I found it fascinating that Adam Driver’s character was portrayed as the weaker of the priests: less zealous, less certain of the mission. But his character runs toward martyrdom without hesitating and literally dies alongside one of his flock. He is the only one of the 3 priests who holds firm to his faith until the end.
@grantlindberg3753
2 жыл бұрын
He is in fact the weakest. Unlike the other two priests, he never lets go of his pride. This was the whole point of Rodrigues’ arc - he has to let go of his faith and pride in order to save the Japanese Christians. But ironically, this sacrifice is what brought him the closest to God.
@denverbritto5606
2 жыл бұрын
@@grantlindberg3753 Rodriguez and Ferreira became traitors.
@DivisiveSnoo
2 жыл бұрын
@@denverbritto5606 and they became traitors in order to save other people from a certain horrible torture and death, jesus would want those people to be saved
@denverbritto5606
2 жыл бұрын
@@DivisiveSnoo they apostasised to save those people, they became traitors for their own egos
@DivisiveSnoo
2 жыл бұрын
@@denverbritto5606 idk how that would be for their own egos if they are doing this only because they don’t want others to suffer
@HabibJackson
7 жыл бұрын
"In this terrible moment, Christians in Syria refuse to renounce their faith everyday"
@etc6615
5 жыл бұрын
🙏🙏🙏😢
@wes6363
5 жыл бұрын
Not even just those who are born Christian. Saint Achmad the Calligrapher pray for us
@michaelloophole
4 жыл бұрын
I am a Syrian Christian now living in Canada due to the war, I have never seen, experienced nor heard of such persecution in Syria, although some Islamic groups like ISIS would do stuff even worse than that we see in Silence, I do not believe of the existence of such extreme persecution in Syria or any place on earth in this age. I could be wrong however.
@kelman727
4 жыл бұрын
MichaelLoophole A siege mentality needs a bogeyman to justify itself.
@internetenjoyer1044
4 жыл бұрын
@@michaelloophole I think the Coptic Christians in Egypt have it quite bad.
@gsiares1394
4 жыл бұрын
The wife put the little cross in his hands during the burial. I understood it as a sign that Rodriguez has converted his wife in a way or is that she understood him/his heart. I believe that throughout his remaining life as a “Japanese”, he had prevented himself and others from suffering physically, but mentally it was torture to him not being able to practice his faith nor to even say my Lord in public.
@sirken2
10 ай бұрын
The cross he was made to bare was being a man of God being unable to speak his word. Silence.
@bournechupacabra
5 жыл бұрын
I like the analysis but you missed out on a key scene. The final time that Kichichiro comes to Rodriguez to confess his sins. I think the scene is very touching and Rodriguez commentary is very interesting. "Even if you were silent this whole time, everything I have done speaks of you. It was through the silence that I heard your voice".
@nicolealderite
5 жыл бұрын
Actually, fr Barron, we have to point out the fact that he caved in due to the torture of OTHER laymen because the Japanese understood he would rather be martyrized than renounce the faith.
@younggrasshopper3531
4 жыл бұрын
Nicole Alderight right. I’d have spit on the cross before letting one other person die. And I have no clue how I’d hold up under torture, probably not long at all 😣
@echoesofmarsmoondragon7600
4 жыл бұрын
It is easier said than done when you already witness the suffering of other innocents because of your refusal to renounce your Faith.. Yes! It is. But at the end of the day, that's where Your True Faith and Trust to The Divine Intervention of Jesus Christ enters. It's all surrendering Our Trust in Him. In all aspects. Let the dead bury their dead as what He said. Death in this Sinful World is Never the End of our called-to-be ChristLike Livesl. That's why as Catholics, we are taught that there really is an AfterLife in Heaven in perpetuity with The Holy Trinity and all Angels and Saints. So if its God's will that its our turn to die in this world, then, so be it. #FilipinoCatholic🇵🇭🙏
@RustinChole
3 жыл бұрын
@@echoesofmarsmoondragon7600 sure wish I had your blind belief in a better after. Problem is christians don’t follow Christ’s teachings. Besides all that Jesus was freaking jewish. At no point did he renounce Judaism. Or say we need a new religion. Add king James into the equation, you’re basing your faith in an afterlife on a buncha paper found in a cave in no discernible order. Have you read all the books that were left out because they were counterproductive to the narrative of Christ the assemblers of the scrolls wanted to convey at the time? The book of Phillip. The book of Enoch. Seems like you’d want the whole Bible. Not parts of the Bible edited and reworked by a buncha people who didn’t know what soap is.
@notlengthy
3 жыл бұрын
@@RustinChole you are an idiot
@honyasenyou
3 жыл бұрын
@@johnreynolds5299 I am posting this from Japan, the land of the rising sun. Most of the past critiques of this work by Endo in Japan are also similar to your opinion. In fact, I remember that when Endo visited Rome and had an audience with the Pope at the Vatican a few decades ago, most of the criticism in Japan at the time was that he was "scolded by the Pope." It's only natural, though, given the content of the story. I'm sure this bishop was also thinking, "Oh no, not again." Endo's work is well known, so I assume that it was already evaluated in the church long before it was made into a movie.
@silenthero2795
7 жыл бұрын
Just finished watching the movie and this is what I felt. It's a grueling movie but at the end, I felt pity for Rodriguez. After his denunciation, never did the movie showed he was happy or content like the former Priest Ferreira presented to him. He became a distant and unemotional being who felt the trauma instead of enlightenment which was around him hails him for. The two former priest felt burdened all their lives and always had a chip on their shoulders. Something died within them. But when I saw the last scene of Rodriguez' body holding a wooden cross in his coffin, perhaps he became more like Kichijiro who time and again betrayed his faith out of his frailty. Rodriguez finally understood Kichijiro who he was always bewildered throughout the movie. There's always a part of him that keeps going back despite he's doing something contrary to it. He didn't become his teacher Ferreira. He became more like Kichijiro. Did Rodriquez do the right thing? It's easy to judge that while sitting beside a computer comfortably and in an environment where religious freedom is practiced. If saying what he did was a bad thing (a Christian in secret), then the whole underground Christian community is wrong in the first place because they do it "underground", not honoring God in public. They should express it freely. Otherwise, it's moot. You see what I'm getting here? They're in an extreme situation so who am I to judge what they did, more so from a tortured man? Show less
@David-_-_-
4 жыл бұрын
@Dennis Metzler That was indeed the point to show that Ferreira had made a sacrifice for others. He sacrificed his own well being, future happiness, reputation and good standing ....... to save others and prevent their suffering. Remind you of anyone connected to Christianity ?!? 😉 ✝️ The step on Jesus scene is paradoxical. His apostasy was paradoxically the first show of real faith and real sacrifice in his life. What he sacrificed by stepping on the plate with Jesus face ..... was not his "faith". Jesus could care less about stepping on a plate. It was his pride he sacrificed. His reputation as a priest and holy man. It was the first time he was willing to truly get his hands dirty like Jesus did. To lower himself in order to help others. His standing on the plate - was him "taking up his cross". The worst and most painful thing he could possibly carry. To renounce his faith even though he dedicated his entire life to God and still believed in Christ with every part of his body. To become essentially a slave of the Japanese government. To become a thing of scorn and disgust amongst his kin and the church. For one reason only. Not because he wasn't strong enough to die himself but because he wanted to relieve the pain and suffering of others. The same reason Jesus went to the cross.
@David-_-_-
4 жыл бұрын
@@johnreynolds5299 not sure why there is such pointed criticism at Scorsese - he didn't write this. As you say its based on the book by Endo Shusaku which was very renowned and won many awards. It follows the narrative pretty closely. Endo was a japanese Catholic who went through difficult times and was trying to understand the "silence" of God during those periods. Have you read the book of Job ? Pretty relevant for most believers - evidently especially so for Endo. I think it makes perfect sense from that perspective. Hardly typical of Hollywood - it's almost the polar opposite of what would be typical for Hollywood film where the white saviour is the prototype for most films. Refreshing to see something different for once. Whether the two men actually did apostasise or not (in the film 1 does the other doesn't and instead dies trying to save the local believers from drowning) isn't really the point. The story is meant to be a challenging thought experiment on faith to make Christians think and analyze what they would have done in the same position and what it really means to follow Christ. Is it just words of I believe .... Or is it helping others. If it is both then what happens when the two conflict with each other ? Which is more important ?
@David-_-_-
4 жыл бұрын
@@johnreynolds5299 sure - but how does that change anything ? It seems not far off what happened in the movie. The main missionary didn't publicly recant his apostasy but was shown in his tomb with a crucifix indicating the same principle. The author never said it was 100% accurate - he said a work of fiction. Loosely based on real events. I think the more pointed question to ask is: Whilst the Japanese behaviour towards Christians was gastly and I'm not condoning it at all - did the western countries give them reason to respond like this ? The sad answer is yes they did. The Christian missionaries were used by the western states in this time essentially as colonization enablers. The missionaries themselves may have had pure intentions but the politicians sending them did not. The missionaries were sent first to establish a foothold and following this the countries would setup settlements and trade which they expanded out into full on colonial take overs. You only have to see what happened immidiately before Japan in the Philippines where spain used Christian missionaries to facilitate an eventual whosale take over of the islands that lead to 300 years of spanish occupation and rule. The next target became Japan. It was such a wanted commodity in the West countries were fighting each other for the right to take Christianity there. The pope had to set up a special enclave where it was debated and he decided Portugal would have exclusive rights to send missionaries to Japan. But that didn't last long after a couple of years the Spanish, Dutch and UK duly ignored this directive from the pope and also started sending their own missionaries who were competing with each other for land and territory. Then the protestants arrived and there were also fights between Catholics and protestants denominations. It's was a shit show and the Japanese authorities having seen what happened in the Philippines was a acutely aware of the western countries true purpose of the missionaries. They reacted accordingly. That parable told in the movie by the japanese to the priest about the 4 jealous concubines fighting each other wasn't just for show. Try and see it through the Japanese authorities eyes. Even if the missionaries themselves had pure intentions - the states sending them did not When Francis Xavier traveled to Japan as the first christian missionary he had an elder Japanese statesman as his advisor. He asked him if the Japanese would accept christianity and was told: "They will listen to what you have to say - and consider the merits of the teaching. But more importantly then this they will watch to see if you actually live what you teach" The failure of the west to do the later - to practice the Christian ideals they taught - is what lead to the failure of Christianity in Japan.
@David-_-_-
4 жыл бұрын
@@johnreynolds5299 see you have taken a completely different meaning from the movie then me. I think the movie did show faith triumphs in great suffering. It just doesn't always look the way you think it should. But that's the story of Christianity isn't it ? When Jesus died on the cross .... Do you think people saw this as a victory for faith ? People mocked him openly. They put a crown of thorns on his head. They spat on him. Cursed him and beat him. If you are really the son of God save yourself and come down from the cross. Did this look like a victory ? His own disciples denied him and went into hiding. Christianity should show you that victory doesn't always look the way you envisioned. Here as weird as it sounds dying for the faith was the "easy way out". But it wouldn't have achieved anything. It wouldn't have saved the other Christian followers nor spread the teaching in Japan. Instead it shows the priest staying a true Christian till the bitter end - still having full belief in Jesus and god. But stepping on the plate and no longer publicly practicing his faith. He opened himself to public ridicule and scorn. He destroyed his reputation. He lived in captivity under the rule and control of Japan for the rest of his days. And he did all this for one reason alone. To save others. That's true Christian sacrifice. No ticket take parade. No celebration as a matyr or Saint. He got only shame, captivity, ridicule - but he did this for the benefit of others. Just like Jesus did. Sacrifice is only holy - if it serves a holy purpose. He didn't merely speak of faith .... He showed it by what he was willing to endure for the benefit of others.
@distilledwater8871
4 жыл бұрын
@@johnreynolds5299 I don't see how the European Christians were made out to be cowards ( Ferrara may be debatable) because Garpe died in an attempt to save the drowning Christians, and Rodriguez remained resilient all the way until the end, where he renounced his faith to relieve the suffering of the other Christians...
@boshamburger123
4 жыл бұрын
I had a slightly different interpretation. To truly live like Christ in that moment was not to die for your pride, but to sacrifice it.
