USCCB withdraws review of “The Golden Compass”

[bones_IV]

From CNSToday the U.S. bishops withdrew the review of the film “The Golden Compass,” which opened in theaters in the United States Dec. 7. The review was written by Harry Forbes and John Mulderig, the director and staff reviewer respectively of the Office for Film and Broadcasting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The review was released and posted on the CNS Web site Nov. 29. The USCCB gave no reason for withdrawing the review.

Since CNS is a distributor of media reviews of the OFB, it must respect the office’s withdrawal of its review. Effective Dec. 10, the review of “The Golden Compass” will not be available on the CNS Web site. It will not be included in subsequent listings of USCCB film reviews and classifications.

Why did the USCCB not give a reason for "withdrawing a review"???

Probably because they had absolutely no excuse for making such a stupid and idiotic mistake by supporting the works of a vehement atheist.

After all, it is the USCCB.

 

[manualman]

Because the bishops delegate the responsibility to review films to certain employees or consultants that have education or experience in the film industry. They do not screen every review before it is published and it is unlikely that any bishop read this before it hit the street.

Once it DID hit the street, the controversy erupted and the bishops have responded by pulling the review without comment until they have reviewed it and checked to see if the criticism is valid. Look for an explanation later. These things move at bishop speed, which is slowly (often for good reason, if infuriating at times).

In ONE sense, this is a job done badly by the USCCB. In another sense, you gotta feel for them. Just how many faithful catholics are there that are articulate, level-headed and educated and experienced in cinema arts? The lack of such candidates is as much our fault as theirs. They sure aren’t going to hire hotheads like bones or myself to do these things, and rightly so!

 

[Sr_Sally]

The lack of such candidates is as much our fault as theirs. They sure aren’t going to hire hotheads like bones or myself to do these things, and rightly so!

But we are glad you are here to enliven these forums!

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Because the bishops delegate the responsibility to review films to certain employees or consultants that have education or experience in the film industry. . .

Maybe someday they will have the good sense to add a couple who have a knowledge of Catholic teaching.

 

[cthemfly25]

Because the bishops delegate the responsibility to review films to certain employees or consultants that have education or experience in the film industry. … Just how many faithful catholics are there that are articulate, level-headed and educated and experienced in cinema arts? The lack of such candidates is as much our fault as theirs. They sure aren’t going to hire hotheads like bones or myself to do these things, and rightly so!

I sense that you have unintentionally hit the proverbial nail on the head. The USCCB should not be in the business of “movie critic” and so a Roger Ebert analysis of a film for cinematic quality and theatrical craftsmanship is out of its expertise. If the USCCB wishes to comment on movies, then it is mandated to do so through the prism of Catholic teaching which is to answer the question of whether a particular film serves Beauty and Truth. Otherwise, the USCCB has no business in show business. In fact, taking this fiasco a step further, one should understand that the USCCB has little expertise in many of the so called domestic and foreign policy and political issues about which it opines. If the bishops are not going to “manage” the affairs of this organization, then it is not an organization which serves the pastoral mission of the Church. This movie mess is a symptom of what goes on inside the USCCB. Otherwise, i prefer the opinions of you hotheads

 

[buffalo]

Good News!

 

[Vonier]

Inspires a lot of confidence doesn’t it. Seems to me, if you publicize something on the USCCB site it would have already been vetted and approved.

 

[tomarin]

I sense that you have unintentionally hit the proverbial nail on the head. The USCCB should not be in the business of “movie critic” and so a Roger Ebert analysis of a film for cinematic quality and theatrical craftsmanship is out of its expertise. If the USCCB wishes to comment on movies, then it is mandated to do so through the prism of Catholic teaching which is to answer the question of whether a particular film serves Beauty and Truth. Otherwise, the USCCB has no business in show business. In fact, taking this fiasco a step further, one should understand that the USCCB has little expertise in many of the so called domestic and foreign policy and political issues about which it opines. If the bishops are not going to “manage” the affairs of this organization, then it is not an organization which serves the pastoral mission of the Church. This movie mess is a symptom of what goes on inside the USCCB. Otherwise, i prefer the opinions of you hotheads

it never fails to amaze me how ordinary lay persons on this board will assume the authority to dictate what falls within the parameters of the bishops’ ministry. on whose authority do you do this? who appointed you to make these judgements? is your authority greater than the bishops the pope has chosen for us?

i read the review to simply be saying that the movie had no explicitly anti-christian elements, because whatever atheistic elements were in the book were toned down or removed. it wasn’t a review of the books, or a judgement on phillip pullman’s personal philosophy. it was an honest review of a movie that apparently had the gall to speak to us as if we were intelligent adults – which appears to be what so many around here find offensive.

