Comedian Bill Bailey is currently staging a one-man show, Dandelion Mind, at Wyndham’s Theatre in London ‘s West End . Much of the evening, according to journalist Quentin Letts, involves attacking Christianity. A particularly distasteful skit insults Jesus Christ by ridiculing the moment when a dramatically convinced Thomas put his hand in the Lord’s side.

Mr Letts has penned a scathing review, in which he calls for evangelicals to turn up to heckle Bailey with hymns, and accuses the panel show contributor of cowardice. Christianity is a safe, soft target, but Bailey would never have the guts to insult Mohammed, says the Mail’s columnist. The same applies to homosexuality. Bill Bailey would never insult the gays. Certainly not in a theatre owned by Cameron MacKintosh,. ‘Not exactly the bravest of Berties – a distinctly predictable performance,’ Quentin Letts concludes.

Bill Bailey himself, in an article in timesonline, says he takes on multi-nationals, as if that is radical cutting-edge comedy, instead of just another soft target. He won’t lose any points among the politically-correct by mocking the theory of intelligent design either. Now if he took on the laughable idea of evolution, or took a sideswipe at abortion or feminism or sexual immorality, now that would be daring, but also a suicidal career move.

Bailey criticises those like Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross who mock the weak. ‘You have got to aim a bit higher than that,’ he says. It could be argued they don’t come much higher than Jesus Christ, but again, he is not likely to lose either his life of his livelihood picking on Christ or Christianity as he might if he took on Islam or homosexuality. That would be aiming a bit too high for Bailey. ‘You have to pick your targets,’ says the comedian. He certainly knows how to pick them to stay alive and wealthy.

Stephen Green has responded by suggesting Bill Bailey might have as much a case of ignorance as cowardice. The National Director of Christian Voice said today:

‘Quentin Letts is to be commended for sticking up for righteousness in the face of Bill Bailey’s onslaught, although his call for us to be booking seats may go unheeded as that would involve parting with money which would support the spiritually-challenged Bailey.

‘It could well be in the back of Bailey’s mind that Muslim anger could result in a burnt-out venue if he were to insult Allah or Mohammed or Islam, but that might not be the whole story.

‘Secularist minds, particularly those filled with dandelion floss, have a challenge getting up-to-speed with the threat that Islam poses in the longer term to their cherished sacred cows. They don’t know a great deal about it and they don’t really care.

‘They are stuck in a nineteenth-century time-warp where the church is deserving of a secularist onslaught because it is a strong part of the Establishment regaling the political sphere with prophetic denunciations of wickedness, arguing for Godly laws. They don’t notice that it hasn’t done that for sixty-five years.

‘In the alternative, Christian virtues are not yet totally dead in our land. Irritating Christians (very rarely Muslims) pop up from time to time objecting to Jerry Springer the Opera, or calling for chastity and fidelity in sexual relations, or saying people should work for a living, or that human life is sacred, or that God created the world. Such ideas, and such people, are obviously dangerous to secularism and they and their beliefs must be ridiculed.

‘Secularists hate Jesus with a passion, knowing he was truly the Son of God, the righteous one who had power to lay down his life and power to take it up again.

‘They really fear a world where Jesus as the Almighty Christ and Redeemer takes up the sceptre and reigns in righteousness.

‘They object to Jesus because his very existence insults their values and their lifestyle. They get what we Christians call ‘conviction of sin’. And they don’t like it one bit.

‘Secularists have a profound ignorance of Islam, whereas Christianity is all around them. Some went to Catholic schools, or to church or Sunday school, or they watched a Remembrance Day service once. Christianity is part of their social conditioning in a way Islam is not.

‘When he attacks Jesus Christ and all the Lord stands for, Bailey is railing against something he dimly understands and perceives as important and challenging to his world-view. He doesn’t understand Islam at all, and it is not important to him (yet). He has a smattering of Christianity, enough to convince his audience of his sagacity, but only enough to make a Christian pity him.

‘Bailey’s act is a tiny bit like Sir Ian McKellen ripping Leviticus pages out of the Bible on stage. That was an act of respect to Holy Scripture, not disrespect. The poor man valued the Bible enough to want it to say nothing against him and his perversion.

‘In the same way, Bailey accords respect to Jesus Christ even as he attempts to disrespect him. There is a sense in which Bill Bailey’s attacks on the person of Jesus Christ are a compliment – in the Oscar Wilde sense that the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.

‘But all the same, I feel a Christian witness at Wyndham’s Theatre coming on. Any excuse for an evangelistic outreach!’

 

16 COMMENTS

  1. I’m sorry but to accuse Bill Bailey of being cowardly because he isn’t attacking homosexuality is implausible, because homosexuality is not a belief nor an idea. The great thing about being human is the ability to challenge ideas and beliefs, because faith is merely based on the grounds of theorization. I can understand the point about not attacking Islamic religions, but that doesn’t sway from the point that Christian Voice is ignorant enough to feel attacked when someone portrays their beliefs.