@Zack-bl2gg
3 жыл бұрын
But he didn’t die for his pride, he sacrificed eternal life for a physical one. Saying someone is too prideful to sin is not a bad thing. “If only he would have sinned he could have saved their life” well life is not the most important thing. Comfort is not important. Your eternal salvation is the most important, even if those die around you. To say you should not die for your faith, and others should not die for it for you, because it is not worth it, is just blasphemous
@boshamburger123
3 жыл бұрын
Yes he didn’t die and he didn’t have those others killed to just maintain his pride exactly! he chose to save the lives and suffering of the all others he had brought into that situation of being tortured and killed. All of whom would have never been there if not for him. And he had to do it by sacrificing THE MOST important thing to him he would have gladly given his life if it was just that they were asking for. But no it was something much more difficult for him to sacrifice Also any all knowing, all caring, and all loving god could see why he took the actions he did. To save human life and suffering! Not to protect his own skin. So I don’t really see it as him sacrificing his eternal life at all And frankly if those more evangelical interpretations of god couldn’t see that and sends him to hell for eternal damnation anyways. Then let me be the first to say that god is an asshole. And I want nothing to do with him.
@boshamburger123
3 жыл бұрын
@@Zack-bl2gg also the big problem is being the one to make that choice for the others. Nobody has the right to chose someone for martyrdom. It’s something that comes from within.
@boshamburger123
3 жыл бұрын
@@Zack-bl2gg Remember the scene when Liam neeson tells him that “they don’t have even have the same gospel. they aren’t dying for god, they are dying for you!” I think that does a great job of really highlighting the whole pride thing.
@Zack-bl2gg
3 жыл бұрын
@@boshamburger123 but why is it most important to him? Because it is the ONLY THING that is important If God is real, and heaven is real, than that’s all that matters. Life doesn’t matter. Physical happiness doesn’t matter So to sacrifice the ONLY THING THAT MATTERS for something that DOESNT is just STUPID. It’s like sacrificing your house for a cardboard box. Or even more to the point, sacrificing your house, and burning in hell for all of eternity, to give someone else a cardboard box. Oh, and now they are also going to burn in hell. Stupid.
@alecmiles915
5 жыл бұрын
I’m seeing a lot of ideas on what his “stepping on the idol” represents, is it a betrayal of Christ. But instead it’s rather a great sacrifice. Throughout the movie father Rodriguez is often compared to Jesus, a man who suffered and sacrificed the most important thing of all, his life. Rodriguez is constantly looking for the opportunity to make a sacrifice like Jesus but is never given the chance. Until the end when he sacrifices his most important thing for the safety of others, his faith. This movie mirrors the life of Jesus in startling ways and I think father Rodriguez is a hero who destroyed the most precious piece of himself for the survival of other. And died knowing his sacrifice was worth it.
@huemungy3212
5 жыл бұрын
i knew this bishops interpretation was deeply flawed somehow, but you've really put it into better words than I ever could.
@bachvandals3259
5 жыл бұрын
To be honest, if you want to be a good Christian... Don't go to church, if god has eyes and he does see what has happen, what they have done under his name... Then all who go to church will burn in hell, buy yourself a bible... Read the things that is not wrong, things that reflect his will... Forgiveness, humble, sway from sins but shall not judge... Dont listen to pedophile, people who sleep in golden bed, people hate and judge whom doesn't lives the way they think is right.
@filipstruhar
5 жыл бұрын
What you say, humanism is better than christianty ? If you take story positivly, that is the message, trueth is that he liked people more than god, so ...
@huemungy3212
5 жыл бұрын
@@filipstruhar like most christians, you have an utterly one dimentional view of your own faith
@briannguyen537
5 жыл бұрын
alec Miles I believe this article, if you’re catholic, sums it up pretty well why the movies ending isn’t exactly good. www.tfp.org/catholics-cannot-silent-scorseses-silence/ Also another point is let’s say these were American soldiers. They show massive patriotism and love for the US but suddenly under intense torture or having to watch other soldiers be tortured they renounce their US citizenship and denounce the US as evil and vile. Would we then still consider these to be patriots to the US.
@Tdisputations
7 жыл бұрын
Agreed. A lot of people want Christians to stay silent, yet they cheer when people speak out against things like "slut shaming." We know that the blood of the martyrs caused Christianity to spread much more than staying silent ever did. One reason we ought not give in - even merely externally - is because we love others. "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends." - John 15:13
@ryanfamilylawgroup2010
7 жыл бұрын
Great comment!
@sketchartist1964
7 жыл бұрын
And that's just the trouble with many priests today, too many are simply too afraid to speak the truth in this neo pagan age. Christian truths are soft peddled in order to not offend. No wonder so many people are losing the faith.
@idicula1979
7 жыл бұрын
Honestly, people outside of places like China, and North Korea a good majority of them, I'm thinking over 85-90 percent know about Christianity. And while in those countries defying the authorities and outside knowledge of all sorts is a good thing. I would say in the west it's overkill you might say maybe they don't know what I know about Christianity, but that life. We all know what we know, and more apropos to this dialogue we all seek to know on our own. We don't need and obtrusive missionaries anymore pounding it to us that they have the good news.
@aardvarkcustard9696
7 жыл бұрын
Passive aggressive much?
@Tdisputations
7 жыл бұрын
mathew idicula The problem we have is that we have atheists going around asking people for evidence that God exists, and none of our young people have the answers. So, yeah, I don't think we need to tell people Jesus is alive, necessarily, but I do think educating people on the fact that there is proof that God exists is a public service that needs to happen. Basically, I think the focus needs to be on apologetics.
@ngonzale3
4 жыл бұрын
When I saw it, I felt that his holding the cross in his hand wasn't to confirm that he still believed in God, but rather that as he anticipated death that he be forgiven for his silence. Such a moving film.
@steveblaxton
7 жыл бұрын
After reading the stories of the saints I think "I want to BE him." After watching Silence I thought "I AM him." I identified with Rodrigues, Ferreira, and Kichijiro because they are weak and fallen. My identification with them was a challenge to overcome my complacency that accompanies the rationalizations I make to justify my daily sins (or betrayals). I think the film captures brilliantly the conflicted interior experience I have as a Christian when attempting to remain faithful to my religious principles within a context where it seems every opinion is opposed to them. Unfortunately, the film leaves out the scene in the book where Rodrigues realizes that he is as wretched as Kichijiro in the eyes of the Father. Rodrigues' hesitancy to forgive Kichijiro then becomes a metaphor for the prayer "forgive us our sins as we forgive those who trespass against us"; this humbles me to more immediately extend mercy to others. I liked that the story explored the human experience of dealing with the consequences of having betrayed Christ: not matter what I do I’m never outside the realm of the Father’s mercy. Ultimately, I think Christians have to ask whether a negative example of Christian life can benefit one’s own pursuit of holiness? My answer is a qualified “yes” since, if critically engaged, the example can lead one deeper into the mystery of human brokenness and the grace God offers to victoriously overcome it. While I agree with bishop that the main character's ought not be praised, my take is that negative examples can serve as effective means of engaging one's conscience to ultimately aid the Christian life.
@xOldRedx
7 жыл бұрын
I can only imagine the enormous pressure of doing something that appears so small in order to stop the suffering of others.
@nut913
5 жыл бұрын
Old Red from you it appears small
@notlengthy
3 жыл бұрын
Yeah maybe Jesus should've of just recounted, lied and said he wasn't the Son of God, just so that he could save people from the very temporary suffering of being Christian, and instead damning them to an eternal and inescapable suffering the likes of which human comprehension could never understand. It's not like suffering the pain of life is a central tenet to Christianity and the Bible itself, or anything. Job should've just denounced God and worshiped Satan, because it would've save him and his family much earthly suffering!
@Zack-bl2gg
3 жыл бұрын
But the eternal suffering is so much worse and important than the mortal suffering. Sacrificing your eternal life is not a good, but rather a wrong. Though it is hard, that is only because that is what is important. Sacrificing your country for your fellow soldiers for instance. It’s hard, but only because you know what you are striving for, what is more important. Even if the men were civilians, sacrificing your country for the civilians, while hard and a sacrifice, is wrong.
@RM22201
3 жыл бұрын
@@notlengthy just have god not put them in hell. Boom. Now no earthly or eternal suffering.
@matthewrocca4197
7 жыл бұрын
Bishop Barron: As a filmmaker and a fellow Christian, I love watching your insightful reviews of some of my favorite films and your discussion of the Christian themes in those films. I totally understand what you're saying about the ambiguity of this character's decision to renounce the faith in the film. However, I think one key aspect is perhaps being overlooked: Father Rodriguez specifically asks God to test him, and in fact seems to WANT and crave the opportunity to martyr himself as Jesus did, as an act of his loyalty to Christ. He's ready to sacrifice himself for what he believes in. But because *others* are being tortured in his place, that is the only reason why he renounces the faith publicly. I viewed his "step on Jesus" moment as actually the most spiritually painful moment in the entire film for his character. It would've been actually a lot easier and less painful for him to be physically tortured and killed for Christ, than it was for him in that moment to step on and renounce Him. But he did it, not out of cowardice or evil intention, but to save the lives of innocent people. In my opinion, he made the ultimate sacrifice that a man with his beliefs could make. He sacrificed his pride, and his entire calling in life, in that moment out of love for others. Which is, in my opinion, the core and most crucial aspect of Christ's teachings. But again, that's why a film like "Silence" is brilliant because it can create this level of serious soul-searching and theological discussion. God bless!
@tonytoons9301
2 жыл бұрын
Yes, that is what the Communist Chinese, for example, would want you to take from this movie. That's why it was made: an excuse for cowardice. Cowardice can be forgiven but not excused. When Peter is asked three times "do you love me?", that was a chance at repentance. And when he did, Christ fortold his martydom *as a gift*! The gospel says "signifying in what way he would glorify God." Peter would not wind up like Rodrigues. That's why I have never hated a movie like I hate this one.
@yuzhulu3252
Жыл бұрын
I really appreciated your view and critic. I also have a similar sentiment after reading the book, I think one of the themes that is heavily explored is "what sentiment does Jesus hold for Judas". Jesus must have love Judas and knows what he would do, but he chose him to be his disciple from the beginning anyway. The author took particular effort to discuss the depth of Jesus love must have had for Judas to not see him as just a "tool" to the completion of the crucifixion. I think it is a very valid argument to say that "Christianity in Japan" cannot and will not look like what Christianity in the western countries, for faith to organically grow in this land, the expression of its love has to become something that is so deeply rooted in this country and in its own unique culture, and what love is greater to put down one's pride and humble oneself to pick up someone else's culture, clothes and subdue oneself to serve the people in a foreign land in the ways that meet them where they are? I also don't know what I feel about comparing evangelical mission to army battle and missionaries to solders. It is true that both have a very clear goal and are highly trained and disciplined. However, I think the mission of Christ's love looks different from a war that strive to conquer by force and violence.
@Wesker10000
Жыл бұрын
@@tonytoons9301 It's cowardice to save other people?
@HuyVu-vi4ut
10 ай бұрын
@@tonytoons9301 yes, people just don't understand that as a christian, a person should love God more than anything else.
@MisterSweetProductions
10 ай бұрын
100%. Your purpose in life is not to save others from passing to eternity, especially not at the cost of your faith. What, in a Christian light is God-honoring about taking salvation into your own hands? Life on earth is short for everyone.
@jeffreysams3348
Жыл бұрын
One point that the Bishop misses is that "cultural elite" of Japan was the ruling samurai class which had recently ended an almost 150 year civil war (Onin war started in 1467 and the last major battle (siege of Osaka was 1615) and one large constant in that civil war was the fight against the Buddhist temples that harbored political/military ambitions. Oda Nobunaga (who was on good terms with the Jesuits) destroyed a huge temple complex at Enryakuji Temple killing around 2500-3000 people in one day and followed that up by killing 20,000 at forts in the Nagashima delta. He also famously had the Azuchi religious debate to effectively neuter the proselytization efforts of the Nichiren (lotus) sect. Toyotomi Hideyoshi also burned some buddhist temples. Tokugawa Ieyasu (the eventual winner of the civil war) was almost killed by the Monto sect. So the samurai forced the Buddhist institutions, into a non political role. The sure as hell were then not going to allow some foreign religion the ability to have a political say in running Japan. The destruction of Christianity in Japan was slow and brutal, but incompetent actions by some Christians (Sorin Otomo destroying many buddhist temples, massed forced conversions, the slave trade out of Nagasaki, threats by the Spanish in Manila to use Christianity as well to topple the samurai government (talk about arrogance), the Okubo affair, etc). Not in any way agreeing with what happened, but it has to be put into the context that the shogunate demanded religion get out of politics and the church did not get the memo
@thomaswilliamruston
7 жыл бұрын
I utterly agree, the true heroes of the film and the novel are those lay Christians who kept the faith for so many years, and who refused to apostatise. But the story is not just about heroes and martrys, it's also about the sinners and their chance for redemption. I'm not sure that the novel claims that the private faith Rodrigues kept in the end was something to be lauded or encouraged. It comes across as another form of persecution, Rodrigues surrendered his freedom and a public faith for the sake of others. He saved the lives of those Japanese people hanging upside down in the pit, but in the process allowed his persecutors to win. In the story, rather than being glorified for his apostasy he becomes a Judas/Peter figure, a sinner. During the final call for confession from Kichijiro (who incidently calls for forgiveness at least seven times over the course of the film, which is significant as Jesus calls us to forgive seventy times seven), Rodrigues and Kichjiro meet at the end of the book as two sinners in need of God's forgiveness. Even Kichjiro is martyred, something which is denied to Rodrigues. Rodrigues' character development, moves from heroic pride, to anger and isolation, to humility. I see the story as a message of hope, for it shows that even in the deepest state of sin we can call for God's forigveness of the sinner.
