Friday, February 26, 2010

FIRST tour: Bailey's Cave Adventures by Nina Meier

It is time for a FIRST Wild Card Tour book review! If you wish to join the FIRST blog alliance, just click the button. We are a group of reviewers who tour Christian books. A Wild Card post includes a brief bio of the author and a full chapter from each book toured. The reason it is called a FIRST Wild Card Tour is that you never know if the book will be fiction, non~fiction, for young, or for old...or for somewhere in between! Enjoy your free peek into the book!

You never know when I might play a wild card on you!

Today's Wild Card author is:

and the book:

Bailey’s Cave Adventures

Tate Publishing (August 5, 2008)

***Special thanks to Nina Meier for sending me a review copy.***


New author Nina Meier is an incredibly talented preschool Sunday school and VBS teacher, having 10 years’ experience in her own church doing just that. Ask anyone under the age of 5 about Miss Nina’s handmade green lizard bag that holds her lessons on love and respect for God’s creation, each other, and ourselves. With fresh, new ideas always at her fingertips, even at a moment’s notice, no child is ever bored in her class, and she is able to laugh and dance them through a Bible lesson effortlessly.

Nina has been enjoying a career in Medical Transcription for the past 15 years, having gone back to school when her 2 sons were both in college. Her husband is a talented wood craftsman and has, on many occasions, brought her VBS ideas to life. He also builds sets for church plays that are of professional quality.

Many of Nina’s lessons on missions come from firsthand experience on the field during short-term mission trips to West Virginia, the interior of Mexico, Moldova near Romania, the Gulf Coast, and an Indian reservation in Ontario, Canada.

With such multi-faceted talent, anything this new author puts her pen to is a guaranteed winner!

Visit the author's website.

Product Details:

List Price: $11.99
Paperback: 68 pages
Publisher: Tate Publishing (August 5, 2008)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1604628766
ISBN-13: 978-1604628760


Bailey’s Cave Adventures

Video/Puppet Show

Scene 1 – Day 1: Bailey comes flying and crashing into the room. When dust settles, you can see him more clearly.

Bailey: “Hi boys and girls, my name is Bailey, and I’m a brown bat. Bet you never saw a bat who was always flying into things! That’s because most bats have sonar. Let me explain what that word means. Bats can see with sound better than light. They send out a sound so high-pitched that human ears can’t hear it! The sound bounces off whatever is in front of them, and comes back to their ears. This happens really fast. That’s how they find food, and keep from flying into things.”

“Well, something went wrong when I was born, and my sonar has never worked! Anyway, it’s okay because my Mom and Dad gave me a seeing-eye dog, you know, the kind blind people use, and he helps me get around, and keeps me from falling, when he’s with me. Sometimes I try to go off on my own and, well, you can imagine. He’s my best friend! Would you like to meet my dog? (Yes!) OK. Here Radar, where are you boy?”

Out from under a curtain Bailey knocked down comes a large black Lab wearing a harness w/handle.

Radar: “I see you’re doing okay, no lumps or bumps? Well, climb on up and grab hold of my harness. I have a few things to tell these boys and girls here.”

Bailey climbs up on Radar’s head, to the harness, hangs onto the handle upside down with a sigh of relief, and falls asleep.

Radar turns to audience and says, “My job is to keep Bailey on the right path, and warn him of danger. Sometimes he listens, other times he goes off on his own without even seeing where he’s going. He has to learn to trust me completely. That’s like what the Holy Spirit does for you. Proverbs 3:5-6 says, “ ‘Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight.’ ”

Bailey wakes up.

Bailey: “Radar, I almost forgot. While I was out flying”--Radar whispers to the audience, “And crashing”-- “I heard some kids talking about going spelunking, that’s cave exploring, and someone who does that is called a spelunker. Anyway, I was thinking I’d make a great spelunker, and I’ve never been very far into the cave, I could go all the way down to the dark zone! It would be a real adventure!” (Getting excited).

Radar: “Now hold on Bailey, that sounds pretty dangerous to me. I’d feel a lot better if you let me go with you.”

Bailey: “Sure, okay, that’d be fun, who’s going to carry the flashlight?” (Turns to audience). “Could you help us with flashlights boys and girls?” (Yes!) “Great, let’s get ready to go then!”

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Christian Encounters Series: Jane Austen by Peter Leithart

Book description from Thomas Nelson's website:

Christian Encounters, a series of biographies from Thomas Nelson Publishers, highlights important lives from all ages and areas of the Church. Some are familiar faces. Others are unexpected guests. But all, through their relationships, struggles, prayers, and desires, uniquely illuminate our shared experience.

Some may know Jane Austen simply as the English novelist whose books are required reading in high school and college. Perhaps it wasn’t until the BBC’s extremely successful TV miniseries of Pride and Prejudice or Emma Thompson’s film Sense and Sensibility that many became entranced. Now younger readers are flocking to Austen with a unique twist in the bestselling Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: The Classic Regency Romance, by Seth Grahame-Smith. In this Christian Encounters biography, fans of Jane Austen will discover the Christian faith that was in the weft and weave of her character and how it influenced her writing and her life.

My Opinion:

Whether you are an avid Jane fan or just want to know more about her then this book from the Christian Encounters series is a must read. As soon as I received the book I began reading it and it's a quick read and a fascinating one at that! I have never read Jane Austen before, I take that back I read one page of one book that I can't remember now which it was but I just couldn't find myself engaged by the book. I'm not sure if because it'd been so hyped up or that that the amount of characters were hard to keep straight, whatever the reason I'm not ready to tackle some Jane Austen novels.

For a history buff, this book really provides a historical background on Miss Austen (that's right she never married although she did have her share of suitors). This history isn't overwhelming and actually takes on a fun aspect when put in the context surrounding Jane Austen. The author has done a wonderful job on giving readers the real Jane, not some Hollywood starlet - for instance she was a Preacher's Kid and was a Christian all her life. We're also introduced to many family and friends which got an ugly portrayal in a movie (I've never seen it but I know the truth now), this aspect makes Jane feel real and not some untouchable author, as authors seems to be nowadays.

I cannot stress enough this book is well worth reading. If you're looking for something for you child to read as an autobiography/biography (yes it's listed as both) or just for a relaxing read on history or your favorite author this is definitely the way to go. A fast read as well as 'exposing' Jane Austen's Christian heritage will make for an inspirational and knowledgeable read. Especially good for a family read aloud - which if you're a homeschooler, like me, this is an added bonus in the literature department.

**This book was provided to me through Thomas Nelson's Book Sneeze program in exchange for my honest review, no other compensation was given.**

Sunday, February 21, 2010

FIRST tour: Good Game: Christianity and the Culture of Sports by Shirl James Hoffman

It is time for a FIRST Wild Card Tour book review! If you wish to join the FIRST blog alliance, just click the button. We are a group of reviewers who tour Christian books. A Wild Card post includes a brief bio of the author and a full chapter from each book toured. The reason it is called a FIRST Wild Card Tour is that you never know if the book will be fiction, non~fiction, for young, or for old...or for somewhere in between! Enjoy your free peek into the book!

You never know when I might play a wild card on you!

Today's Wild Card author is:

and the book:

Good Game: Christianity and the Culture of Sports

Baylor University Press (February 1, 2010)

***Special thanks to Tracy McCarter of The B&B Media Group for sending me a review copy.***


Shirl J. Hoffman, Ed.D is Professor Emeritus of Kinesiology at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro where he served as head of the department for 10 years. He has served at all levels of education, beginning his career as a physical education teacher in White Plains, New York, before moving on to positions as head basketball coach at Westchester Community College (NY). After completing his graduate work at Teachers College, Columbia University, he served successively as professor at The King’s College (NY) and at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. He taught at the University of Pittsburgh for 13 years where he was director of graduate studies in physical education, moving to University of North Carolina at Greensboro in 1985. He has an extraordinarily broad background in the field spanning motor learning and performance, sociology of sports and sport philosophy.

Product Details:

List Price: $24.95
Paperback: 356 pages
Publisher: Baylor University Press (February 1, 2010)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1932792104
ISBN-13: 978-1932792102


Sports and the Early Church

The story of evangelicalism’s dance with sports begins, appropriately enough, with the dawn of a faith that made its appearance in the context of sports-crazed societies. In the towns and cities where the gospel was first preached, athletics and sporting spectacles were woven into the fabric of civic life; they symbolized not only urban life, but what it meant to be Roman or Greek. French historian Henri Marrou characterized the Greek conception of life as a type of athletic struggle in which winning was one of the most significant aspects of the Greek soul. “There is no doubt that the Homeric hero and hence the actual Greek person of flesh and blood was really only happy when he felt and proved himself to be the first in his category, a man apart, superior.” 1 Cities sought identities, not merely through the exploits of their idolized athletes, but by vying with each other in building bigger and better sports and entertainment facilities. Wealthy politicians and entrepreneurs, anxious to display their power and prestige staged increasingly elaborate and expensive athletic shows at enormous personal expense. If the intensity of a cultural practice is reflected in years of assimilation, both the Greeks and Romans were far more steeped in the ethos of competitive sports than are sport enthusiasts of the 21st century. While American football and basketball date back a little over 100 years, Greek athletics and chariot racing, by comparison, had been around for over 600 years and the gladiatorial shows had been part of Roman culture for over 250 years when the first generation of Christians moved among their fellows.

The peculiar ethical demands of the newly formed faith fomented enormous cultural clashes with the societies in which it was being nurtured. The Christian community was forced to ask itself not only how being a Christian was different than being a Jew, but how being a Christian should modify believers’ approaches to all aspects of culture, including athletics, gladiatorial contests, and chariot racing. Tacitus, a first century historian and Roman senator, found the rage for sports among the masses almost inexplicable: “There are special vices peculiar to this city that children seem to absorb, almost in their mother’s womb: a partiality for the theater and a passion for horse racing and gladiatorial shows.” The pagan religious ceremony,as integral to sport spectacles as the Star Spangled Banner or seventh inning stretch is to American baseball, was a continuing source of uneasiness, but that wasn’t all. The single-minded obsession with self-aggrandizement, fame and glory that characterized Greek athletics and the smothering ethic of excess and obscene delight in human cruelty that found expression in Roman sports were problematic for the early Christians too. These impulses and the sports competitions which celebrated them represented an inhospitable backdrop for a new religion that emphasized love, sympathy, self-denial, soberness, and meekness. Given the fact that most early Christians were products of the socializing effects of popular sports, it would be naïve to imagine that their conversions brought with them swift and sweeping changes in their view of sports. It took time for them to sort out the implications of their faith for life in a world permeated with time-honored pagan customs and patterns of thought and action. Christianity’s conflict with heathenism may have begun, as one writer has noted, “in the arena of the people’s play,” but it was certainly not a war to the death. 2

For first generation Christians, informal play was never a live religious issue. Drawn largely from the lower classes, early converts probably lacked the time and resources required for indulging in sports and games, and when time was available, the constant threat of persecution no doubt robbed them of the inclination. Christian children living in the Hellenistic eastern part of the Roman Empire, where some of the earliest churches began, no doubt joined in many of the popular forms of informal play: tumbling and acrobatics, juggling, playing with tops and yo-yos, swinging on swings, and playing on see-saws. There is evidence that an invasive team ball game (episkyros) was played as well, but on the whole the Greeks weren’t much interested in team sports. The people of the Hellenistic provinces were indoctrinated with arete, the Greek ideal of excellence, expressed through a constant testing of one’s individual capacities against another, not only in sports, but in music, poetry, rhetoric, even in contests of surgery, kissing, drinking, eating, and beauty. But arête was a value centered in the individual; it was difficult, if not impossible to display arête while part of a team. Thus, the massive system of organized youth sports of our day probably had no corollary in the early Christian era.3

The Christian Bible does not provide a detailed account of Christian social life in the apostolic age and tells us virtually nothing about how Christians spent their leisure, but as British theologian J.G. Davies pointed out, “they do enumerate principles which were to be applied even more extensively as the centuries passed.” Scripture neither explicitly condoned nor endorsed informal play, implying that New Testament authors considered it to neither confer special advantage nor pose a substantial threat to the spiritual vitality of early adherents to the faith. The congregations at Ephesus and Corinth may not have competed against each other in a church episkyros league, but it wasn’t because they viewed physical activity or informal sports as inherently evil.4 But the public sport shows of the day—glittering, gaudy, contests designed to entertain pleasure-starved, hero-worshipping audiences—were an entirely different matter. Although not singled out for condemnation in scripture nor denounced in the very early years of Christendom, public athletic and gladiatorial shows eventually were vilified by a litany of early Christian leaders. As a rule, it was as a form of entertainment, not as a system of education or informal leisure that sport was problematic for the earliest of Christians. 5

Sports of the Day

Public sport spectacles in early Christian society were shaped by both Greek and Roman influences. The games of the ancient Greeks emphasized the ideals of agon, athletic exploit, honor, and winning. The Greeks valued athletics as military training experiences and thus appropriate for participation by the masses. The Romans also invoked a military rationale, especially for some of their crueler sports, but for the most part athletics weren’t of great interest to the early Romans. To them, the hours spent by Greeks in the athletics of the gymnasia and palestras had been a leading cause of their enslavement and degeneracy. Romans preferred to watch sport spectacles. To meet the demand for sports watching, public and private entrepreneurs offered a variety of dazzling, often vulgar shows.

At the same time, the line between Greek and Roman sports of the time was not always clear cut. The spread of the Roman Empire in Greece and its surrounds, for example, brought with it a Roman-like love of gladiatorial contests and chariot racing and for athletics made cruel and barbarous by modifications that appealed to public taste. Once threatened by the Roman conquest, the ancient Greek athletic contests had recovered by 12BC, thanks largely to an endowment from Herod that re-instituted the Olympic Games. Thus athletics, gladiatorial contests, and chariot racing all flourished in the eastern Hellenic section of the Empire around the time and places where Paul and his fellow missionaries labored.

Athletic Contests

Sports entertainment at the time of the early church assumed three different forms: the athletic games of the stadium, the gladiatorial shows of the ampitheatre (and theater), and chariot racing. In the eastern part of the empire where the church had its vital roots, the main sports attraction was the race at the hippodrome (circus) and athletics at the stadium. There were four primary athletic events of national interest, ancient equivalents of the World Series or the four “major” tournaments in golf or tennis: the Olympic games at Olympia and the Nemean games at Nemea, dedicated to Zeus; the Pythian games at Delphi in honor of Apollo; and the Isthmian games at Corinth in honor of Poseidon. Athletes who had been victorious at least once at each of these games were accorded special honors and usually a great deal of money. Although these events were the most popular, they accounted for only a small portion of the athletic contests of the day. Local games also associated with religious festivals permeated societies of the Mediterranean world. By the first century the sports craze had begun to spread, even to the point where separate competitions for women participants were being held in various cities. It wasn’t for the faint-hearted. Spectators suffered in blazing heat, often finding themselves in cramped quarters, subject to almost unbearable commotion, and constantly pestered by flies drawn to the huge quantities of blood and red meat spilled at the altars. 10

The athletic contests took place in the context of a grand sacred festival. Huge crowds arrived days before the events to revel in an ancient form of tailgating. Street philosophers lectured passersby; poets and artists presented their latest works; and fortune tellers, magicians and peddlers of food and souvenirs pestered tourists who walked the streets. The “pre-game warm up” began with a procession of over a thousand athletes, officials and spectators from nearby towns, stopping at appointed places along the way to offer sacrifices and for the athletes to be sprinkled by pig’s blood, a ritual purification. The modern equivalent, says one writer, would require the Olympics “to be combined with Coney Island, Carnival in Rio, mass at the Vatican, and a U.S. Presidential election.”11

On the first day of the games, the athletes gathered for administration of the sacred oath in front of a statue of Zeus Horkios (Zeus of the Oath). In contrast to the modern practice of collecting blood and urine samples to weed out dishonest athletes, Olympic participants swore on the flesh of wild boars that they would do nothing evil against the games. The five-day festival started with a competition for trumpeters and heralds at the grand altar; the winners served as the ancient equivalent of a public address system. The remainder of the day was taken up by the offering of animal sacrifices, especially by horse owners who sought divine assistance for the chariot races, the first event scheduled for the hippodrome. The next day at dawn, a procession led by priests of Zeus, clad in purple and carrying switches to punish athletes who committed a foul, visited some 63 altars to various gods. The skies were darkened from smoke from the altars, made even worse by private sacrifices arranged by affluent spectators who hired flutists, dancers, and priests to perform.

The first event was the 4-horse chariot race, followed by the horseback race and the 2-horse chariot race. The next day the scene shifted to the stadium for the pentathlon: the discus, javelin, and long jump, wrestling and the 200-meter sprint. These also were independent events. Victory celebrations and parties went long into the night. On the same night (perhaps the next) contestants and spectators gathered for a sacrifice at the great altar of Zeus, seven meters high and ten meters in diameter. Sacrifices continued through the following morning after a large procession in which 100 oxen made their way to the altar of Zeus. After the sacrifice large portions of the meat were roasted and distributed to crowds who spent the rest of the day recovering from the feast. It is significant that spectators saw no line separating athletic competition from worship; they were seamless rituals. And if some evangelical sports aficionados are to be believed, the Apostle Paul was there, watching, eating, mingling, clearing the smoke from his eyes, and discussing the fortunes of his favorite runner or fighter.

The following day featured footraces (gymnikoi agones) including a long distance race and another similar to the modern day 400-meter event. The afternoon brought the “heavy events:” wrestling, boxing, and the pankration, a brutal form of no-holds-barred street fighting. Boxers wrapped their fists with leather thongs which served as a cutting edge; some Roman fighters went them one better by weaving spikes into the thongs. Combat continued until one of the competitors surrendered. In a particularly sensational fight a pankratist named Arrachion dislocated his opponent’s toe, forcing his opponent to surrender, but not before his opponent’s leg scissor hold could be released. It suffocated Arrachion; thus a corpse was crowned and proclaimed the winner. These contests, says ancient sport expert Michael Poliakoff, involved “a level of officially sanctioned violence and danger that the modern Olympics would never tolerate,” even though such violence was fiercely banned in civic life outside the arena.12

While the ritualized murder that passed for sport in the Roman spectacles was eminently more debauched, romantic notions of ancient Greek athletics as honorable and pure, limited to amateur competitors and infused with a sporting spirit that valued “not winning, but taking part” are hardly consistent with what is known about them. To the Greeks, sports were all about winning. Losers were publicly mocked and humiliated. According to Pindar, the losers went “skulking down back roads, hiding from their enemies, bitten by their calamity.”13 British historian E.N. Gardiner, one of the foremost authorities on ancient sports, once said that “few…. realize how corrupt and degraded were Greek athletics during St. Paul’s lifetime.” Almost from their ancient beginnings they were about money. “Purists who refused to mix money with sport did not exist in the ancient world, and victors boast of success in the cash competitions as openly as they boast of victory in sacred contests.”14

Much like modern critics of sport, early Roman commentators resented the enormous sums paid to athletes. Historian Stephen Miller, for example, has estimated that as early as 476BC a boxer and pankratist named Theagenes won the equivalent of $44 million throughout his career. A trainer and medical technician for one athlete signed a contract for $132,000 in today’s currency only to be hired away the next year by a rival for $242,000.15 According to Pindar, the Olympic victors were given lifetime pensions which gave them “sweet smooth-sailing” for the remainder of their lives. They paraded triumphantly through town in four-horse chariots. “Long before the first television endorsement,” notes history writer Tony Perrottet, “they made fortunes from cameo appearances at lesser games in Asia Minor and southern Italy; or they embarked on lucrative careers in politics. One wrestler, Marcus Aurelius Asclepiades, became a senator in Athens, anticipating wrestler-cum-Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura by some 20 centuries.” 16

Scandals, bribery and cheating plagued the athletic contests of the east. Athletes traveled the stadium circuit, hoping to fatten their wallets at each venue. Many invoked powers from the darker side to help them defeat their opponents and bragged about their athletic exploits in the Greek spirit of unbridled self-assertion. The deadly seriousness with which the Greeks took sport is evident in the Iliad, where a boxer named Epeios warned his opponent that he would “smash his skin apart and break his bones on each other” and advised him to arrange to have “those who care about him wait nearby in a huddle to carry him out, after my fists have beaten him”. 17 Athletes, particularly those that fought in the “heavy events,” were peculiar physical specimens, depicted in art and literature as hulking toughs with torn ears, massive skulls and tiny brains whose epigrams boasted of the blood they had spilt. “Perhaps after all, mused one historian, not so very far removed from the gladiators as one might have imagined.” 18

Gladiatorial Contests

Athletic contests never really captured the public imagination in the Roman Empire where sensibilities had been seared by the realities of incessant war. Something more titillating than footraces, javelin-throwing, and wrestling was required. Even the brutalities of the pankration and boxing failed to generate much enthusiasm. Romans found what they were looking for in the ancient Eutruscan custom of forcing prisoners of war, slaves, and other unfortunates to fight each other to the death. By adding a few embellishments and incorporating the contests into lavish and highly marketable spectacles the thrill of athletic competition was blended with the sadistic lure of ultimate defeat. The casual acceptance of these brutal shows continues to puzzle modern historians.

Moderns tend to associate the games with the 50,000 seat Roman Coliseum built in AD 80, but in reality, gladiatorial amphitheaters were widely distributed throughout the empire and apparently enjoyed by highly cultured Greeks. At Pompeii, for example, the amphitheater was large enough to seat the entire city of 20,000. Like Greek athletics, the gladiatorial games were part of a ritual complex incorporating the Imperial Cult of the Emperors, Celtic cult practices, and the cult of Nemesis.19 Statues of gods surrounded the arena, their faces often covered to spare them some of the bloodiest scenes. When a gladiator had fallen, a man dressed as Charon, ferryman to the underworld, entered the arena and, striking the head of the corpse with a mallet, announced his ownership of the body. He was accompanied by another playing the part of Mercury who represented the guide of souls to hell. After he had stuck the body with a red hot iron, he escorted the stretcher-laden corpse from the arena.

