The Golden Compass, Catholic Discussion

Catholic Discussion
http://catholicdiscussion.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/the-golden-compass/

The Golden Compass

2007 December 12

tags: Atheism, Authority, Catholic Church, Enlightenment, Faith, Freemasonry, Magisterium, Reason, The Golden Compass

by Master Paul Xavier

Lately there has been a buzz about New Line Cinema’s latest film: The Golden Compass. From what I’ve read and heard about it, the main theme of the story goes along the lines of a small group of people trying fight against the authority of an entity known as “The Magisterium,” which is more of a twisted envisionment of the Catholic Church by author Philip Pullman. A scene from the trailer itself reminds me of the modern interpretation of Galileo’s questioning by the Church, when one character says: “I propose to discover a world, much like our own, in a parallel universe.” Then a bystander replies, “That is heresy.” And the first character replies: “That is the truth.” I would go into more detail about the Galileo controversy, but that is for another post. Back to the topic. The reason for the “Golden Compass” image using the Free-Masonic symbol is not simply an inside joke between friends about the film, but rather a deep reality. The film portrays questioning authority as the right motive, and that by doing so we’re fighting to free ourselves from the ‘enslaving blindness’ brought about by religion. Anyone who views the movie or reads a review will simply attribute this to a carefully crafted web of Atheism in the story. Atheism isn’t the only ideal behind the story. The whole idea behind the story reminds me of the of the 1700’s and the ‘Enlightenment,’ in which the Freemasons were actively partaking in the establishment of that all to familiar motive of undermining ‘the Authority,’ which turned out to be none other than the Teaching Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church, and the Monarchies of Europe.

Here is the trailer to the film, note the scene concerning the ‘heresy and truth’ scenario.

Also note that New Line Cinema did advertisement for the movie using their ‘Lord of the Rings’ Film Trilogy. Grrrr….

P.S. Here is a note from the article on the book from Wikipedia:

The superficial resemblance of protagonist Lyra Belacqua’s alethiometer (depicted on the book’s cover) to a large compass caused the North American publishers of Northern Lights to retitle the book The Golden Compass. The Golden Compasses was an early proposal for the name of the trilogy (instead of His Dark Materials), taken from Milton’s Paradise Lost, where it refers to the drawing instrument, rather than the navigation instrument.

from ? Catholic Discussion, Conspiracies, Movies, My Life

96 Responses leave one ?

2007 December 12 johnnypeepers permalink This movie is secular-progressive propaganda. Bill O’reilly exposed the author’s attempt to subvert Judeo-Christian values.

2007 December 12 SignaVeritae permalink Firs of all, I was going to write a review on it, but you stole it from me. Oh well, I’ll do one anyway. Has anyone noticed, however, that the children kill God in the last book? And have they noticed, that one of the main characters deamons (pronounced: demons) names Stellmarie? which is latin and translates out to Mary the Star. It is also what Catholics commonly refer to Mary the mother of Jesus as.

2007 December 12 marceg permalink Hey you’re going pretty deep into this movie and it’s pretty refrishing to here, keep it up!

2007 December 12 Paul Xavier permalink JohnnyPeepers, The film is seeking to usurp Judeo-Christian values, but the main attack is against the Catholic Church. Particularly with having the nerve to use the word ‘Magisterium.’ The attacks are no longer subversive, but rather becoming open strikes.

SignaVeritae, Yes, I heard about the children killing God in the end, and basically that is the Masonic Principle of the Enlightenment, to ‘kill’ God in the people’s minds, or rather, to establish a society which rules itself by reason, without the guidance and teaching authority of the Catholic Church. And yes, you’ve made mention of StellMarie to me before, though it doesn’t seem to stick out as much as the open attack against the Magisterium, thanks for the note though, I’ll do a little research on that one.

MarcG, Thanks for the comment!

2007 December 20 Paul Xavier permalink I had to delete your comment because it included language. If you have anything to say, please respectful and courteous. We’re here to discuss, not cuss. If you can’t keep a clean discussion, then don’t bother commenting. Thank you.

2007 December 23 Michael permalink ASSUMING the movie is anti Christian, there is a bit of confusion to me. The magistrate in the movie are the ones with the symbol of a square and compass with an M on it, so it would imply at first blush they were the smear target. However, if you want to say the ‘golden compass’ is actually the masonic symbol and is going to free the world from religious oppression, only then does your thesis make sense.

To play devil’s advocate (pardon the phrase) Christianity does indeed have a history of truth suppression, whether or not you’d like to admit it. They also have a history of starting wars with Arabs. I’m what I would consider a Christian, but you have to look at all sides of a problem. Would you consider me a heretic if I said it was wrong to imprison Galaleio or burn the library of Alexandria or destroy all the artifacts in south america, or give the native americans poisoned blankets, etc. etc. We’ll also go to war to help people in an oil rich country under threats by a tyrant we installed, but leave a resource-less nation (tibet, ireland) to their own defenses against communists or otherwise. You’ve got to stop seeing the world as us vs. them so much and maybe then you can work to reverse the hate / mistrust on both sides.

2007 December 24 Paul Xavier permalink What I’m saying is that the Golden Compass is a insinuation of the masonic symbol. Since the Freemasons are the ones who wage the never-ending war against religion, I was connecting the symbol with the ’symbolic’ war within the Golden Compass Film. And yes, I agree with you. Those ‘Christian’ of those known heretical sects of Protestantism and Anglicans do have a history of suppressing the truth of Christ. For examples look at the persecution of Catholics by Queen Elizabeth of England and the Protestants of the Age of Reformation. And technically, there was no history of starting wars with Arabs. The Islamic Arabs took it upon themselves to conquer the Holy Land from Christian and Western Rule. If you check your history, you will note that the Muslums took Jerusalem from the Byzantine Empire in 637 A.D. This is what propelled into the Crusade Four-Hundred Years later. It was the Arabs who were attacking the Byzantine Empire, which eventually forced the Emperor Alexis to beseech Rome for Aid. Catholicism did not start wars with Arabs, Arabs started wars with Catholicism. No, I wouldn’t say you were a heretic if you said that imprisoning Galileo was wrong, since a heretic is one who rejects a few of the beliefs of the Catholic faith. I’ll have a post about Galileo’s trial soon, so please excuse the delay in that response. Concerning the Burning of the Library of Alexandria, check out the article on wikipedia, it gives a good history of the rumors and sources. Nothing about Christians destroying it. Destorying the Articfacts of South America? Yeah, I sort of wish we still had those temples where human sacrafices were conducted, and millions of lives destroyed in order to ‘appease’ the gods. Oh, and Andrew Jackson did give poisoned blankets to the Indians. Yes, America did set up Saddam Hussein, and concerning fighting Communists, I’m behind you all the way. So I have to say that you have a fairly good argument. But one note, only one of those people you menionted were Catholic, all the other’s were Protestant or other ‘Christian’ groups. And Andrew Jackson was a freemason himself, so yeah, that explains a lot… Oh, and by the way, it is always us vs. them, there are always two sides to a sword…

