Search News


Browse Archives

News

When Prayer Reaches the Locker Room

June 28, 2007

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The pre-game moment of silence and post-game prayer circle are familiar traditions to many college athletes. Coaches pointing to the heavens after a victory; players crediting a higher being for their performances -- those sights and sound bites have become cliché.

Faith and sports have a long history of intersecting, and every so often a case arises that revives the discussion of where to draw the line at public institutions.

Which brings us to Iowa State University, currently embroiled in a controversy over whether its football team -- at the request of its head coach -- should be allowed a spiritual adviser. Some faculty members are upset at the idea, and more than 130 have signed a petition saying that such a position creates a serious violation of the separation between religion and government.

A panel that advises the university on athletics issues has voted, 7-1, in favor of the proposal. That recommendation now goes to Gregory Geoffroy, the university's president, for consideration.

According to the job description, the "life skills assistant" would likely report to the athletics director. The person would serve those who seek counsel on "a variety of practical, moral, spiritual and personal issues," and would not "pressure, coerce or proselytize team members." The adviser would have access to practices, games and other events, but any prayer led during mandatory team functions would have to be initiated and led by team members.

Iowa State says the adviser would not be supported by any state, university, athletic or foundation funds, but rather from donations made by private individuals.

Still, some faculty members remain upset. Hector Avalos, a professor of religious studies and co-author of the petition, said the title of "life skills assistant" isn't fooling the faculty. He said it doesn't matter who funds the position or whether it's a volunteer gig or not.

"It's a clear effort to Christianize the athletics department," he said. "There's a determination to prefer one religious group over another in hiring a chaplain. Once you start applying religious counseling, you can't use a multi-faith approach."

The chairman of the athletics council did not return messages for comment. (A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the university did not return messages for comment. An athletics department spokesman – not a member of the university press office -- was contacted and did not return a message for comment on Wednesday.)

In an e-mail response to the petition (provided by Avalos), Jamie Pollard, athletics director at Iowa State, defended the position. "Much like we have offered our student-athletes access to drug and alcohol counselors, sports psychologists, nutritionists, hypnotists, physical therapists, learning specialists, chiropractors, physicians, etc., we are now going to also provide access to a spiritual advisor."

Avalos said that as college teams become more diverse, the issue of bringing religion into the mix at public institutions will become all the more problematic.

Added Peter Roby, director of the Center for the Study of Sport in Society at Northeastern University, where he was just named athletics director: "In my opinion it is a dangerous precedent because it can lead to some athletes feeling isolated and discriminated against ... I would let the athletes know what religious and spiritual resources are available on campus or in the community and let them access them as they see fit."

At New Mexico State University, a confidential settlement has been reached in a case involving former football players who claimed they were discriminated against because they are Muslims. The suit alleges the players were dismissed because of their religious beliefs, and that while on the team they were asked to recite the Lord's Prayer during team functions. (The settlement stipulated that the university denies wrongdoing or bias. As a result of the suit, the prayer has been replaced by a moment of silence.)

But coaches often say that prayers are directed at the safety of the players, and are not religiously based. Reports have documented coaches at the some universities taking athletes to churches before the football season in an effort to build team unity. The coaches say the trips are never mandatory, and that they cannot remember players complaining.

Pollard, in the letter to Iowa State faculty, indicated that for more than a decade, a local pastor has traveled with its football team and attended home games as his schedule permitted. Avalos said the "business-as-usual" defense doesn't fly.

"At a public institution, it's always a Constitutionally risky thing to do."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on When Prayer Reaches the Locker Room

  • Focus Should Change
  • Posted by William Sumner Scott, J.D. on June 28, 2007 at 7:20am EDT
  • At the higher education level, only facts and actions based on facts should be taught or allowed.

    No one can prove the existence of god or that organized religion has value other than as a motivational tool or self esteem builder. Once organized religion is put in that genre, other methods to positively motivate people that also reduce or eliminate the war component of competition among religions can be developed.

    The public versus private school argument regarding the appropriateness of religion on campus is a tangent.

    All organized religion on all campuses must be brought into the myth category if we are to protect children from pedophiles and people from bombs strapped to believers.

    Higher education must lead the way.