@JonyTony2018
3 жыл бұрын
What is mortal life compared to an eternity in Paradise? Rodrigues should have let them enter God's Domain, rather than betray his faith.
@casuallectures2655
3 жыл бұрын
@@JonyTony2018 What worth is Rodrigues' faith when it's steeped in arrogance and the belief that he is like Christ? Him sacrificing his faith, and by extension his pride, for the safety of others is the greatest and most genuine act of love he committed in his entire life and is arguably the closest he comes to truly being like Chist.
@Maryland2
Жыл бұрын
@@casuallectures2655 this take right here is what that movie is all about. Nice explanation!
@yunaru3643
Жыл бұрын
@@casuallectures2655 He could just sacrifice his life like Garupe did. Unlike Ferreira and Rodrigues, Garupe's faith is the strongest, even in death he refused to give in.
@kittykittycat8379
8 ай бұрын
@@casuallectures2655 Blessed are you when people mock you because of me...
@space_1073
3 жыл бұрын
I think its pretty explicit that Father Rodrigues would have gladly died for his faith in refusing to apostatize. But the inquisitor denied this and instead broke him down by torturing others. A great line he tells him is: "The price for your glory is their suffering". In this way his "caving in" is noble.
@jamis1566
3 жыл бұрын
Exactly.
@joshseeley7
10 ай бұрын
It's not noble to deny Christ. He will be denied before the Father and cast into hell.
@space_1073
10 ай бұрын
@@joshseeley7 You missed the entire message of the film then.
@SevereFamine
8 ай бұрын
@@space_1073No he didn’t, he just was more able to see it was a trash film.
@space_1073
8 ай бұрын
@@SevereFamine If you guys genuinely think the point of that movie was that Father Rodriguez made the wrong decision, and now he's going to hell and that's the end of the movie, you have worms in your brain.
@koby637
5 жыл бұрын
I've watched this film twice now and as a Christian I find the climatic scene so incredibly moving... Unfortunately, I think people are misreading the scene, because they think it's coming from an adversarial place, but the thing to remember is this story was written by Shusaku Endo, not Scorsese. It's clear to me that the priest isn't blameless in stepping on the image of Christ, anymore than Peter was blameless for denying Christ. The moment is meant to show the very human flaws of all the people involved and how Christ resolutely carries the burden of their sin, and delivers the priest from the mental Hell he's experiencing at that moment. They are weak men, weaker than the martyrs at the sea that they supposedly came to save, as you said, but I think that's exactly the point. In the end, the priest is defeated and resolves to be saved by grace alone, because it's ultimately a story about God's goodness, not the priest's goodness.
@rodriguezelfeliz4623
2 жыл бұрын
I think you are missing something here. The sacrifice of the martyrs at the sea is different from that of the priests. Giving your life for a cause you believe in can be way easier than mantaining your faith at the expense of the lives of innocent people. That's exactly why the Japanese authorities were not torturing the priests directly, they knew that it would not work because they would gladly give their life for the cause, they wanted to be martyrs. But being the cause of the death of innocent people (both believers and non believers)... for the priests that was a far worse fate than death itself. After all who were they to decide that others (even people who had already given up the faith) had to die in order for them to remain believers?
@josephl6289
10 ай бұрын
Spot on.
@joyaloliverafilms915
2 жыл бұрын
I just recently watched the movie and to be honest I did have a similar perspectives as the cultural elites of today and back then as Bishop Barron mentioned, but the character that was most relatable to me was Kichijiro, I could literally see myself in that character. At first I disliked him a lot when he betrayed the priests, but soon when he came back to confess and then repeated the same thing over and over, I couldn't help but find myself in that character.
@Ossory88
Жыл бұрын
So sad. My condolences to the weakness of your character
@joyaloliverafilms915
Жыл бұрын
@@Ossory88 😂😂😂 how desperate are you to get into an argument or maybe for the likes of you a "conversation" that you had to make this comment. Don't you have friends ??
@adhamh3666
Жыл бұрын
@Ossory88 you obviously slip up aswell in life.
@joshseeley7
10 ай бұрын
What a terrible person to see as like yourself. He was a miserable person.
@joyaloliverafilms915
10 ай бұрын
@@joshseeley7 in most cases aren't we all, I mean think about it. Faith is tough to have especially when you don't feel Gods grace in your life. and I keep failing and then I keep coming back and I keep failing and I keep coming back. that's how I relate to him. nothing wrong in that. God loves all equally sinner and saint alike so if he's miserable its fine God still loves him.
@lusotuber
6 жыл бұрын
You've hit the nail on the head, Bishop Barron. Those were exactly my thoughts while watching the movie.
@elwood1029
5 жыл бұрын
Almost the whole way through watching this film one quote kept flitting in and out of my mind: 'I once asked Bertrand Russell if he was willing to die for his beliefs. “Of course not,” he replied. “After all, I may be wrong .” '
@ant7936
5 жыл бұрын
Renouncing verbally doesn't really change anything. "A person changed against his will, is of the same opinion still".
@joshseeley7
10 ай бұрын
@@ant7936 Jesus said, "deny me before man and I will deny you before the Father." It does make a difference, we were called to die for our faith if that's what God calls us to do.
@maximilianwalerowicz7322
7 ай бұрын
This is a great quote. Thanks for posting it
@tendaimsimang8630
16 күн бұрын
@@joshseeley7 I agree with you, but I wanted to make clear that denying Jesus before others, is not a matter of words but actions. For many say Lord Lord but do not do the things that God asks. But the few will may remain silent and do all the things that God asks. To deny Jesus is to deny doing the will of God.
@TheDistributist
7 жыл бұрын
I agree in the abstract with Bishop Barron. But silence IS an important film because it depicts not just the kind of deracinated Christianity modernity wants but the way modernity encourages apostasy by pitting faith against humanism. Very important to understand.
@scutumfidelis1436
7 жыл бұрын
Scorsese describes himself as a lapsed Catholic, to me this film is like a view into his inner feelings about Christianity. He likes the majesty of the Church he even appreciates the lengths people will go for faith, yet at the end the lead betrays God with his renouncement. For Scorsese preservation of life is the utmost value but for Christians life isn't worth it without God.
@TheDistributist
7 жыл бұрын
yes, there are problems but intellectual Christians need to have challenging media like this. There were no cheap shots despite the theological problems.
@scutumfidelis1436
7 жыл бұрын
The Distributist To be fair I haven't seen the movie yet, the conclusion that Father Barron makes about the laymen dying for the faith and the Jesuits' recantation of their faith is a textbook example of how Christians treat martrydom and makes for interesting characters. I wonder if Hollywood and secularists understand this concept?
@bencanuck
7 жыл бұрын
Why focus on Scosese and his status as a lapsed Catholic? Endo, the author of the original novel, was a practising Catholic convert. He was a practising Catholic convert who struggled with a lot of things (truly a lot), but he never identified as lapsed. He always put a face on as a Catholic. It's weird to shift the focus away from the actual author (weird on many levels, including racial ones, as well as ideological ones). Unless it's unfaithful to the source material (and Bishop Barron seems to imply it's not), then this film is not "a view into [Scorsese's] inner feelings about Christianity" more than it is Endo's.
@scutumfidelis1436
7 жыл бұрын
Racial what? Like I said before I haven't watched the movie but from what Bishop Baron is saying is that the end is altered from the book. Doing some research shows me that the book ends with the Jesuit stepping on the fumie and lamenting that it wasn't Men that failed God but Japan's tendency to be a spiritual void. Did you find any other differences between the book and film?
@Wigger248
3 жыл бұрын
Most people here seem to be blatantly ignoring the parallels to Jesus and how Rodriguez is sacrificing his pride as apposed to his life to save others. He’s lower him self for others just as Jesus did. The martyrs by the sea only had them selfs to sacrifice. Rodriguez had the burden of others that where dying for him. COMPLETE opposite of Jesus. So “three cheers” for all of them Bishop Barron.
@peroxideladybirds2679
7 жыл бұрын
I just think it's kind of silly that this video ends with such repetition of "they". To quote Mother Teresa, "It is between you and God. It was never between you and them anyway." It just seems that a siege mindset, that doubt and questioning are fundamentally dangerous and tricks simply to erode faith and perpetuate secularism, does not reflect faith. In fact, at the risk of coming off too hard, it sounds close-minded and distrustful of others. The Bishop accurately states that the voice of "Christ" in the apostasy scene is meant to be ambiguous, and the blackening of El Greco's rendering of Jesus' face and the sound of crowing are further there to demonstrate that this act has defiled the faith Rodrigues understands, that he can perceive, up to that point. To then go from that to assuming that the movie is vindicating Rodrigues and his decision at the end because of the little cross, which his wife gives him for warding off "evil spirits" (in that very un-Christian language), as the narration says, seems dubious. Rodrigues mockingly asks whether he will be tortured like Ferreira was before the trampling scene. The viewer is meant to understand that Rodrigues must die for his faith. To do so would be to follow Christ's path. But Rodrigues is not given *that* choice; I hope people in the comments remember that. He is directly asked, "What would Christ do?" Would He allow others to die for His own faith, and if so, must Rodrigues do the same? Or is it not Rodrigues's faith they die for, but faith itself? Is Rodrigues's faith the Christian faith in its absolute purity, or simply his own? We are asked earlier in the movie whether the Japanese Catholics fully understand the Gospel they are presented with (although the sacrifice of the villagers seems like it is meant to be nothing but unequivocally brave), but now we are asked whether Rodrigues does. The quandary the movie presents derives from that: not disbelief, not irreligion, but the difficulty of faith itself. Perhaps some of us feel we have answers, and I personally think that is a valuable thing, so much as it guides understanding. But to ask what one is to faith, to God, is the ore that faith is crafted from, and to mistake that inquiry for some kind of emasculation to appease modern secularism is, at least in my mind, bizarre and misguided. The majority of non-religious people I have spoken to about this movie find it boring and frustrating because they feel the choice of Rodrigues is easy. But the whole point of the movie is that it isn't, the movie demonstrates that it is hard and concedes it may, all the same, be wrong. The film asks us how we inhabit faith, not whether we should wear crosses in public.
@notlengthy
3 жыл бұрын
Christ died knowing his followers would be tortured to death for their beliefs, or did you not read a lick of scripture? John 11:25. Great, you saved their lives but did not save their souls. You traded their temporary torment for eternal torment... you would not be a savior in this situation, you would be a condemner. The voice that told rodriguez to trample the image was Satan and not God. God would never, ever, ever ask someone to sin.
@educationalporpoises9592
3 жыл бұрын
@@notlengthy a question Peroxide Ladybirds asked is whether or not they were dying for Rodrigues's faith, or for faith itself. The movie makes a significant point in saying that the Japanese Christians mostly did not understand Christianity because the Jesuits did not make an effort to broach the cultural barrier and make it clear. The apostate Father stated, outright, that the Japanese were not dying for Christ, but for Rodrigues. Rodrigues wanted to be like Christ so much that the prospect of martyrdom became an idol. Moreover, the narrative makes it pretty clear that the majority of the Japanese Christians were most likely not saved in the sense that we understand Salvation to be. So the question becomes, if a Christian sacrificed the lives of nonChristians (who would thereafter be condemned to Hell) so that his own faith could be saved such that the martyrs who do not understand the Gospel would have no chance at truly being saved, is that Christian really making a Christ-like sacrifice? He may think he is, but it is not so clear. Another way of putting it would be this: is the possibility of you soul burning in Hell worth the possibility that those nonChristians might live another day and eventually come to truly know Christ? If it is, then is that sacrifice Christ-like? Notably, Christ died knowing others would also die for Him. But what if He lived knowing others would also die for Him, no death and resurrection? Those are two different things, especially considering His death was utterly necessary. Christ's situation was not an impossible situation, because He is God and has the ability to accomplish His will in even the worst of situations. So the question is not what God can accomplish in impossible situations, but what are we to make of Christians who are in situations that are impossible to navigate through? Again, your soul versus another? If you choose the others' have you really lost your soul? Some things are just impossible to clearly see through. God sees it clearly at the end, and I think the movie is trying to give some comfort to the vast difficulty of seeing clearly as humans in this life, even as we try to please God and do His will.