 

[manualman]

I sense that you have unintentionally hit the proverbial nail on the head. The USCCB should not be in the business of “movie critic” and so a Roger Ebert analysis of a film for cinematic quality and theatrical craftsmanship is out of its expertise. If the USCCB wishes to comment on movies, then it is mandated to do so through the prism of Catholic teaching which is to answer the question of whether a particular film serves Beauty and Truth. Otherwise, the USCCB has no business in show business. In fact, taking this fiasco a step further, one should understand that the USCCB has little expertise in many of the so called domestic and foreign policy and political issues about which it opines. If the bishops are not going to “manage” the affairs of this organization, then it is not an organization which serves the pastoral mission of the Church. This movie mess is a symptom of what goes on inside the USCCB. Otherwise, i prefer the opinions of you hotheads

I understand the sentiment, but the logic behind would lead to a catholic subculture sort of like the evangelical protestant subculture, which has been aptly described as a “bad Xerox copy of mainstream culture.” The popes didn’t hire Michaelangelo because of his doctrinal purity, they hired him for his ARTISTIC skills and asked him to apply those to the gospel message. I’m glad they did, regardless of how holy the artists personal life was or wasn’t.

I think there SHOULD be USCCB reviews of movies and that they should be done by people that have the artistic appreciation AND the doctrinal founding to give advice to catholics about dangerous messages being presented via the movie medium. Easier said than done…

 

[bones_IV]

The USCCB: Confusing souls for more than 40 years. For everything good that they do, 2 things bad happen. Even if the bishops themselves don’t care one way or the other about the movie, they do care when a staff member creates problems for them. This review would not have been withdrawn if someone higher up didn’t squawk about it. I.e., Forbes & co. created trouble for the bishops. That’s bad for him. Surely someone will have noticed this isn’t the first time.

 

[tomarin]

The USCCB: Confusing souls for more than 40 years. For everything good that they do, 2 things bad happen. Even if the bishops themselves don’t care one way or the other about the movie, they do care when a staff member creates problems for them. This review would not have been withdrawn if someone higher up didn’t squawk about it. I.e., Forbes & co. created trouble for the bishops. That’s bad for him. Surely someone will have noticed this isn’t the first time.

maybe they should never have pulled the review, since doing so simply opens them up to uncharitable comments from people like yourself?

 

[cthemfly25]

it never fails to amaze me how ordinary lay persons on this board will assume the authority to dictate what falls within the parameters of the bishops’ ministry. on whose authority do you do this? who appointed you to make these judgements? is your authority greater than the bishops the pope has chosen for us?

i read the review to simply be saying that the movie had no explicitly anti-christian elements, because whatever atheistic elements were in the book were toned down or removed. it wasn’t a review of the books, or a judgement on phillip pullman’s personal philosophy. it was an honest review of a movie that apparently had the gall to speak to us as if we were intelligent adults – which appears to be what so many around here find offensive.

Actually tomarin on issues of secular and prudential judgment, you (you should not be so hard on yourself as a mere “ordinary layman”) and I do have authority and apparently a “greater” authority than Mr. Forbes—it’s called Reason. You may choose to defer its proper and critical use by defending Mr. Forbes and that is called freedom. I choose otherwise regardless of your rhetorical point that I have no such critical choice to question the bishops on this tawdry matter.

As to your on personal review of the review, namely, that it spoke to us as “intelligent adults” and that it was an “honest review”, putting aside what is an attenuated presumption on your part that it was even an intelligent review to start let alone honest in a broader sense of a purpose being served, the point being made is why did such a review emanate from a Catholic institution without a dogmatic Catholic filter. I’m sure you and i can debate the merits of what you call an “intelligent” review and what i would describe as idiotic pablum, and we can do so in good taste and respect for one another—but that was not the issue.

If you wish to use the USCCB and Mr. Forbes as your source for what is good taste in cinema, by all means it appears that the USCCB will and has provided you such a service, but it is a service no different than any other—which of course explains this embarrassment as well as the brokeback mess. Bones said it best and you offer him a well suited theatrical assist in furthering his point: “The USCCB–confusing souls for more than 40 years.”

 

[rlg94086]

May I recommend an alternate movie site? www.decentfilms.com

Stephen Greydanus does the reviews from a moral perspective. I find his insights very helpful in determining the appropriateness of a movie. He gives “Overall Recomendability” (A to F); “Artistic-Entertainment Value” (4-star rating); “Moral-Spiritual Value” (+4 to -4); and "Age Appropriateness (Adults, Teens and up, etc.).

