And this is the bible college of all bible colleges?

Telling.

This is not your father's fundamentalism.

No, but it is someone's boyfriend's. Makes one wonder if the fine arts departments have a neat little lavender tryst going on. If so, they must be getting the real laughs, and the fundies are looking like total rubes.

Clearwater Christian College exists to provide an excellent liberal arts education centered on God's Word.

There was a day in which I would, or at least could have, laughed at the insulting bawdiness of this sophomoric prank.

But, I wonder if people who have really tasted of the same grace that Cyprian, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Edwards tasted could actually countenance this slight against Christ.

...as I listen to the Cambridge Choir sing "Let all mortal flesh keep silent"...
fresh from St. James Liturgy. It is a difference like between that of night and day, my friends.

This is like an epidemic.

It is like a consequence.

http://www.sharperiron.org/2006/11/08/compartment-rich-discernment-poor/

I offer no comment. Perhaps Dissidens will take it from here.

http://www.sharperiron.org/showthread.php?t=3921&page=1&pp=7

"Much Ado About Nothing"? "Mountain out of a molehill"?

I find the fact that our fundamental Christian colleges are featuring this play and the fundy response to it unbelievably sad.

Do I pray for mercy on us, or for judgment to "begin at the house of God"?

Just out of curiosity I emailed a friend I know on the staff of MBBC about their performance of ‘The Importance of Being Earnest' I asked about their reasoning in performing a play by Wilde and if they had edited it.

Their response.
I'll address the last question first. Yes, the play is a public domain piece and has been edited significantly, to the same extent we edit Shakespeare and other classical pieces of literature with offensive content. Most historical literature as well as current pieces present the same challenge, and we carefully consider the interpretation of the pieces we use during the preparation and production process. As to the first question, traditionally Maranatha has not used literature only written by authors with a Christian ethos or lifestyle, although it would be wonderful if such literature were readily available. The first plays presented at Maranatha from 1968-1970 were The Merchant of Venice, Romeo & Juliet, Taming of the Shrew, A Midsummer Night's Dream, As You Like It in that order and all by Shakespeare. All call for extensive editing prior to production. As I am sure you are aware, unedited, Shakespeare would not be at all acceptable for our audience. Research varies, but much has been made of late of Shakespeare's unacceptable life style; however, his works have merit as pieces of literature and continue to be produced on many conservative campuses with a cultural breadth component to their mission. Through the years Maranatha has used a rotation of types of literature it produces ranging from religious to comedy to classical literature. The Importance of Being Earnest was viewed in the same light as other classical pieces of literature and produced with that in mind. r /> End of their response.

"..it would be wonderful if such literature were readily available."

Hmmm? Makes me think! Maybe there is a reason why such literature for the theater is not available. What's next? -- Heavily edited interpretive dance, because no one has written any for the fudamentalist crowd?

"..it would be wonderful if such literature were readily available."

I wonder how many times they've put on a play by TS Eliot as opposed to a play by Oscar Wilde.

Unk...shall we propose "Murder in the Cathedral"? I think the little choruses would be a tad difficult without the requisite talent, and every fundy and his brother would egg the actors for the play's pro-Romanist stance. At least the ethos would be more in line with the alleged mission of institutions in question.

"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried."
-G.K. Chesterton

How appropriate that this is being discussed here.

Again, what we get at Remonstrans is criticism heavy in innuendo and one-liners but short in substance.

Makes one wonder if the fine arts departments have a neat little lavender tryst going on.

Shakepeare's alleged evil "lifestyle" has been fabricated by the usual suspects on the Left and is at best uncertain. Wilde, on the other hand, was certainly a homosexual. Maranatha's reliance on liberal revisionism to help prop up its unconscionable decision is telling. Fundamentalists are short on substance and inconsistant on standards. Dating regulations on Fundie college campuses make even the EPA appear lax, but plays ridiculing Christian morality are forced upon the students. How very sad.

Austin,

My comments should not be confused with the opinions of Remonstrans. I was merely making an observation. It was not innuendo, it was a statement. It was the presentation of a possible scenario. It was not presented as a foregone conclusion.

To me the actions of these two institutions are indefensible except for the possibility of ignorance. This is NOT the sort of thing a Bible college or Christian college should countenance. It is not slander or gossip to wonder out loud what might be the intended motivations for such a thing. One more thing, they are not short on substance. I wondered out loud. I did not state it as fact. What, are we not now allowed to ask questions and expect answers?

So now we take a very high road. Something harmless is apparently acceptable. Harmless, innocuous, vacuous, vain - what next? Google this play, check around the web, even go to your public library; and you will find that this play is not such an innocent farce. Yes, here we are again, elevating the cultural appetites of college coeds with the likes of a flaming fag and his play which supports his ideals. The difference between many of the serious artistic works that have been alluded to and many of Wilde's is the connection to the lifestyle of the artist. I suppose we can all start watching "A Clockwork Orange" with the TV Guardian set to 'Strict.' I mean, after all, it is a critique of Skinner's behaviorism, it involves a cute little Anglican priest, and we can ignore its assault on the senses by 'objectionable elements.' Come on, even if a Christian college or Bible college had a first rate orchestra (and none do), I don't think it would be wise to waste the effort on Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring." Is there nothing better than Wilde?

Hello out there! Can we imagine the Apostle Paul getting his kicks from a whimsical homosexual farce (yes, that is what it is)? Can we imagine Augustine delighting in the sorts of things from which he believed that the grace of God had rescued him? Can we imagine Luther laying down the flagellum to rest in grace and then have some good ole' fun with such a subtext? If you can, you are perverse. Will we stop the playing around with what we believe to be harmless long enough to hear the hushed snickers and loud guffaws of the homosexual communities in Milwaukee and St. Pete/Tampa/Clearwater?

Of course, some of us might have some objections to the medium. There is a difference between reading the play and viewing it. Those of you from the 60's generation should dust off your copy of [I]Understanding Media[/I], and you might remember this assertion from your Junior year Communications professor. I suppose this will classify me as an elitist and by some, of all things, a racist. The former nomenclature might stick; the latter, not likely.

But, hey, when ya' have an ethic that is based on keeping outside of 20 years behind the current culture, this play isn't so bad. It is much older than 20 years.

Here we are again, sidestepping a real issue with an accusation that someone might be misrepresented. Yet, we still have two performances of the same play that need more explanation. Further, it just might warrant an investigation on why this just happened to take place in two sister institutions at the same time. One instance is a statistical out-lier. Two instances is certainly probable, but it should set up some red flags.

You may be dismissive and you may not like what you call innuendo, but is this the sort of "Christian service" you'd like to see go through the fire at the judgment?

The Lord will come and not be slow
His footsteps cannot err;
Before Him righteousness shall go,
His royal harbinger.

Truth from the earth, like to a flower,
shall bud and blossom then;
And justice, from her heavenly bower
shall come to mortal men.

Rise, God, judge Thou the earth in might,
this wicked earth redress;
For Thou art He who shall by right
the nations all possess.

For great Thou art, and wonders great
by Thy strong hand are done;
Thou in Thy everlasting seat
remainest God alone.

-John Milton

A gay actor playing the part of a Christian Missionary is blasphemy.

Christian college students putting on a play that came from the heart of a homosexual is...enlightening?

And Christians are so enamored with Wilde because he was open with the thoughts of his heart?

Have bible colleges sunk so deep in hypocrisy that they are taking lessons from a homosexual on being earnest?

There is sad irony on so many levels here.

Here we are again, sidestepping a real issue with an accusation that someone might be misrepresented.

I'm interested in engaging the issue. In the Sharper Iron thread "a hungry soul" linked to above ( http://www.sharperiron.org/showthread.php?t=3921 ), I've written two posts so far explaining why I do not think it is terrible that Christian colleges are performing this play. I would love to know where anyone thinks I err.

