Fr. Barron comments on "True Grit" (SPOILERS)

A different take on "True Grit" from Fr. Robert Barron.

The Rite

The Rite O
(PG-13) for disturbing thematic material, violence, frightening images, and language including sexual references.

Oh, January, that cinematic landfill where Hollywood dumps movies they know are awful before they even roll the credits on the first preview. The newest entry in that long proud tradition is The Rite, an exorcism tale that hit the big screen this weekend.

The problem right off the bat with this well intentioned mess is that it gets its background all wrong (please don't let the "inspired by a true story" thing fool you).  Movies about police departments, the military or the legal system will go to lengths to achieve realism.  Directors and actors doing war pictures have been known to go through a truncated basic training, getting to know how a soldier operates in the field.  They'll at the very least talk to military people, past or present, to try and get it right.  Spielberg even had Holocaust survivors on the set on Schindler's List so their experience wouldn't be misrepresented.  No movie gets it all correct, and even last year's best picture winner, The Hurt Locker, took flack for alleged inaccuracies in its presentation of an army bomb disposal team.  But there is such a level of carelessness and ignorance in dealing with the Church and the priesthood in movies that it staggers my mind.  What's sad is that The Rite is actually sympathetic toward the priesthood and the idea of a divine call, and that it gets so much wrong is disheartening.

The story follows Micheal Kovak (Colin O'Donoghue) who enters the seminary because of family pressure (plausible if this was 1951, or maybe if we were in some parts of the developing world today, but not in the contemporary United States).  He goes, planning on ditching right before making his "final vows" that make him a priest (professing vows do not make you a priest, ask any nun you happen to run into.  In fact diocesan priests don't take vows at all).   Four years later a priest / mentor is concerned when Michael passes his psychology and sociology finals but fails theology (that would be like saying a law student failed "law" but passed British literature; it makes no sense.  By the time a seminarian gets to the seminary he's specializing in theology and studying its various branches, not taking "core classes" like an undergraduate.  In the same way a law student studies torts and copyright law, among other things, and not law in some generic form).   Michael tells the priest of his doubts and he sends the young man off to Rome to take a class in exorcism, hoping it will shake him out of his unbelief (I'm not even going to go there, it would take too long).  Once there he's sent to see Fr. Lucas (Anthony Hopkins) a reclusive Jesuit and experienced exorcist.  Michael is sceptical, which is all well and good, but his unbelief endures longer than is reasonable.  Fr. Lucas correctly states that the prayers of liberation can take weeks or months to wear the demon down and defeat him (I've even heard years), but Michael, at the end of the film, is able to accomplish in an evening what Fr. Lucas couldn't get done after months of effort.  I won't go through every problem with the film, it would take too long, and yes, it's Hollywood, and they're making a dramatic film, not a documentary.  But getting some details right would be refreshing.

This particular sub genre of horror film is different from pretty much all the others because it's dealing with something that's real. It's rare, to be sure, but real all the same.  We had an exorcist speak to us one afternoon during a spiritual theology class (my lone exposure to the topic in 13 years of formation, outside of a couple of books I read on my own) and he said he had performed three exorcisms in his 15 years on the job.  Most people have some psychological problem that demands therapeutic or pharmaceutical treatment.  But the power of the Evil One is real and not to be taken lightly.  The movie weaves between reverence and humor in a way I don't think was always intentional.  It takes a low key approach to the scenes of possession when compared to the granddaddy of them all, The Exorcist, which did go over the top.  But it's also less informed on it's topic, never bothering to go into the causes for demonic possession which, when taken into account, make the final plot twist implausible.

The movie's only saving grace is its positive portrayal of the Church, the priesthood and faith in general, which I didn't take as a put on.  The priests were sympathetic, but human as well.  While it tried to present compassionately the struggles a priest goes through, it still can't compare with the Exorcist in that regard, especially William Peter Blatty's novel.  The Rite presents a Catholic Church that simply doesn't exist in the real world.  As much as I'm glad Hollywood was friendly this time, I wish they were also right.

