Actors Taking God's Name in Vain?

[clarkpm2]

I am a student of the theatre and looking to go into the business after I get my degree. At times we are required to read or act out scenes in class in which a character takes God’s Name in vain or uses his Name as an obscenity. This also goes for productions of plays.

Would one be committing mortal sin by playing a character that takes God’s Name in vain onstage? I hear a lot of opinions about this (Some saying its nothing, others saying to find a new line of work) but they don’t back them up with Church teaching of moral theology.

Perhaps its just scrupulosity?

 

[St_Francis]

I have been really upset lately that it is all right, apparently, to take the Name or Our Lord in vain, but all the shock if someone says a mere vulgarity!

I’m sorry I can’t help you with your problem; I was terrible in school plays! But I would just exain that I can’t say that and offer to substitute something else. It may not work because there’s some idea of artistic integrity that made it so someone could not buy a DVD movie and send it to a place to have the off-color bits edited out. i don’t get that at all.

 

[Leegal]

I am a student of the theatre and looking to go into the business after I get my degree. At times we are required to read or act out scenes in class in which a character takes God’s Name in vain or uses his Name as an obscenity. This also goes for productions of plays.

Would one be committing mortal sin by playing a character that takes God’s Name in vain onstage? I hear a lot of opinions about this (Some saying its nothing, others saying to find a new line of work) but they don’t back them up with Church teaching of moral theology.

Perhaps its just scrupulosity?

You are going to get two answers – yes and no.

I say that you are acting a part, written by a playwright – you cannot change the wording so the sin is not yours if you use the script as written. The other choice is not to act in the play, but that seems extreme since that’s your chosen field. It would not be good for you to opt out of what’s required of your profession, even if you then became an agent, producer or playwrite yourself.

However, you might post this in the “ask the apologetics” section so you get the definitive answer.

 

[oldcatdave]

I am a student of the theatre and looking to go into the business after I get my degree. At times we are required to read or act out scenes in class in which a character takes God’s Name in vain or uses his Name as an obscenity. This also goes for productions of plays.

Would one be committing mortal sin by playing a character that takes God’s Name in vain onstage? I hear a lot of opinions about this (Some saying its nothing, others saying to find a new line of work) but they don’t back them up with Church teaching of moral theology.

Perhaps its just scrupulosity?

I can’t believe what I am reading. Are you THAT stupid?.. that you can’t figure this out for yourself with common sense? Okay, I’ll spell it out for you. It is a mortal sin to take the Lord’s name in vain whether you are speaking from a script or from your own anger. The Third Commandment prohibits taking the Lord’s name in vain if you need a Bible reference.

 

[DexUK]

(Edited)

Hold on there fella… you may or may not be right, but calling someone stupid isn’t exactly a friendly way to say it.

The answer has to be more nuanced. This is my two penn’orth…

It really does depend on the context in which a ‘blasphemy’ is uttered. I could be talking about a blasphemy and give an example of it without actually committing the blasphemy myself.

Similarly, a character in a play might be designed to be unsympathetic and therefore be seen to be blaspheming and being reproached for it. In such a situation the play becomes an illustrative example of blasphemy being not good, and does not represent an actual blasphemy.

Finally, to blaspheme one has to have the intent to blaspheme: one has to wilfully use the name of God in vain for the purpose of using it in vain, rather than simply speaking a line in a play for the purpose of speaking that line. There is a difference.

Whether or not it’s a good idea as a whole for the blasphemy to be contained within a play is another matter, but the play is a fiction, which makes the blasphemy a fiction as well. What is left is a matter of taste, and whether an actor pursues a role in a bad-taste production is down to his or her sensibilities.

 

[Leegal]

Whether or not it’s a good idea as a whole for the blasphemy to be contained within a play is another matter, but the play is a fiction, which makes the blasphemy a fiction as well. What is left is a matter of taste, and whether an actor pursues a role in a bad-taste production is down to his or her sensibilities.

But the OP is a student in a drama class – he/she has to do what the assignment says or not take the course. Not taking the course may mean not completing the degree, being a course shy or not completing that requirement.

I see no sin in taking the class if it’s required and following the script as written.

 

[oldcatdave]

Hold on there fella… you may or may not be right, but calling someone stupid isn’t exactly a friendly way to say it.

The answer has to be more nuanced. This is my two penn’orth…

It really does depend on the context in which a ‘blasphemy’ is uttered. I could be talking about a blasphemy and give an example of it without actually committing the blasphemy myself.