I already answered it, your sophistries notwithstanding:

Can we imagine the Apostle Paul getting his kicks from a whimsical homosexual farce (yes, that is what it is)? Can we imagine Augustine delighting in the sorts of things from which he believed that the grace of God had rescued him? Can we imagine Luther laying down the flagellum to rest in grace and then have some good ole' fun with such a subtext? If you can, you are perverse. Will we stop the playing around with what we believe to be harmless long enough to hear the hushed snickers and loud guffaws of the homosexual communities in Milwaukee and St. Pete/Tampa/Clearwater?

I'm sure we can debate the influence of homosexuality in Wilde's writings, but the general perception is that it is considerable.

exlibris, I don't know how to guess what Paul, Augustine, Luther or Jesus would do. It's too easy when people make arguments like that for them just to import their existing assumptions. Instead, I'd rather make the assumptions explicit.

I know homosexuality as a topic appears in some of Wilde's other writings; what I'd like to see is evidence of its being promoted in this play.

Is your principle concern the negative perception of those not in the schools in question, independently of whether that perception is warranted? What I mean by the last phrase is this: should we really care if others are unable to separate the artist from the art?

Austin,

It galls me to be in agreement with these guys, but I am to a certain extent. You ask "should we really care if others are unable to separate the artist from the art?"

I don't know what you think personally, but fundamentalists have made association of the art with the artist one of their strongest arguments against certain music. Whether or not the music is good or whether or not the argument is good, it seems duplicitous to not be willing to make the association in this case. Wouldn't you agree?

And then. . . I don't think it is only about the artist. What about the art itself? Frankly, I'm scratching my head on how the play can be sanitized enough to be played as harmless humor - especially in the context of a Bible College. If it santized like it ought to be then it loses its substance.

I watched the play recently and chuckled all the way through. It wasn't until after the whole thing was done that I started reflecting on what made me laugh. My own depravity was shocking, shocking in the sense that I was thoroughly enjoying the glamorization of things for which Jesus died.

In this case, I'm reminded of a Bible college student that took exception to his leadership on a certain point. They responded by chastizing him about his attitude. Finally, one venerable old man stood and said, "the young boy may have an attitude, but he also has a point."

In this case, I think the Dissedens Divines have a point.

I don't know what you think personally, but fundamentalists have made association of the art with the artist one of their strongest arguments against certain music. Whether or not the music is good or whether or not the argument is good, it seems duplicitous to not be willing to make the association in this case. Wouldn't you agree?

If the the producers of the play hold to the philosophy of music that you describe, then they are inconsistent.

My own depravity was shocking, shocking in the sense that I was thoroughly enjoying the glamorization of things for which Jesus died.

Bob, I'm not being obstinate when I say I don't know what you're talking about; the glamorization of what?

I am a Philistine lover of the banjo, but even I see a problem here. Ignoring for the moment the morality of the play itself, it can at least be said that there is a HUGE disconnect between what Fundamentalism teaches about associations and what Fundamentalism does.

I was taught by Fundamentalists that all rock music was wrong, even Christian rock, because of the form's association with rebellion, sex, and drugs. But then I sat in Fundamentalists schools and colleges and listened to opera. I took my music and art appreciation courses at a state school; I knew what opera was all about. I wondered why opera was OK, but rock 'n' roll wasn't.

Such inconsistency causes people to abandon Fundamentalism.

Turning to the morality of the play, I don't believe that the forms themselves necessarily become evil because of associations. I don't have the same moral objection to the theatre that the "Dissidens Divines" do. I do, however, see that this particular play mocks just about every virtue there is. I listen to rock music sometimes in the car- I do not even try to hide that fact- but when songs which mock all that is good and holy come on, I change the channel (this means I'm changing the channel constantly). You do not even have to be a Christian to see that some art and some music is just vile and not worth experiencing. This play is one of them.

And as Bixby just said, to adequately up this play you would have to cut so much out of it that you'd have nothing left, or at least nothing that even resembled the original.

I stumbled across this post just tonight, so I won't respond to any of the comments. (Need to let it sink in) Besides, I'm not quite sure if anyone will look back here again.

Incidentally, I played Jack in CCC's production.

So what are fundamentalist, separatist colleges teaching their students about the theater these days?