The games followed various plans, but usually the first event of the morning show featured animal fights: bulls against elephants, lions against leopards, and rhinoceros against buffalo. During Nero’s reign elephants and bulls were said to have been attacked by 400 tigers in a single day’s program. The fights were followed by circus acts including boys dancing on the backs of elephants, trained tigers and bears, some dressed as gladiators. Animals that managed to survive were usually killed in the hunt which was the third part of the morning program. Sometimes relatively harmless animals such as deer, ostriches, and donkeys were herded into the arena and killed. Lunch time often featured executions of criminals and Christians which were carried out in elaborate mimes and crucifixions. Some were set afire; others were killed by lions. In a particularly popular innovation a pair of victims was brought to the arena, one armed the other defenseless. The defenseless man was chased around the arena and eventually killed by the armed man who then surrendered his weapon and, in turn, was chased and killed by the next prisoner.20

But it was the gladiatorial fights that drew the most attention. Gladiators were skilled athletes in one sense, trained professional killers in another. Masters of hand to hand combat, they engaged in what were perpetual “sudden death overtimes:” winners lived, sometimes to reap fame and fortune and to fight another day, while the bodies of losers bled into the arena sand. The contests were infused with religious overtones. Upon entering the arena gladiators swore sacred oaths that put their lives “on deposit” with the gods of the underworld. 21 If a fighter put on a good show yet lost this battle, his fate rested in the hands of the crowd and, if he were in attendance, the emperor. A thumbs up sign meant he could live to fight another day, a thumbs down sign sent his opponent’s dagger through his midsection. Few gladiators survived more than three years. Although some enjoyed longer lives and were celebrated as heroes and idolized by women, they were despised as humans, deprived of access to elite social functions.

With the passage of time the popularity of the games grew, as did the thirst for increasingly brutal, elaborate, and spectacular shows. The Romans didn’t have 24-hour telecasts on ESPN, but they watched a lot of gladiatorial games. In the fourth century, 177 days a year were designated as public holidays with 10 full days given to gladiatorial contests, 66 to chariot races and the rest of them devoted to the theater. The games required huge expenditures of private and public money. Emperors and aristocrats vied with each other to present the most colossal spectacle. In the early first century, Augustus sponsored dozens of shows that were estimated to have required 10,000 gladiators; the birthday of Vitellius (15-69AD) was said to have been marked by gladiatorial contests in all 265 districts of the empire. When conventional one-on-one battles failed to excite, promoters offered grander spectacles featuring infantry and cavalry; arenas could be flooded for colossal naval battles. Caesar once sponsored a show featuring gladiators, chariot races, athletic competitions, a naval battle, and five days of wild-beast hunts. It ended with a battle between two armies each consisting of 500 infantry, twenty elephants, and thirty cavalry. In their search for even more depraved entertainments, promoters arranged torch-lit battles featuring women against men, women against women, women against dwarfs, blind against blind, and women fighting from chariots; even combats between aristocrats became popular forms of titillation for frenzied crowds. 22

Scholars have attributed deep and complex motives to the Roman love for gladiatorial games. Some have identified important connections of the games to military and political life while others have seen in it as an attempt to compensate for an “excruciating feeling of humiliation and insecurity” that faced the Romans in their daily lives.23 A case has been made that the games’ popularity can be traced to the sense of reassurance that the crowds felt upon seeing disasters inflicted on others and not themselves. Others have claimed that by enjoying vicariously the violence of the arena the Romans were purged of aggression and hostility, certainly untrue in the case of Empress Pompaea, whom Nero kicked to death because she scolded him for his late return from the Circus Maximus. However one dresses up the ritualized torture and unspeakable violence of the arena in sociological theory, it still remains an unprecedented variation on sports. It represents what historian Crane Brinton rightly called, “a special case of moral history.” One has only to probe the underbelly of bullfights, Acapulco cliff diving, daredevil shows and auto racing to appreciate that the specter of death and violence is intrinsically fascinating to a large percentage of the population, but only in Rome was the urge satisfied by unrestrained ritual slaughter.24

Chariot Racing

Chariot racing in the hippodrome had been part of ancient Greek athletics long before Christ, reaching its ascendancy in the first few centuries of the Roman Empire, not only in Rome, but in the eastern cities where many of the earliest Christian churches were founded. It may be impossible to exaggerate the addictive power of racing in Greco-Roman life. For the average Roman, said a commentator of the age, “the Circus Maximus is temple, home, community center and the fulfillment of all of their hopes.” The race course, along with forums, fountains, theaters, temples, and the public baths, was regarded as an essential hallmark of a classical city. Although not as brutal as gladiatorial contests, chariot races combined frenzy and fury to create a spectacle that was unexplainable in its grip on the Roman conscience. Hundreds of thousands packed the massive Circus Maximus to witness spectacles which, in their day, rivaled those of modern day Super Bowls. If the size of the stadium reflected the level of interest of the citizens, there can be no question that racing was the most popular spectacle. The Circus Maximus stretched more than three football fields long (335 meters) and one football field wide (80 meters), an area large enough to hold up to 250,000 spectators. Most races were seven lap events; twenty four races were run each day, although history records as many as 48 being run on special occasions. Intermissions might include gladiatorial contests, acrobats, boxing, wrestling, and even wild beast hunts.25

It is not stretching the historical record too thinly to describe chariot racing as the forerunner of modern day auto racing in which daring, speed, and the possibility of death on the track combined with ribaldry and drunkenness in the stands. Charioteers tended to be small and their chariots, unlike the bulky ones pictured in the movie Ben Hur, were lightweight and designed for speed, something that enabled them to race at speeds exceeding those possible on a mounted horse. Drivers wore protective uniforms to limit injury in case of a crash. Negotiating the turns posed problems for the charioteer just as they do for today’s race car racer and driving styles were aggressive and ruthless. Cutting across the path of a rival, trying to force it aside and up against the barrier was considered legitimate; hence spectacular accidents, often involving several teams, were accepted as part of the race. All in all it wasn’t a great deal different from the “aggressive driving” and “bump-drafting” that has plagued NASCAR in recent years. When asked by reporters what he needed to do to improve his performance, NASCAR idol Jeff Gordon told them that he needed to be aggressive and “jump back in that throttle and carry that corner speed,” expressing a sentiment that only his fellow competitors and ancient charioteers could have appreciated.26

Although modern race car drivers move at much faster speeds, the chariot races were much more dangerous, to the horses as well as to men. Excerpts from a fifth-century poem written by Sidonius Apollinarius speak of the “sweat of drivers and flying steeds,” “the hoarse roar from applauding partisans,” and at the end, describes the absolute horror: “(Your competitor) shamelessly made for your wheel with a sidelong dash. His horses were brought down, a multitude of intruding legs entered the wheels, and….the revolving rim shattered the entangled feet; then he, a fifth victim, flung from his chariot, which fell upon him, caused a mountain of havoc, and blood disfigured his prostrate brow.” One of the saddest inscriptions embossed on a Roman tomb was placed there by a charioteer named Polyneices. The tomb contained the body of his son, who like his brother, died in a racing accident: “Marcus Aurelius Polyneices, born a slave, lived 29 years, 9 months and 5 days. He won the palm 739 times: 655 times for the Reds, 55 times for the Greens, 12 times for the Blues and 17 times for the Whites.”27

Fierce partisanship ruled the day and the disposition of crowds was a mixed bag: those delirious with joy might be seated close to those seething with anger and disappointment. Young vandals with a special talent for crude and incendiary taunts riled both the competitors and spectators. The “factions,” fan clubs or sport associations with distinct political ties and passionately devoted to their “colors,” had especially notorious reputations for violence. Spectator riots were not uncommon, certainly more common at the races than at the decidedly more violent gladiatorial contests. Gambling was as pervasive as was drunkenness; more than one drunken fan made the fatal mistake of running onto the track during a race. Like the hooligans that disrupt modern European soccer, they “fought with their throats in the hippodrome and occasionally with knives in the streets.” On at least one occasion a brawl in the stands left 3000 Blues dead, killed by Green hoodlums known as “citizen burners,” whose morbid mantra of “burn here, burn there, not a Blue left anywhere” was as familiar to circus crowds as “kill the ump” is to modern baseball fans.28

The races were immersed in almost unspeakable luxury. Successful charioteers reaped vast fortunes for the risks they took in the circus. One Gaius Appuleius Diocles, who took part in over 4000 races in a twenty year career, is reported to have earned nearly 36 million sesterti in his career. The annual pay for a soldier, by comparison, was 900 sesterti. While critics complained about the outrageous sums earned by drivers, they idolized them just the same, even to the point where one grief stricken fan is reported to have thrown himself on the funeral pyre of his favorite driver. But eventually the prize money and the elaborate entertainments proved too costly for the promoters. With the passing of time the ceremonies and ancillary entertainments (cheaper than the races) began to overshadow the actual competitions. By the 12th century they were simply too expensive for anyone to sponsor.29

Religious ceremony, especially the imperial cult of the Emperor, formed a significant part of the racing spectacles. Elaborate pre-race ceremonies featured a procession of the gods (pompa circensis) with hoisted images of Roman deities. In the second century, the Temple of the Sun bordered the racing grounds in honor of The Imperial Sun God who was the patron saint of the circus and chariot races. The cult remained an important element in the imperial ceremony and continued well into the eleventh century. Religious processions became so important that by the third century they consumed as much time and attention as the races themselves. On the track where the fires of competition burned hot, religion and magic became a tool for honing the competitive edge. Many charioteers, desperate for a win, were ill content merely to seek the blessing of their gods; additional insurance was sought on the dark side. An ominous inscription by one charioteer bears testimony to the earnestness of the supplicants: “torture and kill the horses of the Greens and Whites, and… kill in a crash their drivers Clarus, Felix, Primulus and Romanus, and leave not a breath in their bodies.”30

Greeks and Romans, like many people today, simply were unable to imagine life without sport spectacles. Not a great deal of thought was given to the moral issues raised by the competitions; the games were simply there, always had been and probably always would be. From the vantage point of the 21st century, gladiatorial contests, heavy athletics, and chariot racing may stand out as obvious targets of moral outrage, but for the Romans and Greeks, eminently reasonable people in their own right, they represented parts of glamorous and glorious traditions, albeit indelicate at times. Even highly cultured individuals such as Cicero and Pliny the Younger defended the gladiatorial games on the grounds that they encouraged bravery and contempt for pain and death, traits which would come in handy on the battlefields. Senses had become so numbed it may have been impossible for the average Roman to feel sympathy for those who suffered and died in the course of furnishing their entertainments. An indication as to how “naturally” the games were taken by ancients can be seen in the letters of Symmachus, a late fourth century Roman who didn’t have a reputation for being a harsh person, yet in reporting the suicides of some Saxons he was having groomed to fight in the arena, his letters show only how sorry he felt for himself, not at all for the Saxons. Seneca and some of his contemporaries might have complained that they returned home from the spectacles “more covetous, more ambitious, more self-indulgent…crueler and more inhuman for having been amongst my fellow man,” but they were clearly in the minority, pointy-headed intellectuals who obviously didn’t know good fun when they saw it.31

An Ambivalent Laity

The attitude of the average Christian convert toward sport spectacles has been described as “one of fanatical antipathy,” but “ambivalent and irresolute” is probably a more accurate characterization. Surely the Greek “admiration for the uninhibited and unbridled assertion of self” couldn’t be embraced by early Christians who were in the process of learning how to adapt their lives to the severe teachings of the Sermon on the Mount. Yet it seems clear that early Christians struggled in deciding how much of the old way of life should be left behind and how much could be continued without marring their Christian witness. Judging from the tirades of church Fathers, more than a few, especially in the second, third, and fourth centuries, were sneaking off to the amphitheater, hippodrome and stadium. Gladiatorial contests and wild beast shows may have been, as a historian notes, “a Christian’s worst nightmare,” yet it must also be remembered that the early faith attracted people from all walks of life, including many who were accustomed to attending athletic events and gladiatorial shows. Some no doubt had been sport promoters, athletes, gladiators, and charioteers prior to their conversions. Just as some early Christians volunteered for the Roman army with its long calendar of pagan sacrifices, so too we must suspect that some remained patrons of the sport spectacles. “We should allow once again,” says historian Robin Fox, “for Christians who were ready to compromise to a degree which their leaders’ moral sermons would not contemplate.”32