Similarly, a character in a play might be designed to be unsympathetic and therefore be seen to be blaspheming and being reproached for it. In such a situation the play becomes an illustrative example of blasphemy being not good, and does not represent an actual blasphemy.

Finally, to blaspheme one has to have the intent to blaspheme: one has to wilfully use the name of God in vain for the purpose of using it in vain, rather than simply speaking a line in a play for the purpose of speaking that line. There is a difference.

Whether or not it’s a good idea as a whole for the blasphemy to be contained within a play is another matter, but the play is a fiction, which makes the blasphemy a fiction as well. What is left is a matter of taste, and whether an actor pursues a role in a bad-taste production is down to his or her sensibilities.

Well, well, well. I see we have a clown running around here tonight. I bet you even got a red light for a nose that blinks. But I am getting off topic. You may not be stupid, but you are ignorant of what is right and wrong which is just as bad. You need a good ole nun to whack your knuckles till you wake up. What part of the Third Commandment don’t you get? Even a 4 year old can comprehend it. Your excuses for taking the Lord’s name in vain show what kind of Catholic you are. Liberal Communism seems more up your alley.

 

[Leegal]

Well, well, well. I see we have a clown running around here tonight. I bet you even got a red light for a nose that blinks. But I am getting off topic. You may not be stupid, but you are ignorant of what is right and wrong which is just as bad. You need a good ole nun to whack your knuckles till you wake up. What part of the Third Commandment don’t you get? Even a 4 year old can comprehend it. Your excuses for taking the Lord’s name in vain show what kind of Catholic you are. Liberal Communism seems more up your alley.

Time to check the terms of service here.

You can begin here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1892098&postcount=1

 

[Incomplete]

But the OP is a student in a drama class – he/she has to do what the assignment says or not take the course. Not taking the course may mean not completing the degree, being a course shy or not completing that requirement.

I see no sin in taking the class if it’s required and following the script as written.

But if we base it not being “sin” on what he’s required to do in a course, where do we draw the line?

Remember that even if he is playing a role, if the character is blaspheming, it is coming through the mouth of the actor. And people hear the words, if he acts it well, as blasphemy.

There is so much of it in the media that people say these words without even thinking anymore, and this just adds to it.

 

[Leegal]

But if we base it not being “sin” on what he’s required to do in a course, where do we draw the line?

Remember that even if he is playing a role, if the character is blaspheming, it is coming through the mouth of the actor. And people hear the words, if he acts it well, as blasphemy.

There is so much of it in the media that people say these words without even thinking anymore, and this just adds to it.

As DexUK pointed out – the play is fiction. The person does not have the intent to sin – he/she is playing a fictional role.

But remember, I also said that they would get both yes and no answers – so the best way, so as not to devolve this into some disagreement, is that he/she submit the question to the Apologetics – or check with a priest.

 

[oldcatdave]

But the OP is a student in a drama class – he/she has to do what the assignment says or not take the course. Not taking the course may mean not completing the degree, being a course shy or not completing that requirement.

I see no sin in taking the class if it’s required and following the script as written.

So it’s okay to sell your soul out to make a buck as an actor? If an actor takes the name of the Lord in vain he may be able to self justify it in his own mind, but he is influencing all the people who see the act (movie?) to sin. Also is it not going to be a sin for Catholic doctors to perform abortions if Obama get the laws passed to make abortions to be mandatorily performed by Catholic doctors in Catholic hospitals? After all the script (or law) is just being followed as written. Oh, but the student may not be able to complete his/her degree if the course is not taken. Sometimes we have to choose to sin or not to sin. Let’s see now…do I sin and take the $$$$ or do I do the right thing? It seems to be a prevelent view here tonight to take the $$$$$ and shun what is right. What good will the $$$$$$ do you on Judgement Day?

 

[kwitz]

So a Christian can’t play a bad guy? According to some of the logic I’m reading here, it would be immoral to play the roll of Nero in a play/movie about early Christianity? How can you tell that story without someone playing the part of protagonist?

Kris

 

[Incomplete]

As DexUK pointed out – the play is fiction. The person does not have the intent to sin – he/she is playing a fictional role.

But remember, I also said that they would get both yes and no answers – so the best way, so as not to devolve this into some disagreement, is that he/she submit the question to the Apologetics – or check with a priest.