2008 January 2 SignaVeritae permalink Michael, All men can sin, and that is because they are men. I’m not saying it was ok that they did all those things, but, they are the past man! For every one thing you bring up that’s wrong about the Catholic Church, I could bring up, at least 5 times more things that they did right. Perhaps you would say that it is the same things on the Freemasons. Well, go read “Blood on the Altar” or “The Franklin Coverup” or even just any old Malachi Martin book.

2008 January 2 Paul Xavier permalink He didn’t name anything committed by the Catholic Church. The people who did those things were all Protestants and Freemasons. Yes, the Catholics arrested Galileo, but that was because they asked him to not preach his theory as truth since it was rather new and needed research, but he continued to do so despite the Church’s petition. So he was warned not to do something, but did it anyways.

2008 January 2 Johnny B. permalink Dude, just chill about this whole deal. It is just a book. You people are taking this way to seriously

2008 January 3 Paul Xavier permalink It’s just another form of indoctrination. This time, with rebellious ideals.

2008 January 5 Marc permalink i herd that the movie didn’t do good in the box office either. they wanted to continue with the entire trilogy or what ever it is but, with them not making much money it might not happen. and i herd the atheists didn’t like it because it was too watered down. with both sides not liking it if they do continue with the movies there not gonna make much more $.

2008 January 7 music permalink very interesting. i’m adding an RSS Reader

2008 January 9 CLAUDE permalink About Galileo: 1564-1642 AC. …”rather new and needed research ?”

it was known by : Nicolaus Copernicus : 1473-1543 AC Aristarchus de Samos :310-230 BC Veda/ Aitareya Brahmana :/- 900 BC !!!!

STOP desinformation please.

2008 January 9 SignaVeritae permalink Yes, let’s ALL stop dis-information. The Churh was wrong, but all men are created weak! Same reason why the Romans slaughtered thousands of Catholics. When Nero would have an outdoor party, he would tie Catholics to the stake, and burn them, at hte party, for torches. Throwing one man in prison, and killing thousands have big differences.

2008 January 9 Paul Xavier permalink I’m sorry for the confusion about the Galileo statement. I understand that his theory had been debated for many centuries, since the idea of the sun being the center of the universe wasn’t new. But what I mean is that he needed to have a fully detailed research about the theory, giving significant proofs for it’s truth, rather than openly proclaiming it on theory alone. Much like the theory of Evolution. (Not to mix Darwin and Galileo on the same boat) but Darwin out to have done more research before teaching his theory as truth.

2008 January 9 SignaVeritae permalink Paul, Just stop trying to right the wrong. I see that you are just explaining things, but the church has made errors! (Just like every other religion and non-religion.)

2008 January 9 Paul Xavier permalink The Church does not err. Her members do.

2008 January 10 SignaVeritae permalink The Church is made up by her members.

2008 January 10 Paul Xavier permalink True, but the Church is the perfect entity created by Christ, her members are like the cells. Some are cancerous, some are not.

2008 January 10 SignaVeritae permalink Exactly. I will refrain from saying anythingelse, because I think the temptation of calling you a cancerous one is too much. (Just kidding, of course!)

2008 January 12 iJack permalink It’s just a fairy tale!!!!!

By the way, I wasn’t aware that the Catholic Church thought that they were the one and only authority and that everyone must obey them?

Think I’ll rather stick with the fairy tales, less scary…

2008 January 12 Paul Xavier permalink Hmmm, yes. It is just a ‘fairy tale,’ and actually, it does have a moral. The morality being introduced is meant to arouse an interest in questioning authority. The Catholic Church IS the one and only authority when it comes to teaching on the matters of Faith and Morals. But on other subjects, she is not infallible. I could continue arguing with you, but which ‘religion’ are you? If any. Since I can’t give a direct and accurate response to you when I don’t know where you are coming from.

2008 January 13 SignaVeritae permalink “…I wasn’t aware that the Catholic Church thought that they were the one and only authority and that everyone must obey them?…” No, we don’t. But if you insulted the Moslems, they would kill you. We have been insulted, but we aren’t killing you. Give us some credit. If someone openly insulted you, wouldn’t you defend yourself?

2008 January 13 Paul Xavier permalink We try and turn the cheek to the offenses done to us, but when it comes to moral responsibility, it is our duty to speak out.

2008 January 17 iJack permalink Paul, I am of no religion. As soon as religion steps in, God gets forgotten. People get stuck in arguing about bollocks.

I am a child of God. That’s it. God rules me, no church.

2008 January 17 Paul Xavier permalink iJack, in order to become a child of God, you must be adopted by the graces in Baptism. And where do you see us arguing about bollocks? No where. The Church is the Teaching Authority which is to help guide us on our road to heaven. She DOES NOT rule us, but rather guides us. God alone rules over us all.

2008 January 17 SignaVeritae permalink Touche

2008 January 17 marceg permalink “…But if you insulted the Moslems, they would kill you. We have been insulted, but we aren’t killing you. Give us some credit. If someone openly insulted you, wouldn’t you defend yourself?” Very well said people don’t see this as a reality but us Cathloics get picked on worse than the Jews do and for one I’m a little hurt that nobody takes notice of that. In my philosophy class i am surprizingly a respected person along with my point of view, being a Cathloic this is shocking but when the subject of things like the Golden Compass or an even more conterversal subject come up I know that i’m gonna be alone and left to rot. Why should I subjected to such torment. Its a form of descrimination, when I bring God into the matter people shut me out or care not to debait me.

