New Catholic Generation Reviews "Silence" (2016) - Andrew Garfield, Martin Scorsese

Our review of Martin Scorsese's most recent film, Silence, about Catholic Jesuit missionaries in a hostile Imperial Japan. Starring Andrew Garfield, Liam Neeson, Adam Driver.
Connect with us on social media for updates:
Facebook: / newcatholicgeneration
Twitter: / newcatholicgen
Instagram: / newcatholicgeneration
Snapchat: newcatholicgen
Email: [e-mail]
or visit us at www.NewCatholic...

[@WeirdEducator]

I hate to be THAT guy, but I just watched Silence again, and I have to completely disagree with all of you, except the wonderful young lady who hit the nail on the head. The story follows Jesuits, who are famous for their spirituality of Christ and discernment. But it's also an ambiguous story, full of shades of gray. The gentlemen were continually trying to force black and white doctrines and throw them like stones at the characters in the story who are caught in an impossible situation. It is their process of prayer, discernment, and ultimately their properly formed conscience that dictated their actions. Clearly, Padre Rodrigues was committing a sinful act of betrayal, reminiscent of Peter, hence the crowing of the cock. But Christ commanded us to forgive one another seventy times seven times, as embodied by the character Kichijirō. Even though they ostensibly apostatized in committing the act of stepping on the fumie, their heart was still with Christ and they still possessed their faith. In the film, we see so many brave Japanese martyrs, but Endō Shūsaku and Martin Scorsese were telling the story of people who were not brave-- they failed. God, however, works His grace through all people, and He brings good out of every situation, including the bad. And we see that, both in the book and movie. It sounds like this group didn't read the book, but may have skimmed it. Very clearly, in the book, and alluded to in the film, Padre Rodrigues surrenders to the Japanese system and plays their game, but he also perpetuates the Christian faith in a clandestine fashion through his servant Kichijirō. So, that's the lesson: yes, he committed the sin of apostasy, but he continually seeks God's mercy, as Kichijirō did-- and as Peter did after he denied Christ three times. So, that well-intentioned young man can be all up in arms about strict certainty of doctrine and throwing stones at people in complex situations that he'll never find himself in, but ultimately we have to accept that the decision was made by Padre Rodrigues and God's grace continued to work through him. Perhaps this movie, as we're seeing in this discussion, is a Rorschach test of one's capacity for discernment and compassion and mercy.

[@sanctus4639]

Amen!

[@markdaniels1730]

I'm sure that your being charitable to Fr. Rodrigues has nothing to do with your own last name! ;) (Just kidding, I agree with everything you said) God bless!

[@vishalSharma-ol9fl]

Even though I am years late, I totally agree. My takeaway from the film wasn't to just categorize fr into an apostate or a martyr. It was much complex. You put it beautifully. One thing that perplexes me is the ending scene, itself answered many questions and was powerful.

[@florieluvsmusic]

I admire Madison's open minded approach to seeing this movie as a work of art, and an unfortunate reality of some situations. I'm personally annoyed by the way Joseph analyzes the film. People doubt, people give up the faith. This film is a beautiful representation of reality, not a promotion of it. I actually found it strengthening to my spiritual faith. It made me think, and consider what I believe about the value of faith.

[@cashernandes1]

The girl made the best points. As a Catholic, I feel very disappointed with other Catholics who want their films to be easy to digest and 'apologetic'. If you want something like that, go watch "God is not dead", which is a horrible film that does a lot of disservice to Christianity. EVEN if the movie didn't give hints that Father Rodrigues came back to faith, so what? It would have been a film about a man who turns "bad" in circumstances where his culpability is highly debatable. Why can't films just TELL a story?

[@GreatKhanMatt]

You need to remember than this film is an artistic piece that isn't meant to accurately explain or display correct catholic theology. Personally i think Joseph is setting a way too high standard for this film, the film is all about human nature not Roman catholic dogma or what Catholics are ought to do.

[@josephangsten1595]

MattyBlue99 I understand what you're saying yet Martin and the crew emphasized how much research went into the film and how many people helped make it "accurate" of the times and on Catholic Teaching and Jesuit customs, dress, etc. So when the film is advertised by the director himself and by people involved its disappointing and almost insulting that the film almost baits Catholics into a film which almost seems to glorify apostasy. You make a good point but i give Joe and all the reviewers Catholic or otherwise a pass on this one specifically just because that marketting which is often directed at Catholics is so misleading. Thats just my opinion though.

[@GreatKhanMatt]

the film was geared to towards Christians in general and at the end of the day it is Martin's personal work not the church's. Yes the film focuses on the catholic struggle in 17th century japan but in my opinion does not glorify apostasy.

[@josephangsten1595]

MattyBlue99 Fair enough. many of Martys films are all open to interpretation. I just am more on the side that it felt personally hard as a Catholic to have apostasy be so centered and ambiguous.

[@angpuppy6943]

Out of fairness, the book was written by a Catholic and Scorcese is a lapsed Catholic still exploring his feelings toward Catholicism. That said, I think there are some Catholics and Christians who struggle to appreciate art because good art doesn't involve people following all the rules correctly. Good art explores the human condition, the challenges we face, and the moral dilemmas we find ourselves in. Characters are supposed to struggle with imperfect consciences, sinful nature, and all that. If they don't, they don't feel human or relatable and the story actually has less value and is reduced to the status of propaganda.

