Sermon

The Rules of Golf

The Rev. Jack D. Bryant

Hope Unitarian Church

January 30, 2005

First Reading: 1 Corinthians 13:

If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. For we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love.

Second Reading: From an unknown source:

Ever wonder why golf is growing in popularity and why people who don't even play go to tournaments or watch it on TV? The following truisms may shed some light: Golf is an honorable game, with the overwhelming majority of players being honorable people who don't need referees. Golfers don't have some of their players in jail every week. Golfers don't kick dirt on, or throw bottles at, other people. Professional golfers are paid in direct proportion to how well they play. Golfers don't get per diem and two seats on a charter flight when they travel between tournaments. Golfers don't hold out for more money, or demand new contracts, because of another player's deal. Professional golfers don't demand that the taxpayers pay for the courses on which they play. When golfers make a mistake, nobody is there to cover for them or back them. The PGA raises more money for charity in one year than the NFL does in two.

. . .

You can bring a picnic lunch to the tournament golf course, watch the best in the world and not spend a small fortune on food and drink. Try that at one of the taxpayer funded baseball or football stadiums. If you bring a soft drink into a ballpark, they'll give you two options -- get rid of it or leave.

. . .

Golf doesn't change its rules to attract fans. Golfers have to adapt to an entirely new playing area each week. Golfers keep their clothes on while they are being interviewed.

. . .

In their prime, Palmer, Norman, and other stars, would shake your hand and say they were happy to meet you. In his prime Jose Canseco wore T-shirts that read "Leave Me Alone."

. . .

At a golf tournament, (unlike at taxpayer-funded sports stadiums and arenas) you won't hear a steady stream of four letter words and nasty name calling while you're hoping that no one spills beer on you.

Sermon

I need to begin by telling you I don’t know much about Golf. I have played a few times, but it’s been over twenty years since I last did so. I never scored below a hundred. I did, however, once - and only once - make a birdie. It was the last time I played golf and it was at Southern Hills Country Club. All that proves, however, is the truth of the old saying that even a blind hog will occasionally find an acorn. But getting back to the rules of golf, let me be more specific about my ignorance. Not only do not I not know much about golf in general, I don’t know much about the rules of golf. I understand the general outline of what they require, but I have not a clue with respect to the finer details. So, you may be thinking, what’s he doing with a title like “The Rules of Golf.” Maybe you’re thinking you’d rather go play golf. But that actually leads into what I want to say this morning - which is more about what actually happens when one plays golf, than the rules themselves - and more about what actually happens in the practice of religion, than the creeds and beliefs and rules of religion. But the rules of golf are where I start this morning.

Have you noticed that there are a lot of different games out there? Anybody know what the game is today? That’s right: football. This is the big day, the Superbowl. But Golf isn’t like football. The rules are completely different. You can’t use a stick in football - the rules don’t allow it. There’s a ball, but it’s a different shape and even Tiger Woods couldn’t drive a football three hundred yards. Football has a regulation field. The rules of Golf allow for variety in where the game is played. I think football requires the players to wear helmets these days. Golf doesn’t. You can wear a funny hat while playing golf, but it’s not required. There aren’t any holes in football. The rules of golf require eighteen. In both games you can wear cleats, but the cleats used in golf aren’t allowed by the rules of football. The winner in football is the one who has the highest score. The winner in golf has the lowest score.

I could go on like this all morning. The rules of Golf aren’t anything like the rules of football. Do you think that’s why they don’t have instant replays to review the calls by the referees in golf? Do you think it’s the differences in the rules of Golf and football that cause football players to curse and scream and pretend to moon tens of thousands of people in the stadium after scoring a touchdown? I need to stop right here and say something about the difficulty of writing this section of the sermon. I wasn’t sure I should say that last sentence. I wasn’t sure how far I could go in describing some of the behavior I’ve seen and heard at football games - much less some of the things I’ve seen during the halftime shows. But don’t worry: This is a church, I’m a minister and there will be no wardrobe malfunctions this morning. I’m supposed to be a little more circumspect, a little more delicate, than some people. But how does one describe some of the crude and vulgar activities that one sees at sporting events today? Well, most of you’ve seen first hand what I’m talking about. Let’s just leave it at that and get back to the question: Is it the rules that make the difference in behavior? Let’s suppose it is the rules that make the difference and try to test that hypothesis.

I’ve seen professional golfers call rule infractions on themselves. Nobody else could see it, but they call it on themselves and cost themselves tens of thousands of dollars. One could argue it has something to do with the rules of golf. Maybe it’s because they’re allowed to use sticks. But the rules of hockey allow their players to use sticks and hockey games are more like brawls than games. I can’t imagine a hockey player would ever call an infraction on himself. Must not be the rules that make the difference.

I’m not suggesting golfers are perfect. I’ve seen golfers get upset and say and do things that weren’t appropriate. But such incidents are rare. Golfers and golf fans - as a general rule - don’t behave like players and fans of other sports. I don’t think it takes much reflection to realize that it’s not the rules of golf that make golf and golfers different. So what is the difference? Why is golf typically characterized by civility and good manners? Why are so many other sports characterized by incivility and overt violence?

Here’s where I want to get into religion. When I was in seminary I was talking one day with Bob Shelton. Bob was a Presbyterian minister with a Ph.D. from Princeton, the intellectual Mecca for Presbyterians, and the Seminary’s President. He didn’t know much about Unitarians and he was curious. This led us to have a number of long conversations about Unitarianism. On that particular day I was telling him about some of the more famous Unitarians - people such as Thomas Jefferson and Susan B. Anthony and Ralph Waldo Emerson and Clara Barton. He listened attentively for several moments and then interrupted me with a question. “Jack,” he said, “have you found any religious tradition whose followers are - as a whole - more moral and ethical in their behavior than other people?”

