The Golden Compass is pointing towards anti-Catholicism (starring Nicole Kidman - a Catholic)

American Papist ^ | August 20, 2007 | Thomas Peters

[NYer]

CathNews alerts us to the potential problem:

Nicole Kidman has denied that a new film she's making is anti-Catholic. The movie features an organisation known as "The Magisterium", which kidnaps children to remove their souls.

The Brisbane Times reports that Kidman told a US magazine that her Catholic faith affected her consideration of the script for the film, which is titled The Golden Compass.

The fantasy film is based on a novel by Philip Pullman called Northern Lights. It is already attracting attention in the US for avoiding much of the book's perceived anti-Catholic rhetoric.

Kidman said some of the religious elements were removed from the movie script.

Kidman told the magazine: "I was raised Catholic, the Catholic Church is part of my essence.""I wouldn't be able to do this film if I thought it were at all anti-Catholic."

The Golden Compass is due for release in the US on 7 December.

I watched the extended trailer for the movie recently, and remember raising my eyebrows during some parts:



Narrator: "[This] is a world dominated by the Magisterium, which seeks to control all humanity, and whose greatest threat, is the curiosity of a child." (oh darn, he's on to us!)

Scientist Good Guy: "... [there is a] parallel universe, where there is no Magisterium." Religious Evil Guy: "That is heresy." Scientist Good Guy: "That is the truth." (aw shucks, science proved us wrong again!)

What's worse, I found an Amazon review of the novel that this movie is based upon. The review more than collaborates first-hand what CathNews mentions about the books being anti-Catholic:

A shock of bigotry

I read all three of these books and I kept waiting for the Anti-Catholic crap to be explained and rectified. I was horrified particularly that this is a book directed at children when the point of the whole story was to kill the "Authority" aka God. Not only that but all of the Priests of the Church were horrible, evil men who are lacivious, dirty, and murderous. Not one of them is good. And then the only way that the world can be saved is for two 12 year olds to make out.

There are so many other details in the story that I could name as examples of the vemonous anti Christian and particularly anti Catholic bigotry in these books. The 'tempter' is an ex nun who flat out tells the two children that Christianity is a mistake...and there is also a thinly veiled reference to sex when the book says her greatest time of 'bliss' was not when she was a nun. She also goes on to tell these two 12 year old kids that she was not married but lived with a man for four years. Then there is a bizarre story of the two male 'angels' who are in love with each other.

I'd like to tell any parents to steer clear of this book that is supposedly for children or even young adults. And also for people who are fairminded individuals and who dislike bigotry in any form.

I rated this item one star but I would give it NO STAR if I could.

And that's just a start! Read what another Amazon reviewer, from another viewpoint, had to say:

I am not a religious person. I wouldn't say I'm an atheist, but I'm seriously leaning toward agnosticism. However, this series made me feel not just uncomfortable, but downright unclean because of how it dealt with religion. Mr. Pullman is an atheist, and I do not take exception with his right to his beliefs. I probably share some of them. The problem is, this series has been published and marketed as a children's fantasy novel, with no mention of the active dislike - hatred, even - in it's portrayal of religion. Mr. Pullman is free to believe what he chooses, and I'll defend to my dying day his right to do so. However, readers (and their parents) also have a right to their beliefs, and should not be blindsided by a seemingly harmless children's book. We label music with violent lyrics, restrict access to movies with adult themes, even rate television shows so parents have some idea of the content before allowing their children to watch. It disturbs me that this book is marketed directly to children, without any indication of its anti-religious themes.

This is not a series for young children, no matter how precocious they are. Religious issues aside, it's just too dark. Even young teens should not read this series without adult input. If your child wishes to read it, you should read it first and be prepared to discuss it with them. This is especially true if you are even casually religious because it's unsettling to have your beliefs twisted into something evil and spit back at you. Adults and older teens should be aware of the subject matter before reading it. If you don't have a problem with it, fine, enjoy the books. They're certainly well written. If I had been prepared for the subject matter before going into it, I might have actually liked the books.

... and here's a third negative review along similar lines, for good measure.

Now, tally these objections with the fact that New Line Cinema is trying to market the movie as a logical/related continuation of their Lord of the Rings productions (and thereby trying to take advantage of its huge audience), and I'm not at all pleased.

The official trailer begins with the line "In 2001 New Line Cinema opened the door to Middle-Earth. This December they take you on another epic journey", while the Golden Compass is falling through air and spinning around to look like the One Ring from the LOTR promotions. How cute, but also how wrong.

I don't think I'm being pedantic on this point. People love LOTR not just for its fantasy world, but for its philosophy. To say that LOTR and the Golden Compass are two epic journeys is to ignore what kind of epic journey the LOTR presents. While perhaps sharing a similar genre of fiction, these sound like two very different tales.

Of course, you might be wondering why people are making a fuss over the anti-Catholicism of the book if the movie has tried to remove the offensive parts. Well, these types of movies always generate a renewed interest in the original titles. In the case of the LOTR and Chronicles of Narnia, this is great. In the case of the Golden Compass, this is a problem. Moreover, it seems that the Golden Compass isn't just sprinkled with the occasional anti-Catholic/anti-religious sentiment - it is deeply-inundated with the bigotry of a bitter atheist.

.... and it's marketed as a book for children?!

Update: Christopher Blosser has previously treated the problematic nature of Philip Pullman's work. If you want a more in-depth analysis of the issues involved I highly encourage you to read Christopher's post.

[Porterville]

It is true, the talking polar bears are from my favorite passage from the bible. I’m especially enamored with the part of the bible about shape-shifting ferrets and monkey-cats. But, by far, the most bible like part was the wicked witch to the north who lives where Santa Claus and his elves make toys.