[@josephangsten1595]

Angela Curio I agree with your point up to a point. you can make art and explore a character and the human sides of all characters without having God Himself condone a sinful act. Thats sort of taking a creative liberty as an author or filmmaker that quite frankly no one should take. Thats my biggest problem with it. That God "speaks" and condones it. And for the people that interpret it as someone other than God I still say that its not clear enough and is definitely being taken as God by the general populace

[@WeirdEducator]

As a Catholic, particularly one who devours a lot of Catholic media, I was very excited for the film. I even read the book By Shūsaku Endō. After watching the film, I was very emotionally shaken, but my own faith felt strengthened. And I think that's where, while I appreciated your discussion about the film, I think you all missed the point. We are 21st century Americans watching a film about 17th Century Catholics suffering under the worst forms of physical, mental, and emotional torture. So, it's easy for us to sit back and criticize the actions of Father Rodrigues. Instead, you should understand the movie with two things in mind: (1) God's extreme mercy and (2) evangelization. (1) The Judas figure in the film, of course, is Kichijirō, who consistently betrays his Catholic brethren. But Kichijirō has a conscience, and by God's grace he returns time and again for confession-- even after Rodrigues apostatizes. (2) The most effective evangelists understand how to engage the culture. Japan's culture, particularly as shaped by the ruling elites, was inhospitable to Christianity and to European philosophical thought. By publicly apostatizing, Father Rodrigues was able to be recognized as a Buddhist working with the government to remove any Christian images, and he is brought out to step on fumies to re-establish his apostasy. But this is where the book is critical, though it was implied in the movie's end: Father Rodrigues continued to minister to the Christians in hiding. Kichijirō, the coward, was being educated by Father Rodrigues and sent out to continue educating people in the faith, including the hierarchical form of the Church. So, by publicly condemning the faith, he saved the lives of the Japanese faithful and allowed Catholicism to flourish underground until the persecution was ended. Father Rodrigues, therefore, used the system the Inquisitor had in place as a means of protecting and promoting Christianity. In the final analysis, simply condemning the film without fully appreciating all of its dynamics isn't fair to the author or to the director. It also has the effect of preventing others from seeing the film or prejudicing their viewing. I recommend you watch the film again.

[@djvoldemort1]

Andrew Garfield's character apostacized long before the climax of the movie. The whole time he was basking in his own glory, not trying to give it to God.

[@baraka92]

I disagree with you guys when you say that the movie promotes apostasy. Rodrigo's situation wasn't: "Renounce your faith or we will kill you". Had it been that, he would have gladly gave up his life for the faith. No, it was: "Renounce your faith or we will continue to kill these people". They were keeping him alive only so he could be tortured not in a physical nor in a mental way but in a spiritual one. It is a very extreme and specific situation. Endo and Scorsese didn't mean to say that apostasy is good. Him stepping on the fumie was an act of mercy and in the end he continued to believe in Christ, but nothing is for free, the crowing means that, indeed, there was a betrayal and Rodrigo had to carry that "cross" for the rest of his life by not being able to express his faith publicly. I think the intention of the story was to show the bare bones of what faith is and to say that NOTHING can take that away from you. I wonder what Renee thinks about this story and I also wish you could review other classic movies about faith like Ordet and Diary of a Country Priest. Anyway, God bless you guys.

[@nicholasspies1115]

The earthly things don't matter. It is our souls. Betray Christ through apostasy, which is a mortal sin, or have your converts be martyrs, which win the crown of everlasting life? The crown of everlasting life is way more greater than mortal sin

[@ladybug8580]

Something that bothers me though, is Liam Neeson's comment right before the moment of apostasy.... Rodriguez cries for them to apostatize, but he is told that they already have, several times. So I think his situation is made much more serious by the fact that not only are five people about to die because of him, but five people whose souls are in a state of mortal sin. I'm not a theology expert - if someone is martyred, does it not matter if they were in a state of grace at the time of death?

[@milovarquiel]

So death and martyrdom are the best ways to live? What about Matthew 25:45 "‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for Me.’"

[@marinazaynulina3712]

Thank you for your commentary. I understood the movie the same way

[@brycegassner3596]

Listening to Joe makes me cringe. He makes his point like an overzealous freshman in an intro to theology class. I think that it is a good video otherwise, however. I enjoy the longer format for discussions of movies.

[@billymandalay9504]

Bryce Gassner Perhaps deep inside, the movie terrified him about the possibility of himself denying Christ in such a situation ? Young people usually look at life solely in black and white terms. It's abstract . It's NOT coming from a life lived.

[@happyricepaddle]

I would not be hopeful that Rodrigues' crucifix at the end might suggest a win for Christianity in Japan. A child pointed and laughed at "Apostate Paul!"; the Inquisitors successfully rendered the religion a sham in that country. Even if he converted his wife and Kichijiro secretly ministered, the scandal of the Fallen Priests surely would have encouraged remaining Christians to apostatize and live double lives, that is, to lie to themselves. Nothing truly hopeful can come from lies, so it remains a dark story to me.

[@markdunphy4561]

happyricepaddle The priests’ agony over the people suffering for them was beautifully human and tragically flawed. In apostasy, they betrayed the devout Japanese who accepted death for Christ; and they betrayed even more their own persecutors who needed Christ and witness most of all. Yet it is a movie, a story - and apostasy is real. So common - without violent persecution.The story is a tradgedy - not inspirational- but masterfully done. With that perspective, I think the devout Christian could watch the film and not feel betrayed at the end. The one thing that offended me Ned’s comment helped -about Andrew’s hearing christ - or some voice - telling him to step on the plate , to apostasize; Ned is correct, it is very plausible and consistent with the flow of the story at that point that Andrews character might have lost his mind temporarily. I was offended because Christ says, “he who denies Me before others, him will I deny before my Father” and initially I thought the voice encouraging a sort of “compassionate” apostasy was meant to be Jesus. Insanity is plausible- particularly as nothing miraculous happens in the movie otherwise.The voice also sounded more like the Tempter than Jesus. Yet I don’t know really who Scorcese meant the voice to be. Joe is correct however that Andrews character remains culpable for his persistent apostasies after. A tragedy. If you can appreciate a tragedy, then I recommend this movie. The movie also shows devout Japanese christians who died rather than apostasize. I look forward to reading the book and learning more about the history of the Japanese persecution. Prayers for all Christians persecuted today.

[@carlrajoo8209]

I'm sorry but after hearing you rant about how "beyond hurtful" it is to trample on the fumee, I can't help but feel you have missed the entire point. This is not about apostasy to save yourself. It is to prevent the very real suffering of torture, torture that would have been dealt out to children. Go to a Japanese mother and explain to her why it is less "hurtful" to let her child be burnt alive, than to outwardly apostasize, because the pain from spiritually trampling on the faithful is just too much for your ego to bear. All these Japanese Catholics that lived in secret apostasized all the time. Please get over yourself. It's painful to watch your indignation about something you have no idea about. And by the way, Peter repented, but had the help of oh I dunno, witnessing the resurrection!!? No offence to Peter, whom I love, but you don't need as much faith when you see Jesus risen from the dead. So cut Father Rodriguez some slack. Best to try to see the good rather than focus on the bad. A fellow Catholic.

