Replies

Apparently the USCCB had a change of heart?

I doubt it...Catholic News Service has this on the change (reformatted for easier reading):

Editor's Note: "Brokeback Mountain," originally rated L (limited adult audience, films whose problematic content many adults would find troubling), has been reclassified O -- morally offensive. This has been done because the serious weight of the L rating -- which restricts films in that category to those who can assess, from a Catholic perspective, the moral issues raised by a movie -- is, unfortunately, misunderstood by many. Because there are some in this instance who are using the L rating to make it appear the church's -- or the USCCB's -- position on homosexuality is ambiguous, the classification has been revised specifically to address its moral content.

There it is - it seems as if the classification was changed because many could not properly comprehend or understand what was in the glowing review and how it related to the “L” clasiification. Nice!

This is backpedalling nonsense. How does their explanation jibe with the clear "O" rating for Caddyshack? Was Rodney Dangerfield SO morally offensive that the USCCB had to slap it with an "O"?

I think what USCCB is saying that they wouldn't want those who can assess movies from a Catholic perspective, to miss this heartfelt and universal theme of two men abandoning their marriage vows and children for the joy of impaling each others backsides. The power of the blogosphere outed these flamers, now they're scrambling to feign orthodoxy, until the next opportunity.

The USCCB has issued a non-retraction retraction. It's completely inadequate, in fact, it only communicates to the laity the how pathetic Catholic teaching becomes when it acquires pop-culture street cred. Apparently, they still need our e-mails and faxes to clarify Church teaching.

As Mr. Forbes is clearly enamored with these gay cowboy studs, he needs to be removed and replaced with a Catholic who understands the purpose of the Office of Film Review. Forbes glowing review throws in two mild caveats to appease those who would object to the film’s approval of homosexuality.

The first caveat "As the Catholic Church makes a distinction between homosexual orientation and activity, Ennis and Jack's continuing physical relationship is morally problematic."

This needs to be changed something along the lines of: "Since homosexual orientation itself is—in the words of the Catechism—"intrinsically disordered," Catholics watching this movie are advised not to yield to the director's attempt to give the impression that the homosexual orientation may not itself be a source of concern and that only homosexual activity is "problematic."

His second caveat: "While the actions taken by Ennis and Jack cannot be endorsed, the universal themes of love and loss ring true."....and...."It's the emotional honesty of the story overall, and the portrayal of an unresolved relationship -- which, by the way, ends in tragedy -- that seems paramount."

This needs to be changed to: "The movie seems intended to leave the viewer with the impression that the pain caused to the two gay characters’ wives and children are ultimately the result of a homophobic culture and if only people had been more accepting of homosexuality then Ennis and Jack wouldn’t have felt pressured into marrying women and having families. Since Catholics maintain that sin is the source of pain and injustice in the world, they should reject the film's implication that we all can learn a lesson from this that our society must come to embrace homosexuality as an equal, respectable alternative lifestyle."

USCCB rating "OA" --Offensive and Antithetical to Catholic teaching.