Football, Theology, and the Scorched Earth Battle for America
Football is usually out of the spotlight in late May. Around this time, the gaze of the sporting world typically makes a brief turn to the NBA and NHL playoffs or to the regular season of Major League Baseball. So perhaps the perceived tranquility of offseason media inattention was part of the impetus for the NFL's newly announced anthem policy.
But it came as a surprise to no one that the policy set off a Twitter firestorm. The #MAGA crowd declared that it was back on board with the sport it had supposedly boycotted, while the #BlackLivesMatter crowd, along with the NFL Players Association committed to "fight anything that encroaches on players' rights to the end." Despite the resistance, the land of the free's football league seemed intent on its policy of compulsory Uncle Sam veneration.
With the NFL becoming the most visible employer to mandate flag worship, there may well be another boycott and ratings drop in the NFL this fall. At least liberals like me will be able to enjoy Wisconsin's beautiful September Sundays!
And while much could be discussed and debated about the ridiculousness of obligated oblation before the red, white, and blue in a democratic country, it is the reactions to the controversy that are perhaps the most telling of the state of affairs in America.
In the scorched earth America we inhabit, competing ideologies battle fiercely over the same inch of turf. This turf cannot be shared. When one ideology gains a temporary victory, the other side chooses to flee, to destroy, or both. With the league's prescribed postures for the anthem, the NFL's Donald Trump conservatives see themselves as the victors. Just as the right-wing fans will flock to the stadium this fall, the left-wing fans will inevitably vacate their seats - or so they will claim on Twitter. Regardless of who is in, the other retreats out. And just as they leave, they proclaim and invoke the imminent destruction of the 501 (c)(3) known as the National Football League.
The reactions to the anthem controversy show just how fractious our culture has become. The supposedly patriotic purveyors of forced allegiance were ridiculous to boycott the league when players took the knee. Similarly, liberal football fans will be ridiculous to call for the league's demise when players stand for the song this fall.
Both visceral reactions are nothing but explicit provocation, and ultimately create barriers to dialogue. But that is the modus operandi of this country. When one side gains a fleeting upper hand, the other side will run and hide - at best. At worst, they will launch a plan of coordinated sabotage and self-destruction, as it was with Republicans from 2008- January 2017. If Americans cannot sit down on the same sofa, or in the same row of bleachers, as those with different views, how can we possibly expect pragmatic bipartisanship from Washington? If the NFL can only be for liberals (when players kneel), or for Trump supporters (when players stand), are there any institutions left that will unite, even if just briefly, on a Sunday afternoon?
Unfortunately, our religious institutions hardly provide a remedy - especially with their example in the last 501 years. Splintering, breaking away, and creating rival institutions seems to be the offshoot of Martin Luther, a reformer who ironically had no intention to create rival institutions to the Catholic church! If anything, church seems to be the model, not the counterweight, for our cycle of disengaging and breaking away.
But while the institution of "church" may not provide a remedy, perhaps there is something to be said for the exercise of theology. Theology is the act of thinking about how God is at work in the world. And one of the fundamental pillars of theology is the "Law" of God. When people hear about the "Law," their first thought may be of fundamentalism, or street preachers who preach the "wrath" of God to those who violate the "Law."
Curiously, these fundamentalists, many of whom no doubt kneel at church on Sunday but oppose the right of others to do the same, miss one of the most fundamental aspects of God's Law: that it evolves.
It changes to meet its circumstances. The Law of the Hebrew Bible (Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers) is different from how Jesus treats the Law in the New Testament (love your neighbors as yourselves, see Matthew 22:35-40).
God's Law even became secular, breaking out of the scriptures with the spread of Greek and Roman Christian influence. Throughout our history, people have updated God's Law. They have changed its wording. They have changed some things, removed others, and added to it. And they have done so because of a willingness to co-exist with tensions of the time - to sit a little longer despite the urge to turn and run. The reason why Christians today do not build restrooms as mandated by Deuteronomy 23:13 is that the law of the Ancient Israelites has been interpreted, shaped and reshaped, debated, and molded into something more relevant to the times.
Theology teaches us to sit with the tension between our treasured traditions and our pressing reality, to contemplate, to pray, and to move forward - not divided by a temporary upper-hand, but united in the pursuit of a bigger truth, a higher purpose, even in times of intense disagreement. Theology gives us a framework through which to engage the question about what it means to be patriotic in our 21st century democracy. Such a framework gives us the freedom to engage the question of what it means to stand during a 204 year old song. And perhaps most critically, theology gives us a model wherein our traditions adapt so as to do the greatest good.
It may be a stretch to think that America can learn to theologically contemplate the issues. So perhaps the place to start is simply to sit - to sit next to those who would insist that we all stand.
