I can accept that Jane found a “sort of happiness” and “human flourishing” with friends, family, and work. But, it is clear from the story that her happiest, best, and most fulfilling years came at the end of the story when she was reunited with Edward. (Further disproving Robertson’s argument for divorce, because Jane was very happy caring for a “blind, crippled, emotionally broken man” who was her beloved!)

The human experience is certainly full of examples where the “happiness” one hoped for with the beloved does not come to pass. In those cases, the wound and hope for reunion may never go away. However, those of us who follow Christ must find a way to “move on” so that we can flourish by serving God and others without the beloved. In these faithful actions there is indeed flourishing and “a sort of happiness,” but it is a path of sacrifice, service, and sometimes pain.

I mean by happiness “human flourishing.”

Your reading may vary, but I think one part of her life (marriage) was closed off to her. In that sense, she was not happy with one part of her life, but she was going on. She could not marry St. John, but she could live as a normal wholesome person.

In one sense, I so miss people now dead (such as my Aunt Karen and Uncle Roddy) that in one way I will never be happy again until paradise.

And yet . . . in another way I am happy. That is how I see Jane.

However, as a fan of Jane Eyre, I don’t know that Jane “found happiness” without Rochester. She was noble and content with friends, family, and work; but I don’t think she was truly “happy” until she was reunited with her beloved at a time when it was appropriate.