    William Sumner Scott, J.D.

    wss@jefound.org

  • Insulting
  • Posted by Tom McCool on June 28, 2007 at 8:25am EDT
  • William, is that the best you can come up with? Insulting people? There is nothing in your post that lends one intelligent thought to this subject. You're baiting people. Go find something else to do, such as what you get paid to do, for instance.

  • Tolerance
  • Posted by Katrina Peterson on June 28, 2007 at 8:40am EDT
  • It’s definitely important to act in a positive manner when such controversial issues arise, rather than perpetuating the language and action of intolerance. Why should the beliefs/needs of one group—for instance, those who call themselves “nonreligious”—be privileged over the beliefs/needs of other groups? The same freedoms should be extended to all systems of belief, not just those who practice their own brand of “nonreligious religion.”

    I find it interesting that so many faculty members have reacted against the head coach’s idea. To shift this focus to the positive, how many students are in favor of a non-university-funded spiritual advisor? The head coach at Iowa State apparently feels that his players have an unmet need, which he is trying to address. In trying to protect the rights of one group of students (or is it a group of faculty members?), it is crucial not to neglect the rights of others.

  • Iowa State and religious football players
  • Posted by Arthur Ide, PhD on June 28, 2007 at 9:40am EDT
  • Hector Avalos is correct. His comment ("There’s a determination to prefer one religious group over another in hiring a chaplain. Once you start applying religious counseling, you can’t use a multi-faith approach") is worthy of serious reading.

    Iowa State University's football coach is like many others who have little knowledge of or appreciation for the dignity of studies: academic or physical. Football is not a curriculum subject, but a pasttime to keep donors pushing funds into athletic coffers. It does nothing to enhance or expand the mind. If the football coach feels there is a need for a religious teacher for the team, then it is appropriate that there also be another person who can detail an opposing viewpoint that religion has no scientific basis and that faith is a matter of personal determination and conjecture--only by this means can a player have a logical and nuetral choice.

    To point to the sky after a victory only deposits the imbicility of the ancient world that saw "god" as sitting on a cloud or rainbow in defiance of gravity. Then, too, god was a "he" endowed with male sexual organs to spawn his children by copulating with Asherah (Canaanite goddess that YHWH--an agricultural deity--mated with to downgrade her religion before his could be enforced on her people) or Diana or Sheva (prototype mates for the senior god regardless of his name).

    For any player to pray for protection and go out and attempt to harm his/her body is only a nice way of excusing dangerous corporal roulette, and is a direct challenge to a god--so that if injury does take place it can be excused as "god" saying no to the prayer (at best) or rejecting the supplicant as unworthy of protection (at least), or, if the player does not receive injury, it becomes ipso facto "proof" of the existence of that which can not be proven to exist. These mental gymnastics are best left for the elementary school, and not forced on to the football field. I applaud the Muslims who sued their university, but their suit did not go far enoug--it should have banned religion from the playing field. Only in ancient civilizations did the gamesters invoke a deity and then because they expected to die. The ISU coach should be coaching football, not religion. If he wants t coach football, he should resign and become a priest, pastor, mullah, or rabbi, or whatever.

  • Posted by Ron on June 28, 2007 at 9:40am EDT
  • If you read the Mission Statement of many institutions, K-12, public and private, Colleges, Universities, they espouse for the development of the inner man, woman, child, pushing beyond the scope of an algebra book, or the execution of a forward pass. Let's stop fearing fear.

  • Posted by B Swecker on June 28, 2007 at 9:45am EDT
  • What is wrong with having a spiritual adviser for the sports teams, and the whole student body for that matter. Obviously there are 130 non-spiritual advisers on campus within the faculty. Why not represent the other side? We are for holistic development of our student population correct? Well if that is a common aim of higher education, then I believe the representation of a spiritual adviser for the students is in the best interest of the whole.

  • Posted by KEN on June 28, 2007 at 10:00am EDT
  • I'm always struck by the hypocrisy of invoking any diety before huge boys go out and purposely run into each other in an hour of mock combat. We again reminded that Football is to Higher Education as Bullfighting is to Agriculture.

  • Interesting remarks.
  • Posted by Larry Jackson on June 28, 2007 at 10:00am EDT
  • William says only facts should be taught at universities---I guess that eliminates theories and the general exploration on concepts. He also makes the ISU coach's point if he feels religion provides motivation or self-esteem.

