Even the bishops' conference loves the gay cowboy movie

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yin,

I still firmly believe that if all US Christians would behave and spend their money as true faithful Christians we would never have seen this story make it to film.

I could not say it any better. I agrew with that statement 100%!
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Orion,

I do not need to see the movie to know it is morally offensive. All I need to do is the review a few reviews and that tells the tale.
Click to expand...
And still, this USCCB reviewer is not encouraging you to see it. So how has the review led you astray? I still do not see how this review can be considered misleading to the reader.
 
Orion,

I do not agree. Movies, or art, or tv, or anything we choose to watch/view, should be things that lift-up the spirit in some way. Many of the movies out today tear down the spirit and should not be viewed…imo.
 
Yin,

The reviewer did a poor job because the movie is morally offensive and is dangerous to marginally formed souls.
 
40.png
fix:
Why the category and why place this movie in that category?
Click to expand...
Because people like me exist…Catholic people…so it helps to have that category. I appreciate being included as a category by my Church.
I think that is central to the discussion. The two issues that everyone is focusing on are the final rating and the way the film was portrayed.
Click to expand...
If the nuance was not presented by the review which is the center of this thread then why those nuances be included here?

The two issues - final rating and how the film was portrayed - neither, by the USCCB reviewer, nuanced gratuitous sex, bare breasts, multiple gay nude sex scenes.
 
40.png
fix:
From another review:
Click to expand...
Ahh…and yet, that “other” review is not the USCCB review we’re talking about. It is another person’s review of the USCCB review…
 
40.png
buffalo:
OK then. Years ago Hollywood was able to get acrosss their message without resorting to the above scenes. The same discriminating adult can and will use their imagination to complete the scene. We definitely don’t need the explicitness to understand the message.
Click to expand...
Which is a very valid observation.
People will reach the conclusions their minds and hearts lead them to regardless of what is really in front of them.

Reminds me of the cardinals who walked past a prostitute…one averted his eyes, the other did not. After she passed, the one who averted his eyes admonished the other for not doing so, and the other responded, “Did you see her beauty?” One only saw her sins, while the other saw God.

If you haven’t noticed yet, I’m an eternal optimist. The glass is always half full for me…I refuse to allow Satan to corrupt God’s awesome world. Many, many before you have exhausted themselves trying to get me to see the ugliness around me, I just can’t bring myself to do it.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Orion,

I do not agree. Movies, or art, or tv, or anything we choose to watch/view, should be things that lift-up the spirit in some way. Many of the movies out today tear down the spirit and should not be viewed…imo.
Click to expand...
That is right for you but not me. I don’t always go to movies for their pure entertainment value. Schindler’s List, the recent movie about sexual harrassment of miners in the Iron Range in Minnesota starring Charize Theron, Silence of the Lambs, Mississippi Burning are not uplifting movies but in some ways profoundly depressing as it shows how cruel man can be to man. But at the same time they give us insight into evil and its manifestations. Screwtape Letters (C.S. Lewis) or Hostage to the Devil (Malachi Martin) or The Prince (Machiavelli) are books that do the same thing. But just because they don’t have shallow entertainment value or aren’t uplifting doesn’t mean they aren’t without merit.

P.S. Am I the only one incensed that people falsely accused the USCCB and our Bishop’s of “loving” or being “glowing” about this movie?
 
40.png
buffalo:
Catholics do not find the good in evil. or Satan! They are tricked into thinking they see good in evil.
Click to expand...
Wow. News to me.
How else could we respond joyfully to the death of our Lord?

You don’t think evil was part of His brutal torture and execution?
You think the Church ‘tricked’ us into seeing the good from His death?
 
40.png
buffalo:
The laity is now the conscience of the Church?
Click to expand...
I doubt that, but since the reviews are offered in response to the laity it’s assuring they continue to respond to the needs of the laity, don’t you think?
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
I thought the review went right to the points that we Catholics care about. It told me there was indeed one sex scene…it told me it was mostly clothed…it told me there was one bare breast scene…it told me the wives were portrayed well, not as nags. Up until I read the review I fully expected the movie to contain several gay sex scenes without clothes, and I didn’t even know they had wives and kids…I also thought it was going to be about how wonderful their love was without regard for everyone else around them, and perhaps have a happy ending for them. This review showed me my preconceptions were wrong. I welcome that.
Click to expand...
Welcome aboard. You have purchased 1 ticket to propaganda.

What you are saying is the US Bishops put a positive spin on a movie that is intentful propaganda to legitimize the homosexual lifestyle even to the point to put a positive light on adultery and potentially leaving your family as long as you are being true to yourself. Whether there is more gratuitous nudity or not is secondary to the underlying justification of perversion. The whole thing makes my stomach turn quite frankly.

Maybe the Bishops did not do this on purpose. If not, they are also paying customers.
 
40.png
Orionthehunter:
P.S. Am I the only one incensed that people falsely accused the USCCB and our Bishop’s of “loving” or being “glowing” about this movie?
Click to expand...
Well even I see now where I got off the track along the way of this thread.

I thought the thread source was the USCCB review, when in fact it was the review of the USCCB review :o

The title of the thread was not the OPs doing, nor did anyone in this thread appear to agree the bishops LOVED the film…

The title was the title of the review of the review…THAT person is the one you would be justifiably upset with.

The people on this thread who agreed with the review of the review did so based on that argument about giving it the L instead of the O.
 
40.png
Brad:
Welcome aboard. You have purchased 1 ticket to propaganda.

