Bill Donohue: "The Golden Compass" has a Pernicious Agenda
Horrors!
“New Line Cinema and Scholastic Entertainment have paired to produce ‘The Golden Compass,’ a children’s fantasy that is based on the first book of a trilogy by militant English atheist Philip Pullman. The trilogy, His Dark Materials, was written to promote atheism and denigrate Christianity, especially Roman Catholicism. The target audience is children and adolescents." ...
“Atheism for kids. That is what Philip Pullman sells. It is his hope that ‘The Golden Compass,’ which stars Nicole Kidman and opens December 7, will entice parents to buy his trilogy as a Christmas gift. It is our hope that the film fails to meet box office expectations and that his books attract few buyers. ...the fact remains that the movie is bait for the books. To be specific, if unsuspecting Christian parents take their children to see the movie, they may very well find it engaging and then buy Pullman’s books for Christmas. That’s the problem.
“We are fighting a deceitful stealth campaign on the part of the film’s producers. Our goal is to educate Christians so that they know exactly what the film’s pernicious agenda really is.”
Source: Catholic League
Philip Pullman wins the
Whitbread Book of the Year Award, 2002
Photo: Sion Touhig / Getty Images
Such shrill objections to the presentation of an alternative viewpoint — and criticism of the long-dominant viewpoint — is a great example of how people can react when their traditional privileges come under fire. In the past, anything that was critical of traditional Christian institutions would have been much less likely to be made or attract so much positive attention. It was part of the privilege of Christians that their worldview could persist inside a bubble generally free of very pointed criticism, question, and challenge — it was something that was simply taken for granted as good, true, and right.
Today that privilege has largely evaporated. There is still a lot of backlash against criticism of Christianity, but such criticism is also easier than ever. Many Christians, though, have not yet managed to come to terms with this situation and regard such criticism as a violation of their rights. In their ideal world, no one would challenge Christianity, question Christian institutions, or suggest that perhaps we'd be better off if we gave up religious theism altogether. No amount of kicking and screaming — or protests — will lead us back to a time when Christians were specially privileged in society.
Comments
Excellent article Austin.
I find it encouraging that, in spite of the apparent changes made to the story to remove mention of the Church specifically and Christian theology in general, the movie is still managing to scare bejeezus out of zealots like Donohue.
My three young children (Connor 6, Erin 11 and Ryan 13) saw the trailer for this movie and are very enthusiastic about the release on Dec. 7, 2007.
Ryan simply revels in finding non-believers in media and entertainment (Zac Efron, Amanda Bines, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, etc.) and lights up when more people are exposed to the goodness of atheists.
Great article Austin!
Steve Schlicht
Counterpoise tp Narnia
Interestingly enough, i have read an online report that Nicole Kidman, star of the movie and a devout Catholic, demanded rewrites to make the movie version less obviously critical of religion. If I remember correctly, she was quoted as saying that she would not have been comfortable having a role in a movie that she felt disparaged religion in general and Catholocism in particular. I wonder how she has responded to these criticisms.
Heaven forbid the general public be allowed to make their own decisions about anything! Why must organizations (religious orgs specifically) try to spoonfeed us what they want us to hear and believe? The Inquisition started with this exact thinking - That people should be forced into believing what others believe is correct. Freedom of thought is sadly becoming an outdated idea.
What interests me is the fact that these books have been out for years, they’ve won a very impressive crop of awards and they’ve been brisk sellers, yet only now are religious organisations getting het up about them.
If they actually bothered to read the books, they’d see that the real message is “Think for yourself.” Now that’s something for them to be afraid of…
People should think for themselves and decide what they want to believe about God and religion. However, I understand the concern the Catholic and Christian communities have in allowing their children to watch something that criticizes their religion. I think the problem the communities see with the movie is not that it criticizes belief in God, but that it does so in a way that is not readily apparent. Parents should know what they are allowing their children to see, for good or for bad, so that they can make an informed decision. I just don’t see anything wrong with informing parents who want their children to believe in God of a movie that goes against beliefs they hold dear.
Funny how those who oppose organized religion do so in the name of free thought, yet feel so inclined to judge those who “believe” as enslaved and oppose their right to express their beliefs. Pullman’s books promote his personal belief that organized religion constricts freedom of thought and expression. Those who are enlightened and freed by religious truths and who detect in Pullman’s books and ultimately the movie an attempt to indoctrinate their children with Pullman’s ignorance are rightly concerned and free to express those concerns. Pullman uses subtlty and fantasy to promote an atheistic agenda, but to make comments that those who oppose such deception are somehow trying to spoonfeed you their beliefs while promoting Hollywood’s and Pullman’s attempts to dump a truckload of atheism on us is the height of hypocracy. I’ll grant you your right to oppose organized religion. Grant me the right to support the truth and expose Pullman’s attempts the deceive my children.
