Wimbledon Needs A Liturgical Update
In a piece on Marin Cilic -- written after his loss to Roger Federer in the Wimbledon men's final -- I compared sports fans who watch tennis only at Wimbledon or the U.S. Open (specifically the semifinals and finals) to Catholics who attend worship only at Christmas or Easter each year.
I reference that comparison because Wimbledon -- in many ways the Vatican of tennis, with Centre Court being its great cathedral -- has a liturgy which has lost its relevance in modern times. This puts the tournament in the same basic position as the Catholic Church, which is shrinking in most of the world, growing only in the less developed global South, particularly Africa.
To put a finer point on this comparison, the liturgy -- a public expression of communal faith -- is not the same thing as the faith itself. Yes, people who attend a liturgy will get the impression that Mass reflects something about the faith of the community, but it is only a surface-level product. Layers below that one parish's representation of the Catholic faith is the actual Catholic faith itself.
Like any religious tradition, it is susceptible to interpretation. Accordingly, it can be interpreted or expressed the wrong way... or if not the "wrong" way, certainly in a more rigid, extreme or doctrinally vague manner which negatively affects the way newcomers or agnostics perceive it. A good liturgy will generally be aesthetically pleasing, but it doesn't have to be.
The main point of a religious liturgy is to inspire faith in a nourishing way -- to not merely improve faith in a community, but to do so in ways which give more life and spiritual goods to more people. Increased faith isn't helpful if the faith being taught is corrosive or regressive or otherwise harmful. Faith -- taken from the realm of theory to the realm of practice -- needs to be empowering and life-affirming.
The essence of Catholic faith (like any other religious faith tradition) needs to be honored in liturgy. If not, the faith can't be accessed and transformed into something much more powerful and meaningful.
How does Wimbledon fit into this? Much as many people in the West are turned off by public expressions of Catholicism -- even though the essence of Catholic faith remains beautiful and a source of potential empowerment -- Wimbledon has made so many enemies when its essence remains so attractive.
Let's offer a point of clarity: There are really two Wimbledons -- one is the event whose logistics and schedules are managed by human beings. Tournament officials and supervisors are traffic cops, trying to put every match in its proper place.
The other Wimbledon is the tennis itself, the fortnight starting in uncertainty, gaining momentum, then disrupted by plot twists, then rising to the crescendo of the semifinals and championship matches... all taking place in the cradle of tennis on the sport's original surface, grass.
Far too often, Wimbledon the organized logistical event overwhelms Wimbledon the showcase of tennis in an iconically historic setting. Much too regularly, the ineptitude of people making decisions overshadows the beauty and drama of high-level athletic competition.
Human beings mismanaged the Catholic Church for a long time. The same is true of Wimbledon. It's true that people still flock to Wimbledon, unlike Sunday Mass, and the collection plate (so to speak) is still full. Yet, the damage to the reputations of both entities is all too real... and far more severe than it ever should be.
Not putting Novak Djokovic on court last Monday night -- under a roof -- was Wimbledon's biggest and most egregious error this fortnight, but that wasn't all. Wimbledon -- under the guise of "tradition" -- made boys players show their underwear ON COURT -- IN VIEW OF THE PUBLIC --to make sure they followed the all-white dress code.
Wimbledon thinks this is a feature, not a bug, of its tournament. Inspecting undergarments is a ridiculous practice in any context, but it is striking how this was done promptly and in front of spectators, not in a way closed off to cameras and fans.
Why does this detail matter? It shows that Wimbledon can act very promptly in the attempt to run its tournament. Wimbledon CAN be highly vigilant and responsive.
Why was the tournament so slow -- even paralyzed -- in its response to the evident need to put Djokovic on court Monday evening after the Roger Federer-Grigor Dimitrov match ended at the relatively early time of 6:50, offering nearly two hours of daylight (i.e., non-roof) tennis to Djokovic and Adrian Mannarino? The men could have started at 7:20, played 1:45, and -- if not finished -- moved into a roof-closed situation. They probably would have been able to finish no later than 10. Then, had the Rafael Nadal-Gilles Muller match not finished (25-25 in the fifth???), those men could have come to Centre Court near 10:20 and played 40 minutes to fully complete the men's draw, putting everyone on the same footing heading into the quarterfinals.
