Stigmata the movie

  • Thread starter Thread starter freesoulhope
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

freesoulhope

Guest
Has anyone seen this film? And is anyone aware of the heresy that is spoken of in it?

If so, can somebody please tell me why the Catholic Church veiws it as a heresy?

It Goes something like…

“The kingdom of God is in side you, not in buildings and stone.”
 
It’s been about 10 years since I saw that piece of ****. I wasn’t even that avid a Catholic then; I was the type who proudly said “Yeah, I’m Catholic” when people asked me about the ashes on my forehead, but then I’d skip Mass for months on end.

In any case, even then, I was able to recognize that film for what it is: a poorly conceived, terribly written pseudo-psychological drama with the age-old “the Church is hiding stuff from us in order to maintain its power and influence” device as the driving force behind the plot.

Pshaw.

I don’t remember the heresy to which you refer, but I do remember the extraordinarily weak plot device in which the protagonists had to solve some half-baked spiritual mystery before the girl got the last stigmatum (sp?). Where the heck did they come up with that?

Oh, and the placard at the end, which the filmmakers obviously thought lent some credibility to their “opus”, was brilliantly ignorant: it was a summary of the Church’s supposed quashing of the “gospel” of Thomas, full of innuendo about the Church having something to hide.

El oh el.

Peace,
Dante
 
I found it an interesting movie. I’d never heard of the stigmata before this movie, so in that sense it was educational. Then again, I watch movies simply to enjoy a good piece of fiction. I saw Jesus Christ Superstar when it was considered a heresy. I also saw The Last Temptation Of Christ and Dogma as well. Woop de doo. They’re movies, not Religous Education.

The whole Passion Of The Christ fanfare blew over my head. It wasn’t a spiritual expierance for me, just another movie.

Kim
 
If I remember correctly, it is a passage from the “Gospel of Thomas” which of course is not an accepted canonical book.

Basically the plot revolved around the CC “cover up” of that piece of scripture. The church would lose their power and wealth if word got out that Christ actually said such a thing.

bada bing, there’s your heresy.

Been a while since I’ve seen it so I could be mistaken.:eek:
 
mesquite_magic said:
I found it an interesting movie. I’d never heard of the stigmata before this movie, so in that sense it was educational. Then again, I watch movies simply to enjoy a good piece of fiction. I saw Jesus Christ Superstar when it was considered a heresy. I also saw The Last Temptation Of Christ and Dogma as well. Woop de doo. They’re movies, not Religous Education.

The whole Passion Of The Christ fanfare blew over my head. It wasn’t a spiritual expierance for me, just another movie.

Kim
Click to expand...
The problem is that many people who have never heard of the stigmata may have gotten the wrong impression not only of this miracle and its meaning, but also of the Church in general.

Your argument – even without the condescending tone – is the same one people use to acquit The DaVinci Code. Your mention of Dogma illustrates the shallowness of your view, as that was one of the most ignorant and relativist depictions of Catholicism I’ve ever seen. It was hilarious – but the funny parts were all juvenile body humor. There was nothing clever or insightful in that movie whatsoever.

You can claim that you watch movies “just for entertainment”, and that there’s nothing spiritual in them for you, but you’re deceiving yourself. Such entertainments lower the tastes and weaken the intellect – we’re called to be so much more than fart-joke spouting nincompoops.

Peace,
Dante
 
**Stigmata ** – Dizzy horror hokum about a priest-scientist (Gabriel Bryne) sent by the Vatican to investigate reports of stigmata-like wounds on the wrists of a Pittsburgh woman (Patricia Arquette), then turns to protecting her from demonic forces as well as the psychotic Cardinal (Jonathan Pryce) behind a Vatican plot to suppress a supposed “lost Gospel” that would render the institutional Church irrevelant. Director Rupert Wainwright keeps the bogus plot boiling with sexual innuendo as the priest is drawn to the young woman, scary interludes of demonic special effects and a hokey conspiracy plot that a misleading epilogue suggests is truth rather than fiction. Exploitative use of religion with an anti-Catholic flavor, frequent violence involving the stigmata and demonic attacks, a shadowy sexual encounter, occasional profanity and rough language. (O) (R) ( 1999 )
Click to expand...
(O means morally offensive)

This review is on the US Bishops website.
 
DanteAlighieri said:
The problem is that many people who have never heard of the stigmata may have gotten the wrong impression not only of this miracle and its meaning, but also of the Church in general.

Or, like me, it might cause people to research the issue a little.

Your argument – even without the condescending tone – is the same one people use to acquit The DaVinci Code. Your mention of Dogma illustrates the shallowness of your view, as that was one of the most ignorant and relativist depictions of Catholicism I’ve ever seen. It was hilarious – but the funny parts were all juvenile body humor. There was nothing clever or insightful in that movie whatsoever.

**What condescending tone? I said I watch movies for entertainment, not to get my Religious Education, is that the tone you are referring to? That wasn’t condecending. It was sensiable.

I watched The DaVinci Code as well. I saw right through many of his arguements. Some weren’t very well thought out. It was still a good piece of fiction, action, and a little adventure.

I never said Dogma was clever. I said I found it funny. All you have to do is see J. and Slient Bob on the cover to tell you it isn’t going to be reverant. If that doesn’t tip you off, maybe the fact that George Carlin plays the Cardinal, will. **

You can claim that you watch movies “just for entertainment”, and that there’s nothing spiritual in them for you, but you’re deceiving yourself. Such entertainments lower the tastes and weaken the intellect – we’re called to be so much more than fart-joke spouting nincompoops.

Watching a movie doen’t change my personality. Parenting and Spirituality helped to form me. What deception is there in that?

Peace,
Dante
Click to expand...
 
40.png
mesquite_magic:
J and Silent Bob? Sounds like you’re thinking of a different movie entirely. If I remember correctly you’re thinking of Dogma.

Which I must admit I found very funny albeit very irreverent. As a female I’ve gotta love the idea of God being female, even though I’d never assume our heavenly Father is female.
 
40.png
mesquite_magic:
My apologies – I didn’t mean to single you out. The point is not that you are vulnerable, but that many are.

In any case, the point about eroding your tastes and standards still stands.

Peace,
Dante
 
freesoulhope said:
Has anyone seen this film? And is anyone aware of the heresy that is spoken of in it?

If so, can somebody please tell me why the Catholic Church veiws it as a heresy?

It Goes something like…

“The kingdom of God is in side you, not in buildings and stone.”
Click to expand...

It’s a work of fiction - so I would no more rely on it as a theological guide, than I would rely on “Ben Hur” as a guide to the history of Judea before the destruction of Jerusalem :), or on “The Fly” as a guide to gene splicing.​

A plot device in a film, is not the same thing as its message; many films don’t have a message. One can have both together; or they can be the same thing; or one can have either without the other.

As for that particular quotation: I think it’s perfectly orthodox & true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top