MovieChat Forums > The Cardinal (1963) Discussion > Odd Premise: That Catholic Church was FO...

Odd Premise: That Catholic Church was FOR Democracy


Watching Otto Preminger's THE CARDINAL (1963), one finds out that the Roman Catholic Church is dedicated to the American way of life, that is, liberty, equality and the pursuit of happiness. Funny -- and for all these years I thought Pius XI denounced democracy, and Anglo-Saxon-style democracy based on capitalism, in particular, in a papal bull in the early '30s. (It might have been the bull related to the Spanish Republican government's dispossession of the Church?)

The history of the Catholic Church in America in the 20th Century (up until a new generation of priests appeared in the 1960s & '70s) was autocratic and aligned to repression (such as film censorship). The Catholic Church in America supported the Franco's Fascist cause in Spain.

An odd film, and one that I find practically incomprehensible, and incoherent. What was a Jew (Preminger, who had waged war with the Church over censorship) making this film for? Did Austrian or American Catholics help him and his family escape the Nazis in Europe, or help other Jews he knew of? This must be a testament to the good character of Pope John XXIII, a liberal who did help the Jews escape Nazi persecution in Italy, when he was a Cardinal. An ode to the spirit of Vatican II.

In that, it is a fascinating social document, as it presages the activist priests that arose, who were interested in fighting oppression (and who were supressed by Pope John Paul II, a conservative).

reply

Watching Otto Preminger's THE CARDINAL (1963), one finds out that the Roman Catholic Church is dedicated to the American way of life, that is, liberty, equality and the pursuit of happiness.

No. An individual functionary of the Church is dedicated to that. Not the institution as a whole. This film is about that particular individual.

What was a Jew (Preminger, who had waged war with the Church over censorship)...

First of all, Otto Preminger's grudge against the church extends to the fact that his father, a respected state attorney in Vienna was denied the post of a higher office on account of his refusal to convert to Catholicism. So it goes deeper than a silly feud with the censorship board(which Otto won thoroughly).

An ode to the spirit of Vatican II.

When this film is in fact set in the pre-vatican II era and the masses are done in the Latin rite and not in the vernacular as it is done today.

...making this film for?

Preminger is an artist and who was in the period of the late 50s to mid60s interested in the functions of institutions. He dealt with the legal system in Anatomy of a Murder, moved on to Washington D.C. and the house of the senate in Advise and Consent. Then he turned his attention to the Catholic Church and after that the US Navy(In Harm's Way).

The reason Preminger made this film was in his own words, "The Catholic Church is a political institution, forget religion." This film examines the Church's organization in wholly political terms and supplies it to a secular critique.

In that, it is a fascinating social document, as it presages the activist priests that arose, who were interested in fighting oppression...

If you are referring to guys like the Berrigan Brothers or the Liberation Theologists than you are missing the point of the film.

This film is about how an individual functions within a system and tries to maintain integrity and political conscience from the inside. Which means how he uses the system to his advantage, how he is compromised by that system and when, where and how does the system work and fail.


"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes

reply

Terrific answers to a very foolish post.

reply

Guy,
You would understand the story better if you had read the book. In the book, the Church is neutral on the form of government a nation has, as long as the nation allows the church to freely pursue its mission. You are correct, in a way, about the Papal Bull. In one scene in the book, one of the Cardinals (Giacobbi, if I remember) is commenting on the situation in Mexico, and Stephen explains that the US intervened during the hunt for oil, but public opinion in the US would not permit the US government to urge Mexico to allow the church to function within its borders. Giacobbi then reminds Stephen acidly that democracy is neither the preferred nor the best form of government.

As I said, reading the book is a real eye-opener and in many ways more satisfying than the movie.

reply

In real life, Pius XI collaborated with both Hitler and Mussolini to protect Church interests and, indeed, church members from persecution.

Of course, Hitler broke every promise he made to Pius, as the movie intimates. The Church's muteness with regard to the persecution of the Jews -- and outspoken Catholics, I might add -- is just one of those things that the Church has had to answer for in the subsequent decades.

The Catholic Church helped finance this movie, BTW. Give Preminger credit. He touches on the Church's failures, but he isn't qite truthful enough to incur the Church's ire -- to his discredit.

Just my opinion. Please don't flame me.

reply

As I just told a poster on another IMDB form, I always appreciate it when someone says "This is my opinion" rather than present what they're saying as a matter of fact.

Thank you for that.

BTW, I agree with your opinion.

reply

[deleted]