PDA

View Full Version : May Christians Dance? (Jas. H . Brooks - 1869)


DanceMentor
02-28-2004, 04:09 PM
Dancing in partnership has really only become acceptable and popular in the last 100 years. Take a look at this excerpt from "May Christians Dance?" written in 1869. I hope not to cause any sort of religious debate here. I simply want to present the perspective showing how the church did not condone dancing (in partnership) until recent times.

Let us review for a moment the ground over which we have passed in the progress of this investigation. After stating the precise question to be discussed, noticing the apologies or excuses that are usually presented by the advocates of the dance, and examining the character of the witnesses that appear in its defence, I brought forward twelve arguments against it.

The first of these is found in the fact that dancing, as at present conducted, is forbidden by those passages of God's word which require us to "abstain from all appearance of evil." Second. It is condemned by those passages which charge us to "be not conformed to this world." Third. It was shown that the practice increases this dangerous relish for the world, while it leads to the neglect of the ordinances of religion and to evil associations. Fourth. It was proved to be inconsistent with the fundamental principles of a true Church and of church membership. Fifth. It is in direct conflict with the duties, privileges, and tastes of sincere Christians as they are set forth in the sacred Scriptures. Sixth. It is a source of grief and cause of offence to many of the disciples of our Lord, and is therefore clearly unlawful. Seventh. If "there is no wrong in dancing," as you affirmed, then no wrong would be done although your minister and ruling elders and all other members of the church should rush into the frantic whirl of gayety; but this you could not tolerate for a moment. Eighth. It is forbidden by those Scriptures which declare that the body of the Christian is the temple of the Holy Ghost, and that he is bound to live with reference to the glory of God whether he eats, or drinks, or whatsoever he does. Ninth. It invariably destroys the influence of professed Christians for good. Tenth. It is a source of unspeakable injury to those who are not Christians. Eleventh. It furnishes the most important test, perhaps, that can be made in our day, of the willingness of the young disciple to deny self in conformity with the example and precepts of the Saviour. Twelfth. Fashionable dancing, into which every form of the amusement is certain to run with the great majority of those who indulge in it at all, is essentially immoral and licentious.

Even after this was written, dancers of the early 20th century had an uphill battle showing that dancing was a classy thing to do. :D

jon
02-28-2004, 05:01 PM
Dancing in partnership has really only become acceptable and popular in the last 100 years. Take a look at this excerpt from "May Christians Dance?" written in 1869.

This stuff is cyclical and varies by group. There are Xian sects today which oppose dancing. There was lots of dancing done in the 1800s, albeit not in certain religious circles.

pygmalion
02-28-2004, 05:44 PM
And there are plenty of Christian denominations today that don't dance. Really, think about it. With all the threads we've had in dance forums about dancing and sexuality, it's not surprising that some religious groups would find partner dancing too dangerous to tolerate.

And look at the date on this article. 1869? True, partner dancing had been around a while, but not really all that long. This wasn't all that far removed from the days of the minuet and all those large, boy can't possibly touch the girl dances. Think how scandalous the Viennese waltz was when it was introduced -- not that long before 1869 -- in sophisticated upper class circles. (Early 1800 or 1810's, right?) It only makes sense that it would take a while for the social values of the rich and famous to trickle down to the commoners. Hmm.

Just my thoughts. Probably wrong. What does anyone else think?

jon
02-28-2004, 05:56 PM
And there are plenty of Christian denominations today that don't dance. Really, think about it. With all the threads we've had in dance forums about dancing and sexuality, it's not surprising that some religious groups would find partner dancing too dangerour to tolerate.

I don't see anything in that quote specific to partner dancing.

Of course the classic fringe anti-dancing screed is "From the Ballroom to Hell" (the 1892 Faulkner book, that is, not the 1992 book partly inspired thereof - though that looks interesting as well). Shrug. Viennese Waltz is scandalous. No wait, actually it's Lindy Hop that's disgusting. No wait, actually freaking is immoral. Lather, rinse, repeat.

mhgroove
02-28-2004, 05:56 PM
"Let them praise his name with Dancing" Psalm 149:3

"You turned my wailing into dancing" Psalm 30:5

"A time to mourn and a time to dance" Ecclesiastes 3:4

I include the scriptures from the Old Testament to show dancing does have its place in a Christian's life. A great link to read about Christianity in Salsa is Edie the Salsafreak at salsafreak.com about this topic.