2008 January 17 Paul Xavier permalink Hey, I’ll go to law school, and when I get out, I promise to take up your case! (Teasing) lol But it’s true, we always have to be on the so called ‘offending’ side of things. Simple because we try to practice what we preach. And if someone doesn’t like what we say or preach, they simple cry ‘Intolerance!’ You have a good point Marc. It seems as though everyone is intolerant of Catholic thinking and Morality.

2008 January 23 iJack permalink So my Krishna friends aren’t children of God? Neither are the Muslims? What about the Methodists? And the Buddhists (mind you you don’t have to be baptised or anything to be a Buddhist, you just have to be a CHILD OF GOD!!!) I wonder where the Jews fit into the Catholic picture of a CHILD OF GOD? And the Lutherians, Rastafarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, phew, seems like a lot of “unguided” people to me!!!

2008 January 24 Paul Xavier permalink We are all created in the image of God. That is to be understood. But we are all NOT children of God. We become children of God through the Sacrament of Baptism, which gives us Sanctifying Grace, and washes away the effects of original sin. By Baptism, the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity (The Holy Spirit) enters into your heart, making you a true child of God. So in so many words, you cannot become a child of God, unless you become ‘like’ God. Not in the sense of which Satan tempted Adam and Eve, but in the sense of how a son imitates his Father. This time, the Heavenly Father.

2008 January 28 iJack permalink Oi, so I guess, not being Catholic, I’m ‘unguided’ and there is no hope for me. Does this mean I’m also ‘condemned to go to “hell”‘?

2008 January 28 SignaVeritae permalink Unless you convert, or if you have mortal sin on your soul, when you die, you will go to Hell.

2008 January 30 iJack permalink This is very interesting, I never knew the Catholics were so full of themselves. What about Christians who aren’t Catholics? Will the also go to the eternal pool of fire and burn for all eternity?

2008 January 30 SignaVeritae permalink It all depends. The Ten Commandments, used to define law in this country. The founding fathers didn’t say, let’s use the Ten Commandments, they simply said, “Let’s do what is moral and right.” That would be, the Ten Commandments. Other Christians, will most likely be given a chance to accept Jesus as their savior after they die, along with every other religion. However, don’t quote me on that. If you have mortal sin on your soul, that you were truly repentent of, then if you take Jesus as your savior, you will get to heaven. If you have mortal sin on your soul, that you don’t repent of, you will definately not go to Heaven. But know one really knows whether or not you have to be Christian. But you do definately have to accept Jesus as your savior. I reccomend finding a Catholic parish near you, and asking the pastor.

2008 January 30 Elenatintil permalink I’m confused. The way you’re wording it, it sounds as though Christains who are not Catholics can’t accept Jesus as their savior. But Romans 10:9-10 says “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.” I’m not a Catholic, yet I fully believe that Christ is my savior and have followed the instructions in this verse. Also, from reading I have done relating to the discussions between the Catholic Church and differant Protestant denominations, I understand that the Catholic church does recognize other Protestant denominations as being legitmate “Christ Followers” (or whatever you want to call them.) The biggest sign of this is that the Catholic church and several of these denominations agreed to mutually recognize the baptisim of each other’s members- that means if you were baptized as an Anglican, you don’t need to be baptized again if you convert to Catholocisim. Correct me if I’m wrong. And I can probably find exact quotes if someone wants more details.

2008 January 30 Paul Xavier permalink The Catholic Church’s teaching is simple: “There is no salvation outside the Church.” This is in reference to the many heretical and schismatics sects throughout hte world, who have WILLFULLY left the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church of Christ, in favor of their own desires and ambitions. God alone sees and judges each and every individual soul. The Church has made these laws as a straighter guide to Heaven, which if we follow these laws and rules, we can be sure of attaining the Beatific Vision. Is it possible for man to make it to Heaven outside the Catholic Church? Yes, it is. For as I said before, God alone knows the heart of the individual. But that person is taking a risk, since, God has appointed a true and sturdy way to Heaven, the Catholic Church.

IJack, Concerning the issue we were talking about with Baptism, I advise you to look up the Catholic meaning of the word. And, if you want a deeper and more insightful view on this topic of ‘Hell,’ I’d advise reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Elenatintil, Conerning the issue of Catholics excepting the Protestants as legit, it varies. On the issue of Baptism, if the rite is the same as that instituted by Christ “Go forth and preach to all nations, Baptizing in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” it is generally excepted. The one thing, sadly, about the Protestants, is that they have seperated themselves from the Catholic Church. At the time of Henry VIII, they were simply ’schismatic.’ Meaning, that they still had the Sacraments and had hte same rite as the Church of Rome. (Much like the Greek Church. Which is also Schismatic.) But alas, they Anglicans eventually seperated themselves to the level of Heretics, by changing the rite of the Mass, prayers, and Clerics. For a Bishop must have ties to the Apostles in order to confer Holy Orders upon other men. I forgot the name of the exact person, but the Anglicans chose someone who didn’t have Apostolic ties as a Bishop, thus breaking off the Clerical ties that the Anglican Church had with the True Church. (I’ll look up the name of the Bishop.)

2008 January 30 Elenatintil permalink Paul-

I appreciate the fact that you are willing to allow that it is possible for non-Catholics to go to heaven. Just as I also appreciate the Protestants who allow that Catholics may actually be able to go to heaven! It would almost be laughable if it wasn’t so sad. I really do wish that the church was not so divided. A great many talks were initiated between the Catholic Church and other denominations to try and find common ground in order to bring more unity to the body of Christ. Some of the talks went better than others, especially when both parts were able to agree on “at least” things. Such as both Catholics and Protestants would agree that Communion was at the least x, x and x (I can’t remember the exact things) even though Catholics and some Protestants would actually believe it was more than “x and x.” Does that make sense? I had to read the section in the book twice before I understood what it was talking about. And I would agree on baptisim. It must be in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That was how I was baptised.