Would you care to cite any examples of this? Oh, wait — you think that because I criticize someone, I’m therefore opposed to their right to express themselves? By that “logic,” Donohue is “opposed” to Pullman’s right to express himself.
Feel free to support your claim that the film is an attempt to “indoctrinate” anyone.
Right, when you can actually provide evidence of any real cases of Pullman trying to deceive anyone, I’ll fully support your right to shout about it from the rooftops. In the meantime, however, I’ll treat unsupported accusations as irrational, unthinking, faith-based nonsense and shout that out myself. Deal?
Oh, I assume that you completely agree that the Narnia movie was an attempt to “indoctrinate” and “deceive,” right? Of course you do.
Well said, Mike! I agree.
It is true, Golden Compass has an atheist agenda:
www [dot] snopes [dot] com/politics/religion/compass.asp
You know, the page you linked to doesn’t actually say what you are implying here. Many religious leaders agree with the anti-authoritiarian message of the books - and that religion has far too often been far too authoritarian.
Since you agree, then you shouldn’t have any problem answering the questions and criticisms I put to Mike. I look forward to your responses.
I am not against free speech for movies or books; however, a group (in this case Christians or Catholics) should not be made fun of for boycotting such works, if they critisize their world view. Some say they are “open minded” in that they view everything and keep their views to themselves and that is their right. In this case, I will definately not expose my young children to a movie that directly opposses my world view. In the future as they become adults and choose to support such efforts, that will be up to them.
Eric
For those of us who like a heads up with regards to what is out there going against or for our religion and beliefs, I am thankful for people like Donogue who do the research. After hearing what he and others have to say, I can make a decision for my kids. I praise those who are critical of what is thrown out there for all. Imagine going along with everything that is presented to the public. I am not a robot and I don’t need to say “yes” to someone else’s views. They can find plenty of people to follow them. I won’t.
I have received this “warning” email many, many times this past week. I first received it from a Catholic acquaintance. Since she regularly sends me religious emails (“God is watching out for you”, “A guardian angel has blessed you – now forward her to ten of your friends”, blah, blah, blah), I think that this one was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back for me. I responded kindly, but firmly, and revealed to her for the first time that I am an atheist. This is, in part, what I wrote to her:
“If you ever go see a movie or read a book and you personally think it contains an inappropriate level of violence, gore, foul language, overt sexual content, or anything that you think is not okay for our kids, and you want to email me to warn me against unintentionally exposing my kids to something like that, I will heed your warning in a heartbeat, because I absolutely respect your judgment as a mother and a friend.
That said, I consider myself an avid reader and movie watcher, a book-ban-hating, free-thinking, Bill-of-Rights-loving American, and a fiercely protective mother. I am also an atheist. So, as you can imagine, I am slightly disturbed by the content of the email you sent me on several levels, and though I know you do not mean anything negative by forwarding things like that to me, I would hope that you would understand that it could ruffle my feathers a bit. Honestly, it distresses me to see negativity of ANY sort perpetuated in this way, whether it is about someone’s religion (or lack thereof), race, gender, sexual preference, free speech, whether or not they enjoy lima beans on Tuesdays, whether they pluck or wax — whatever.”
To others who have sent this email to me, I have also said:
“I will pay close attention to whether or not this book is appropriate for my children, as I would with any of the myriad books and movies that are marketed to them. I expect that most parents would do the same, so it’s a little disappointing to see an email like this go around as if we parents don’t have a speck grey matter in our noggin to deal with what our children are potentially exposed to, no matter what are religious beliefs are.
I just get a little crazy when I see things like this because I am VERY wary of anything that resembles the banning of a book. If you don’t want to spend your money to line the pockets of an atheist, then forget the movie, check the books out from the library, and use your own common sense about what it all means and whether or not your child(ren) are equipped to handle a story of this nature. And certainly read it WITH them and explore and explain the story in a way that is comfortable for you and promotes YOUR beliefs. Please resist the urge to allow a nameless, faceless email author (OR a nameless, faceless movie marketing executive, for that matter) to make a decision for you about what is right for your children.”
