Vatican newspaper says Hays film code was hypocritical and anachronistic

  • Thread starter Thread starter bobzills
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, considering that it was down on movies portraying inter-racial couples, I’d say the Hayes code definitely was hypocritical.
 
Matrix_Refugee said:
Well, considering that it was down on movies portraying inter-racial couples, I’d say the Hayes code definitely was hypocritical.
Click to expand...
Obviously, that part of the code should have been thrown out. However, there were other parts of the code that some may think are reasonable and promote good morality, such as the restrictions against the vulgarity, obscenity and profainity which we see in today’s movies and such as we read in today’s novels written by Roman Catholic priests such as Father Greeley.
 
bobzills said:
Obviously, that part of the code should have been thrown out. However, there were other parts of the code that some may think are reasonable and promote good morality, such as the restrictions against the vulgarity, obscenity and profainity which we see in today’s movies and such as we read in today’s novels written by Roman Catholic priests such as Father Greeley.
Click to expand...
Would that include Father Malachi Martin’s “King of Kings”? Well-written account of the life of King David, but the scene with Bathsheba leaves little to the imagination (though I got distracted in a good way by the description of biblical-era underwear, which was anything but Victoria’s Secret. Maybe he intended that). Or the scene with – and this is an elaboration of two verses in 1st Samuel – the very graphic scene where the prophet Samuel flays Agag alive; the creators of the SAW movies would have nightmares after reading that part. And yes, it’s written by that Father Malachi Martin, ie. the biblical scholar and exorcist for the diocese of New York City.
 
I seem to recall Lucille Ball not being able to use the word ‘pregnant’ on her TV show - instead she had to say something like ‘I’m going to be a mother’. That strikes me as particularly daft. Don’t know if it had anything to do with the Hays code though. And no couples shown on TV sharing a bed, or having a toilet in their bathrooms, until the Brady Bunch? Puh-leeze!

Not to mention that the public are just as influenced by the private lives of celebs (which were every bit as convoluted and sordid back then as they are now) than by what happens on screen. And perhaps it was less
 
LilyM said:
I seem to recall Lucille Ball not being able to use the word ‘pregnant’ on her TV show - instead she had to say something like ‘I’m going to be a mother’. That strikes me as particularly daft. Don’t know if it had anything to do with the Hays code though. And no couples shown on TV sharing a bed, or having a toilet in their bathrooms, until the Brady Bunch? Puh-leeze!

Not to mention that the public are just as influenced by the private lives of celebs (which were every bit as convoluted and sordid back then as they are now) than by what happens on screen. And perhaps it was less
Click to expand...
Your view is distorted. There was a Catholic Legion of Decency in the United States. Fortunately, good Catholics avoided gossip back then as well as now. I am aware of the recent trend to popularize gossip and it’s a bad thing. Catholics should not be seeking out the sordid. There is nothing anachronistic about using film, TV and radio as positive tools to enrich healthy minds and encourage spiritual growth.

I invite everyone to read the words of Pius XI about this subject:

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_29061936_vigilanti-cura_en.html

Peace,
Ed
 
I don’t think it was hypocritical or anachronistic. It was just a manifestation of the Church’s abhorrence of sex. When I was a freshman in high school back in the early 50’s I got dressed down in a speech class for using the word “pregnant.” Talk about a bunch of puritanical folks!
 
OriginalJS said:
I don’t think it was hypocritical or anachronistic. It was just a manifestation of the Church’s abhorrence of sex. When I was a freshman in high school back in the early 50’s I got dressed down in a speech class for using the word “pregnant.” Talk about a bunch of puritanical folks!
Click to expand...
This was the same nonsense that Hippies and ‘fine artists’ and Meathead in All In The Family spouted. The Church understands the proper use of human sexuality. It was the so-called Sexual Revolution that tried to market the idea that Catholics are repressed sexually. In fact, at one time, Catholic children were actively taught how to deal with their developing sexuality. The Church wants Catholics to avoid hedonism and to avoid treating other human beings as mere objects. At one time, the words love and sex went together.

Read your Bible, it has a lot to say about controlling the things you say. There are more Sexually Transmitted Diseases today than in the early 1950s.

Peace,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top