AmericanPapist Comments
Here is a link to a new website of Book Reviews for Catholic parents. It has a pretty in-depth review of the 'Golden Compass'.
http://carpefabulam.blogspot.com/
This is considerable in that it is and has been for years the stated policy of the Catholic League not to criticize or protest any Catholic institutions.
WAC
the devil never sleeps.
The positive reviews for The Golden Compass and Brokeback Mountain prove that the movie reviews of the USCCB are worthless, as far as trusting them for comment on the morality in films.
It is obvious that the recent pruning of staff at the USCCB was not as complete as it should have been.
Gen X:
What is your reaction to First Things and its review of Pullman's books?
If someone thinks an organization/church/whatever is wrong, let them say so. It's never beneficial to spout words you don't believe. if it leads you away from the church, so be it. At least you can go with a clear conscience. "Perhaps misguided moral passion is better than confused indifference."
Ah yes, playing the Nazi card. When they have to resort to caricature to portray the other side, you can be sure the tank is empty.
Todd, I don't think this is a case of Godwin's law. It is a legitimate comparison.
A hypothetical has been implied, "It is always good to show people exercising their free will in a negative way."
A concrete example is being used to test the hypothetical, "Would it be good to show Nazis exercising their free will in a negative way?" Obviously not.
Therefore the hypothetical is clearly, obviously, and demonstratably false.
This is just another attempt by American bishops not to look "too conservative". They do not want to be steriotyped, so they will say things about such minor topics without thinking them through.
I can see the possibility that laymen will one day save Christianity from apostating bishops who do not want to appear too non-PC.
So, Michael, what about First Things and their review of the series?
I am waiting for one person to discuss it in relation to this movie review.
Sadly, just as you cannot trust Nihil Obstats and Imprimaturs anyone (thanks to Modernist bishops), you cannot trust anything that comes from the USCCB. Orthodox Catholics have to be very careful these days to ascertain that teaching is actually coming from the Magisterium itself and not a bunch of liberals trying to hijack it, as the USCCB loves to do.
About the only movie reviews I trust these days for accuracy are Debbie Schlussel's. These are great for orthodox Catholics:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/a...rchives/movies/
O.K. Henry,
I read the review, but I haven't read the books . Moloney loves the books, this is clear, but would he want his kids to read them ? I'm pretty sure my kids would not be getting the same messages that Moloney is. For Catholic parents, the discussion is not in the form of a university level academic book analysis. The discussion is along the lines of 'what is the sum total effect that this book will have on the innocence, spiritual, and emotional growth of my child?'
I don't think Moloney has addressed this at all. His forum is an academic one, somewhat removed from the reality of the 'target' market - children. I don't believe that Pullman is disturbed by the labeling of his books as 'children's books. Children are clearly his chosen demographic - where he will make the most money.
Although Moloney's review was interesting to read, it wasn't useful, in a practical sense, for discerning the appropriateness of letting my children read it. Other reviews by parents were much more 'down to earth' and relevant to my needs, and those of my family. (Perhaps this is part of th problem with the USCCB review as well.)
Actually, if you read the work, at the end he pointed out, since Pullman's ethics can in general be accepted, and his "response" is not as beautiful and compelling as the Christian one, he would not be afraid of letting his kids read the works. He said he would be concerned if Pullman's world was able to pull it off -- but he couldn't. That's a telling response, and don't tell me this is a "liberal" or "academic" response. It is a discussion for parents in relation to their children, and he makes it clear he thinks it can be read by children.
My reaction? Well, I don't think the books sound that good, and from all I hear, the first book is the best, and it's all downhill from there. He had an agenda, and it get in the way of a story. Others have had similar agendas but let the story win and have done great work which I can appreciate (such as Douglas Adams). But it is also an issue of prudence -- and here is a place where prudence does not mean you need to mock what others think/don't think in relation to your own. Especially, as you can see, FT itself makes similar claims as the Bishop's Conference. It seems to me the whole issue is it is the Bishop's Conference, nothing else and some people would criticize it if they said "Mary Poppins is good fun."