Wimbledon didn't lift a finger.
A tournament exists for the fans to enjoy, but it must safeguard the best interests of the players first. Court assignments -- who gets Centre, who gets No. 1 Court, who gets No. 2 -- matter in terms of giving the WTA equal representation, but court assignments do not decide who wins (or loses) Wimbledon matches. Handling plot twists -- such as Nadal-Muller running long, forcing the need for Djokovic to be moved to Centre Court -- can affect the shape of a tournament. Wimbledon plainly valued inspecting boys' underwear -- IN PUBLIC -- far more than ensuring Djokovic received fair and equitable treatment.
If that's tradition -- if that is Wimbledon's liturgy on its hallowed grounds -- it is clear the tournament's claims of being "in step with the times" (which is, not coincidentally, a turn of phrase often uttered by Catholic theologians, often in reference to the Second Vatican Council of the 1960s) are profoundly and laughably inaccurate.
True evolution in step with modernity does not mean Wimbledon must ditch its traditions and its sense of timelessness -- the unchanging outward exterior of Wimbledon is indeed part of the tournament's charm. However, there is not -- and never can be -- anything charming about shortchanging WTA players regarding Centre Court and show court assignments. There is not -- and never can be -- anything charming or evolved about inspecting underwear in public, especially not when those boys' singles players wore the properly white shorts and shirt.
Wimbledon -- the logistical and code-conscious supervisors -- obsesses about the wrong details. Accordingly, Wimbledon -- the compelling tennis tournament savored for its action and competition -- is overshadowed in the minds of far too many tennis fans and tennis television viewers.
For every fan Wimbledon keeps, the tournament consistently alienates others. A good number of tennis fans might enjoy the matches and the stories, but they won't attend the All England Club because of the decisions organizers keep making, year after year.
Catholicism is beautiful on paper, but liturgy -- lived practice and expression of it -- often fails to meet the mark. Much of the same is true at Wimbledon, whose own "liturgy" needs an update informed by more compassion toward players and more common sense in terms of knowing what is truly important.
I reference that comparison because Wimbledon -- in many ways the Vatican of tennis, with Centre Court being its great cathedral -- has a liturgy which has lost its relevance in modern times. This puts the tournament in the same basic position as the Catholic Church, which is shrinking in most of the world, growing only in the less developed global South, particularly Africa.
To put a finer point on this comparison, the liturgy -- a public expression of communal faith -- is not the same thing as the faith itself. Yes, people who attend a liturgy will get the impression that Mass reflects something about the faith of the community, but it is only a surface-level product. Layers below that one parish's representation of the Catholic faith is the actual Catholic faith itself.
Like any religious tradition, it is susceptible to interpretation. Accordingly, it can be interpreted or expressed the wrong way... or if not the "wrong" way, certainly in a more rigid, extreme or doctrinally vague manner which negatively affects the way newcomers or agnostics perceive it. A good liturgy will generally be aesthetically pleasing, but it doesn't have to be.
The main point of a religious liturgy is to inspire faith in a nourishing way -- to not merely improve faith in a community, but to do so in ways which give more life and spiritual goods to more people. Increased faith isn't helpful if the faith being taught is corrosive or regressive or otherwise harmful. Faith -- taken from the realm of theory to the realm of practice -- needs to be empowering and life-affirming.
The essence of Catholic faith (like any other religious faith tradition) needs to be honored in liturgy. If not, the faith can't be accessed and transformed into something much more powerful and meaningful.
How does Wimbledon fit into this? Much as many people in the West are turned off by public expressions of Catholicism -- even though the essence of Catholic faith remains beautiful and a source of potential empowerment -- Wimbledon has made so many enemies when its essence remains so attractive.
Let's offer a point of clarity: There are really two Wimbledons -- one is the event whose logistics and schedules are managed by human beings. Tournament officials and supervisors are traffic cops, trying to put every match in its proper place.