2008 January 30 Paul Xavier permalink Yes, it is rather interesting to see that there is finally some talk and attempts to bring the Protestants and Schismatics back into the Church. The Catholic Church is always ready to welcome them back into the fold with open arms, but it is often a matter of personal beliefs which stop the Protestants from coming back. United We Stand, Divided We Fall. If Christianity is so divided against itself, how can it possible expect to leave a mark on today’s society? It is imperative that Christianity Unites under the one banner of the Church, otherwise each denomination will slowly wither away into nothing, under the never-ending attacks of the modern world.

2008 January 30 Elenatintil permalink And who knows? Perhaps someday it will happen. The Catholic Church has made some changes, and some Protestants are learning to be less against Catholicism. But there is still a lot to be done on both sides. And since we live in a fallen world, perfect unity is probably not possible.

2008 January 30 iJack permalink I am not as well versed in the ways of the church as you guys, but to me it seems too much. Too much of what? I don’t even know, it makes my head hurt.

I am a Child of God. I’m not a Catholic, Protestant, Christian or whatever you want to call it. I’m just God’s child. And thats good enough for me. I commune with him on a day to day basis and bide by his will. If I won’t go to heaven (the heaven/hell thing is also open to a whole other debate) because I am not Catholic and was not Baptised in a Catholic church, then I want no part in any of it.

There are a lot of good people out there who are not Catholic. I cannot understand what it is with mankind that they always want to force their way onto other people. And if someone won’t do as they say, they will put the living fear into them. I’m sorry, but that is just a load of bull. Let people be and live free as God intended it.

2008 January 30 Paul Xavier permalink Now, you say you abide by His will. What constitutes as God’s will? I understand that there are a lot of good people out there are aren’t Catholic. And who talked about forcing their way onto other people? I am not forcing anything on you. You are the one who freely comes here to debate. I welcome debate, but in order to fully understand and grasp what I am saying, you have to be either a Christian or a Catholic, since I am speaking with a Catholic frame of mind, and it may not come as clear to you as it does to me.

2008 January 30 Elenatintil permalink Christ died to open the doors of heaven to all who believed. But why would those who do not believe in Christ want to spend eternity with him in heaven? Or why should he offer people who hate him a place in his house?

I bring up this point because it is something that I think most people overlook when they try to explain why Christ is the only way to heaven. It doesn’t contain all the theological reasons, and yet I think it probably makes the most sense to a non-believer.

2008 January 31 music permalink What do you mean ?

2008 January 31 Paul Xavier permalink Elenatintil, What you just said makes perfect sense! Why would someone who isn’t a Christian want to spend eternity with Christ? That is why it is important to explain with detail in a discussion. In order for a discussion to be thorough, one must take a look at both sides of the situation, study them carefully, and then make a decision as to why or why not they conflict. Also, what you said about Christ dying for those who believed…it’s interesting you mention that, since there is a bit of distortion in the Mass. “This is the blood of the New and Everlasting Covenant, it will be shed for you and for ALL, for the remission of sins. Do this in rememberance of Me.” Notice the ‘all,’ the traditional translation is: “It will be shed for you and for many…” (Just something that your comment brought to my mind.)

2008 February 1 iJack permalink I won’t debate with you guys anymore. This is becoming like politics.

2008 February 1 iJack permalink …which was exactly why I started posting here. See my second post. Through your reaction, I basically proved my point. And that is why I think religion is bollocks.

2008 February 1 SignaVeritae permalink Go ahead, think that, but just be prepared to tell it to God.

2008 February 1 Elenatintil permalink That is why many Christains say that Christianity is not a religion- it’s a way of life.

I actually DO think that a lot of Christains spend too much time arguing over theological differances and not enough time living out the commands of our Lord. Unfortunately it’s hard to show this on online *Discussion* blogs.

Paul- thank goodness I’m not Reformed or I’d probably argue your last sentance. Yes, Christ died for the salvation of all- but you can only be saved if you actually WANT to be.

2008 February 1 Elenatintil permalink *sigh* and I probably didn’t even phrase that last sentance right.

2008 February 1 marceg permalink i think you did alright with your last sentance, going to Heaven is a choice because of free will, it’s Heaven or Hell God wants us to go to Heaven but some people seem to ingnore that. Free will is also somthing that i also dicuss in my philospohy which people really don’t get, they think that the law’s of a government take away you free will, which really dosen’t make sence if you know the defenition of free will.

2008 February 4 PJ permalink Wow, I have been a Roman Catholic nearly all my life, I feel a little ashamed and abashed that people still tend to have a “our way is the right way” attitude concerning the church on earth. You see as a Catholic you need to believe there aretwo churches, one that is of the earth and the one that is in heaven. Sometimes, like two members of the same familly, there are disagreements, bt in all things the church on earth digresses to the rule of the church in heaven. This is something that is part of our faith and yet so few realise what ramifications this has. Can the earthly church be wrong in it’s decisions? Yes. What happens when the earthly church makes mistake? The heavenly church has final judgment on the matter. This is why Saint Joan, under mortal persecution from the church on earth answered her hgher calling from the church of heaven. Did it lead her to denounce the church and turn her back on those that persecuted her from amongst her own faith? No, she died and was true to her convictions and years later the earthly church realised its errors and understood that she was indeed correct and eventually was shown as what a good catholic should be. Now, does this mean that all non-catholics are going to burn in hell? Does this mean that all those not baptised cannot be saved, or even sainted? No. But they may be viewed as being contrary to the current teachings of the earthly church. In the end we all must stand before the pearly gates. With all the talk in this thread about who is and is not correct in thier views please remember, as a catholic, it is not we who should judge. For my part, as head of my familly I have let my kids see the movie a even support the reading of his books. It gives them a wider view of the world, and as long as me and the other members of the catholic community have raised my children well, then they will be able to make thier own mind up ad choose not to judge iether. THats my 2 cents. Go see the movie and enjoy it for the celuloid fantasy it is.