In light of this, a range of opinions about the public sport spectacles most likely characterized the early Christian laity. New converts felt pulled in two directions: by cultural traditions and the excitement of the arena on one hand, and by the stern warnings of Christian ecclesiastics on the other. St. Augustine of Hippo, who regarded the gladiatorial contests as “licensed cruelty,” tells of his friend, Alypius, who gave up the games when he became a Christian, but on one occasion was enticed to the arena by friends. Overcome by guilt, Alypius put his hands over his face and refused to look. Yet, before long, the atmosphere got the best of him and soon he was shouting and roaring with the crowd. Surely Alypius was not alone. Many who had attended the spectacles on a regular basis before their conversion probably found that excising these pastimes from their lifestyles was not easily done.33

Some Jewish converts’ former separatist tradition had already forbidden attendance at spectacles, not simply on grounds of the pagan rites and nudity of the athletes (which violated Mosaic Law), but because sports were blatantly Hellenistic, a dangerous threat to Jewish ethical codes and customs. However, there is reason to think that this belief did not hold for all or even most of the Jewish population. The eminent Jewish theologian Philo of Alexandria, for example, is known to have frequented the athletic contests of his day, often offering critical and informed commentary on them. He also was known to have attended the chariot races. The late H.A. Harris, remarking on the enormity of the influence of Greek culture on Jewish perceptions of sport, pointed out that the nudity of the contestants may not have been as objectionable to Jews as historians have imagined. Some Palestinian Jews as well as those scattered throughout the region had been attending and even participating in athletic contests as early as two centuries before Christ. If the Macccabean story of an unscrupulous high priest of the second century is true, even the priesthood had difficulty resisting the addictive pulls of sports. Jason was the leader of a pro-Hellenist faction in Jerusalem who, in an effort to facilitate the integration of the Greek and Jewish cultures did an unthinkable thing: he erected a gymnasium in Jerusalem, “enrolled the most influential young men and ‘brought them under the Greek hat.’” It was an immediate success, attracting Jewish priests who “no longer showed any zeal for the offices of the sacrifices, and were anxious to share the unlawful facilities of the palestra in their keenness to challenge one another in throwing the discus.”34

In a brief play written by a second century Roman lawyer named Minutius Felix Marcus, the heathen Caecelius accuses Christians of being dullards by saying, “you have no concern in public displays; you reject the public banquets and abhor the sacred games” (italics added). Octavius acknowledges the claims and explains that Christians object to the games on two grounds: the pagan worship associated with the games, and the fact that the games “purvey and stimulate immorality.” 35 Shunning sports in a sport-mad society earned many early Christians reputations as kill-joys. “The world hates the Christian,” said the second century author of the Epistle to Diogenes, “though it receiveth no wrong from them, because they set themselves against its pleasures.” The early Christian lawyer and apologist Tertullian, an arch-critic of the sports of his times, thought abstaining from popular sport spectacles was the hallmark of a believer. 36

For some, ridding their lifestyles of sporting spectacles could be a defining moment in their religious lives. Thascius Cyprian, a third-century lawyer who became a Christian in mid-life (he called himself “a born again Christian”) gave up his practice and sold most of his property to help the Christian poor. Looking back on his life he was able to connect the change in his moral convictions as having been provoked by his shunning of displays of riches and the gladiatorial shows. In some cases this change in conviction happened so quickly that it raised suspicions, as for example those of early church father St. Jerome who once observed that the converts who were “yesterday in the amphitheater, (were) today in the church; (who) in the evening (were) at the circus (are) in the morning at the altar.” 37

A Hostile Clergy

In spite of the laity’s lingering fascination with the sport spectacles of their day, there was little doubt where Christian leaders stood on the issue. Preachers and apologists consistently thundered against “the circus, the race-course, the contest of athletes…which the Devil introduced into the world under the pretext of amusement, and through which he leads the souls of men to perdition.”38 In the authoritative words of historian Ernest Renan, “one of the most profound sentiments of the primitive Christians, and one too which produced the most extended results, was detestation of the theater, the stadium and the gymnasium—that is to say, of all the public resorts which gave its distinctive character to a Grecian or Roman city.” Another historian notes that “actors, musicians, dancers, and athletes were ranked together with prostitutes, astrologers, and diviners by Christian thinkers and rejected outright as representatives of the immorality, idolatry, depravity, and inhumanity characterized by such entertainments.” 39 The Apostolic Constitutions compiled in the third century urged Christians to avoid “indecent spectacles such as the theater and public sports,” and forbade baptism, church membership, and communion to those who frequented the amphitheater. Gladiators and fencing masters who taught how to kill were not to be baptized into the faith until they promised to give up their professions; and the canons of the Council of Arles in 314 AD specifically forbade Christians to associate with gladiators or charioteers.40

Preachers found it especially difficult to imagine newly converted Christians ambling comfortably among the scores of burning altars at the Greek athletic contests or sitting with a clear conscience as the procession of the gods passed by in the circus. Novation, an early 3rd century theologian, fired off a stern warning to early Christians who, he was shocked to discover, were unashamedly attending the games. “Sacred scripture condemns the spectacles,” he said, “because idolatry is the source of all the public games. How incongruous it is for a faithful Christian, who has renounced the devil at baptism, to renounce Christ at the games!” It wasn’t only idolatry that bothered Novation; he was equally critical of the immorality and brutality of the games, the strife and discord that they fomented among spectators, and the immoral climate that spawned including “wanton licentiousness, public vice, and notorious lechery.” These same two themes—idolatry and immorality—figured prominently in the writings of the Apostle Paul, who condemned the Corinthian practice of eating meat that had been sacrificed to idols (1 Cor.8: 1-13), possibly to Zeus at the Isthmian games that were held at Corinth. Historian Richard DeVoe allows that the Apostle Paul’s dennounciation of “debauchery, idolatry and withcraft…drunkenness, orgies, and the like” as behaviors that will bar people from the kingdom of God in Galatians 5:19-21, his warning to the Corinthians not to indulge in pagan revelry (I Cor 10:7), and Peter’s warning against living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing, and detestable idolatry all might have been aimed at the popular games. Beginning in the last half of the second century the church fathers preached unremittingly against Christian attendance of the games.41

For many church leaders, the sport spectacles represented in a microcosm all that was wrong with Roman society. They were paradigms of excess and extravagance, shallowness and sensuousness, selfishness and self-gratification. Church fathers often used the incredible story of Kleomedes, a famous Green athlete who was said to have killed his opponent using an illegal blow that tore open his rib cage, not simply to condemn athletics but to condemn the whole of pagan society.42 The brutality of the amphitheater was vilified, not simply because of the pain and suffering it caused the gladiators, but because of its pernicious effect on those who watched. There was an abiding concern about the capacity of fanaticism and consumption of violent displays to erode the reasonableness and humility that was seen as a hallmark of Christian demeanor. For example, Cassidorus, Christian secretary to Emperor Theodosius, viewed the frenzy of the circus as incompatible with the Christian spirit:

The spectacle drives out sound morality and invites childish factiousness, it banishes honesty and it is an unfailing source of riots… most remarkable of all, in these beyond all other spectacles men’s minds are carried away by excitement without any regard for dignity and sobriety. Green takes the lead and half the crowd is plunged into gloom. Blue passes him, and a great mass of citizens suffer the torments of the damned. They cheer wildly with no useful result; they suffer nothing but are cut to the heart. 43

But no early Christian leader so elegantly and systematically showed how and why sports of the times the sports should be brought into judgment by Christians as did Tertullian, a late second century ecclesiastic writer, lawyer, and apologist who had undisguised ascetic leanings. His De Spectaculis stands as the most explicit and harsh denunciation of sports in the early Christian era. In blunt and uncompromising prose, Tertullian considered arguments put forth by some in the Christian community to justify their attendance at the games and rebutted them like the skilled lawyer that he was:

The games bring enjoyment. God is not offended by people enjoying themselves so it is perfectly legitimate to gain pleasure by attending the spectacles. (I, 233)
The games are products of God’s creation. Since all things are part of God’s creation, they cannot be hostile to Him. This includes the horse, the lion, the strength of the athlete’s body, and the cement and marble of the stadium. (II, 237)
Scripture doesn’t specifically forbid attendance at the spectacles. (IX, p. 270; XV p.271; XVI, 273)
God looks on the games and is not defiled, neither will Christians be defiled merely by watching. (XXI, 283; XX 281)
As for the athletic events, Tertullian condemned the gambling that was rampant, and he found the violence in boxing and wrestling (and no doubt the pancratium) incompatible with the Christian view of the body as the object of God’s creation (XVIII, 277). Taking a passing shot at running, throwing, and jumping competitions as “idle (or frivolous) feats,” he believed wrestling to be intrinsically devilish (IVIII, 277). Quaint though his perception of wrestling might have been, Tertullian possessed keen insight into the nature of sports of his day, a perception shaped no doubt by many years of attending prior to his middle-aged conversion.44

When such blasts from the pulpit proved ineffective in stemming the public craze for sports, more extreme action was taken. In one of the more grizzly protests of this sort an obscure Syrian monk named Telemachus traveled to Rome from the desert in the early fifth century where he attempted to halt the gladiatorial shows single-handedly. He managed to make it to the floor of the Coliseum, thrust himself between two battling gladiators and commanded them to stop “in the name of Christ Jesus, King of Kings and Lord of Lords.” Incensed by the rude interruption the spectators stoned him to death.45

Again, Tertullian didn’t speak for all Christians of his age and especially for those in succeeding centuries. The large-scale Christianization of society in the late third and fourth centuries would lead to a dulling of the sharp distinction between the attitudes and lifestyles of believers and pagans with respect to many aspects of popular culture. “The question of what it was that defined a Christian had never been easy to answer,” says historian R.A. Markus, “but it had become especially troubling in an age when Christianity seemed to have become so easy.” Some Christians probably always had attended the games and races, but with the passing of a century or two, visiting the circus and arenas became more accepted in Christian circles. How else is one to explain a Phrygian inscription dating to the third century that tells of a wealthy Christian who paid for the expense of city games, or historical records showing that in Eumenia a Christian athlete named “Helix” had won prizes in pagan games extending from Asia to southern Italy, or Christian emperor Constantine’s decision to allow the inhabitants of a town in Italy to honor him by sponsoring sport spectacles?46

And there is the curious story of Hilarion, the third century charismatic Christian ascetic who lived as a hermit in the desert who was said to have performed miraculous faith healings. According to Jerome, this pillar of the faith not only applied his faith healing to heal a charioteer’s neck which had been stiffened by racing, he agreed to bless the racing horse of a prominent charioteer in Gaza whose opponent was said to be amassing wins by using a sorcerer to curse his opponents. According to Jerome, Hilarion gave a blessing to the horses, their stables and the racecourse and next time out they romped home to resounding Christian cheers. “The decisive victory in those games and many others later,” said Jerome, “caused very many people to turn to the faith.” If these records are indeed true (Jerome was the only historical source) history may duly record Hilarion as the first Christian chaplain to sports and his protégé charioteer as the first athlete evangelist.47

The ultimate demise of the Greek athletics probably occurred not so much as a result of Christian condemnation as of a declining economy and the waning of interest in the religion with which they were associated. Wild beast shows continued to be popular even under the rule of some Christian emperors, and the chariot races continued well into the 11th century, long after Christians had assumed political power and engineered feeble attempts to Christianize them (see chapter 3). There is no doubt that by five centuries after Christ, Christianity had impacted the races, but despite the protests of ecclesiastics, it never brought down the final curtain on them. In the end, the spectacles simply became too costly to sponsor. And while Christian influence no doubt played a significant role in the eventual demise of gladiatorial shows, there also is reason to believe that even against this most outrageous of sports, the church proved to be a weak moderator of public opinion. Constantine banned gladiatorial games in 325 AD, but there is evidence that they continued to be popular in the western Empire into the early decades of the 5th century. 48

Was Paul a sports aficionado?

