Blessed Duns Scotus

Not Rated

Catholic-ometer: 4 of 5

Enjoyability: 3 of 5

For those who don't know, Duns Scotus was a Franciscan theologian, who argued for the immaculate conception of Mary; eventually overcoming the intellectual difficulties which had once prevented even Saint Thomas Aquinas from acknowledging the notion.  This eventually became a doctrine of the Catholic Church; an everlasting testament to the success of this great man.

However, historically, Scotus is know primarily for his accomplishments in theology.  Little is known about his friends, his feelings, his motives (apart from holiness,) and so forth.  Because of this, I was expecting a rather dry movie about theological truths, but at the very least, something different from the norm.

However, what I got instead was a sort of midway point between what I was expecting (and hoping) to get, and your average, run-of-the-mill studio flick.  There are things this movie does, which it shouldn't.  Regardless, I think I should talk about the good parts first, before moving on to the bad.

The costumes in this movie are excellent, for what they're intended to depict, and much of the acting is very good as well, though I thought the main lead was a bit too melodramatic; particularly when the situation didn't call for it.  It's a minor gripe at best, though.

The scenery is a little lackluster.  It seems that they had an abbey and a countryside to film in, and that's just what they did.  Still, the story doesn't call for much else, and I was never expecting the film to dazzle me with its visual panoramas.

Much of Scotus' theology is faithfully depicted in this movie, just as I was hoping it would be.  However, there's one scene where, rather than discussing things like formal distinction or haecceity, he talks about "the eucharist being for the purpose of uniting everything."  I'm not convinced that he would ever say it as imprecisely as this.  The Eucharist is for the purpose of uniting people to God, not to one another, and certainly not to the world.  Still, again, a minor gripe.

The one thing that I don't consider minor, and the one thing that I refuse to let pass is the truly awful subplot about a seminarian who learns theology under Scotus, leaves the seminary to get married to a flower girl, and is encouraged in this by Scotus using, it must be admitted, no coherent reasoning at all.  Stupid, empty-headed romances pop up like daffodils in the modern moviescape, it seems, and no film featuring such will ever get a perfect score from me.

This movie tries to stuff a romance into a story about a great theologian, but it's a very badly-written romance, so it won't really appeal to the romantic.  It tries to depict a debate on theology, but you have to get to that debate by skipping over a horrible romance subplot, so theology students would be better served by just reading a book.

I want to give this movie a good grade, because at least 75% of it is spent discussing theology and holiness, and that's a rare thing these days.  Still, I need to acknowledge its failings as well.  This movie wasn't terrible, but it could and should have been better than it was.

Courageous

Rated PG-13

Catholic-ometer: 4 of 5

Enjoyability: 4 of 5

This review is a bit delayed, since I actually saw this movie when it was first out in theaters.  However, I'm writing the review on same night I saw the film, so I still remember it perfectly well.  I just didn't want to post it until I could provide a link to it.

It's a film about four deputies, working to bring the hammer down on a drug ring, while simultaneously struggling with their family issues, and their incomplete commitment to God and those they care about.

Of course, this comes from the same group who brought us "Fireproof," so we know two things about it from the get-go.  One good news, and one bad.  The good news is that the movie is beautiful and has a very strong story about its characters.  The bad news?  It's essentially a protestant movie.

I'm not going to hide this; there are three scenes with a "pastor," who doesn't wear a collar, and one in a "church" that just lets anybody get up and speak to the "congregation;" a church that looks, for the most part, like an auditorium.

This fact is solely responsible for the one cross down.  When a film is strongly and overtly protestant, as this one is, it gets four out of five crosses from me.  As much as we might want to be virtuous and good, and to face our responsibilities with courage and boldness, without the rock of God's inerrant will to ground ourselves to, we'll never succeed, and that rock can be found only in the Catholic Church.  Everything else is man-made.

Like the other films made by this group, this film is very real about its characters, and very grounded in reality.  It's very strong in its integrity, but it doesn't stroke the imagination, so I'm afraid that there's only so much enjoyment I could get out of it.  I'd much prefer to watch a substantive piece that also has some supernatural or imaginative dimension to it, because I feel it holds the attention much more strongly.  However, I understand and respect those who want to see a movie taking place in a world identical to their own; those who think it's easier to relate.  As a man, I don't think like that.  This is the reason for the 1 star down in enjoyability.

Now, with all that dealt with, I really liked this film, in spite of its somewhat mundane premise and under-the-top delivery.  It had a good heart and a strong message with a lot of characters (perhaps too many, but perhaps not,) who all get the chance to show who they are.  The main character seems to be Adam; one of the deputies, who suffers a horrible tragedy and must gradually cope with it.  His integrity shines through the strongest, and he and his team go through a lot of soul searching (as well as a brief adventure or two,) on their route to a lifelong commitment that they have to make; to live with integrity and courage.

Adam's partner Shane struggles with his own issues, and Nathan; another deputy, needs to face the fact that he's been focusing too much on being better than his father, and not enough on being the best father he can be.  The rookie, David, has an old shame to confront as well.

Over the course of the film, Adam also makes the acquaintence of an out-of-work, but hardworking family man named Javier.  I would say that he has some of the strongest faith in the film, as well as being one of the most welcome additions to the cast.  He adds some much-needed comedy to the proceedings, but not by being foolish, or a stereotype, the way less-complicated movies probably would.  Javier adds many laughs to the movie, while facing his own difficult situations with honor and integrity, and I honestly found him one of the movie's most likable characters.