@educationalporpoises9592
3 жыл бұрын
@@notlengthy I will say though, that Rodrigues becoming a force against Christianity in Japan was a pretty clear indication that his faith after a certain point most certainly became false, even if he tried to hold onto it at the end. But it's kinda interesting because it makes him very similar to the Japanese man whom he forgave over and over, and who betrayed him over and over, except now instead of Rodrigues being a priest who conduits forgiveness onto the Japanese traitor, it's Christ who is being asked by the traitor Rodrigues to be forgiven. Rodrigues despised that Japanese man through the fault of prideful sin in his heart (though he offered him the sacrament of confession), and now there's a question of whether or not Christ (who is not guilty of pride or selfish hatred) would forgive Rodrigues. I think more than a statement on what it means to be saved, the film asks us to consider whether or not our faith manifests genuinely.
@Zack-bl2gg
3 жыл бұрын
The point is if other people die for your faith, it doesn’t matter. Your faith is the most important. Giving up your faith for other’s lives is not worth it. It isn’t a valiant choice, but rather an easy way out. Sure the psychological torture is hard, but it doesn’t matter. Eternal life is the most important. Take it back to the soldier point. If the soldier was asked to sacrifice his country to save civilians of another country, he shouldn’t do it. He’s not being prideful by saying his country is worth more than their lives, because the point is it IS worth more. Eternal salvation is worth more than any one’s life, even if they are not sacrificing it themselves. He is not the one killing them, and no one in their right mind would say he should sacrifice his country for the other’s lives.
@lukasg9031
3 жыл бұрын
@@educationalporpoises9592 how do you know it was not the devil tempting Rodriguez through the other apostate when he said "they are dying for you"
@323guiltyspark
7 жыл бұрын
I read the book before seeing the movie. Your analysis has merit in that people should be able to express their faith in a public manner, but it is kind of heartless when we take into account the historical context of the film and the romanticization of martyrdom. Japan at the time was (and to an extent, still is ) very xenophobic and they say Christianity as a form of colonialism and a threat to their society. It wasn't anything in particular about Christian doctrine that the Shogunate was against, mainly its foreignness. It would have had almost the exact same reaction to say Islam arriving on its shores. The analogy of special forces, I understand and I feel antipathy towards people who would betray their country like that. But faith is different than patriotism. Patriotism is firmly tied to the temporal world. There is no notion of salvation in patriotism. Plus, special forces are elements used against an enemy power. Are not missionaries messengers of peace to friends? It's very strange to equate Japan (a county you are trying to save) with a hostile force and missionary work as a military operation. That implies the word of God is being forced on Japan. The message I got from the ending is that martyrdom is beautiful and heroic only in the retrospect and from people who didn't really experience it. Can you honestly call yourself a good person if you allow others to suffer in your stead when you have the power to end it? Faith is beautiful when expressed, but to say that the expression of that faith is the most important aspect of it turns faith into a superficial act. There are so many cases of false preachers who used expressions of faith for unrighteous ends, who didn't even believe in what they were saying. Rituals are only a part of faith, and aren't even the most important part. Rodrigues probably did hear the voice of Jesus when he was told to step on the plate because Jesus suffered much more and would be damned if he allowed others to suffer just for the vanity of martyrdom. Is not faith kept at the heart one of the most distilled forms of faith? I'm sure Rodrigues would have died to stop the suffering of the Japanese disciples, but that wasn't on the table. He sacrificed his ego and kept his faith in his heart.
@andyzar1177
6 жыл бұрын
323guiltyspark Beautiful!, that is exactly the stunning message of the movie and book. God bless you and keep you.
@davids2368
6 жыл бұрын
I think I agree with this interpretation the most. I'm not Christian (just a film guy) but I gotta say the most interesting interpretations of this film come from Christians.
@Kingofredeyes
5 жыл бұрын
You misunderstand the special forces example. Christians fight a battle against the devil, who in many times works through people the same as God does. He isn't equating Japan to a hostile force, he is talking about going into the heart of the enemy, IE a nation shrouded in darkness due to it's lack of faith and the persecution they face, and then giving in to their demands and joining them. As for "faith kept close to the heart being the most distilled forms of faith" you would also be incorrect. While faith and your relationship with Christ is very personal, it is something you are called to share, part of that whole "go and make disciples of all nations" that people like it ignore in favor of the "when you pay close the door and do so in private" passage that is so often misunderstood and misquoted by people who never really studied it. Faith and Christianity are not about "being a good person" as we humanly define it. People who are being made martyrs while the suffer in the human sense actually receive one of the greatest gifts of all, "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness for theirs of the kingdom of heaven." What you don't realize is you are making an argument for the humane over the Godly. You say Jesus would never have allowed people to suffer and yet he has the power to end all suffering, including that of his missionaries, and yet he does not on a daily basis. Many people still suffer to this day for God, it is THE highest calling a person can have to suffer for Christ's sake. What you have posted here is of a faith in humanity, not in a faith of Christ.
@antidepressant11
5 жыл бұрын
Bloody well articulated mate!
@Skyezrlj
5 жыл бұрын
The holy martyrs who died in Japan did not die for Rodriguez. That is what the cruel ruling Japanese pitted it as. But even though they gave up the faith by word, they were still suffering for Christ. Not only did poor Rodriguez put his soul in peril, but also denied the people being tortured the chance to die for Christ. That is true ego. There is no sacrifice there, no matter how much you’d like to make it out to be. Only wanting people to stop suffering and succumb to the prince of earth at the possible forfeit of their eternal reward in heaven. God bless those who stayed strong in the faith until the end.
@Mendaz
7 жыл бұрын
I am an atheist and I very much like this movie. It is an important piece of history that is not known by many. It shows the test of human faith and willpower. It also shows Christianity is not always a big religion wherever it spreads and that it is also persecuted.
@strategosopsikion8576
5 жыл бұрын
I’m a Christian. But I appreciate your comment. It shows your maturity to think in such a way.
@joejohn6795
5 жыл бұрын
“Christianity is not always a big religion and wherever it spreads it is also persecuted” talk about an understatement. Even today Christianity is the most persecuted religion. This is especially true in the middle where in countries such as Iraq, Syria, and Libya. Many Christian communities have been wiped out or are in the process of being destroyed. In the United States and many other countries founded by north Western Europeans its popular to hate Christianity. Many secular people see it as an oppressive and powerful force. However if you take a broader look at history you’ll find that Christianity tended to act as a civilizing force. Christianity wiped out barbaric practices such human sacrifice where it spread and laid the foundation for modern civil society. I know how it feels to only know certain parts of history that spotlight negative aspects of western people and cultural. I went to public school. Anything I learned from public school I heavily discount. I Retain the what, where, and when, but the why, how, and impact usually reflect the biases of the institution. Try to learn what happened and when from history. Try to realize the scale and context of events. For example the slave trade: how many slave were brought where by who? Most schools will not tell you this. Most slaves stayed in Africa next most went to the caribians and Middle East. A relatively small percentage actually went to North America. Yet I would have never know this if I didn’t look outside of what I was taught in school. Furthermore almost every group of people have been enslaved at various points throughout history. Europeans for example enslaved each other for example during Rome’s conquest of Gaul, Spain, and other areas. Europeans were often enslaved to Arabs and North Africans during the conquest of Spain or the sack of the eastern Roman Empire for example. Anyway this just one area where context helps to understand the role of slavery in history. Yet I would have thought slavery was exclusively a white on black thing after coming out of high school. My advice for learning history in an environment where so many people are trying to push their own agenda is this: try to read history books written before the cultural revolution of the 1960s. When someone tells you what the meaning of something is ignore it. Focus on what happened and try to construct your own prospective.
@TheBAGman17
5 жыл бұрын
A christian has no right to tell others to seek knowledge considering how proudly ignorant and meek you people are. Im well aware that I may be lied to or handed false info but unlike you I question all of it when you aren't even allowed. you blindly follow men who have more than often not manipulated you into getting what they want.
@joejohn6795
5 жыл бұрын
TheBAGman17 I’m not even Christian but what would it matter if I was? Dude you just assume all these negative attributes about people you haven’t even met. You call them ignorant while at the same time making lots of negative assumptions. Please think about that.
@TheBAGman17
5 жыл бұрын
@@joejohn6795 It's not an assumption it's experience. There are very important questions that had to be answered that I was neither allowed to ask nor would ever be answered.
@sketchartist1964
7 жыл бұрын
No doubt about it, Fr Barron has nailed it once again! Weakness is never courage. Fear is never faith.
@huskyfaninmass1042
7 жыл бұрын
"My power is perfected in weakness."
@SquirrellyFries
7 жыл бұрын
I haven't seen the movie yet, but the book was pretty haunting to me. though as you bring up Peter, I remember a scene near the end of the book where the main character has already apostasized and one of his laypeople comes to find him. Over the course of the book, this layperson had time after time betrayed the Catholic community to the authorities but then reconciled, and in this scene he asks the priest for confession again. This scene demonstrated the stark contrast between the priest's betrayal and a truer Peter-like Christian who kept trying again and again.
@MissPopuri
5 жыл бұрын
I watch this after a deconstruction of Faith video describing Silence. The KZitem algorithm strikes again.
@JMTgpro
5 жыл бұрын
Me too, and you feel the difference in perspectives from afar. xD In my opinion, deconstruction of faith, gave a much more complex perspective than shown here, since it took into consideration the greatest aspect ignored; Rodrigues and his excessive ego that threatens the lives of others under the idea of spiritual superiority.
@ff8740
5 жыл бұрын
Yeah Deconstruction of Faith is way more observervant and a lot bias. It is especially telling that the movie especially shows that the Lay people or native Japanese don't even understand Christianity, and probably are not even christian. Not Barron either does mention it or was blind to it.
@ameygetsitright
4 жыл бұрын
Deconstruction of faith analyses actions Father Rodriguez through perspective of a commoner, In this video it is a priest's perspective. Usually as a movie watcher; people tend to associate themselves with protogonist and try to draw parallels. Sympathies with his/her sufferings and find inspiration/ answers for their own lives. Deconstruction describes that very well. In fact going beyond it, it erases the 'identity'. Maybe conflict isn't between Buddhist Japan and Christianity. This is war of identities. Buddhist, Christian, are simply names of these identities (replaceable as depicted in the movie how Japanese perceive Jesus. Also highlighted by change of name for Rodriguez and Ferreiro.) Maybe the deconstruction of faith suggests sacrifice should be the centerpiec of faith and not the the identity. Faith is a medium; a mean to reach divinity and not the goal itself. If I am fixated upon such identities it automatically brings in separation from so called non believers. From example Kichijiro movie also comments on nature of sacrifice. There's no sacrifice without the belief. In the end it isn't us and they. Maybe it is all about me for everything else. How to assimilate with rest whilst remaining 'ME' in most pious sense. Sacrifice of my faith; letting go of daunting mantle of heroic attribution of sacrifice and wearing a humble robe of self discovery. The silence within; far from constant chaotic turmoil of conflict. This video however Bishop talks about the same fight that Rodrigues plagued from the beginning. Even in his example he cites a company soldiers. Which I fundamentally disagree. Again even on those terms; considering nation is another identity, we keep fighting/ dying for identity to keep them alive in whatever form possible. And the true conflict arises there. Why do we need silence? The conflict isn't out there. It is within us. The sacrifice of life or the sacrifice of egoistic identity? What gives you the peace?
@ff8740
4 жыл бұрын
@@ameygetsitright our bias are diffently gonna affect the way we view/consume media, as someone who is much for keeping or defending culture I think the Japanese are being horrible, regardless of whether or not they view Christianity as a threat to their way of life. That being said christian missionaries are often a branch of imperialism and colonialism, and where often violent in the cause. So I can understand why the Japanese viewed them as a threat. As someone who is not religious I see Rodrigies actions as not only ego driven as he seems to be often comparing himself to Jesus, but futile.
@ameygetsitright
4 жыл бұрын
@@ff8740 Yeah I agree with you. I think it's kinda like a game. It may sure sound insensitive; but in a way missionaries are somewhat responsible for actions of the Japanese. Ideally what of paramount importance should is life, yet as a missionary; in order to 'replicate' passion of Jesus, many missionaries historically has sacrificed their lives in order to upheld faith. Now there's a lucrative prospect of being a martyr which too was beneficial as PR gig for the church. But somehow it reduced the value of life, made 'religion' and it's symbols larger th life and thus worthy of dying for. Now Inquisitors in a way are merely matching the stakes raised by the Church. Missionaries promoted martyrdom, and people are simply following it blindly through faith. Isn't it wasted? Isn't it marching in a void for no appearant cause? Is the goal of a living to achieve martyrdom over a religious sentiments? These questions arise, and maybe, just maybe 'Silence' takes a divergent take on what true martyrdom is. It is not of life but that of ego.