2008 February 4 Paul Xavier permalink If you looked at one of my previous comments on this post, you will see I addressed the situation where there have been corrupted members of the Church. The Church can be wrong in its decisions. But NOT in the decisions regarding matters of Faith and Morals. (That is where Papal Infallibility comes in.) The mentality that ‘our way is the right way’ isn’t wrong. Christ established the One Holy Catholic Church. Did He not say, “You are Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my Church. And the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it?” So we can clearly see that Christ created an institution by which man could attain salvation. ‘I’ have never said that an unbaptized person cannot gain salvation. NOR has the Church. There is the Baptism of Faith and the Baptism of Blood. Did I say that all non-Catholics are going to Hell? No. But I stated that ‘we,’ with our limited revelation on earth, know that Christ instituted the Church as a means of gaining Sanctification, and WE must use this means! God alone knows the soul, and He alone is the Judge. And I am not arguing with people to see who is correct and who isn’t. I’m stating the Church’s view of things. And I understand that reading the books and viewing the film can be a means of getting a wider view of the world. One must do the research before making a statement. I have not seen the film or have read the books, but I have read summaries of the story online, read the reviews, and read the Vatican’s statement regarding it. I do not have any children, but if I did, I would be sure to explain to them the dangers of the world’s philosophies and the need to embrace Christ close to their hearts.

2008 February 4 Elenatintil permalink The problem with any controversial film like this is that while there are many of us who know the truth and are willing to explain to our families where the lies are, there are many more who do not have this sort of discernment and films like this CAN seriously mess with their thinking. While the controversial elements in GC have been played down, this was done intentionally so that it would be well recieved and the NEXT two books (which are even worse) could be made with all of those controversial and dangerous statements intact. (Like homosexual angels and a god that can actually be killed by men. No, I’m not talking about the “false” angel-god, but the actual one that the children “release” unto death.)

2008 February 5 Nolan permalink Propaganda whether Christian, Catholic, Islamic or Government is still propaganda, and needs to be seen as the mind bending drivel it is. Why cant you people stop judging, and accept that other people have VALID views as well? Which idiot wrote the original article anyway?

2008 February 5 Paul Xavier permalink Yes, I read about the film makers doing a bit of ‘editing’ (if you want to call it that,)in order to make the film more ‘acceptable’ to Christians.

Nolan, Propaganda is propaganda, and that is all there is to it. Me? I’m not judging anything. All I am saying is that this film is, (What’s that word you just used?) Propaganda, meant to poison the minds of children with Atheistic ideas. I am just showing that this film is nothing more than a vicious attack on the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, meant to make people question its Authority.

2008 February 6 Nolan permalink Well Paul. Have you read the 3 books in question? You assume the Catholic church has authority outside of it’s sheep. It doesn’t! And works of fiction don’t attack it. Perhaps the Magisterium are Paranoid? The premise of “Eternal life” as your reward for being a faithful servant, is a very shaky one indeed, and as you will appreciate must be guarded by whatever means possible. So, when a work of fiction is a little too close to home, and shows the false foundations of “Organised Religion” for what they are, the “Organised Religion” sheep panic and close ranks as a ‘knee jerk’ reaction, without thought. Panic?. Beware there might be some one out there that has an original thought. Good luck Nolan (Nihilist, and recovering Christian)

2008 February 6 Barry permalink Considering you mindless sheep that that believe the crap you read or by your choir boy loving leaders you know nothing about what you are talking about or the religion you believe in for instance the religion of voodoo has been around longer than any form of christianaty ind in voodoo they worship saints so i wonder where you morons got it from hey they only real difference here is they do not force there beliefs on anyone and they are prosecuted for there beliefs next point is more people have been killed in the name of your god than in any other war in history combined so in this case I would have to say that the god you believe in is a nothing more than the spirit of a serial killer who is pissed off the other point i would like to put here is if you think the bible is true take this into consideration for starters every time the bible is re released its different so if its the truth then how come the story keeps changing after all just about as many copy’s of the lord of the rings has been sold since its release date as the bible during the same period but in the lord of the rings the story doesn’t change so why don’t you except Gandalf as your personal savior Lord Souron as the and the elves as the angels of heaven devil after all they are both fairy tails but at least the lord of the rings is constant

and to top my comments off if you don’t think that the church is the biggest scam of all time start looking at your religious leaders show me one just one that doesn’t live in a decent sized house with at least one luxurious car

2008 February 6 Paul Xavier permalink Nolan, I will humbly state that I have not read the 3 books in question, though I have done enough research online regarding the storyline and plot to understand that it IS an intended attack on the Authority of the Catholic Church. Since, what are these works pushing forth? IDEAS! And what are ideas? Something which develops in our minds, and guides us in our actions and beliefs. The ideas in this story are ATHEISTIC and FREEMASONIC. In so many words, they push the agenda of the ‘Enlightenment,’ which intended to do away with Faith and establish Reason as the sole source of guidance. The author himself stated “The Magisterium is a fictionalized version of the Catholic Church, horribly gone astray from its roots.” So you CANNOT say that the books are not directed in an anti-Catholic Manner.

As for the promise of ‘Eternal Life’ as a reward, it is a valuable reward when compared with your ‘reward.’ I looked up your ‘Nihilist’ values, and it simply is the belief that ‘being’ attains no purpose. So, if that is true, then all of what I am saying shouldn’t matter to you. Since, after all, it’s pointless and it will fade into nothingness in the years to come.

2008 February 6 Paul Xavier permalink Barry,

Hmmm, it seems you are unable to discuss things in a proper and intelligible manner without using some inappropriate words…

First of all, may I ask “What Choir-Boy loving leaders?” If you are referring to the abuse scandals, I will simply say that THERE HAS BEEN an infiltration of the Catholic Church by homosexuals. All we can do is pray for those poor souls. Secondly, Christianity has been around for a longer period of time. Christianity is nothing more than the fulfillment of the Old Law. The Law which was kept by the Jews for thousands of years and perfected by Christ. He Himself said “I have come not abolish but to fulfill.” So Christianity is just a continuation of the Religion practiced by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, handed down through the generations, and perfected by Christ. I have to say yes, there have been many people killed in the name of Christ, but when what are those numbers when compared with the sacrificial acts of abortion offered to the ‘god’ of Lust? Or with the Human Sacrifices of the Aztec Indians? or of the Carthaginians who offered their children to Moloch? You cannot blame the acts of man upon God. For we are all gifted with Free Will, which can be used both for good and for ill.

