Why was Catholicism portrayed more favorably in film in 1940's and 1950's?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 7_Sorrows
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve noticed this too about Father Mulcahy. Even to the point that Sunday services don’t look like Mass at all. I do remember one episode where the characters were all suffering from nightmares, he fell asleep hearing a confession.

As for the wedding, it doesn’t make sense he would be the celebrant. I’m sure Colonel Potter or was it Blake could have done it. :confused:
Good point. I would guess that the writers think something along these lines: Mulcahy’s a great guy as well as a priest, he’s close to Houlihan, almost family, so why wouldn’t he marry them? Wouldn’t it be cruel of him to say (as he should) you should really go to Colonel Potter?

It’s possible they (the writers) didn’t even understand this, it’s so crazy and out of the realm of possibility.

I had an acquaintance once who was outraged that a Catholic priest wouldn’t agree to marry him and his wife (before they were married) because she was Hindu. To my mind the priest made the only decision he could but to him it was something akin to an act of discrimination. I think for him marriage was a practical and not a sacramental matter.
 
“It never existed” is a common statement from those on the Left to discredit a whole generation. It existed. I was there. I was happy. We had meager means but that didn’t matter. We did not all go to the same Church but we shared common values and treated each other in a friendly, polite way. We had manners. We had boundaries. We had a community, not the disconnected tribalism of today.

Sure, it wasn’t perfect. We had a few bad apples but we did not lock our doors at night.

It is wrong to make broad brush statements.
Where did you live specifically, Ed, and what period of time exactly are you talking about?

No offence, but when forming views of broad periods of history it’s much better to study a range of accounts and look at legislation, statistical data, etc. One person’s idealized memories of childhood isn’t a good way to form a view of what life was like for the average person. I can give you personal accounts from people living in countries in the Soviet bloc as children who have very positive recollections of their childhood and view it as a “better time”, but I still wouldn’t consider it a nice place to have lived.

As a young person I do not believe in the idealized past that nationalists and general right-wingers like to promote. Even if it was good for you, I would question how much your experience is that of most of the population.
 
Where did you live specifically, Ed, and what period of time exactly are you talking about?

No offence, but when forming views of broad periods of history it’s much better to study a range of accounts and look at legislation, statistical data, etc. One person’s idealized memories of childhood isn’t a good way to form a view of what life was like for the average person. I can give you personal accounts from people living in countries in the Soviet bloc as children who have very positive recollections of their childhood and view it as a “better time”, but I still wouldn’t consider it a nice place to have lived.

As a young person I do not believe in the idealized past that nationalists and general right-wingers like to promote. Even if it was good for you, I would question how much your experience is that of most of the population.
I think its natural for people with happy childhood memories to see the past through rose tinted glasses. There are still people in Russia who lay flowers on Stalin’s tomb. They would tell you that Stalin made Russia a great place to live…and in many ways he did drag Russia out of the Middle Ages…but the millions of Ukrainians he starved to death would have had a different perspective. That’s what I was trying to get at in regards to the rights and lifestyles of, say, the pre-1960s Black population in the Southern US or aboriginals here in BC.
 
I think its natural for people with happy childhood memories to see the past through rose tinted glasses. There are still people in Russia who lay flowers on Stalin’s tomb. They would tell you that Stalin made Russia a great place to live…and in many ways he did drag Russia out of the Middle Ages…but the millions of Ukrainians he starved to death would have had a different perspective. That’s what I was trying to get at in regards to the rights and lifestyles of, say, the pre-1960s Black population in the Southern US or aboriginals here in BC.
At least Stalin helped the allies defeat Hitler. But he was a very cruel man.
 
I remember the Church was (at least) associated with a ratings system which was published in our local paper.

A1 was a movie approved for all audiences

A2 was for older children (teens, I believe)

It went on from there to a Condemned category.

And, believe me, my parents checked the rating before we were allowed to see anything.
 
Where did you live specifically, Ed, and what period of time exactly are you talking about?