[@jessicawurm23]

Carl Rajoo (I know I'm a year late ) So what about St Felicitas, a martyr of the Roman persecution who was asked to apostasize as they slaughtered her 7 sons, and renewed their demands after each was killed. And she refused, comforting her children as they died. Our Lord wasn't being poetic when He said we would be forced to choose between Him and our closest friends and families.

[@edsonestrada8759]

I just want to point out that Peter might have witnessed the resurrection but even then he was too afraid to go out and preach. It was not til the Holy Spirit came down on pentecost that he then was brave enough to do God's will.

[@randymcray7116]

But was Abraham not willing give up his own son for his faithfulness to Christ?

[@dylanmoore7902]

Let’s say Jesus actually did tell him to step on Him. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. The scene is not about giving up his faith. Liam Neeson and Andrew Garfield still held on til their Christian values internally. They never stopped believing. The scene is not meant to say “give up your faith”. The scene is meant to show that the world is not black and white even tho the Bible is suppose to be. If I had to step on the Bible to save the lives of 5 ppl, I absolutely would and would feel no regret in it because those ppl did not deserve to be tortured. If god is real then he knows what is in your heart and soul and what your intentions are. Neeson even say “there are things more important then the judgment of the church”. In the context of the movie, god know what Garfield is going through, his dedication, his love for Jesus. There is nothing he can do to save those people other then to step on Jesus. He won’t do it because his love for Jesus is greater then that of himself and others. When Jesus speaks (and yes that is what I think happens) he saying “I suffer with you. I will take it for you the way I carried the cross for” (keep in mind I’m agnostic) Jesus saying “step on me” is honestly the most Christian thing in the entire movie and I think it was beautiful!!

[@moviefreakjj]

I really want to say 2 things, in reply to this video, about the issue many Catholics had with "Silence". #1 Christ's voice, at the end of the film, was not an "artistic" choice by Scorsese. It was in the book, controversially. It was the choice of Endo, and not a public criticism of martyrdom. #2 There is no definitive or clear declaration that the voice Fr. Rodrigues is hearing is the authoritative voice of Christ. It is actually rather subtle and incognito. He is seen going nearly insane in multiple scenes, begging to to hear God. I genuinely concluded that this is an aspect of the film which cannot be debated as heresy or false teaching. It is too unclear and says way more about the character than it does our Lord... and I believe that was the intention. It saddens me greatly that so many people were unable to fully embrace the beauty and sheer Gospel grit of this film because of something so minute and open-ended. Many of us make ourselves vulnerable to be hurt, and we maximize the pain to the point that great blessings go unseen and quickly forgotten. To me, this film is a miracle. It is perfectly controversial, perfectly human, and perfectly convicting. It addresses the most grounded and difficult questions and spawns questions in our own hearts and our own personal faith. The film holds much power, and it truly reflects some of the greatest and most controversial art throughout the millenniums in Catholic history. If you study Catholic art, some of the concepts and painters are supremely controversial figures... but they addresses questions and presented their troubled perspectives... usually resulting in great frustration from the people and the Church. But now these same paintings hang from the highest points of Cathedrals and the madmen painters are still celebrated today. Not because they were Saints, but because they strengthened our faith through their questions. You guys are great and you inspire me through each video. I greatly hope to meet some of you one day. I am 22 and I am a filmmaker, writer and artist. But I am a Catholic first. Thank you all for your generous time and passion.

[@NewCatholicGeneration]

Here is, finally, our highly-requested review of Silence. Apologies for our mispronunciations of some of the character names!

[@taylorfoster24]

New Catholic Generation The author was Japanese Catholic. Do you believe that the movie and the book have the same message that it's ok to denounce your faith like the way Andrew Garfield character does? Or is this Scorsese misinterpreting what the author true intent/message? And if it's not the same message, what do you believe was the author message? It would really help to hear about your opinion of the novel so that I might have a better grapple on the story if I choose to read the novel.

[@giodashorts]

The film is a very, very accurate adaptation of the book. The only difference is in the final shot of the film (and a moment that precedes it). And I do agree with Madison (and no, you aren't optimistic in your own opinions -- stick by them!) in that, the final moment with Kichijiro completely expresses their relationship to God that would follow. A lot is said in those that final moments. The narrator is a person in the story (in the book those final moments are described in the appendix. Rodrigues loved him for the rest of his life. As it is in the book -- "He loved him now in a different way from before" (298). There is also something to be seen in Rodrigues truly finding God in renouncing (publicly) his faith. He changes after this moment. Art is interpretive. And subjective in the way of what we take from it. What is said is the surface level facts. His wife slipped the cross into his hands. Of course she'd heard of Christianity. As did Kichijiro when he was found to have a Christian artifact in his possession. The film is worth revisiting.

[@ironchancellor1]

It should be noted that Garfield's character didn't apostatize because of his own pain. In fact he was fully prepared to be tortured and killed. It was the torture and killing of others on his behalf that broke him.

[@taylorfoster24]

giodashorts thanks that gives me something to think about. I found Ned interpretation of the movie as a tragedy a good way to look at the film since you can ask yourself what can I do differently than the characters.

[@aokayt9517]

ironchancellor1 there were families who were slaughtered- mothers and fathers who had to watch their their children being sliced with a machete to pieces, who still held onto their faith. Why? Because they knew that the suffering they all were enduring could not compare to eternal life with Jesus. They knew the right choice not only for themselves, but also for their children. When you have that much faith...well, you can watch that kind of thing...as horrifying as it may be

[@lukestager8953]

When I saw that the review was 53 minutes, I thought, oh, never mind. But then I was like, oh, but I want to hear what Joe has to say before I close the video. Well, since it took like 20 minutes for him to finally talk, by that time I couldn't stop watching, so good strategic call there, ha ha. I haven't seen it yet, but some of my fellow seminarians have, and they, too, have a wide variety of opinions. Thanks for the video!

