A Brief Reflection on the Covenant School Shooting

March 28, 2023 – Tuesday in the Fifth Week of Lent

Here we are again.

I have been thinking a lot lately about certain “gay conservatives” on the bird app and elsewhere who bend over backwards to defend the “parental rights” bills, which are really just thinly disguised homophobia. I suppose it’s a manifestation of “best little boy in the world” syndrome, which is often a thing among gay men – attempting to prove their worth and purge the sickness by being as perfectly compliant as possible. But the reality is that they will not be exempt from the backsliding of our rights simply because they collaborated with the Republicans.

The same is true of gun violence. No one is exempt from the effects of this evil. These weapons of war can appear anywhere on American streets and in our schools. The shooters do not care whether the dead child’s parents are Republicans or Democrats. Folks, the gun lobby is not your friend. Voting with the gun lobby cannot protect you. Voting with the gun lobby cannot protect your child. You are not exempt from the carnage – this ultimate violation of our human rights – simply because you collaborated with the gun lobby. The gun lobby are modern-day priests of Molech, stoking fear and capitalizing upon it, building an altar of profit upon which to sacrifice our children.

The only thing that voting with the gun lobby does is put more weapons of mass carnage into society. It makes us sicker. And Republicans, explicitly, are “not gonna fix it.”

But we must fix it. We shall not, must not, allow them to press down upon our brow a crown of ammunition and crucify mankind upon a cross of AR-15s. We must choose live babies over dead babies. Christians must take up the clear teaching of Scripture and beat swords into plowshares. Until this happens, we are all in danger. The gun lobby delenda est.

Elijah in the Wilderness

December 14, 2022 – John of the Cross

Elijah in the Wilderness, Herman van Swanevelt

The lesson for John of the Cross comes from 1 Kings 19. To summarize, Elijah has just won a fire-making contest to demonstrate that the God of Israel was the one true God and also ordered the killing of four hundred prophets of Baal. Jezebel, the evil queen consort of the evil King Ahab, gets wind of this and promptly threatens Elijah’s life. He therefore flees into the wilderness, asks God to kill him, and promptly falls asleep. He is awakened twice by an angel, who essentially force-feeds Elijah food and water; that nourishment sustains him for forty days and nights until he comes to Mt. Horeb, the location at which God provided Moses with the Ten Commandments. At Mt. Horeb, he takes a nap. “Then the word of the Lord came to him, saying, ‘What are you doing here, Elijah?’”

The prescribed reading ends there, but the story goes on to recount Elijah’s encounter with God. Elijah tells God that he is the only remaining true believer, as all the Israelites have deserted the worship of God. God lets Elijah know that he’s dooming for no reason and directs him to anoint Elisha as his successor.

Elijah has completed a great triumph, demonstrating that God is the God; yet at the first sign of adversity, he falls into a deep fit of depression. Asking God to die, falling asleep, having to be prodded to eat: not to psychoanalyze someone who lived well over 2000 years ago, but this is very much depression. And they didn’t have Wellbutrin back then, so that’s no help. Elijah is depressed because he believes that he’s the only true worshipper of God left in all of Israel.

This is wildly contrary to the actual facts in evidence. The first thing: Elijah knows better based on his prior interactions as recorded in 1 Kings up until now. Just at the beginning of the previous chapter, Elijah chats with Obadiah. The text states that Obadiah “revered the Lord greatly” and that he protected a hundred prophets of the Lord from Jezebel’s planned mass execution of believers. So there’s at least 102 folks; it is not the case that, as Elijah claims, he alone is left. The second thing: Elijah had just successfully ordered the seizure and killing of four hundred prophets of Baal. One man cannot kill four hundred men on his own; you have to have some help at least to keep them corralled so they don’t escape. There were probably a fair number of people involved in this episode whom we would count as worshippers of God.

Nonetheless, Elijah believes that he is alone in the world. To snap him out of it, God asks him that famous question: “What are you doing here?” God asks us that same question: what are we doing here? And it can be taken in myriad ways. What are we doing to advance the Kingdom of God today? What are we doing here just lying on the floor, doom-scrolling and clutching the dog for comfort? Just as he did Elijah, God gives us tasks: anoint Jehu as king of Israel, make disciples, take your Wellbutrin. 

Things aren’t as bad as they seem; there were in fact 7,000 worshippers of God in Israel.

We are living in an uncertain time in history. Russia continues to occupy Ukraine; the situation in Tigray continues to be dire. Closer to home, my mind is still reeling from the Moore County power grid attack; that these terrorists would cause great economic harm to an entire county and, in many cases, physical harm to its inhabitants is scary. It seems probable that it was all to make a point – a wrong, discredited, bigoted point – about a drag show and the LGBTQ+ community. Just today, there was another arrest of a January 6 insurrectionist. The far right feels persecuted, which drives them to extremist actions.

In reality, the structures of our government give the far right an outsized voice. An electoral college misfire in 2016 led directly to the appointment of three people to the Supreme Court who do not reflect the values of the majority of Americans. The mere existence of the Senate favors small states, which right now tend to be more right-wing. Put simply, Democrats have won the popular vote for President in seven out of the last eight elections, but you sure wouldn’t know it from the way our government functions (or doesn’t).

Nonetheless, we should not and cannot doom. Psalm 121:7 states, “The Lord shall preserve you from all evil; it is he who shall keep you safe.” We must go forward without fear and do the work that God has given us to do. Take your Wellbutrin and march on.

Hark! A Blog Post.

A while ago, I was chatting with a mentor and a surprising sentence fell out of my mouth: “If I could just write all day for a living, I might be happy.”

