The "It is finished" -- I haven't seen people comment on that either, I don't think. And that includes people who liked it and people who are grumpling that they don't think it was true enough to the book or emphasized Aslan's divinity enough. I've been contemplating bringing it up a few places, actually -- it bowled me over, I was completely not expecting it -- but I don't particularly feel like getting into the argument if someone complains that it should have come before he died. (Never mind that his mouth was tied shut, or that in the context of a physical battle it makes somewhat more sense where they put it.)
What bothers me - did nobody notice this? - is that it reverses the last of Our Lord's last words on the Cross. We know that Aslan is Jesus, the Messiah, the Second Person of the Trinity. And Jesus spoke these words, not as any enemy was being killed, but as He was. There is something here that does not ring true to me, and reminds me that many of the people involved in this will not have been any kind of Christian.
Yes, but is it not the general feeling that His Death represents the very reverse of aggression and punishment? Also, in the context of Narnia, the fall of the Witch is to do not with His Death but with His Resurrection.
I guess what I am saying is that I do see parallels. I do not claim that the parallels are perfect. I do see your basis quite clearly.
Your criticism does extend, however, to the original book. It is not an artifact of the movie. If we stand against the agression and punishment of the movie, we should also therefore stand against the aggression and punishment of the book.
I stand firmly against aggression and punishment in real life, but find that I cannot so staunchly oppose fictional aggression against (punishment of) fictional characters that likely represent non-anthropomorphic entities.
My personal feeling is that the Rule of Sin over Man did die a kind of death with Jesus' sacrifice and with his resurrection, and thus I do not share your deep misgivings.
I would note, however, that the dismissal of people as NotReallyHuman in order to unflinchinly perpetrate aggression against them is a common human failing with disastrous consequences. That does give me pause.
Well, no. The Harrowing of Hell is a definite part of Tradition, and it was Our Lord Himself who saw Satan falling as lightning from Heaven and spoke of the everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels. I am the last person in the world (if you had followed some of my online rows!) to want a Christianity purged of Hell and Divine anger. I just think that particular expression, at that particular time, is out of place. It is as if to say: This is all that I, as Savìour, have come to do. But it is not. By rising from the dead, Our Saviour not only defeated Hell and Death, but above all opened wide the gates of Heaven. That, if anything, should be what "It is finished" should be used for, if it is removed from its natural place in the story
( ... )
I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with, since I'm not aware that I alluded to stripping the world of Divine anger. I rather alluded to the fact that dehumanisation of anthropomorphic figures is a universal prelude to atrocity, and is perhaps one of the most dangerous mental steps that we can take, whether as a group or in individual action.
"It is as if to say: This is all that I, as Savìour, have come to do."If those were the words used, I would certainly condemn them. But they were not, and I do not share that interpretation of the actual dialogue. I suspect that that difference in our interpretations is key
( ... )
Yes, I do not say anything more than that. I was sharing a doubt I had, not intending to hammer anyone over the head with facts. Nor did I intend to imply that you wanted to strip the faith of Divine anger - if anything, I was trying to say that I was not! I agree with you about dehumanizing others, too, and I find that bit in Lewis a bit too close to the overt racism of his Catholic friend Tolkien (and, incidentally, I love Tolkien too, though I find some aspects of his views disquieting). It is not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, in general, so much as of trying to clarify a feeling I had
( ... )
YOu said: The line you quote from "We are the World" prevented me from liking the song. To me, this implied "if it had not been there, I might have liked it." I, on the other hand, would have disliked it with or without that line. If I misunderstood what you said, I apologize.
If you're going to continue this discussion do you mind taking it somewhere else, as it hasn't really got anything to do with the post any more and seems to be just between the two of you? Thanks.
Christ spoke those words as He had completed the work of redemption, thus defeating Satan in what Satan no doubt believed was his hour of greatest triumph. As such, having Aslan speak that phrase after killing the White Witch seems perfectly legitimate to me. And, as others have pointed out, he couldn't have said it at the Stone Table, because his mouth was tied with cords, and anyway it wasn't finished, not in the Narnian sense, until he was actually killed.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Your criticism does extend, however, to the original book. It is not an artifact of the movie. If we stand against the agression and punishment of the movie, we should also therefore stand against the aggression and punishment of the book.
I stand firmly against aggression and punishment in real life, but find that I cannot so staunchly oppose fictional aggression against (punishment of) fictional characters that likely represent non-anthropomorphic entities.
My personal feeling is that the Rule of Sin over Man did die a kind of death with Jesus' sacrifice and with his resurrection, and thus I do not share your deep misgivings.
I would note, however, that the dismissal of people as NotReallyHuman in order to unflinchinly perpetrate aggression against them is a common human failing with disastrous consequences. That does give me pause.
Reply
Reply
"It is as if to say: This is all that I, as Savìour, have come to do."If those were the words used, I would certainly condemn them. But they were not, and I do not share that interpretation of the actual dialogue. I suspect that that difference in our interpretations is key ( ... )
Reply
Reply
What do you think I am saying about the song?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment