More Thoughts – “A Brief Theology of Sports” by Lincoln Harvey

My last post looked at two ideas I found important and helpful in Lincoln Harvey’s book A Brief Theology of Sport. Overall, I enjoyed the book finding it accessible and timely.


Today, however, I want to consider a question I have about the book and I think it is a question Harvey expects because he seems to spend time offering an answer. At the beginning let me state, I am unsure if have I understood Harvey because at times I want to agree with his explanation and at other times I want to disagree (it could be that I’m confused!). Thus, I present this as a question seeking further explanation.

In the chapter on sport as “The Liturgical Celebration of Contingency,” Harvey makes a distinction between sports and worship. It is a distinction I find helpful for various reasons, one I discussed yesterday, but it also raises questions. Let me quote a few passages from the book:

“(Sport) is an event in which the creature, as itself, celebrates itself” (94).

 “Worship is the liturgical celebration of who God is with us. Sport is the liturgical celebration of who we are by ourselves” (94).

“In worship, God in his freedom is committed to being present to his people in this reality…In sport, however, the opposite is the case. God instead steps back, evacuating the space created by the liturgical action…He is in one. He is out of the other” (95).

“Sport is only for sport. It is the one thing that is not directed to the glory of God. That is what sets it apart” (96).

If I understand correctly, these statements arise from the premise that to make sport about something other than sport ruins it. Since sport is “autotelic,” meaning it has no meaning outside itself, to make sport about something changes it from sport to something else. Thus, sport cannot be a celebration of anything outside itself because to make sport about celebrating God, or for the glory of God, is to make it about something else. Sport, therefore, must be the celebration of who we are apart from God, a space where we can exist in nothing but our nothingness (our not ‘Godness’).

If these statements were allowed to stand alone, I would want to disagree with them, but here are a few quotes from the same pages that make want to agree:

“(Sport) is graced creatures living out grace. We chime with our own being” (94).

“(In sport) God instead enjoys watching us being ourselves as we pivot freely between himself and nothingness” (95).

“That is precisely what is so amazing about sport. It is not for God. It is simply the graceful creature” (96).

My question arises from how do the ideas of celebrating ourselves and living out grace fit together? Also, how does God’s enjoyment relate to God’s glory? The following is my attempt to answer these questions (these ideas are built upon Harvey’s points but they are not meant to reflect Harvey’s thoughts, as I said I’m still trying to figure out if/where we agree and disagree):

In a previous chapter, Harvey explained being graced as “we are held in existence only by the divine will that we be” (81). Graced then is the fact that we exist only in a space that is sustained “unnecessarily but meaningfully” by God and “the good news is that there is no territory that is not grace” (81). In this sense, if sport is “living out grace” then it is not a space outside God but the place we exist most completely as ourselves with God. Or to say it another way, the place we exist with God as God intended, unnecessary but meaningful.*

Sport is surely different from worship, as Harvey explains, because in worship we approach God in all his glory. On the other hand, sport is where we approach God in all our glory. Glory that because it is given by him pleases him. Thus, sport is a celebration of who we are in ourselves but not of who we are by ourselves. It is a celebration of ourselves as graced by God.** Furthermore, sport can be celebrated by God as we live out the unnecessary-but-meaningful existence he graced us with in the first place.


*Harvey seems to make a similar point, “When we play – unnecessary but meaningful – we are living out our deepest identity as unnecessary but meaningful creatures” (84).

**Harvey seems to make a similar point (although on this point I’m not sure we are meaning the same thing), “When we play sport, we are celebrating our freely determined form as these particular creatures through a freely determined rule-governed unnecessary-but-meaningful activity” (93).


“A Brief Theology of Sport” by Lincoln Harvey – Thoughts

Disclaimer: I bought this book.


I love sports! I loved playing them competitively, I enjoy playing them recreationally, and I have three little boys for whom I am their coach, their second biggest fan (can’t compete with mom), and often serve as the replay review booth for backyard disputes (takes some imagination but it works!).

Therefore, I was excited to finally get a chance Lincoln Harvey‘s book on celebrating “sport for what it is without confusing it for what it isn’t” (xv), and I wasn’t disappointed. Harvey has written an excellent book, both easily readable and deeply informative.


Over the next couple of days, I will offer some thoughts on the book but these posts are not meant to be a full review. Today will focus on two central ideas stemming from the book and tomorrow will ask one question about the book.

For Harvey, sport is “a subspecies of play” (70). Harvey describes play as “a fundamentally unnecessary-yet-meaningful activity” and explains what distinguishes sport from other types of play is it involves physical prowess and rules (60-72). Most important for Harvey’s theology of sport, however, is the basic characteristic “unnecessary-yet-meaningful activity.” Drawing from the Christian understanding of creation, specifically humanity was created by God as “unnecessary-yet-meaningful” creatures,* Harvey suggests “that when we play – unnecessary but meaningful – we are living out our deepest identity as unnecessary but meaningful creatures” (84). Thus, Christians can celebrate sports as “The Liturgical Celebration of Contingency” (88-96).**

With these basic ideas in mind, I want to draw attention to two ways Harvey helps us think about sports as Christians. First, sports is not worship. Although the two have a “strong family resemblance” (93), Harvey explains, “Worship is the liturgical celebration of who God is with us. Sport is the liturgical celebration of who we are by ourselves” (94). This distinction, which I will question somewhat in my next post, helps us to see one way sports is tainted by sin. Rather, than being a celebration of who we are as God’s “unnecessary but meaningful creation” sport can easily become self-worship. Harvey writes, “Because the Fall impacts our deepest identity, our playfulness is corrupted. Instead of being non-serious, we instead take ourselves too seriously, even to the extent of deluding ourselves that we are God” (103). This advice is needed in the church today and especially for parents, like myself, who are raising children who love sports. We must be able to teach our children how to rightly relate to the sports they play and perhaps even more importantly have the language to teach ourselves how to rightly relate to two of the biggest idols in the church, our children and the sports our children play.