I agree, over the years, and many translations, the Bible has lost some of its ‘bite?’ In so many words, the many translations have taken away from the true meaning of its words, and have brought us to a watered-down conclusion. Now, I must state some facts. The Bible is in no way ‘twisted’ from its original context, since while the Apostles were alive, the history of the past was documented by the Scribes and Historians of the Jewish people, the Apostles in NO WAY changed the Bible, since the writings of the Old Testament were well known among the people (as it was taught at the Synagogues.) Secondly, the Apostles did not distort any facts about Christ, since He had many followers and they all knew His true story. Third, the Church DID NOT twist the Bible, since after all, the Bible was taught by word of mouth, let alone by written words, since many people in the Middle Ages were unable to read or write. (This ability being actually taught by the Church itself. The universities it set up, and the wise monks of the past.) So, your accusation that the Church has twisted the Bible is un-found. But may I say, that the Protestants HAVE changed the context of the Bible. For example, you have the King James Version…etc. Ever wonder why the Catholic Bible has more books than the Protestant one? But you must understand, when translating a text from one language to another, some of it’s quality is lost. Like if you translate a sentence from Latin to English, it loses part of the classical taste which the Latin contains. As for the Lord of the Rings Series, it hasn’t even reached its 100th Anniversary, so you have yet to see what may become of it. The Lord of the Rings is a parallel universe with that of this world. Gandalf is like the priest, the elves are unto angels, and Iluvitar can be related unto God Himself. Tolkien was a Catholic, and he incorporated the morality of his faith into his masterpieces.

If you intend on attacking the living conditions of the Clergy, I have not seen on priest who has a luxurious car. (Don’t get me wrong, I am sure there are a few.) Now, tell me, tell me of one Politician that doesn’t have a luxurious car? The only people I know who don’t have a decent house, are the poor and homeless people living on the streets. I’m sure you have a decent home yourself. Whether it be a house or a rented apartment. Decent is defined as ‘fair, or good enough.’ There are many people out there with decent homes, so why pick on the clergy? Why not go pick on the politician who is spending your tax dollars on his car and home? The money received by the Church is donated by free will offering. There is a difference between Free Will and Tax Dollars.

Also, if you post a respond to this, there better not be any language in it. If so, I will simply delete it without thinking twice. I am open to hearing your views on things, but if you cannot be polite, then I will not be polite enough to take the time to listen. Thank You!

2008 February 6 Elenatintil permalink Paul-

Just a note on bible translations- the Apocrypha is eliminated from Protestant bibles because it was never a part of the original Hebrew scriptures. It only became included later on in the Greek Septuigent, which then carried onto the earliest Christain bibles because most early Christains read the Old Testament in it’s Greek form (since most of them read Greek, not Hebrew and the New Testament itself was, of course, in Greek). The Protestant position (And traditional Jewish position)is that such books are useful for historical and moral purposes, but they are not divinely inspired the way the rest of the scriptures are.

But the other books of the Bible should be equally valid as translated from the original writings, whether Protestant or Catholic. (Althoug I will admit that the Jerusalem bible was the only one to properly contain the full description of one bodily function…somethign that I noticed when I was doing some Greek translation. None of the other Bibles wanted to go into that kind of detail! I laughed so hard over that one…)

2008 February 6 Elenatintil permalink Oh…and I’m not trying to start a debate on bible translations. I just finished reading a book on the subject…and taking a college Intro to Bible class full of that kind of information…so I just felt like sprouting info…

2008 February 7 Barry permalink Paul

First and foremost I would like to thank you.

For helping me conduct a little experiment (thank you)

However in answering my above question you have shown me what I have already know and understood since i was seven. Christians and im including everyone Protestant, Catholic, seventh day Adventists the hole lot. Cannot and will not think outside of the proverbial box (FOR THEM SELVES)in your comments you are only repeating what your parents told you and so on. on your reply to me you said and I quote. (the Church DID NOT twist the Bible, since after all, the Bible was taught by word of mouth, let alone by written words, since many people in the Middle Ages were unable to read or write. (This ability being actually taught by the Church itself. The universities it set up, and the wise monks of the past.) Now on this I would like to ask you to conduct a little experiment of your own if you will. The night before you go into I would like you to come up with a story write it down word for word and When you go into work or you go some where tell someone this story word for word. and wait for it to do its rounds.

2008 February 7 Elenatintil permalink Barry…

Have you studied the accuracy of historical documents? The Bible has many, many more copies and all much closer to the original writings than ANY other historical document of that period. Including such classics as the Iliad, the Oddessy and Julias Caeser’s writings.

I can post exact numbers if you’re interested. The research and facts backing up the reliability and historical accuracy of the Bible are amazing.

2008 February 7 Elenatintil permalink P.s. I am NOT just quoting my parents. In fact, on this subject I probably know more than they do.

2008 February 7 Paul Xavier permalink Barry,

That is a wonderful example! Since I already have done the experiment in a class before, I don’t deem I need to re-do the experiment. What I would like to say, is simply that YES, some small changes take place (namely in the words and style of the writing,) but the story ever remains the same. You may use the same example with history. Why is it that there are so many views of what happened in history? For example, I’ll use the Crusades. Some historians say that the Crusaders were a ‘colonial’ expedition. Others deem that it was an act by Christian Europeans to put a stop to the advance of Islam. Others say it was an opportunity which the nobles exploited to make money for themselves. And some even say that the Crusaders were moved by the promise of indulgence. None-the-less, we all agree that Pope Urban II preached the Crusade at Clermont, and from the there, the army marched towards Asia minor. We have some records of what Pope Urban preached at the Council, but over time they have been destroyed, and only copies remain. When translating and copying, SOME of the story is re-worded, and as you’ve said, it isn’t the EXACT replica, but it is still a sound replica. For the though the wording has changed, it still withholds the same meaning.

May I ask what religion you are? If you are of any…

And thank you for being charitable in your comment!

