Disclaimer: I stole this topic from an essay I wrote in my first year of University, for a Religious Studies paper. If parts of the following text seem disjointed, overly formal, generally out of place, or just shit (my essay writing has improved from first year), then that is why. Just ignore the 'surface' of this post.
Oh, and sorry for all the NZ references -- but the essay required them, and it's easier to leave them in, especially because a lot of my evidence refers to studies carried out within New Zealand. I don't think it's a leap to suggest that they generally apply to other Western nations.
------------------------
It is often claimed that New Zealand’s most popular form of religion is "beer, racing and rugby" -- but is usually raised in jest. However, it does suggest a deeper link between sport and leisure with religion.
Theologian Lloyd Geering argues that by the year 2100 we are likely to have new, more secular forms of ‘religion’ that will “probably not even be called religion.” Different ideas of what religion ‘is’ do arrive at differing conclusions, particularly when linked to sport.
To see sport and leisure as a surrogate religion is relatively simple, as the rituals, symbology, feelings of transcendence and social values of sport arguably make it a form of ‘folk’ or ‘secular’ religion.
For many reasons, however, sport may not be conceived of as a form of religion, mainly as it is clear that sport does not attempt to answer any ‘ultimate’ questions. In addition, sport has severed its organic roots to become almost completely commercial, and quite often contributes to the negative societalisation of people, ultimately shedding its religious connotations.
These arguments that sport does and does not equate to religion appear mutually exclusive, but there does exist a more relevant middle ground where the two concepts relate symbiotically, with neither claiming to be the other, but instead operating complementarily. This result appears the most useful, as the alternative arguments rely on foundations that cannot coexist.
Possibly the clearest vision of sport as religion is contained in the plethora of organisations, rituals and symbology associated with sport that establishes it as at least quasi-religious. Any religion lacking a coordinating body would also lack a high level of organisation and activity for its religious sentiment. In terms of organisations then, for example, the New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) can be seen to be the organising force of New Zealand rugby ‘sentiment’. If a functional definition of religion is utilised, organisational structures of sport and religion have similar purpose – to coordinate. Despite our secular culture portraying strictly religious rituals as “silly”, they are shamelessly copied by every other part of society. Sport has its ‘hallowed grounds’, onto which only the best may walk; ‘saints’ are made out of retired players, those who best embodied the dogma of the sport; and images of players are transformed into ‘icons’. This is a Durkheimian perspective of religion, where the distinction lies in a common conception of sacredness. Both traditional religions and sports involve activities, locations and events that are non-ordinary and are maintained intentionally as separate from everyday life. Anything that holds meaning for an individual, and especially an entire nation, begins to take on a vestige of sacredness, in that it becomes revered and respected.
It is apparent, then, that sport has many aspects of a functioning religion. However, religions also hold 'positive' moral values to heart, and attempt to instil them into their adherents. As a leisure activity, what values does playing and watching sport attempt to reinforce? At first glance, individuals rarely think of sport moralistically; seemingly, it is a fun, recreational activity. However, this is too simple, and there are various moral messages that are implicit or explicit within sport. One of the more obvious is the notion that one must submit to a team. Various means are used to emphasise a team ethos, such as travelling to events as a team unit, the use of a uniform not only at games, but at practices and in transit – places where they have no purpose aside from creating this sense of camaraderie. Rules of sport teach children to submit raw individualism for the good of others. Parents, schools, and wider society commonly encourage sports participation in children as a good way to socialise children into values of hard work, determination, goal attainment, and self-discipline. Indeed, it seems unlikely that there is anything else that can provide a comparable level of recognition and celebration of success to such a diverse array of people.
In addition to these earthly moral values, sport can often function as a source of ultimate meaning, further giving credence to its comparison with religion. There was seriously one TV opinion poll (of New Zealanders), who placed the losses of the 1995 and 1999 Rugby World Cups alongside the Holocaust and the bombing of Hiroshima as the ten worst disasters of the 20th Century. With so much personal and national identity linked to sport, the desire for sporting victory clearly assumes a high position in many lives. The level of importance given to victorious national sportspeople is a significant source of collective meaning, fulfilment and purpose, which is not too far removed from the role of religion over the last century. It is possible to argue that with secularism, declining institutionalised religion, and an ever-present desire for sacredness, “minor forms of worship” arise, in particular, popular spectator sports.
Another aspect of religion that is present in sport is feelings of transcendence. In recreation, ordinary life is set aside, and awareness is narrowed to be almost solely concerned with the activity. High-performance athletes often describe experiencing a feeling of ‘peak performance’, or perfection within the confines of the sport. This feeling in sport has been described as a type of ecstatic “madness” and sense of “all-encompassing” action. It is unrealistic to assume what people of certain religions experience of their faith by looking solely at their dogmas and organisations; rather, it depends on an introduction to a whole new world, a new plane of experience.
From this Durkheimian perspective it is possible that sport can be treated as a form of surrogate religion. However, this approach can be criticised on several levels, and one of the most significant concerns the very nature of sport. Sport has a “spiritual poverty” in that it does not propose some form of supernatural salvation from this world, or indeed much in the way of non-earthly experience. Sport may have rules to govern play within 80 minutes, but it does not provide a set of ‘rules’ to govern life.
To consider sport an adequate 'secular religion', on should consider how the different genders approach the same 'religion'. One study highlighted that (in New Zealand), 69 percent of all sports participants, 79 percent of paid Executive Officers, 80 percent of volunteer administrators, and 89 percent of elected national directors, are male. Sports are seen as more important to male school students, who, on average, participate in a far wider range of sports than female students. This (male) sporting culture is often combined with a drinking culture; two activities which are so prominent in New Zealand that they are seen as the origins of hegemonic masculinity in feminist literature. A 1988 study showed that over 1.3 million New Zealanders belonged to a sports club of some description, and that most of the clubs surveyed were licensed to sell alcohol – something the clubs saw as necessary to attract and retain members. The question raised from a feminist perspective is how much of this ‘quasi-religious’ support for sport and alcohol is actually aimed at, and supported by, men? In particular, this ‘beer, racing and rugby’ religion cannot claim to be the 'comprehensive religion’ if women do not participate to anywhere near the same extent as men. If sport is a religion, is it a male religion rather than a female one?
---------------------------------------
From a functional perspective, sport takes on many societal roles that religion has and does. These include rituals, the creation of sacred space, formation of social values, and feelings of transcendence in players. In combination, and in our increasingly secular nations, sport has potentially taken on the role of surrogate religion.
On the other hand, sport has never attempted to answer ultimate questions of human existence, and how to achieve non-worldly status. With the advent of professionalism, sport has become obsessed with its own productivity, shedding many religious connotations. The values sport inherently suggests for society can also be considered somewhat masculine, and unrepresentative of many females in society.
---------------------------------------
So what are your thoughts? Can sport be considered a religion?
Originally Posted by chad
Bookmarks