Who Knows Where the Time Goes

It's hard to believe that it's been over ten days since I last posted something here.  When I say it's been busy, I'm not making some vague generality.  A parish normally quiets down after Christmas with the lull lasting until Ash Wednesday.  Then it's breakneck through May, what with confessions, Lenten programs, the Easter Triduum itself, 1st Communions, Confirmations, the backlog of infant baptisms that have to wait until Lent is over, the spare wedding here and there.  Summer brings another lull of sorts before September when school and religious ed begin again and it's a blur until Christmas. But nothing stopped after Christmas, and now January is almost gone and I'm not sure where it went.

There are a lot things I would have liked to have done this month, especially considering the feast of Don Bosco is coming up next week (never mind that today is St. Francis de Sales' feast day).  Francis de Sales in many ways is a key inspiration for me in working on this blog.  He wrote an incredible body of work, much of it in simple pamphlet form, to convince people of the truth of the Catholic faith during the Counter Reformation.  While these works might be considered polemic in the sense that they addressed controversies, defending the Catholic position staunchly, St. Francis was the Doctor of Charity who understood that it was not bombs or guns that would bring the separated brethren back into the fold, but loving kindness, as well as passionate and intelligent apologetics. I hope to follow in that tradition in some small way.


But the time has been a dictator, as Nina Simone would say, and I haven't had the time or the energy to put my full efforts into this space.  But I know I need to get focused, and the best way to do that is by developing a theme over a series of posts, and I've got one (but I don't want to let the cat out of the bag just yet).  For the rest of this week I'll write more on Francis de Sales and Don Bosco in preparation for the feast, and then on to a topic that I've been mulling over for quite some time.


But time; what a mystery.  I offer you all one of the great songs on the topic of time and change, by Fairport Convention, with the late Sandy Denny on vocals.

Black Swan

Black Swan
MPAA: Rated R for strong sexual content, disturbing violent images, language and some drug use.
Catholic News Service Media Review Office: O (morally objectionable)

In my quest to catch as many movies that will be getting Oscar nominations as I can I took time out of my R&R and saw "Black Swan."  Normally going to the movies is a part of taking a break, but this time it was work.  This is not a film that I would usually go and see.  Of the roughly twenty people at the midweek matinee I attended, I was one of three men.  It looked like the others were brought by their significant others, so I'm guessing that I'm the only man who went of his own accord.  But what made this movie work for me wasn't that it's a film that appeals to women more than men, but in the morally confused compass that guides it.

From the beginning it's clear that Nina (Natalie Portman), an up and coming ballerina, is a basket case.  She's living claustrophobically at home with her overbearing mother (Barbara Hershey, reminding me ever so slightly of Piper Laurie in "Carrie"), she has a history of self mutilation, is repressed, passive, and lacks any self confidence (which makes me wonder how she got as far as she did in such a competitive field). Her director (Vincent Cassel) acknowledges her technical prowess, which makes her perfect to play the "White Swan" in Swan Lake but complains she doesn't have the passion to play the seductive "Black Swan."  But she unwittingly changes the director's mind by rebuffing his romantic advances with a well placed bite, revealing the fire just below the surface. 

But in winning the role she so covets poor Nina's problems only get worse.  She has competition from a sultry newcomer (Mila Kunis), who may not have Nina's skills but possesses the passion that makes her perfect for the Black Swan. She feels guilt over replacing the company's aging and self destructive star (Winona Ryder, in a bit of art imitating life).  She also descends into what can only be described as paranoid schizophrenia, at the very time she takes the director's advise to free herself through sexual experimentation.  She sees people who aren't there, her mother's paintings take on lives of their own, and the viewer begins doubting what is real and what is a product of Nina's increasingly deteriorating mind. 

