Sunday, September 7, 2008

Why Obama, Part 2: A Brief-as-Possible Look at Taxes

I thought about heading into the territory of “change,” since both candidates have decided to make the word their mantra this election, but since everybody always talks about Obama and change, I think I’ll talk about taxes and fiscal responsibility instead.

[EDIT: If you want an even clearer comparison of McCain’s and Obama’s claims to fiscal responsibility, read this article: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/09/04/2008-09-04_forget_the_pork_wheres_the_beef.html .  Frankly, this article says it better than I ever could, and I think you should read it.]

            It is the view of the Republican Party that the government should let more people keep more of their own money, should spend less money itself, and should keep a tightly balanced federal budget.  It seems to be a tightly guarded secret that, for the most part, Democrats actually agree with all of these tenets.  Yes, Democrats tend to support new social programs that do cost money, and are less averse to raising taxes than Republicans, but Democrats aren’t here to steal away your hard-earned house to turn it into a bathhouse for the homeless.  And while Democrats tend to spend more on things at home, they tend to spend considerably less on things like the military.  And, you know, wars against nations that weren’t threatening us.

            Listen to a few facts, take a look at a few numbers, and re-assess what you think.  Neither Obama nor McCain plans to raise taxes for the middle class – anybody below the $250,000/year mark.  In fact, both McCain and Obama plan to cut taxes for people up to that mark.  After that, their plans diverge: McCain’s tax cuts extend all the way to the top, while Obama plans to simply return the tax levels of the top 10% to just below where they were during the Clinton years.  McCain’s tax plan results in a very clear and very direct loss of income for the government – that is, less money to fund the government’s most necessary functions.  (Actually, of course, all of this money is hypothetical – we won’t actually run out of it, we’ll simply run ourselves further in debt to countries like China, whose ties to us are purely opportunistic.)

The theory is that the low taxes will encourage so much growth and trade and revenue that they will pay for themselves.  While I admit that this is quite reasonable, I am forced to say that I am unconvinced by its results in the past twenty years.  Our Federal Budget deficit ballooned during the 80s as our economy grew and stabilized with low taxes, and in the 90s, under higher tax rates, our economy grew by leaps and bounds.  In fact, those higher taxes left us with a budget surplus, long since evaporated after falling into the hands of a president whom no one, Democrat or Republican, calls a fiscal steward.

A philosophical disagreement with taxes is something worth talking about another time, but let’s stop to look at what we’ve got here: moderate increases in taxes don’t destroy the economy, and they can provide our country with a balanced budget and economic freedom.

Now, back to some numbers: the way McCain’s plan is structured heavily favors the wealthy.  That’s not an accusation, it’s number sense (click this link to see just how much: http://nearing.newsvine.com/_news/2008/08/28/1797267-mccains-tax-cuts-are-aimed-at-the-rich-even-more-so-than-bushs-were ).  The average middle-class family, under McCain’s tax cuts, can hope to save some $325 a year, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center (a non-partisan group).  If you’re voting to put more cash in your wallet, take a look at this: the same family, under Obama’s plan, can hope to save about $1,120 a year - $795 more than with McCain. [http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/a_new_stitch_in_a_bad_pattern.html ] With Obama, 85-90% of the public is getting a tax cut.  Are the wealthy stuck with the tab?  Well, somewhat – as mentioned before, their taxes go back to just below the Clinton tax levels.  But while their tax levels return to 90s levels, their actual income levels have multiplied since that time by at least five-fold.  They won’t be forced to shut down their factories just yet.

But how does it pan out on a national level?  Where do these cuts and raises leave our national budget?  McCain’s cuts are expected to increase our debt by as much as 4.5 trillion dollars, while Obama’s are expected to increase it by 3.3 trillion dollars.  Those numbers look pretty similar in type, but think about the actual difference between 4,500,000,000,000 and 3,300,000,000,000.  It’s staggering. [http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htm?cnn=yes]

Here are some other things to chew on: McCain and Palin are running on a platform to cut pork-barrel projects and dastardly earmarks.  More power to them – if the projects are worth spending money on, they should go through the whole process that everything else does.  But cutting pork-barrels and earmarks does not add up to a plan to balance the budget.  Do you know how much money is spent on pork-barrel projects?  In 2004, it was less than 53 billion dollars.  Even if you could eliminate all of that – which, of course, you couldn’t – it would barely put a dent in government spending (we were just looking at numbers in the trillions!).  By comparison, our government now spends more than $700 billion a year on military expenses alone.  Even as recently as 2002 that number was just about $350 billion dollars. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/01/27/GR2006012700168.html

(If you want to see some really interesting – and scary – charts about military spending, click here: http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending)

Just so you know I haven’t left reality behind me, I’m going to admit that neither candidate is going to balance the budget.  It’s not gonna happen.  But it is valid to ask which of the two will leave us in a better position at the end of his term, especially when one of them wants to focus so much on the government’s budget habits.