He did not have the intent, but sometimes we do sin without intent. For example, we would see people who lie as committing a sin even if they were atheist, so there was no intent to sin. It’s just mortal sin we do not do without intent (so if he had not questioned it, it definitely would not have been mortal sin…and I do realize that he was questioning mortal sin, not venial.)

Beyond that, if we say it is OK because there is no intent to sin, we open it up to all sorts of behavior being acceptable because we didn’t mean it as sin.

I think the question of whether it is sin at all is much more complex than to say there is no intent. It is a fictional role, but he is the one saying the words, and he is a very real person. And it does lead to other people hearing those words, and if he acts well, to feeling it. To some, in a sense, it is a form of scandal, as he will be among the many who say those words now. And he won’t be saying those words just once, but in rehearsal after rehearsal after rehearsal, plus in performance. And what of his future career, what else will he be asked? Where does he draw the line, and why?

My main point, though, was that we can’t write it off just because it is a requirement for a class.

I do agree that he should consult elsewhere, not here.

 

[Incomplete]

So a Christian can’t play a bad guy? According to some of the logic I’m reading here, it would be immoral to play the roll of Nero in a play/movie about early Christianity? How can you tell that story without someone playing the part of protagonist?

Kris

You can tell a story, you can be a bad guy. But somewhere you have to draw the line in both your words and actions.

To portray a sinner is one thing. To be asked to do something sinful is another.

To be asked to portray someone who kills, for example, is a portrayal. Everybody knows the person is not actually killing. But if you are asked to actually kill, you shouldn’t do it.

If you are asked to do a nude scene, should you, just because you are acting? Maybe I’m wrong, but I’m guessing not. And that’s just the kind of decision he could reasonably be asked to make in his career.

I think he should outright ask if he can substitute another word. It might be allowed.

 

[Catholic90]

You are studying this, you are taking a class, you are playing a role, you are pretending to be someone you are not. That is what acting is. YOU are not really saying this; your CHARACTER is saying it.

 

[oldcatdave]

So a Christian can’t play a bad guy? According to some of the logic I’m reading here, it would be immoral to play the roll of Nero in a play/movie about early Christianity? How can you tell that story without someone playing the part of protagonist?

Kris

The word is role not roll. Split hairs all you want to then. Curse God and be happy because you really didn’t mean it and and it was in the script and and you were only reading it and and you really needed the degree and and the future jobs. I wash my hands of all of you.

 

[Catholic90]

(Edited)

The character is cursing. The actor is not cursing. Two separate and distinct entities.

Who do you suggest play the antagonists if not actors?

 

[Incomplete]

The character is cursing. The actor is not cursing. Two separate and distinct entities.

Who do you suggest play the antagonists if not actors?

We used to have antagonists all the time without cursing.

Where do you draw the line with what is and isn’t immoral in acting, and why?

 

[Catholic90]

We used to have antagonists all the time without cursing.

Where do you draw the line with what is and isn’t immoral in acting, and why?

I never said the antagonists had to curse. I did point out that the character was saying the words, not the person.

A character can pretend to hurt someone, fight, etc. It’s all pretend. Fight choreography is quite amazing. My son’s school had a fight choreographer come to show the high school actors how to stage a fight and make it look very real without anyone getting hurt. It was amazing!

I don’t think anyone has to act out sex scenes. Leave that to the imagination. Having the camera fade away to the window or over a lake leaves the imagination working.

Anything else - act away.

 

[Incomplete]

I never said the antagonists had to curse. I did point out that the character was saying the words, not the person.

A character can pretend to hurt someone, fight, etc. It’s all pretend. Fight choreography is quite amazing. My son’s school had a fight choreographer come to show the high school actors how to stage a fight and make it look very real without anyone getting hurt. It was amazing!

I don’t think anyone has to act out sex scenes. Leave that to the imagination. Having the camera fade away to the window or over a lake leaves the imagination working.

Anything else - act away.

But he is saying curse words. If he is “acting” sex, is he really having sex, or is it the character? Why is it ok to curse if you’re just acting, but not to have sex if you’re just acting? I’m really not trying to be adversarial, and I realize it sounds like I am. I think this is something worth thinking about.

See, acting a fight is, as you said, just acting. Nobody actually got hurt. If they had deliberately hurt each other, it would have hurt in real life, not just in fiction.

So to me it seems an appropriate thing would be, if you shouldn’t do it in real life, don’t do it as an actor. If you are pretending to hurt someone, pretending to steel, pretending to kill, pretending to do drugs, you aren’t really doing those things. But if you are saying certain words, you are really truly saying them.