What do you have to say for yourself ?
I pray that someone takes the initiative to create unabashedly Catholic movies about the saints. Fertile ground is being ignored. We need someone like a Mel Gibson to make mainstream Hollywood pictures on the great heroes of the Faith. (And the countless martyrs will still give them their gore if they want it.) Not to slight them, but the saccharine, low-budget films on saints like Don Bosco and Therese of the Child Jesus just can't reach a wide audience.
If A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS and BECKET could be so successful, it can be done today (even if the studios shied away from it). That's why a guy like Gibson could be so instrumental in funding such films himself. We've seen movies on Elizabeth I and a Showtime series on the Tudors; the audience is out their for a feature film on someone like John Fisher or Edmund Campion.
The Church has always been the greatest patroness of the arts. Why is it that after the Council that wished to engage the culture we've become irrelevant in the arts. We need to reclaim that mantle.
Why am I not surprised? WE have been doing a lot of background info and warning about this movie and its books nefarious intent with our students and parish as a whole. Leave it to the USCCB to ONCE AGAIN yank the rug from under us! I'd try to think of a new meaning for USCCB...but it's too early in the morning.
... I just came a bit closer to unplugging my internet for good.
Hmm, this review from the same USCCB that gave such a glowing review for 'Brokeback Mountain'? What's the purpose of the USCCB again? Unitarian Sociologists Creating Catholic Bewilderment?
Yeah, a good Jew-basher will make us stand proud!?!? You guys are again pathetic, in your reductionistic judgments about the arts. Does Mel, screaming Catholic, mean good art, while this producer, proessed atheist, mean bad art.
Does not it say somewhere: test everything, hold fast to what is good..
Get out from behind those bastioned walls...
The USCCB should stand for United Socialists Conference of Communist Bishops.
After all, they showed no anger towards Brokeback Mountain did they? Nope. No anger towards this movie. They release the heretical document saying that salvation for the Jews isn't "necessary". Their document on citizenship was just appalling! Lots of doctrinal errors in that statement. Not to mention the United Socialists Conference of Communist Bishops are working against the American Life League's efforts to get canon law 915 enforced. Shameful!
The USCCB treated EWTN shamefully. They owe Mother Angelica an apology and an admittance of wrong doing. Sorry, but I'm just really running short on charity right now! The Church continues to survive despite being persecuted by it's evil Bishops and wicked pastors.
This will be the USCCB's judgment.
Daniel 5:25 And this is the writing that is written: MANE,THECEL, PHARES. 26 And this is the interpretation of the word. MANE: God hath numbered thy kingdom, and hath finished it. 27 THECEL: thou art weighed in the balance, and art found wanting. 28 PHARES: thy kingdom is divided, and is given to the Medes and Persians.
On the other hand, it's great entertainment to see some Catholics so knarled up about a movie review.
Just in the past day, self-styled orthodox are nominating themselves for bishop. Or they want to pick their bishop. They want to dissolve a national episcopal conference. They will have to read their diocesan organs and see things they disagree with.
I'm sure that Pullman and the movie studio are salivating about the padding to their bank accounts.
Can we have some Spe Salvi instead, please?
USCCB endorses Brokeback Mountain, why should be be surprised by the spineless and near-useless USCCB endorsing an anti-Catholic film.
I've sent an email to mr forbes. maybe you should too. hforbes@usccb.org. I don't really expect an answer, but, it made me feel better.
I was wondering what the annual Advent "Christianity is a crock" story would be. Looks like this is it.
Tracey Rowland has suggested the people who implemented Vatican II suffered from neo-Thomism's ignorance of culture. I think the reviewer here is ignorant of the subtle ways in which a culture hostile to Christianity works.
I tire of the effete attitude exhibited by Mark et al. Expose the kiddies to this. Shall I expose them to Birth of a Nation as well? How about Mein Kampf? How about the Satanic Bible? How about websites that purvey 'virtual' child porn? How about Oijia Boards and Tarot Cards? Heck while I am at, shall I expose them to plague? or Leprosy? It is our jobs, you elistist, to protect our children from influences that will not help them. This attitude of 'expose them' has reaped a whirlwind of trouble in our society. But as any liberal believes...if a little didn't work, maybe more will.
