On Sunday, Kyle Taylor released a statement as director of athletics for Covenant College about the upcoming championship match. The match was scheduled for the Covenant women’s tennis team, a group that deserves a great deal of respect for a remarkable season, standing 15-5 overall and 11-1 within their conference. The problem arose, however, when the team was slotted to compete for the championship on April 17th, a Sunday, against Methodist.
In national tournaments the NCAA does allow for paperwork to be filed to avoid schedule matches on religious days of observance. Given the scope of religious institutions (or individual preference) the NCAA is wise to avoid these issues at all costs. The USA South Athletic Conference, however, is not bound to accept these terms, so was free to schedule the championship match on Sunday. Tournament officials comments showed little sympathy:
…Covenant does not compete on Sundays and has chosen to forfeit the match. This gives Methodist the program’s eighth all-time USA South Tournament Championship and the sixth in the past seven years.
The forfeiture likely should not have been necessary. Covenant had submitted the appropriate paperwork, and given they were seeded #2, there was at least a fair chance they would be in the championship match. Covenant also has on their squad the tournament MVP, Aly Hall.
Still the choice was made and Covenant was left to forfeit the championship match.
Sports and the Sabbath: a quick history
Sports and recreation on the Sabbath has always been a thorny issue, especially when it comes to recreation. On this issue, Reformed theologians have not always seen eye to eye. There have been historically two camps, though we should be careful not to see these as a hard division within Reformed theology:
– Continental Reformed position. This view is that Sabbath is to be observed with regard to work. Sabbath is to be a time of rest and worship, but this does not necessarily prohibit recreation or sports during Sabbath. The focus is absolutely on rest and worship, but it allows for freedom of conscience on matters of sport or recreation.
– Puritan Reformed position: This view arose mostly in the context of England, with the ongoing fights between Puritan and conformist leaders of the English church during the Stuart era (c. 1603-1649). This view agrees with the Continental view on every point, except it does prohibit recreation on Sabbath. So again this is more a debate on applying the Reformed view of Sabbath than it is a fight over Sabbath itself.
In the English context there were a number of struggles that gave rise to the question of recreation. The root of a lot of this arose during the controversy under Elizabeth I and the question of vestments. English Reformed leaders worked to convince their colleagues in the church that too much license was being taken apart from scripture, while in others matters not enough attention to scripture was being paid. So in this case: vestments were required, while none seemed to care how they observed Sabbath. The result was a great deal of squabbles over the subject of sports and recreation.
In fact, the situation grew bleak enough that the king had to issue a royal decree about the subject of sports. In 1618, King James I issued a decree about the appropriate use of recreation in England, allowing most recreational activities that did not themselves result in sinful activities such as gambling or drunkenness. This decree was tidied up and reissued by his son, King Charles I, not long before the English Civil War provoked the Puritan leaders to cut the sporting kings head off.
Much of this can appear nonsensical to us today. It confused people in the 17th century, too, and in fact this apparent attack on good fun and sports was part of the reason why Puritans began to be lampooned as boring grumps in need of an occasional Sunday afternoon out on the court. How could anyone be so concerned about recreation?
But in the heritage of the Reformed tradition this issue is not so much a provocation for a fight as it is a
staging ground where different interpretative views of the Bible are played out. All Reformed churches agree that Sabbath is primarily about worship, primarily about resting from our labor and coming to praise the King of heaven and earth. Where they differ is on the subject of the boundaries of my pleasure versus the enjoyment of creation itself. Some Reformed communities have been hesitant to baptize any recreation as enjoyment of Sabbath in rest. At no point has any other Reformed community looked down on others for taking this view. They may disagree, but they always show respect for a conscience captive to the Word of God.
Respect for Covenant College Women’s Tennis players
This is, for me, not a story of the clash of cultures or the decline of American society. We can press these women into this narrative, but it would do little good to them. The story of Sabbath observance is one that goes back centuries, and this is certainly not the last time we will see conflict over the issue. Covenant College makes no bones about its stance on sports during Sabbath: they will not participate. We should, then, not only respect their position but understand it in the light of history. They are taking an historic position that is embraced by many within Reformed history.
But for me the story should first be one of respect for the women’s tennis squad at Covenant: their hard work, practices, teamwork, and devotion to their calling as collegiate athletes. This is not an outcome they wanted and it should not have come to this. When they joined Covenant they may not have realized their commitment to scripture may cause a clash at some point in the future. I really wish it had not come to this for them.
But since this has happened—and cost the opportunity for a championship—I hope they know how much they are respected for their sacrifice.
