Morality of cage fighting?

[Bro_Elijah]

Hello Rocko, I’ve just joined the forum because of your very interesting topic.

I haven’t read all the (name removed by moderator)ut, and haven’t checked if there’s any priest who contributed - if not, I’m the first one. Please Rocko, do not feel too discouraged by the advice of the priest.

There are a lot of things to be said here. It is my personal conviction (after a lot of thought and experience), that a fighting sport should be part of the religious education of christian men in today’s culture. There are many reasons for this.

For starters, it seems to me that the morality or immorality of a fighting sport should focus not on the competitors, but on the spectators.

I’m gonna study the topic closely and discuss. I hope many will discuss. My dream is a monastic community, where consecrated brothers take part in combat sports to help young men form their personality. Are you scandalized? That might be a good sign!

By the way, probably most participants are American - well, I’m European!

God bless you all, bro Elijah

 

[Rocko]

Thank you for your response Bro Elija. I think your idea of starting a combat school is wonderful. As I’ve stated previously, there is absolutely nothing wrong with training in combat sports. I’m still continuing my combat training - but I’ve simply decided not to put it to use in the ring where I could seriously hurt someone.

That’s not to say that all fighting competitions are bad. As my parish priest had told me, if sufficient safety precautions are taken so as to insure a lower risk of injury, the sport could be considered moral. This could be done with the use of headgear and of course rules to discourage foul blows. The MMA cage I was going to fight in had no head gear, and few rules. So I encourage you, if you do start a competitive fighting school, to put the safety of your fighters as your first priority.

 

[Bro_Elijah]

Safety is a tradition as old as combat sport itself.

The two opponents can fight and forget themselves and ‘rage’, because for a short determined time called ‘round’ the referee is in charge of their safety.

Combat is an education of anger, and according to the best (thomist) theological tradition, anger is the noblest of passions, because more than any other passion it requires spiritual light.

Truthful anger and adoration are closely linked - both are lacking terribly in our Church today.

I don’t like the term ‘martial art’, because it suggests there is a kind of closed and complete system for combat skill. It is not; any fighting competence is essentially open to something else, something spiritual and higher than man’s capacities. Anger and fear are rendered relative, victory becomes the reminder of something that remains.

No surprise the Olympic games were a religious feast - starting and ending with a day of prayer.

bro E.

 

[Gerard_Nadal]

Rocko,

I’m late to this thread, but I have some thoughts on the matter. Combat art is essential to transmit from generation to generation. Until we develop a human being that will not engage in predatory behavior that targets other humans, then self-defense will be necessary.

Indeed, those in the military and police forces train for just such a purpose. However, their training stops well short of the kind of fighting that takes place in the cage. Training to knock the snot out of a predator is one thing. Brutalizing another human for sport is altogether different.

Who are these people who will cheer you on? Will they be there for you if you become disabled? They are showing up to be entertained by the spectacle of two humans doing unspeakable violence to each other for the purpose of…doing unspeakable violence to each other.

It isn’t the fighting itself that is immoral. It’s the context and purpose. Why not become a trainer for a police department? Open a school to teach women self-defense. Become a Navy SEAL. There needs to be a just and proportional reason for doing violence to another human being. Entertainment isn’t it.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Rocko,

I’m late to this thread, but I have some thoughts on the matter. Combat art is essential to transmit from generation to generation. Until we develop a human being that will not engage in predatory behavior that targets other humans, then self-defense will be necessary.

Indeed, those in the military and police forces train for just such a purpose. However, their training stops well short of the kind of fighting that takes place in the cage. Training to knock the snot out of a predator is one thing. Brutalizing another human for sport is altogether different.

Who are these people who will cheer you on? Will they be there for you if you become disabled? They are showing up to be entertained by the spectacle of two humans doing unspeakable violence to each other for the purpose of…doing unspeakable violence to each other.

It isn’t the fighting itself that is immoral. It’s the context and purpose. Why not become a trainer for a police department? Open a school to teach women self-defense. Become a Navy SEAL. There needs to be a just and proportional reason for doing violence to another human being. Entertainment isn’t it.

While you have some valid points I think you have stepped beyond the realm of reality a bit. Unspeakable violence? Really?? You mean to tell me that the two consenting people who wear some safety protection (mouth guard, gloves) and have a fight with very reasonable rules and usually end up hugging or shaking hands afterward is “unspeakable violence”? As someone who has competed before, I have no scars or lasting wounds/disabilities, and I never broke a bone or lost a tooth, nor did I ever harbor any hard feelings towards anyone that I competed/trained with.

Heck, a friend of mine who played high school football broke his collar bone twice, and another friend of mine who plays hockey today has sustained more injuries than I ever have fighting, so would these also fit into the realm of “unspeakable violence”?

While I don’t think entertainment in general is particularly sanctifying, I would say that cage fighting, (properly sanctioned of course), isn’t any worse than football, hockey or soccer.

 

[WillieWonka]

Thanks for the quick response.

I like that. That’s very true. The only problem is that I didn’t believe it to be sinful last week, so why the change? I guess I’m really asking for more solid reasons why I should believe it would be sinful - because I really don’t WANT to believe it’s sinful. But then, God’s Will is more important than mine, so what I really want is the Truth.

Father did make the distinction between watching real fighting or a movie. Movies are okay as long as the act can be faked. (This would go for any sin portrayed in a movie)

If yo don’t think it’s a problem, then who cares what all the folks in the bleachers think. Stand up and live your own life.

 

[Roman_Army]

After doing a search I found the following article which would be relevant to this question and I agree with it:

Adsum

October 2002

The Morality of Prize-fighting and Boxing

From the book, Father Connell Answers Moral Questions
by Very Rev. Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R., S.T.D., L.L.D., L.H.D.

Question: What is to be said about the lawfulness of prize-fighting and boxing?

Answer: Boxing, in the sense of giving and parrying light blows without any intention of striking the opponent severely or inflicting injury, is lawful for the purpose of exercise and recreation, and in order to test one’s skill in self-defense. But it is difficult to reconcile prizefighting, as we have it today, with Catholic principles of morality. For, undoubtedly, the purpose of the fighters is to deal each other severe blows, and if possible to score a “knock-out.” That grave injuries frequently come to those who follow prize-fighting as a career is well known from experience. The fact that both contestants willingly submit to the probability of being severely pummelled does not alter the case, since a man has no right to allow another to beat him, apart from justifiable punishment. Neither does the fact that the combatants will be paid a large sum of money justify a means that is unlawful.

Even boxing may easily assume sinful features. Speaking of this sport, Damen says: “This type of contest can easily be-come unlawful, either venially or mortally, in accordance with the degree of the more or less probable danger of injury or even of death — for example, if the due cautions are not observed or if the contest tends to the ‘knock-out’ of one of the fighters” (Theologia Moralis [Rome, 1947, I, n. 586).

This opinion may seem somewhat severe in view of the widespread conviction of the American people that prizefighting is a “good, clean sport.” Yet it is difficult to see how any other interpretation of the fifth commandment can be given. Needless to say, pastoral prudence will often suggest that people be left in good faith on this point.

**Source: cmri.org/adsum02-10b.html

Further, I would add that in some cases prizefighting or the infliction of severe injuries for entertainment can lead to hatred among the fighters. Also, in my opinion, by indulging in watching such blood sports makes one an accessory to sin.