In the minds of many in the modern Christian community, Paul’s use of rich athletic imagery suggests that he may have not been as critical of sports as were his progeny of the second and third centuries. The evangelical athletic community has interpreted his heavily reliance on athletic metaphors as an apostolic blessings on the sports and games of his day, and by extension, justification for their involvement in popular sports today. Evangelical athletes find inspiration in the passages; it isn’t uncommon, for example, for them to sport T-shirts emblazoned with athletic imagery from Philippians 3:14 (“I press toward the mark for the high calling of God in Jesus Christ”) or II Tim. 4:7 (“I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith.”)49

Citing Paul’s use of athletic language in order to justify involvement in sports is hardly a modern Christian invention. Third century church leader Novatian was dismayed when some of his contemporaries sorted through scripture in a frantic attempt to justify their attendance at the games. They questioned why they shouldn’t be allowed to attend the races at the hippodrome when Elijah had driven a chariot. And if the Apostle “paints for us the picture of a boxing match and of our own wrestling against the spiritual forces of wickedness…Why then should a faithful Christian not be at liberty to be a spectator of things that the divine Writings are at liberty to mention?” But Novation tells his readers that the Apostle’s references are merely exhortations to practice virtue, “not concessions to attend pagan spectacles and enjoy base pleasures,” and wonders if “it would have been far better for such people to lack (any) knowledge of the Scriptures than to read them in such a manner.” But this doesn’t answer the question of why would Paul have used these athletic figures of speech unless he, in contrast to the church leaders that followed in his wake, was a proponent of popular sports50

First, a quick review of the athletic passages in Paul’s writing.51 The most elaborate applications of this athletic language refer to the events of the stadium, especially running. In I Corinthians 9:24-26 where Paul urges his readers to exert greater effort in running “the race,” he draws a parallel between the self renunciation required in his ministry and that required of athletes who compete for prizes in the stadium and in verse 27 shifts to the metaphor of boxing to make the point that his own desires are not to stand in the way of the spiritual war. He uses the technical term hypopiazo (“I give it the fist blow under the eye: I beat my body and defeat it.”) In Philippians 3:12-14 the Apostle, again in the context of an apology for his ministry, uses the athletic metaphor of a runner to illustrate the critical importance of the goal for which he is striving in his ministry. In other passages he speaks of having finished his race and adhered to the course set for him by God (Acts 20:24; II Tim 4:7). In Romans 9:16 Paul reminds readers that salvation comes not merely by wishing or running, but by mercy bestowed by God. A reference to running in Gal 2:2 mentions his not having run in vain, and again in Phil 2:16, Paul notes that he “did not run or labor in vain,” where some scholars believe the word used for labor refers to an athlete’s training.52 In Galatians 5:7 he mentions that although he has been running well, someone has broken the rules, fouled him, and caused him to stumble, and in II Tim 2:5 he urges Timothy to endure hardships and to keep from becoming tangled in worldly affairs, reminding him that a man (athlete) is not crowned unless he runs according to the rules.

Other metaphors employ language referring to the training done by athletes (e.g. Acts 24:16) and to umpires that supervised competition, urging believers to “let the peace of Christ “umpire” in their hearts (Col 3:15). He contrasts athletes’ corruptible crowns, with the much more enduring crowns of righteousness for believers (I Cor 9:24-25). In Phil 4:1 the thought of reward is more prominent where Paul describes the Philippians as “the wreath” with which he himself will be crowned if they stand firm, for they will be living proof that he had neither run nor trained in vain. In 2 Tim 4:8 he uses terms for both reward and umpire in stating that “there is laid up for me (as on the ivory and golden table at Olympia) a wreath of righteousness, which the Lord, the umpire who makes no mistakes, will award me on that day.” Chariot racing, not running, is thought to be the sport envisioned in Philippians 3:13-14 where Paul talks of forgetting what has gone on before and “straining forward” to what lies ahead, “I drive on toward the finishing line.”53

The gladiatorial contest forms the basis of yet other metaphors. In I Cor.15:32 Paul claims to have fought wild beasts in Ephesus, reminding his readers that he would not have done so if he didn’t believe in the promise of eternal life to believers. He appeals to Philippian Christians to “stand firm” in one spirit, contending together as one for the faith of the gospel, thought to be a clear reference to gladiatorial contests. Like those thrown into the arena to face the beasts, Christians are condemned to fight for their lives (or their faith). And, in Phil:1:30 he describes himself engaging in a “contest” with his readers, and again, in 4:3, speaks of certain women who had once fought side by side with him in the cause of the gospel, all thought to be drawing on gladiatorial imagery. Commentators have also pointed out subtle references to gladiators in Philippians 1:28, Romans 3:6; 15:30, and 2 Cor 4:8-9.54

On the basis of Paul’s plentiful athletic metaphors it is tempting to assume that he was predisposed to the sports of his day. The definitive work on Paul’s athletic metaphors remains Victor Pfitzner’s St Paul and the Agon Motif, a painstakingly thorough examination of the literary, historical, philosophical, and theological context in which Paul’s athletic language was used. Pfitzner contends that the athletic terminology had long lost any direct association with athletic contexts by the time it appears in Paul’s epistles. In this respect it would not be unlike metaphors used by contemporary sports fans and critics alike. “Make sure you touch base with me (baseball),” “I struck out” on the exam (baseball) “Do an end run” around the committee (football), “go an extra round” (boxing), or “take a rain check” (baseball) all derive from sports, yet they are so far removed from their original context that those using them rarely appreciate their connection to sports. The athletic metaphors used by Paul were “very much in the air” so that he undoubtedly would have grown up with them or acquired them in his discussions with street corner philosophers who roamed the Mediterranean world or perhaps in his many contacts with Greek-speaking synagogues. The metaphors were so common, claims Pfitzner, that “it is not hard to imagine that any Hellenistic Jew could have either written or understood them without himself having gained a firsthand knowledge of the games from a bench in the stadium.” Because the metaphors Paul used had long been dissociated from actual athletic experience, along with Paul’s background as an educated Pharisee who identified with the Palestinian Jews’ “deep lying abhorrence (of) Greek athletics and gymnastics as typical of heathendom…” Pfitzner concludes that “one must question Paul’s so-called love for, and familiarity with Greek sports!” Even more problematic was how Paul could have blended an image that glorified the Greek ideal of agon, with its spirit of self-assertion and human achievement, with a theological system that repeatedly underscored human insufficiency and divine grace.62

It is possible, even likely, that Paul played sports informally in his youth. It is conceivable, though highly improbable, that he maintained an interest in the public games during his ministry. In light of the pagan religious ceremonies that were part of the games, and the sharp contrasts between the atmosphere and ethos of Greco-Roman competition and Paul’s exhortation to the spiritual life, it seems more likely that he shared the largely negative views of influential church leaders who followed in his wake.


In summing up the story of Christianity’s first encounter with popular sport it is important to point out that the historical record contains no evidence of early church authorities having condemned sports played informally; the essential acts of moving, striving, contesting, and developing skill for purposes of enjoyment never came under attack. It seems likely that early Christians played an assortment of informal games prior to and following their conversion, surely as children but perhaps as adults as well. But sports made part of grand entertainment spectacles were another matter entirely. To those in the vanguard of the faith, the major sport palaces of the day were off limits to Christians. Early Christian leaders were not nearly as concerned about the effects of sport on the participants (since most weren’t Christians) as they were its effects on the minds, souls, and dispositions of those who watched. They were careful, critical observers of sport, arguably more critical than the Christian community is today. They saw how sport spectacles so often appealed to baser human instincts and softened Christian resolve against not only pagan religious sentiments but also the underlying worldview that defined the essence of Greek and Roman culture. To the early fathers, watching the games risked blurring the lines that distinguished the new faith from the old religion.

Secondly, the church took seriously its stand against sport and other public entertainments. How one integrated sports into his or her lifestyle represented a kind of litmus test for measuring Christian commitment. “It is above all things from this,” said Tertullian, “that they (the pagans) understand a man to have become a Christian that he will have nothing to do with the games.” Third, from the beginning popular sport proved to be a divisive issue, not only in setting Christians apart from their pagan neighbors, but in fomenting dissention among the Christian community as well. Early Christian leaders may have been united in the belief that the sport spectacles of the day were incompatible with the teachings of Christ, but apparently, rank-and-file believers weren’t so sure. Thus, in taking a position against sport, clerics and church authorities set themselves apart not only from the secular sports promoters but from part of the early Christian community as well. Almost from the outset it was clear that the church and the laity would be locked in a long battle over sports, and given the public’s unquenchable thirst for sport spectacles, it was a contest the church was destined to lose.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Farraday Road by Ace Collins

Book descripition from Zondervan's website:

It’s just another quiet evening out for Lije and Kaitlyn Evans. But somewhere along the way, it becomes something more sinister and a murder takes place. In the aftermath, a small-town attorney sets out to find his wife’s killers and uncovers a deadly conspiracy. A suspenseful mystery with a twist of faith.

About Ace Collins (also from Zondervan):

Ace Collins is the writer of more than sixty books, including several bestsellers: Stories behind the Best-Loved Songs of Christmas, Stories behind the Great Traditions of Christmas, The Cathedrals, and Lassie: A Dog’s Life. Based in Arkadelphia, Arkansas, He continues to publish several new titles each year, including a series of novels, the first of which is Farraday Road. Ace has appeared on scores of television shows, including CBS This Morning, NBC Nightly News, CNN, Good Morning America, MSNBC, and Entertainment Tonight.

My Opinion:

I have never read Ace Collins before and I must say I didn't know what to expect from someone I hadn't read before, but as before, I was estatic that I did read this book. I will say at first I was leery, murder, suspense, and conspiracies - well not exactly what one would think of as a Christian book. My husband doesn't understand either how these go together but I will say this having come from a place where I used to read these type of secular books but with more risque situations and language this one was much more Christian.

I was drawn in from page one - and didn't want to put it down, I found it hard to put it down and was glad when my husband allowed us a snow day in our homeschool. Instead of the usual one dimensional, see through characters of most suspense books Ace Collins does a wonderful job of drawing you in to the character's and make you feel attached to them. I could hear the fear in their voices, the sadness of grief, and other emotions through out this book. God and faith were a strong overtone in this book, even if not outrightly spoken - Lije struggles with his faith after loosing his wife, while another character has total faith in God because she knows that faith is not based on seeing.

I would suggest this book especially if you are coming from a place in your life where you are used to secular suspense but want something cleaner and with more Faith involved. Definitely a must read, but for those who don't want to read about murder then this definitely wouldn't be the book for you even with the Christian aspect of it.

