Wheaton College in Wheaton, Illinois has invited prodigiously talented pianist Greg Anderson to perform on September 28, 2024 as part of Wheaton’s 75-year-old Artists Series. What makes this invitation noteworthy is that Greg Anderson is legally married to a man. Some rationalize the decision of Wheaton College to give a platform to a man who publicly affirms egregious sin as good with five lousy arguments.
First, it is argued that Wheaton College’s Artist Series has never been solely a showcase for Christian musicians. The argument goes that over decades, Wheaton has invited many famous musicians, including atheists, agnostics, and people who follow other religions. Musicians are invited to share their music, not speak about their lives outside of music.
This raises questions regarding the wisdom of inviting artists to perform who publicly affirm egregious sin as righteousness—particularly a sin that mocks the institution (i.e., marriage) that is a picture of Christ and the church, that poses arguably the greatest attack on biblical truth in centuries, and that is destroying every cultural institution, including marriage, families, schools, and churches.
By that reasoning, Wheaton would be justified in inviting prodigiously talented musicians who publicly affirm all sorts of grievous sins as righteousness. Would Wheaton invite and pay a prodigiously talented pianist to perform who publicly affirms polyamory (as evidenced by his public poly union), kink, zoophilia, sex “work,” or white supremacy as good? If not, why not? (My guess is there are two chances that Wheaton would invite such persons to perform: slim and fat.)
The second rationalization is that Wheaton does not inquire about the religious or moral convictions of their guests. But Wheaton doesn’t need to inquire about Greg Anderson’s religious or moral convictions to know that he promotes evil as good. It is public knowledge.
The third rationalization is that Wheaton regards the music shared by invited musicians as a gift of God’s common grace rather than, for example, a testimony of his saving grace.
Artistic talent is, indeed, evidence of God’s common grace, and Christians are free to enjoy those gifts. But there’s a significant difference between individuals appreciating the works of art produced by non-Christians and a distinctly Christian institution providing a platform—presumably accompanied by a payment—to an artist who publicly affirms and celebrates evil as good.
Finally, it has been argued by defenders of Anderson’s invitation that not inviting artists like Anderson constitutes missed evangelistic opportunities. This is perhaps the silliest rationalization of all. This suggests Wheaton has a positive obligation to invite artists who publicly affirm grievous sin as righteousness in order not to miss evangelistic opportunities. I would submit there are countless better ways to evangelize.
Do the powers-that-be at Wheaton wonder if Wheaton College’s invitation to artists who publicly affirm sin as good may have a counter-evangelism effect? Do such invitations give an imprimatur—not just to the artist’s talent—but also to their beliefs and actions as well? Artists of Anderson’s cultural status are, after all, role models.
