The basketball season has begun. Every season has it's own personality, it's own existence, so to speak. This one feels different all together, as it feels very much like I'm on borrowed time.
When last season ended, I believed that I was done as a basketball coach. For reasons that I don't need to get specific about, I was ready to walk away from an activity that I loved. The cost had become too great, the reward too little. I wasn't ready to be done coaching, but I had made my peace with it. I ended the season, gave myself a month to think about it, then told my wife that unless something drastic changed, I was going to walk away.
Something drastic did change, so here I am, starting another season. I'm excited. I'm passionate. And after one week of practice, I'm having more fun that I've had in years. I also understand that my personal approach to this season must be fundamentally different than it ever has before.
For the 1st eight years of my coaching career, I put everything on hold until the season ended. Mostly, I gave myself an excuse to get myself out of physical, mental, and spiritual shape. I told myself that I would work out once the season ended and I had more time and energy. I would read books or catch up on homework once March came around. And I would swear to remember who God was and how I fit into an eternal worldview when I could just get basketball out of the way.
In the back of my mind, I can believe that part of the reason the mess at Nora Springs occurred which took me away from head coaching for a time was because I was holding so tightly to the job. I would say that I could lose all yet have Christ and all would be fine; however, I couldn't imagine my life without leading a basketball program every winter. My identity was wrapped up in being the head coach at Sutherland or at NS-RF. Without that, I felt like less. And I felt like if I lost that, I would have less in life. Unfortunately, I had a much tighter grip on this identity than I did on my own spiritual well-being.
Then I wasn't a head coach any more. That was a major blow to my identity for a while, but I adjusted. I was fine. The world didn't stop, nor did my life. I continued to coach; but as I indicated above, the cost of coaching became greater, the reward smaller. Last spring I thought I had finally learned my lesson - I learned to hold loosely to that part of my identity and realized that I could walk away.
Then the situation changed in a quite favorable way - a way that would allow me to use my skills and passions more effectively and work closely with people I enjoy a great deal. The reward was great again. So I'm back.
I feel like God is telling me, "Dykstra, you can do this. Go ahead if you want. You learned your lesson. But if you worship this again, it's your loss. It's your wasted winter. It's your loss of the exponential joy of focusing on Me for the cheap substitute of a much lesser joy. Go do this, but understand that your joy hangs in the balance."
Whether or not those are God's exact words, they are true. My joy does hang in the balance. I can have it all this winter - feeding my God-given passion for coaching basketball and experiencing exponential, eternally-driven joy in the process. But that can only occur if I see God while coaching, if I seek to bring Him glory and improve His reputation and build up the people I have influence over. Basically, I must stay in spiritual shape this winter in order to have it all. I can do this thing I am passionate about, but only if this passion springs from my passion for a God-centered life.
I want to do this job for many, many years to come. For that to be worth it (for my family, for myself, and for the players and coaches I'm around), this winter must be different.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Monday, November 1, 2010
Those with whom I disagree
A recent editorial in the Des Moines Register prompted an essay assignment in my Composition class. It may involve one of the most important skills I can teach my students.
The editorial was bemoaning the current state of the nation and the fact that we have we have become a collection of homogenous communities. More and more, Americans tend to socialize, live, and talk with like-minded people with similar backgrounds, experiences, and even appearances. Unfortunately, the editorial even pointed out that a church growth strategy taught in some seminaries is based on attracting a certain "kind of people" in the church. The writer also wrote that studies have shown that the longer individuals are around others with whom they agree, the more radical they become in their views. Most Americans ignore "other" kinds of people with whom they disagree. It's just easier. And it's convenient when seeking to demonize individuals if you don't know them personally.
I had noticed in my Composition course sections, as we discussed controversial current events, that students struggled to disagree with their peers without getting personal, offensive, and incapable of reasonable dialogue. I don't write this to belittle my students; I notice many of the same behaviors in adults, even though I quit watching Fox News and MSNBC past 7 pm several years ago.
The assignment I created asked students to take a position on 21 controversial topics of varying degrees of severity. They then were charged with choosing three of those issues, finding at least two people per issue who disagree with them, and writing down why their "opponents" held those beliefs. Now they must write a persuasive essay using these arguments with which they disagree. If common sense and a desire to treat humanity with respect couldn't motivate them to listen respectfully to other students, perhaps their grade will.
