No doubt many of the readers of this blog have been paying attention to the Mitchell report on the use of steroids in Major League Baseball and its clamorous aftermath. As a lifelong baseball fan I was saddened by the report, for mostly sentimental reasons. The whole phenomenon of sports in American culture is a fascinating one. Some might see this as a marginal (or even indulgent) concern, with little to do with Catholic social teaching. On the contrary. Many thinkers, from Hugo Rahner, to James Schall, to Stanley Hauerwas, have commented on the importance of sport as a form of leisure, continuing a tradition that began with Plato and the classical notion of eutrapalia. Aristotle noted that usually the closest man comes to pure contemplation is the watching of a beautiful game.
Sports are the principal place where children learn the notions of right, law, and fairness. It is also one of the few places where the common man thinks metaphysically: here is something that might not have been, but is. And it is one of the few liturgical acts remaining in our culture: something that is done, not for ulterior reasons, but for its own sake. In a world that is dominated by consumerism and fealty to the almighty dollar and its queen, efficient production, the playing field is the last place where people gather for no other reason but to celebrate, to enjoy festivity, to witness and contemplate the beautiful. It is true that sports are constantly threatened by pernicious forces, particularly in the world of professional athletics, and even in collegiate sports (e.g. the current bowl system in college football, the hegemony of which is preserved solely because it brings in lots of money). Nonetheless, no where else is the value of the amateur so prized.
But this is not a post about sports. The whole tragedy of steroids and baseball has raised a deeper issue for me: what should our attitude be toward the law, rules, right and fairness.
It is a shocking thing to be confronted with the fact that so many have been “cheating” in professional baseball for some time. Part of the reason we enjoy watching sports is because we believe these players take nothing else save their natural abilities and intellects, and compete on a fair playing field. We do not enjoy guile or duplicity in sports for a reason. This is why soccer will never really approach the popularity it has in other parts of the world here in this country. Why? Americans cannot stand the sight of players taking a fall. This phenomenon is endemic in soccer. Europeans, as with their attitudes to rules and the law in general, do not seem to mind. In fact, they seem to even enjoy this intrusion of the theatrical.
The reality is, and the steroids incident in baseball should only remind us, that cheating has long been a part of the game. Particularly in its early years, when betting on the game was rampant. Altering bats, scuffing balls, stealing signs, taking uppers, they’ve all been in the game since the beginning. Nonetheless, we do not like to know about it. And when we find out, the offenders are usually punished. The same goes for other sports. Think of the whole notion of a “foul” or a “penalty”. Despite the fact that certain actions are “illegal”, most players will try to get away with as much as they can. Most will rationalize this as “it’s part of the game”. I would maintain it’s not. The virtuous thing would be to contain one’s actions within the rules of the game, only for the sake of preserving the integrity of what one is delighting in doing in the first place. Of course not all violations are intentional, as these acts may be instinctual. But when it is revealed that a player has premeditatedly and deliberately sought to circumvent the rules, fairness has been upset, and the spectators (and other players) are offended.
The pressure to win, not to mention the financial incentives involved, have made the intention to bend and circumvent the rules fairly the norm. How pervasive is this attitude, particularly in youth athletics? Quite, I would guess. It seems the task would be, teaching children that, despite the adulation that victory ensures (and despite how good it feels to win and be seen as the victor), fidelity to the rules and playing fair provide a greater moral victory, despite the presence or absence of adulation received. Moreover, the adulation perhaps should be avoided or even disdained, and devotion to the game itself for its own sake, prized above all.
So my question is: how important is fairness? Is obedience to the rules something truly praiseworthy? The extensions are obvious. Many Americans cheat one their taxes. Many Americans break traffic laws routinely. Et cetera, ad nauseam. It seems, at least in this country, we like to maintain the appearance of propriety, but if we can get away with it and no one finds out, we will cheat and break the rules. In other countries, for whatever reason, this attitude is all the more pervasive.
(I would maintain that American culture has the most respect and reverence for following the rules, and opprobrium against breaking the law, than any other, despite how hypocritical we may be. For anyone who has spent significant time in other countries, this should be obvious. And it is a peculiar thing as to why we are so concerned/obsessed in the country with following the rules. Whether this is better or worse is another question.)
What is the Catholic response to this? How important is encouraging an attitude of obedience to rules and laws? Should this obedience be unquestioning? If not, how much should be left to the discretion of the common man, and what does this do to legitimate authority? The implications in politics, not to mention the moral life, are obvious.
In recent years there has been a strong reaction against a perceived long-standing tradition in Catholic morality which was overwhelmingly law-based. Many have probably read Pinckaers’s account of this, among others, where much of the blame is laid on the voluntarism of Scotus and the Divine absolutism of Ockham. Opposed to this is a recent emphasis on “virtue ethics” and a morality that proceeds from questions of happiness and right desire, all of which is supposedly a recovery of a more classical understanding of morality. Still, I think that there is a huge penumbra remaining here: the Church is still a very much rules-based society, with our own code of law. Israel was also very law-based, as we see in the Old Testament, which isn’t to say that they were unaware of other ulterior motivations or foundations for their code (covenant, God’s spousal love with Israel, etc.). And for better or worse, when most people examine their consciences and confess, they think of trespasses and violations of rules, boundaries, and thou-shalt-nots.
(A related point: I have often heard the distinction where some try to express a more “European” approach to canon-law, morality, etc., where the law is the ideal, and everyone knows this, but in fact most are comfortable aiming at it if often falling short. This attitude is typically opposed to a more “American” one, where the “letter of the law” is the most important.)
What should our attitude toward rules be? How important is right and fairness, and what and how should we teach our children about this?
(E.g. should we encourage and teach our children to bend the rules in sport, so as to win, or rather is fidelity to the law so as to promote fairness more important? Remember we then have to explain why most will not follow the rules or will bend them, and how our children will be persecuted if they decide to follow the rules since they will not win as often on a playing field where in fact many do seek and retain an “unfair” advantage, and are rewarded with adulation for winning.)
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In