Second Comment Question

Here's a column I came across today while reading through The Week.  It was excerpted from The Washington Post and answers "yes" to the question "Is religion losing ground to sports?"  Read it for insights into the history of the relationship between religion and sports.  While it certainly does not mention Ravi Zacharias or Condoleeza Rice, I get the sense from this column that public acknowledgement of sports loyalties from Christians in or outside of public office or public ministry would have been quite unthinkable during most of Christian history.  The fact that it happens now marks a change that occurred mostly during the 1900s.

First, I want to be clear about not wishing to discredit these people.  I am certain, however, of several things:

1)  They aren't perfect.  Because they have apparently held loyalty both to Christ and to sports teams does not automatically make them role models worth following.  Following them as they follow Christ is safe.  Doing everything exactly as they do?  Not necessarily.

2)  Speaking of "Condi" mostly now, her role in government is not consistent with a traditional Anabaptist understanding of the Two Kingdom Concept.  That doesn't mean I can't learn anything from her, but it does mean that how she "slices and dices" matters of faith and life will almost certainly look very different from how anyone with reference to Anabaptist thought and practice will do it.

I know almost nothing about these people's personal lives.  Are they married?  With children?  Are they close to their parents and siblings?  Are they active in a local church?  I have the impression that Condoleeza Rice is not married.  I remember hearing, though, that she is "whip smart."  Is any of what they have accomplished in life because of their interest in sports or in spite of it?  We'll likely never know.  Might the record that counts in the Heavenly Father's eyes look different if they had ordered their "loves" differently?  Again, we'll likely never know.

I find it interesting that early Christians lived in a "sports-crazy" world, and apparently stood almost entirely apart from it.  Paul's writings include sports imagery, which was meaningful to his readers because it was pervasive in society.  Paul did not discredit physical exercise entirely, but relegated it to the category of "little profit."

We all know that the Roman games took a really grisly turn eventually, and great crowds gathered to be entertained by watching human combat, or humans being devoured by animals. When Christians participated in the games, they were more likely to be found in the arena, involuntarily, than in the stands, voluntarily.

The matter of competition is a can of worms I don't have the energy to tackle now.  I think it's worth asking whether the competitive element in sports is constructive.  It helps win games, but does it help in living well?