No offence, but when forming views of broad periods of history it’s much better to study a range of accounts and look at legislation, statistical data, etc. One person’s idealized memories of childhood isn’t a good way to form a view of what life was like for the average person. I can give you personal accounts from people living in countries in the Soviet bloc as children who have very positive recollections of their childhood and view it as a “better time”, but I still wouldn’t consider it a nice place to have lived.

As a young person I do not believe in the idealized past that nationalists and general right-wingers like to promote. Even if it was good for you, I would question how much your experience is that of most of the population.
I and my contemporaries grew up in a city. And I had relatives living in a Communist bloc country. A friend of the family visited that country, put a tape recorder on a table and we listened as they talked about their lives. I have personal accounts and English is not my first language.

The Left has as part of its primary mission, a hatred for moral living. I watched as not just my neighborhood, but the entire West was turned upside down to suit their wishes and desires. The Left has an idealized version of reality we are living through right now. What I lived through is well documented but it drove the Left crazy. They are telling most of the population, right now, to conform to their “ideal,” which is wrong. They are promoting it 24/7.

I will not deviate from what I was taught. Never.

That is why I study history, in-depth.

Ed
 
Where did you live specifically, Ed, and what period of time exactly are you talking about?

No offence, but when forming views of broad periods of history it’s much better to study a range of accounts and look at legislation, statistical data, etc. One person’s idealized memories of childhood isn’t a good way to form a view of what life was like for the average person. I can give you personal accounts from people living in countries in the Soviet bloc as children who have very positive recollections of their childhood and view it as a “better time”, but I still wouldn’t consider it a nice place to have lived.

As a young person I do not believe in the idealized past that nationalists and general right-wingers like to promote. Even if it was good for you, I would question how much your experience is that of most of the population.
Your dubiousness is exactly correct. It was actually a time of abject horror that I do not look back upon with any nostalgia. To depict that era in some sort of utopian term is offensive.

I grew up in the aftermath of World War II, which had further decimated the continent after the “War to end all wars”…men of that era, soldiers, invaded and decimated our countries and our families and our lives. They tore asunder national sovereignties and integrities. That is not civilised behaviour.

Civilised era? Go to Oświęcim and visit Auschwitz-Birkenau or go to Bergen-Belsen and then try to tell me about this “civilised era” in which everyone was safe.

Or go back and look at Reichskristallnacht and all the other pogroms and tell me about how everyone was civilised.

Those who had suffered the bombardments would hardly describe this time period as a civilised era.

Today, I have only to look around to be reminded of the absolute horror of that era; I can still see it wherever I look…because my parents made sure I would never forget…or allow people to tell lies about what that era was really like.

From the '50s and the '60s, the children of Korea and French Indochina would not be speaking in such idyllic terms of what life was like – nor would the children in the countries of Africa, which were suffering under and freeing themselves from the oppression of colonial powers as they gained independence.

As for the United States…among my most vivid memories from decades ago was meeting African Americans who had been with the Reverend Martin Luther King in the tremendous and violent civil rights struggle to throw off decades of suffering and oppression. Hearing their account first hand. The words they used to describe that era were anything but the expressions I have thus far read in this thread. And, I could say the same thing regarding women Religious from the United States in that era with whom I worked. They also had much to say. May God bless them.
 
I and my contemporaries grew up in a city. And I had relatives living in a Communist bloc country. A friend of the family visited that country, put a tape recorder on a table and we listened as they talked about their lives. I have personal accounts and English is not my first language.

The Left has as part of its primary mission, a hatred for moral living. I watched as not just my neighborhood, but the entire West was turned upside down to suit their wishes and desires. The Left has an idealized version of reality we are living through right now. What I lived through is well documented but it drove the Left crazy. They are telling most of the population, right now, to conform to their “ideal,” which is wrong. They are promoting it 24/7.

I will not deviate from what I was taught. Never.

That is why I study history, in-depth.

Ed
Couldn’t have said it better.
 
