May 6 - There Be Dragons

This is what I want for my birthday.  I want the family to go to this movie together!
THERE BE DRAGONS is a powerful film about love and redemption, directed by Roland Joffe    (The Mission, The Killing Fields).   It opens in theaters May 6. Hope you can see it too, and please forward this to others.




Roland Joffe, the director who brought us the THE MISSION has returned to his roots with the epic movie THERE BE DRAGONS, a powerful story of war, tragedy, love and redemption. Set during the turmoil of the Spanish Civil War (early 1900's), Dragons tells the story of two childhood friends who became separated during the political conflict to find themselves on opposite sides as war erupts. One chooses the path of peace and becomes a priest (Josemaria Escriva) while the other chooses the life of a soldier driven by jealousy and revenge. Each will struggle to find the power of forgiveness over the forces that tore their lives and friendship apart . . .


SOURCES:
www.DragonsResources.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwgo9sldmwU&feature=player_embedded#at=12

Atlas Shrugged - Not Rushing Out to See the Movie!

Ayn Rand’s philosophy?  Her philosophy reduces itself to: "I’m on board; pull up the lifeline."

I recently read a review of the movie Atlas Shrugged. It went something like this:

"Its theme is the role of individual achievement in society and its goal is to demonstrate what can happen when individual achievement is undervalued, suppressed and demonized. Complex characters embody heroism and evil, in a plot that combines drama, mystery, romance, and science fiction - the result is ultimately inspirational, not apocalyptic."

Sounds wonderful, doesn't it? If you are unfamiliar with Ayn Rand, the author of Atlas Shrugged,  here is some important stuff to know before reading the book or seeing the movie.

Ayn Rand advocated a particular philosophical system that she dubbed "Objectivism," because of its supposedly objective viewpoint.
Just as the term "pro-choice" sounds inviting, open and fair . . . so does this philosophy (at first glance).

Objectivism tends to support a form of individualism that leaves open to the individual certain forms of freedom that Catholic theology would hold are immoral (e.g., it sometimes exalts selfishness as a virtue). It also tends to be strongly anti-religious. She is not taken seriously as a philosopher by real, academic philosophers but she did sway popular culture (think Oprah Winfrey - LOL)

This clip from 1959 is definitely worth a "look-see."  I found it over at Why I Am Catholic (great blog!) 




AS I am sure you heard in the clip, one of Rand's beliefs is, "You love only those who deserve it."

Can you hear my gasp and "gulp!" How polar opposite is that to Catholicism and what Our Heavenly Father teaches us?

A movie adaptation of Atlas Shrugged is due to hit theaters on April 15th, 2011. I doubt that I will go see it. The book was more than enough, thank you.

You see, I prefer the thoughts that the Word made flesh delivered at the Sermon on the Mount to the "objectivist" philosophy of Ayn Rand any day of the week. That's because these words appeal to the rational, realistic, and fully human side of me. Especially those expressed around Matthew 7:3

In a later post  Frank (over @ Why I am Catholic) suggests insights that weave G.K. Chesterton into the mix. He writes:

I just as easily could have used an interview she did later on. Same story, same selfish pseudo-philosophy.

You see, being selfish is easy and being a Christian is hard. And being really, and truly Christian is almost never even attempted.

Remember what G.K. Chesterton said,

The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.

Sadly, I have Christian friends who, oddly enough, look up to Ayn Rand because they like the 10% of what she has to say about Libertarian freedoms (Laissez-faire economics, for example) vs. the 90% of the rest of her horror show ideals.  Shoot, I like some of what she says but I like some of what many people say. If you get to know people and "philosophies" through random quotes and opinions of pseudo-intellectual ramblers . . . you are asking for trouble.  I think of it as something to grow out of - as quickly as possible!
Case in point: In Jr. High I admired Nietzsche. Please don't judge me!  I was 12 and I had only heard these quotes:

"Admiration for a quality or an art can be so strong that it deters us from striving to possess it."

"And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once."

As an antidote (for both Rand and Nietzche), how about spending some time with the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, and Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical Caritas in Veritate? Not to mention the lives of the Saints. Or maybe introduce them to Blaise Pascal.

But first, just start with a close reading of Our Lord and Savior's Sermon on the Mount.

