The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1894-07-25
There are Dances and Dances.

initely settled by all that is said for
or against the practice. In some de-
nominations the decision is not lett
with Individual members nor decided
by the private opinion of the pastor.
It is simply laid down as one OF the
rules that the communicates shall not
dance on pain Of losing their member,
ship and it would seem to unbiased
lookers-on that this is the easiest So
luton of the difficulty, giving the
church members the choice either to
obey or to seek some communion more
to their liking. But the number OF
sects who thus cut the Gordian knot
by decisive action is but small COM
pared to those who temporize and
yield so far to the social usuage as to
permit dancing under certain, or rath'
er uncertain restrictions.
One of our exchanges, which has a
peculiar fondness for getting up SYM
posia upon various subjects, has re-
Gently published a number Of letters
from eminent divines giving their
views concerning the advisability Of
Christians dancing. There is only
one among the number who has the
courage to speak out plainly and un-
mistakably on the subject utterly con-
demning the practice and giving in
very plain language his reasons for SO
doing. The others seem to agree that
it should be left to the conscience of
church members to decide for them
selves, it being positive Christianity,
not positive church rules, that is
necessary for the real solution Of this
difficulty. At the same time they all
agree that dancing may be a very in
nocent amusement when INDUCED in
to moderate extent by pure-minGed
people. ,,.,,.
In letter written by Phillips
Brooks shortly before his death he
saws: "I would say that 1 do not
think it wrong for a Christian to in
dulge in dancing. For Christian to
indulge in public, promiscuous dan
cling / should deem highly inconsist-
ent and inadvisable, if not absolutely
wrong. But, like other people,
Christians must have recreation. The
20 need it quite as much as the
wicked, and to dance in the family,
in the private parlor and with friends
| is graceful, harmless and innocent
| amusement, and in no way incOnsis-
tent with profession of the Chris
tian religion. Diversion l believe to
be healthful both for the soul and
body, but there are many diversions
| which, while by no means sinful in
themselves, may yet be inexpedient
because, though not temptation to
| us, they may be so to others. If we find
| that any amusement we may indulge
| in, in public is a temptation to
wrong-doing on the part Of others,
| though perfectly harmless to oursel-
| YES, we should unhesitatingly give it
up"
This common sense view of the sub
iect puts the whole discussion in
nutshell, and we see that the question
| is in no way materially different from
that of the propriety Of drinking wine,
playing cards, and doing number of
other things which a Christian may
do if he can indulge himself without
moral injury to himself and others,
but which are not always expedient
because of the influence his example
may have upon other. At the same
time it seems as though anyone of av-
erage intelligence would have no need
to consult any person as to what he or
she ought to do in these matters, since
each Of us can best Judge whether
such amusements are injurious to his
spiritual life or not. And if one is
really in earnest about religious things
he would find it very small sacrifice
to give up dancing. or card playing or
anything which seemed to be In the
slightest degree harmful to his souls
health.
In Bishop Brooks letter he reviews
briefly the history Of dancing from
the earliest recorded times, when it
was used by men to stimulate them
| to war like deeds, or else as an ex-
preston of the religious feeling and
he mentioned David's grace Of atti.
tude, upon the return of the Ark OF
the Lord, as an instance of its en-
ployment for the better purpose. 1t
seems to our modern ideas that David
might have found more digni6ed
and appropriate way Of expressing his
feelings, and we have always sympa-
thized with Michal in tie annoyance
she felt when she saw her husband
dancing before the Ark but it is a
case Of "other times, other manners,
we suppose, though We are, very
| glad that our public rejoicing on
State occasions do not require our
Chief Executive to initiate David S
example.
The nations of antiquity, however,
did not long con6ne dancing to solemn
| occasions Of state and religion they
soon discovered in it means OF
amusement, although the better classes
had more dignity and self-respect
than to indulge in it themselves:
Slaves and hired dancers furnished
their amusement, as they do in most
Eastern countries to the present time,
and the stately men and languid wo-
men Of those days would as soon have
thought of trying to initiate their
iugglers and .acrobats as their dancers.
Even yet, in spite Of our having been
81 long accustomed to the sight, and,
Notwithstanding all that has been
said of the grace and beauties of mod
ern dancers, there is something gro
tesuue in watching a number Of men
and women solemnly twirling around
ball room, like q set Of Turkish der
wishes, and the absurdity Of the sight
| is redoubled if the spectator happens
to be so placed that he cannot hear the
music.
But if the question Of moderate and
modest dancing be one that SO much
disturbs the tender consciences OF
Christians, what is to be said about
their frequenting places Of amuse-
ment where the stage dances of the
present time are exhibited A good
many of those who concede that a
| dono;no Christian "a an anomaly have