Letters to the Editor
-
by theological
By theological, I mean that it might add something, as the author of the article suggests, to theology, which generally seems to be the field of people who are interested in learning about God, not trying to kill God.
Milton's "Paradise Lost," for example, though inherently heretical by orthodox Christian views, is still highly relevant to theology. Heresy is still concerned with learning about God.
Pullman's books seem unconcerned with learning about God, and Pullman himself seems unconcerned with God (except that he wants to undermine God). I suppose perhaps the books might seem theologically useful in helping to describe how God isn't... No theology I have ever read would describe a Creator so limited as the usurping angel in His Dark Materials.
I just think it's misplaced judgment for us to try to treat the books as anything other than what they actually are.
-
A Curious Statement
It doesn't trouble me that Pullman kills 'God' in his book (since his god looks nothing like the real one)
And what does this real God look like, exactly? Cause it seems to me religious people have been slaughtering religious people for centuries over assertions of what God really looks like, and no two cults seem to fully agree on that picture.
-
Heinlein once said:
No one has ever managed to create a god superior to themselves.
-
The dreaded Index
Surely Freitas knows well the history of her Church regarding ideas that its authority--yes, authority--deems heretical/inappropriate/challenging. During the Counter Reformation period of the late 16th century, that unease led to an Index of banned books, for which read-ing alone could threaten excommunication. And official books of Catholic theology still receive a "nihil obstat" (nothing objectionable) rating from Church theologians, viz. censors. Nor are the various Protestant denominations, esp current American evangelicals, much better on the subject of open-minded discussion of doctrine. The past half millenium has not been a very encouraging era of critical thinking regarding religious beliefs, so why should the 21st century be any different (unless you truly believe in liberal education after the Enlightenment). A little history is in order here.
-
I never thought that the trilogy was against, specifically, the Catholic Church.
I'm not refuting the author of the essay. It's just surprising to me that, of all the Christian religions, it's the Catholic Church that has its knickers in a bind about this movie. The outcry by members of the Roman Catholic Church is very interesting, and caught me by surprise. I went to Catholic grade school and high school, which gives me an insight into the desires of the Catholic Church (I thought about giving details, but decided against it; suffice it to say, I was indoctrinated 5 times a week and while I don't know all the ways Church doctrine got into my consciousness, I don't completely hate the RC Church).
So, with the release of this movie, I find myself asking: what do adherents to the Roman Catholic Church find specifically offensive about the trilogy? Sure, original sin is debated, and [2 spoiler alerts] God is killed in one of the later novels. And, oh yeah, there seem to be these two male angels who love each other in a way that I would denote as passionately [end spoiler alerts].
But what, really, is ramming up against the Roman Catholic Church, specifically, as an institution, as opposed to any number of other Christian religions? There are no sacraments defiled, the trilogy is not refuted, and as far as I can remember, well, women aren't a part of the ruling hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, but these books show a woman who is. Yay for Christian feminism, I suppose, in that a woman is a power in a religious powerhouse. [spoiler alert] Ok, she's kind of evil, but she's still powerful. [end spoiler alert]
So, is it the fact that there's this all-powerful governing religious body that's getting the Catholic Church up in arms? I think that it's wishful thinking on their parts. Maybe they wish to be back in the 14th Century when they could ex-communicate someone and it actually meant something.
Wait 'til they see the sequels.
Or, you know, they could read the books and see what they think of them. Which would really piss them off.
I know this: I won't recommend the books to anyone who is a devote Christian and not willing to read fiction regarding aspects of their religion.
OH! And all of this may be moot because I hear that religion was taken out of the screenplay! So let's just get indignant about an all-powerful group that has, yeah, nothing to do with religion!
-
Ms. Freitas and Mr. Pullman
Donna Freitas:
"I recently published (with Jason King) a book called 'Killing the Imposter God: Philip Pullman's Spiritual Imagination in His Dark Materials.'"
Philip Pullman:
"So the word 'spiritual', for me, has overtones that are entirely negative. It seems to me that whenever anyone uses the word, it's a sign that either they're deluding themselves, or they're pulling the wool over the eyes of others."
To Ms Freitas: Mr. Pullman doesn't love you and he never will. What does he have to say to you before you get it?
-
The corruption of worldly power
Ms Freitas,
This tempest over a critique of the corrupting influence of worldly power in the hands of the Church reminds me of an earlier one. In the late 14th Century William Langland wrote in The Vision of Piers Plowman,
When the kindness of Constantine gave the Holy Church endowments
In lands and leases, lordships and servants,
The Romans heard an angel cry on high above them,
"This day dos ecclesiae has drunk venom
And all who have Peter's power are poisoned forever."As a Catholic with a deep skepticism of hierarchy (literally priest-rule) I'm looking forward to reading Pullman's trilogy.
-
John Paul the Great
For those who speak of John Paul "the Great," an anti-Catholic is one who condemns the death penalty, does not support the war in Iraq, and who criticizes the Bush tax cuts.
-
Look, Ultra-Christian types
You feel threatened by a lot of things.
You feel threatened by atheists actually defending their lack of belief.
You feel threatened by scientific advances.
You feel threatened by birth control.
You feel threatened by a British comedy called "The Life of Brian."
You feel threatened by a statue of Jesus being made out of chocolate.
You feel threatened by the Jews in Israel actually pointing out the truth about the Church during WWII.
You feel threatened by role playing games.
You feel threatened by a fantasy trilogy about your religion possibly being a bad thing.
Maybe you should just stop feeling threatened and stop believing if that's how fragile your faith is.