Here is a real life example of  Rand's "objectivist" philosophy at work . . . .
It is from the current issue of Salon Magazine about a family's real life experience with Ayn Rand's Objectivist ideal, taken to it's literal extreme. An Objectivist Fundamentalist? Lord, have mercy!

How Ayn Rand Ruined My Childhood: My Dad Saw Objectivism As a Logical Philosophy to Live By, But It Tore My Family Apart
by Alyssa Bereznak

My parents split up when I was 4. My father, a lawyer, wrote the divorce papers himself and included one specific rule: My mother was forbidden to raise my brother and me religiously. She agreed, dissolving Sunday church and Bible study with one swift signature. Mom didn't mind; she was agnostic and knew we didn't need religion to be good people. But a disdain for faith wasn't the only reason he wrote God out of my childhood. There was simply no room in our household for both Jesus Christ and my father's one true love: Ayn Rand.

You might be familiar with Rand from a high school reading assignment. Perhaps a Tea Partyer acquaintance name-dropped her in a debate on individual rights. Or maybe you've heard the film adaptation of her magnum opus "Atlas Shrugged" is due out April 15, 2011. In short, she is a Russian-born American novelist who championed her self-taught philosophy of objectivism through her many works of fiction. Conservatives are known to praise her for her support of laissez-faire economics and meritocracy. Liberals tend to criticize her for being too simplistic. I know her more intimately as the woman whose philosophy dictates my father's every decision.

What is objectivism? If you'd asked me that question as a child, I could have trotted to the foyer of my father's home and referenced a framed quote by Rand that hung there like a cross. It read: "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." As a little kid I interpreted this to mean: Love yourself. Nowadays, Rand's bit is best summed up by the rapper Drake, who sang: "Imma do me."

Dad wasn't always a Rand zealot. He was raised in a Catholic family and went to church every week. After he and my mother got married in 1982, they shopped around for a church. He was looking for something to live by, but he couldn't find it in traditional organized religion.

Then he discovered objectivism. I don't know exactly why he sparked to Rand. He claimed the philosophy appealed to him because it's based solely on logic. It also conveniently quenched his lawyer's thirst to always be right. It's not uncommon for people to seek out belief systems, whether political or spiritual, that make them feel good about how they already live their lives. Ultimately, I suspect Dad was drawn to objectivism because, unlike so many altruistic faiths, it made him feel good about being selfish.

Needless to say, Dad's newfound obsession with the individual didn't pan out so well with the woman he married. He was always controlling, but he became even more so. In the end, my mother moved out, but objectivism stayed. My brother and I switched off living at each parent’s house once a week.

It was odd growing up, at least part-time, in an objectivist house. My father reserved long weekends to attend Ayn Rand Institute conferences held in Orange County, California. He would return with a tan and a pile of new reading material for my brother and me. While other kids my age were going to Bible study, I took evening classes from the institute via phone. (I half-listened while clicking through lolcat photos.)

Our objectivist education, however, was not confined to lectures and books. One time, at dinner, I complained that my brother was hogging all the food.

"He's being selfish!" I whined to my father.

"Being selfish is a good thing," he said. "To be selfless is to deny one's self. To be selfish is to embrace the self, and accept your wants and needs."

It was my dad's classic response -- a grandiose philosophical answer to a simple real-world problem. But who cared about logic? All I wanted was another serving of mashed potatoes.

SOURCES:
http://yimcatholic.blogspot.com/2011/03/because-atlas-shrugged-is-not-sermon-on.html
http://yimcatholic.blogspot.com/2011/04/because-proof-of-ayn-rands-pudding-is.html
http://www.jimmyakin.org/2007/02/atlas_shrugged.html
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/04/04/my_father_the_objectivist/index.html
You can read the rest of Alyssa Bereznak's story here or at the source link above.
http://conservapedia.com/John_Galt

Graphics:
http://pyracanthasketch.blogspot.com/2009/09/atlas-shrugged-graphic-page-2.html

A Line in the Harry Potter Sand

Sister Mary Martha has a very interesting post on her blog . . . . I welcome the opinions of friends and readers.