McCain knew that the Bush tax plans were bogus back when they were first being pushed through.  He voted against them, and he was vocal about it.  Whether Adam Smith has chosen to haunt McCain’s dreams ever since, or whether McCain has chosen to make another considerable concession to his conservative base (as he did with Palin…more on her some other time…when I’ve got a lot more time on my hands…), I cannot say.  But the fact that he now not only supports them, but wants to extend them further, confuses me.  And it saddens me.  Because he’s never given a good explanation for why he switched on this issue, and I’m not sure that he can. (See also: environment, global warming, off-shore drilling, straight talk).

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Why Obama, Pt. 1: The Beginning of Something Long

I've been thinking through some of these things for months, and I wanted to voice them. If they spin out unheard into the void, I don't mind - some of this is just a chance for me to organize my thoughts. They need organizing, because I'm quite given to incoherent babbling when it comes to politics, and as I mentioned in my previous post, I'm going to try to avoid willfully subjecting my friends to this.

Essentially, my thought is this: whether you are a Republican, Democrat, liberal, centrist, or moderate conservative, I think the case for Obama can be made very compellingly. I'm going to take a crack at it. I don't think any solid conservatives will go for it, but I'd still like them to listen in anyway. While I don't plan to hide my views, I hope to state them in a way that avoids the simple habit of bashing the other party for kicks, slandering people, making unfair accusations, or making straw-men arguments from the opposing view. I respect the conservative Republican approach to things, and I respect people who maintain that approach. But let me tell you why I shifted away from it.

Introduction:
I’ve been vaguely interested in politics for much of my life. When I was younger, I believe my motivation was chiefly that the ability to talk politics seemed to make me sound smarter, more adult. I probably still hope it does these things, but this hope is entirely secondary to my growing fascination of the pure mechanics of it all. In the last two years, politics has become a hobby of mine that consumes a surprising amount of my time, as I spend hours combing through the New York Times, the BBC World News, and sites like www.politico.com.
I might as well tell you now that in 2004, I voted for Bush. I did not know Kerry very well, I didn’t like his voice, and he sounded very suspicious to me. I was not entirely sure that I liked Bush, but at the time I was more concerned that any Supreme Court openings be filled by more conservative judges. As it happened, two openings came up, and Bush appointed Roberts and Alito (aside from his rulings in favor of expanding executive powers, I think I like Roberts. I don’t really know about Alito yet.)
Around 2006, I began to grow very excited about the 2008 elections. Interesting things had been happening. John McCain had been finding his way into the press again, and I couldn’t imagine anyone else getting the Republican nomination in ’08 – which was great, because I loved McCain. I even got to see him speak in person, and he conveyed a message that deeply resonated with me: the needs of America ought to come above the petty squabbles between parties. This same year, Democrats had chased Sen. Joe Lieberman out of the Democratic Party because he wasn’t against the war – never mind the fact that he had always been a successful, popular, well-loved and well-respected senator. But he, too, rose above: he ran as an Independent, and won his seat back handily.
I began thinking that my dream ticket for 2008 would be McCain/Lieberman (when people actually began to consider this a possibility in recent weeks, nobody believed me when I tried to say I predicted it years ago. This may be why I’m writing my thoughts now, just in case I get the chance to say, years later, “I told you so.”) Both of these men were well-respected, ethically sound men who could – and frequently did – work together to get things done. McCain broke with his party to pursue responsible care for the environment, and Lieberman broke with his to support things like the troop surge in Iraq, among other things. These two men could change the world.
And then, early in 2007, I stopped to watch a little video online. A good-looking young black man with a name I wasn’t sure I could pronounce gave a forty-five minute speech in his church about how faith ought to interact with politics – providing a compelling contrast to our current president’s approach, which has deeply troubled me. I wasn’t ready to let go of McCain, but I had to hear more from this man. Just as I knew that McCain had to be the Republican nominee, I knew that this man had to be the Democratic.