The other Wimbledon is the tennis itself, the fortnight starting in uncertainty, gaining momentum, then disrupted by plot twists, then rising to the crescendo of the semifinals and championship matches... all taking place in the cradle of tennis on the sport's original surface, grass.
Far too often, Wimbledon the organized logistical event overwhelms Wimbledon the showcase of tennis in an iconically historic setting. Much too regularly, the ineptitude of people making decisions overshadows the beauty and drama of high-level athletic competition.
Human beings mismanaged the Catholic Church for a long time. The same is true of Wimbledon. It's true that people still flock to Wimbledon, unlike Sunday Mass, and the collection plate (so to speak) is still full. Yet, the damage to the reputations of both entities is all too real... and far more severe than it ever should be.
Not putting Novak Djokovic on court last Monday night -- under a roof -- was Wimbledon's biggest and most egregious error this fortnight, but that wasn't all. Wimbledon -- under the guise of "tradition" -- made boys players show their underwear ON COURT -- IN VIEW OF THE PUBLIC --to make sure they followed the all-white dress code.
Wimbledon thinks this is a feature, not a bug, of its tournament. Inspecting undergarments is a ridiculous practice in any context, but it is striking how this was done promptly and in front of spectators, not in a way closed off to cameras and fans.
Why does this detail matter? It shows that Wimbledon can act very promptly in the attempt to run its tournament. Wimbledon CAN be highly vigilant and responsive.
Why was the tournament so slow -- even paralyzed -- in its response to the evident need to put Djokovic on court Monday evening after the Roger Federer-Grigor Dimitrov match ended at the relatively early time of 6:50, offering nearly two hours of daylight (i.e., non-roof) tennis to Djokovic and Adrian Mannarino? The men could have started at 7:20, played 1:45, and -- if not finished -- moved into a roof-closed situation. They probably would have been able to finish no later than 10. Then, had the Rafael Nadal-Gilles Muller match not finished (25-25 in the fifth???), those men could have come to Centre Court near 10:20 and played 40 minutes to fully complete the men's draw, putting everyone on the same footing heading into the quarterfinals.
Wimbledon didn't lift a finger.
A tournament exists for the fans to enjoy, but it must safeguard the best interests of the players first. Court assignments -- who gets Centre, who gets No. 1 Court, who gets No. 2 -- matter in terms of giving the WTA equal representation, but court assignments do not decide who wins (or loses) Wimbledon matches. Handling plot twists -- such as Nadal-Muller running long, forcing the need for Djokovic to be moved to Centre Court -- can affect the shape of a tournament. Wimbledon plainly valued inspecting boys' underwear -- IN PUBLIC -- far more than ensuring Djokovic received fair and equitable treatment.
If that's tradition -- if that is Wimbledon's liturgy on its hallowed grounds -- it is clear the tournament's claims of being "in step with the times" (which is, not coincidentally, a turn of phrase often uttered by Catholic theologians, often in reference to the Second Vatican Council of the 1960s) are profoundly and laughably inaccurate.
True evolution in step with modernity does not mean Wimbledon must ditch its traditions and its sense of timelessness -- the unchanging outward exterior of Wimbledon is indeed part of the tournament's charm. However, there is not -- and never can be -- anything charming about shortchanging WTA players regarding Centre Court and show court assignments. There is not -- and never can be -- anything charming or evolved about inspecting underwear in public, especially not when those boys' singles players wore the properly white shorts and shirt.
Wimbledon -- the logistical and code-conscious supervisors -- obsesses about the wrong details. Accordingly, Wimbledon -- the compelling tennis tournament savored for its action and competition -- is overshadowed in the minds of far too many tennis fans and tennis television viewers.
For every fan Wimbledon keeps, the tournament consistently alienates others. A good number of tennis fans might enjoy the matches and the stories, but they won't attend the All England Club because of the decisions organizers keep making, year after year.
Catholicism is beautiful on paper, but liturgy -- lived practice and expression of it -- often fails to meet the mark. Much of the same is true at Wimbledon, whose own "liturgy" needs an update informed by more compassion toward players and more common sense in terms of knowing what is truly important.
Comments
Post a Comment