bedroom space in her basement to provide Sheri with some domicile stability. Bob Newton, assisted by some donated manual labor of Stephen Kammerman, the consulting of John Roh, and the generosity of Dennis Iverson who paid for the materials, turned a small storage area of the basement into a beautiful bathroom for Sheri. Without these individuals’ help, Sheri would be living in the RV with me without a home, traveling around wherever I wanted to be at the time.
Without others, Sheri would be wearing my crown, one which a Utah Third District Court Judge (Stephen Henriod) decided was “troglodytic[2].”
- “The Court will not condone Respondent’s choice to drag his children into his troglodytic lifestyle. More egregious than Respondent’s disregard of the Court’s authority is his neglect of his children’s welfare. It is unconscionable that Respondent has fathered so many children and simultaneously demonstrated utterly no intent to take responsibility for, or to support any of them. His failure to pay even the nominal child support he owes, and condemning his children to live in poverty, is reprehensible.” (Case # 924902578 DA)[3]
I sincerely thank my dear critics for the provided link. With wonderful irony, Judge Henriod gave his decision on this very same day, August 1st, in 2007. What my critics don’t know is what really happened that day in court. (Others do, who were there and who filed personal affidavits of the matter, that are also included in the court record, which, of course, a critic would never divulge.)
When I get around to documenting what actually occurred, not only leading up to the Judge’s decision, but what happened right before and during the hearing and the days following the decision, my dear critics will wish the case history didn’t exist. The facts will prove the “unconscionable” and “reprehensible” acts of a judge who, in open court, as Sheri approached the witness stand, said with great reproach and prejudice, “You’re married to this guy!??”
But, of course, a critic would edit and publish only those parts that he thought best represented what he personally thinks of me. A example of this presented itself recently in the media in the case of Shirley Sherrod and her critic, Andrew Breitbart. For some giggles, one should find pictures of both Breitbart and Chris Hampton (one of my many critics and the one responsible for the published and severely edited and misaligned facts given at sealednot.wordpress.com) and compare their demeanor with my own. :-)
The judge was right. I have no right to expect others to live as I live. And I guess I should be put in jail (as I was ordered) for trying to influence others to live my troglodytic lifestyle. I suppose both me and ol’ Jesus got it all wrong! And to think that a judge would disagree with our lifestyle! How reprehensible!
:-)
But anyways…
My perspective of this life and the world is completely different from everyone else’s, as it should be, or I would have never been able to do this work. If Sheri had my perspective, she would, and could, live my lifestyle and her flesh would be completely satisfied. She does not. She’s not supposed to. Neither is anyone else. And without the perspective I have, no one, not even a Utah State Judge (go figure), would understand.
I know this life is a time to gain the experience of opposites—the very opposite of our true nature. It is all good and needed for our development and eventual ability to appreciate who we have each chosen to be. Sheri is not exempt from the purpose of mortality. She’s not my creation. She’s not me. She is not even actually Sheri! But for now, upon this earth at this time, she is. And I wouldn’t have it any other way. She was placed in my life for an important purpose. If the world only knew who she was in the past, it would then know, first, why she is the way she is, and second, why ONLY she could put up with me and my troglodyticosyncrasies (I just made that one up!).
Sheri’s essence is closer to that of an eternal female than most any other’s. Those who know her can see this in her. From her outward appearance and the way she carries herself, the world would rightly wonder, “You’re married to this guy!??”
In this world, she is innocent, naïve, sometimes “airy,” and often vain and worldly. She offers the world a glimpse of what happens when an essence such as hers is placed in an imperfect mortal body in an imperfect world. But most importantly, if she has a personal weakness, given to her for her own sake and growth, then every other woman in the world is justified in her own.
Now again,
But anyways…back to the Camry…
A couple of years ago, Sheri cosigned on a car so that her daughter Cassie could get one. When Sheri signed the papers, I told her that within six months she would be paying for the car herself. Cassie surprised us and made it over a year before she couldn’t make the payments and consequently stuck her mom with the car. Sheri took over the payments and gave her old, paid-for car to Cassie. Sheri did not like the car that she inherited. She never would have purchased it if not for the worldly love she has for her daughter. (I call it “worldly love” because mine is “troglodytic love.” :-) )
With the car payment, Sheri had even less to care for her “troglodytic” caveman husband.
There were recent changes in how portions of this work are provided for. As a result, Sheri has very little because of that which she gives to this work, pays for her new car, and drinks at Starbucks. But should anyone feel sorry for her?
Hell no!
She’s driving around in a 2011 Camry!
[1] “To the Few Who Feed The Sheep,” Yahoo!®Groups, 1 Aug 2010 <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/marvelousworkandawonder/message/369>.
[2] Someone who dwells in a cave; or one who lives in solitude.
[3] “Court Findings,” Not The Sealed Portion – Christopher Nemelka, 1 Aug 2010 <http://sealednot.wordpress.com/court-findings/>.