Thomas,
I did see an interview not too long ago where the guys behind the film "Bella" are very interested in bringing the life of Father Miguel Pro to the big screen.
That's good hearing, paw prints. Like I said before, such a film needs to be more in the vein of A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS and not ST JOHN BOSCO.
And mark, in typical fashion of the likes of katherine and radio45, you completely dodged the actual substance of my post in favor of a rather irrelevant diatribe.
FRBP,
Effete?!? I guess I do not communicate in your virile, rant fashion. You are such a man.
Thomas, I agree with you about the necessity of great art.
But most oftentimes, saints are not martyrs as gored super-heroes, as love is paradoxically most fertile whenever it is 'seems' most obscure and weak. We need to teach the world to see the beauty of silent, broken heroism. Remember, Christ's glorious death on the cross did not attract the contemporary attention that it deserved, even w/ the blood-bath, as his enfeebled humanity bore the full weight of his Father's majesty. And he promised us that it will be not otherwise with those of us he graces to most fully share in/bear his glory. How can we get the world to behold this w/ eyes of faith. Transforming the figure of super-hero from the action genre of contemporay cinema will only be counterproducive, don't you think?
As a parent who, by family rave reviews, read and allowed my children to read this book, telling myself all the way that 'daemon' couldn't possibly mean 'demon', and then was so horrified midway through the second book as to ban Philip Pullman in my household, I am not happy about this endorsement.
If the schools, libraries, and PARENTS fall as hard for this series as they did for Harry Potter (and yes, I lost my taste for the wizard and his cronies by the 4th book, because it was ENOUGH, because by it Catholics were likening the Holy Spirit to a magic wand, and because it had become a crime to dislike HP) then we will be looking at another decade of poison being poured into our children by people they trust. We'll be having cute little 'daemon' parties all over the place.
For those who have been preparing to reject this film as the first in a poisonous series, the USCCB endorsement is a blow. We will have had enough difficulty battling schools, libraries, friends, and family without having to resist our Church as well. Oy!
What is the opinion here of the "First Things" review of Pullman's trilogy, then?
Mel Gibson is a Catholic only in the sense that Henry VIII was.
But you didn't answer the question, Mark. Why should we expose our youth to things that seek to undermine their faith? An adult who has better knowledge, I could see. But a child who is at much less developmental levels? Is that wise? In atypical liberal fashion, instead of dealing with a topic, you chose ad hominum attacks. I called the arguement effete and elitist, not you.
We should not expose them, but we must not be so narrow in our adults pre-judgements about what may and may not be uplifting, good art. Gerald in his Amazon store recommends Mozart's Great Mass in C and Beethoven's Missa Solemnis. I concur that both works are uplifting, beautiful and--at least with the Mozart--glorious in the full sense of the term. But how do we caope with the indubitable fact that Mozart was dabbling in freemasonry at the time and Beethoven was no orthodox Christian in any sense of the term.
I believe, as you do, that critical judgment in the arts is paramount, but wonder if the immediate reduction of art's value to the issue of the circumstances of its genesis (the artist's exterior purported, mind set, his professed commitments at the time, et al) is not a but to narrow of a move.
Test everything and hold fast to what is good...this does not mean throw it directly at our kids, nor does it entail, however, a rejection of everything that arises from a not entirely, explicitly Catholic confession...And sometimes our surface enemies can highlight truths for us that we are all too ready to suppress.
Mark, I really have no idea where you are coming up with these responses that have no bearing on my initial post. You jumped on my example of Gibson as someone who could make a mainstream film independent of the Hollywood powers that be. Then you carry on about saints shouldn't be bloody super-heroes and virtually denigrate martyrdom even though martyrdom was originally the exclusive means to being named a saint. I see nothing "counterproductive" to depicting the lives of men like Edmund Campion and John Fisher. And as for your dismissive remark about contemporary cinema, isn't that the great liberal clarion call over the past 40 years - to engage the culture on its own level?
The USCCB needs to be disbanded but for now it should be ignored. It is a playpen for wayward bishops and liberal elite apparatchiks masking socialism and marxism in the form of enlightened theology. I say this in the broader context of the political garbage which emanates from this glorified and unaccountable group of lobbyist as it sits on its beautiful Washington DC campus telling easily mislead catholics how to behave politically. Recently Bishop Wenke penned a letter to the State Department advocating the sale of nuclear fuel and technology for "peaceful" purposes to Iran and further advocated the inclusion of Al Quada in "dialogues" for peace. As an advocacy group the USCCB shows all the worst of political advocacy in its deception and blatant disregard for both empirical and moral truth. Shame on this group.
