Paul’s Statement
(published as a full page ad in the Daily
Californian on Monday, April 17, 2000)
I believe in…
God’s love
The powerful, persistent, and unfathomable love of the one true God, in the persons of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, for each of us human folk…
one hope
expressed perfectly in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who entered into human history, fully God and fully man, showing us a God who is holy and perfect, unbounded in power, who compassionately knows our suffering…
the invitation
who calls for us to live our whole lives in an all-consuming, passionate, and live-defining relationship with our Creator…
the lost
a relationship we’ve thwarted because we are all lost and guilty of wrongdoing, distanced by our spiritual poverty from the God we were meant to know…
the Word
but I believe that God nonetheless calls out to us now, and I believe the Bible is the infallible and completely inspired Word of God to us…
the redemption
it speaks about Jesus, crucified to bear the punishment of our sins, and who then rose from the dead, announcing to us that through Him, we could find the victory of God’s life over our spiritual death…
the promise
so that by the Holy Spirit, all who come and put their trust the Lord for their whole lives will find a restored relationship with God, a new relationship with the world, forgiveness for our sins, new life in the present, and hope in the life to come, by God’s amazing grace to us, and we will be with Jesus on the day He returns…
Just
like He said.
More
than just a creed, more than a system of beliefs, but my hope and all that I
am…
Paul Lai, Cal Sophomore
Simultaneously
that Monday, hundred of students across campus began wearing bright orange tee
shirts with the statement, “I AGREE WITH PAUL” written across them in light
blue letters and continued wearing them all week. This was all part of a
movement by many Christian groups on campus to promote Christianity, or as they
liked to say, “spread student awareness of what Christianity is all about”.
They called it Paul Week. It was really Protestant propaganda week. In support,
they continued to publish teaser ads in the Daily Cal, where they just took out
a small box with the statement, “Do you agree with Paul?”. Paul also came down
to Sather Gate on three separate occasions to speak to the masses, answer
questions and spread his word. Additionally, Christian groups were tabling on
Sproul Plaza, selling more “I AGREE WITH PAUL” shirts, which you could only buy
after signing your agreement to Paul’s statement. It was probably that largest
organized student movement I’ve ever seen in my four years at Berkeley (if only
Graduate Students could be this organized when they went on strike). By
Wednesday, many people that were antagonistic to this movement (which was the
majority of people that weren’t wearing Paul’s shirt) had come up with their
own shirts, of the same bright orange, with statements such as, “I AGREE WITH
NIETZSCHE”, “PAUL AGREES WITH WEED”, “FUCK PAUL”, and my personal favorite, “I
fucked Paul’s mom and all I got was this lousy shirt!”. Also, a chalkboard was
brought onto Sproul Plaza with one side labeled, “I agree with Paul” and the
other side labeled, “I don’t agree with Paul”, and by noon that day, the
chalkboard had been filled with comments three times over. The area around the
chalkboard on Sproul Plaza was a continuous debate session while every
religious non-Christian student group on campus set up tables in an aggressive
semicircle around the table where Paul’s shirts were being sold. I seriously
thought riots were going to break out any minute. In the end though, nothing
serious happened aside from a few harsh words spoken during some heated
arguments on the “I don’t agree with Paul” side of the chalkboard. The
interesting thing to consider is the fact that the statement above, as well as
the activists methods were all very reasonable. There isn’t much to argue with
when examining the statement. The Bible is obviously not infallible (see, the
Word above), but aside from that, Paul’s statement is pretty
un-revolutionary. Standard Protestant propaganda. Why was everyone getting so
up-in-arms about everything? I know a lot of people aren’t very sympathetic to
Christianity, but what I saw this week was pure distain for what was going on.
And it wasn’t just from the non-Christians, but it was also coming from people
(including myself) that considered themselves Christian!
So what was the real problem? I think this backlash is something that would happen only at Berkeley. What specifically was it that everyone was upset about? It took me awhile to figure it out… I didn’t particularly like what Paul’s supporters were doing. But I didn’t really dislike it either. Most of my friends though, were outright annoyed or offended by the situation. I don’t think anyone really knew exactly why… people gave superficial reasons, more emotions than arguments. But I think I know what was really bothering everyone. I believe that most of the student body was offended by the blatant conformity that suddenly sprang out of nowhere. I think a lot of people were threatened by it. I think that more than anything, students at Berkeley are socialized to treasure their individuality. The irony of this is that the university is basically a machine to pump out corporate clones, and while we all treasure our individuality, we all are shopping at the Gap. But even so, having hundreds, even thousands of students walking around wearing identical shirts with identical statements, professing to all believe the same thing was too much. Conformity of the mind is perceived as the ultimate threat, a relic of high school years where peer pressure ruled. Conformity is recognized as a trait that correlates with ignorance, mainly with people in cults and from southern states. As much as we all may disagree with each other, every student here respects that we’re entitled to our individual opinions. What are all wary of any sort of forced indoctrination though. The message of Christianity being forced on the rest of the student body by a mass of orange clones isn’t just scary, it’s abhorrent. I don’t blame the student body for being so negative towards the movement. It’s what we’ve been taught to do.
For more info on Paul Week, please go to the following link, and also read the following articles from the Daily California about Paul Week.
Christian
T-shirts Stimulate Debate
|
|
|
Daily Cal Staff/Jennifer Hasa |
|
Students
show off their T-shirts worn to commemorate a religious campaign called ‘Paul
Week.’ |
|
by Will Evans |
|
|
|
Students from 12 Christian campus groups yesterday donned
bright orange T-shirts that read, "I agree with Paul" as part of a
religious campaign sweeping universities across the nation.
Julie Dobie, a senior political
science and economics major, said she coordinated "Paul Week" to
stimulate conversation.
"Our purpose is to propel
(others) to think about what is their purpose in life," she said.
"Here in Berkeley, people don't stop and think and ask questions a lot.
I've talked to three atheists, a unitarian guy and a guy who didn't really know
what he believed."
Dobie, a member of Campus
Crusade for Christ, said she chose sophomore Paul Lai to represent the week
because he is the most humble person she knows.
"He's just personable and
down to earth," she said. "He's very passionate about what he
believes."
Although a large number of
students are taking part in the event, no Catholics groups were involved in
planning the campaign, some participants said.
The idea for "Paul
Week" came from an event held at the University of Arizona last semester
during which Christian groups staged a "Dave Week," Dobie said.
Groups at campuses across the country, including UC Santa Barbara, UC San Diego
and the University of Southern California have organized similar activities.
Lai wrote a "statement of
faith," and the coalition United in Christ raised money from local
churches to publicize the event. A double major in social welfare and English,
Lai said he was not sure why he was selected to spearhead the week.
"When they asked me, I felt
as if God had been preparing me for this," he said. "The point is not
how great a person I am or how great a Christian I am. Everyone who is wearing
a shirt is just like me, just a regular person."
Although group members said that
there are no ulterior motives behind the movement, one student said he felt the
campaign was a recruitment ploy.
"Why would anybody just
blab out, 'I'm a Christian'?" said Guido Schauer, a senior majoring in
molecular and cell biology. "Christians often do things that are an
imposition on everybody else."
Event organizers said Lai was an
excellent tool for distributing their message to other students.
"We use Paul as a vehicle
to basically reach out to other people," said Caleb Chu, a junior majoring
in molecular and cell biology and a member of the Asian American Christian
Fellowship. "If you were a cancer patient and I had the cure for cancer,
wouldn't I tell you?"
Chu said the 500 to 600 students
wearing the orange T-shirts went through "training" to prepare them
to speak on the subject and test their seriousness. Additional shirts are being
sold for $6 to students who will sign Lai's statement of faith.
"Some (Christian) groups
are not aware, and some groups are doing other stuff, but that doesn't mean
they're not Christians," he said. "People may think it's cultish, but
we hope it's not."
Although not everyone on campus
agreed with the campaign's mission, the group was able to stir debate.
"Science just is,"
said Berkeley resident Tim Lawlor. "You have an agenda. You have been
trying to convince me to be a Christian."
Despite these criticisms, one
group member said that the ultimate goal of the campaign is to open channels of
conversation.
"Our goal is to be open-minded," said Amy Cameron, a group member and a junior studying political science. "It's hard when people come and you want to have a discussion and people want to argue."
'Paul'
Week: a Request for Thought Police
|
by Keith Chan |
|
|
This is a response to the article about the current
religious activity on campus ("Christian T–Shirts Stimulate Debate,"
April 18). Many participants in Paul Week have used questionable methods to
convince fellow students of their views.