This thread has put me in mind of something which may or may not be related. I’ve been watching a lot of MAS*H lately, and in general I enjoy it but Father Mulcahy is a problematic character for me, because either he is not a very self-aware priest or the writers writing the show don’t know much about Catholicism. He’s obviously meant to be a sympathetic character to a very large extent, and there’s no question that he is a good Christian as well as a self-sacrificing priest but in many instances his instinctual kindness leads him to say or do things that aren’t really Catholic - and he doesn’t seem to feel any regret or discomfort in that, as if he may not even know that they’re not Catholic. There’s one episode in which he marries two people (I think it was Hot Lips Hoolihan and her fiance, Penobscot ((forgot his rank))) who aren’t even Catholic. It’s almost as if the writers don’t know that Catholicism isn’t just another Protestant denomination.

There’s also the fact that as kindly as Father Mulcahy is, there’s something a little nebbishy and unmanly about him, as if one can’t help but expect the cynical world view of the show (the movie was far worse, but still) to take hiim as a chump of some sort. It’s almost as if he’s to be regarded as some sort of eccentric for believing in God in such a seemingly godless place as a war zone.
I believe the actor, William Christopher, just passed away…😦
 
This thread has put me in mind of something which may or may not be related. I’ve been watching a lot of MAS*H lately, and in general I enjoy it but Father Mulcahy is a problematic character for me, because either he is not a very self-aware priest or the writers writing the show don’t know much about Catholicism. He’s obviously meant to be a sympathetic character to a very large extent, and there’s no question that he is a good Christian as well as a self-sacrificing priest but in many instances his instinctual kindness leads him to say or do things that aren’t really Catholic - and he doesn’t seem to feel any regret or discomfort in that, as if he may not even know that they’re not Catholic. There’s one episode in which he marries two people (I think it was Hot Lips Hoolihan and her fiance, Penobscot ((forgot his rank))) who aren’t even Catholic. It’s almost as if the writers don’t know that Catholicism isn’t just another Protestant denomination.

There’s also the fact that as kindly as Father Mulcahy is, there’s something a little nebbishy and unmanly about him, as if one can’t help but expect the cynical world view of the show (the movie was far worse, but still) to take hiim as a chump of some sort. It’s almost as if he’s to be regarded as some sort of eccentric for believing in God in such a seemingly godless place as a war zone.
I think the time is long past to critique how this show was written. For starters - to your point about the marriage of “Hot Lips” - my understanding of military chaplains is that they offer cross-denominational services, especially on the front line, and in the case of marrying 2 non-Catholics, I don’t believe the fictional Fr. Mulcahy was under the obligation to make that look like a Catholic ceremony.
 
I think the time is long past to critique how this show was written. For starters - to your point about the marriage of “Hot Lips” - my understanding of military chaplains is that they offer cross-denominational services, especially on the front line, and in the case of marrying 2 non-Catholics, I don’t believe the fictional Fr. Mulcahy was under the obligation to make that look like a Catholic ceremony.
Was he specifically a Catholic priest or could he have been Episcopalian?
 
I think the time is long past to critique how this show was written. For starters - to your point about the marriage of “Hot Lips” - my understanding of military chaplains is that they offer cross-denominational services, especially on the front line, and in the case of marrying 2 non-Catholics, I don’t believe the fictional Fr. Mulcahy was under the obligation to make that look like a Catholic ceremony.
What about how the movie “MASH” was written – has anybody ever seen that movie (not the TV show) lately? Among its anti-Christian sentiment, it literally makes fun of the Last Supper and may have been the first R-rated movie to drop an f-bomb. Other than the characters having the same names, there is very little in common with the movie. However, it is one of the few movies from that era whose entire cast is nearly all still with us – including Rene Auberjonois, who played Fr. John Mulcahy in the original movie version.
 
What about how the movie “MASH” was written – has anybody ever seen that movie (not the TV show) lately? Among its anti-Christian sentiment, it literally makes fun of the Last Supper and may have been the first R-rated movie to drop an f-bomb. Other than the characters having the same names, there is very little in common with the movie. However, it is one of the few movies from that era whose entire cast is nearly all still with us – including Rene Auberjonois, who played Fr. John Mulcahy in the original movie version.
I don’t remember seeing the movie version. I was never a big fan of the TV show MASH or Hgan’s Heroes. I thought they were both stupid
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top