@unacceptablesisterpeter3431
7 жыл бұрын
I have yet to see the movie but the book haunted me. When I finished I had so many thoughts on where would I be found. Can I endure the horrific suffering of others to hold on to my faith? Can I ask others to suffer for me? What if it were my nephews who were being tortured and I could end it by stepping on a crucifix. What would I do?
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
God Bless you Sister, I have the same thoughts. I also feel haunted by the movie, how would I respond to watch innocent people suffer and be tortured when I can stop it? This is of course in the face of being absurd psychologically and physcially. I do believe that a person can withstand only so much and then they loose they mind and make decisions and choices that are not coming from their true self.
@martinjohnson4405
7 жыл бұрын
Peace be with you Sister. The line that Fr. Ferreira said that is haunting me is spoken just before Fr. Rodrigues steps on the icon: "You are now going to perform the most painful act of love that has ever been performed." In the book this line is repeated. This has opened for me similar questions as the ones you suggested. What is sacrifice? Is there something greater than the sacrifice of our body? At the end of the movie Fr. Rodrigues appears to be an empty broken shell of a man. What does it mean to sacrifice out of love? Fr. Ferreira saved his own life, Fr. Rodrigues saves the lives of others, what does this difference tell us? My faith is such that God forgave both priests.
@unacceptablesisterpeter3431
7 жыл бұрын
I just recently returned from a private pilgrimage Nagasaki. I had already been set to go when the movie came out. During my week there I visited many sites of both the martyrs and the hidden Christians. I also by God's "coincidence" was able to view a real fumi-e in a temporary exhibit at the museum of history and culture. I knelt under the praying stone where the hidden Christians for 300 years brought their children in the dark of night to teach them to pray. These people continued on in secret and darkness with no outside assistance until Fr. Petitjean began the building of Oura Church. I believe that God permitted the act of stepping on the fumi-e in order that the faith may persevere in silence. I cannot condemn either priest because I feel I too would step on my beloved Lord. In the book the character that I feel I most resemble is Kichijiro. The man who was a coward and constantly stepped on the fumi-e and yet was constantly compelled to return. I discovered at his literary museum that Shusaku Endo considered himself to be Kichijiro also. In the book it should be noted that it is Kichijiro who returns the priesthood to Fr. Rodregues when he comes at the end asking for confession. Once a priest always a priest. This book/movie has been a real blessing for me as it has forced me to lookdeeper into my soul.
@martinjohnson4405
7 жыл бұрын
Yes, Kichijiro and Peter. From the interaction between Jesus and Peter at the end of John, I know I will be forgiven and would be if I stepped on the fumi-e as Frs. Ferreira and Rodrigues were. I watched the 1971 Japanese version of the movie and there were a few differences, including that Fr. Ferreira stepped on the fumi-e to save five believers who were being tortured and that both fathers experienced the pit before hearing the cries of the other believers. I've yet to read the book, but it is on the way. A few years ago I accompanied another American on a tour of the cathedral in which I had been worshiping when I first moved to Beijing. The person giving the tour said that during the Cultural Revolution the crucifixes and stations of the cross and other icons were laid in the center aisle and the priests and nuns were told to walk on them. Those who refused were beaten, some to death. That was not several hundred years ago, rather within my lifetime.
@martinjohnson4405
7 жыл бұрын
P.S. it isn't like that in China today, occasionally we heard of some harassment of Chinese Christians, but nothing like during the Cultural Revolution. As foreigners we were free to worship and while we could answer questions about our faith to anyone older than 18, we were forbidden to postalize.
@MegaMac464
2 жыл бұрын
I think the meaning of the movie went right over his head
@richardlee033
7 жыл бұрын
Bishop Barron, thank you so much for your ministry. It has encouraged many like me on the faith, even drew me to the Catholic church. I seldom disagreed with you. And I am not opposing you here. What I think is that we need to do some justice to the millions silent Christians in the world. This commentary, I think I understand your basic position as a defense of 'public Christianity', and your role as a priest, a public minister for Christ. But I wonder if martyrdom is the only option viable for Christians under oppression and persecution. I'm from a country where oppression and the growth of Christianity are paralleling. There have been thousands of martyrs shedding blood for Christ throughout history. Meanwhile, millions remain Nicodimite (silent) Christians. Both the martyrs and the silent Christians have contributed to the building of the Kingdom of God. The only difference would have been the grace and mission they have received from God. Speaking about martyrdom can be easy. But I wonder how many would dare to boast how strong their faith is when witnessing the horrible persecutions occur to their beloved ones? God bless and keep on the good work!
@BishopBarron
7 жыл бұрын
Friend, I'm with you in regard to silence, under certain circumstances. But public and repeated apostasy? That's not silence, but most eloquent denial.
@marcbrmb
7 жыл бұрын
To the Most Reverend Bishop Robert Barron: I wholeheartedly agree with your thought-provoking review. Moreover, as with other videos of yours, it has the great double merit of answering and raising many fundamental questions. Such as: is killing a man intrinsically evil? I was wondering how, for example, the doctrine of Just War is to be understood in this perspective. I find the issue quite troubling. Also, while the reiterated renunciation of the faith out of convenience is morally objectionable and utterly repugnant to the Will of God, as You correctly point out; what are we to make of someone stepping on a sacred image as a mere exterior and formal act? In order not to save his own life, but to save the life of innocents (granted that no one is truly innocent and all have fallen short of the glory of God)? Were the lives of my own father, mother and younger sister threatened in such a horrific way, how am I supposed to react, what is the right thing to do? I'm struggling to find a clear and definitive answer. I would greatly appreciate your help, dear Bishop. In Matthew 10:16 we find Jesus saying: "Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves." What is therefore to be understood as wise in such extreme circumstances? It seems to me we are here confronted with two evils. From the one side an act of formal apostasy (be it only exterior and inauthentic or simulated). From the other side the tacit though unwilling consent to innocent people being tortured and executed. This is highly problematic. What is the lesser evil of the two? Is a forced repudiation factual, even when selfless, or the responsibility of it falls entirely on the torturers and slaughterers? What kind of behavior would Jesus expect of us, what would He consider wise and moral out of His infinite Love and mercy, and out of His profound humanity? Thank you dear Bishop Barron
@goalie9198
7 жыл бұрын
You have said elsewhere that A Man For All Seasons is your favorite movie. I haven't seen "Silence" yet but I have seen AMFAS almost as many times as you have (so you can't slip a piece of dialogue from the movie past me). Meg saying, "Say the words of the oath and in your heart think otherwise" always seemed to make good sense to me.
@marcbrmb
7 жыл бұрын
Dear Bishop Barron, upon further reflection and having examined the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I arrived at the unavoidable conclusion that your stance is thoroughly accurate. So that previous doubts have now dissipated for the most part. In fact, according to the Catechism “A good intention (for example, that of helping one's neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).” And again, “The circumstances, including the consequences, are secondary elements of a moral act. They contribute to increasing or diminishing the moral goodness or evil of human acts (for example, the amount of a theft). They can also diminish or increase the agent's responsibility (such as acting out of a fear of death). Circumstances of themselves cannot change the moral quality of acts themselves; they can make neither good nor right an action that is in itself evil.” Regarding self-defence, it is stated that “The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not.”” I think I am left with this one last difficulty, Bishop Barron. Let’s say a missionary, as in the case at hand, is forced to apostatize formally or else people entrusted to his care, but unwilling to die as martyrs, be tortured and killed. Were he to perpetrate this intrinsically evil/disordered act, in order not to preserve his own material body, but the life of those people in peril; in that case, granted no other option is available, and that he intends not to renounce Faith, but to defend innocent lives, would he still be responsible, at least in part? And to what extent? I mean, does the moral burden for the terrible act (apostasy in and of itself is gravely and intrinsically sinful) fall on the torturers and murderers alone/entirely? Sure, Love of God comes before any and all worldly preoccupations and considerations, so that some measure of detachment from all which is other than God or mundane has to be achieved. That argument I’ve made in previous comments, concerning equally evil alternatives, was probably flawed at its core, since we must never commit evil, no matter what. In this sense, by its own nature, apostasy is possibly the most evil of acts. Yet, from the Love of God derives love for our brother, grounded as it is in that Love. Tortured, helpless men, there the suffering face of the crucified Christ is most visible. It is made clear how problematic and disheartening the position of the missionary is, how dramatic his choice (I'm not talking of repeated public denial, of course). Nonetheless “It is…an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.” This being true, as it is, does not deny the legitimacy of self-defence, because in certain circumstances resorting to violence against a brutal aggressor is not in and of itself repugnant to morality nor intrinsically illicit: he is not innocent, but is harming the innocent. Thank You Bishop Barron. God bless You
@Zenitself
6 жыл бұрын
I think the criticism is not of the silence, but the outright betrayal and public conversion, when push came to shove, against Christ. But it's easy to say so, while the obviously heroic and difficult position to die for the Faith is the most difficult and complete expression of the Faith. Most of us betray Christ in small matters, so it is silly to think that we could ever be faithful in the Largest matters of life and death; and that is why we need LENT and mortification. Then when the time comes, we can choose to die so that we may truly Live. God bless you and keep up the struggle. "When you're going through hell what do you do?" "You keep on GOING!" ~Churchill
@lungfish
7 жыл бұрын
I believe that he made the right decision and should be celebrated for it. That he did what the Japanese wanted, fine; but he saved those people from torture and death, and it was an unwinnable war. Of course the martyrs are to be exalted. But he was not a "traitor," because he did not want to do it. Real traitors side with the enemy because they come to hate their own; that is not the case here. I think the film supports the idea that Ferreira and Rodrigues held to their faith in secret. Of course there is a parallel to secular society, which is what the film is trying to convey. It is not to suggest that apostasy or private faith is desired, but that we should have sympathy for those who must do so for unfortunate reasons.
@WilliamBrownGuitar
7 жыл бұрын
".....but he saved those people from torture and death" I think that this is the main point, and I agree with Madoka K. If the movie (and book) had been made differently, with a renunciation of faith meaning only the death of the priest, then perhaps we could look at it differently. But his renunciation, in fact, saved the life of many innocent people.
@BadboyAnarchy
7 жыл бұрын
Christianity is concerned with the salvation of souls and the glorifying of God, NOT maximising material utility and the life span of individuals... no-one has the right to deny Christ no matter how many lives it could "save" (I write "save" because ultimately everybody will die eventually anyway) . Their renunciation and defeatism arguably prevented countless Japanese souls from ever entering Heaven.
@WilliamBrownGuitar
7 жыл бұрын
God only knows what you would have done Michael. And, it is important to remember that in many ways, we deny Christ every time we sin.
@BadboyAnarchy
7 жыл бұрын
William Brown 1) This isn't about what a weak individual would have or wouldn't have done, this is about what the RIGHT THING to do in that situation would have been. 2) Some sins are more egregious than others, deliberate wilful and public rejection of Christ is one of the more serious ones. (Church teaching on mortal vs. venial sin is proof of this heirachy)
@FatherJoel
7 жыл бұрын
It was utterly disgraceful. I empathise of course, but nevertheless. Any empathy I had was lost when they were casually going through religious articles and pictures of saints like St Laurence - who did die for his faith - and turning them into authorities. Not only turning away yourself but stopping others from being strengthened in the faith.
@Scotchism
7 жыл бұрын
From what I remember, the novel had Rodrigues saying he was still a Christian in his heart but I guess for the film they threw in the little cross in his tomb. But like you said Bishop Barron, the real heroes of the novel/film are the ones who died on that beach and whose witness kept the faith alive
@trioan3500
5 жыл бұрын
But those people were wrong about Jesus They thought they were worshipping the Sun of God rather than the Son of God If only the Misionaries cared about the Japanese Language, their customs and traditions along with foods
@croesuslydias6488
5 жыл бұрын
Trí Đoàn the complexity comes in where none of us know if we are worshipping the “correct” version of Christianity. I took it as their version being as valid as anyone else’s, and father Ferarra not being able to understand that due to the strict catholic dogma
@trioan3500
5 жыл бұрын
@@croesuslydias6488 Yes, but the point of Christianity is to believe that Jesus who is THE Son of God and God Himself, came down to earth and died for our sins so that we may enter a relationship with God and Jesus The Japanese thought they were worshipping the Sun of God since they can grapse the concept of something natural or from nature NOT being a sort of the Divine and God
@croesuslydias6488
5 жыл бұрын
Trí Đoàn I didn’t take the part of the film you are describing as literally then. I took it as ferarr convincing himself that it was impossible to convert japan when it was his own failure not that of the people of Japan
@zenuno6936
4 жыл бұрын
@@trioan3500 They did, the Jesuits even created the first dictionaries. The movie is not historical when it accuses the priests of not caring about the language, it serves as plot device but its untrue. The way to evangelize a lot of people was to first convert the Lords, and so the Jesuits intermingled with the high society and obviously spoke Japanese with them.
