A new movie actually looks pretty good: The Ten Commandments. The early reviews seem to suggest the movie sticks to it's Biblical roots, which is great. The website includes some games and information for children. Be sure to support these Christian movies when they hit the big screen! You can watch a trailer for the film here.
God bless,
Jay
I couldn't pass this Newsweek story up, China bans reincarnation:
China has banned Buddhist monks in Tibet from reincarnating without government permission. According to a statement issued by the State Administration for Religious Affairs, the law, which goes into effect next month and strictly stipulates the procedures by which one is to reincarnate, is "an important move to institutionalize management of reincarnation."
But inside the humor is a serious shocker:
According to a 2005 Gallup poll, 20 percent of all U.S. adults believe in reincarnation. Recent surveys by the Barna Group, a Christian research nonprofit, have found that a quarter of U.S. Christians, including 10 percent of all born-again Christians, embrace it as their favored end-of-life view.
God bless,
Jay
Michael O'Brien is one of my favorite Christian writers. And he's the author of A Landscape With Dragons: The Battle for Your Child's Mind, which I would highly recommend for all parents.
Today I read an excellent article by Michael O'Brien called Harry Potter and "the death of God" (full article here). It's a great analysis of the whole Harry Potter series and some of the big issues Christians should have with it (we've posted on those problems previously). It is a very good analysis and I wanted to point out some of the key parts of it. This is what every parent considering letting their children read it should hear:
Lev Grossman, in the July 23, 2007, issue of Time magazine, writes, “If you want to know who dies in Harry Potter, the answer is easy: God.” In this he has expressed the core problem with the Potter series. There is much that could be written, and has been written, about the specific problems in the books. Without neglecting the valid point that good fiction need not be overtly Christian, need not be religious at all, we might ponder a little the fact that the central metaphor and plot engines of the series are activities (witchcraft and sorcery) absolutely prohibited by God. We might also consider for a moment the fact that no sane parents would give their children books which portrayed a set of “good” pimps and prostitutes valiantly fighting a set of “bad” pimps and prostitutes, and using the sexual acts of prostitution as the thrilling dynamic of the story. By the same token we should ask ourselves why we continue to imbibe large doses of poison in our cultural consumption, as if this were reasonable and normal living, as if the presence of a few vegetables floating in a bowl of arsenic soup justifies the long-range negative effects of our diet. Leaving aside a wealth of such arguments, let us consider Lev Grossman’s insight.
“The death of God?” many a reader will respond. “Surely he is making too much of the matter! Aren’t we discussing a single phenomenon in a vast sea of cultural phenomena? And aren’t there a lot of positive values in these books and films—even some edifying moments of courage and sacrifice? And isn’t it all about love?” Yes, in a sense it is. But what kind of love? What kind of sacrifice? And for what purpose? The series is also about the usefulness of hatred and pride, malice toward your real or perceived enemies, seeking and using secret knowledge, lies, cunning, contempt, and sheer good luck in order to defeat whatever threatens you or stands in the path of your desires. It is a cornucopia of other false messages: The end justifies the means. Nothing is as it seems. No one can really be trusted, except those whom you feel comfortable with, who support your aims and make you feel good about yourself. Killing others is justified if you are good and they are bad. Conservative people are bad, anti-magic dogmatists are really bad and deserve whatever punishment they get (hence the delicious retributions against the Dursleys). The ultimate cause of evil is rejection of magic: the arch-villain Voldemort, for example, first went off track when he became a dysfunctional boy abandoned by his anti-magic father. Then there’s the adolescent romance in the atmosphere, a potent element when mixed with magic, usually latent but growing with each volume and culminating in domestic bliss for the central characters at the end of the final volume. Yes, Harry faces near-satanic evils, passes through an unceasing trial of conflict and woe, triumphs against insurmountable odds, saves the world, marries Ginny and brings forth with her a new generation of little witches and wizards. If it were a spoof or satire we might laugh. But it presents itself as very serious stuff, this festival of noxious half-truths and overt falseness, interwoven so conveniently with some positive values, some attractive role-modeling, and the timeless authorial device of an under-dog orphan as the hero/anti-hero of the series. So pleasurable, so thrilling at every turn. So deathly and hollow.