[@nyrukdaerog3973]

The movie is only an issue if you view the main characters of movies as always heroes. This is based off a novel, where the main character can be the most flawed and incorrect person in the whole story. I like getting stories every now and then where the main character isn't the moral hero, but just another character in the story that was made the POV. A lot of good Catholic novels are from the POV of a flawed character who witnesses amazing (or seemingly amazing) people, but may not necessarily change during the course of the story. There were "fallen priests" in Japan, and I thought it was interesting for Endo to give that POV for his novel. It was like giving the POV of those who sacrificed to the Emperor in Acts and then brings up the same question that Christians brought up, "what do we do with these people/sinners?"

[@TheFourLastThings0000]

I agree with Joseph 100% on this review(as does my fiancé, Daniel). You can't justify anything that the main character does after he apostazises. Whether or not he was "internally disagreeing with what he was doing", as he stepped on the religious item, still that would not justify his actions. This would be the case for any Christian, regardless of our circumstances. That is our ultimate test and we will be repaid in such abundance in the next life that we won't even be able to comprehend here in our earthly existence. That is faith, and that is what Jesus asks us to do if we truly love Him and want to follow Him. Jesus says to Peter, "feed my lambs." If Fr. Rodrigues was a true priest of Jesus Christ, he would have fed Jesus' lambs, the Japanese Christians. He would not have apostatized, he would have accepted martyrdom, thus teaching his lambs, the people he was brought to serve, how to ensure salvation for their souls. He was not loving these people by telling them to apostatize because that would lead them to hell upon their death. Leading a person to hell is never the loving thing to do. Any sin against the Ten Commandments, despite how difficult the circumstances may be, is never an act of love. God is love. Adhering to the Ten Commandments is always for your good and the good of those around you. Had Fr. Rodrigues done this, then yes, they may have all been tortured and killed, but they would most definitely be in Heaven with God and all of the other martyrs who suffered the same as they did in eternal happiness. These people had the potential to become Saints, as did Fr. Rodrigues. The argument relating to your interior disposition being separate to your exterior dispositions could be compared to those who receive Our Lord in the Eucharist, those who "go through the motions" but do not believe in the Real Presence. Are they still receiving Our Lord? Or, because they believe that His Precious Body in the Host is just a symbol, does that mean that they are actually only receiving bread and not Our Lord Himself in the Flesh? Of course, they are still receiving Him, regardless of their interior dispositions. This is the problem with our modern culture. Relativism has convinced even Our Lord's own children that it is ok to do certain things, even if they deeply offend God and are against the Ten Commandments if the people "feel" it is the "right" thing to do. There is an objective Truth. Our emotions play no part in this fact. This is what we know(not feel) to be Our Lord, and His Commandments are Truth regardless of any situation. If you, for one minute, question Our Lord's Truth then you are either a relativist or you are rejecting God. There is no in between. God is always Truth and we should trust and have the faith to know that everything He instructed us to do is out of love for us. If we truly know God, we know that He will look after us for eternity and will never abandon us. God is never silent. He is always there. We are the ones who respond to His call for our holiness and sanctification in silence. Let us look out for our brothers and sisters in Christ and stand up for our faith, for the objective truth. Let us never be silent. In regards to the camera angles, and beauty of the movie etc. I personally think that unfortunately is was in vain and could have been used in another movie that actually taught people the faith. Satan himself tempts people to sin by a means of making something look beautiful and appealing, and oftentimes, the socially "just" choice. Just to clarify, in case that I'm being unclear, I'm not suggesting that any of the people who are saying that the movie is beautifully made(in an aesthetics sense, it is) are falling at the ruin of Satan's deception. But, beauty can be deceiving. True beauty lies in the intellect and the informed conscience that can detect what is the true beauty, that which only comes from God. Thank you for reviewing this movie, guys! I've been looking forward your take on it. God bless, Ashlee in Cork, Ireland.

[@Nice_Fella]

Sorry, but I completely disagree. Jesus was a compassionate and understanding teacher without an ego that needed massaging... if a simple physical gesture (which can be seperated entirely from ones faith & belief) has the power to save those less fortunate from suffering then it isn't an option... it's an obligation. Despite the apostle Peters apostatising, Jesus continued to look for the good in him. Peter felt guilt for his actions, and it reinvigorated his faith. When a servant of God falls, what matters most is not the depth of his fall but the strength of his determination to get up again. Peter was forgiven. The action of putting your foot on jesus's face was only offensive to those within Japanese culture (where it is a sign of huge disrespect). In Christianity, Jesus washed all of his disciples feet. It would not have been a problem for Jesus or our Lord.

[@milovarquiel]

What martyrdom? He was seeing the lambs die. What he should do? Let that people die? That people have apostatized, as you said they were in sin and out of the kingdom of God. What would be of them, their souls? Didn't Jesus die for the sins of man? Was he selfish to try saving the lifes of these people? You're saying that people shouldn't deny the Truth and God wouldn't abandon any man. Then what about when people sin? Would God never received those stray sheeps again in his kingdom? The answer of catholics is that this life doesn't matter, the important one is the next. And you say that they could became saints. Then where is the love of God? If he can't received the wretched and sinful in his love, what about those who doudt in this life?

[@billymandalay9504]

TheDerpleton Joseph sounds like a muslim, doesn't he. Look at the disciples called to follow Him...second chances for ALL who ran and hid and deserted Him after the arrest and crucifixion. I think in persecution and suffering and torture, Joe would be the first to renounce Christ, frankly. Zeal blinds us to ourselves. Do we seriously think ISIS aren't willing to die for their beliefs ?

[@marywarren8357]

Ashlee: This is so well said. I agree with you and Joseph and pray that I will have the strength to never deny Jesus no matter what the circumstances are. Billy: Yes, ISIS is absolutely ready to die for their beliefs and it's a tragedy that many Catholics today aren't ready to die for theirs. If you aren't willing to die for your faith, do you really have any? Nice & Milovarquiel: Jesus is most definitely compassionate. But he is also very clear in what he expects from us. We should never take his forgiveness or compassion for granted or in any way condone something with the excuse or expectation that well, Christ knows my/their intentions were good and he'll forgive me/them because that is a slippery slope indeed. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. God LOVES people on fire for him and will reject the lukewarm in the end. For me, the true saints and heroes in this film were the Christian Japanese Martyrs who died for their faith in Jesus. Surely they went straight to Paradise and saw Him. Peace and Love to all. Please pray for me, as I will for you.