A point the movie seems to be making is that true freedom and self actualization comes from the elimination of inhibitions and indulging in unfettered sensual pleasures.  Obviously, I don't agree with that, but the movie itself seems to under mind its own point, with Nina's increasing self actualization being accompanied by increasing levels of insanity.  After all the barriers are knocked down Nina indeed dances the ballet of her life, but at quite a cost.

In one of the literature courses I took in college the main character of a book we were reading had a transformation from a shy milquetoast to a rather bold assertive fellow after his first sexual encounter.  The professor explained that the author was trying to say that we don't become fully human until we engage in sexual activity, an opinion she concurred with.  My initial thought was:  Mother Teresa, John Paul II, Therese of Lisieux, John Bosco, oh yeah, they never really actualized themselves as human beings, did they?  "Black Swan" makes the same mistake my professor did all those years ago.  Being human is more complex than we understand, and while our sexuality is an important part of what makes us who we are, the contemporary mind has exaggerated its place a bit.  The people I mentioned above had great passion, and lived their human lives to the fullest even though all were life long celibates.  They found themselves by giving themselves to others in selfless acts of love.  Mother Teresa's writings reveal a woman of tremendous passion, but it was not focused inwardly.  It was pointed out to the world in the service of others.  Any other path leads to self absorption, and possibly self destruction.

To be fair Nina's transformation involves more than just a sexual awakening, and it is important to learn how to get up on your own two feet and stand up for your self.  But the movie, always dealing in extremes, has Nina embrace a total will to power.  Her coming of age is won after a totally unapologetic pursuit of her goals that tolerates no rivals.  She becomes completely focused on what she wants and is even willing to kill for it.  In the end I'm guessing the film makers want us to see Nina as a heroine.  I couldn't help but see her as a tragic one, destroyed by the very journey of discovery and self realization that was supposed to save her.

I would be amiss if I didn't mention the "strong sexual content" that the MPAA alerts viewers to.  I'm going to save a fuller exploration of sex in movies for a later post, but for now I'll say it is pretty strong stuff.  Nudity is avoided, but not much else is left to the imagination.  It strikes me that if the material is strong, you don't have to resort to explicit content.  While I don't agree with the world view the film puts forward (if it even has one), the material is strong enough, the performances good enough, that they didn't have to resort to shock.  But as I wrote, more on that later.

I Stand Corrected

In my review of the new Narnia movie I questioned how Susan and Peter, the elder Pevensie children, made it over to the US in the midst of World War II.  I have it on good authority that there was a wartime program of bringing children to the US to escape the Blitz.  One review I read later explained that as young adults the two had some service related jobs that brought them to the States.  Either way their transatlantic journey was not implausible as I first imagined.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
OO 1/2
Rated PG for some frightening images and sequences of fantasy action. 

I am at a distinct disadvantage walking into any Narnia movie because I haven't read the books by C.S. Lewis that the films are based on.  Or maybe that's a good thing, since I can review the movie on it's own terms without nitpicking over whether they included every detail from the original stories.  This is not just idle chatter on my part, because if the new Narnia movie (Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader) falls short of it's predecessors, as I believe it does, it might be because they tried to include too much.  From the little I have read, of the three this film is the least faithful to its original text, and considerable simplifications were made. But the plot still takes too long to come into focus as they seemingly tried to cram as much as they could into a tween friendly 115 minutes.

The story begins with siblings Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund (Skandar Keyens) living out the final days of World War II with their uncle and aunt in Cambridge while their older brother and sister are off in America (how they got there safely in the midst of the War is a mystery to me, but I'll let that one go by). The returning characters are joined by cousin Eustace (Will Poulter), a budding skeptic who has no patience for his cousins' talk of Narnia and other fairy tales.  Even after he gets swept into the fantasy world by way of a magical painting he doesn't believe what's happening is real, concluding it must be some perverse trick.  Ben Barnes returns from the last film as Caspian, though he's lost his mixed up Spanish-Eastern European accent and speaks as a Englishman.  They are now at sea, though the purpose of their voyage remains a bit murky. 

