At the start of every Illinois high school basketball season the IHSA held 'Rules Interpretation Meetings' throughout the state. The thrust of these mandatory meetings was the focus upon 'newly' adopted rules and how they would be interpreted and administered. Sometimes the verbal interpretation explanation was spot on other times it was left a tad fuzzy. As for the implementation and administration of most rules it did not make poor officials better or good officials worse.
I don't attend basketball rules interpretation meetings any longer however, I do go to 'interpretation meetings' every Sunday morning. I have heard explanations of many scriptures as they relate to an eye for an eye, taking a life (abortion/capital punishment), divorce and homosexuality just to mention but a few of the ever hot topics. I have come to appreciate that faith-based living predicated upon Biblical interpretation can be an evolving-elusive state. Living in a ethnic and faith-doctrine melting pot requires secular laws against a backdrop of a myriad of religions. Finding that sweet spot of tolerant coexistence and leaving judgments to God seems to be a most reasonable approach.
As with the sport officials, I always wonder if personal views of the ONE interpreting gives 'slant' to interpretations. If not, why then the debate?
No comments:
Post a Comment