Why Give Offensive Movies Any Ink At All?

Last night I had dinner with four friends and one mentioned that she had seen the movie Brokeback Mountain. My friend, who is not Catholic, proceeded to tell me how its obvious intent is to normalize homosexuality, thus further contributing to the moral decay of our culture. I was shocked today when my 16-year-old son told me that the National Catholic Register had a review of Brokeback Mountain (“Tainted Love Rides Into Town,” Jan. 8-14).

My son spontaneously quipped, “It is immoral to see an immoral movie!” What, may I ask, is a Catholic newspaper doing printing a review of a clearly immoral movie?

I, my husband and our four oldest children eagerly await our issue of the Register. I like everything about the paper except the movie reviews. I am frequently surprised and disappointed with both the choice of movies reviewed and the reviews themselves. Readers of the Register are serious Catholics taking their call to holiness seriously. We desire to participate in a culture that leads us to Christ. Thus, most of us shun the evils of modern culture by finding alternatives to productions that reflect our culture’s sickness, the “culture of death.”

Just because movies exist in our culture as entertainment does not mean that we should embrace them. There are excellent movies that have been made since the inception of the movie industry, and I would expect the Register movie reviews and recommendations to cover those excellent movies that immerse us in beauty and goodness, and ultimately lead us to Christ. We Catholic adults and teens should not have to read in your paper the lurid details of the depravity in our culture of the entertainment industry.

Mary McCauley Wood

Ojai, California

Editor’s Reply: Unlike our Weekly Video/DVD Picks, our full movie reviews look not at recommendable movies per se, but “bellwether” movies — films that, by their success or notoriety, point to trends developing in popular culture that, we believe, our readers ought to know about if they are to bring the Gospel into the culture. In such cases as the loudly celebrated release of Brokeback Mountain, which will almost certainly vie for “best picture” honors at the Academy Awards, our main aim is to equip.

Rice Isn’t Nice

I believe the front-page article about Anne Rice was ill-advised (“Literary Convert of the Year,” Jan. 1-7).

I wonder if the Register is familiar with all the outspoken and well-publicized disagreements that Anne Rice has with the Catholic Church. Frankly, I wasn’t until I read a feature article in the Jan. 3 Baltimore Sun newspaper singing the praises of Rice’s latest book, Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt. At a minimum, I have to wonder why she “returned” to the Roman Catholic Church.

Given her substantial disagreements with the Church, it’s a puzzle to me how Archbishop Philip Hannan, the retired archbishop of New Orleans, could not be distressed about her public views and, furthermore, be quoted on her website  congratulating Rice on “the splendid novel you have written about the life of Jesus. ... I am confident that your writings will contribute to a great harvest of souls who need such inspiration today.”

In my view, there are enough events taking place lending to the confusion of Catholic faithful, so why must the Catholic press add to it?

Meanwhile, thanks for “Pro-Catholic Movie of the Year” on The Exorcism of Emily Rose (Jan. 1-7). I watched the movie last night and your article helped me separate fact from fiction, while also enabling me to enjoy an excellent movie presentation.

K. Dale Anderson

Randallstown, Maryland

Shepherding Catechesis

Regarding “Pittsburgh ‘Strict’ on Kid Texts” (Jan. 8-14):

Thanks to Bishop Donald Wuerl and his staff for making sure that parishes’ catechetical programs — in particular, the Montessori-inspired Catechesis of the Good Shepherd and religious-education textbooks in the Pittsburgh Diocese — are in conformity with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

The Montessori Method of education, which Dr. Maria Montessori said she borrowed from the pedagogical method of the Catholic Church, is indeed very powerful and attractive, especially when applied to religious education. The Catechesis of the Good Shepherd is one program that was developed jointly by a Montessori-trained educator, Gianna Gobbi, and a Scripture scholar, Sofia Cavalletti. There were others who applied the Montessori Method to religious education, but Good Shepherd’s catechetical program is the most popular one.

Catholic catechists must promote and embrace this and other Montessori-inspired catechetical programs because the Montessori Method, when applied to religious education, is very effective in teaching the faith to children of all ages.

Delia V. Mendoza

Woodside, New York

Cafeteria Rice

Regarding “Literary Convert of the Year” (Jan. 1-7):

It’s distressing that the Register would publish an article like this without commentary. Mrs. Rice’s cavalier attitude about her return from atheism to the faith of her childhood while harboring and confidently stating her doubts about the Church’s teaching on contraception and homosexuality is outrageous.

