Rabelais & Classroom Evangelism

Hi Everyone :)

So yesterday was my first presentation of the term. It was a 15min individual presentation on Rabelais' Abbey of Theleme for a Utopian Studies course. Those were the only parameters I was given. No box. No question to answer or topic to address. I was literally given the green light to take this in any direction I wanted to as long as I had done adequate research to back up my work.

SO...

I decided to go with the minority (Who's surprised???) and I chose a fairly controversial angle. Keep in mind that I am speaking in a classroom setting in a nation that is 96% catholic and that out of the 10 other people in the classroom, 3 come from buddhist backgrounds, one I don't know about, and the rest were raised Catholic - and most of them have actively chosen a life of agnosticism or atheism...

so what do I decide?

I argue that instead of being the sarcastic, bawdy, carnivalesque, critical utopia that the majority of academia believes, Rabelais' Abbey of Theleme (you don't really need to know the story to understand the joy of my self imposed bravery/stupidity, fyi) could actually be seen as a blueprint for a true following of the Christian faith - that he attacked the rituals of the Catholic Church while maintaining the essence of what Paul was trying to teach in the New Testament...

And that would have been okay. I did have my academic journal articles to support this argument... but then the prof(s) and student(s) started asking questions. The big ones were "how do you think Rabelais' Abbey can be applied to 21st century life?" and "What do you think about the fact that the Abbey literally had no walls?" and "Isn't a 'civilised world' one that requires rules in order to have order?"

SO

I went into this big evangelical PROTESTANT talk about how I believe in a Christianity where people can follow the freedoms allowed in the Abbey and still reflect Christ without being restricted by religious rituals... and how my life (and the lives of many people in my Christian circle (hope you don't mind!) is filled with this philosophy of being "in the world and not of it" and how as much as we would like to sequester ourselves into our retreats and never go home -- the world needs us, and needs to see the freedom that Christ offers, and that by living our lives with the freedoms Rabelais offers, the world will be able to see what Christianity really is and that his walls can be taken figuratively. AND that we, as Christians, should, in fact, be drawn toward actually BECOMING a figurative version of Theleme (which means "God's Will" from the original Greek, by the way) - that if our lives are Spirit-led and Spirit-filled and the fruits of the Spirit can be seen in our lives, then our will cannot stray far from the Will of God and what we want to do will in fact be what God would have us do.

YES. I SAID THIS IN A GRADUATE-LEVEL COURSE. *SIGH*

And in response to the 3rd big question, I mentioned that I don't believe that civilisation is restricted to a world of rules and laws -- but that (and I quote): "if Dr Kelly is looking at God, and Muireann is looking at God, and I am looking at God, and God doesn't change, He won't lead us in different directions, and the order will come naturally." I also mentioned that my understanding of a civilised world was a world in which respect and consideration were priority - instead of legalism.

Can we say "soapbox"??? The thing is... they DID ask me the questions.

I just don't know if I will get docked marks for not quoting theorists... I am familiar with ton(ne)s more than I was 6 mos ago, but I don't know them well enough to spout them off the top of my head...

but I apparently know my bible and church history! That's good, right?

hahahaha

welcome to MY world. If I don't make it to PhD programs because I know more Bible than I know theory... I am okay with that :)