by Stephen H

Created on: December 21, 2007   Last Updated: March 06, 2010

It may be that organised religion is feeling particularly beleaguered at the moment.  There have been a series of questions challenging religious belief asked by authors such as Dan Brown (the da vinci code).  This in a context where the church is finding it difficult to deal with modern issues, such as homosexual ministers.  We have also two of the world's major religions, Islam and Christianity, finding it difficult to live together even though their core beliefs are not really in conflict.  And now another film raising questions about whether organised religion is a good or bad thing.  Any writing that either directly or indirectly criticises religious beliefs will stimulate debate. When that criticism is well founded and accurately portrayed, then controversy is sure to follow.  This is exactly the situation in which Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy finds itself.  The first of the three books has been produced as a film, and while lacking the subtleties and complexities of the novel, it does capture the basic philosophy.  It is from this philosophy that the current controversy stems.

The part of the plot that has caused some to call for a ban revolves around the villain of the piece, The Magistratum.  In this fantasy world everyone has a spirit which is externalised and takes the form of an animal.  While you are a child the animal changes but by the time you reach adulthood the form is fixed.  The magistratum is kidnapping children and robbing them of their spiritual companions.  In addition the magistratum is withholding a substance called dust. This dust, when properly used, helps people to develop and establish their own free will.  By preventing this the magistratum can exercise control and keep people unquestioningly within their power.  As the plot progresses there is a point where God is portrayed as an old senile Angel and is killed.

The magistratum is clearly representative of organised religion, particularly the catholic church.  The way in which organised religion constantly tries to stifle debate and asks for unquestioning faith from its followers is clearly paralleled.  The mere fact that religious groups are calling for the film to be banned is an ironic testament to the underlying criticism of organised religion that Pullman is making.  Instead of seizing the opportunity to engage in debate about the religious and philosophical issues the film raises, it is being suggested, quite vehemently from some quarters, that the questions should not even be asked.  This is surprising because the idea is not at all new.  Perhaps Karl Marx was the most eloquent at making this point when he described religion as the opiate of the people.

Much has been made of the author's claim to be an atheist.  The suggestion is that he wishes to be an evangelical atheist forcing his views on others. Given that this film is aimed at children, the film is being described as evil in its intent to brainwash our young away from the moral certainty of religious belief.  The suggestion is that children should not be encouraged to see this film or read the books as the ideas portrayed are too subversive.  Again, this mirrors the withholding of dust by the magistratum.  Another own goal I think. Denying and hiding ideas and knowledge is not how to protect our own beliefs.  We should instead engage in debate and defend our point of view while allowing others to come to their own conclusions.  This film could be an excellent tool for religious leaders to raise spiritual issues with children in a context with which they are engaged.

Learn more about this author, Stephen H.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.