Why are we less enthusiastic?

Why is it that despite having a national team that is way more successful than its football counterpart, and certainly much more likeable, Rugby Union still has a very limited reach?

After all, everytime I watch Rugby I get the impression I could really like this sport…but never get into it…

Some possibilities:

1) Club Rugby is pretty invisible, monopolized by Sky. This low profile seems to be reflected in the attendances, equivalent to lower league football.

2) The rules are complex and at the moment seem to favour a style of play that involves grinding out possession until you get a penalty. This might fascinate the fan, but is off putting for the interested spectator for whom the World Cup Final was a dull 0-0 draw decided on penalties.

It was interesting to see that minor rule changes are being proposed to deal with this. Considering how football was revolutionised by simply not allowing goalkeepers to pick up pass-backs, this might have a great impact. There are many serious issues with football these days (teams becoming corporations; the boring predictability of the Premiership; players seen as spoilt brats; exagerratted dissent and diving) which Rugby could exploit to its advantage.

A Dylan Moment

” Now the rovin’ gambler he was very bored
He was tryin’ to create a next world war
He found a promoter who nearly fell off the floor
He said I never engaged in this kind of thing before
But yes I think it can be very easily done
We’ll just put some bleachers out in the sun
And have it on Highway 61.”

Highway 61 Revisited

Bush and Blair anyone…?

Bye Bye Martin

So Jol has gone. Hardly a secret, and probably one of the most shocking treatments of a manager by a board that I can remember.

It does mean that in less than 2 seasons Darren Bent has seen 4 managers depart from 2 different clubs…

Second generation again

In Urban Church, Robert Tang acknowledges the challenge of dealing with English speaking second generation British Chinese. However, unlike Ortiz, he does not envisage any change in the ethnic church, rather a process of placing these young people in more adequate churches.  He suggests a process of

(1) worship with parents
(2) English speaking youth congregation
(3) integrate into local non-ethnic chuches

Until I see it in practice I remain unconvinced of the viability of such a strategy. Firstly, if they have assimilated British culture it is unlikely that these young people are likely to have their ecclesiastical future decided for them. Secondly, most local non-ethnic churches are struggling to integrate their own young people, let alone those coming from other churches.

Integration?

Writing in Urban Church, Wale Hudson Roberts claims that despite the phenomena of multiculturalism Britain continues to be an institutionally racist society, with the worst affected being those from Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Caribbean origin.

Quoting JH Cone he really throws the gauntlet down when he affirms:

“if integration means accepting the white man’s style, his values or his religion, than the minority culture must refuse.”

This, of course, is out of step with the present official line of “integration” based on mythical “British values” (surely genuine British values would be based upon being taken over by immigrants–i.e. the Romans, the Saxons and the Normans!),which are basically an expression of a ‘liberal’ middle class ethos and institutionalized through diverse means such as citizenship tests.

The Second Generation

Ortiz perceives a challenge for second generation ethnic churches as they find themselves torn between two cultures, and often two languages.

He defends the following principles:

 Identity needs to be maintained. I wonder how this relates to postmodern themes of identity, especially ethnic identity being a social construction.

History needs to be known

Church leaders need to understand the second generation

Need for Leadership

Language: Ortiz envisages a transition to English, especially in sermons, with ethnic languages being used for other parts of the sermon.

Ethnic churches

Ortiz describes 3 models of integrating ethnic churches:

(1) renting model
(2) celebrative model–still separate but diversity celebrated
(3) integrative model–co-equal leadership, shared ownership of facilities, vision and ministry approach.

What Ortiz does not explore, but I take up in an article published in the Encounters Magazine, is how the renting model, which here in the UK seems to be the most popular often results in an exploitation of the ethnic church, being used to bankroll the failure of the more established congregation.

Immigration and the Homogeneous Unit Principle

Conn and Ortiz have harsh words to say about the application of the HUP in urban areas claiming that applying the HUP in multi-ethnic cities actually ends up killing churches as “these churches literally die off because they are incapable of reaching out to the new citizens of the community, people who are from a different ethnic group and maybe even a different socioeconomic class.” (331)

This urges greater reflection amongst those of us involved, directly or indirectly, in planting churches in multi-ethnic London.

Current Immigration

Conn and Ortiz reflect upon the impact of international travel on migration, especially in terms of a greater number of women migrating. In terms of impact, there is a negative element in that these people become unsettled and lose their family support system, yet they also become open to novelty, including the gospel.

Fortress Europe

Conn and Ortiz, also refer to the emergence of a fortress mentality in Europe and hostility towards immigrants stemming from unemployment caused by automation and the transfer of many services outside of Europe due to cheaper labour costs.

Worryingly, they affirm that in Britain, the deep-rootedness of the class system means that acceptance of multiculturalism is made more difficult.

In fact, what is particularly concerning is the way that in the UK government policy is increasingly dictated by the Daily Mail and the Express rather than serious academic study. Even when such study is filtered through, it rarely seems to have the benefit of a multidiscipline approach.