Here is his review on The Golden Compass:
decentfilms.com/sections/reviews/goldencompass.html

He doesn’t review every film that comes out, but if you need guidance on the morality of something like *Superbad, *for example, then you may be beyond help.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

it never fails to amaze me how ordinary lay persons on this board will assume the authority to dictate what falls within the parameters of the bishops’ ministry. on whose authority do you do this? who appointed you to make these judgements? is your authority greater than the bishops the pope has chosen for us?
. . …

Do note that while each bishop has authority over those in his diocese, the USCCB has no authority over anyone. It is there to study, consult and make reccomendations. For any action of theirs to have authority it must have the unanimous approval of all the bishops, or be validated by the Vatican.

 

[bones_IV]

maybe they should never have pulled the review, since doing so simply opens them up to uncharitable comments from people like yourself?

Why not just fire the staff and hire Steven Gredanus to do the reviews for them?

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

…

it was an honest review of a movie that apparently had the gall to speak to us as if we were intelligent adults – which appears to be what so many around here find offensive.

Speaking to intelligent Catholic adults assumes that you are informed of that which intelligent Catholic adults are interested in.

The “reviewer” was obviously not informed of the issues about the film of which intelligent Catholic adults are concerned.

You assume that you know what “intelligent **Catholic **adults”, who ARE the audience for which the review was issued and NOT SIMPLY “intelligent adults”, means, and I, probably the vast majority of those here, and now even the USCCB disagree with you.

Please explain your meaning of “intelligent adult”, and any difference between that definition and your definition of “intelligent Catholic adult”.

Thank you VERY much for your well thought out and thorough response in advance.

 

[rlg94086]

Why not just fire the staff and hire Steven Gredanus to do the reviews for them?

 

[johnnykins]

it never fails to amaze me how ordinary lay persons on this board will assume the authority to dictate what falls within the parameters of the bishops’ ministry. on whose authority do you do this? who appointed you to make these judgements? is your authority greater than the bishops the pope has chosen for us?

Gee, I thought we the people, as the Church, were all appointed (as we are anointed) and given the authority to criticize and make such decisions by the Spirit of VII and the anti-clerical/anti-hierarchical underpinning of same that have likewise empowered Bishops to ignore Rome, priests to ignore Bishops and everyone to do pretty much what they want.

 

[consumedconvert]

I sense that you have unintentionally hit the proverbial nail on the head. The USCCB should not be in the business of “movie critic” and so a Roger Ebert analysis of a film for cinematic quality and theatrical craftsmanship is out of its expertise. If the USCCB wishes to comment on movies, then it is mandated to do so through the prism of Catholic teaching which is to answer the question of whether a particular film serves Beauty and Truth. Otherwise, the USCCB has no business in show business. In fact, taking this fiasco a step further, one should understand that the USCCB has little expertise in many of the so called domestic and foreign policy and political issues about which it opines. If the bishops are not going to “manage” the affairs of this organization, then it is not an organization which serves the pastoral mission of the Church. This movie mess is a symptom of what goes on inside the USCCB. Otherwise, i prefer the opinions of you hotheads

I don’t resent the USCCB’s entrance into film reviews at all; in fact, I use the site quite often. It lets me know what not to rent on Netflix. It helps my wife and I be choosy. Not every review will be perfect; but then I think we must recognize that there is room for disagreement in issues like whether a moview is suitable for Catholics.

Meat offered to idols, anyone? Got it halfprice!

 

[tomarin]

Do note that while each bishop has authority over those in his diocese, the USCCB has no authority over anyone. It is there to study, consult and make reccomendations. For any action of theirs to have authority it must have the unanimous approval of all the bishops, or be validated by the Vatican.

here is what the catechism says:

1560 As Christ’s vicar, each bishop has the pastoral care of the particular Church entrusted to him, but at the same time he bears collegially with all his brothers in the episcopacy the solicitude for all the Churches: “Though each bishop is the lawful pastor only of the portion of the flock entrusted to his care, as a legitimate successor of the apostles he is, by divine institution and precept, responsible with the other bishops for the apostolic mission of the Church.”

i understand and respect the right of lay people to criticize a bishop or the bishops collectively for a particular action – they are after all human beings and can make a mistake – but i think some of the comments i read here go too far, namely when they gratuitously insult or defame the bishops or their official organization.

i think as successors of the apostles they deserve better.