Ever see some of the works which the Vatican released on their lists of best movies? Some are quite surprising.
I do not think that Moloney's review provided the information I was looking for. I'm not convinced that children, even perhaps Moloney's, are able to discern the motivations and success/failure of author's intentions etc...
The Golden Compass has a lot of disturbing things and ideas in it. I don't know what conclusions my children would draw from the readng of it. I choose to save that kind of 'reading' for later, when they are more discerning - more mature. That is my parental perogative. Also, since the book, according to Moloney, is 'nearly' CHristian, but 'not quite', I would consider this the most dangerous, as far as confusing messages, or setting a child up for a misunderstanding of the tradition we are trying to pass on. AND I also haven't read any redeeming things about the books. Where's the beauty? What idea of love? Of the soul, Of God. Of parents?
Having read some reviews from certain sources that have proved not to meet my needs, I don't turn to those sources for help. Its very simple. I read reviews from parents with similar ideas of parenting to my own, for they are the most useful to me.
As far as how 'good' the writing may be (as puffed up as Pullman may be about his own talents in comparison to Tolkien and Lewis) the only child (13) who I have heard a personal review from said she didn't finish it because it wasn't that good...
I am not asking "Do you agree with the review," but pointing out that people from all sides of the spectrum can come to a similar conclusion to the Bishop's Conference. My own view of the text can be found elsewhere (hint, I am not favorable to it), but I think one can accept the Bishop's Conference and FT's reviews as opinions which do not require mudslinging at the Conference or FT because those opinions were published by them. And that the Bishop's Conference is taken to task without the further context of the wide-range of reviews within circles which are normally respected by those who are doing the mudslinging, I am thinking there might be more here than concern about a simple movie review.
...and I am not 'mudslinging' when I point out that their reviews are useless...to me, and obviously others. I also think that the USCCB - affiliated review (the Bishops didn't actually write it, or vote on it!) is a little worse than useless. It is irresponsible, in that it (unkwnowingly - knowingly...who knows?) allows itself to be used as an argument against parents' concerns. The reviews don't seem to consider the FACT that the movie is targeted for a market of CHILDREN and therefore the review coming from a Catholic perspective should be related to whether or not it is GOOD for children. It isn't, IMHO, and I don't want schools and teachers using the USCCB review to 'prove' to me how I'm over-reacting. If that sounds like I'm making a judgement about it, I am. That isn't mudslinging. And its not muslinging to say that the USCCB could stand to care a little more about how what they say and do, or have said and done in their name, affects the efforts of families trying to be faithful and obedient, and raise up Christ centered families. One might even expect that that might be part of their mandate. = to care about it enough to NOT CAUSE CONSTANT OBSTACLES tO THE APPROPRIATE UPBRINGING OF FAITHFUL FAMILIES!!!
If someone's opinion is to be considered of no consequence, well then, its of no consequenc! But if it to be considered educated, thoughtful and faithful, then it should be.
Regarding the FT review, - it actually is of no consequence. Its just an (well educated)opinion in a forum of opinions. In other words, its where it should be. I immensely enjoy reading FT. My kids don't read it. (And neither do any of the teachers at the local Catholic school...)If I had a kid who could read FT, I wouldn't worry about him reading GC!
I doubt your kids are reading USCCB reviews as well; it was for adults to read just as much as the FT review. I see you are giving FT more leeway to tell parents it is ok to give the series to children because you like FT is very telling...
Nobody looks to FT as an official Catholic 'authority'. Should you be putting the USCCB on the same level?
You seem to have missed the point.
Also, nowhere did I suggest that I didn't like the USCCB. For example, I have used their publication on Catholic Education to support parents right to protect and educate their children. To suggest an improvement is not to 'despise' or 'disrespect'. I doubt the USCCB would take my comments as personally as you have, Henry, which is somewhat telling about you! If you wish to support the USCCB, you'd do better to encourage improvement, than to blindly try to prevent discussion of weakness - like the weakness of having things published under their name which may not hold up to scrutiny, or may cause scandal or confusion of purpose.
Commenting by HaloScan