@noahc3887
4 жыл бұрын
The problem I have with this interpretation is the idea that Rodriguez did it for himself. He was very willing to allow himself to die for the cause, but he didn't want others, who did not believe, to be killed for his cause. I don't know that it would be ethical, or even Christian, to allow others to die. Even before they leave the first village, the priests are almost acting selfishly by allowing others to die in their place. If they really loved the people they were ministering to, which is what the Gospel is about, they would have given themselves up. Heck, their mission wasn't even to preach; it was to find their mentor.
@davidsavage519
5 жыл бұрын
I really enjoyed your analysis. As a staunch atheist, I thought this movie was a masterpiece. It fits into Scorsese's run of perfection in the 70's. I think youll connect to it if you have ever thought critically about religion or struggled with faith. Wherever you end up, the struggle itself is universally recognizable. A truly human film
@lfrn1532
Жыл бұрын
Every Scorcese movie is a masterpiece
@stephenpaulwilson
Жыл бұрын
God bless you 🙏 ❤
@andreechristian1006
3 жыл бұрын
Wow, found out about you today on Jordan Peterson's Podcast, and the first thing that i want to know is your opinion about this 4 years old film because it has troubled me so much in the past and even today. I love your explanation soooo much! Thank God for someone like you! Love from Indonesia.
@matthias66
7 жыл бұрын
Very good points in this review. I told someone about this movie, and they brought up an interesting point. When I spoke of the Christians being tortured by Tsurushi (hanging in the pit), and Father Rodrigues having the power of life or death over his flock by stepping on the fumi-e plate depicting Christ or Mary, this person I talked to told me "The Japanese authorities could have easily released the prisoners from the pit, and had them executed just as easily. The Japanese Tokugawa government was merely giving the illusion of control, of life or death, to Father Rodrigues. Then his apostasy would have been for nothing." That was a very good point she brought up- the illusion of control. Father Rodrigues really didn't have control- whatever control he had temporarily was allowed by the Japanese, who could have taken it away just as easily. But I understand the enormous difficulty that Father Rodrigues was under from an emotional and humanitarian standpoint. It is is difficult to say what any of us would do in that kind of situation- thank God that we are not put in that position (I mean that sincerely, not sarcastically or vainly). What would we do if we were in his position, hypothetically. But I agree, the movie does put Christianity into a unfavorable light, and places the value of a common sense of humanity and love of one's fellow man over one's beliefs and personal convictions. As difficult as it is to fathom sometimes, Jesus did say: Matthew 16:25 "For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it."
@not2tees
4 жыл бұрын
But what did Jesus say about Whoever wants to save the lives of others? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you - that quote makes judgement very difficult. Buddhists were very good (that is, evil) at probing the psychological weakness of any human, not only Christians. As the movie says as the final scene arrives, "The man who was Rodrigues . . . was lost to God. But as to that, indeed, only God can answer." No man can judge souls, only God.
@HassanMadeov
4 жыл бұрын
@@not2tees So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, 33 but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven. Not Peace, but a Sword 34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household. 37 Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
@not2tees
4 жыл бұрын
@@HassanMadeov It's a relief to know that Buddhists, who usually get presented in such a positive light, were capable of some exquisite torturing of minds and bodies, just like their Christian brothers of the Inquisition. I personally do not fear Hell - that's my judgement at the moment. When you look down from your cloud in the future and see me screaming and writhing, I hope you won't feel extra good about it. But like I say, only God can judge a soul.
@HassanMadeov
4 жыл бұрын
@@not2tees i quoted just Jesus and im sure he did not say it for fun. He knew there will be people which deny him and he warned us. I dont judge
@not2tees
4 жыл бұрын
Whoever is in control of the torture and the brain washing takes the responsibility of ruining "the value of a common sense of humanity and love of one's fellow man" and diabolically attacking that value by opposing it against "one's beliefs and personal convictions." And in this movie, that is Buddhism.
@bellaangel7598
7 жыл бұрын
Criticism of Christianity is far more acceptable in our culture than is criticism of atheism or paganism; nothing has truly changed since the time of Christ. They did it to Him they will do it to sincere followers since as Christ said "The servant is not greater than the Master."
@kylestyyle987
7 жыл бұрын
Your first claim simply isn't true. Atheists and Muslims are the two most disliked minorities in America. 49% of Americans say they would be most disappointed if an immediate family member married an atheist. There are zero atheists in Congress and seven states that prohibit atheists from holding public office. It is sanctimonious for Christians to act like they are part of a persecuted minority.
@moschu7135
6 жыл бұрын
Why would you criticise an atheist? He/She doesn't believe in any spiritual movement. They mostly criticise the organisation behind the religion and they have valid points. You as a Christian decided to be Part of this organisition which in many cases neglects modern science and forces its views upon people (being born as a member of the catholic church, you are forced to be part of it before you can question that institution). If an atheist dislikes your cult what is there to criticise if he is being polite. Being an atheist just means not believing in religion, it isn't rude behavior or being unpolite to people who follow the spiritual orientation of a religion.
@Newovar
5 жыл бұрын
This arrogance and blindness is exactly why people turn away from religion.
@Bi0Dr01d
5 жыл бұрын
@@Newovar and Seinfeld, Mo just got done expressing that atheism isn't rude and it looks like his statement was immediately contradicted, twice. I'm not here to condemn anyone and I don't think it would be a good idea to try to justify this approach, but this isn't the way to do things. I also don't think it's fair to say atheism is just a lack of belief or simply a rejection of religion since by not believing in the supernatural, it immediately leads one to becoming a naturalist (unless you are a spiritual atheist such as a Buddhist), which is a belief. Atheists disagree about the definition of atheism and those that say it's just a lack of belief, it just can't be true. This lack of belief fuels how an atheist views the world. Invent your own purpose because there isn't any, we create our own meaning and value, naturalism, all of it is tied to this lack of belief. Due to atheism being a positive belief, it should be included in this list of worldview beliefs and therefore should not be seen as superior to any other belief. It is a preferred position, not an evidential one, because it being a positive belief needs to be justified with evidence just as any other belief and if the burden of proof for no God has not been met, evidence can't be the reason to be atheist, just a preference. I understand if you disagree and it's not my intention to be insulting because I know this offends some atheists but when a person is a naturalist due to their lack of belief or their lack of belief is due to one's naturalist perspective, either way, it is a belief and this needs to be justified with the burden of proof of God's existence and is therefore not superior to alternative views. It would only be a preference apart from the proof. Either you are a naturalist atheist or a spiritual atheist (like Buddhism). Both are beliefs. Please look up the definition of naturalism on Google. It is a belief... Then ask yourself, "Is it that I don't believe because there is no proof for God? If so, where's my proof for my beliefs? If not, then is it simply because I don't want God to exist?" That is something only you can answer for yourself. Please be honest and done be afraid of the truthful answer, but follow truth because that's what you claim to be in pursuit of... Here is the moment of Truth...
@kaboomgoo
5 жыл бұрын
Did you say that after you stepped over the hundreds of thousands of dead non believers to say that lol. You are truly warped..
@saradiaz2976
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for this! Keep up the good work! I think it is necessary for us Catholics to stand up for what we believe, specially in social media. Thank you Bishop!
@kenmaingot
7 жыл бұрын
I haven't seen the film yet - but I have read the novel. I couldn't understand why the 'apostasy' of Father Rodrigues was so controversial - Peter apostatized no less than three times under less MUCH less mitigating circumstances than Father Rodriguez. First of all, he had the benefit of being an eyewitness to Christ's ministry and miracles, which should have built an unshakeable foundation of faith. Secondly, unlike Father Rodriguez, who presumably apostatized out of mercy for fellow Christians (since that portion of the book is written predominantly in the third-person, I tend to believe that was his true motivation rather than a rationalization for escaping his own torture and death), Peter did so out of fear for his own safety. The novel indicates the main character was not subject to physical torture (although perhaps its imminence is enough). Therefore, I was initially disappointed by Bishop Barron's seemingly simplistic perspective on the story. However, the more I thought about it, I saw the OBVIOUS flaw in my reasoning. True faith is a faith in everlasting life...which means true mercy manifests ultimately in the saving of souls, not temporal lives. From a secular standpoint, Father Rodrigues is a shining example of mercy...but as a shepherd of souls, he fails. Furthermore, Peter denied the Lord before the resurrection, whereas had the main character had the benefit of this knowledge in the foundation of his own faith. I'm still on the fence about his initial apostasy, however. The novel makes it very clear that the peasants whose lives were in his power to 'save' at the book's climax had already apostatized. Ending their temporal suffering, albeit miniscule relative to an eternity of suffering, I can still see as act of true mercy. However, there is no justification for the next 30 years of his collaboration with the Japanese government in obstructing the spread of the gospel throughout Japanese society. Like in so many other related topics - a rational argument regarding God's methods is impossible, unless both parties believe in an everlasting life (e.g. Why does God allow suffering? etc.). Without that premise, martyrdom and its encouragement is simply incomprehensible. Where you fall on the spectrum of the sanctity of a human life vs. a human soul, as determined by the strength of your faith, will determine what you take from this story.
@FromAcrossTheDesert
5 жыл бұрын
I think the goal of the Japanese authorities was to silence these men. They succeeded in their time to accomplish just that. However, all men are mortals, and in the end the swamp was drained, and providence continues forward. The interesting point about Endo's ending and emphasized in Scorsese's ending, points out one clear fact of life. You cannot dictate what anyone believes. You can only force people to be silent, and it is in silence in which we all have the chance to hear the voice of the shepherd.
@moetpo4521
3 жыл бұрын
This is exactly what I needed to hear, thank you for putting it into perspective 🙏♥️
@christominded4726
3 ай бұрын
Today’s Catholics and Christian’s will be put to the test by modern society. It’s not if it will happen but when is going to affect us all. 🙏🏻✝️
@javiervonsydow
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you Bishop. I was waiting for your comment because I didn't know what to make of it. I took my confirmation name after St. Francis Xavier and I'm very drawn to the missionary work of the Jesuits in the Far East so I didn't know what to make of the movie. Thank you for your pastoral work. Now I see why Pope Francis put you as a bishop in this diocese, where Hollywood resides! It probably won't escape you that when Hollywood gave us The DaVinci Code, Pope Benedict went on to fill Cardinal Mahoney's cathedra here with a bishop from the Opus Dei. That's so 2000-years-of-church-history like! God bless you and your vocation!
@danielbartolini115
2 жыл бұрын
I like this review and I agree that the Lord does not want us to live out our love for him in secret. But there is one big hole in Bishop Barron's argument: for the priests, "giving in" did not mean they themselves would be put to death, giving in meant that their followers (the Japanese laypeople) would continue to be tortured and murdered. So yes, it is not good for us to practice Christianity in some "ambiguous" "private" way, but one of the main issues in the dilemmas the priests faced was the fact that their followers were being tortured, so that changes the situation greatly. This argument would make more sense if it were the priests themselves being put to death. I don't know if Bishop Barron chose to disregard this big detail, or if maybe I am misunderstanding something about his argument.
@Carlos-ln8fd
7 жыл бұрын
what about Garupe? he also defended his faith. to me he was the cooler character.
@PopeEdward
7 жыл бұрын
As always...right on the mark. God bless you. Thank you.
@makerstudios5456
5 жыл бұрын
I interpreted this movie as a meditation on the only unforgivable sin according to Catholic dogma. IE blaspheming the Holy Spirit. It’s a compelling drama if you assume Catholic dogma. But from a point of view of an outsider it’s almost as crazy as Islamic suicide bombers. The big difference is Catholic martyrs are masochistic and Islamic martyrs are sadistic. Elevating those who are willing to die very painfully over those that lie under torture seems very strange to me. American POW Jeremiah Denton read the script the North Vietnamese gave him while blinking in Morse Code. That seems far more rational than dying before refusing to read an obviously fabricated and forced statement. If my mom or wife was kidnaped and forced to say she didn’t love me under torture I wouldn’t judge her when she got back. Why would a god who literally knows what’s in your heart care what you said under such duress?
@janeh.448
4 жыл бұрын
That get me thinking as well
@pikachuuprising637
2 жыл бұрын
Yes. Some people in the comments seem to be forgetting that he didn't do it to save himself but to save other people.