Another acquaintance sent me this email and was unwittingly a recipient of a watered-down version of my rant. She wrote back to me saying, “…please know that I was only sending this on to others. I did not write it! Although maybe I should have put the caveat out there that I know nothing about this book or series, and these warnings are to be taken with a grain of salt! As are most!! I have not read them, nor do I know anything about them - as probably most of us. And like most of those trilogy movies based on books I realize there is gray area and a level of interpretation being left up to the reader / viewer.”
Okay, poor use of the English language aside, I understood what she was saying. But I still have to think that anyone who forwards this kind of stuff to people DOES believe it on some level or why else would they bother?? And therein lies my issue. To me, this is still prejudice disguised as a benign and benevolent “warning”.
Interesting.
The message of the “His Dark Materials” trilogy is anti-authoritarian and has been described as ‘think for yourself.’ Before a rabid Catholic (and here I am distinguishing between rabid Catholics and normal Catholics. Not all Catholics are rabid) jumps down my throat, prove that this is not the case. You cannot, can you? And what’s more, you cannot even prove that the books - or the movie - explicitly challenge any organized religion, can you?
Now consider. What do we know about “The Golden Compass”? Aside from the basics, we know that its themes are, as I said, based around challenging authoritarianism.
We know something else. Rabid Catholics (not normal Catholics!) find the books threatening, and claim that it directly challenges the Catholic faith - and all forms of Christianity.
Isn’t it funny, the way that people are so quick to assert that their religions are not based around any sort of logic (providential or otherwise), but instead around blindly listening to what the men in strangely shaped hats say?
“a group (in this case Christians or Catholics) should not be made fun of for boycotting such works, if they critisize their world view.”
This isn’t making fun of religions for boycotting. This is making fun of honest-to-god imbeciles who insist that everything challenges them because they can’t handle the idea that not everyone agrees with their beliefs. For AnthropomorphicDietyOfChoice’s Sake! I was introduced to those books by a Christian! I’m sure that others have had the same experience. This isn’t about a perversion of Free Speech with the intent of defaming a religion, it’s about a faction of a faith zealously attempting to stifle exposure to alternate viewpoints because they’re afraid that people might start thinking for themselves.
In fact, if you want to stop and use your heads for a second, consider this: these books are infinitely more challenging to Islam than Christianity.
Of course, given that I’m a Secular Humanistic Jew (That’s right, a Jew AND and atheist), this is all straight from the maw of Satan, right? I have nothing against faith. I have something against stupidity and misinformation.
I find Austins article rather amusing. For an author to state that there was “… a time when Christians were speceally privileged in society.” shows me a person with little historical knowledge of the persecution of Christians throughout world history. Al-in-all I believe this to be a well orchestrated publicity hype. Maybe there should be an Oscar for the best pre-release movie hype.
So, you are denying that Chirstians have ever enjoyed privileges and benefits denies to members of any other religion — or people with no religion at all — in western societies like America? Do note that it’s possible for Christians to enjoy special privileges in society at one point of history while being persecuted in another society at some earlier point of history.
The article is well written, to be sure. The line in the last paragraph, “[m]any Christians, though, have not yet managed to come to terms with this situation (very pointed criticism, question, and challenge) and regard such criticism as a violation of their rights.” is rather disturbing. My catechism (church teachings) taught me that I was to ask many questions, to question everything, actually. So to say that we’ve lost the ability to ask questions, challenge our own belief system, and be critical of our Church’s teachings is a bit extreme.
Also, to say that the article has “shrill objections to the presentation of an alternative viewpoint” is a bit much as well. Would you want someone coming into your house and teaching your children what to believe? Shouldn’t children first emulate their parents, and then come to their own beliefs as they mature?
Finally, whether you are Christian or Atheist, to teach your children only one side of an argument is to present them with a lop-sided view of the world.
Why do you assume that I was talking about you specifically?
Why?
People with TVs do exactly that all the time; however, I fail to see how that’s happening here. The books offer a strong criticism of authoritarian institutions — one which even some Christian leaders appreciate and value. The only people who need fear this criticism are those who suspect that their treasured institutions are too authoritarian to stand up to strict anti-authoritarian criticism.
Not necessarily, and I’m sure you don’t believe that all parents are emulation-worthy. Should children emulate racist parents? Of course not.
First, “atheist” is not a proper noun. Second, if presenting children with another perspective is good, then why isn’t it “shrill” to complain loudly and vociferously about a single movie that does indeed present an alterative perspective?
One of the best ways to question something like religion is to entertain statements against it. The same goes for any entrenched notion. Doubt involves statements more than questions. A question always leaves authority to answer it.
