So here we are. In the midst of reading days, leading up to finals, to end the first year. "They" always say the first year is the hardest. If that isn't true, I'm not sure how anyone actually graduates from law school. It's a winnowing process.
Or something like that.
I don't actually have time to be writing this right now; I should either be studying or getting ready for a wedding (which, of course, is what makes that studying that much more important, since I won't be studying the rest of the afternoon).
I feel okay about finals. It's hard to tell though, because it's all set to a curve. I don't just have to do well to get good grades: I have to do better than my classmates. No matter how much you study, there's no way to ever feel good about out-performing people on essay questions.
The competition notwithstanding, I do feel good about my chances. As long as I keep my scholarship, I won't be heartbroken. As long as I perform near the top of the middle of the pack in each class, then I won't lose my scholarship.
It's hard to believe the first year is already almost over. Until finals end, it won't feel like it's over. No matter how well I actually do, just getting this far feels like an accomplishment.
To think that, a year ago, I was still with InterVarsity, just starting at Starbucks, and didn't really know what a "tort" is, makes the road look much longer than it felt.
Truthfully, it was somewhere between the fastest year I've lived, and the hardest- not that those actually preclude each other.
In 20 years, I might look back on this post and laugh at how much I worried about my grades and studying for property.
But 20 years ago, I cared about the teenage mutant ninja turtles a lot more than I do now too.
And even now, I don't think that was stupid, all things considered.
-Zack
"I ain't play the hand I was dealt, I changed my cards
I prayed to the skies and I changed my stars"
-Kanye
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Unchained
One year ago today, I announced, as much as a post on here is an announcement, my split with InterVarsity on ideological grounds.
Little did I know, those ideological grounds would become the issue in our country for the 365 days after that. Around a month after my termination with InterVarsity, President Obama announced his "evolving views" on gay marriage. About one month ago, 2 Supreme Court cases were heard on the very issue (which, in typical post-marshall fashion, will probably render divergent judgments, if they both survive the inane technicalities Roberts harps on to avoid making useful decisions. Though I can't actually blame Roberts for that as much as I'd like- it's a hallmark of post-Holmes Courts in many ways-- and it's not entirely invalid, from a legal/lawyer point of view: just unhelpful for lay-people who maybe follow 2 SC cases per year and don't have legal training).
But I wasn't just taking a stand for my progressive political views. I wasn't just trying to up my Lakewood hipster street-cred. Indeed, though "an ideological split" is not the worst way to put it, I was really just standing up for people I love. I was just standing up for people who love Jesus, as much as anyone in InterVarsity, and who, for whatever reason (it is not my road to walk), searched out the Bible, attuned to the Holy Spirit speaking to themselves, as individuals and couples and families, and heard nothing but blessing of the love inside them for a person of the same sex.
Though I can describe it as "taking a stand," in ways, it was the opposite: I was deciding not to take a stand. I was deciding that, at least for me, I cannot declare that an honest, God-fearing, bible-reading, Jesus-loving person, who feels, in the deepest depths of themselves, that God created them with a true and blessed orientation to be attracted to and love a person of the same sex. I decided not to take that stand. It's not my place. It's not anyone's place. It's not InterVarsity's place. It's not the pope's place. It's not Justices Scalia, Roberts, and Thomas' place.
In the early days of InterVarsity, a woman who owned a mansion offered it to InterVarsity for retreats, so long as no black students be in attendance. InterVarsity refused and went on to strike a path of racial reconciliation among Christians that is essentially, historically, unequaled. I was always proud to be a part of that tradition.
But InterVarsity has recanted on that sort of justice-driven fortitude. Truth be told, had InterVarsity either A. decided not to have an official position on the morality of same-sex intimacy in all its levels or B. decided it wasn't as outlawed in the Bible as we've been led to believe, millions of dollars flowing in from rich, southern donors would have been cut off immediately. Perhaps that was never considered. Unfortunately, everything I saw from InterVarsity said otherwise: what donors thought and think controlled everything we did.
That's really beside the point though. We've come to a grand canyon as a country, as a church. There are those on the side of the progressive, who see the unclarity in the Bible (and it is unclear: what we mean by homosexuality today is nowhere near what it meant 2000 years ago, and further), coupled with the experiences of gay Christians, as God's blessing on love in all its forms. Conversely, there are those on the other side, who see everything as always already literal, and believe more in the meaning of words than the importance of people. InterVarsity publishes gains, in almost every category, every single year. That will continue, but make no mistake: growing your organization with parochially minded conservative students who fear what they do not know will, some day, lead to a reversal. Kids who grew up opposed to gay people (because that's what it really is) are going to be drawn to InterVarsity: tacit hatred is an attractive cause. But as our country and Church grows, and love regains its ground (God is love, after all), the traction will start to wear. Those drawn to InterVarsity and its ilk because of their closed-mindedness will decrease in number. InterVarsity will either have to reverse its position (though without swift action at that point, that may not undo the damage), or face a form of extinction.