    I am an atheist, however I’m open enough to consider that there is a extremely small percent chance that the Christian religion, the Islamic religion, or the Buddhists could be correct with their theory. My beliefs are so because there is no substantial evidence from Science, Christianity, or any other religion that prove the reason existence, or the definition of the after life. I challenge everyone who preaches to me why they are so adamant that they are correct, all of which are too arrogant to understand that they no better than I do on the given subject.

    I have nothing against Christianity, but I have everything against its ability to distort people from the truth. Some of the most unchristian people I have met have been Christian, because they have allowed their fundamentalist view of the bible to permit their prejudice. Therefore I preach to you that you should abstain from your definitive view and recognise the humility of the human race. That we are all equal and innocent from knowledge, and that the joy in life can be found from looking out and giving love and jot to others, and I can comfortably say this without the assumption that there is in fact a god.

  2. From your response, you clearly didn’t read my comment properly. My apologies for writing quite a balanced thought provoking comment to a website so clearly open-minded. If you read through my comment properly, you would’ve understood that I actually have no problems with Christianity; one of my best friends is Christian, my sister is an evangelist, and it is with sheer hypocrisy that you scorn my behaviour as pontificating. Once again if you had read my comment properly you would have noticed that I’m directing my opinions to what I hope is a minority within your religion.

    As I pointed out before (Once again, if you read my comment properly), what angered me the most is the way your article condemns the entitlement to challenge beliefs. This world is multi-cultural and you have the audacity to claim unfair every time your beliefs go challenged. Let me tell you Stephen that I am more than willing to listen to your ideas about the reason of being, (and if you have a fair point, I will listen) though I am unsure whether you are so open to listen to mine. Or am I pontificating? To keep with the running theme, if you read my comment properly, I agreed with your point about Islamic religion, and I feel that comedians should also set around tackling the beliefs of their religion as well.

    And to draw to your last sentence: Yes, I will always judge whether actions are Christian or not. I am not to let the title of ‘Christianity’ fool me into the security that you are good people. If you read my comment properly, I mentioned that SOME of the most unchristian people have been christian, emphasis on the word some. Are you telling me that I’m wrong in stereotyping the values of Christianity as benevolent?

    • No, our article does not ‘condemn the entitlement to challenge beliefs’.

      It challenges the entitlement to make a fast buck out of ridiculing sincerely held beliefs in a crass, smug, scatological, repellent manner.

      Challenge our beliefs all you want. But can atheists ever do that in a civilised, sincere, grown-up way?

  3. @harry

    What a vile and disgusting thing to say, if you dont have anything nice to say dont say anything at all… didn’t your parents teach you that?

    @Stephen

    Please do not group all atheists together like that, not all of us a disgusting human beings.

  4. This is an incredibly stupid article. Bill Bailey is a funny, clever and most talented man. Just because he won’t buy your bullshit, doesn’t mean you have to write this crap about him. This stupid thing called religion is on it’s way out, anyway. And saying he wouldn’t attack gay people is correct, because gay people don’t deserve to be attacked. They deserve to be treated with the same respect and dignity as all human beings. Jesus himself had two daddys. It’s not a perversion as you say. Go home and talk to your imaginary friend that you are so eager for Bill Bailey not to mock, we of the civilised world will keep watching him, and find him the lovely person he is. Bill Bailey > Jesus.

  5. This article is ridiculous. If god is real, if Christianity is supposed to be the true religion then surly it shouldn’t be an easy target. God is protecting it is he not? Then in which case from an obserever he isn’t doing a very good job. Unless he isnt real…oh dear…maybe he isn’t!

    • Maybe you’re not real, Patrick. God will allow our society to go its own way and hold us collectively accountable. In such a society it’s up to Christians to make a stand. But make no mistake, God is not mocked. As a man sows, so shall he reap. Bill Bailey will come to a bad end. You read it here first.

      • Im not real? Errm… if you say so. But to be honest with you the last time I checked I was capable of during a lot more than your almighty god, eg lifting my little finger to help those in need (in what ever guise it may appear), the same need that presumably your god sent to ‘punish’ them for some convoluted and obscure wicked act.
        And as for Bailey coming to a bad end, how every Christian of you. Lets hope God doesn’t read blogs otherwise he might have a few choice words for when you reach the pearly gates.

        • Are atheists really this stupid, or do they just pretend to be?

          God uses his people to alleviate suffering. Look at what the Trussell Trust are doing with Food Banks, to take one newsworthy example.

          You don’t like what I wrote about Bill Bailey coming to a bad end? You think it isn’t very ‘Christian’? Oh dear. Read what the Lord himself said:

          Luke 19:27 ‘But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me’.