**I was provided a copy of this book through Zondervan in exchange for my honest review.

Green by Ted Dekker

Book Description from Thomas Nelson's website:

At Last . . . The Circle Reborn

The story of how Thomas Hunter first entered the Black Forest and forever changed our history began at a time when armies were gathered for a final battle in the valley of Migdon. Green is a story of love, betrayal, and sweeping reversals set within the apocalypse. It is the beginning: the truth behind a saga that has captured the imagination of more than a million readers with the Books of History Chronicles.

But even more, Green brings full meaning to the Circle Series as a whole, reading as both prequel to Black and sequel to White, completing a full circle. This is Book Zero, the Circle Reborn, both the beginning and the end. The preferred starting point for new readers . . . and the perfect climax for the countless fans who’ve experienced Black, Red, and White.

My Opinion:

Like Ted Dekker's other books, Green, pulls you in to the story as soon as you begin reading. The characters will be remembered from the previous books and some new ones which keeps the storyline going and progressing. Mr. Dekker has a great ability for storytelling and weaving in Christian values and beliefs into his book, including Green. I will admit that while the book does pull you in, it took me longer to actually read this one since I had to re-aquaint myself with the characters and plot, it had been awhile since I last read Black, Red and White, but it wasn't hard to get back into the storyline.

It has always amazed me at how an author can weave so many genre's and still make it flow smoothly with any weird or unusual plot lines. This is what I think makes Green so great, is that the flow at reading this book from the others just goes seemlessly together making it a great read that will lead you on twists with the suspense, love for Elyon and even hatred. I truly feel this book encompasses a lot of themes that fit well for Ted Dekker's usual writing style.

**I was provided a copy of this book through Thomas Nelson's review program in exchange for my honest review.

Saturday, February 13, 2010

FIRST tour: "So Long Insecurity: You've Been a Bad Friend to Us" by Beth Moore

It is time for a FIRST Wild Card Tour book review! If you wish to join the FIRST blog alliance, just click the button. We are a group of reviewers who tour Christian books. A Wild Card post includes a brief bio of the author and a full chapter from each book toured. The reason it is called a FIRST Wild Card Tour is that you never know if the book will be fiction, non~fiction, for young, or for old...or for somewhere in between! Enjoy your free peek into the book!

You never know when I might play a wild card on you!

Today's Wild Card author is:

and the book:

So Long Insecurity: You’ve Been a Bad Friend to Us

Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. (February 2, 2010)

***Special thanks to Vicky Lynch of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. for sending me a review copy.***


Over the past decade, Beth Moore has become an internationally known and respected Bible teacher, teaching over 250,000 women annually in Living Proof Live Conferences and regularly sharing God’s Word with an interdenominational community at her church in Houston; teaching the Bible on the nationally syndicated Life Today with James Robison; and through her best-selling books and Living Proof radio program.

Visit the author's website.

Product Details:

List Price: $24.99
Hardcover: 368 pages
Publisher: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. (February 2, 2010)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1414334729
ISBN-13: 978-1414334721


Mad Enough to Change

I’m seriously ticked. And I need to do something about it. Some people eat when they’re about to rupture with emotion. Others throw up. Or jog. Or go to bed. Some have a holy fit. Others stuff it and try to forget it. I can do all those things in sequential order, but I still don’t find relief.

When my soul is inflating until my skin feels like a balloon about to pop, I write. Never longhand, if I can help it. The more emotion I feel, the more I appreciate banging on the keys of a computer. I type by faith and not by sight. My keyboard can attest to the fact that I am a passionate person with an obsession for words: most of the vowels are worn off. The word ticked really should have more vowels. Maybe what I am is peeved. That’s a good one. How about irrationally irritated to oblivion? Let that one wear the vowels off a keyboard.

The thing is, I’m not even sure exactly who I’m ticked at. I’m hoping to find that out as I hack away at these chapters. One thing is for certain. Once I figure it out, I probably won’t keep it to myself. After all, you know how the saying goes: hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. And I’m feeling scorned.

But not just for myself. I’m feeling ticked for the whole mess of us born with a pair of X chromosomes. My whole ministry life is lived out in the blessed chaos of a female cornucopia. I’ve been looking at our gender through the lens of Scripture for twenty-five solid years, and I have pondered over us, taken up for us, laid into us, deliberated over us, prayed about us, lost sleep because of us, cried for us, laughed my head off at us, and gotten offended for us—and by us—more times than I can count. And after a quarter of a century surrounded by girls ranging all the way from kindergarteners to those resting on pale pink liners inside caskets, I’ve come to this loving conclusion: we need help. I need help. Something more than what we’re getting.

The woman I passed a few days ago on the freeway who was bawling her eyes out at the steering wheel of her Nissan needs help. The girl lying about her age in order to get a job in a topless bar needs help. The divorcée who has loathed herself into fifty extra pounds needs help. For crying out loud, that female rock star I’ve disdained for years needs help. When I read something demeaning her ex said about her recently—something I know would cut any female to the quick—I jumped to her defense like a jackal on a field mouse and seriously wondered how I could contact her agent and offer to mentor her in Bible study.

Several days ago I sat in a tearoom across the table from a gorgeous woman I love dearly. She has been married for three months, and they did all the right things leading up to that sacred ceremony, heightening the anticipation considerably. After an hour or so of musing over marriage, she said to me, “Last weekend he seemed disinterested in me. I’ll be honest with you. It kind of shook me up. I wanted to ask him, ‘So, are you over me now? That quick? That’s it?’”

I’m pretty certain her husband will perk back up, but what a tragedy that she feels like she possesses the shelf life of a video game.

I flashed back to another recent communication with a magazine-cover-beautiful thirty-year-old woman who mentioned—almost in passing—that she has to dress up in costumes in order for her husband to want to make love to her. I’m not knocking her pink-feathered heels, but I wonder if she is paying too much for them. I’m just sad that she can’t feel desirable as herself.

Then yesterday I learned that a darling fifteen-year-old I keep in touch with slept with her boyfriend in a last-ditch effort to hold on to him. He broke up with her anyway. Then he told. It’s all over her high school now.

I’ve got a loved one going through her third divorce. She wants to find a good man in the worst way, and goodness knows they’re out there. The problem is, she keeps marrying the same kind of man.

I’m so ticked.

If these examples were exceptions to the rule, I wouldn’t bother writing, but you and I both know better than that. I hear echoes of fear and desperation from women day in and day out—even if they’re doing their best to muffle the sound with their Coach bags. Oh, who am I kidding? I hear reverberations from my own heart more times than I want to admit. I keep trying to stifle it, but it won’t shut up. Something’s wrong with us for us to value ourselves so little. Our culture has thrown us under the bus. We have a fissure down the spine of our souls and, boy, does it need fixing.

This morning while I was getting ready for church, my cell phone nearly vibrated off the bathroom counter with six incoming texts from a single friend who was having a crisis of heart. I answered her with what little I had to give, even as I grappled with my own issues. I decided that what I needed was a good sermon to keep me from crying off my eyeliner, so I flipped on the television to a terrific local preacher. Lo and behold, the sermon was about what a woman needs from a man.

Deep sigh.

Actually, it was a great message if anyone had a mind to do what he was recommending, but knowing human nature and feeling uncharacteristically cynical, I could feel my frustration mounting. The preacher had done his homework. He offered half a dozen Scripture-based PowerPoint slides with state-of-the-art graphics describing what men should do for women. “Women want to be told that they are captivating. That they’re beautiful. Desirable.”

I won’t deny that. What woman wouldn’t thrive under that kind of steady affirmation?

But here’s my question: What if no one tells us that? Can we still find a way to be okay? Or what if he says it because he’s supposed to, but to be honest, he’s not feeling it? Are we hopeless? What if a man is not captivated by us? What if he doesn’t think we’re particularly beautiful? Or, understandably, maybe just not every day? Are we only secure on his “on” days? What if he loves us but is not quite as captivated by us as he used to be? What if his computer is full of images of what he finds attractive, and we’re light-years from it? What if we’re seventy-five, and every ounce of desirability is long behind us? Can we still feel adequate in our media-driven society?

Adapted from So Long Insecurity by Beth Moore. Copyright © 2010 by Beth Moore. Used with permission from Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved.

My Opinion:


FIRST tour: Celtic Treasure by Liz Babbs

It is time for a FIRST Wild Card Tour book review! If you wish to join the FIRST blog alliance, just click the button. We are a group of reviewers who tour Christian books. A Wild Card post includes a brief bio of the author and a full chapter from each book toured. The reason it is called a FIRST Wild Card Tour is that you never know if the book will be fiction, non~fiction, for young, or for old...or for somewhere in between! Enjoy your free peek into the book!

You never know when I might play a wild card on you!

Today's Wild Card author is:

and the book:

Celtic Treasure

Lion UK; 1 edition (September 1, 2009)

***Special thanks to Cat Hoort of Kregel Publications for sending me a review copy.***


Liz Babbs is an award-winning author, performer, broadcaster and retreat leader. She has written many books on the subject of spirituality, including The Celtic Heart, The Pilgrim Heart and Into God’s Presence.

Visit the author's website.
Visit the book's website.

Product Details:

List Price: $9.95
Hardcover: 80 pages
Publisher: Lion UK; 1 edition (September 1, 2009)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0745953557
ISBN-13: 978-0745953557



My Opinion:


Thursday, February 04, 2010

FIRST Tour: Life of Washington by Anna C. Reed

It is time for a FIRST Wild Card Tour book review! If you wish to join the FIRST blog alliance, just click the button. We are a group of reviewers who tour Christian books. A Wild Card post includes a brief bio of the author and a full chapter from each book toured. The reason it is called a FIRST Wild Card Tour is that you never know if the book will be fiction, non~fiction, for young, or for old...or for somewhere in between! Enjoy your free peek into the book!

You never know when I might play a wild card on you!

Today's Wild Card author is:

Anna C. Reed

and the book:

Life of Washington

New Leaf Publishing Group/Attic Books (November 30, 2009)

***Special thanks to Robert Parrish of New Leaf Press for sending me a review copy.***


Anna C. Reed, niece of a signer of the Declaration of Independence, authored this amazing work for the ASSU prior to 1850. Originally translated into over 20 languages, the book was among the most widely read biographies of Washington at that time. The ASSU, now called the American Missionary Fellowship, has been associated with some of America's most prominent citizens and religious leaders. Bushrod Washington, George Washington's nephew and heir of Mount Vernon, was vide-president of the ASSU until 1829. Other ASSU officers include Francis Scott Key, D.L. Moody, Laura Ingalls Wilder, and John Adams (descendant of both early presidents).

Product Details:

List Price: $16.99
Hardcover: 299 pages
Publisher: New Leaf Publishing Group/Attic Books (November 30, 2009)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0890515786
ISBN-13: 978-0890515785





To give us the delightful assurance, that we are always under the watchful care of our almighty and kind Creator, He has told us that He notices the movements of every little sparrow; and as we are ”of more value than many sparrows,” He will surely ever care for us. It was His powerful and kind care that protected and guided Columbus, the once poor sailor boy, to obtain the favour of a great king and queen; and then to pass over the waves of a dangerous ocean, in a little vessel, and reach in safety an unknown land. The same powerful and kind care which protected and guided houseless strangers to a land of freedom and peace, gave Washington to their children, to lead them on to take a place amongst the nations of the earth. His history is as a shining light upon the path of virtue; for he “acknowledged God in all his ways.”

