British self-flagellation

The not-so-amazing box office performance of The Golden Compass comes as little surprise to me.  Whether or not the movie was all that good, it wasn't surprising that folks of an even mildly religious character would choose to pass on the adapted work of an author who is one of those strange creatures that can best be described as an evangelical atheist.

As Mark Steyn likes to point out, people with strong religious beliefs tend to have larger families than the "enlightened secular humanist" crew.  Thus, making a "family movie" that pisses them off isn't such a great idea from a marketing standpoint.

I've little interest in reading the books, and thankfully, I don't have to, because the author has been good enough to say early and often that he hates Tolkien and despises C.S. Lewis - thus sparing me the chore of arguing with his supporters about what hidden meanings are there.  We know he hates religion and what the point of his book is.  This means I can skip it simply through the virtue of disagreeing with him.

The thing I don't get is the the British obsession with self-flagellation.  I'm told that in the book version, the eeeevil Catholic Church in disguise (the Magisterium) practices this. 

I was then reminded how in almost every British film that shows Catholics, at least one of them will flog himself - usually until he is a bloody mess.  Whether we're talking Elizabeth, or any of a host of period films, it is a reliable cliche - as shocking as the part of every cop movie where the funny, happily married black partner of the hero with the great kids and only a week to go in retirement gets killed.

Is this in the book?  Why?  Talk about a straw man.  I know lots of Catholics (what with being one) and I've never encountered a flagellant.  Where are these fine self-abused chaps kept? 

I think it's amusing that we as a society have banned the more outrageous racial stereotypes (try showing a black person eating watermelon) but the anti-Catholic ones just keep right on rolling.

Comments

[BlueNight]

According to what I've read about the books (which I will not buy, but may borrow from our city library), the whole thing is a giant straw man.

Pullman offers a church and a theology that closely resembles the Catholic church and theology, but which is substantially different. God is, in this version, a being not of infinities, but of very large finities. This key difference makes either The Nothing (the opposite of God), or a lukewarm non-entropy the true god of that multiverse.

This is similar to how the subtle differences in Mormon theology upset evangelical Christians. if Jesus is a created being, and not a person of the Trinity as historically understood, it makes Mormon theology a different religion altogether, despite its socially Christian trappings.

The history of the universe is vitally important. If standard Atheism were correct, there would be no reason not to implement a full-on Nietzche-originated pragmatism that would ensure humanity's survival until the last star died. If Christianity is correct, it makes sense to spread the Gospel so nobody has to go to Hell.