[@tswindell9496]

Ashlee Foley what right did Fr Rodriguez have to reverse the choice of the Christian Japanese who decided they rather die for their faith? Liam nielson's character was wrong, they weren't dieing for the priests, they was dying for Jesus

[@fizpop01]

While apostasy is wrong, I have to disagree with you Joe. You aren't looking at the movie as a movie. You are looking at it as if it is supposed to be the bible or the CCC. However, even in the bible people do evil things. Even followers of God. Would you refuse to give the bible based on the evil things done by people in it? You wouldnt because the bible has moral teachings and good things. While comparing silence and the bible isn't the best analogy(for obvious reasons), I hope you get what I mean. If you as a Christian take away the message that apostasy is OK just because you saw it in a movie, then you are very wrong. There are multiple different messages you can take away from this movie. There's always a way to find positive in what seems negative. Like Ned said, its a tragedy. Its the story of how someone who you would believe is very strong in their faith, has trouble standing up for it when his life is endangered. A priest is human too, they can sin and aren't perfect. Expecting this movie to have every character be moral(especially 100% of the time) is wrong. Joe, you too are a sinner just like me and every person on this Earth. Of course we would hope that we would choose the right decision but we don't know until it happens. I also believe that it is possible that he still kept his faith but hid it due to the situation he was in. I think its an artistic choice of the director to show a priest not as someone who is holier than thou, but as someone we can relate too. He loves God but like any other human, he wants to live. In this situation, his human instinct to live overcame his faith. I hope you understand that there are other ways to look at things. I think that as an apologist, you tend to look at things only theologically. If you read all this, I would like to see what you think about this.

[@fizpop01]

BTW, I haven't watched this movie. I'm just basing my argument on what you guys talked about and how I have been taught to analyze different forms of literature in English classes. I think seeing this movie as having a religious theme, rather than expecting it to uphold christian values, is a better way to watch it. Im really hoping I get to watch it. You never know, maybe my opinion will change.

[@michaelrex6948]

The problem is that the movie expressly portrays apostasy as God's will. This is wrong, whether in a movie or in real life. Whether we like it or not, movies influence people. We need to make sure that influence is positive.

[@fizpop01]

Michael Rex Well of course that's wrong. However, you can easily attribute that part to his mental instability due to the situation. It just seems to me that Joe overreacted a bit.

[@fizpop01]

Michael Rex Also I don't believe in the influence thing people throw around. Just watching a movie or playing a video game will not make you become a school shooter or make you a devil worshipper. If you become too obsessed with media that is very evil then I can see how it affects people but the average person won't be influenced by this. For example, just because there is torture in the movie do you believe people will think its OK to torture others?

[@michaelrex6948]

fizpop01 Obviously it won't go that far (well, most likely, at least); but that doesn't mean it has no influence on you. What you watch influences you just as the people with whom you spend time influences you.

[@CallMeSmash]

Have you guys thought about Joe doing a series on short videos about theology? I think it would be really cool!

[@sophiagomez5619]

#GiveJoeaRadioShow

[@MrFreshest123]

#GiveJoeaRadioShow

[@dietrichotto14]

#GiveJoeaRadioShow

[@ILoveMagic15]

#GiveJoeaRadioShow

[@dietrichotto14]

***** Don't take this the wrong way, but your profile pic looks like a character from Elder Scrolls Oblivion.

[@directedbyervin]

I wish I was on this panel. I'm reminded of people who hate La La Land. The harshest critics of musicals are those who love musicals. For Silence, the harshest critic is the one who loves the faith. I'm glad those who loved the movie at least saw the good in it. The real heroes are the Japanese people who kept the faith going especially when there was no Priest present. And those who died for the faith. I loved how much reverence given to Jesus in the Eucharist. It puts me to shame. I cried. Nobody wants to see a Priest mess up and that’s why we have to always continue to pray for our Priest. I dislike cheesy christian movies that only preaches to the choir. I also dislike movies that bash christianity and show christians as weak. This movie challenges the viewer and depicts what happened. There is so little good Christian art being made these days that when a film like this comes along we would do well to praise God for the incredible good in it, despite its defects.

[@tito810]

positiveyoungster excellent observation. You might have convince me to watch la la land.

[@ThePianoLover12]

Ned's description of the movie as a tragedy is spot on.

[@wolfgar45]

well it is. You can just tell by the title that the main character is gonna fall into despair

[@CallMeSmash]

Oh do I appreciate you all so much. Unrelated: I have been incorporating your skits in my talks during youth ministry. Teens have been enjoying them. :)

[@gabrielpreciado2940]

im a catholic but i dont want silence to be a Christian movie so those characters dont have to be martyrs. that being said, i dont want silence to fall into bad or good message for us catholics. iF this movie makes you argue for an hour, it serves its purporse.

[@giodashorts]

This film is, I think, a beautiful and monumental work of art. A film that is never to be forgotten. It will stand the test of time.

[@jonasperez949]

I'm glad you guys first mentioned that the movie was picturesque. Its great to see positivity in reviews. Thanks! great work!

[@doplyer]