    And Katrina is suggesting that people of faith are discriminated against (as a religous person I resent that), and says that the coach is simply trying to fill a need that I guess the dozens of pastors and counselors in Ames can't provide. Please.

  • Generalizations of our students?
  • Posted by Renee on June 28, 2007 at 10:35am EDT
  • If religion is this institution that is missing facts and not worthwhile for our students (as stated in the article and eluded to in several posts), than why is everyone so scared of these athletes having a spiritual advisor? If they are willing to pay for it themselves, without state fees, and as many who have posted have said they are engaged in an activity not worthy of academic merit, than let the athletes and the thousands they bring to your institutions just be. No one is requiring students to seek a spiritual advisor, but it's about time that higher ed stops touting this holistic approach to education if we're not going to offer it - students should have the opportunity to criticize religion and spirituality as well as embrace it. However, we owe them more than just the avenue to critique and disseminate but also one to explore, embrace, and find support.

  • Optional?
  • Posted by Larry Jackson on June 28, 2007 at 11:15am EDT
  • Don't be foolish enough to think that the players don't feel pressured to participate in such things. They want to play. They want to start. So they go along with the program so as not to alienate coaches and other players. Don't think that players feel its optional and that not participating won't have any repercussions.

  • Posted by tgs on June 28, 2007 at 11:30am EDT
  • Ames, Iowa? No surprise.

  • Posted by Karl on June 28, 2007 at 11:35am EDT
  • Let us not forget that the U.S. Military has a long-standing tradition of having chaplains to serve its Soldiers/Marines/Sailors/Airmen. This system has continually been proven to not violate the 1st amendment. If a college were to model a "spiritual advisor" program after this, it should be constitutionally legit.

  • Response to Mr. McCool
  • Posted by Quizzical on June 28, 2007 at 11:40am EDT
  • What could be more insulting than to to work as Dr. Britton, or a walk as Theo Van Gogh, or to volunteer as the lady at the Jewish Federation in Seattle and end up dead because some religious bigot had contrary beliefs.

    Your attitude is insulting.

    Have something to contribute rather than attempt to silence discourse with the assertion that you find another comment insulting. This is higher education, not the government.

  • Here’s Why This Is A Bad Idea ...
  • Posted by Frizbane Manley on June 28, 2007 at 11:55am EDT
  • Most of the coaches I know – and that’s a lot – would argue that Ken’s clever remark about football and bullfighting misses the mark by a long shot. In fact, most of them like to talk in terms of student athletes, equate their programs with the university’s academic departments, and compare themselves to members of the faculty, albeit highly paid, non-tenured “professors.” Duke’s basketball coach, Mike Krzyzewski has been quite articulate in expressing that perspective.

    So let’s take these guys at their word. Now what would be the tenor of this discussion if I announced that I, as chair of my university’s mathematics department had procured funding from a sympathetic alumna to institute such a program and I had employed one of the spiritual leaders of a local Muslim mosque to head up the program. Of course my decision was based on the fact that I think there are characteristics of Islam that if practiced faithfully will structure the minds of my students in a manner that will enhance their learning of mathematics.

  • I'm not surprised
  • Posted by JR , What would you expect from an atheist religion professor? on June 28, 2007 at 12:20pm EDT
  • On the heels of Iowa State atheist religion professor Hector Avalos being outspoken in his support of denial of tenure to fellow professor Guillermo Gonzalez due to Gonzalez' belief in intelligent design, are we really surprised to hear him trying to stamp out an attempt by the athletics department to meet the spiritual needs of those students under their care?

    The hypocrisy of those who want to claim that universities are great places for free thinking, tolerance and open dialogue is blatant, evidenced time and again by their actions which show their understanding of tolerance as allowing any speech or action that agrees only with a left-wing, godless agenda. No other beliefs need apply for equal status on campus for they shall surely be rejected and, if possible, outlawed.

    So much for free speech.

  • Posted by RJ Lash , It was optional for me! on June 28, 2007 at 12:20pm EDT
  • Mr. Larry Jackson...as a four year participant in athletics at a major university... never once did I feel pressured to participate in any prayer or religious gathering. After graduation, I remained with the Athletic Dept. for one year. I can assure you, the subject of religion was NEVER discussed. Coaches are under a tremendous amount of pressure to win...they will put the best athletes on the field to accomplish this goal. They could careless what your religious background is!!!