[ichabod1]

I should say... a Civil Divorce. There is no such thing as a Divorce, per se, in the Catholic Church. Annulment is supposed to be a recognition that the marriage essentially never was. The complication is that to Catholics, the Sacrament of Matrimony is one of seven sacraments - Baptism, Confirmation, Confession (Reconciliation), Eucharist, Matrimony, Holy Orders, Anointing of the Sick (last rites). Of these, Baptism, Confirmation, Matrimony, and Holy Orders can only be given once.

[ichabod1]

Yes but... the fear of the children becoming post hoc illegitimate is very real to Catholics contemplating the seeking of an annulment.

[gondramB]

>>I should say... a Civil Divorce. There is no such thing as a Divorce, per se, in the Catholic Church. Annulment is supposed to be a recognition that the marriage essentially never was. The complication is that to Catholics, the Sacrament of Matrimony is one of seven sacraments - Baptism, Confirmation, Confession (Reconciliation), Eucharist, Matrimony, Holy Orders, Anointing of the Sick (last rites). Of these, Baptism, Confirmation, Matrimony, and Holy Orders can only be given once.<<

And this is why, even though I am curious and one of best friends is a Nun, I never visit Catholic churches....

Its so complicated I am afraid I will embarrass whoever I go with by doing something wrong/

[ArrogantBustard]

Huh?!?!?!

Baptism? check

Confirmation? check

Holy orders? Not quite ... essentially three times ... a man may be ordained a Deacon ... then a Priest ... then a Bishop.

Matrimony? We take that “until death do us part” thing seriously. That means a widow(er) is free to marry; death did them part. If it were not so, I’d be in trouble. But I’m not. At least, not that kind of trouble.

[ArrogantBustard]

Its so complicated I am afraid I will embarrass whoever I go with by doing something wrong.

YMMV, but in my experience Catholics tend to be quite understanding about that sort of thing, especially where there's no apparent sense of malicious intent.

[steve8714]

She could have had it annulled because of “fraud”, couldn’t she?

[gondramB]

>>YMMV, but in my experience Catholics tend to be quite understanding about that sort of thing, especially where there’s no apparent sense of malicious intent.<<

Hopefully they would take being accompanied by 80 year old retired Nun as a good start. :)

[firebrand]

whatever belief system the couple subscribed to at the time of their marriage.

I thought it had to be a Jewish or Christian marriage, not just any belief system.

I do know people who consider any marriage valid, even one before a justice of the peace--a promise is a promise, etc. This differs from the Catholic point of view, but their view of the marriage after it takes place is essentially the same as that of Catholics: no seeking of divorce, and if a divorce must take place, no remarriage.

[vladimir998]

I never even heard of this book, and now that I have, I have reason to never purchase or promote it in any way.

What gets me is that Hollywood could make soooooo many movies based on good books that affirm Christianity instead of this crap. The idea that Hollywood does everything to make money is a lie. They do everything to promote their agenda.

[Claud]

Its so complicated I am afraid I will embarrass whoever I go with by doing something wrong/

LOL! I wouldn't worry, you'll be ok if you ever decide to. Just go with someone who's Catholic and he or she will tell you what to do. Otherwise:

1) sit/stand all the way in the back
2) just follow everyone else with the standing and kneeling
3) no need to make responses, sing, or anything...plenty of other people won't be anyway.
4) when people go up for Communion just stay in your seat and let everybody go around you. Not everyone goes to Communion anyway, so no one will think it odd.

You can pretty much not participate and no one will say anything. :)

[A.A. Cunningham]

her children are bastards

That might be what the secular world refers to them as but the Church does not.

[gondramB]

Thank you.

[Tax-chick]

It's so complicated I am afraid I will embarrass whoever I go with by doing something wrong.

Nobody's going to quiz you on theology or practice if you attend Mass with a friend. Just do what everyone else does, except don't receive Communion if you're not Catholic.

[Tax-chick]

Iirc, the children were legally adopted. This makes the Catholic Church’s judgment of the sacramental validity of Tom Cruise’s and Nicole Kidman’s legal marriage even less relevant that it would otherwise be.

[Tax-chick]

Of these, Baptism, Confirmation, Matrimony, and Holy Orders can only be given once.

The Sacrament of Matrimony can be celebrated more than once if a spouse dies and the survivor marries again.

[A.A. Cunningham]

The fact that she's a redhead has to be taken into consideration.

Kidman has since been granted an annulment on the basis that her first marriage did not conform to the requirements of the Church.

[ArrogantBustard]

Very good start. :’} And if she’s anything like most of the nuns I know, she’d enjoy it. They tend to be real sweethearts ... unless you’re acting up in class.

[sitetest]

Dear gondramB,

It’s tough to say what her marital status vis-a-vis the Church. First, there is the question of whether Mr. Cruise was eligible to contract a valid Catholic marriage. He was divorced when he married Ms. Kidman, and a Scientologist as well. Either of these circumstances may have been prima facie impediments to a valid sacramental marriage, meaning that they may have never even attempted a Catholic marriage.

Next, even if they were ostensibly married in the Church, Mr. Cruise’s bizarre beliefs may affect his views toward marriage, as well, and may make his participation in a Catholic marriage problematic.

sitetest

[x]

Nicole and Daniel Craig are also opening in the new Invasion [of the Body Snatchers] remake.

The tag line -- "Do Not Trust Anyone. Do Not Show Emotion. Do Not Fall Asleep." -- left me thinking: "Well, at least she shouldn't have any trouble with the middle one."