I just watched this movie with a couple of brothers and we found the film to be very controversial. I was informed that the priest's use of absolution towards the end of the film was arguably misused. With that in mind, many of the themes and beliefs surrounding Catholicism (and what it means to be Catholic in the midst of persecution) were somewhat positive and in some cases genuine especially for laymen and non-believers. What was most troubling about the film were the blurred lines between good and evil. I think most Catholics could see straight through the deceit and temptation while watching this film, despite how much the priests' souls became "broken." The ending, of course, skews the lines even further...is "silence" its own form of retaining faith and prayer? Without question, it's wrong to renounce one's faith as a Catholic, even if it's to save the lives of five or five million. That's how the devil wins souls. But, I can understand the internal conflict that was experienced...the argument that Jesus already died for our sins so that we need not sacrifice ourselves for the sake of others vs. imitating the life of Jesus and sacrificing oneself for the sake of one's faith is invariably a difficult question to answer. I also studied Asian Studies in college (that was my major) with a particular focus on Japanese culture and Japanese language, so there was much for me to enjoy about this film (as I am proficient in Japanese and have studied Japanese culture and history extensively). I am very fond of St. Francis-Xavier and his work in Asia, which was brought up on a number of occasions. When I first heard this history some years ago, I straight up asked my professor if the Japanese hated Catholics/Christians...I think this film did a good job of clearing those ambiguities while maintaining the atrocities the Japanese committed against the Christian people, especially in the Nagasaki region. The only thing I think was inaccurately portrayed was the conversation about Buddhism v. Christianity. Believe it or not, the two religions are actually compatible as Buddha is not a god and is not worshiped (which was inaccurately discussed in the film). For this reason, the Japanese at one time believed in Shinto-Buddhism (a dual religion that celebrated polytheism along with Buddhism, which has no god). Having said that, it is redundant to practice both Buddhism and Christianity because they both essentially teach the same core principles with the major distinction being that Buddhism teaches to raise oneself up to reach enlightenment, whereas Christianity teaches altruism (or selflessness) to reach Heaven. In terms of faith, mainly what the brothers and I questioned was the voice that emerged from the photo of Jesus...Was it the actual voice of the Lord or the voice inside Fr. Rodrigo's head (that he felt the Lord was speaking to him)? Priests act as mediators for the Lord and interpret His word, so it can be argued that it was the actual voice of the Lord telling him to step on the face of Jesus...which definitely would violate the Catholic faith in many dimensions and make any Catholic feel uneasy. Also highly controversial was the discussion between Fr. Rodrigo and Fr. Ferreira..."Are the people following God, or are they following you? Are they following His son or are they following the sun?" Are you kidding me? That's not a valid, theological argument. You can't just pass it off as a translation error. That kind of thinking is dangerous for relativistic and secular views. Overall, I felt the film was educational in the respect that it shows Catholics how laymen should act in the face of persecution AND offer unwavering forgiveness (that was a big theme of the film, I felt like)...but some of the more in-depth qualities of performing the sacraments and especially leading people towards Jesus (remember that scene where they argued whether or not the laymen should step on the face of Jesus?) were incredibly questionable. At least the one good thing came out of it was the transformation of the actor Andrew Garfield...he was able to experience the life and story of Jesus in a way he never had before. I enjoyed the film and felt it was incredibly inspirational in many respects. There were plenty of scenes that almost moved me to tears. It was a very thought-provoking film, that much can be said.

[@gabe2492]

SPOILERS: Personally, I thought that the ending was saying that he was still a Catholic in secret. The reason why is because the ending reminded me when the people in the village would be praying to God in secret, so it made me think if they could do that in secret, why couldn't he?

[@Coffeh]

Feature Madison more often please, she was great :)

[@ashwith]

Joseph's arguments remind me about Eleazar from 2 Maccabees. He could get away by only acting as if he broke the law but still refused to do so since that would lead others astray.

[@pepemelo8772]

Apostasy is not the worst sins, it is self-righteousness.

[@luvpinas123]

Amen!

[@marywarren8357]

Says who? You or God? Or the Church? And in whom should I trust and believe in? You? God? The Holy Church? IMHO, self-righteousness can lead you to be blind and sin, but it is not on the same level as Apostasy.

[@Gabrielcezar94]

With all due respect, I don't think you're up for the task of discussing art...

[@ironchancellor1]

Well, the Jesus speaking to Andrew Garfield part is really open to interpretation from what I've seen. I've heard that some think that the "voice of Jesus" in that part of the movie/book may have actually been Satan, or Garfield's own tortured inner voice. It should also be noted, that once Garfield apostatized, a cock crowed 3 times (in the movie it's very subtle, but it happens). Which suggests that perhaps what Garfield did was indeed a betrayal in the same way Peter betrayed Jesus (of course, that's where the resemblances end).

[@ironchancellor1]

Yes, of course. Apostasy is *very* serious, and people should die for their faith before committing it. At the same time though, I think the movie is a lot more complicated than some moral relativist preaching. In fact, I'm not totally convinced after seeing the movie that this was the point of the story. While they didn't make it clear in the review, this was the circumstance behind Garfield's apostatization (although I'm also not necessarily condoning it) : The Christians who the Inquisitors were torturing had already apostatized, 100 times over according to their torturers. But they held them and continued the torture (which was tying them up upside down in a pitch black pit with small cuts on their neck, an incredibly slow bleed out death) in order to break Garfield. Because those people wouldn't have died for God, they would have died because of Garfield. At least according to the rather demented Japanese authorities. I think another thing that people should keep in mind while watching this movie/reading the book is that it is inspired by and reflecting historical events. There was a massive persecution of Christians in Japan and there were Jesuits who became "fallen priests" like in the film. In fact, Liam Neeson's character, Father Ferrera, was a real person. And apparently, according to history, he repented before his death (although I can't imagine the Silence character Ferrera, who is borderline antichrist, doing such a thing).

[@JDemen82]

Though I love hearing Renée's POV .. it's nice when this channel gets other Catholics to review film's or give there piece of mind. Good job Madison.

[@gewatzig123]

Silence was not a disappointment. I'm not a very religious person, I consider myself as a spiritualist more than anything. However, it's very rare (for me) to watch a movie that involves with religion. The last movie I saw that did involve with religion was Spotlight. This film was obviously way more violent than Spotlight and a bit more disturbing. Silence I think did relieve a message, and the message is, you're not perfect. You're not Jesus. You can't resist the pain he felt on the cross. Rodrigues wasn't weak, he was human. It was only in a matter of time when he was basically forced to step on the Fumi-e which he heard Jesus say, "Go ahead now. It's all right. Step on me. I understand your pain. I was born into this world to share men's pain. I carried this cross for your pain. Step." That was the most powerful moment in the whole movie. He doesn't say it but in my opinion, Jesus promised Rodrigues that he will be saved. Rodrigues knew he was saved, he just had to live for a while until he died of old age with the tiny crudely-crucifix in his hands.

[@odonnell1218]

It’s also important to note that in real life, it is reported that Fr. Ferrera (Liam Neeson) repented and died a martyr

[@jmlee369]

Having just seen the film, I just wanted to note that neither Father Ferreira nor Rodrigues became Buddhist monks, who were required to be celibate by state law at that time in Japan. There is nothing in the film to indicate conversion to Buddhism. Also, the package placed on the body by Rodrigues' wife was not a Buddhist object.

[@GreatKhanMatt]

also im pretty sure his wife became a christian, hence why she put the cross on his body.