Dear Sister,
Due to a recent discussion among some good Catholics I know the whole witch/magic thing has been on my mind lately and I'M SO CONFUSED!!!! I feel like everyone has their own adamant opinion of where the line should be drawn with reading that kind of stuff and I can't figure out where the line should ACTUALLY be drawn. Like is Harry Potter okay? What about Twilight? I feel like you have the Bible on one end of the spectrum and the satanic bible on the other and somewhere in between a line has to be drawn but I don't know where! Oh and if witches aren't real then why is this stuff a problem at all? HELP!
Clare

I actually think I can clear this up for you! You have to draw your own line. That's the simple answer. But it's not a shot in the dark. (Note from Soutenus:  I would add that your line just might be different than your child's. Age, formation, maturity and personality tendencies all must be considered)

Let's walk you through it.

Point #1. There are no witches, warlocks, werewolves, vampires, magic spells, potions or wizards.

There are, however, people who attempt to be these things. That doesn't mean they actually are these things, or that they have any magical, mystical powers.

Point #2. Evil exists. The devil exists. The devil is trying to win your soul.

Now, if you were the devil how would you go about that? If I were the devil, I would work with people who think they are witches and I would work on you to believe that they had some power over you.

The mind is the most powerful thing in this equation. It's easier to believe that the reason you never finish anything is because you are an Aries with Gemini rising, than to believe the truth, that you are a little lazy or scattered or unable to concentrate. The next thing you know, you're checking your chart to see what to do next. Thanks, Omar!

The question is, how seriously do you take this stuff? I think I can safely read Harry Potter. (I haven't, but only because I'm just not interested. I like to read about Abraham Lincoln.) I can do that because I fully understand that it is fully fiction and I can sit back an enjoy the fantasy world because it is just that -- fantasy.

As I have mentioned before, "The Wizard of Oz" is all about witches, too, but I don't hear anyone squawking about that delightful fantasy. Fairy tales are full of magic and sorcery and witches, too. Is anyone talking about banning the Brothers Grimm. Let me answer that: no.
Perhaps the Jehovah's Witnesses, on second thought.

If you want to dress up like Harry Potter or the Wicked Witch of the West for Halloween, great! Have fun!

But if your interest in Harry Potter causes you to study the black arts, or talk about it as though it were real, or question the Pope, then stay away from this stuff.

The Catholic Church actually wishes everyone would stay away from this stuff, but not because it is, oh, so dangerous. The Catholic Church has to take care of everybody, and everybody can't handle it. Mother Church can't take the chance on telling everyone to have at Harry Potter and then have some poor soul decide he is a wizard and run around in a pointy hat until he finds himself in Hell.

The Catholic Church will always warn you never to open the door to the devil. Isn't that the moral of the story of "Dracula"? Never open the door to a vampire. Evil = the devil.

I can't tell you whether or not to read such things. I can understand why some people are so adamantly against them. People are weak. We must guard the weak. (Another note from Soutenus - you may also want to read "weak" as: young, naive, ignorant, morally at risk, those who do not do well with peer pressure, etc.)

As long as you understand that witches and the like are not real at all, then they are no problems at all. The giant that lived at the top of the beanstalk is no threat to you and neither is Harry Potter.

Point #3: Do stay away from the "Twilight" series. It's not about vampires. It's about teenage sex and a heroine who is readily willing to risk her own soul to be with a vampire.  Thanks, devil!

 

 

 

No copyright infringement intended. All posts are fully cited for source and author. I have provided links back to the original source whenever possible. This information is for my personal, Faith Formation, Confirmation class, OCIC and homeschool referencing.
I am so very grateful to the authors, website and blog owners for sharing this information, commentary, and knowledge.
 

Advent: Bailey, Roarke and Us

author of this post: The_Anchoress

One of the best things about this season is that, invariably, someone writes about It’s A Wonderful Life, and muses on the complex, sometimes dark character of George Bailey.