I've watched these students over the past couple of days interview each other. It has forced them out of their comfort zone, especially in that they have had to speak with individuals who are not "like them" in terms of the unwritten social hierarchy of high school life. I don't think anyone's mind has been changed regarding specific issues, but that's a good thing. These kids should be strong in their beliefs. What they have done is have conversations, and most of them have learned that reasonable people can disagree. Honestly, it's been one of the most pleasant classroom environments I've been in for a long time.
Christians, I fear, don't do enough of this, especially interdenominationally. An old joke at our house growing up when we looked out at the cattle on our farm and saw half on one side of the pasture and half on the other is that one half were the Christian Reformed cattle, the other the First Reformed. Though there is usually respect amongst individuals from differing congregations and denominations in a "I guess we're in this battle with the world together," sort of way, rarely do the average members ask each other why differences in matters of doctrine exist. I fear one reason is because many simply don't know.
We also don't do enough of this with members of other faiths and with atheists. In fact, there's rarely much mutual respect at all. "They" are simply to be looked down upon, perhaps pitied, or more likely, condemned. This is, at best, a flawed path; at worst, it is a path that is losing souls.
Without rational dialogue, we lose the chance to influence others. We lose the chance to be Christ. We also lose the chance to better understand this world, a world we are charged to live effectively in, even if we are not to become "of" the world.
The number one commandment is to love God with all our heart, and the second is to love our neighbor as ourself. I don't think we'll ever really know the strength of our faith until we believe the term "neighbor" includes even those who don't look, think, and act like us.
The editorial was bemoaning the current state of the nation and the fact that we have we have become a collection of homogenous communities. More and more, Americans tend to socialize, live, and talk with like-minded people with similar backgrounds, experiences, and even appearances. Unfortunately, the editorial even pointed out that a church growth strategy taught in some seminaries is based on attracting a certain "kind of people" in the church. The writer also wrote that studies have shown that the longer individuals are around others with whom they agree, the more radical they become in their views. Most Americans ignore "other" kinds of people with whom they disagree. It's just easier. And it's convenient when seeking to demonize individuals if you don't know them personally.
I had noticed in my Composition course sections, as we discussed controversial current events, that students struggled to disagree with their peers without getting personal, offensive, and incapable of reasonable dialogue. I don't write this to belittle my students; I notice many of the same behaviors in adults, even though I quit watching Fox News and MSNBC past 7 pm several years ago.
The assignment I created asked students to take a position on 21 controversial topics of varying degrees of severity. They then were charged with choosing three of those issues, finding at least two people per issue who disagree with them, and writing down why their "opponents" held those beliefs. Now they must write a persuasive essay using these arguments with which they disagree. If common sense and a desire to treat humanity with respect couldn't motivate them to listen respectfully to other students, perhaps their grade will.
I've watched these students over the past couple of days interview each other. It has forced them out of their comfort zone, especially in that they have had to speak with individuals who are not "like them" in terms of the unwritten social hierarchy of high school life. I don't think anyone's mind has been changed regarding specific issues, but that's a good thing. These kids should be strong in their beliefs. What they have done is have conversations, and most of them have learned that reasonable people can disagree. Honestly, it's been one of the most pleasant classroom environments I've been in for a long time.
Christians, I fear, don't do enough of this, especially interdenominationally. An old joke at our house growing up when we looked out at the cattle on our farm and saw half on one side of the pasture and half on the other is that one half were the Christian Reformed cattle, the other the First Reformed. Though there is usually respect amongst individuals from differing congregations and denominations in a "I guess we're in this battle with the world together," sort of way, rarely do the average members ask each other why differences in matters of doctrine exist. I fear one reason is because many simply don't know.
We also don't do enough of this with members of other faiths and with atheists. In fact, there's rarely much mutual respect at all. "They" are simply to be looked down upon, perhaps pitied, or more likely, condemned. This is, at best, a flawed path; at worst, it is a path that is losing souls.
Without rational dialogue, we lose the chance to influence others. We lose the chance to be Christ. We also lose the chance to better understand this world, a world we are charged to live effectively in, even if we are not to become "of" the world.
The number one commandment is to love God with all our heart, and the second is to love our neighbor as ourself. I don't think we'll ever really know the strength of our faith until we believe the term "neighbor" includes even those who don't look, think, and act like us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)