[@deacontodd7853]

The problem is, as it was pointed out, there is nothing to lead the viewer to come to that conclusion. It wasn't in the book, and it felt forced in the movie.

[@ElRifrawad]

^ A MOVIE IS AND MUST NOT BE A COPY OF THE BOOK ITS B A S E D ON. I cannot stress enough on this as a filmmaker. The director must put his own essence in the mix thus creating or paralleling a new story. And in that story the wife definitely became Christian and honored her husband's wishes by putting a cross in his hands.

[@CatholicGaming]

Dear Joseph, I believe you may have mentioned this before, but are you discerning the priesthood? You would make a great priest. I'll be praying for you and all the New Catholic Generation crew.

[@CatholicGaming]

Also, Please pray for me.

[@nick.s.c3102]

Some one should make a movie about the persecuted catholics in China. The catholic churches there are run by the government, and teach that Mao went to heven and god loves comunisim. The ones persecuted there are the house hold christianans who follow the faith. I just wish there was more reginition this.

[@billymandalay9504]

N Colaiano What about the book "God's Chinese Son" ? The delusions of a cult leader, leading to the death of countless Chinese people.

[@nick.s.c3102]

BILLY MANDALAY Never herd of it. I will definitely check it out.

[@sakatakintoki3]

N Colaiano lol i know this is 6 months old but your comment reminded me of boondocks with Reagan being white Jesus, and Heaven is an American paradise

[@NasCostomano]

"for the letter kills, but the spirit gives life..."

[@Bnio]

When the village is made to stomp on the fumie, notice how much emphasis is made on how muddy the ground is. The people can barely walk in it. Yet, the movie very deliberately shows that the fumie remains clean. Scorsese doesn't make continuity errors like that. That was on purpose. Go ahead, step on me.

[@raec.449]

I wish people would realize that Silence is a literary tragedy like Oedipus or King Lear. Father Rodriguez was weak and flawed from the beginning and that's what people should see. He's fallen from the start. He only realizes it at the end.

[@yagorodrigo01]

Who says that was really God speaking to Padre Rodrigues and not just a voice in his head? Part of the point of the movie was he fighting his ego(many characters call him arrogant for comparing himself to Jesus at the expense of that people's suffering). Second, there was a lot of apostasy in the history of missionaries. There are not only heroes in the world, there are many people who fail. So the film can be an exercise of compassion for these people as much as a crude representation of reality of the facts. Thats why I find strange that Catholics take this personally(to the point of "feeling offended"). Another aspect is that both, the author of the book and the director of the film, are the "bad catholic" type, they admit their own weaknesses, they provoke, they take the viewer out of the comfort zone. And whoever believes the film is relativistic or that passes the "wrong message", did not get the message.

[@lalumierehuguenote]

if you think the movie promotes apostasie you haven't understood it...

[@TheDonavich]

It's Rodriguez, not Rodrigo - and it's not Kochiro - it's (phonetically)...Keech-eecheero...lol...It's very clear that at least 3 of the presenters have never read the book. Not good. Having read the book several times and having studied it and prayed for clarity, so many of the opinions of the movie were simply off base and missing the point. A small example is when Kichijirō is caught with the Christian image in the amulet case. This entire sequence is in the Appendix, but the panel simply said it's not in the book. Well, it is - and Kichijirō's friend Matabe is hanged for this incident. This is real life and death...so WWYRD (what would you really do?). Well, we won't know that - but to denigrate those who cave in is, IMHO, rather deplorable. There was only ONE Jesus Christ. In addition, I believe that you all fundamentally missed the point regarding Scorcese's comparison of the Japanese' Christianity being relatively similar to what we are seeing in the modern west/USA (was that Martin? Or was it from the last paragraph of Section II of the Translator's Preface? "For if Hellenistic Christianity does not fit Japan, neither does it (in the opinion of many) suit the modern West; if the notion of God has to be rethought for Japan (as this novel constantly stresses), so has it to be rethought for the modern West”). Anyway, I don't believe this statement has any connotation whatsoever with comparative suffering/fear/death. Instead, it is both extremely clear and somewhat nuanced. The Japanese "swamp" had a large number of Christians, many of which had confused God and Son of God with the god Sun. In addition, almost all had adopted an zealous idolatry for Christian trinkets and conflated Mary to an equality with Jesus. Any of these are major showstoppers - the fact that they could endure torture, pain and death could well speak much more to their culture, their terrible daily suffering, and the wish that death would bring paradise - without necessarily fully comprehending what that meant (all in the book). This is similar to the West - where we have multimillionaire preachers preaching blasphemy to mind numbed parishioners who like the nice music and other idols outside of Jesus. No, they wouldn't last a minute under torture - but they haven't earned everlasting life. One last point here is that there have been tens of millions of people who have been brainwashed to hate Christ and Christians and can be very vocal and aggressive in putting down same. These entities include most of the Leftists, which redundantly do include the press, entertainers, politicians and many, many others. These are all similar to the Shoguns, samurai and peasants who would turn the Christians in. Lastly, there is a recurring refrain in the book concerning Father Rodriguez' thoughts about Judas. While there are several other passages that clue the reader into the Father's weakening strength of faith, these are probably the most poignant and powerful. And I believe that this refrain most clearly reflects a key point of the movie (beyond God's apparent silence during suffering, death - and the decades of Priest's silence when tens of thousands of Japanese were being killed and tortured) - namely, that Rodriguez's battle was fundamentally fought within his heart, mind and soul - and not against the Japanese leadership. I really appreciate the time you took to give such thoughtful insight to this thought provoking movie. All comments and input were provided with peace, love and joy. I've been thinking about these things a lot in the last few weeks and had to get some of it written down - this ended up being a venue to land on.

[@DeadWordz]

Bishop “This is not cool at all” Joe. Movie was a masterpiece

[@therockisbornchristmasnativity]

here is my interpretation the priest was a Christ figure he chooses to sacrifice his title as priest and apostasize in appearance so that the persecution would stop. the message I get is that the Japanese did not change his hearts belief in Jesus the message I believe the director gives regardless of what you think of the ending is that the persecution of personal faith is christ is wrong. the director and all the actors in interview are not trying to encourage apostasy but the end of religious persecution. I encourage everyone at new Catholic Generation to attempt to reach out to those involved with the film to hear their point of view. this is my view as a Christian.