George Washington was the third son of Augustine Washington, whose grandfather left England, his native country, in 1657, and settled at Bridges Creek, in Virginia, where, on the 22nd of February, in the year 1732, his great-grandson, George, was born.

One of the first lessons which young Washington received from his faithful parents, was, the importance of always speaking the truth; and they enjoyed a satisfactory reward for their attention to this duty; for through his childhood, “the law of truth was in his mouth,” so that he was not known in one instance to tell a falsehood, either to obtain a desired indulgence, or to escape a deserved punishment or reproof. His character, as a lover of truth, was so well known at the school which he attended, that the children were certain of being believed, when they related any thing, if they could say, “George Washington says it was so.”

An anecdote is related of him to illustrate this trait in his character, which we introduce without being able to ascertain on what authority it is related. We hope it will not be supposed, however, that we regard such an incident as an extraordinary proof of an ingenuousness on the part of young Washington. We trust there are very few boys who would think of adopting any other course under like circumstances, and those who do generally find that “honesty is the best policy,” to say nothing of a quiet conscience and the law of God.

The story is, that he was playing with a hatchet, and heedlessly struck a favourite fruit-tree in his father’s garden. Upon seeing the tree thus mutilated, an inquiry was naturally made for the author of the mischief, when George frankly confessed the deed, and received his father’s forgiveness.

In all the little disputes of the school-fellows, he was called on to say which party was right, and his decisions were always satisfactory.

It is, perhaps, not out of place to remark in this connexion, that much of the injustice and oppression which are seen in the intercourse of men with each other, shows only the maturity of habits which were formed in childhood. At home, or in school, or on the play-ground, instances of unfairness and fraud are often seen, which, among men, would be regarded as gross violations of law and right. Washington in his boyhood was just.

When he was ten years old, his worth father died, and he became the care of an anxious mother, whose fortune was not sufficient to enable her to give him more than a plain English education. He was very fond of studying mathematics, and applied his mind diligently, in improving all the instruction which he could get in that science. As he grew up to manhood, he was remarkable for the strength and activity of his frame. In running, leaping, and managing a horse, he was unequalled by his companions; and he could with ease climb the heights of his native mountains, to look down alone from some wild crag upon his followers, who were panting from the toils of the rugged way. By these healthful exercises the vigour of his constitution was increased, and he gained that hardiness so important to him in the employments designed for him by his Creator.

Mrs. Washington was an affectionate parent; but she did not encourage in herself that imprudent tenderness, which so often causes a mother to foster the passions of her children by foolish indulgences, and which seldom fails to destroy the respect which every child should feel for a parent. George was early made to understand that he must obey his mother, and therefore he respected as well as loved her. She was kind to his young companions, but they thought her stern, because they always felt that they must behave correctly in her presence. The character of the mother, as well as that of the son, are shown in the following incident. Mrs. Washington owned a remarkably fine colt, which she valued very much; but which, though old enough for use, had never been mounted; no one would venture to ride it, or attempt to break its wild and vicious spirit. George proposed to some of his young companions, that they should assist him to secure the colt until he could mount it, as he had determined that he would try to tame it. Soon after sun rise, one morning, they drove the wild animal into an enclosure, and with great difficulty succeeded in placing a bridle on it. George then sprang onto its back, and the vexed colt bounded over the open fields, prancing and plunging to get rid of his burden. The bold rider kept his seat firmly, and the struggle between them became alarming to his companions, who were watching him. The speed of the colt increased, until at length, in making a furious effort to throw his conqueror, he burst a large blood-vessel, and instantly died. George was unhurt, but was much troubled by the unexpected result of his exploit. His companions soon joined him, and when they saw the beautiful colt lifeless, the first words they spoke were, “What will your mother say – who can tell her?” they were called to breakfast, and soon after they were seated at the table, Mrs. Washington said, “Well, young gentlemen, have you seen my fine sorrel colt in your rambles?” No answer was given, and the question was repeated; her son George then replied – “Your sorrel colt is dead, mother.” He have her an exact account of the event. The flush of displeasure which first rose on her cheek, soon passed away; and she said calmly, “While I regret the loss of my favourite, I rejoice in my son, who always speaks the truth.”

In his fifteenth year, he had so strong a desire to be actively employed, that he applied for a place as a midshipman in the English navy, (for our country was then under the government of Great Britain,) and succeeded in obtaining it. Full of youthful expectations of enjoyment in a new scene, he prepared ardently to engage in it, when he became convinced that by doing so, he would severely wound the heart of an anxious parent, and with a true spirit of heroism he denied himself, and in obedience to the command, “Honour thy mother,” he gave up his fondly cherished plan, and yielded his own inclinations, to promote her comfort. Thus, while his manly superiority to companions of his own age caused admiration, his filial tenderness was an example to them of compliance with the direction which is given to children in the word of God. “Let them learn first to show piety at home, and to requite their parents,” and they are assured that “this is good and acceptable to the Lord.” Washington proved the truth of this assurance; for, to the act of filial regard which “requited” the anxious cares of his mother, may be traced his usefulness to his country, and the glory of his character. If he had crossed his mother’s wish, and entered the British navy as a midshipman, it is not probable, that he would ever have deserved, or obtained, the title of “Father of his country.”

Being unwilling to remain inactive, young Washington employed himself industriously and usefully in surveying unsettled lands; and when he was nineteen years of age, he was appointed one of the adjutant generals of Virginia, with the rank of a major. At that time, the French nation had large settlements in Canada, and in Louisiana, and they determined on connecting those settlements by a line of forts; in doing this they took possession of a tract of land, which was considered to be within the province of Virginia. The governor of Virginia (Mr. Dinwiddie) thought it was his duty to notice this, in the name of his king; and it was very important, that the person whom he employed in the business should have resolution and prudence. Young Washington was worth of his confidence, and willingly undertook the perilous duty; as it gave him an opportunity of being actively employed for the advantage of his native province. The dangers which he knew he must meet, did not, for a moment, deter him from consenting to set out immediately on the toilsome journey, although winter was near. He was to take a letter from the governor, to the commanding officer of the French troops, who were stationed on the Ohio river; and the way he had to go, was through a part of the country that had never been furrowed by the plough, or, indeed, market by any footsteps, but those of wild animals, or ferocious Indians. Many of those Indians were enemies, and those who had shown any disposition to be friendly, could not be safely trusted.

The same day, (October 31, 1753,) on which Washington received the letter which he was to be the bearer of, he left Williamsburgh, and travelled with speed until he arrived at the frontier settlement of the province; and there engaged a guide to show him the way over the wild and rugged Alleghaney mountain, which, at that season of the year, it was difficult to pass. The waters to be crossed were high, and the snow to be waded through, was deep; but persevering resolutely, he arrived at Turtle Creek, where he was told by an Indian trader, that the French commander had died a short time before, and that the French troops had gone into winter quarters.

He went on with increased ardour, because the difficulty of his duty was increased; but he did not neglect the opportunity of examining the country through which he passed; wishing to discover the best situations on which forts could be erected for the defence of the province.

As the waters were impassable without swimming the horses, he got a canoe to take the baggage about ten miles, to the forks of the Ohio river; intending to cross the Alleghany there. In his journal he wrote, “as I god down before the canoe, I spent some time in viewing the rivers and the land in the fork which I think extremely suited for a fort, as it has the absolute command of both rivers. The land at the point is twenty or twenty-five feed above the common surface.”

The spot thus described was soon afterwards the site of the French for Duquesne. It was subsequently called fort Pitt by the English, and from this the name of the town of Pittsburg was taken, which was built near the for, and is not a city, containing 22,000 inhabitants. Washington remained a few days in that neighborhood, for the purpose of endeavouring to persuade the Indian warriors to be friendly to the English. By a firm but mild manner, he gained friends among the inhabitants of the forest, and obtained guides to conduct him by the shortest way to the fort, where he expected to find a French officer, to whom he might give the letter from the governor, as the commander was dead.

He arrived there in safety, and when he had received an answer from the officer, set out immediately on his return, and the journey proved a very dangerous and toilsome one. Some extracts from his journal, which he kept with exactness, will show his disregard of self, when he was performing a duty for the benefit of others. He had put on an Indian walking dress, and given his horse to assist in carrying provisions; the cold increased very much and the roads were getting worse every day, from the freezing of a deep snow, so that the horses became almost unable to travel. After describing this difficulty, he wrote thus:

“As I was uneasy to get back, to make a report of my proceedings to his honour the governor, I determined to prosecute my journey the nearest way, through the woods, on foot. I took my necessary papers, pulled off my clothes, and tied myself up in a watch coat. Then, with gun in hand and pack on my back, in which were my papers and provisions, I set out with Mr. Gist, fitted in the same manner. We fell in with a party of Indians, who had laid in wait for us. One of them fired, not fifteen steps off, but fortunately missed; we walked on the remaining part of the night, without making any stop, that we might get the start so far, as to be out of the reach of their pursuit the next day, as we were well assured that they would follow our track as soon as it was light. The next day we continued travelling until quite dark, and got to the river. We expected to have found the river frozen, but it was not, only about fifty yards from each shore. The ice I suppose had been broken up, for it was driving in vast quantities. There was no way of getting over but on a raft; which we set about making, with but one poor hatchet, and finishing just after sun-setting; this was a whole day’s work. We got it launched, then went on board of it, and set off; but before we were half-way over, we were jammed in the ice in such a manner, that we expected every moment our raft to sink, and ourselves to perish. I put out my setting pole to try to stop the raft, that the ice might pass by, when the rapidity of the stream threw it with so much violence against the pole, that it jerked me out into ten feet water.”

In this dangerous situation he was saved by the protecting hand of God, and enabled again to get on the raft; and by the next morning, the river was frozen so hard, that there was no difficulty in getting to the shore on the ice. The remainder of the journey was very fatiguing, being in the month of December, and for fifteen days it either snowed or rained.

He arrived the 16th of January at Williamsburgh, and delivered the important letter to the governor. The answer of the French officer, which was contained in the letter, was such as to make needful immediate preparations for defending the frontier of the province. The resolution with which Washington had performed the duty entrusted to him, and the judgment he had shown in his conduct towards the Indians, gained the favourable opinion of the people of the province, as well as that of the governor, and he was appointed a lieutenant-colonel of the regiment which was formed to march to the frontier, in order to prevent the French erecting their forts on it. Ardent and active, he obtained permission to march with two companies, in advance of the regiment, to a place called the Great Meadows, he thought that in doing so, he would have an opportunity of getting early information as to the movements of the French, and of forming a treaty with the Indians, to prevent their joining them. On arriving there, he was informed, by and Indian, that the French commander had sent a party to stop the American workmen, who were erecting a fort; and that they were forming one for themselves, called fort Duquesne. The Indian also gave the information, that French troops were advancing from that fort towards the Great Meadows. The night on which this account was given, was dark and rainy; but Washington marched rapidly with his soldiers to the place where the Indian said the French would be encamped; and there he found them, and surrounded them so unexpectedly, that they gave themselves up as his prisoners. The chief officer of that part of the regiment which was marching slowly on, died; and Washington then had the entire command of about four hundred men. They joined him, and he directed them to form a shelter for their horses and provisions; when it was completed, they named it fort Necessity.