His question surprised me, but I could tell he was serious. I thought for a few moments and said, “No.”

He returned my momentary thoughtful silence and said, “Neither have I.” I’m not sure, but I’ve always thought he was a bit troubled by his answer. As a Presbyterian I’m sure he would like to think Presbyterians were “better.” And as a Unitarian I would like to think “Unitarians” are better.

Just as there are many different kinds of games there are many different kinds of religions. Just as games have their respective rules, religions have their individual beliefs and creeds and traditions. Some recite the Apostle’s creed. Do you know it? “I believe in God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth and in Jesus Christ his only son our Lord . . ..” And so on and so forth. There’s also a Nicene creed. There are Buddhists, of course, who believe that life is full of suffering and the way out of suffering is to stop grasping for things. Evangelical Christians insist on the literal truth of the bible and the existence of God. Atheists insist the fundamentalists are right about the nature of God, but wrong to believe he exists. Feminists believe there’s a God, and she’s not happy with being called “He.” Muslims believe God requires complete submission. Hindus believe there are a million gods and at the same time believe there is really just one. Those are all generalizations, of course, and as such inaccurate in the details, but you get the idea - many religions, many different ways of believing - making Islam as different from Christianity as football is from golf.

I’ve met followers from a number of different religions who believe that one can only be good if one believes the way they do. Some say one can only be good if one recites the Apostle’s Creed; others say no, it’s the Nicene Creed; others says no, one must pray seven times a day; and others say just meditate. But what’s the reality of how people behave?

A lot of people today are saying Islam is a religion of terror while Christianity is a religion of peace. My reply to that is that anyone who says so must be ignorant of the history of Christianity and Islam. Both are religions with bloody histories. And both are religions with a history of peace and love and charitable deeds. On an individual basis I have known people who were - to use the kindest word that comes to mind - jerks. Such people have been Christians of every variety, Unitarians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, atheists and people of every other religious persuasion I can recall. And I have known people from each of those religious persuasions who were kind and generous and loving and good, decent people whom I would not hesitate to trust with my life and the life of my family.

So what makes the difference? Just as it’s not the rules of Golf that account for the civility of golfers, it’s not the beliefs or disbeliefs of people, it’s not their creeds and beliefs and traditions - or the rejection thereof - that explains whether a person is good or bad - or just indifferent. What is it that makes the difference? I think the answer is the same for both golf and religion.

It’s not the rules of golf that make the difference, it’s the understanding that exist between golfers about how they will behave, an understanding that transcends the rules. You might call it a covenant, a promise about practical behavior that says they will walk together on the golf course in a particular spirit. It’s a spirit that says they won’t have to have a referee to call their fouls. If they make a mistake they will call it on themselves. And something similar happens with religion. It’s not what someone believes. It’s not what someone doesn’t believe. It’s about how people decide they will walk together. It’s about what I call the covenant of behavior that people will decide will guide their lives. Regardless of their beliefs, regardless of what those around them believe, they commit themselves to acting in a particular way, in a particular spirit. And in religion, such agreements are called covenants.

The Apostle Paul said,

If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

We might say of golfers, if they can drive the ball three hundred yards, if they can make six birdies a round and never go over par they are nothing unless they love and respect both the game and those with whom they play. And it does not matter if yours is the one true religion, it does not matter if you really have found the genuine truth with a capital “T”, it does not matter if you reject every falsehood, it does not matter if your logic is flawless, you - I should say we - are nothing unless we walk together in love.

In 1629 a group of Pilgrims in Salem, Massachusetts put that idea into words when they wrote a covenant to bind them together. “We Covenant with the Lord and one with an other; and doe bynd our selves in the presence of God, to walke together in all his wales, according as he is pleased to reveale himself unto us in his Blessed word of truth.” The operative words of that covenant are “We covenant to walk together.” But it’s not enough to just walk together. Those words from 1629 are still the covenant that members of First Church in Salem, Massachusetts recite today. I believe they endure because the people of that church understand that the power of love lies behind those words.

Love is a peculiar idea. Most of the time we think of love as being about romance or physical attraction. If you browse the newsstands - as I did yesterday while at the grocery story - it would seem to mean nothing more than sex. But that’s not really love. Love is what sometimes compels us to say no. I think you really have to love someone to tell them no. I think you really have to love someone to have high expectations of them. I think you really have to love someone to be serious about walking together. And such high expectations begin with the individual. A genuine self love requires a person to be willing to say no to himself or herself, to have high expectations of the self, to regulate one’s own behavior. That’s why I think there’s an element of love in the behavior of golfers - because the civility of golf begins with the golfer calling his or her own fouls. The willingness to do what you say you will do - coupled with the courage to hold others accountable to that same standard - is a leadership ethic rooted in love.

“If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.” If all we do is brag about who the famous Unitarians were or proclaim the truths we know and the falsehoods we reject, we are noisy gongs and clanging cymbals. Our liberal religion, our free religion, is only genuine and can only make us free, when we imbue it with the spirit of love. That requires us to embrace not just principles and purposes and this or that, but to live together in a genuine covenantal relationship that makes love the heart of our community. Everything else that we know, all of the wisdom we or any other religious community possesses is of little value. It is as if we see in a mirror, dimly. We can see face to face, we can see truly and fully and be what we should be as individuals and as a community only when we realize the truth of love and make it the basis for the covenant that binds us together. As Paul said, “And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love.” Amen.