The second distinction is that sports is not a civilized form of war. Here I want to quote Harvey at length:

Sport is often thought to be a civilized form of war, a domesticated outlet for the pre-programmed genetic struggle for survival in the cultivated terrain of civil society, But, because the state of (original) nature is not war but peace, we can say that this way of seeing things is upside down and back to front. Of course, our fallenness means we are constantly at war with ourselves, which makes war seem primary to our twisted minds. But on a properly Christian reading of creation, war would be much better understood as the a fallen state of sport rather than sport being seen as a domesticated form of war.

Though I have thought a lot about the ways I engage in sports as a Christian, I have not given as much thought to how I define sport. After reading Harvey’s book, I started to listening to the ways I, and those around me, talk about sports, and war terminology is by far the most commonly used descriptions. Thus, regardless of whether or not I knew it sports as domesticated war is my default definition of sport. Harvey’s book has made me aware of the fundamental ways this definition shapes the way I talk about and engage in sports. It has also made me begin questioning these ideas and changing the ways I think about sports, talk about sports, and engage in sports.

In the end, the highest praise I can offer the book is that it has changed the way I engage in a very crucial part of my family’s life. Thus, Harvey’s description of the theological task rings true as he has given “voice to reality by speaking in tune with the event of God’s own self-introduction in Jesus Christ” (xiii).


*”Creation may not be serious, but it is not meaningless. Instead, the Church believes that we are created freely out of nothing and for something” (81).

**This quick recap cannot do justice to all of Harvey’s ideas. My suggestion is if you find it interesting read the book!


Book Review: The Slavery of Death by Richard Beck


At some point during Richard Beck’s The Slavery of Death, I found my reading transformed into worship. Beck, a regular blogger at Experimental Theology, is a skilled thinker who has mastered the art of integrating theology and psychology. This gift is nowhere more manifest than in this book, self-described as an attempt to “bring modern psychological science into conversation with Orthodox theology to illuminate what the writer of Hebrews describes as ‘slavery to the fear of death.’” (xiii) Beck’s thesis is that the fear of death, observed and analyzed by modern psychology, has demonically enslaved humanity and ensures that we will live selfish and violent lives. Salvation is thus found when death is defeated through Christ’s resurrection and his people, no longer afraid, are free to love sacrificially.

Beck’s work, a relatively short read, is divided into three parts. Part 1 (“The Last Enemy”) lays out the theological foundation for his thesis and explores the Orthodox understanding of sin and atonement. He highlights the Orthodox tradition of emphasizing death as the ultimate enemy of mankind. It is our mortality, inherited at birth, which produces in us the desire to grasp onto our lives and leads us into sin. Part 2 (“Held in Slavery by Their Fear of Death”) is Beck’s description of this slavery to the fear of death and its role in producing the devil’s works from a psychological perspective. He artfully expounds on the distinction between basic and neurotic anxiety as he illustrates the power which death holds over humanity. Beck draws frequently from the work Arthur McGill and Ernest Becker as he explores this specific interaction between psychology and the Scriptures. Part 3 (“There is No Fear in Love”) is Beck’s conclusion that it is love which leads to an emancipation fromthe fear of death. Further, Beck helpfully flushes out examples of how that liberation might be accomplished. He states, “To be set free from the slavery to the fear of death is to be liberated from self-interest in the act of genuine love. Thus the sign of Christ’s victory in our lives over sin, death, and the devil is the experience and expression of love. This is resurrection and life.” (24)

This book is both illuminating and provocative. It is a very brief read, which makes it all the more accessible. I highly recommend it, particularly to anyone interested in:

  • the relevance of Eastern Orthodox theology (including the Christus Victor theory of atonement)
  • the relevance of psychology to Christian theology
  • a thoughtful exploration of the meaning of Hebrews 2:14-15
  • a pastorally practical and theologically rich guide to living a life of resurrection

I received this book from Wipf & Stock (Cascade Books) in exchange for a fair review. 

In the Mail: Richard Beck’s “The Slavery of the Death” | Thanks @wipfandstock

Look what came in the mail today (courtesy of Cascade Books / Wipf and Stock)!

The Slavery of Death by Richard Beck


Even before I started blogging here at Cataclysmic, I was a daily reader of Richard Beck’s blog: Experimental Theology. I’m a BIG fan. Some time ago he did a series of posts called “The Slavery of Death” on the interplay between death and Christian living (utilizing somewhat equal parts of Eastern Orthodox theology and existential psychology) that I thoroughly enjoyed. In fact, I referenced these posts multiple times during sermon prep. The last time I needed some good sermon-fodder from Beck, I went to the blog and was frustratingly unable to find this series. After some digging around in the comments section, I saw that he had taken them offline because of a publishing deal he had signed for the material. That Sunday’s sermon might have suffered, but I was excited to be able to get my hands on the posts in the form of a book.  And now that I’ve got my very own copy to review for the blog, I can’t wait to read it and am looking forward to sharing my reflections!