First Things:
I hope there is nobody out there who still thinks Obama is a Muslim. He’s not. (Insert obligatory “Not that it would matter…” here). And I think most people have put the flag-pin incident behind them (although, in truth, he was making a very apropos comment on patriotism). His wife’s “finally proud of this country” statement was nothing more than a mis-phrased gaffe (if you want to hear a gaffe, you should hear some of the things McCain has called his wife in public), and I haven’t heard anybody say anything about Jeremiah Wright in a while. I find this comforting, but I also haven’t been hanging around the people who would say something about these things, and so I imagine these non-issues haven’t completely died for everybody. Particularly Wright. I considered writing full-fledged responses to these ridiculous items, but I find that I can’t bring myself to do so: these topics are just not worth it. None of the above-mentioned topics is in the least bit important. At all. Seriously. I’m open to discussing these if somebody else wants to get me worked up about them, but honestly, I’d rather discuss more interesting things, like tax policies and health care.

Monday, September 1, 2008

I was wandering around the DNC last week with my roommate, enjoying the festive air and the bounty of crazy people doing bizarre, attention-grabbing activities, when I made what I admit is something of a crass joke. "Hey," I said. "Wouldn't it be funny if, every time I passed anyone who looked remotely ethnic, I ran up to them and shouted, 'Yes we can!'?"

The joke, of course, is that it would not be funny at all. It would be really embarrassing and offensive to assume that anybody with slightly different pigmentation in their skin would vote for Obama simply because he's black, no questions asked (Does anybody remember Alan Keyes? There's a reason you have to wikipedia him. He didn't win anything.). So why is it that everybody thinks it's perfectly acceptable to assume that women are going to turn out in droves to vote for a woman, simply because she's a woman?

I grew up in good old conservative Tennessee, and I swear I didn't hear a kind word about Hillary Clinton the whole time I was there. Even from women. I didn't even know people liked her until last year, when I was able to warm up to her a bit myself. The news talked incessently about her picking up the female vote (as though she was born with that vote in the bag), but you know, it all panned out pretty evenly. If she had gotten "the female vote" (as though they vote in bloc!), she would have handily won the nomination.

And now you have McCain's choice of Sarah Palin for VP, which I think was an incredibly shrewd choice (I just hope it wasn't shrewd enough to tilt things in his favor). I think it was shrewd for a number of reasons, but none of these reasons have to do with Palin picking up the mythical "female vote." Palin will appeal to, oh, I imagine about half of American women. Roughly the same amount as sympathize with her [incredibly] conservative views. She's excited conservatives, she's gotten endless news coverage since the announcement, she's generating much needed attention for the Republicans, but she didn't just sew up the election by virtue of her reproductive organs. Ok?

Oy. So anyway, I've decided that, since I feel far too guilty to actually subject my friends to endless inane political talk, I'm going to broadcast it into the great void of the web, where it will bounce around harmlessly and bore only those who wish to read it. Say, have I told you about the series of articles I'm planning to write...

Monday, June 2, 2008

Variations on a theme: The Original Speech

This, then, is the original speech I wrote for graduation. Looking back on it, I'm glad I gave the other speech, but I certainly feel this has its place. I would appreciate any attention given to it, any thoughts voiced, but I feel a bit repetitive posting so many similar ideas. Nonetheless, I hope this does something for you.



Several weeks ago, as I was formulating my very first ideas for what to say, it was suggested to me by one of my wise professors that I avoid the common theme of “advice for the young graduate.” I agreed with her - there will be plenty of other people to provide that, and, being no further down the road myself, I would probably tell you something terrible, like “It’s cheaper to move back in with your parents.”

I would like to speak, then, not of where we are all going, a subject of which I am entirely clueless, but of where we have been. I hope to trace for you a narrative of faith from Point A, the day on which we first stepped onto campus, goofy and awkward, to Point B, today, sitting here again goofy and awkward in our funny-looking traditional garb. I should disclaim at this moment that the story I tell may not apply to each individual here today, but it is a story that I believe, if it does not directly apply today, very likely will apply in the future.

If our memories have been kind to us, when we think back to freshman year, we remember the incredible retreats, the sudden and perhaps surprising camaraderie which sprung up in our stairwells or in our classes, or maybe the delight in finding that there was a club, a ministry, or a discipleship group seemingly tailored to our interests. It was a gleeful time. There were plenty of uncomfortable times that year, of course: I imagine nearly every one of us at some point walked into an apartment to find a new couple sitting quietly. They were only holding hands, of course, but they were very clearly, and very awkwardly, waiting for you to leave. Even if it was your own apartment.

May God forgive any of us who actually were one of those awkward couples.