Portrayed so perfectly by the perpetually likable James Stewart, it is easy to miss the fact that George Bailey is not a simple and good-natured cornpone from upstate New York; he is a man whose heart and faith are essential to him, because they balance out a real bitterness that shows itself in little ways. A man who has had to cast aside every dream in order to do “the right thing,” Bailey is -thanks to an old injury- denied even dubious adventure of soldiering during World War II. Watch him spit in disdain at himself and his situation, after he has responsibly handled a blackout drill in his neighborhood. When the big man from the small town comes beeping by in a slick, shiny car and a shinier woman, see George Bailey’s lip curl, not because his wife is wearing a baseball cap and sitting in his old clunker, but because she is so clearly content with the cap, and the clunker, and with comfortable, sacrificing, trapped old George, who always wanted so much more. He adores his wife; he wants what she wants, but why doesn’t she want more?
He kicks the car door.
George Bailey, who is a very good man living by what our post-Christian era might consider “quaint” morals, is deeply distressed. He loves much. He hates, too. Where there is great goodness, there is always equal potential for badness and mayhem, and it is a testament to James Stewart’s talent, and Frank Capra’s direction, that we barely notice Bailey’s flaws for all his good points. The truth is, though, that Bailey’s flaws are what define him; they challenge him, constantly, to transcend his own instincts. Subconsciously, I think we see the man in full -good and bad, light and dark- and recognize ourselves in him.
No wonder we want to sympathize; no wonder we want him to win. He is the personification of all of our demons and better angels.
He is also, as Joe Carter writes in a very smart piece, The Fountainhead of Bedford Falls:

Howard Roark, for example, is an idealistic young architect who chooses to “struggle in obscurity rather than compromise his artistic and personal vision‚” by conforming to the needs and demands of the community. In contrast, George Bailey is an idealistic young architect-wannabe who struggles in obscurity because he has chosen to conform to the needs and demands of the community rather than fulfill his artistic and personal vision. (Howard Roark is essentially what George Bailey might have become had he left for college rather than stayed in Bedford Falls.)
While both represent the artistic, ambitious, talented individual who is surrounded by stifling mediocrity, each character’s story unfolds in dramatically different fashion. Rand portrays Roark as a demigod-like hero who refuses to subordinate his self-centered ego for the wishes of society. Capra, in stark contrast, portrays Bailey as an amiable but flawed man who becomes a hero precisely because he has chosen to subordinate his self-centered ego to society.

Both men suffer, but one has suffered with the whole world, and the other has suffered only for himself. You’ll want to read the whole piece. I concur with Carter’s conclusions.

Read also Ed Morrissey’s Insightful musings on It’s a Wonderful Life
When one considers George Bailey, and our own mended and rebroken, hopeful hearts, how can the first reading from Mass today not lift us, keep us airborne:

Thus says the Lord God: But a very little while, and Lebana shall be changed into an orchard, and the orchard be regarded as a forest! On that day the deaf shall hear the words of a book; and out of gloom and darkness, the eyes of the blind shall see. The lowly will ever find joy in the Lord, and the poor rejoice in the Holy One of Israel . . .

And then to meditate on this:

The reason why we must hope in God is chiefly the fact that we belong to him, as effect belongs to cause. God does nothing in vain, but always acts for a definite purpose . . .
— St. Thomas Aquinas

And…

I fancy that hope is the last gift given to man, and the only gift not given to youth. Youth is pre-eminently the period in which a man can be lyric, fanatical, poetic; but youth is the period in which a man can be hopeless. The end of every episode is the end of the world. But the power of hoping through everything, the knowledge that the soul survives its adventures, that great inspiration comes to the middle-aged: God has kept that good wine until now.”
— G.K. Chesterton, Charles Dickens, Last of the Great Men (Source)

It took George Bailey a while to understand that. And the rest of us, too, probably.

______________________________________________________________________________

All credit for this post goes to The_Anchoress.
No copyright infringement intended. This is a complete copy-and-paste-save for my personal notebook (en todo from the blog, First Things)
_______________________________________________________________________________

Go to the web site to read all comments. 
Comments thus far:
December 4th, 2009 | 10:49 am | #1

Excellent insight about one of my favorite movies of the season.
Side note about Capra’s (and maybe Donna Reed’s) genius. In this same scene, when Sam Wainwright is ribbing George Bailey about rejecting the offer to go into plastics (which George did as he embraced Mary and realized his love for her), Mary’s hand touches her abdomen, because she knows (or thinks) she’s pregnant, but she hasn’t told George yet. It’s a lovely little touch that adds depth to Mary’s character.