2008 February 7 Barry permalink See how it comes out the same or different? I would say way different.so how close do you think the original text was to what actually happened little alone how far off the versions that available today are. And on the subject of the golden compass. your already so far indoctrinated into Catholic Church. that reading these will not change your views on Religion and even if you were not they wouldn’t change you they are nothing more than fairy tails. If you will not read them then stop posting comments on a subject you know nothing about. I leave you with that to think about (good luck with your experiment)

2008 February 7 Paul Xavier permalink Why would you say it comes out ‘way’ different? Are you a historian regarding the Bible Texts? No. And nether am I. There are always two views to every one situation. It seems I have taken one side, and you the other. In the long run, we can argue back and forth as to whether or not the Bible is in the correct context. May I ask you, do you have any faith in any historical documents? Because it is a known fact that the Bible IS the most thoroughly researched and studied historical document ever.

To be honest with you Barry, there has been very little discussion about the Golden Compass within these comments. Most of them are questioning my Religion and the authority of the Church. I take your statement ‘your already so far indoctrinated into Catholic Church, that reading these will not change your views on Religion’ as a compliment, for in it, you are simply saying that I know my Faith too well for it to be easily broken.

There is a moral to every story…

2008 February 7 Barry permalink I am of no Religion I Do have morals and care for others. I do agree that Religion is good as people need something to believe in The fear of eternal damnation seems to work. for now but what will you do to keep people in line when they are not afraid of that anymore ? And what makes you think that only catholics have morels and are right the church and the heaven and hell thing are of no interest to me what so ever. however I did some reeding on what I wrote so that I would not be writing blindly. my interest lie’s more with the comments people are writing on the golden compass any have a good day all

2008 February 7 SignaVeritae permalink Well, if you are of no religion, do you believe in a creator?

2008 February 8 Barry permalink The answer to that question is simple. NO I do not the only Creator’s there are. Are parents Your parents created you and Paul’s created him etc its called ( Evolution )

2008 February 8 Elenatintil permalink Uhm…no. Having babies is not Evolution. Evolution (Macro Evolution) is the changing of one species into another. For which, by the way, there is no scientific evidence.

My mother and father did not *create* me. Sure, I wouldn’t exist without them, but they did not sit down and go…okay, this chromosome goes here…and this cytosine and thymine link up and this cell with this nucleus…to create this girl…

All of those components existed in my parents- which existed in THEIR parents, and so on back to Adam and Eve. (Even in my birth, I have less genetic information in my than my parents do. That alone refutes evolution, which requires the creation of NEW genetic information. (Positive mutation of genetic information has NEVER been recorded.)

No. They did not do that. No human has ever been able to create life from nothing.

2008 February 8 Paul Xavier permalink Ok, I’ll take a look at this from your point of view. You have no Religion, and say that ‘fear’ of eternal damnation is what keeps people in the Church. Let me ask you, which code of morality or law, set down by the Catholic Church, is harmful to a person, if they are to follow it? Since clearly, having no religion, you must believe that life does not have a purpose, and that when you die, you shall simply rot into the dust of this earth. May I ask, what possible harm would there be in following the Church’s Law? Or is it that you fear that following a Religious Authority would be a waste of your time in Life; since, (having no religion,) you believe there is no God who will reward the good you accomplished and punish the sin you’ve committed.

As for my statements on the Golden Compass, I shall repeat: I have done my research regarding the story. Though I have YET to read the books. I am being straightforward with you.

Now, may I ask, have you read the Bible? Since you seem to be so bold so as to attack it legitimacy…I thought you must be an expert as to the historical manuscripts yourself…

2008 February 8 Elenatintil permalink I’ll also be so bold as to add that it is the hope of eternal life, and not the fear of eternal damnination that leads us to Christ. Sure, living in Hell, apart from Christ forever is pretty awful…but if we didn’t love God and serve him, then spending eternity with him would be rather…nerve-wracking…

(No disrespect intending, as I certainly don’t think an eternity with God would be at all nerve-wracking. I’m just saying that if you deny him your whole life and never turn to him and then for some reason you ended up in heaven and found that everything that Christainity had taught about him was true…you’d feel pretty stupid.)

2008 February 8 Paul Xavier permalink Or rather, if you ended up in Hell and realized that everything about Religion was true, you’d be regretting having forsaken God in Life.

2008 February 8 marceg permalink yea poor Protestants, what will they think when they see Our Lady on a throne.

2008 February 8 Elenatintil permalink ummmm…..

2008 February 8 Elenatintil permalink umm…lets not go into the Protestant vs. Catholic thing. It’s really not worth it.

Anyhow, there is something called Pascal’s wager. Pascal said that if you believe in God, and it turns out to be false, you will have lost nothing, but if it turns out to be true, you will have gained everything.

However, if you don’t believe in God, and it’s true, then you will have lost everything.

2008 February 9 Paul Xavier permalink Marc’s statement isn’t actually a Protestant Catholic Thing, it fits in with the wager, to a degree. What he means to say is that people will rather be shocked to find Our Lady so uplifted by God. For, if Mary were simply like us, having on her soul the stain of original sin, how could she be able to give birth to the Christ, the perfect man and Son of God? Something with sin cannot bring forth something without sin. So it is natural to assume that Mary would be without sin, since she IS the Mother of God.

And yes, thank you Elenatintil, that was the exact idea I was trying to explain! “If you believe in God, and it turns out to be false, you will have lost nothing; but if it turns out to be true, you will have gained everything…” The same thing with following the Church’s Teachings. If you follow it, and it is false, what harm is there in doing so? Since, after all, Her teachings are for the good of man and the sanctification of his soul. But, if everything the Church taught was true, then you shall enter into a greater glory and be rewarded for your Faith.

2008 February 9 Elenatintil permalink Paul- but by that same degree, if Mary were perfect, no one could give birth to her. And we know that a LOT of the other women in Jesus’s family tree were guilty of some pretty terrible things. Not that I think Mary WAS guilty of anything like that, I do believe that she was probably one of the most faithful woman that every lived. But there is a verse in Romans that says “There is NO one good, not even one.” and then of course “ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” I’m not saying that it ISN’T possible that there was something even more special about Mary than that she was just very faithful- after all, who am I to know the mind and ways of God? But I do know this- Christ was the only man to ever (be perfect) keep the law in it’s entirety. If Mary had already lived up to that standard, then why wasn’t SHE the sacrifice for our sins?