This was a really good film.  It doesn't look like much, but it's got the right things in the right places.  Is it perfect?  No, but it's easily one of the best films released all year.  It's involving, substantive and severe.  Most of the movie is spent getting serious and doing what needs to be done; an attitude that we really need to bring back.  This is certainly not my favorite of the films made by this particular group (that honor still goes to Fireproof,) but it stands head and shoulders over its competitors.  Watch the film.  Take your teenagers.  Parental discretion is encouraged, but I'm sure you'll get something out of the experience.

The Mass of the Early Christians

By Mike Aquilina

Catholic-ometer: 5 of 5

Enjoyability: 5 of 5

I'm really learning to enjoy Mike Aquilina's writings, and I've yet to read anything of his that I don't like.  He's very faithful, very thorough, and very consistent.  His strong suit seems to be research and the faithful study of Catholic History, and that's just what this book is as well.

This time, the topic of study is the mass.  What did the mass look like to christians of the first few centuries after Christ, and what was its structure like?  What did those Christians believe about the mass?  How was it perceived by the rest of the world?

These are all topics of this book, and it covers them quite fairly, including exerpts from some of the best historical sources on this topic.  What surprised me, though, was that the book contains exerpts, not only from Catholic sources, revealing what the mass was really like, but also from pagan, heretical and secular sources, each attempting to paint the mass as what they wanted it to be.  Heretics wanted the mass to be something they had thought up and designed, and the secular authorities wanted it to be an atrocity, so they'd have an excuse to arrest its adherents, who refused to pay worship to caesar.  It's easy to see why these writings were condemned as incorrect by the church when they were written.  Their motives are like glass.

At first, in fact, I was a bit taken aback by Mike's choice to include quotes from those sources; not really sure what he was planning or why, but he puts the quotes in their appropriate context, and that's enough for me.  Far from being unfaithful to the church, the re-presenting of these quotes helps us to get into the minds of those roman empire folks and see just how they saw Christianity from the start.

Though I scratched my head once or twice, I really liked this book, and I would definitely read Mike's work again.  He's a fine, faithful and competent author in his field, and I feel he's really helped my understanding of liturgical history.

The Fathers of the Church

By Mike Aquilina

Catholic-ometer: 5 of 5

Enjoyability: 5 of 5

Of course, over the centuries, many people have made fine contributions to the church, but some of the finest were those of the early church fathers; Augustine, Ambrose, Leo, Gregory, Origen, Tertulian, Polycarp, and so forth.  That's what this book is about.

It's a fine and well-researched book, presented well with good exerpts from their writings, quotes and summaries of their lives, all of which makes it even easier to read.  It even goes somewhat into their personalities.  I found myself even more drawn to Ambrose and Jerome, and even to Augustine, even though he's already my favorite of the church fathers.

This book is all about the lives, works, and in some cases, about the deaths of many of these great men.  In fact, it's something of an overview of the subject, since it's a relatively short book, and huge volumes could have been written about most of these men.  It has information on the start of the benedictine monastic orders, the early development of theology, of scripture canons, of the persecutions suffered by the church, and so on.  It's all fascinating, and a little humbling, because it's a firm reminder of just how much our own culture has lost.

So many people think their generation is superior to all previous ones; that they're somehow more intelligent, or more "evolved," but a cursory glance at the writings of someone like Aristotle, Augustine or Thomas Aquinas proves that to be a ludicrous claim.  I found I got the same kind of impression from reading about the lives of these great Catholics from the early days of the church, and of course, I don't even need to say that it was faithful and orthodox to a T.

If you have any interest in the early development of the Catholic Church, but don't want to spend years studying, then this book will be a very good starting point.  It's a simple introduction to the fathers of the Church, and what they did, said and accomplished, and it's done well.  I suppose that's really all there is to say.

150 Bible Verses Every Catholic Should Know

By Patrick Madrid

Catholic-ometer: 5 of 5

Enjoyability: 5 of 5

I've really read very little of Patrick Madrid's work in the past.  I think the only thing of his that I'd read from cover to cover was "the Godless Delusion," which, if I recall correctly, was the work of two authors.  It wasn't perfect, but it was faithful enough, so I was eager to see what else he had to offer.  This book of spiritual reflections on a number of scripture passages (guess how many...) seemed like just the thing.

Boy, was it ever.  Covering a wide range of church teachings like the sacraments, divine revelation, the communion of saints, the sanctity of life, the escaton and so forth, the verses chosen in this book are spot on, and, I have to admit, some of the ones I've found most useful for reinforcement in my own faith journey.

In reflecting on these verses, Madrid shows a strong understanding of the culture of Jesus' time, of the doctrines of the church, sacred tradition, and especially theology.  I tend to latch on to any imperfections I find in a book (as readers of some of my other reviews can attest,) and the fact that I have little to say in that respect about this text says something by itself.

To give you some idea of just how I pleased I was with this book, however, I'm going to tell you my biggest problem with it.  On page 148, Patrick Madrid claims that Matthew 7:3-5 implies that we should mind our own business unless we're somebody's parent/teacher/coach, etc...  I don't agree.  Prohibitions against gossip, slander and condemnation are not alien to the bible, but I don't feel this particular verse is such.

As I said, this is the biggest issue I had with this book, and I hestitate to even call it an issue, because it fits so well into the "we can agree to disagree" category.

I think what impressed me most was his solid, scriptural support for all seven sacraments, as well as for the conclusion that faith and reason are entirely compatible, and in fact, totally connected, but it was all good.  Check it out.  As a scriptural reference text, and a modern one at that, I've seen very few books that can top it in terms of faithfulness -or- insight.