According to Voris, the main reason it is “too protestant”
is because the film fails to point out the real meaning of the Last Supper –
the institution of the Eucharist. Voris
admits to not yet seeing the film, but he’s come to his conclusion from
watching the movie trailers.
Voris states: "This movie appears to have been shot alongside The Bible series with an eye to a larger release. Smart business move – economies of scale, following up on one success immediately with another, etc.But here’s the issue – again. America is a protestant nation.So practically any large scale effort is gonna be tailored to a protestant audience and when you get something as important as the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity as a topic up on a movie screen – there’s gonna be issues; spiritual issues.We’ve attached a link to the movie’s promotional page. On that page you will find various video commentaries by mostly protestant religious leaders talking about various scenes in the movie.The Last Supper is one such scene. It is a hyper-dramatized scene with emphasis on Jesus saying goodbye to His Apostles, Him washing their feet, the betrayal of Judas, Peter’s pledge to die with him if needs be.Nowhere, beyond the absolute basic mention is there any real suggestion of what the Last Supper was actually about – which was the institutionalizing of the Holy Eucharist.That aspect (The Most Important One) of the Last Supper is so drastically downplayed and given short shrift, that if someone who watched the movie and knew little or nothing of Our Lord beforehand, they would leave still knowing little of Him. The movie (at least the clips they have made available for viewing so far) is all about emotion – evoking an emotional response in the viewer – appealing to the emotions directly – to the near exclusion or bypassing of the intellect.But, that’s what should be expected in a presentation essentially produced with a Protestant approach for Protestants.We haven’t seen the whole movie – but it would be surprising if the scene in John Chapter is treated with any seriousness – if at all."
Voris goes on to say
that Catholics should not support the movie or any “biblical” movie if it isn’t
done properly from a Catholic point of view.
“Any movie that tries to present to us the Son of God, and yet skips over one of His most essential teachings, is definitely not worth support from Catholics.”
Voris is not alone– or he has inspired some of his fans to
poo-poo the movie too after a recent episode of his “The Vortex” show…
Last week EWTN’s Director of Communications Michelle Johnson sent me TWO EWTN
Press Releases promoting the movie, HERE and HERE.
To which I received the following comment on my blog…
Lucia Bartoli comments: In the name of orthodoxy please re-review the film. I tend to agree with those whose doctrine is intact insofar as emotion is not synonymous with salvation. This film, although "pretty," panders to mainstream (Protestant) Christianity. Where do Burnett and Downey insist on the emphasis of the "body and blood?" I was disappointed enough when I learned that Bishops Wuerl and Gomez found a lot of inspiration in this drek. If I want emotion and drama to feel all warm 'n fuzzy, then I choose Downton Abbey. Burnett and Downey earned their Malibu digs on the coattails of Gibson's Passion of the Christ. Hmmm, they even live in Malibu, as well. Ah, EWTN where hast thou gone? Now you insist on feeling us this pablum of unCatholic "stuff." God help us all! Now I understand precisely why our Church is like a vacillating grand dame who will not dig in her heels and call it like it is.
I am guessing from that comment that Bartoli just watched Voris' "The Vortex" before coming to my blog to read the EWTN press releases.
About my own view...I am VERY biased when it comes to actress Roma Downey. I don’t watch ANYTHING that has the fake "devout Catholic" *yeah right* Roma Downey in it or works on (Downey is divorced twice and remarried to Mark Burnett who is also divorced and remarried at least twice - their 'wedding' was performed by actress DELLA REESE at their Malibu home- hardly "Catholic" but rather ADULTEROUS).
Downey may wish to fool her fans with her "I'm a devout Catholic" bit but this Catholic hasn't fallen for it. And to be honest, I have NO IDEA WHY EWTN WOULD PROMOTE THIS WOMAN AS A DEVOUT CATHOLIC. My personal opinion is, you would NEVER see Downey or Burnett being interviewed by Mother Angelica if she were still doing her show. Mother might comment on the movie, but then she would shake her finger at Downey through the camera and give it to her straight between the eyes, as is Mother's style. :)
I flat out refused to watch “The Bible” because Downey played Mary - which in my movie viewing opinion was unforgivable and laughable. Personally, I clearly have NO liking for this false "Catholic" actress and avoid her work, so I will not be watching “Son of God”.
That said, I have to disagree with both Michael Voris and the
comment left on my blog. While I agree
it would be WONDERFUL if EVERY Bible movie/television show ever made was from
an official Catholic view point there can be some good found in any decently
depicted Bible story shown. For example,
it gets people TALKING about Jesus! That’s
a good thing! It takes the place on the
movie screen or television screen of something secular and replaces it with a
Bible story! That’s a good thing! It can
show a real THIRST for God – look at how many people tuned in to watch “The
Bible” last year- people THIRST for God and are eager to hear about Jesus
Christ and His life. That is a good
thing.
This controversy over watching and supporting the “Son of
God” movie because it’s not strongly Catholic reminds me of the complaining
disciples and Jesus’ words to them…
Mark 938 “John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.” 39 But Jesus said, “Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. 40 Whoever is not against us is for us. 41 For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.”New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
So while the presumed Protestant leaning view of the Bible
in the “Son of God” movie may not be perfect because it doesn’t strongly enough
show the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper, it’s not all bad.
“Whoever is not against us is for us.”
While I don’t particularly like Downey or the fact that this
movie isn’t done in a perfect Catholic view point, I can see that it may have
merit in other areas. The Word of God
NEVER goes out without producing fruits.
Michael Voris is a “cradle Catholic” and I am a convert. I know NOW that my old Protestant Bibles were lacking and did not contain the FULLNESS of the Catholic faith because books, chapters and verses were missing from those Protestant Bibles, yet I still found God among those pages and those Bibles –missing parts as they were- they still helped lead me to the Catholic Faith.
Michael Voris is a “cradle Catholic” and I am a convert. I know NOW that my old Protestant Bibles were lacking and did not contain the FULLNESS of the Catholic faith because books, chapters and verses were missing from those Protestant Bibles, yet I still found God among those pages and those Bibles –missing parts as they were- they still helped lead me to the Catholic Faith.
If assorted Protestant Bibles missing entire books, chapters
and verses can feed people and lead them to the Truth found in His Holy
Catholic and Apostolic Church, then a mere movie depicting a few moments in our
Lord’s life can too.
In Christ,
Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner
Link: http://www.churchmilitant.tv/scripts/vort-2014-02-19.pdf