But freshman year, for the most part, I would describe as a year of stunning, blinding, beautiful idealism. The opportunities were spread before us like a tree heavy with fruit – we had only to choose among them. And the truest beauty was this: we found ourselves in a friendly, close-knit community of other people who were as passionate for Christ as we were. What a novel idea it was! Those of us who came straight from public schools found we could suddenly openly discuss the nature of God in the middle of class – and with the professor! Not only that, but we could take entire courses on theology and on the Bible, regardless of our major. What could be more blissful than studying God?

I would like you for a moment to hold onto this image of a freshman I’ve described. When I was a freshman, that is exactly what I was thinking. I, like many around me, was desperate for more of God and more Christian community wherever I could find them – chapel, church, d-group – anywhere. I was full of hope, full of love, full of a supreme confidence that the God I knew, the God I had grown up with, would direct me down a path that would bring about deep, significant changes in the world. If I were to give this image I’ve painted a label at the bottom, it would read “Certainty.”

I don’t remember when the first changes began to occur, but we had to have known that the honeymoon could not continue forever. Perhaps it was toward the end of freshman year, after a few strong disagreements with a roommate and close friend. For many of us, it was in our first theology class, or in Old Testament. But there came a point for most of us when we looked around at our Christian community, at the people all around us in these classes, and we listened to them explain what they believed, and we came to a startling realization: everybody around us was wrong. Usually not on the largest points – we could all sign a similar statement of faith, but on all the little points that made our faith our personal faith, we found ourselves rather isolated. Somehow, it seemed, not everybody got the same memo. And sometimes we found that the disagreements were about the largest, most important aspects of our faith. It’s easy to write off somebody speaking from “outside” the faith. It is far more difficult to ignore the sharp differences within the faith. Could we find room for these people under the banner of Christ? Could we call these people with whom we so passionately disagreed brothers and sisters in Christ?

Around the same time, we began encountering wonderfully strange new situations for which we had not been as prepared as we imagined: mission trips and local ministries, among other things. Personally, I found myself confronted by my experiences with the group Fatboys, CCU’s homeless ministry. I had never thought about the homeless before; I had never needed to. And consequently, I had never thought about how God wanted me to interact with them, what God would have me think of them. There were the drug addicts, of course, and the drunks, and those so fresh from prison their tattoos were still bleeding. There were also those people down on their luck. There were former veterans, victims of mental disorders, victims of physical abuse, victims of economic strain. Oftentimes they stuck together in incredible bonds of friendship, taking turns guarding their few possessions while the others slept. I could never have imagined there were so many kinds of homeless people. I was surprised to find that nearly all of them knew the gospel, many of them expressed belief in it, and some could quote more scripture than I ever could. One night a homeless man who camped next to a bicycle path led me down to the Platte River, where he washed my feet in the cold, living water in a gesture of humble gratitude. If I had missed it before, I knew then that anything I had ever thought about homeless people in the past would need to be completely re-thought.

Before I knew it, I found that nearly everything had to be re-thought – I didn’t necessarily have to change everything I believed, but as I traced all the loose threads of my faith further back, I found more loose threads. And as if working these things out alone were not hard enough, those of us going through this process often found that our friends were also going through it, which meant that rather suddenly and all at the same time, none of us knew anything. If we raised questions in conversation, we got questions in return, and all those people we had previously disagreed with, those friends and roommates who called themselves Christians but whom we had previously doubted – well, they began to seem perfectly reasonable. Or, at least, no less reasonable than ourselves. Actually, among all of us Christian students, it began to become very difficult to tell just who was being reasonable, if any us were.

Parents in the room, friends of the graduates – I am quite sure you have heard us complain about our school work, about exams, about not getting enough sleep at night. These are the cries of the student that everybody hears, and everybody knows. But I wonder if you have heard the cries of the spirit, the cry of the young man or woman whose faith, whose very identity, seems to be unraveling on the floor. An upcoming mid-term may rob somebody of a good night’s rest, but this experience, this slow, torturous stretching, straining, snapping of long-cherished beliefs – this will rob the very soul of peace.

We were learning lessons. We were experiencing life. But on the inside, a little lamp flickered, and at times, went out. The very nature of the struggle was that it removed the only true comfort we had. In the words of writer Franz Kafka, we felt “forsaken like children lost in the woods. When you stand before me and look at me, what do you know of my sufferings and what do I know of yours? And if I fell at your feet and cried and told you, would you know any more about me than you know about hell when they say it is hot and sets one shivering?”