As though to endorse the unfortunately popular opinion that the Catholic Church is like a cafeteria, retired Archbishop Philip Hannon, who knew Mrs. Rice from her childhood in his archdiocese, commented that he is not distressed by her doubts. He seems to think that “we” will eventually straighten out her thinking. In truth, her heretical doubts should have been laid to rest before her return to the communion of the faithful. The Catechism describes heresy as the obstinate denial of some truth that must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or an obstinate doubt concerning the same (No. 2089).

In 1994, Archbishop William Levada, the newly appointed head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who is known for having a gift for compromise, wrote: “A ‘cafeteria’ approach to the faith has no basis in Scripture or the Church’s tradition. Indeed, it has always been the case that rejection of even one of the doctrines of our faith implies a rupture with the visible communion of one faith, one Church.”

If Anne Rice’s formation in this fundamental truth of the faith was deficient, then it seems it is the responsibility of the Register’s correspondent’s to at least add a note at the end of the article clarifying the truth. I would expect to read this kind of article in a secular newspaper. I buy the Register to get a strong, balanced Catholic viewpoint.

In the future, I hope the Register’s editors will be more critical in their review of articles such as this one.

 Marilyn Farinholt

Winchester, Virginia

The War Over the War

Regarding “Let’s Step Up and Stop the War” from Molly Powers-Aranda (Letters, Dec. 18-31):

On May 2, 2003, Pope Benedict XVI (then Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), stated that Pope John Paul II “did not impose this (anti-Iraq war) position as doctrine of the Church but as the appeal of a conscience enlightened by faith.” Unlike many U.S. Democrats, Pope John Paul’s thoughts on the Iraq war were not voiced in an arrogant, judgmental manner. He loved America and praised President George W. Bush’s moral leadership.

Cardinal Ratzinger later confirmed: “There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion, even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not, however, with regard to abortion and euthanasia” (L’espresso, June 2004).

On Feb. 17, 1998, President Clinton stated: “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”  Ted Kennedy, Al Gore, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton also believed that Saddam Hussein had biological, chemical and nuclear programs in place.

If President Bush is a liar, why aren’t Democrats held accountable? Do they think faulty intelligence on Iraq only came through George W. Bush? They originally got it from President Bill Clinton.

Vincent Bemowski

Menasha, Wisconsin

Rocks in the Head?

Regarding “Experts Debate Impact of Intelligent Design Ruling” (Jan. 15-21):

I found Federal Judge John Jones’ ruling against informing Pennsylvania school students that there might be an alternative to the “Big Bang” and Darwin’s theory of evolution rather narrow-minded.

First, why is evolution incompatible with God? It’s seems obvious to me that a “Great Designer” would design a system that would incorporate the evolutionary process. A static universe would be as dynamic as a wall painting and therefore hardly “perfect.”

Also, without the concept of Intelligent Design, we are left with the following “Big Bang Genesis” explanation for the creation of the Universe:

“In the beginning there was a self-creating rock. The rock decided to blow itself up. As bits of the rock hurtled through the void of space, they created the laws of thermodynamics, gravity, physics and time itself. After a while, parts of the rock decided to animate themselves and create an ever more complex and difficult environment in which to survive. Still later, the more evolved, animated rocks decided to create a deity to explain their existence, since the idea that they came from a self-animating rock never occurred to them. Later still, the more intellectual descendants of the self-created, auto-animating rock finally realized they were, in fact, descendants of the first rock and so decided there was no further need to believe in an eternal, benevolent, creative consciousness. They then decided to pass laws so that all must believe i pn the Universal Omega Rock.”

Well, there you have the “real science” that the logical Judge Jones wants taught to our school children. I don’t know about you, but it sounds like a big leap of “scientific faith” to me.

Richard Schaefer

Frazier Park, California

Acronym Accuracy

Thank you for featuring the Institute for the Psychological Sciences in your back-page article “Defeating Despondency” (Jan. 8-14). We wanted to point out that the Institute is referred to as “IPI” throughout the article, instead of the proper “IPS.”

 Genevieve Yep

Institute for the Psychological Sciences

ipsciences.edu