Thomas,
Read what you are writing! I denigrate the martyrs? Martyrdom means bearing witness, and I just remind you of the various means of doing so, and you say that I outright dismiss the likes of Campion and Fisher. Yes, the public has an appetite for blood, and I guess we can exploit that for purposes of evangelization; does not this explain some of the success of the "Passion"? But the public also reacted positively to the "Spitfire Grille" and "Dead Man Walking", much quieter orthodox Catholic productions, which too produced lasting effects. In a setting that is willing to open itself to further reflection, is there not a question of whether these too are necessarily "saccharine"?
For the great majority of adults, we come to the resigned insight that the heroism and bearing witness that God allots us are much duler, more everyday affairs. The "outside" world has a sense of this, but longs for the confirmation that God has made possible the commonplace--their finite, broken and weak lives-- becoming divine.
I proposed that all of the adult bloggers on this threed pause and not have a knee-jerk reaction to art based on information about its creator. My fault is that I am a trained philosopher. You accuse me of advocating a position that is nothing less than throwing "Birth of a Nation" and Hitler's diatribe at the kiddies. My skin is thick, so I can take it; bring it own. But is not the more productive move a concession of my point. As Socrates reminds us, the understanding of truth comes to us through our quilifications, expansions, connections and further elaborations.
Yes, I entered this thread with a rash comment. I apologize. But I have attempted to bring the discussion to another level. I only hope you proceed in the same spirit.
We're not going to see it or buy it or have the books here.
I don't want to give my hard earned money to anyone whose explicit purpose for their 'art' is to undermine my faith or my children's faith. He doesn't need to have one penny of my wealth for his next project. I'll pray for the man, but not pay for his junk.
Besides that, if in seeing it the faith of just one of my children is somehow scandalized, I will be called into judgement for it. Jesus said it would be better to have a millstone about the neck and be cast into the sea than cause one little one scandal.
Not that I'm very good at it 100% of the time, but I do try to maintain a millstone-free wardrobe and this is a no brainer.
I have not yet seen the movie myself, so I will reserve judgement about its actual perniciousness.
"'Dead Man Walking', much quieter orthodox Catholic productions..."
Hahaha! Classic.
Again, what the hell is your point? I expressed my desire for mainstream Catholic films about great saints (who were frequently martyred - the great champion of orthodoxy Saint Helen Prejean aside) and this is somehow a source of great consternation for you.
You go enjoy The Golden Compass and any other hateful, bigoted screed you want. I'll settle for A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS and other movies about saints that have little relevance to the lives of oh-so-modern thinking, adult Catholics.
Thomas,
Now, your pride sounds as though it may be running a bit deeper than your charity.
Can you act in any other way in the blogosphere than as the all-too- pervasive pundit? Gerald is getting paid for it, at least, and I understand a man's need to make an honest living. He is intersting enough for me to do here, so he is doing his work well. But I am giving you the opportunity for a reasonable exchange, and you only approach, with your seemingly sly dismissals,and then retreat, with probably yourself-congragulatory giggles and back-pats.
You know, the Vatican a few years ago called, of all choices, Bjork's film "Dancer in the Dark", an anti-death penalty film, the deepest spiritual cinemaic offering of the year, most worthy in its own right of viewing by all serious movie-goers. I am not talking of children's movies now, I realize. But how would you cope with this judgment from a Vatican Congregation? Do you distinguish THE Vatican from the Vatican, and chuck to the side the judgment? Hell, Bjork is a friggin' crazy-minded, dying-bird-sounding female alternative rock vocalist. The fact remains, however, that the movie, while,fictional, centered on a blind factory worker,IS as authentically and beautifully Christological as anything I've seen in years. The director did not intend this explicitly, I am sure. But the Vatican praise its merits. And rightly so.
And by the way, Man for all Seasons is one of my favorite movies, as are all the classic movies about our glorious saints that you cherish so dearly. And, I concur, there should be, among oher things, big budget movies on Campion, Kolbe et al.