But that is the point, isn’t it. If the universe in which we live is not “hallowed” (sacred, holy) but rather hollow and deadly, then we must do what we can to change it, right? There is no God, apparently, so we must be our own gods. If there is no father (as every orphan knows) than we must be our own fathers. A tough job for anyone to do, but with the help of some incredible powers it can be done. And even if there is, after all, something in existence a little more than the material world and this materialist magic, can it be trusted? Definitely not, according to the story. There are hints of other realms in the Potter series, immaterial or metaphysical dimensions devoid of any reference to a higher moral order. But these are window-dressing to the cosmology Rowling establishes. Throughout the series there is overwhelming evidence that a Gnostic worldview is being slowly but surely presented. In fact, it is a new form of that ancient archipelago of heresies, a neo-gnosticism that borrows remnants of Judeo-Christian symbols and mixes them with cultic concepts of life and afterlife. For example, toward the end of the final volume, Harry’s headmaster and mentor, Dumbledore, meets with Harry in a nebulous otherworldly zone, after Dumbledore’s death and Harry’s pseudo-death, before the latter’s mysterious “resurrection.” Yet even these and other metaphysical references are merely used to serve the author’s real goal, which is the exaltation of the humanist ideal. Such humanism cannot long survive without a “spirituality” of some kind or other—and what better spirituality for Homo Sine Deo than one which offers the thrills and rewards of the preternatural, without moral accountability to God. One might call this, paradoxically, the religion of secular humanism. In this religion, as in most other religions, the world is gravely threatened and needs its saviour. What, then, is a lovable hero to do in this situation? He must grow up, it goes without saying, and he does so throughout the seven tales by coming into the realization of his inherent semi-divine powers. These are never referred to as god-like powers because that would be a tacit admission of some kind of higher authority, and Potterworld will admit no absolute hierarchy in creation.
Genuine freedom is possible only where there is genuine love. And genuine love is not possible without truth. As Tolkien once pointed out in his essay on fantasy literature, the writer who hopes to feed the imagination in a healthy way must remain faithful to the moral order of the real universe, regardless of how fantastic the details of the fictional world may be. The Natural Law which God has written into our beings cannot be entirely eradicated, but it can be gravely deformed, leading to distortion of consciousness and conscience, and hence our actions. Healthy fiction, no matter how wildly it may depart from the material order, teaches us to love ourselves in a wholesome manner, by loving our neighbor. Indeed, even by loving our enemies—at least by trying to learn to love them, and by believing that it is right to do so. With grace this is possible. But selective love (coupled with selective hatred) does not lead to freedom. It is the feelings of love without the substance of love, the feelings of freedom without the foundations of freedom. If God is the absent father—or the father who perhaps never existed—the hero and his readers are left only with such emotions, their hooked loyalties, their love of the self’s insatiable appetites, which they feel cannot be denied without a killing curse of self-annihilation. That is why so many people cling fiercely to the “values” in the Potter books while ignoring the interwoven undermining of those very values. That is why the defenders of Potterworld exhibit such adamancy, frequently outrage, against critics. According to their perceptions, the critics of Potterworld are the enemies of freedom and identity.
Please read the article - it's very good. And our thanks to Michael O'Brien for keeping this information out there.
God bless,
Jay
There is a lot of trash being labeled as entertainment nowadays. It seems like movies have to have more violence and more sex to keep people coming to see them. What I find to be especially disturbing is how horror films have to keep going deeper into the satanic world to give people a thrill. Every now and then, a movie comes out that returns our faith in humanity. And in September, that movie will be “Bella”. Every person of good will must see this movie (and every movie like it) if we want to send a clear message to the entertainment industry that what sells is what is good and true, not what is cheap and degrading.
The movie stars the Mexican acting sensation Eduardo Verastegui, who has a wonderful conversion story. At 17 he left his home village of Xicotencatl, Tamaulipas for Mexico City to become a lawyer. While he was in the big city he got involved in modeling and eventually acting. He started living the typical celebrity life with the desire for more wealth, women, fame, and power. But of course, he wasn’t happy. He was setting his sites on Hollywood, when his English teacher started asking him questions that led to his conversion. After discerning that the priesthood was not his vocation, he continued his acting career in Los Angeles, and providence has allowed him to meet the right people for “Bella” to be made.
In the movie, a single waitress played by Tammy Blanchard finds out right before going to work that she’s pregnant. Then, at work, she gets another shock and it looks like her life is falling apart. Suddenly, the chef of the restaurant, played by Eduardo Verastegui comes to her rescue and the adventure begins. After having worked for him day in and day out, she finds out who this man really is.
“Bella” is set to be one of the most impressive pro-life movies ever made. It has won numerous awards and is being promoted by pro-life groups such as Heartbeat International, “Celebrate Life” magazine, and others. This movie is also said to transcend all expectations. It has opened in Texas and is scheduled for national release September 15th. Please help promote this film. To have it come to a theater near you, see www.BellaTheMovie.com, e-mail contact@MetanoiaFilms.com and call 888-474-6025.
Pax et Bonum,
Daniel
Just wanted to point out that this week's Catholic Carnival is excellent. Go enjoy it.
For those not aware, the Carnival is a collection of posts from various blogs throughout the blogosphere. Worth checking out.
God bless,
Jay
I'm hearing more and more positive things about Fred Thompson. He seems to be a viable, serious option for social conservatives (read: pro-lifers) in the next presidential election. And others are reporting on his popularity. So perhaps we have a new breath of fresh air moving in for this election? Let's hope so, the current crop of candidates is embarrassing if you view life as sacred.