I could be totally misunderstanding what you’re trying to say, and if I am, I know you’ll explain it nicely to me. But that’s the Protestant understanding of the situation.

(Okay, I take that back. I know there are some Protestants who have a more Catholic view of Mary. So Protestant/Catholic probably isn’t an accurate terminology.)

2008 February 9 Paul Xavier permalink Elenatintil,

Adam an Eve were created as human beings, WITHOUT original sin. Couldn’t it also be possible that Our Lady was conceived without original sin? “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed; she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” It is here, that God shows his plans for a redeemer, and that he will will use a woman to fight the serpent. “I will put enmity between you and the woman.” We can see that the Devil shall always wage his war against the woman. Mary is the new Eve, the Mother of all the Living, since in Christ we find life.

The reason that Mary wasn’t the sacrifice for our sins, was because only Christ, the Lamb of God, could be offered such. However, we may partake in His sufferings, and offer up our trials and crosses along with His as a token of His Sacrifice on Cavalry. The same part with Our Lady, she is termed ‘Co-Redemptrix’ for her role of suffering alongside our Savior. Imagine how much she must have suffered, seeing her only son walking to Calvary, with the heavy cross of our sins upon His shoulders. Would her suffering and sorrow go to waste? Of course not. Mary has a much larger role in the redemption of humanity than simply the Mother of God. I would write more, but these conversations are beginning to stray far from the topic. If you would like, you can send me a private message on the forum. I’m just trying to keep this a bit ordered as well. If you really want to have a deeper explanation on Our Lady and her role as Mother, go to this site: http://airmaria.com/?cat=58. Dr. Mark Miravalle is a Professor of Theology and Mariology at the University of Stuebenville, I’ve worked on preparing his videos for posts on AirMaria, and have listened to nearly all of them. They’ve really deepened my understanding of the Blessed Virgin Mary. You ought to take a look at them, they’re only an average of 5-7 minutes each. They are very indepth and worth taking the time to watch!

2008 February 9 marceg permalink sry. i never ment to strike a chord or anything or make a “Protestant vs. Catholic” thing it’s just that i have a very strong devotion to Our Lady. and another thing that Paul didn’t mention was that Mary was conceived before original sin. how is this possible? it is possible because she was conceived in the mind of God before the punishment of Adam and Eve was bestowed upon them, infact just before i think. this shows the awsome power of God. †

2008 February 9 Paul Xavier permalink Thank you Marc! I knew I had forgotten something.

2008 February 9 Elenatintil permalink Thanks Paul. I’ll bring it over to our message on the forum. =)

2008 February 12 barry permalink Good day again Paul

Yes I have read the bible. But at the age of seven. I could see through it. I am sure you are highly educated So I don’t understand how you and others can’t see how it contradicts its self at every turn.But enough of that I am not trying to change who you are. Inst ed id like you to think about something.

” Practice what you preach ” now before you answer this allow me to explain what I mean. Read the Bible again although I have no doubt you will but this time actually Read and take in what it means because I believe you have missed or miss understood one of its lessons It says LOVE THY NAB OUR correct ? Not love thy nab our as long as he is aether Catholic or believes the way you do

Good bye Paul I will no longer be posting anything hear but think about what i’ve just said

2008 February 12 Elenatintil permalink Barry,

We do try to love all our neighbors, Christain or not. We’re not perfect, of course, but we try. I would ask what specifically Paul is doing that you think is unloving, but since you aren’t posting anymore, I doubt my question would be answered.

Anyhow, if you DO read this, we DO love others, even if they aren’t Christains.

2008 February 12 marceg permalink well… because of barry’s first post i think he wouuld be closer to breaking the commandment of “love thy neighbor” then Paul was, by calling us “lost sheep” and all. Barry if you do by some reasion come back and look at this post, why didn’t you see the contridiction you just made?

2008 February 12 Paul Xavier permalink Hmm, to be honest, it sounds like you’ve been at the receiving end of ‘Christians’ who haven’t been practicing what they’ve been preaching. Might I ask, how does the ‘love your neighbor’ scenario fit into these comments? Love has to do with the person, not embracing your beliefs. In so many words, it can be defined as looking at each and every person as ‘created in the image and likeness of God.’ Showing respect, and the like. Take care, and think about some of the things I’ve mentioned as well.

2008 February 13 SignaVeritae permalink And could you give me an example of how it contradicts itself?

2008 February 13 Paul Xavier permalink His crude use of language and such, attacking the Church.

2008 February 13 lepantogm permalink I think what the consideration of Barry’s is that because Catholics consider Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindu’s, etc. not saved then we are not showing love. On the contrary, by having the type of respectful conversations that are occuring here and explaining truths, not reasonings, then love is being showed to all.

Because beliefs are different doesn’t mean that one has to treat another any different. As a matter of fact, the proper teaching is to go out of our way to express even more love to those who are not believers, using words, actions and prayers. To lead by example and to show others a true apostolic way of life, demonstrated wholeheartedly by Our Lady Queen of Heaven, while she lived on earth.

We must all demonstrate God’s love to our neighbors that is correct, by showing that love to our neighbors we show that love to God.

Therefore the quote mentioned by Barry is correct. But keep in mind speaking truisms does not display a lack of love to our neighbors, it displays true love to our neighbors. After all isn’t truth what we all really want anyway?

2008 February 14 Paul Xavier permalink Just because Catholics hold people in the view as ‘not saved,’ it does not mean we do not love them. If someone your love commits a crime, and you decide to go and tell them that what they did is wrong, does that label you as ‘not loving them?’ No. In all reality, you are correcting them because you DO love them. So when I speak to you here, don’t say that it is an act of uncharity, but rather, it is out of Christian ‘love’ that I am trying to help you see the light.

2008 July 5 Darkwood permalink very interesting. i’m adding an RSS Reader

Trackbacks & Pingbacks Less Gold, More Compass « ~{Catholic Discussion Blog }~ Happy Anniversary!!! « ~{Catholic+Discussion+Blog}~ Click here to cancel reply. Leave a Reply

Total Visits 223,713


Further Reading:

In Focus (Bro. Tom Hanks, etc.)