However, if you'd take off those pharisiac (sic?) glasses, you may be able to see the triumph of love over hate in some of its more 'lowly' instances, and agree with me that this is what the world needs to cherish too, and hold as a more doable model for its own emulation. Will not that conribute to His kingdom coming?11 You may be surprised at the range, then, of the plethora of historical figures, for possibly wonderful movies to uplift the faithful/world in the future.
I confess, St. Terese is my favorite saint, so this my slant my view. Have you ever read Brothers Karamazov or the Idiot? Von Balthasar praises these works with lowly, Christ as fool, broken figures as their heroines. And Benedict XVI embraces von Balthasar.
Call me "oh-so modern", "elitist', "liberal" or whatever you like. I am sure it makes your world all the easier. As flawed as Sister Helen is, anyone who stands up for JPIIs gospel of life as it applies to the non-necessity of capital punishment in the U.S. penal system and has us see, as she stands with for hours and hours of her life the convicted murderers, the divine image in even the most humanly self-defiled specimens of humanity is worthy of our admiration.
No: I am not gong to "rank" saintliness, as you seem to do, and thus preclude or dismiss possible movies about the less "illustrious" instances of Christ-enfused glory.
There's more in the praiseworthy artistic world than your Ignatius Press/ Mel Gibson philosophy can account for, Thomas.
Yours in Christ,
Mark
We can always count on the Bishops to make the-- wrong choice. They also supported "Brokeback Mountain" until there was an outcry and they removed their approval.
Our Sunday Bulletin denounced the movie, although it has been watered down, because the movie might encourage children to read the series; exposing them to the author's ravings and perverted outlook on religion.
Supposedly,the actress that appears in this blatantly anti-Catholic propaganda piece,Nicole Kidman, was herself at one time Catholic.
I think she should reconsider her position as it pertains to her eternal fate.
It seems that the lady has openly announced, by her choice of screenplays to endorse, her spiritual allegiance.She has fallen.
She has become A willing follower of the Outer Darkness.
I fear for the future safety of the souls of her children and ours.
Dominic.
The USCCB leaves me speechless in their incompetence. Fortunately they do not have the charism of infallibility or authority. We can only hope the individual Bishops speak out. I'm still looking for a Bishop in LA, can you find me one?
We should complain about this, and petition the USCCB for a redress of grievances.
Mark,
I'm now convinced you either didn't read, or failed to understand, a single post I've made. I never "ranked" saints or any such nonsense. I said I wished to see big-budget movies on great saints like Fisher, Campion, etc. Period. End of story. This was your jumping off point for rambling, nearly incoherent rantings about things I never said. The mere mention of Mel Gibson (as a mere EXAMPLE, mind you) was enough to set your head spinning. Show me the sentence I posted in which I spoke against non-martyred saints as unworthy of portrayal in the movies, or imitation in life. Show me if you can, but you can't. It never happened.
And your ability to spell "pharisaic" is matched only by your ability to apply it appropriately.
Unfortunately the USCCB has become like the permissive parents which are prevalent in our current society.
To refuse to watch a movie based on books that are offensive is not to judge an artist by his religion or lack of it.
Did you read the books, Mark? The film will generate interest in the books, and the popularity of the film (if it is popular) is sure to excite librarians and teachers all over the place.
It has been impossible to get a non-witchy, warlock, magic wandy elementary book suggestion from librarians and teachers since Harry Potter. Will we have to wade through piles of "daemon" literature for a decade after Pullman's promotion gains ground? Some parents are tired, already. The USCCB didn't help us with its review, even if it was being "fair" in judging the film on its own merits.
Thomas,
Gerald started this post. He focused the attention on the intentions of the producer, which is a factor to be minded. and Many others post here, besides yourself. My first response was not at your post by itself, but the emergant conversation. I am not out to persecute you or simply to "prove" your position wrong. In fact, I agree entirely with everything yousay in your first post by itsef. I qualify, counterproducive would be ONLY making the movies you wish to be made; this I should have specified in my directed thoughts at your post. I regret the mutual misunderstanding that ensued. I do not think you want to make only those types of movies, and never intended to insinuated, I hope, that YOU did.
You are entirely correct in what you first stated.
Pax Christi,
Mark
Commenting by HaloScan