@Jack4nd1
2 жыл бұрын
There is no sin that is unforgivable.
@makerstudios5456
2 жыл бұрын
Jack4nd1 Read the Bible dude. They make it very explicit.
@truthfreedom8506
7 жыл бұрын
I agree with you Fr. Barron. The Lord told us to go forth and make disciples of all men. The Blood of the Martyrs is the seed of the Church.
@0218Magico
7 жыл бұрын
To apostatize or not to apostatize, that’s the question. This is a thorny and very complex subject, and very very current in our days. In our desacralized world and increasingly atheist or more indifferent, many of us are pushed daily to trample on Christ; Daily - in our jobs, in the university, in our social circles - we are pressured to apostatize our faith. And many apostates! We remain silent before the mockery of our faith, our priests, our Pope. We remain silent before the bombing of death ideologies that grow and gain more and more ground in our cities and in our media (left-wing atheist feminism, abortion culture, practical atheism, gender ideology, etc.). We keep comfortably quiet. Scared. Fearing that we are Catholics. Silently we go to mass on Sundays and period. We don’t bring Christ to others, we don’t commit ourselves to evangelization, we don’t say anything to abortionists, atheists, active and politically committed gays with "their cause" ... silence and a private life, so called Catholic. However, I believe that these types of films have the positive side that is to put into discussion the theme of faith, the issue of consistency, the subject of salvation. I do think it's important to watch this movie.
@Throwbacc7
7 жыл бұрын
very good point. it seems like in an age where everything is secularized it's almost even more of a challenge to keep the faith. An irony of all ironies.
@Throwbacc7
7 жыл бұрын
very good point. it seems like in an age where everything is secularized it's almost even more of a challenge to keep the faith. An irony of all ironies.
@iruleatgames
7 ай бұрын
This video was a lot more based than most realized at the time. After the start of the Great Awakening, it's now far more common knowledge how deep the rot of the elites is entrenched, and their absolute hate of Christ.
@evanponton1438
7 жыл бұрын
There were many insightful points in this movie (though I think yours Bishop is a valid analysis). Just to pick one I thought interesting. Ferrera's comments about Japanese peasants unable to recognize the true God of Christianity, the risen Jesus the Son (rising "Sun") of God and consequently, their dying for the priests, not their faith. The one thing that runs against Ferrera's argument is the cross. I read it as testimony of their faith in the real God of Christianity because they believed in a crucified Son of God. It is our modern wish for a Jesus without the cross that leads us into pure myth and abstraction.
@barbaramoore6111
3 жыл бұрын
Wasn't the initial failing of the priests cultural ignorance? Didn't Ferrera make the point that the martyred lay people were mistakenly worshipping the "sun" rather than the "Son"? I will have to read the novel. . .
@alcymuluk8715
7 жыл бұрын
I agree with Father Barron! No one would want to see "Bowe Bergdahl - The Movie".
@The7MUSICLove7
7 жыл бұрын
Finally I found a review with the right mindset on the story... it makes me a little sad seeing all those videos praising Rodriges' decision/ and fall. I live in Bulgaria and here the Othomans did the same and maybe worse to our grandparents... In my opinion, when life comes to surviving without faith, the question should be, is it worth it at all. Without the spiritual side to it, is it really a life?
@PierroxXxPunks
7 жыл бұрын
for me fr, i think what the story wanted to say is that, in loving, you must not do it in manner that you prefer but how it would be sufficient to the ones you'll be loving. we saw the two priests somehow denounced their faith not becuz they we're weak but becuz they saw that the lives of the lay people weren't worth wasting. it was a clear manifestation of embracing Jesus on the cross, where you are persecuted becuz people didn't understand how you loved the other. sometimes we think that dying for our Faith is heroic but would not realize that it is already a product of pride and not of Faith.
@BishopBarron
7 жыл бұрын
But friend, they maintained their apostasy long after lives were in immediate danger. For decades and decades, they continued to repudiate their faith, their priestly commitment, and their deepest identity. I just can't see them as heroes.
@PierroxXxPunks
7 жыл бұрын
Bishop Robert Barron exactly Fr. they realized that being a "hero", or a Marty to the faith was not worth the lives of the lay. i understand that it was painful for the two to denounce their Faith, but by doing so, they saved multiple lives. at the end, it wasn't anymore important if they became martyrs of the Church. it was love. only love.
@kryptexgamer7542
6 ай бұрын
I absolutely do not have the same opinion as him. I challenge everyone to go watch the video „silence-the deconstruction of faith“
@jameskolan9195
7 жыл бұрын
Bravo, Bishop Barron. I hope that if I am ever faced with the choice of eternal life or apostasy, I have the courage to choose eternal life.
@rps714
7 ай бұрын
3 cheers for them indeed. Confronting death in the face pulls out all the bluffs. Revealed is the true person.
@santoslopeziii9210
7 жыл бұрын
This review was much needed by me after seeing this movie. It caused so many questions in my head. This movie is very good! The persecutions christians face in other parts of the world is real. This film can make you wonder if you can still stand firm amidst trials, persecutions, loss, betrayal and when you feel God is very distant. It also opens your eyes to the sacrifices every missionaries, priests and pastors face. However, I think that what the movie is trying to say doesn't reflect the whole truth about christianity. Jesus' disciples and apostle paul suffered greatly for preaching the gospel wide open to everyone and they did not denounce their faith. Apostle paul said to live is for Christ and to die is gain. I also agree with this review about the three lay person who died while crucified on the cross on the sea to be the most inspiring. Just saying... God bless!
@troydaum4728
5 ай бұрын
Desecration of the image of Christ was strangely the most Christ-like thing he could do at that moment, as Ferrero understood.
@mattquevedo4963
7 жыл бұрын
I agree. Better to die in Christ the live as a heretic.
@regil93
7 жыл бұрын
Yes if your talking about your life but in this case they not only had their life to worry about but the lives of their christian brothers thats why he says to him prepare to do the hardest act of love before he stepped on the image.
@Saddam.Eusafzay
7 жыл бұрын
And you chrisitans dropped ATOMIC BOMB on these people later , very peaceful religon of chrisitan LOL
@davedien7
7 жыл бұрын
when Bush said god told him to invade Iraq, does that go into the "religion of peace" bucket or the secular bucket?
@mattquevedo4963
7 жыл бұрын
Source?
@davedien7
7 жыл бұрын
quick google search: www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-god-told-me-to-invade-iraq-6262644.html
@lukagorgadze4886
4 жыл бұрын
Just Google "Hundred Thousand Martyrs of Tbilisi", very similar true story, icons were put on the bridge and people were told to walk on them (as a sign of denying Christian Faith), they refused and were killed one by one.
@JohnnyBGoode1122
7 жыл бұрын
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."
@leonardomapache
7 жыл бұрын
It is incredibly refresing to see a film critic who's commited to his faith. A lot of people from the artistci circle are rebelious towards any social convention. Including faith. And while they can see be fair to those who profess their beilefs, there's always a low key element of cinicism when it comes to religion. I found this review informed and objective. Thanks, Bishop.
@laurants
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you Bishop for explaining here what I was thinking immediately. Satan wants a harmless church that stays quiet and out of the way.
@markpowls
7 жыл бұрын
I agree with you, Bishop Barron.
@space_1073
3 жыл бұрын
I see Rodrigues's apostasy not as caving in, but as his form of ultimate sacrifice, as he does this to save tortured christians. Afterwards, his new found faith, though in complete secrecy is found. In a way, he had to give up his faith to gain his faith.
@danielcronk3459
2 ай бұрын
"but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven."
@GebreMenfesKidus
7 жыл бұрын
I agree with Bishop Barron about the mindset that wants to tolerate Christianity as long it's not proclaimed openly, as long it makes no demands, as long as it remains strictly in the private realm. There were many themes and questions raised by this movie, but one idea that I would especially like to discuss is the question of whether it is permissible to verbally renounce Christ in order to save the lives of others. If we are more concerned about not apostatizing than we are about saving the lives of our neighbors, then is that not an apostasy in and of itself? I don't know the answer, but this is one of the difficult questions raised by this movie and I would love for Bishop Barron to discuss this question.
@maysurawski7772
3 жыл бұрын
Fantastic review - need more reviews such as this!
@debbiel7659
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you, Bishop Barron.
@henryswift5329
7 жыл бұрын
Bishop Barron, could not the crucifix at the end be interpreted in a different way? Recall where the crucifix came from--the hard-earned faith of the Christians he met when he first set foot on the island. Those three gave up their lives for that crucifix. So another possible interpretation is that Rodrigues *is* saved, but not by anything *he* did. Rather, he is saved through the prayers of the three martyrs on that beach.
@luvpinas123
7 жыл бұрын
AD-AS diagram lol..
@c.c.s.1102
18 күн бұрын
To use the same soldier metaphor you could say Rodrigues went undercover as a spy and never relinquished his mission.
@catesmike
7 жыл бұрын
Excellency, Thank you so very much for providing an orthodox review of this movie. Being a military man, I loved your analogy with the Special Forces. God bless you and thank you for your vocation!
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
Below is an excerpt from Julie Roy's article in the Christian Post. I personally find what she has written to be a well written article on Silence. This is just a portion of the article. It is worth reading. Taken from the ChristianPost: To my eyes, though, all Silence portrays is weakness. There is no triumph because triumph comes in enduring to the end. Jesus would not have triumphed had he gotten off the cross, knowing that his death and resurrection would eventually lead to the brutal execution of all but one of his apostles. I don't think Silence presents a helpful spiritual message, but a potentially harmful one. Yes, it has redeeming qualities. And yes, the questions it raises are worth considering - but in the right context and among believers mature enough to handle its problematic themes. But as a feature film, it's pretty depressing and potentially disillusioning. Rather than exaltation, it features capitulation. And rather than inspiring, it simply deflates and confuses. Excerpt from Julie Roy's
@Rosa01010101
6 жыл бұрын
So what i got from that is: compassion is weakness
@ElongatedVowels
5 жыл бұрын
So the right thing to do would have been to allow the Japanese to continue to kill innocent men, women and children through slow, excruciating, dehumanizing, and inglorious torture?
@antoinedevienne6552
7 жыл бұрын
As a french catholic priest, I have highly appreciated this comment about this film I have watched previously this week. The plot and present implications were fairly displayed. It reminds me about a latin philosopher saint Augustin critized, who pretented that Church was not made of walls. Actually, this philosophur, keen to a mostly private faith, wouldn't imply himself in an objective and public attitude of faith belonging. I had a catechumen, also a philosopher, whom I bid to recognized this trial to commit himself in such a way. He told me afterwards that it strocked him and led him to go further in this decision to receive baptism.
@Matt-vx3ow
7 жыл бұрын
Well said, Bishop Barron. I've been wanting to see this movie for a long time, but unfortunately no theater in my area is showing it, which is a shame. I'm sure this will be one of my favorite movies this year.
@jevinday
Жыл бұрын
I am not a believer, but I have taken it as it was the voice of Jesus. It felt authentic, it didn't feel like something deceitful like it was Satan. I felt like it was the voice of Jesus. I've never thought anything else
@wcyee26
7 жыл бұрын
Lesson from the movie: The true faith is deep in your heart instead of in shape.
@keepers...
5 жыл бұрын
wcyee26 it your statement you then negate the "shape" of the faith in the Incarnation, in the Sacraments, in the Church, in a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith is the substance of things hoped for. This substance has shape.
@visforvendetta1326
7 жыл бұрын
...And that is the difference between Father Rodriguez (depicted in the film) and Bishop Robert Barron. Bishop Robert Barron would gleefully support the decision for the horrific sacrifice and suffering of defenceless men to promote an agenda... then to feel the weight of the barbarism against defenceless people. Father Rodriguez felt that weight and had compassion for those men who suffered on the cross. How can you not cry with tears of anguish to watch people suffer and die for you? Rodriguez at least was horrified, and aggrieved to watch people suffer for his own sake. He wanted them to "apostatize" rather subject them to cruelty for his sake. As a former missionary to Japan I cannot fathom how you can take such a position and call yourself a man of God?
@BishopBarron
7 жыл бұрын
Affirming one's faith in Christ in the face of persecution is..."an agenda"?! Tell that to Thomas More, Maximilian Kolbe, Padre Pro, and Edith Stein.
@visforvendetta1326
7 жыл бұрын
Of course it is. I...like Father Rodriguez in defense of my beliefs can face persecution if that is my wish, but I don't have the moral grounds to expect some one else to do this on my behalf. The idea you can "root for" people to suffer for your beliefs is disgusting.