Since explaining the plot briefly is impossible, I won't. The problem with the story in general is that it takes too much time for the movie to decide on its objective.  We go through about three false starts before our intrepid adventures figure out what it is they were brought back to Narnia for. This was a bit frustrating, because just when it gets my imagination going, the film switches gears and moves into another direction.  Just as the action heats up, it stops abruptly to give us more exposition to set up the next episode.  It's not until the last third of the movie that things really begin to get going, and then it ends. 

That said, I'm recommending the movie, especially for younger teens.  There are solid lessons to be learned about courage, loyalty, resisting temptation, and self acceptance.  The action is solid, especially in the climactic sequence.  The returning actors know their roles, but don't seem bored by them.  While out side of Cousin Eustace there aren't any new characters to speak of, there is a clear passing of the baton that sets up the pictures to follow.  Does The Dawn Treader pale in comparison with the first two movies?  Yes it does.  But on a rainy afternoon it's worth the ride.  I just hope next time they trim the sails a bit.

Pizza and Wings

I hate decorating for Christmas.  Call me Scrooge if you will, but it just seems like a colossal waste of time and energy.  I don't mind Christmas decorations, mind you, I just don't want to be the one to put them up. Bah! Humbug!  So after wasting most of the Advent Season I got one of our parishioners, a young man who used to work in the office, to help me drag the artificial tree down stairs and decorate it.  It was just a few days before Christmas, and he came by after work.  After we got that and the Nativity scene set up and lit, we went out for pizza and wings. We were met by another of our intrepid youths.  Both guys are in their mid twenties, one got married this past spring and the other has been seeing a young lady for the last few months.  I'll call them Steve and Eddie, because they actually read this blog from time to time and I don't want to embarrass them.

After we settled into Michelino's, a pizza place up the street from the parish, Eddie, the newlywed, began peppering me with questions.  "What do you think of Fr. Benedict Groeschel?" "Do you believe Jesus really rose from the dead?" "Have you ever watched Fr. John Corapi?" "Do you really believe in the True Presence?"  These questions, and some others, weren't asked in an accusatory way.  It was more like a boxer feeling out an opponent in the early rounds of a fight.  He was trying to figure out who I was and what I was about (even though we had met years ago at a Salesian leadership retreat).  I've been blessed to have been to many talks and retreats given by Fr. Benedict, and admire him greatly.  I'm not as familiar with Fr. Corapi, but have caught his TV programs and radio shows, and like him as well.  As for the doctrinal issues, my only answer was that I wouldn't have given up marriage and family for a myth or a metaphor.

Eddie seemed relieved in a way at the answers I gave.  He said that I was one of the few priests he knew who held such "by the book" beliefs.  I was saddened to hear that, actually.  I don't consider myself too far in one direction doctrinally.  I'm not pushing for a Tridentine Mass to be said in my parish, though I have nothing against it.  There are people who think I should get more worked up over Catholic politicians who don't let their faith influence their politicking.  I tend to avoid controversy, really.  My forays into controversial topics here has been pretty limited, actually.  But there are certain basics we must hold to; such as the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the supremacy of the Pope, devotion to the Blessed Mother, and the Virgin Birth, the great mystery we celebrate during the Christmas Season.  If not what is the point being a Catholic?

On a personal level, the answer I gave about living chaste celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom wasn't just some flippant remark.  If Jesus didn't really rise from the dead, if it was just some "spiritual" return, or a group hallucination, or, worse yet, a fabrication, than any sacrifice we make, even the smallest, is a waste of time, never mind the putting aside of family life.  It is that Jesus is Lord of life with power over death, the Bread of life that gives us his very self by way of the sacraments that makes the vows poverty and obedience, as well as chastity, worth living.  That Jesus' message of repentance and mercy needs to be preached to a new generation is what gives purpose to sacrifices religious and priests make.  That Jesus was an historical person, who lived at a particular time in a particular place; that the events of his life were witnessed to and handed down in both written and spoken form;  that his death had a special significance beyond that of other deaths; that his death did not end with the grave but in resurrection in a body, both glorified and tangible;  that we are destined for that same resurrection is the foundation of the faith.  Without it let us eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.