After placing the horses and baggage in it, Washington marched with his troops towards fort Duquesne, for the purpose of endeavouring to drive the French from it; but when had advanced about thirteen miles, an Indian told him, that there were “as many Frenchmen coming toward him, as there were pigeons in the woods;” and he thought it was most prudent to return to his little fort, and meet their attack there. He returned, and assisted his men in digging a ditch around the fort, and while they were thus engaged, about fifteen hundred French and Indians made their appearance, and soon began to attack them. The ditch was not sufficiently completed to be of any use. The Indians sent their arrows from behind the surrounding trees, and the French fired from the shelter of the high grass. Washington continued outside of the little fort, directing and aiding his soldiers, from ten o’clock until dark, when the French commander made an offer to cease the attack, if the fort would be given up to him. The conditions he first named, Washington would not agree to; but at last, the French commander consented to allow the troops to march out with their baggage, and return to the inhabited part of the province, and Washington then gave up the fort. He returned to Williamsburgh, and the courage with which he had acted, and the favourable terms he had obtained from so large a force, increased the confidence of his countrymen in his character. This occurrence took place on the third of July, 1754.

In the course of the next winter, orders were received that officers who had commissions from the king, should be placed above those belonging to the province, without regard to their rank. The feeling of what was due to him as an American, prevented Washington from submitting to this unjust regulation, and he resigned his commission. Many letters were written to him, to persuade him not to do so; and he answered them, with an assurance that he would “serve willingly, when he could do so without dishonour.” His eldest brother had died, and left to him a farm called Mount Vernon, situated in Virginia, near the Potomac river; he took possession of it, and began to employ himself industriously in its cultivation. While he was thus engaged, General Braddock was sent from England, to prepare and command troops for the defence of Virginia, through the summer. Hearing of the conduct of Washington as an officer, and of his reasons for giving up his commission, he invited him to become his aid-de-camp. He accepted the invitation, on condition that he might be permitted to return to his farm when the active duties of the campaign should be over.

The army was formed of two regiments of British troops, and a few companies of Virginians. The third day after the march commenced, Washington was taken ill, with a violent fever. He would not consent to be left behind, and was laid in a covered wagon. He thought that it was very important to reach the frontier as soon as possible, and he knew the difficulties of the way; he therefore proposed to General Braddock, who asked his advice, to send on a part of the army, while the other part moved slowly, with the artillery and baggage wagons. Twelve hundred men were chosen, and General Braddock accompanied them; but though not cumbered with baggage, their movements did not satisfy Washington. He wrote to his brother, that, “instead of pushing on with vigour, without minding a little rough road, they were halting to level every molehill, and erect bridges over every brook.” What seemed mountains to them, were molehills to the ardent temper of Washington. His illness increased so much, that the physician said his life would be endangered by going on, and General Braddock would not suffer him to do so, but have him a promise to have him brought after him, so soon as he could bear the ride. He recovered sufficiently, in a short time, to join the advanced troops; and though very weak, entered immediately on the performance of his duties.

General Braddock proceeded on his march without disturbance, until he arrived a the Monongahela river, about seven miles from Fort Duquesne. As he was preparing to cross the river, at the place since called Braddock’s Ford, a few Indians were seen on the opposite shore, who made insulting gestures, and then turned and fled as the British troops advanced. Braddock gave orders that the Indians should be pursued. Colonel Washington was well acquainted with the manner in which the French, assisted by Indians, made their attacks; and being aware of the danger into which the troops might be led, he earnestly entreated General Braddock not to proceed, until he should, with his Virginia rangers, search the forest. His proposal offended Braddock, who disregarded the prudent counsel, and ordered his troops to cross the river; the last of them were yet wading in it, when the bullets of an unseen enemy thinned the ranks of those who had been incautiously led into the entrance of a hollow, where the French and Indians were concealed by the thick underwood, from which they could securely fire on the English. In a few moments, the fearful war-whoop was sounded, and the French and Indians rushed from their shelter on the astonished troops of Braddock, and pursued them to the banks of the Monongahela.

In vain did their commander, and the undaunted Washington, endeavor to restore them to order and prevent their flight. The deadly aim of the enemy was so sure, that in a very short time Washington was the only aid of General Braddock that was left to carry his orders and assist in encouraging the affrighted troops. For three hours, hw was exposed to the aim of the most perfect marksmen; two horses fell under him; a third was wounded; four balls pierced his coat, and several grazed his sword; every other officer was either killed or wounded, and he alone remained unhurt. The Indians directed the flight of their arrows towards his breast, and the French made him a mark for their rifles, but both were harmless, for the shield of his God protected him, and “covered his head in the heat of battle.” His safely, in the midst of such attacks, astonished his savage enemies, and they called him “The Spirit-protected man, who would be a chief of nations, for he could not die in battle.” Thud did even the savages own a divine power in his preservation; and the physician, who was on the battle ground, in speaking of him afterwards, said, “I expected every moment to see him fall; - his duty, his situation, exposed him to every danger; nothing but the superintending care of Providence could have saved him from the fate of all around him.” – This battle took place on the 8th of July, 1755. in a note to a sermon preached a month afterwards, by the Rev. Mr. Davies, of Virginia, (afterwards president of Princeton College) we find mention made by the author of “that heroic youth, Colonel Washington, whom I cannot but hope Providence has hitherto preserved, in so signal a manner, for some important service to his country.”

General Braddock was mortally wounded, and his few remaining soldiers then fled in every direction. But his brave and faithful aid, with about thirty courageous Virginians, remained on the field, to save their wounded commander from the hatched and the scalping knife of the Indians. They conveyed him with tenderness and speed towards that part of his army which was slowly advancing with the baggage, and he died in their camp, and was buried in the middle of a road, that his grave might be concealed from the Indians by wagon tracks. A few years since, his remains were removed to a short distance, as the great Cumberland road made by the government of the United States, was to pass directly over the spot where he had been laid. More than seventy-five years have passed, since the terrible scene of Braddock’s defeat. The plough has since furrowed the ground which was then moistened with the blood of the slain; but it is saddening to see on it white spots of crumbled bones, and to find amidst the green stalks of grain, buttons of the British soldiers, marked with the number of their regiment, even the brazen ornaments of their caps. “Braddock’s road,” as the path was called, which his troops cut through the forest, is now almost overgrown with bushes; and few travellers pass near to it, without stopping to look along its windings, and recall the time when it was filled with animated soldiers, who were soon to be silenced by the destructive weapons of war.

In writing an account of this dreadful defeat, Washington said, “See the wondrous works of Providence, and the uncertainty of human things!” he was much distressed by the loss of the army; and the officer next in command to General Braddock, instead of endeavouring to prepare for a better defence, went into winter quarters, although it was only the month of August. It was thought necessary to raise more troope immediately, and the command of all that should be raised in Virginia was offered to Washington, with the privilege of naming his own officers. He willingly accepted this offer, as he could do so without placing himself under British commanders, who were not really above him in rank. He immediately set off to visit the troops that had been placed in different situations along the borders of the province; and on his return to prepare for an active defence, he was overtaken by a messenger, with an account, that a number of French troops and Indian warriors, divided into parties, were capturing and murdering the inhabitants of the back settlements, - burning the houses and destroying the crops; and that the troops stationed there, were unable to protect them.

Washington immediately used every means within his power to provide for their relief; but it was impossible to defend, with a few troops, a frontier of almost four hundred miles, from an enemy that “skulked by day, and plundered by night.” While he was anxiously doing what he could, he wrote to the governor an account of the distress around him; and added, “I see their situation, - I know their danger, and participate their sufferings, without having the power to give them further relief than uncertain promises. The supplicating tears of the women, and the moving petitions of the men, melt me with deadly sorrow.” – It might have been expected, that the people in their distress would blame him for not protecting them better; but no murmur arose against him; they all acknowledged, that he was doing as much for them as was within his power.

He wrote to the lieutenant-governor the most earnest and-pressing requests for more assistance; but instead of receiving it, he was treated unkindly, as he related in a letter to a friend. – “Whence it arises, or why, I am truly ignorant, but my strongest representations of matters, relative to the peace of the frontiers, are disregarded as idle and frivolous; my propositions and measures as partial and selfish; and all my sincerest endeavours for the service of my country, perverted to the worst purposes. My orders are dark, doubtful, and uncertain. – Today approved, tomorrow condemned; left to act and proceed at hazard, and blamed without the benefit of defence. However, I am determined to bear up some time longer, in the hope of better regulations.” –Though disappointed in all his best formed plans, by the obstinacy and ill-nature of the person who had the power to control him, and pained by the increasing sufferings around him, which he was not enabled to relieve, yet he did not suffer to angry resentment to induce him to give up the effort of doing some good.

He continued his active and humane endeavours, and pleaded for the relief of his suffering countrymen, until his pleadings were called impertinent. In answer to this, he wrote to the governor, “I must beg leave, in justification of my own conduct, to observe, that it is with pleasure I receive reproof, when reproof is due; because no person can be readier to accuse me than I am to acknowledge an error, when I have committed it; or more desirous of atoning for a crime, when I am sensible of being guilty of one. But on the other hand, it is with concern I remark, that my conduct, although I have uniformly studied to make it as unexceptionable as I could, does not appear to you in a favourable light.” – With calm dignity he endured a continuance of such vexations, without ceasing to toil in his almost hopeless work of humanity.

A new commander of the British troops was sent from England, and he listened to Washington’s opinion, that the frontiers could not be freed from the dreadful visits of the Indians, in connection with the French, until they were driven from Fort Duquesne; for that was the place from which they started on their destructive expeditions. When it was determined that this should be attempted, Washington advanced with a few troops, to open the way for the army; but before they reached the fort, the French left it, and the English took possession of it, November 1758, and named it Fort Pitt. As Washington had expected the possession of this fort prevented all further attacks on the frontiers; and when his countrymen were freed from the dangers which he had left his farm to assist in defending them against, he determined on returning to it. His health had been injured by his being exposed to severe cold, and being often, for many days, unsheltered from the falling rain; and he felt that he ought to use means to restore it, as he could do so without neglecting a more important duty. He resigned his commission, and the officers whom he had commanded united in offering to him affectionate assurances of regret for the loss of “such an excellent commander, such a sincere friend, and so affable a companion.”

Soon after his return to his farm, in the twenty-seventy year of his age, he married Mrs. Custis, a lady to whom he had been long attached, and who was deserving of his affection. She had an amiable temper, and was an agreeable companion; and in performing all the duties of a wife, she made his home a scene of domestic comfort, which he felt no desire to leave. Employing himself in directing the cultivation of his ground, and in the performance of all the private duties of his situation, he lived for several years in retirement, except when attending the legislature of Virginia, of which he was a member.

For the benefit of his health, he sometimes visited a public spring in his native state, to which sick persons went, with the hop of being relieved by using the water. At the season when there were many persons there, it was the custom of a baker to furnish a particular kind of bread, for those who could afford to pay a good price for it. One day it was observed by a visitor, that several miserably poor sick persons tottered into the room where the bread was kept, and looked at the baker, who nodded his head, and each one took up a loaf, and, with a cheerful countenance walked feebly away. The visitor praised the baker for his charitable conduct, in letting those have his bread, whom he know could never pay him; but he honestly answered, “I lose nothing, - Colonel Washington is here and all the sick poor may have as much of my bread as they can eat; he pays the bill, and I assure you it is no small one.”

All his private actions were as deserving of the approbation of his countrymen, as those of a public nature had been of their respect and praise; and those who were nearest to him, and know him best, loved him most.