I must admit I'm a new Christian and I thought this would be an issue that I would have to give up dancing. But, the word shows that dancing has acceptance in a Christian's life and if I dance knowing that Lord knows my true intentions...it's okay to dance!!!

pygmalion
02-28-2004, 06:01 PM
I don't see anything in that quote specific to partner dancing.

Good point, jon. There isn't.


Of course the classic fringe anti-dancing screed is "From the Ballroom to Hell" (the 1892 Faulkner book, that is, not the 1992 book partly inspired thereof - though that looks interesting as well). Shrug. Viennese Waltz is scandalous. No wait, actually it's Lindy Hop that's disgusting. No wait, actually freaking is immoral. Lather, rinse, repeat.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

In all seriousness, though, I went to school with several friends from various denominations that didn't find dancing proper. Not at all. And this was long after 1869. Not sure why. mhgroove's quotes are right out of the Good Book. But then, I didn't think to ask them at the time. I was into freaking. Rinse. Lather. Repeat. :wink: :wink:

DanceMentor
02-28-2004, 06:22 PM
I don't believe partner dancing with leading and following was common until after 1900. There were sequence dances, where a specific routine was given by the host, but I don't believe partner dancing as we know it today was done before 1900.

pygmalion
02-28-2004, 08:44 PM
I found an article on dancesport.uk that talks about Viennese waltz. It doesn't mention partner versus sequence dancing, although I'll ask my teacher, the dance historian, as soon as I can. What I find interesting about this, is the references to scandal assciated with the dance.

The origins of Viennese Waltz are dated back to 12th/13th centuries and found in the dance called "Nachtanz". The Viennese waltz originally comes from Bavaria and used to be called the "German". However, other people question this origin of the Viennese waltz. An article which appeared in the Paris magazine "La Patrie"(THe Fatherland) on 17 January 1882, claimed that the waltz was first danced in Paris in 1178, not under the name waltz but as the Volta from the Provence. Presumably this is a dance in 3/4 rhythm, which the French regard as the forerunner of the Viennese waltz.

Probably the first waltz melody was "Das Lied vom lieben Augustin" written in 1679 in 3/4 time. It was introduced in Pairs in 1775, but it took some time before it became popular. In 1813 Mr Byron condemned the waltz as being unchaste. In 1816 the waltz was also accepted in England. But that the struggle against it was not over yet. In 1833, a "good behaviour" book was published by Miss Celbart and according to it, although it was allowed for married ladies to perform this dance, she called it "a dance of too loose character for maidens to perform".

I guess this leaves all the single girls out. :shock: :lol:

Bronzestudent
03-06-2004, 05:25 PM
{edited by DanceMentor}
Sorry bronzestudent, but your reply caused quite a stir. I am choosing to remove the text...

but please hear this...

It sounds like you have a great interest in Christianity and i hope your life might be a good example that will inspire others.

It is my desire that this edit will not affect your desire to be a part of the dance forums.

Thanks,
David
{end edit}

pygmalion
03-06-2004, 07:14 PM
Yes, Bronzestudent, I agree that there are some parallels between the husband/wife dynamic expressed in Ephesians and the lead/follow dynamic in partner dancing.

Isn't it interesting how the cultural perspective on dancing has changed since 1869, too? Back then, biblical references were given to show the evils of dancing; today, many Christians see the beauty of dance and give scriptural supports for their view. What has changed? Society's view of dance. Interesting.

HothouseSalsero
03-06-2004, 07:54 PM
Ephesians is the same book that accepts the institution of slavery and exhorts Christian slaves to obey their (human) masters "as though you were serving Christ." (Ephesians 6:5-8)

pygmalion
03-06-2004, 08:03 PM
You bring up a good point, HotHouseSalsero. The Bible has been interpreted in many different ways throughout history. And while I'd love to get into a discussion about it (I'm a minister's daughter, and can quote the Good Book with the best of them LOL) , I think I'm going to decline.

If we get into a religious debate here, it could possibly lead to the kind of negativity that DF is famous for avoiding. So let's not. Okay? Seriously, no offense to anyone, but I can't see that conversation going anywhere good or productive, from a dance point of view.

DanceMentor
03-06-2004, 08:14 PM
We have people from all over the world with differing religions. I want to avoid getting sidetracked with a topic might be better debated elsewhere. I apologize, but I need to lock this topic. PM me if you have any comments.

Thanks,
David