Some people find themselves at this point somewhere in the middle of college. Others stumble into it toward the end, and are perhaps at this stage right now, and others still will find that it hits them once they leave the warm, enveloping community of school life. It is a cold and lonely position to be in, especially when you seem to be surrounded by people whose faith is stronger than ever. The questions within you will not lie still, and it becomes clear that something must change, the questions must stop, if you are going to maintain any sort of life.

At this point, it often appears that there are only two options. The first of these is that young person I asked you to keep in your mind: the freshman, armed with certainty. Our old selves – they seem in retrospect so achingly beautiful. We believed beautiful things beautifully, and the memory of who we once were seems almost to haunt us. Our faith was so fresh, so alive. If you have not experienced this yet, I would warn you: there is a terrible temptation to return to what you once knew. But if you are to do so, you must go with greater passion than ever, and never let yourself rest. And you must disregard your experiences; you must forget your doubts. You must erase the person you’ve become.

I think very few of us would choose to simply “go back” – even if we had the choice. But the simple fact is that there is no going back to the way things were before – just as there is no putting new wine in old wineskins.

I tried something else. As I grew to understand my lack of understanding, as every temporary foundation shifted from beneath me while I tried to build my scaffolding upon it, I began to give up the hope and the faith that there was any solid ground into which I might sink my roots. I knew nothing, and I knew that I knew nothing, and I held up this knowledge as the one thing certain. I became proud of a foolishness, one that degenerated quickly to uncritical laziness, and from laziness to bitter apathy.

If we must escape our state of anguish, then, and we cannot go back to the past, there appears to be only one other option: give up. When the questions come, force them down until you cannot hear them. When somebody begins to pray, leave the room, because it is uncomfortable. Put the bible away, because it brings more agony than relief. I have seen many friends reach this point. And I have spent a great deal of time there myself. It can last for months; it can last for years.

Friends, graduates, families: if you find yourselves at this point, now or in the future – have hope. If your efforts to find the God you seem to have misplaced prove fruitless, have hope. But why should you?

Because God will never stop bothering you. I don’t mean the idea of God, and all the questions, although that is perhaps true as well – I mean God, and bother is exactly the word I mean, too. We have all heard the verse in Job which reads, “What is man, that thou art mindful of him?” Seldom do we put it in its context, in which Job says to God, and I quote, “Let me alone; my days have no meaning. What is man that you make so much of him, that you give him so much attention, that you examine him every morning and test him every moment? Will you never look away from me, or let me alone even for an instant?”

The answer, of course, is no. If we ever think we have escaped God, and all of questions that we have, then we have fooled only ourselves. A 19th century poet named Francis Thompson wrote of this feeling in terms better than any others I have found. In his poem “The Hound of Heaven,” which I strongly recommend that all of you read, he describes God as a bloodhound, who literally follows him “down the nights and down the days…down the arches of the years…down the labyrinthine ways of [his] own mind, and in the midst of tears,” all while Thompson continues to run, continues to chase after a life free from God. At the end of the poem, however, he is finally caught like a cornered fox, and God, the hound of heaven, says to him:
“All which I took from thee I did but take,
Not for thy harms,
But just that thou might'st seek it in My arms.
All which thy child's mistake
Fancies as lost, I have stored for thee at home :
Rise, clasp My hand, and come!”

The writer Yann Martel, in his book Life of Pi, wrote that “zoos are no longer in people’s good graces. Religion faces the same problem. Certain illusions about freedom plague them both.” To return to faith, to accept the extended hand and step out of the despondency that comes of having not been able to completely reconcile your faith with your experience, is not to re-enter a cage from which you have escaped – to return to faith is to release God from the cage you tried to build. Logic and reason are tools with which we understand the world – they are not the world itself, they are not God, and God does not fit within them. The desire to understand God should be pursued, but it is not the chief end of life. Greater minds than ours have tried and failed, and St. Augustine himself, one of Christianity’s most influential theologians, wrote that “If you think you have conceived of something – if you think you have finally understood something - then it is not God.” For anyone who grew up speaking Latin as their native language, that’s “Si comprehendis non est Deus.”

We came to the school with a very reasonable faith and a God we understood. I hope we can say that we leave it with a resurrected faith and a God we love. When God takes our hand, and lifts us out onto the other side of the bleak, trying time – and I must stress that there is another side to reach – we are able to look back with new eyes. The faith and the passion that we remember having from that beautiful, ideal time in our past – they are not gone. They are in the hands of God, who has allowed them to pass away that he might resurrect them anew, just as he allows us to experience – even leads us into – the dark night of the soul, that he might transform our very concept of God. Hopefully, we find ourselves feeling not trapped but released, not defensive and petty, but open, and passionately loving.