As a father of three children, I can understand that a parent gets worried about the content of a book or a movie his/her children are exposed to. But I find difficult to understand the overreaction of Christians. My children are exposed all the time to movies that promote the theistic view (The Green Mile, for example), and even so I don’t try to censor what they can watch. They have me and my wife as models, they know what we think about religion, and they have plenty of information about what Christians believe in. I am not at all worried about what they watch on TV or in a movie about religion, because I think that the atheist position is rooted in much more solid ground than the theistic one. Give a child plenty of information about religion and about atheism, and the child will most probably grow an unbeliever.
Well, after reading what I have just written above, I think I understand the concerns of Christian parents. One never knows what could ruin years of indoctrination.
It seems that it is Jeff who has little historical knowledge of the persecution of Christians throughout world history. One only has to take a glance at any history book to find that the vast majority of persecution of Christians was done by other Christians.
My wife also got the warning email. I find it appalling that people would advise me of what to read, see or hear. I have 3 boys and try to raise them to THINK. And that involves hearing, seeing, reading other viewpoints. Do I restrict what they are exposed to? Yes of course. Is it restricted because it challenges my world view? NO. A far more condemning “video” for the children to watch would be routine news coverage of the sexual scandals of the Catholic Church. Do I let my children see this? No they are too young. I note that some of the religious in their replies are bent on indoctrinating their beliefs without challenges to their children. I guess the idea is to brainwash the kids as much as possible before exposure to conflicting ideology.
When I was young I was Catholic and our family used to get copies of “The Monitor”. My brother and I would look for the movies that were condemned and make sure we saw them. My mother was so annoyed at that rag sheet, she asked the local priest to have delivery stopped. He told her that he had to send out a number of copies. My mother threatened to have the post office send it back as “obscene mail”. He thought this was really funny and did agree to have delivery stopped.
“My books are about killing God.” - Philip Pullman, 2003 interview with The Sydney Morning Herald
Here’s the link to the Sydney Morning Herald interview: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/12/1071125644900.html
And here are a few quotes that loco seems to have missed:
“I’ve been surprised by how little criticism I’ve got. Harry Potter’s been taking all the flak. I’m a great fan of J.K. Rowling, but the people - mainly from America’s Bible Belt - who complain that Harry Potter promotes Satanism or witchcraft obviously haven’t got enough in their lives. Meanwhile, I’ve been flying under the radar, saying things that are far more subversive than anything poor old Harry has said. My books are about killing God.
“If we’re talking on the scale of human life and the things we see around us, I’m an atheist. There’s no God here. There never was. But if you go out into the vastness of space, well, I’m not so sure. On that level, I’m an agnostic.
“That’s not to say I disparage the religious impulse. I think the impulse is a critical part of the wonder and awe that human beings feel. What I am against is organised religion of the sort which persecutes people who don’t believe. I’m against religious intolerance.”
@ Jeff
For an author to state that there was “… a time when Christians were speceally privileged in society.” shows me a person with little historical knowledge of the persecution of Christians throughout world history
Jeff, you’re absolutely right. That period of time between all religions other than Christianity being banned in what was left of the Roman empire, through the period of the Holy Roman Empire, Papal ordination of Kings, Divine Right of Kings, enslaved American Indians being “granted” freedom if the accepted Christ, the EuropeanGhetto-ization of Jews, thenow near theo-cratic hold of Christianity of America….all that really isn’t part of history is it?
If I’m not mistaken the actual specific persecution of Christians ended in 313 CE with the Emperor’s Constantine’s Edict of Milan
I found the following article a great help in responding to those who want to ban the book because it is anti-_____ (you fill in the cause of the moment urged by the boycott, Catholic, religion, moral) http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2007/11/25/god_in_the_dust/?page=full
Great article by Christianity Today
“Fear Not the Compass”
http://www.christianitytoday.com/movies/commentaries/fearnotthecompass.html
I find it amusing that the parents who are refusing to let their children see the movie out of fear that it will turn them into atheists only need to let their children read the ENTIRE bible.
The movie isn’t a “threat” to Christianity, but the bible sure is. Rape and murder anyone?
Response to Eric (#14)
Apparently you don’t understand the concept of freedom of speech. People are free to express how they feel about the movie, and even boycott it, and others are free to express how they feel about the actions of first group, including making fun of them. Freedom of speech means that everyone is free to voice their opinion, whether you agree with what they say, or not: popular speech requires no protection.