"Here in Berkeley, people
don't stop and think and ask questions a lot."
–– Julie Dobie
I have no statistical data to
refute this statement but I consider it to be absurd. Berkeley has calmed down
since the 1960s but this school is not Bob Jones University. The many
student–run activities on Sproul Plaza, including Paul Week, is a testament to
the activist style of the campus. The non–Paul supporters should be given some
credit as they are not mindless drones yet.
"Our purpose is to propel
(others) to think . . ."
––Julie Dobie
"Everyone who is wearing a
shirt is just like me, just a regular person."
––Paul Lai
While the purpose of Paul Week
is to "have a discussion," Lai hints at the ultimate goal: to make
people conform to his ideals. The "training" the group received is to
steel themselves against opposition. Now if participants lose a discussion they
have betrayed what it means to wear an orange shirt. To the dismay of the
group, they would no longer be an ideological (and fashion) clone of Paul but
an individual who finds one's own answers. The real purpose of Paul Week is to
have everyone think and look the same. To get a shirt, people have to sign a
"statement of faith," a legal document. There is no two–way exchange
of ideas. They want people to sell their minds for a shirt. This process is
called hegemony. It is not a good thing.
"If you were a cancer
patient and I had the cure for cancer, wouldn't I tell you?"
-–Caleb Chu
I question whether Chu or the
rest of the followers have a spiritual cure and their assumption that everyone
else needs one. Regarding his cancer example, I have no doubt that Chu would
tell anyone afflicted with cancer that he had the cure. He would not give it to
that person but tell him or her where to buy it. If he invented the cure he
would patent it, sell it to wealthiest pharmaceutical company, and receive
royalties whenever it is purchased. Of course, if Chu did tell someone, that
person would then pay for Chu's house. Being a Molecular and Cell Biology
student, he should know better than to give such a naive statement regarding
his future field, unless the purpose was to lull the audience into a false
camaraderie with him and his group.
"It's hard when people come
and . . . want to argue,"
––Amy Cameron
The Paul Week participants share
a common thread of thought, one which they are not ashamed to hide. In fact, their
mission is to do the opposite of what they say — flaunt their peace of mind in
the face of others. This bravado is seen by people of other faiths and views as
a challenge; to them the wearers of orange shirts have their faith set in
stone. People want to see if the stone is breakable, thus the arguments. It is
intimidating knowing that there are 500 to 600 devoted and tenacious supporters
of the ideology of your discussion partner. The approach is as hostile as a
defense mechanism.
"Christians often do things
that are an imposition on everybody else,"
––Guido Schauer
This is a criticism of the
counter–point in the article. I have to disagree with this quote, citing some
of my good friends who are Christians. It is important to understand that the
students and faculty involved are not the Spanish Inquisition but rather
partaking in a legal form of expression. What is ethically wrong is that they
impose it on others with no intention to change their own views. Their numbers
and resources make counter–argument difficult, especially for lone dissenters.
If a discussion does not produce enlightenment to all parties involved, what is
the point?
In the same edition of The Daily
Californian, there is a half–page advertisement titled "We Agree With
Paul…" followed by a statement of Christian faith signed by 12 athletes.
While again this is legal under the Constitution, it is also very disturbing.
Since I do not play sports I can give them credit as my physical superiors but
are athletes my spiritual and mental superiors? Does their testament to their
faith annihilate that of their non–athletic Christian peers as well as those of
differing ideologies?
An advertisement by Julie Dobie,
Paul Lai and other founders of this enterprise would be appropriate because it
is their movement. This advertisement includes 12 people I have never heard of,
proclaiming that athletes are elites in this school who can pay for a pricey
advertisement declaring their religious faith. They are saying I should be like
them. Why else would they say they are athletes except for the hope that the
label would give them social control over others? This issue of the Paul
movement has nothing to do with athletics and the use of that term as a
unifying force is nothing but an attempt at exerting power without having the
right to power. I would not give such control of my soul to Michael Jordan,
much less these signers.
I have no problem with
Christianity. The issues I raise involve the methods by which these members of
the faith attempt to pull others into their mental box through the promise of a
"discussion," which is one–sided before it starts.
Shouldn't people discover their own purpose in life and then find the Christian, Hindu, or Wiccan lifestyles for themselves?
Keith Chan is
a UC Berkeley student.