Very likely, this is not the last time it will happen to us. I have been speaking of us graduates, but the idea applies to everyone present. Life breaks boundaries. Life, experience, love, conversation, ideas – if we have trouble reconciling these things to our idea of God, it is to God’s credit that he is beyond our comprehension. We embrace God not because God makes perfect sense, or because God fits into a method of thought that we find comforting. We embrace God because, against all reason, God pursues us. When we have given up, even when we would ask God to leave us alone and let us be, God is there, forever and ever, amen.

Si comprehendis non est Deus.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

This Is the Speech I Gave

Hey folks. So I got the chance to speak at my own graduation last week. If you were there, you heard what was, technically, the seventh draft of my speech. The first was about four times longer and completely different in its path, and I'll post it here in a day or two. But first, this is the speech I gave:

Good morning, and congratulations, everybody. In addition to my friends and family who’ve seen me through for so long, I would like to thank our amazing Education and English departments for the incredible work they do. Those of us who have benefited from their service, and from any of our faculty, are deeply indebted to them.

Looking back at my own experience at this school, and that of many of my friends, there were only two things that struck me as being both applicable to nearly everybody, and being located, in one form or another, very near the heart of our existence these past few years: one of these is the struggle of faith, and the other is community. We expected these things when we enrolled – we even looked forward to them – and yet I doubt either of these things manifested itself in exactly the way we thought it might.

Personally, I had imagined that the struggles within a Christian school would be fewer and simpler than those of any other given institution. As I discovered, they were not fewer; they were of a different kind altogether. The question for me was not “What do I do or not do?” but rather, “Who am I, what is this faith I have been professing, and what does it mean to me?” The answers to these questions, if we have found them, are deeply personal to each of us. But I would like to characterize our search for answers with the only story that ever seemed to fit. I read from Genesis 32:

24 So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob's hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. 26 Then the man said, "Let me go, for it is daybreak." But Jacob replied, "I will not let you go unless you bless me."
27 The man asked him, "What is your name?" "Jacob," he answered.
28 Then the man said, "Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome."
29 … Then he blessed him there. […]
and Jacob was limping because of his hip.

How like the conflict that arises in any faith! We find ourselves, sooner or later, alone in the dark night of the soul, and we grapple with a stranger who will not reveal himself to us. The temptation to surrender is nearly unbearable, the pain and exhaustion nearly overwhelming, and yet we know that without this struggle and its promise of a blessing, we have nothing. We feel wrenched apart, and broken, and the night seems never to end. It is only just in time that the glowing fingers of dawn stretch across the horizon.

In the light of the coming day, we find ourselves not destroyed, but changed utterly, and we see that our blessing from God was not some gift at the end: it was the struggle itself, and the transformation it brought. Our new identity is summed up in the meaning of our new name, Israel: “struggles with God.” Our limp reminds us that there will be more wrestling in the future.

We see also that we were not alone at all during our experience – around us in the night were our brothers and sisters in faith, some wrestling as well, and others, unbeknownst to us, supporting us through the hardest times. This is the community of Christ.

As we graduate, many of us will be leaving this particular community. And though each of our experiences with it has been vastly different, these words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer bring perspective:

“It is easily forgotten that the fellowship of Christian brethren is a gift of grace, a gift of the Kingdom of God that any day may be taken from us […]. Therefore, let him who until now has had the privilege of living a common Christian life with other Christians praise God’s grace from the bottom of his heart. Let him thank God on his knees and declare: It is grace, nothing but grace, that we are allowed to live in community with Christian brethren.”

Even if nothing I have said of our experience has rung true to your own time here, know that nonetheless, I am as entirely bound to you, and you to me, as any two people on this earth. As Christians, each one of us lives out a small, unrepeatable fragment of an ever-increasing whole that we call the Christian experience. If there is anything I believe CCU has taught me, it is that the Christian experience is infinitely broader, infinitely more complex, infinitely more all-encompassing than I could ever have imagined, and the grandeur of God, in the words of the poet Gerard Manley Hopkins, will flame out like shining from shook foil.

We have struggled together, and we have found a holy love together. If we leave after today and settle elsewhere, my prayer is that wherever we travel we support those others who grapple with the Lord; that when we struggle ourselves, we allow our brothers and sisters to support us; and that in all situations, we infinitely pour out to others from the infinite love we have received, and continue to receive.

Thank you.