Sparki
December 4th, 2009 | 10:49 am | #2

Video of this whole scene here:

Mimsy
December 4th, 2009 | 11:11 am | #3

What a very nice way to start my day as we wind through the first week of Advent. I will send this to College Girl, who still wants to marry James Stewart and whose favorite book is A Tale of Two Cities.

Dagwood
December 4th, 2009 | 12:51 pm | #4

Great, great post. You’ve got me fired up to watch the movie again this season, something I’ve skipped the past several years.

Paul
December 4th, 2009 | 1:37 pm | #5

Every year I watch “It’s a Wonderfull Life”. Every year it makes me cry. It never gets old. God I love that movie.

Victor
December 4th, 2009 | 1:44 pm | #6

I might be sixty three but nevertheless, I’m learning everyday that I’m simply a child of God and spiritually speaking if I may say, I’m very young indeed.
Thank you for the memories and although I’ve seen “IT’s” a wonderful life” many, many times in the pass and if I might again say that I’m spiritually educated every time I see how God’s Angels are always around to help us when we have a sincere heart and joy jumps within this flesh of mine every time I see this movie.
Ha yes! I’ll go off topic just a little to say “Merry Christmas” and there’s so much more that I want to say but I think I’ll simply quit while I’m still in the running if you know what I mean?
God Bless,
Peace

Bender
December 4th, 2009 | 1:52 pm | #7

I suppose that George Bailey is a bit of the prodigal son’s “good” brother

The 13th Day - Our Lady of Fatima Movie

The Catholic leadership premiere screening of The 13th Day on October 13th was great!

My son and I drove 4 hours to see it and it was so worth it! We REALLY hope our parish will sponser a showing (or two or three).

You can learn how to bring the film to your parish . . . . .
Ignatius Press has created a website for the film: http://www.ignatius.com/the-13th-day/.

Please visit for more information.

May God continue to bless you in all that you do!

Our Lady of Fatima, Pray for us!

The Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, appeared six times to three shepherd children ("the Three Seers") near the town of Fatima, Portugal between May 13 and October 13, 1917. Appearing to the children, the Blessed Virgin told them that She had been sent by God with a message for every man, woman and child living in our century. Coming at a time when civilization was torn asunder by war and bloody violence, She promised that Heaven would grant peace to all the world if Her requests for prayer, reparation and consecration were heard and obeyed.

"If My requests are granted ... there will be peace"

Our Lady of Fatima explained to the children that war is a punishment for sin and warned that God would further castigate the world for its disobedience to His Will by means of war, hunger and the persecution of the Church, the Holy Father and the Catholic Faithful. God's Mother prophesied that Russia would be God's chosen "instrument of chastisement," spreading the "errors" of atheism and materialism across the earth, fomenting wars, annihilating nations and persecuting the Faithful everywhere.

"If My requests are not granted, Russia will spread its errors throughout the world, raising up wars and persecutions against the Church. The good will be martryed, the Holy Father will suffer much and various nations will be annihilated."

In all Her appearances at Fatima, the Blessed Mother repeatedly emphasized the necessity of praying the Rosary daily, of wearing the Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel and of performing acts of reparation and sacrifice. To prevent the terrible chastisement at the hands of Russia and to convert "that poor nation", Our Lady requested the solemn public Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart by the Pope and all the Catholic bishops of the world. She also asked that the Faithful practice a new devotion of reparation on the first Saturday of five consecutive months ("the Five First Saturdays")
The heart of Our Lady's Message to the world is contained in what has come to be called the "Secret" which She confided to the three child seers in July 1917. The Secret actually consists of three parts, the first two of which have been publicly revealed. The first part of the Secret was a horrifying vision of hell "where the souls of poor sinners go" and contained an urgent plea from Our Lady for acts of prayer and sacrifice to save souls. The second part of the Secret specifically prophesied the outbreak of World War II and contained the Mother of God's solemn request for the Consecration of Russia as a condition for world peace. It also predicted the inevitable triumph of Her Immaculate Heart following Russia's consecration and the conversion "of that poor nation" to the Catholic Faith.


sources:
http://www.fatima.org/essentials/facts/story1.asp
http://www.the13thday.com/index.htm