If this tradition of standing is ever to evolve, we owe it to our house divided not to get up and leave.
Ryan Panzer is a rabid Wisconsin Badger football fan. On home football Saturdays, he is usually in line for the bathroom during the national anthem. @ryanpanzer on Twitter.
But it came as a surprise to no one that the policy set off a Twitter firestorm. The #MAGA crowd declared that it was back on board with the sport it had supposedly boycotted, while the #BlackLivesMatter crowd, along with the NFL Players Association committed to "fight anything that encroaches on players' rights to the end." Despite the resistance, the land of the free's football league seemed intent on its policy of compulsory Uncle Sam veneration.
With the NFL becoming the most visible employer to mandate flag worship, there may well be another boycott and ratings drop in the NFL this fall. At least liberals like me will be able to enjoy Wisconsin's beautiful September Sundays!
And while much could be discussed and debated about the ridiculousness of obligated oblation before the red, white, and blue in a democratic country, it is the reactions to the controversy that are perhaps the most telling of the state of affairs in America.
The reactions to the anthem controversy show just how fractious our culture has become. The supposedly patriotic purveyors of forced allegiance were ridiculous to boycott the league when players took the knee. Similarly, liberal football fans will be ridiculous to call for the league's demise when players stand for the song this fall.
Both visceral reactions are nothing but explicit provocation, and ultimately create barriers to dialogue. But that is the modus operandi of this country. When one side gains a fleeting upper hand, the other side will run and hide - at best. At worst, they will launch a plan of coordinated sabotage and self-destruction, as it was with Republicans from 2008- January 2017. If Americans cannot sit down on the same sofa, or in the same row of bleachers, as those with different views, how can we possibly expect pragmatic bipartisanship from Washington? If the NFL can only be for liberals (when players kneel), or for Trump supporters (when players stand), are there any institutions left that will unite, even if just briefly, on a Sunday afternoon?
Unfortunately, our religious institutions hardly provide a remedy - especially with their example in the last 501 years. Splintering, breaking away, and creating rival institutions seems to be the offshoot of Martin Luther, a reformer who ironically had no intention to create rival institutions to the Catholic church! If anything, church seems to be the model, not the counterweight, for our cycle of disengaging and breaking away.
But while the institution of "church" may not provide a remedy, perhaps there is something to be said for the exercise of theology. Theology is the act of thinking about how God is at work in the world. And one of the fundamental pillars of theology is the "Law" of God. When people hear about the "Law," their first thought may be of fundamentalism, or street preachers who preach the "wrath" of God to those who violate the "Law."
Curiously, these fundamentalists, many of whom no doubt kneel at church on Sunday but oppose the right of others to do the same, miss one of the most fundamental aspects of God's Law: that it evolves.
It changes to meet its circumstances. The Law of the Hebrew Bible (Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers) is different from how Jesus treats the Law in the New Testament (love your neighbors as yourselves, see Matthew 22:35-40).
God's Law even became secular, breaking out of the scriptures with the spread of Greek and Roman Christian influence. Throughout our history, people have updated God's Law. They have changed its wording. They have changed some things, removed others, and added to it. And they have done so because of a willingness to co-exist with tensions of the time - to sit a little longer despite the urge to turn and run. The reason why Christians today do not build restrooms as mandated by Deuteronomy 23:13 is that the law of the Ancient Israelites has been interpreted, shaped and reshaped, debated, and molded into something more relevant to the times.
Theology teaches us to sit with the tension between our treasured traditions and our pressing reality, to contemplate, to pray, and to move forward - not divided by a temporary upper-hand, but united in the pursuit of a bigger truth, a higher purpose, even in times of intense disagreement. Theology gives us a framework through which to engage the question about what it means to be patriotic in our 21st century democracy. Such a framework gives us the freedom to engage the question of what it means to stand during a 204 year old song. And perhaps most critically, theology gives us a model wherein our traditions adapt so as to do the greatest good.
It may be a stretch to think that America can learn to theologically contemplate the issues. So perhaps the place to start is simply to sit - to sit next to those who would insist that we all stand.
If this tradition of standing is ever to evolve, we owe it to our house divided not to get up and leave.
Ryan Panzer is a rabid Wisconsin Badger football fan. On home football Saturdays, he is usually in line for the bathroom during the national anthem. @ryanpanzer on Twitter.
Trump builds or buys golf course. Trump raises flag that is too large for local zoning. Newspapers write about flag. Public awards sympathy to Trump. Public uses golf course.
ReplyDeleteTrump battles with vulnerable groups. Trump loses sympathy. Trump criticizes protesters ("disrespecting the flag"). Public awards sympathy to Trump.