The Golden Compass - irreligious?

[jedaisoul]

On the one hand there is the tyranny of the majority in a democracy, while on the other hand there is the tyranny of a minority which by hook or by crook monopolizes brute force...

What "tyranny of a minority" are you referring to? Is it perhaps a prime minister who, based on his personal religious beliefs, took the UK into a war that was illegal under international law and overwhelmingly unpopular with the electorate?

[Eclogite]

What "tyranny of a minority" are you referring to? Is it perhaps a prime minister who, based on his personal religious beliefs, took the UK into a war that was illegal under international law and overwhelmingly unpopular with the electorate?

This is an interesting thought, but could we stay on track please - the discussion is about the alleged anti-religious stance of The Golden Compass.

 

On topic, I hope to see the film this weekend. I have read the first two novels in the series, and am just finishing the third. My impression is that the books are very religious, they are however anti organised religion in general and Christianity and the Catholic Church in particular.

[CraigD]

My impression is that the books are very religious, they are however anti organised religion in general and Christianity and the Catholic Church in particular.

I think the anti-Catholic interpretation of the books is coincidental, not inate.

 

The Church in Lyra’s world has more the role of a central government than of a institution of religious instruction, it’s principle doctrine “do what those in authority tell you to: they know what is best for you” Although our real-world Catholic and Orthodox churches do have a similar authoritarian nature when compared to protestant churches, all share a central doctrine that their religionists should, when confronted with a conflict between what they believe to be right according to God, and what they are told to do by a person in authority, to obey God, not human authority.

 

Lyra’s church also appears curiously devoid of religious stories. While our world’s churches are full of vivid, dramatic stories, such as the “passion play” of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ common to Christian churches, Lyra’s passionately pursue a course of seeking to eradicate knowledge and evidence of the objective reality of the human soul, and, in the extreme, to eradicate actual souls. In our world, religionists would rejoice in the clear and compelling evidence supporting their worldview offered by the demons and Dust of Lyra’s.

 

IMHO, the villain in Pullman’s books has the trappings of organized religion (more, I think, Anglican than Catholic) because they are set in a alternate Oxford and greater British Empire – Pullman’s own world of experience, from which it’s usually a good idea to write. Had Pullman written from the perspective of a 20th century Russian, I believe his villain would have been that country’s secular central government – and his books far less enjoyable and popular with English readers.

 

I strongly agree that the books are not at all atheistic. They’re chocked full of Souls, Angels, including physical wrestling matches between them and humans, physical journeys to the afterworld, and other extraordinary events, beside which the Old Testament and Greek myth pale in comparison.

 

Rather than promoting atheism, as their most strident critics commonly accuse, “His Dark Materials” promotes different-theism. Apparently, when searching for a single word or phrase to summarize their objections, these critics find “atheism” a better derogatory label than “false gods”. Why this is so, I’m unsure. Perhaps religionists of the Abrahamic traditions don’t like bringing up the old theological controversy concerning the alleged existence of “other gods” that OT scripture forbids “having before Me”, which clashes with the more modern concept of a single God that is the only god that has ever existed?

[cotner]

No, I have not seen the movie nor read any books of the author.

 

But I would like to ask the people who have seen the movie and/or read the books, this personal query:

 

Forgive the crude language, is it I mean seeing the movie or reading the books like a condomized orgasm in a way and to some minimal degree, which gives us some thrill but nothing more -- except for parties who love each other there is a lot of tenderness and thus a reinforcement of love between them, the condomized orgasm that is.

 

 

 

Hahahaha!

 

 

And should we who are men in the street be concerned whether the movie is irreligious or not, against the Catholic Church, Orthodox Churches, Anglican Church, whatever, or not, if we are independently intelligent and religious or a-religious in our own personal do-it-yourself way?

 

 

I must congratulate the author though, he is one smart dude who has succeeded in making I imagine lots of dough with his brainchild -- and must be laughing secretly within himself while putting up a posture of being profound and taken with transcendental issues.

 

 

Anyway, it should be good entertainment for otherwise jaded spirits.

 

 

Hahahaha!

 

 

 

cotner