Which Way Does the Golden Compass Point? (Part 1)
Bless the hearts of our dear Catholic friends. Only recently has Dan Brown villified the Catholic Church in The Davinci Code and now, British author Philip Pullman’s very popular children’s book trilogy (His Dark Materials) hits the big screen with the first book, The Golden Compass, in theatres this Friday. The movie itself is presented very well with an excellent cast (what’s the world coming to - Two great actors, Tom Hanks and now Nicole Kidman play key roles in an attempt to defame the Catholic Church???) and great cinematronics. Plus, the previews are nothing less than Narnian. The positive and negative buzz surrounding the movie insures it will be well attended as it opens this weekend. So what are its negative aspects?
As an author, Pullman is an openly avowed atheist with a dislike (and that’s a kind term) for Christianity. He has written to directly attack the Catholic Church particularly and Christianity in general. He considers the church to be authoritarian and tyrannical, represented in the movie as the Magisterium. But it is actually Mr. Pullman who has a very overt agenda.
Through the Golden Compass, Pullman hopes to offer a naturalistic moral compass (no pun intended) that invalidates the biblical narrative concerning the fall while simultaneously providing the spiritual age in which we live, and a young generation in particular, a new story-line that is not based on or honoring to the Scriptures. Basically, he thinks the Bible got it all wrong. What God considers sin is good and what Christianity considers good is really, really bad for humanity. Thus, the on-going struggle against the tyranical God and His Church. It’s a fantasy remake of “V for Vendetta” and Parliment is played by St. Peter’s Cathedral.
Pullman has openly called the “original sin anything but,” has confessed a hatred for Christianity and intends (in the third book) to unashamedly kill God. His characters say things like, “The Christian religion is a very powerful and convincing mistake, that’s all” and “Every church is the same: control, destroy, obliterate every good feeling.” Pullman openly confesses, “My books are about killing God” and “I’m trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief.”
In addition, Pullman is adamant in his dislike of C.S. Lewis’ classically famed Chronicles of Narnia which he considers “morally loathsome” and “one of the most poisonous things I ever read.” He is quoted as saying, “I hate the Narnia books, and I hate them with a deep and bitter passion.” He confesses that Narnia created a world that is “the Christian one….And mine is the non-Christian.” One author wrote, “What Lewis did for Christianity, Pullman wants to do for atheism.” And while its very fine for Mr. Pullman to endorse his world-view through children’s books or any kind of legal medium for that matter, must it be done with such negativity and distaste for things and people who have never been unkind or mean spirited to him? I can deal with a lot from some people but it’s quite possible that sin against CS Lewis may not be forgiven in this world or the next. (Oh, laugh!) And if he hates Narnia so much, why couldn’t he just leave Lucy alone? Why did he have to drag her name into his series? And there’s so much more that Pullman has borrowed from the man (CS Lewis) and land (Narnia) he despises. All of this goes to prove that if Pullman isn’t anything, it’s original, in his books or his atheistic intentions.
By the way, it was one thing for Lewis to positively portray what he believed in but Pullman negatively portrays what he doesn’t believe in. It’s like, “Did you hear about the invisible couple who had children? Yea, the kids were nothing to look at!” Pullman spends three books trying to disprove what he doesn’t believe exists. It’s like a blind man searching in a darkened room for a black cat that isn’t there. It’s a rerun of the old atheist’s line, “I don’t believe in God but just in case He’s real, here are three reasons (books) why he doesn’t, shouldn’t or couldn’t.” I’ve never understood all the hatred for something that doesn’t exist (according to the atheist).
Still, for the atheist Pullman, Adam and Eve (who never really existed) were right to rebel against God (who doesn’t exist) whom the author views as a tyranical dictator, just as the children in his stories rebel against the Magisterium. Sadest of all, ultimately, the knowledge of good and evil rests with mankind and its innate ability to choose between what is right or wrong without ‘the fear of the Lord.’ In reality, there’s nothing new about what Pullman intends in his trilogy. It’s the old snake in the garden trick (’Yea, hath God said…?”) and it hasn’t worked yet. Thus, the Golden Compass is neither the end of the Christian world or the dawn of a new world. The movie may be great fun but the author’s intent hardly merits a yawn.
Still, Christian parents should be fully informed about this movie and Pullman’s books. No one should read the books or see the movie thinking that it is simply a neutral tale intended to entertain. Remember, no information is neutral and this movie possesses an entertainment agenda second to none. While The Golden Compass hides its eventual and surprising end - the death of God in book three - everyone should be aware of Mr. Pullman’s intent in creating a fictional world that excludes the sovereignty and eventually the very existence of God. And certainly, no one should buy their children the books or take their children to see the movie without an understanding of the movie’s purpose.
Tomorrow we’ll talk about a Christian’s response to The Golden Compass and how we can use the books and this film to advance the cause of Christ into a world that is increasingly unaware of the fall and its eternal consequences. It’s true, The Golden Compass provides Christians with a wonderful opportunity to talk about God and humanity with both nonbelievers and their own believing families. By all means, let’s take advantage of it.