@BishopBarron
7 жыл бұрын
Come on, friend. This is just getting silly. Who's "rooting for people to suffer"?! The moral responsibility for the suffering of the Christian lay people belonged, not to Rodrigues, but to their torturers.
@martinxp86
7 жыл бұрын
"You go into a foreign land try and usurp another person's culture" You've just given yourself away. And no, the moral responsibility of course doesn't belong to the missionaries, that's an absurd claim. You wouldn't say that if it would apply to SS torturing Jews in a KZ, asking them to renounce their God.
@NequeNon
7 жыл бұрын
Vis Forvendetta. Using such a consequentialist perspective, did you not consider that those who were being persecuted could also be freed by renouncing their Faith? They didn't, and they didn't expect the priest to do so. By maintaining his fidelity to Jesus, the priest would indeed be compassionate and honor their testimony and he meaning of their sacrifice. You are mistaken by saying that maintaining the faith in the face of that particular type of torture is irreconcilable with the teachings of Jesus. It was Our Lord Jesus Christ who said that because of Him, His followers would be persecuted. According to your logic, Jesus should have stopped His mission and His followers would have been spared. Don't take it just from the martyrs' perspective, take it from Our Lord's pov. Jesus said to not worry of those who can destroy the body but to be more preoccupied by those who can destroy the soul. Truth and the conformation of the will to the Truth speaks to the soul. Renouncing Christ to accept Christ makes for a Kingdom which cannot stand, and has ultimately nothing to do with His Kingdom. Also, to blame the missionaries is completely deluded. Going in a foreign land" to preach the Gospel and baptize all Nations, is to be obedient to Christ. Obviously, the real "beef" isn't with the missionaries. In my view, your commentary would be better addressed to Jesus Himself for having issued those commands. Take it up with the correct authority (like Job, like Jonah, like Moses begging, lamenting and interceding before God) not with those trying to follow Him even under extreme circumstances. I don't think your being fair to the citation of Hosea. In fact one translation says: I desire loyalty, not sacrifice. The point is not to attack Fr Rodriguez for his decision. On the contrary, as devastating as it was to watch, it was fully understandable. Surely, any inkling of repentance would have been showered with God's forgiveness and mercy. However, to justify it is untenable and undermines the entirety of the Christian Faith. It leaves no place for Christ's mercy since it is all taken up by our personal offerings and sacrifice. At that point, why even sacrifice? One could take away our air, our food, our families, but when you take away that which our souls were made for, when you take away our beloved then what the Hell kind of life is that? Justifying the apostasy of Fr Rodriguez means the faith can be justifiably lost by any of us. There is no justification, no matter how twisted, that can justify such an evil which despairs in the word of God who promised His fidelity to us.
@MalrickEQ2
4 жыл бұрын
"God will understand, my lord. And if he doesn't, then he is not God and we need not worry." - from the movie Kingdom Of Heaven
@themanofmyth
4 жыл бұрын
Nice!
@ncgerstell
3 жыл бұрын
This presumes that you know better than God in the first place which is extremely presumptuous.
@MalrickEQ2
3 жыл бұрын
@@ncgerstell Well if God ended up being evil, would he still be God?
@RM22201
3 жыл бұрын
@@ncgerstell well it’s just as presumptuous to presume the opposite.
@JohnJohnson-du7vc
10 ай бұрын
I'm not a steadfast believer but it's clear the bishop is correct. I wish the Inquisition had been portrayed more subtly, I understand the book has it so. Too much time is spent on Rodriguez' "passion", but it's a good movie, a shallow masterpiece. It's Last Temptation with the temptation accepted.
@elenatesti89
7 жыл бұрын
I think you and whoever you were talking about totally missed the point. I think Scorsese never meant for them to be heroes. Just humans. He never meant for them to be justified. They blatently and completely failed their mission. They gave in to fear into the scandal of sufferance and it is harsh and tragic and devastating. But I suspect it's Scorsese's tragedy too, it's Endo's tragedy for sure, given his background. It's the kichijiro's tragedy too. It's a reality that exists in the Church. God knows that. God knows we're weak and He Loves us. He made Himself bread for us. HE is our Saviour, not you, no me, HE brings on the mission, not you, not me, He asks us if we can help, but for our own conversion and salvation, not because he NEEDS it. Scorsese identified himself in those more confused, who see the beauty, but are lost and weak and wanted to represent this aspect of the Church too... Express, maybe hope, that Jesus is also in those who can't take it anymore, those who are scared, who don't win the race here on Earth. I follow you often from Rome, I understand it touches you priests more than anyone, but why you would doubt that was Jesus' voice he heard as he was stepping on His Image? Isn't God's Love so infinite to let Himself be betrayed again and again to save us? That doesn't sound new to me. I don't want to sound polemic, but I think your disappointment, like mine, in seeing them "defeated" didn't allow you to see the whole picture and understand the real value of this movie (that was done with the help of jesuits).
@Rosa01010101
6 жыл бұрын
They dont need to be justified There is nothing wrong with stepping on a Pierce of Wood in order to save innocent people. God knows what is in your heart.
@gabrielebianchi161
3 жыл бұрын
Wow this helped me understand this move a lot!!!
@maolsheachlannoceallaigh4772
7 жыл бұрын
I have been watching your videos for some years now and this is my favourite so far.
@baepedro
3 жыл бұрын
He failed his test. Those Japanese Christians could've done the same. They could deny Chirst and thus saving themselves from the torture but they carry though until they die. He became an apostate because within he feels burdened by seeing his follower die one by one. That is his torture and he gave up.
@raycon921
5 жыл бұрын
what if him stepping means that he sacrifices himself for others, that's the real martir
@owen5023
5 жыл бұрын
But he's not sacrificing anything, he's just posing as an apostate and indirectly leading others away.
@datanotfound4556
5 жыл бұрын
@Owen He sacrificed his pride, which is not something so easy to throw away. In the final-ish scene where he was being pressured to step on the picture of Christ and a voice spoke to him saying, “Do it. Step on me.” That I think is symbolism for Christians throwing away every earthly thing we rely on, including our pride, because Jesus is the only person we can truly rely on. That’s what I think anyways.
@raycon921
5 жыл бұрын
he's sacrifices everything: his salvation, his afterlife. no more heaven for you sir
@datanotfound4556
5 жыл бұрын
But the whole reason God sent His Son to die was so that we could be forgiven. To say that God couldn’t forgive that sin just doesn’t make sense.
@raycon921
5 жыл бұрын
@@datanotfound4556 Agreed, but the movie starts from this idea that if you step on the image of God you give up your faith, because you need a frame of reference in the movie
@andrewdeen1
7 жыл бұрын
I know it wasn't intended to be, I understand Scorcese is a practicing catholic, but the effect this film had on me was that is one of the most effective anti-religous films I have ever seen. Silence seemed to be to religious films what Born On The Fourth of July was to war films. Just my take, though I thoroughly enjoyed the film and thought it was very powerful.
@irico3640
7 жыл бұрын
would you rather live for Jesus or live under a very oppressive government? the answer is very simple: We are warriors for Jesus.
@MudPig6110
9 ай бұрын
I think he was dead wrong about the end of the movie. I took it as Rodriguez's wife's loving gesture to her husband, placing the cross in his hands. Perhaps Rodriquez had kept the cross hidden for years, or maybe she kept it hidden for years knowing that her husband never stopped loving god. She knew him well enough to understand that he was a prisoner of his own making and felt a deep sense of shame for renouncing god, even though it meant saving all those people. In essence once he saved those people from torture and death by publicly renouncing his faith he felt unworthy of gods love and let the Japanese do what they wanted with him after that because he couldn't go back to being a priest even if he made it home. Religion sure does poison one's soul when one passes judgement on themselves with no thought to redemption and practicality.
@bagnasbayabas
4 жыл бұрын
What we know is that we are all children of the universe. We have the right to be here. We are here to live, explore and thrive. Anyone who says to die in the name of your faith is noble, I'd say no way. Live your life to the fullest because it's your life.
@nicholaskruse2297
6 жыл бұрын
Absolute fire. Definitely some wisdom on those words. Keep speaking the truth and showing the world the raw love of Jesus.
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
Bishop Barron, I personally think that we cannot set aside the knowledge that these priests were subjected to extreme lengthy psychological torture and what they would do under these circumstances is hardly a representation of what they would do when in a healthy state. It is very very difficult to say what anyone would do when psychologically tormented and when thrown the option that you can SAVE lives by an action asked of you. I feel that I would be completely tormented by the idea of laying down my life for another and saving their lives or not saving their lives???? I have lived in a relationship of psychological abuse and it is not a place where you make healthy decisions or actions that are coming from a God centered place. I also personally can say that the affects of this psychological abuse lasts for years, even after the tormentor is out of your life. SILENCE, can you please address the title of the movie, the men heard SILENCE from God and this was a contributing factor to their MENTOR eventually stepping on the stone. THank you, deborah
@BishopBarron
7 жыл бұрын
I agree with you that all of these considerations would help us to understand why the priests betrayed their faith. But they don't lead me to praise them for it.
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
No, I personally do not feel praise for them, I feel the torment of their souls. When other peoples lives are on the line, what do you do?? Does God want you to save the human lives? Hence, please address the SILENCE that they felt from God.
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
But when the JC put their doubts to Mr Wiesel on Wednesday, he replied: "Why should they know what happened? I was the only one there. It happened at night; there were just three people. At the end of the trial, they used the word chayav, rather than ‘guilty'. It means ‘He owes us something'. Then we went to pray." E. Wiesel, author - read his books, he believes in God.
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
I believe that in that quote the author is referring to God suffering with every person and he himself is hanging from the gallows. crownheights.info/general/2897/elie-wiesel-on-his-beliefs/
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
Q: What is it like having strangers ask you if or why you believe in God? A: You know who asks me the most? It’s children. Children ask, “How can you still believe in God?” In All the Rivers Run to the Sea, I speak about it. There are all the reasons in the world for me to give up on God. I have the same reasons to give up on man, and on culture and on education. And yet … I don’t give up on humanity, I don’t give up on culture, I don’t give up on journalism … I don’t give up on it. I have the reasons. I don’t use them. Q: How often do people ask you this question? A: Whenever there’s a question-and-answer period after a lecture, inevitably the question comes up. Inevitably. I still (can’t) remember once that I gave a lecture on philosophy or on history or the Talmud or the Bible (when it didn’t come up) at one point. It’s `How come you - or do you - believe in God?’ Q: How do you respond to people who no longer believe in God because of the Holocaust? A: I ask them, `How can you believe in man?’ After all, God did not send down Auschwitz from heaven. Human beings did it. And most of them were cultured, educated. The (Nazis) were led by people with college degrees, some of them with doctoral degrees, some with PhDs. Then they don’t know. This is from the link that I put in the previous answer, it would be good to go to it and read the entire page.
@marywarren8357
7 жыл бұрын
So on point. Thank you, Bishop!
@funnyjeffstuff
7 жыл бұрын
"But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven." That was Jesus' answer when it came to whether it was better to apostatize publicly and believe in your heart. Scorsese and Endo's answer that's it better to deny your faith and temporarily relieve bodily suffering misses the whole point of why Jesus came in the first place, to save souls. This life is temporary but the next life is eternal. However our whole culture has been influenced by materialist thinking that there is no heaven, hell or afterlife and the universe is a cosmic accident. If you believe that then of course it makes sense to apostatize. Martin Scorsese and Shusaku Endo seem to believe it, or else they wouldn't promote apostasy. The Japanese authorities wanted to break the Jesuit priests and make them pampered traitors so they would demoralize Japanese Catholics. Silence may have great actors and production values, but its message appears to be designed to demoralize believing Catholics who might watch it.
@ForbiddenFruit73
7 жыл бұрын
Well first of all Martin Scorsese and Shusaku Endo are both Catholics, and based on everything I know about them I don't think that's their belief. Second I don't think Bishop Barron is saying the message of the film is that apostasy is good and faith should be silent, just that that's what certain people would want us to take away from it. See the part where he talks about the cock crowing.
@dabliss101
6 жыл бұрын
A full throated three cheers for Bishop Barron and his analysis here
@LeCapped
3 жыл бұрын
the amount of self righteousness and moral high ground taken is unreal in this vid.
@radvermin1541
5 жыл бұрын
Excellently argued.
@mimisworlda
6 жыл бұрын
Hi, I found you through your Dr. Jordan Peterson's video. I am not a Christian but really like your videos and style, Wish there are more people like you. Subscribed! :-)
@deborahanne9793
7 жыл бұрын
I was not familiar with this verse, I read it on a Catholic Marian site. I cannot take any credit for finding such an appropriate verse for this discussion. Matthew 10:28New International Version (NIV)28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Пікірлер: 1,7 М.