Leave aside the internal psychological drama wrapped up in “might be happy” – that’s for another time and probably a therapist.

My mentor replied, “Well, Ernest Hemingway did it.” We chuckled and continued walking. I’m no Hemingway. When I write at work, it’s purchase agreements or operating agreements, and they’re not even original. Precedent based on precedent based on precedent. It’s turtles all the way down.

No, if I were to write, I would be less Hemingway and more Moses at the burning bush: “What shall I say?” Hot takes, straight from the oven? Enough people do that already. Sober analysis? That doesn’t tickle the ears. How often do I post? I might not have time to do daily, but is weekly too infrequent? All of this is part and parcel of one overriding question: who’s the audience? How many of my 408 Twitter followers would be willing to read long-form, or short-form, or whatever it is that I end up publishing? Am I starting a Substack?

As Twitter continues its long and slow descent into madness and/or bankruptcy, many of us have been looking for alternate means to get our thoughts out into the world. Some have gone to Mastodon. Others have gone to something called Post, which I haven’t checked out yet. Frankly, it only came into my consciousness yesterday, when Mark Joseph Stern announced that he would be putting content there. The more I’ve thought of it, the more I think that perhaps we ought to go back to where it all began – the humble blog.

There are many virtues to blogging. For starters, the author isn’t constrained by character limits like Twitter, so he can say exactly what he wants in precisely the way he means it. The blog doesn’t have to be scheduled like a Substack; the author can post when he wants. Facebook’s out there, but … that’s just not intended for writing, at least not anymore.[1] So we’re back to the blog. Also, I met my husband through a blog, so clearly that’s the best form of communication ever invented.

I’m not going to set up a Patreon or anything similar to that, at least not yet, because I don’t want to be beholden to post anything. But I might in the future! Wouldn’t it be great if I could just write all day for a living, and y’all paid me to do it?

So here’s the deal, Jack: it’s going to be based on my interests, which are multifaceted and varied. There will be church posts. There will be sports posts. There will be politics posts. There could indeed be other genres of post. I will try to remember to tag the posts appropriately.

Additionally, I will begin each post, other than this one, by identifying the day via the liturgical calendar, because I am a pious homosexual and I hope to encourage piety in others. One thing I won't be doing is posting pictures of my daughter (or any future offspring); there are too many weirdos out here on Al Gore’s internet.

So here goes: back to the future.

With love,
Samuel

P.S.: I apologize for not finishing the North Carolina Emergency Powers/Council of State article that you will see below this post. I had to study for the bar and then I started work and then the General Assembly changed the law via the budget bill, so it kinda got superseded by events. I hate when legislators do policy in the budget bill, unless it's policy that I like, in which case it is simply expeditious. I still think the Council of State is unconstitutional, and we might explore that together later, but that is not for today.

---

[1] I’m old enough to remember when you had to have a .edu email address to get a Facebook. I’m also old enough to remember when people did use Facebook similarly to a micro-blogging site. You would “update your status” so that your friends could see what you were doing. It would say “Samuel is: [fill in the blank].” But Samuel “is” leads you toward starting your status with a present participle: “writing this blog post,” for example, and it would display as “Samuel is writing this blog post.” At some point, however, they did away with the “Samuel is” – during one of the big UX revamps, I suppose – so if you scrolled back through old statuses, it would just be uncapitalized sentence fragments. O tempora, o mores, and the beat goes on.

Viruses, Drive-Ins, and Dives: Executive Power in North Carolina Through the Lens of the Coronavirus Emergency

This Article has been my "quarantine project," so to speak. I intend to submit this Article for publication at some point in the near future. Due to the fact that "Reopen NC" is gathering momentum and lawsuits are being filed against the Governor, I felt like it was an appropriate time to go ahead and post a draft version, just to get the argument out into the open. Certainly, there is more to research and more to say, as is mentioned toward the end of the Article. But for now, this is about as good as we can get. The Abstract is below.

Viruses, Drive-Ins, and Dives: Executive Power in North Carolina Through the Lens of the Coronavirus Emergency

Abstract:

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused incredible amounts of disruption to the American way of life. Governors across the nation issued emergency declarations to impose stark restrictions on economic activity to prevent spread of the virus. While many restrictions were enacted with bipartisan support, bans on dine-in restaurant service quickly became a partisan flashpoint. This Article traces the circumstances behind North Carolina’s emergency ban on dine-in restaurant service and explains the statutory authority that permitted the Governor to impose the restriction without the concurrence of the Council of State that his opponents claimed was required. The Article then shifts focus to pandemic preparedness and the North Carolina Emergency Management Act, urging the General Assembly to revise portions of that statute.

This revision is even more necessary because of a surprising conclusion: while the General Assembly has required the Council of State to agree to certain gubernatorial decrees, those assignments may be unconstitutional. While this is certainly an open question of state constitutional law, comparisons of the plain texts of North Carolina’s historical constitutions and considerations of how the constitutional text has evolved over the nearly two and a half centuries of North Carolina’s history demonstrate that the Council of State is not simply rendered impotent by the statute but may also be forbidden to act by the constitution. Given the number of statutes in which the General Assembly has awarded the Council of State a veto over the Governor, this Article suggests that this open question should be resolved outside the context of a state of emergency.

Articles

List of Publications:

Samuel D. Gilleran, Comment: Purcell v. Gonzalez, Principle and Problem—Native American Voting Rights in the 2018 North Dakota Elections, 55 Wake Forest L. Rev. 445 (2020)