God bless,
Jay
I recently finished a research paper on something that has fascinated me for a long time: the countless number of Protestant churches in the United States. I’ve always wondered how all these different churches came about. I knew that Martin Luther started the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, but how did that evolve to Bob’s Bible church down the street? All the Protestants I have talked to through the years have been surprisingly uninterested in this question, and look for any Christian, non-Catholic church when they seek to join a different faith-community. I finally have some answers.
Although Martin Luther began the Protestant Reformation in Germany, Protestantism has flourished in the US much more than in Europe. Why is this so? Well, America has provided the perfect conditions for Luther’s notion of sola scriptura to be taken to its extreme. The New World offered everybody from Europe a chance to start anew, a clean slate for any political, economic, or religious undertaking. For those seeking religious freedom, there was no entrenched religious institution to destroy before starting a new one. The remarkable ease with which one could splinter off a religious group and create a new one was too tempting for many Protestants in America.
The political structure and democracy of the United States has also helped to shape the extreme nature of Protestantism in America. For example, when the leaders of the Restoration Movement broke with the Presbyterians of Kentucky, they called the move their “Declaration of Independence”. These founders of what would later be known as The Disciples, Christian Churches, and Churches of Christ thought that July 4, 1776 was a day of equal importance to the Jewish Passover. The American passion for political liberty spilled over into passion for religious liberty, especially regarding personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture. Hierarchies were generally disdained. The reformation battle cry of “the Bible alone” became a Protestant battle cry with a more distinctly American appeal – “no creed but the Bible!”. Because of these factors, the number of Protestant churches in this country could ultimately be as many as the number of Christians. Ironically, not even Luther himself would have approved of this end result.
Sadly, I have found that the Protestant Christians in this process see this as a good thing; they see it as Christianity recreating and purifying itself. I don’t see how they reconcile the fact that Christ wanted us to be one in the Faith. . It also harms evangelization efforts to non-Christians in the United States - I can’t imagine how confusing this looks for an outsider looking in. Let us continue to pray for Christian unity, and engage in more Catholic-Protestant ecumenical efforts in this country.
Breaking from Rome is never the answer, no matter how bad things get, because we believe in Christ and He wanted it this way.
In Christ,
Daniel
The Council of Trent, as is every council, was much needed injection of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Church in 1545. Unfortunately, people who misunderstand the teachings of Vatican II like to dismiss and use Vatican II to nullify this very important event in Church history.
To fully understand and appreciate the council, one must put himself in the context of the times. The corruption within the Catholic Church and the Protestant Revolution (the Reformation was more of a revolution than a reformation) severely hindered the flourishing of the Faith in Europe. At the beginning of the Council there was a debate as to whether the reform of the Church should take place first, in order to win over the Protestants, or whether the dogmatic decrees should take precedence. The bishops finally decided that the work of defining the Faith and reform should occur simultaneously.
During the Council, the bishops clarified the teachings that the Protestants were rejecting. Some of the most important doctrines defined were on the authority of Scripture and Tradition, the Sacraments, and Justification. If one looks at the canons on Justification, he will see that Trent elucidated the Church’s constant teaching that faith and works must not be separated. It never taught that works alone can earn one salvation. Canon I makes that explicitly clear. Earning salvation through works alone is just as theologically erroneous as earning it through faith alone. (Ironically, these extremes are very close; if a Protestant decides he has faith, he ‘earns’ salvation by deciding to get baptized).
Great fruit came forth from the Council, and it is generally known as the Catholic Reformation or Counter Reformation. A wonderful tool to counter the tracts and pamphlets that the Protestants were flooding the continent with, was the Roman Catechism. This catechism brought about a much-needed uniformity in teaching the Catholic faith. Great saints like St. Charles Borromeo, St. Philip Neri, and St. Peter Canisius were zealous for the Faith and formed by Scripture and the Roman Catechism. Even St. Vincent de Paul, known much for his work for the materially poor, was also a passionate reformer for the spiritually poor in the spirit of Trent.
I urge anyone who might have some misunderstandings of the Council of Trent to read about it, or actually read some of the document itself.
In Christ,
Daniel
Just have to mention that Deo Omnis Gloria has officially been alive for four years now. Like Castro or the Energizer Bunny (depending on your religious persuasion), we just keep going. Thanks to everyone who visits, participates, reads, and writes for us. I personally appreciate it a great deal.
God bless,
Jay
PS - the official date is July 25, 2003. So I am a little late in the announcement, but (like my conversion to Jesus' Church) better late than never . . .
By the way, be sure to check out this week's Catholic Carnival. As always, you are sure to find an interesting article from one of the many Catholic blogs out there.
God bless,
Jay