I understand that the strongly-literalist minded believe that, because they believe God is on their side, they can't fail. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, after all. Of course, if God is on your side, you can't fail. That's what Jesus said. But Jesus only ever said he's on the side of the poor and downtrodden- not the protectionist privileged who fear what they don't understand.
Claiming God's on your side doesn't put him on your side.
And that's why I don't take the stand and judge anyone's love. From what I know of God, according to the Bible, it's our job to love, and nothing else. The most damning words in the Bible are reserved for the oppressors.
And I ask this, to end this, what is more oppressive than telling two people that their love, which they ardently believe is a gift from God, is nothing but a product of sinful desires?
Dieu est amour.
-Zack
"Blast me but never ask me to live a lie"
-2Pac
Little did I know, those ideological grounds would become the issue in our country for the 365 days after that. Around a month after my termination with InterVarsity, President Obama announced his "evolving views" on gay marriage. About one month ago, 2 Supreme Court cases were heard on the very issue (which, in typical post-marshall fashion, will probably render divergent judgments, if they both survive the inane technicalities Roberts harps on to avoid making useful decisions. Though I can't actually blame Roberts for that as much as I'd like- it's a hallmark of post-Holmes Courts in many ways-- and it's not entirely invalid, from a legal/lawyer point of view: just unhelpful for lay-people who maybe follow 2 SC cases per year and don't have legal training).
But I wasn't just taking a stand for my progressive political views. I wasn't just trying to up my Lakewood hipster street-cred. Indeed, though "an ideological split" is not the worst way to put it, I was really just standing up for people I love. I was just standing up for people who love Jesus, as much as anyone in InterVarsity, and who, for whatever reason (it is not my road to walk), searched out the Bible, attuned to the Holy Spirit speaking to themselves, as individuals and couples and families, and heard nothing but blessing of the love inside them for a person of the same sex.
Though I can describe it as "taking a stand," in ways, it was the opposite: I was deciding not to take a stand. I was deciding that, at least for me, I cannot declare that an honest, God-fearing, bible-reading, Jesus-loving person, who feels, in the deepest depths of themselves, that God created them with a true and blessed orientation to be attracted to and love a person of the same sex. I decided not to take that stand. It's not my place. It's not anyone's place. It's not InterVarsity's place. It's not the pope's place. It's not Justices Scalia, Roberts, and Thomas' place.
In the early days of InterVarsity, a woman who owned a mansion offered it to InterVarsity for retreats, so long as no black students be in attendance. InterVarsity refused and went on to strike a path of racial reconciliation among Christians that is essentially, historically, unequaled. I was always proud to be a part of that tradition.
But InterVarsity has recanted on that sort of justice-driven fortitude. Truth be told, had InterVarsity either A. decided not to have an official position on the morality of same-sex intimacy in all its levels or B. decided it wasn't as outlawed in the Bible as we've been led to believe, millions of dollars flowing in from rich, southern donors would have been cut off immediately. Perhaps that was never considered. Unfortunately, everything I saw from InterVarsity said otherwise: what donors thought and think controlled everything we did.
That's really beside the point though. We've come to a grand canyon as a country, as a church. There are those on the side of the progressive, who see the unclarity in the Bible (and it is unclear: what we mean by homosexuality today is nowhere near what it meant 2000 years ago, and further), coupled with the experiences of gay Christians, as God's blessing on love in all its forms. Conversely, there are those on the other side, who see everything as always already literal, and believe more in the meaning of words than the importance of people. InterVarsity publishes gains, in almost every category, every single year. That will continue, but make no mistake: growing your organization with parochially minded conservative students who fear what they do not know will, some day, lead to a reversal. Kids who grew up opposed to gay people (because that's what it really is) are going to be drawn to InterVarsity: tacit hatred is an attractive cause. But as our country and Church grows, and love regains its ground (God is love, after all), the traction will start to wear. Those drawn to InterVarsity and its ilk because of their closed-mindedness will decrease in number. InterVarsity will either have to reverse its position (though without swift action at that point, that may not undo the damage), or face a form of extinction.
I understand that the strongly-literalist minded believe that, because they believe God is on their side, they can't fail. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, after all. Of course, if God is on your side, you can't fail. That's what Jesus said. But Jesus only ever said he's on the side of the poor and downtrodden- not the protectionist privileged who fear what they don't understand.
Claiming God's on your side doesn't put him on your side.
And that's why I don't take the stand and judge anyone's love. From what I know of God, according to the Bible, it's our job to love, and nothing else. The most damning words in the Bible are reserved for the oppressors.
And I ask this, to end this, what is more oppressive than telling two people that their love, which they ardently believe is a gift from God, is nothing but a product of sinful desires?
Dieu est amour.
-Zack
"Blast me but never ask me to live a lie"
-2Pac
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)