A Separation Of Church And Sport?

Tebow

Tom Krattenmaker calls televised sports "one of the most outwardly religious sectors of American culture":

Players point skyward to the Almighty after reaching the end zone or home plate, star athletes voice thanks and praise to their savior after a big win, and sports heroes use their media spotlight to promote the Christian message. (See University of Florida quarterback Tim Tebow and his eye-black, touting Scripture.) […] Far less visible, but worth knowing about, are the infrastructure and strategy of the sports-world evangelicalism that powers these pious displays. Athletes' expressions of Christian faith reflect decades of hard work by evangelical ministries to convert players and "coach" them to use their stature to promote a particular version of conservative Christianity. Christian chaplains are embedded with all the teams in professional baseball, basketball and football — and many college teams as well — to provide religious counseling, Bible studies and chapel services.

[…S]hould we be pleased that the civic resource known as "our team" — a resource supported by the diverse whole through our ticket-buying, game-watching and tax-paying — is being leveraged by a one-truth evangelical campaign that has little appreciation for the beliefs of the rest of us?

Sam Cook says we shouldn't be pleased:

Religion – except for the "Hail Mary" pass – has no place in sports. In Tebow's case, he should play football and forget about us sinners for 3 1/2 hours every Saturday. Somehow, we'll survive without him displaying a "John 3:16" Bible verse under his eyes. We separate church and state. Why not church and sports? Would it fly with the NCAA or TV networks if a player exhibited "God is dead" on his face? Freedom of expression would be wiped away as quickly as the greasepaint.

Oh, please. Lighten up. This is America. And I'd much rather sports be publicly religious than politics. FYI, Isaiah 40:31 reads:

But they that wait on the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.

(Photo source: Orlando Sentinel)

Homo Religiosus

Nun-on-the-Run

Karen Armstrong defends God in this month's Foreign Policy:

[The new atheist] writers are wrong — not only about religion, but also about politics — because they are wrong about human nature. Homo sapiens is also Homo religiosus. As soon as we became recognizably human, men and women started to create religions. We are meaning-seeking creatures. While dogs, as far as we know, do not worry about the canine condition or agonize about their mortality, humans fall very easily into despair if we don’t find some significance in our lives. Theological ideas come and go, but the quest for meaning continues. So God isn’t going anywhere. And when we treat religion as something to be derided, dismissed, or destroyed, we risk amplifying its worst faults. Whether we like it or not, God is here to stay, and it’s time we found a way to live with him in a balanced, compassionate manner.

(Photo: "Nun On The Run" by Geoff Stamp)

Neutering The Lords

Thomas Bingham thinks Britain should ditch the House of Lords and create a "Council of the Realm":

This body would differ from the House of Lords superficially in that membership would involve no outdated pretence of nobility, and it would differ fundamentally in having no legislative power. It could not make law. It could not (save in one respect which I shall discuss shortly) obstruct the will of the Commons. There would be no persisting democratic deficit.

The Council would, however, resemble the House of Lords in crucial respects. Its members, appointed not elected, would be very much the same people, and the same sorts of people, as now make up the house. It would perform, but in an advisory and not a lawmaking way, the revising function it now performs. Its expert committees could function much as they do now. It could debate issues of public moment. In this way the most valuable functions of the existing house could be preserved, but the features of the house which fuel calls for reform could be eliminated.

He then outlines 12 questions such a reform would provoke.

Theological Checks And Balances

USA Today reports on the new new atheists:

[Atheists] can be a "blessing" for believers, said Samir Selmanovic, co-founder and co-leader of New York's interreligious Faith House Manhattan and author of It's Really All About God: Reflections of a Muslim Atheist Jewish Christian. Atheists are "God's whistle-blowers," who keep believers honest and focused on the here-and-now, Selmanovic said. "Atheism at its best grabs us by the collar and throws us to the ground, demanding to see lives well lived, forcing us to dig deeper and live up to the best of our own religions," he writes.

Face Of The Day

Wolf-jumping

Victoria Gill reports:

A picture of a hunting wolf has won the prestigious Veolia Environment Wildlife Photographer of the Year 2009 award. Jose Luis Rodriguez captured the imaginations of the judges with a picture that he had planned for years, and even sketched out on a piece of paper. "I wanted to capture a photo in which you would see a wolf in an act of hunting – or predation – but without blood," he told BBC News. "I didn't want a cruel image."

Internet remix here.

Are Videogames The New B Movies? Ctd

A reader writes:

No, they aren't. My husband is a gamer. In fact, as I type this, he's playing Left 4 Dead with a group of friends all over the country. They get together three times a week to kill zombies, drink beer, and talk smack. It's the 21st Century version of a bowling league. We've sat down and talked about why he'd rather play video games than watch movies. He's given me a variety of answers.  I'll do my best to sum them up.

First, the amount of money invested is worth it. He paid $50.00 for that game in the middle of a recession. He plays it for 8 to 10 hours a week. A movie simply can't do that. Second, it's interactive. As much as movies want audience input the focus groups often get it dead wrong. Sappy endings, terrible dialog, and horrific plots. Video games allow for user generated content that is truly unique. If his map isn't good no one will play it. A focus group doesn't need to tell him that. Third, it involves skill. I've watched my husband practice getting moves just right so he can beat levels. It takes time, patience, and willingness. Movies can't offer that. Lastly, the plot lines are becoming more detailed and timely. Sure, the original Mario Brothers called for a quest to save a Princess, but in games like Katamari Damacy is a comment on consumerism and the quest to fill one's life with stuff.

Hollywood should take note of how well the video game industry is doing, and how they are innovating their products. If they don't they won't see people like myself or my husband in the theaters for quite some time.