What you are saying is the US Bishops put a positive spin on a movie that is intentful propaganda to legitimize the homosexual lifestyle even to the point to put a positive light on adultery and potentially leaving your family as long as you are being true to yourself. Whether there is more gratuitous nudity or not is secondary to the underlying justification of perversion. The whole thing makes my stomach turn quite frankly.

Maybe the Bishops did not do this on purpose. If not, they are also paying customers.
Click to expand...
That is grossly inaccurate of what she was saying.
 
40.png
Brad:
Welcome aboard. You have purchased 1 ticket to propaganda.

What you are saying is the US Bishops put a positive spin on a movie that is intentful propaganda to legitimize the homosexual lifestyle even to the point to put a positive light on adultery and potentially leaving your family as long as you are being true to yourself. Whether there is more gratuitous nudity or not is secondary to the underlying justification of perversion. The whole thing makes my stomach turn quite frankly.

Maybe the Bishops did not do this on purpose. If not, they are also paying customers.
Click to expand...
First of all, the reviewer himself is not a bishop and he’s not teaching on faith and morals. He’s a lay person reviewing a film in light of Catholic teaching.

Second, where did you get from the USCCB review this film puts a positive light on adultery and leaving your family? The review seemed rather clear that the movie focuses more on the damage such an affliction brings to all involved than celebrate it.

Third, as before, nothing in the USCCB suggested this film should be embraced by all people. No where did it counter your basic premise that the film is objectionable by Catholic standards, in fact, it agreed on those points precisely.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
Wow. News to me.
How else could we respond joyfully to the death of our Lord?

You don’t think evil was part of His brutal torture and execution?
You think the Church ‘tricked’ us into seeing the good from His death?
Click to expand...
From the Catechism:

1713 Man is obliged to follow the moral law, which urges him “to do what is good and avoid what is evil” (cf. *GS *16). This law makes itself heard in his conscience.

1714 Man, having been wounded in his nature by original sin, is subject to error and inclined to evil in exercising his freedom.

**324 **The fact that God permits physical and even moral evil is a mystery that God illuminates by his Son Jesus Christ who died and rose to vanquish evil. Faith gives us the certainty that God would not permit an evil if he did not cause a good to come from that very evil, by ways that we shall fully know only in eternal life.

**312 **In time we can discover that God in his almighty providence can bring a good from the consequences of an evil, even a moral evil, caused by his creatures: “It was not you”, said Joseph to his brothers, “who sent me here, but God. . . You meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive.” From the greatest moral evil ever committed - the rejection and murder of God’s only Son, caused by the sins of all men - God, by his grace that “abounded all the more”, brought the greatest of goods: the glorification of Christ and our redemption. But for all that, evil never becomes a good.
 
40.png
buffalo:
From the Catechism:

1713 Man is obliged to follow the moral law, which urges him “to do what is good and avoid what is evil” (cf. *GS *16). This law makes itself heard in his conscience.

1714 Man, having been wounded in his nature by original sin, is subject to error and inclined to evil in exercising his freedom.

324 The fact that God permits physical and even moral evil is a mystery that God illuminates by his Son Jesus Christ who died and rose to vanquish evil. Faith gives us the certainty that God would not permit an evil if he did not cause a good to come from that very evil, by ways that we shall fully know only in eternal life.

**312 **In time we can discover that God in his almighty providence can bring a good from the consequences of an evil, even a moral evil, caused by his creatures: “It was not you”, said Joseph to his brothers, “who sent me here, but God. . . You meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive.” From the greatest moral evil ever committed - the rejection and murder of God’s only Son, caused by the sins of all men - God, by his grace that “abounded all the more”, brought the greatest of goods: the glorification of Christ and our redemption. But for all that, evil never becomes a good.
Click to expand...
And this is in any way contrary to what I’ve been saying???

I’ve never said evil becomes a good.
I’ve said, everything created comes from God, Satan manipulates what he can, and God prevails by still producing good despite Satan’s attempt to thwart it.

In the case of porn, I acknowledged, that is sheer evil from the onset and God would not use that to convey messages to the masses. However, that’s not to exclude God being able to do so should He choose. Since all creation comes from God, even the existence of that branch of media comes from Him, though it is obviously deeply in the throes of Satan’s manipulations. I would not be surprised to learn that some people were converted to faith in God after having been exposed to pornography for years at a time. Perhaps the degrading nature of it all finally struck them as ‘naturally morally wrong’ and caused them to seek a truth better than that.
 
orion,

It is as simple as this: we are called to lift our spirits to God. If something has potential to pull down our spirits, then we should not partake.
 
Per the site:

"movies have been evaluated by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop’s Office for Film and Broadcasting **according to artistic merit and **moral suitability. "
Click to expand...
this in no way would seperate artistic merit from what is truly beautiful, which is something that is universal. if we assume artistic merit is a measure of beauty, or at least it should be in the catholic perspective, then we also know that God is the ultimate author of beauty.

what makes something ugly is the fact that it is disordered, or goes agains the natural law established by God, and not the goodness of God’s creation. objectively speaking, icons, the sistine chapel, gothic cathedrals, the rocky mountains, are beautiful. stuff like much modern art which reflects society, the homosexual act itself, destruction, sin, unjust war, injustice… etc., are not beautiful inherently. so unless this movie uses images of evil to bring out greater good, it could never be beautiful or have any artistic merit.

now if we define artistic merit as simply the secular notion of reflecting society, then perhaps it does have artistic merit. but, if you agree to this, then you are seperating God from reality and you are going down the wide path to destruction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top