If I am one of the few "by the book" priests out there (and I know that there are a lot more than just me), then we can see why the vocation crisis is so deep.  If priests are skeptical about the basics of the faith, who will actually see the priesthood as something to aspire to?  If the Mass is just a memorial in the ordinary sense, why sacrifice to be able to celebrate it?  Young people do have generous hearts, but they want to give themselves for something real, not a fable.  If we don't believe it's real, they aren't either, or else they will believe in the truth but not in us as credible ministers of God's Word and sacraments. Either way we shouldn't wonder why so few are following in our foot steps.

Snowy Day, Dream Away

First off I want to wish all of you a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year, filled with all the Lord's blessings.  It wasn't my intention to take over a week off from the blog, but since the passing this week of Fr. Hector Poulin, SDB most of my time was taken up with helping to coordinate the funeral arrangements.  This was Fr. Hector's last assignment before going to St. Philip's Residence in Tampa, Florida.  He had been suffering from Alzheimer's, and Fr. Pat Diver, my predecessor here, had done God's work caring for him until he needed more specialized care.  So we had the funeral here at St. Anthony's yesterday, New Year's Eve, with the burial up at our cemetery in Goshen, New York.  But I did start on a reflection on the weather before things got too crazy, and  here it is:

The best laid schemes of priests and pastors oft get buried under 31.8 inches of snow.  Last Sunday, the day after Christmas, I waited out the storm here in Elizabeth, hoping to get out Monday.  The last time I tried to beat a winter storm to New England I ended up right in the middle of it, crawling a long at 15 miles an hour, barely keeping on the road.  So I hunkered down for the night.  The next morning the sun was out, even if the birds weren't chirping, so I figured I could make my  get away.  I shoveled a path from the garage to the street and I tested out our new four wheel dive Honda.  Not that I'm trying to sell you cars folks, but it passed with flying colors.  It was after 1PM before I got going and figured the main roads would be cleared.  Needless to say the roads, even Elizabeth Avenue, were a mess.  Added to that, every entrance to the Jersey Turnpike was clogged with semis, vans and other assorted and sundry vehicles stuck in the snow.  No matter which approach I tried, the results were the same; there was no way to get out of Elizabeth.

The story was the same all over the Metro Area;  un-plowed streets, stuck cars and mass transit shut downs.  It would be easy to jump ugly on the poor sanitation department.  If it is true that the New York City sanitation worker's union was using the blizzard to stage a labor slowdown then you'd have a gripe, to put it mildly.  But we as a people have to come to grips with the fact that the government is not bigger than the weather.  There are going to be times when even the best, most efficient municipality is going to get overwhelmed by mother nature.  This was the type of storm that happens maybe once in a generation around here.  I'm not sure if it's more correct to say that we've been conditioned, brain washed or spoiled into believing that the government is some all powerful force that has the ability to save us in every situation, and make everything right in an emergency with time to spare.  But it just doesn't happen that way.  These are human institutions that can do great good, but are also limited and fallible.  As much as we don't want to believe it, the street isn't always going to get plowed quickly, the garbage picked up promptly and, more disturbingly, the ambulance might not always get there on time.

I'm not saying we shouldn't demand that the government do its job, but to understand that it doesn't replace our responsibility to prepare ourselves and use common sense in times of crisis.  Sometimes we should just stay home (memo to self on that one) and out of the streets, and enjoy the downtime while it lasts.  Also, people out of the streets means fewer cars stalled and abandoned that makes the city's job of plowing that much tougher.

Well, that's all I have to say about that.  But there is a wider point to be made about our reliance on government and whether we've become a nation of wussies (yeah, I'm going there).  More next time.