    A few weeks ago, IHE had an article about professors wanting a "bigger say" in how the Athletic Depts. are run. I think this is a perfect example of why professors should keep their snouts out of the locker rooms.

  • Leave the Constitution out of it
  • Posted by Bill M. on June 28, 2007 at 2:25pm EDT
  • Reasonable people can disagree over whether providing a "life skills" advisor/chaplain for a team is a good thing.

    But arguing, as Prof. Avalos does, that such a practice violates the Constitution is ludicrous, especially given that public funds are not even going to be used.

    The 1st Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion . . . " Claiming that a "life skills" tutor, paid for by private funds, would violate the establishment clause, is an argument without support in the Supreme Court caselaw.

    See, for example, Marsh v. Chambers, where the Supreme Court held state legislatures may open sessions with a prayer by a salaried Christian chaplain. Numerous other recent cases have permitted a church-state relationship much closer than that contemplated here.

    As long as the University does not compel players to talk to this person, or compel them to attend his talks/lectures, there is nothing legally objectionable.

  • A WASTE ALL AROUND
  • Posted by Comm Prof on June 28, 2007 at 3:35pm EDT
  • The last thing god needs is special entreaties from football players and their 'life skills assistants' -- I think she has more important things to deal with than sports.

  • Posted by Perry on June 28, 2007 at 4:45pm EDT
  • Have you forgotten that there was a scandal at the Air Force Academy because the chaplains (and other faculty) were pressuring students to convent to evangelical Christianity and discriminating against non-Christians? The military isn't a very good example.

    I agree with Frisbane Manley's example of the math dept. Religion is inextricable from all other aspects of life for certain types of Christians -- those most likely to proselytize others. That makes it highly likely that those who clamor most loudly for this position are most likely to abuse it, and abuse those who do not believe (or who believe in other religions). Let the religious tend to their own needs. Religious belief is not part of athletics and thus a religious counselor should not be on campus where he or she will divert time and other resources from legitimate activities. Being among strongly religious Christians is oppressive for everyone else. Institutionalizing that oppression into a counselor-role is wrong. Criticizing those who object, is even more wrong. I doubt that anyone expects the counselor they hire to be a rabbi. That expectation sums up both the intent and the objections to this proposed idea. Christians don't own the world and I get very tired of their attempts to remake it (and others) to suit their beliefs. It is the antithesis of tolerance.

  • 'religious advisor' for athletes
  • Posted by Erik Wassenich on June 28, 2007 at 4:50pm EDT
  • People in sports are very often superstitious when it comes performing on the field. They even go as far as to ask a minister to pray for victory.

    One should think that the people in higher education, even students, have enough intelligence, are even intellectual enough to know that religion is only for the uneducated. Why was the church of Rome so successful? It managed to keep the general population uneducated for centuries in order to be able to convince them of every nonsense and to control them and, first of all, to steal them blind - it was a matter of money, not of belief - as it still is today.
    In the US today, especially under Bush, the separation of church and state is no more than a sentence in the constitution that no one follows anymore, that is being ignored.
    In comparison to the Muslim world, Americans are as fanatical about their religion as the Muslims are.
    Monotheism was thought up by men for men, women became second class citizens, the bible, koran, torah are only fairy tale stories.

  • Posted by Bill M. on June 28, 2007 at 6:35pm EDT
  • Erik Wassenich wrote:

    "In the US today, especially under Bush, the separation of church and state is no more than a sentence in the constitution that no one follows anymore, that is being ignored."

    The phrase "separation of church and state" appears nowhere in the Constitution. It was first used by Thomas Jefferson in the early 19th century. Jefferson was a great man, but his personal views are not equivalent to constitutional text. See my earlier post for the relevant language from the 1st amendment.

  • 'Morality Coach' is a bad thing? Two points.
  • Posted by Everyman on June 29, 2007 at 10:05am EDT
  • Given the recurrent shooting deaths (after hours)associated w/college and pro sports,why wouldn't you want someone - ANYONE,to impart some life skills to those who need them.

    Didn't see anything about a particular denomoination or sect in the original article about a "Life Skills Coach". Sounds like the Religious Studies prof is a wee bit parnoid; maybe, Christian-phobic...