My family is no stranger to religion. Both my grandfathers were Presbyterian ministers and biblical As well as other religious stories and ideas have been of regular interest through my life.
The Catholic Church in particular though has proven a challenge. For all its mighty traditions and moral authority, I have struggled with its rigid approach to the modern world and have found it often in situations where I question their commitment to the teachings of love and mercy that have characterised a lot of the experiences I have engaged in within religious discussion.
My experience is unlikely to be uncommon. Religion remains a major source of moral and spiritual authority across the world. In particular the Catholic Church, for all its faults, remains a powerful and relevant institution to over one billion people.
And the debate about its nature is now regularly challenged by the public and indeed by the current head of the church, Pope Francis.
No wonder, then, that. Netflix has produced a film about one of the most dramatic eleventh’s faces by the Catholic Church in the modern era, the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI and ascension of the first non-European pope for hundreds of years, Pope Francis.
Two Popes is an excellent, if sympathetic, portrayal of the modern challenges faced by the church.
The first, and overarching, issue – whether the church can or should change (or compromise) to meet the modern era.
The champion of the view that the church must remain steadfastly principled in its defence and nurture of tradition is brought to life by Anthony Hopkins’ portrayal of Pope Benedict.
The stoic arguments defending an approach to the church that has come under fire as inflexible and intolerant, a challenge out to the old patriarch by the, then cardinal from Argentina.
Francis passionately puts forward the reformat case, pointing out that Catholic teaching has evolved and moved over time (no angels until 500AD but now they’re everywhere, like pigeons).
Much of the film rests in the competing views of these two spiritual archons and the debate between tradition or reform mirrors the debates that are held across the world today and, indeed, debates I have and struggle with.
On that basis alone, and with the ability to look at the way Pope Francis has sought to slowly move the church and to reflect a different type of Catholicism makes this film one that tries to engage us in a better understanding of an important institution and dwarves to be watched.
The Catholic Church’s history and tradition is unparalleled and the knowledge that it has guarded over time and the moral authority it provides and has provided for centuries is a testament to the institution itself.
But, the obvious and I think weighty critique of the church’s inflexibility on a hunger of issues ranging from basic rights and recognitions to debate over the nature of the metaphysical and morality itself make the church not just unapproachable for many but downright oppositional and harmful.
Arguably, it is the rigid nature of the hierarchies if the church, the assumption of pseudo statehood and entrenchment of authority leads to inflexibility and distrust of a changing world outside the fortifications of tradition.
The most present example of this forms the Second major challenge of the film, the issue of abuse within the church.
The premise for Benedict’s resignation was ostensibly connected to the church’s handling of cases of abuse.
This was present in the film, indeed the outrage of Francis was a highlight, but it’s presence was as shadowy as many have claimed the church’s response to be.
Indeed, much more of the film focused on the personal trials of Francis as he associated with the past junta of Argentina than on the soul searching that appeared to be being portrayed by both men over the present abuse occurring in the church. This was particularly surprising given the connection the film drew between this and the dramatic resignation of Benedict.
The film explores a serious debate about the nature of the church and straddles a line between this and the less serious portrayal of two interesting men engaging in witty argument. The latter is, I believe, too often used to pivot away from the security’s issue of abuse.
The problem with this is that it it introduces a more sympathetic portrayal of the church and how it has engaged in these challenges.
As Francis says in the film on the topic “sin is not a stain, it is a wound” and wounds require tending. But I am not convinced the film hits the mark of tending this particular wound.
While it does not undermine the overall good nature of the film or its superb portray of the theatrical arts, it does reduce to some degree the weight of the film.
