Auteur: Joan Ball
Category: Vérité et pluralisme
I’ve been watching a lot of soccer this week. I’ve also been thinking a lot about "truth" and what is "right" and how we communicate with one another in light of the sometimes contentious comments on my last post, "There is No God: Understanding the Unbeliever".
If you’re following the 2010 World Cup, you know that fans and the press have been buzzing about some bad calls by referees in the first round of play.The US v Slovenia game where a goal late in the game was disallowed for reasons still unknown was but one (albeit dramatic) example of the humanity of the referees figuring into the outcome of a game. Of course many people are crying foul and calling for instant replay which, advocates claim, will "fix" this "problem."This interview with author Alan Black (The Glorious World Cup: A Fanatics Guide), which was taped weeks before the US v Slovenia game, offers a different take on instant replay and the role that flawed human referees play in creating and maintaining the rich historical drama of World Cup soccer.
As I watched I found myself wondering if this desire to clarify every detail (of soccer calls and faith doctrines) is not rooted first in a desire to control the uncontrollable. Do we want to live in a world where every call is perfect and every doctrine is explained and provable? Can we find a way to get comfortable in the uncertainty (and disagreement) without sniping or needing every detail to be defined (and "correct") at every point in the journey? Might we learn to accept that we are a very small part of something much, much larger than ourselves and enjoy the mess that living, working, conversing and playing together inevitably causes without constantly attempting to label and explain every "call"? Can we do so without losing the integrity of the game and our unique (and sometimes opposite) beliefs about God and humanity?
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this...