[@lauriethompson740]

Yes this is how I read it. In a strange way he now has a truer faith because his ego is crushed, he is no longer a part of a dominant arrogant institution but a humble believer who has sacrificed himself for love. After all, in the context of religion as a whole the Christ concepts strengthen is precisely it's paradoxical sacrifice inversion, that is the birth of spiritual love.

[@kairozartstudio]

Rodriguez denied his faith openly, and in turn betrayed his sheep. They may live for the time being, but what are the ramifications of his apostasy on them? I think the film illustrates what not to do.

[@edsonestrada8759]

One thing I wanna point out is I know Joseph was saying how can God tell father Rodriguez to apostatise (commit a mortal sin)? Well one way for it to be a mortal sin is to willingly do it on your own, that is you can't be forced to do it. Father Rodriguez was clearly forced to commit apostasy to save the Japanese from being tortured, he didn't actually want to do it. That's why when he heard God's voice saying it's OK I know where your heart lies that was God telling him it's not a mortal sin if he tramples because you're being forced to do it even though deep down he doesn't want to. I also believe what Madison was saying that maybe he preached Christianity in secret otherwise his wife wouldn't have put the cross in his tomb. By the way Madison is super gorgeous! I'd love to find myself a nice young Catholic woman like her who loves her faith and appreciates art and cinema.

[@torigutierrez7613]

stumbled across this video. so glad I did. I watched silence out of impulse and was really getting into the movie. when he denied his faith I felt so confused!!! I didn't know how to feel about it as they continued the ambiguous ending!!! so happy to have things cleared up. thanks Joe!

[@MorganInForm]

The problem with Joe's view is he is assuming what Jesus would and wouldn't say to Rodrigo. That seems like a bold assumption.

[@jessicawurm23]

Thank you all so much for reviewing this film, especially you, Joe. Everything you said exactly mirrored my own thoughts, and your fervor for the Faith and it's defense is truly inspiring. I would love to have a friend like you. God bless you all.

[@flavs8802]

There is a movie call "cristeros" it was made years ago, eva Longoria and anda García aré in it, its about the cristiada war in México in the 20s itss pretty good, you should consider it

[@figaro7995]

"For Greater Glory" - is the name of the movie about the Cristeros.

[@flavs8802]

thanks a lot, that is the one, i would like to see everyone taught, i think the comparison with silence will be very interesting, here in Mexico it was very well receive among Catholics, also is very well done (in my opinion), Viva Cristo Rey!!! : P

[@figaro7995]

I've heard great things about that film (it came out in 2012 I believe). I've always wanted to watch it and look forward to comparing the two films. Thanks for bringing it up! Vaya con Dios!!

[@deacontodd7853]

I agree with Joe on this review. My take is that I don't think that Jesus would have told Rodrigues that it was ok to step on the image, and renounce his faith committing apostasy. This would cause the Japanese Christians to lose faith because they would then question the validity of the Gospel message, as it did, thereby wiping out Christianity in Japan at that time. BTW, Madison was an awesome special guest, and I hope that she comes back for more videos.

[@kjanjusz7007]

I respectfully disagree. You make the characters less developed than they are presented. This is primarily a Scorsese film - and in most of his movies, there are no "good" guys, and even if there are, they are still morally ambiguous. Secondarily, in the Parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus stresses the idea of mercy and love being greater than any laws. Rodrigues steps on the fumie - whether because he was told by Jesus, or his own mind (or temptation) to do so - to help the others, not to break away from the Church.

[@paulstabell9342]

Thank you guys for sharing this conversation! This is exactly the kind of difficult discussion that more films should encourage, even if you disagree (passionately) with the film's "message". It is polarizing, divisive and thought provoking, but it is also a male filmmaker's attempt to grapple with the apparent contradictions of faith. In fact, I wonder if a less ambiguous approach would have undermined the very struggle this picture was trying to work out. That reality is, we DO struggle, and this struggle can serve to unite or divide, as evidenced your wonderfully heated discussion! Finally, I understand why you guys focussed on what you did, but I think there's even more to talk about. For instance: the difficulties with intercultural evangelism, how human pride complicates Christian leadership, personal and communal faith, how the film leads audience identification and the problems therein... the list goes on, but I'd love to see this conversation continue once you've had a chance to let things sit.

[@LucaPariah]

I once had a dream that these people came into a room I was in and killed a bunch of my friends, and then asked me if I was a Catholic. I started thinking, in the dream, "What if I said no?" While thinking this, I accidentally say "No" out loud. The attackers immediately left, before I could correct myself. I remember thinking "Next time, I'll say yes. I have to correct this mistake." ...But there wasn't a next time. This dream made me think about how seriously I take my faith as a Catholic, and I have to agree with Joe, it's really not good that they justified apostasy. Think of all the missionaries and native Japanese saints who were martyrs! That would be the great majority of them!

[@MrAquinas1]

Consequentialist reasoning is always wrong, in part, because it is impossible to know the consequences of our actions. God is in charge of grace, not us. We can only choose to do the right thing because of the virtue of hope. With this virtue, we know that God can and will draw a good from what seems to be evil. But this does not mean we can try to do good through an objectively evil act. A Christian in this situation knows that God desires the conversion of a murderer who tries to force others to be complicit. In real life, not a movie, rewarding the hatred of a murderer encourages greater murder in the future. Absorbing evil, ultimately extinguishes evil.

[@akirahojo2]

Historically, the Japanese Christians went underground and kept their faith throughout the Edo period though their practices and theology changed as a result. So one interpretation was Fr. Rodriguez might have still preach the faith.

[@akirahojo2]

Silence is really hard to watch because this is how persecuted Christians minorities live in sectarian countries even today.

[@eliasm907]

Not a big fan of Joe. I don't think he understands films or Scorsese. And i think he needs to learn how to dig deeper. Its better than God's Not Dead 1 & 2.

[@sheriljohn249]

best review so far, jo, love ur passion about the church and those who have died for it!

[@NicholasSilva1380]

Joe apparently would prefer, without having been in any situation close to what Father RODRIGUEZ experienced, that he does not apostatize and thousands of people die continuously merely because others had died for their faith before...how compassionate

[@timmartin4442]

Yeah...that kid is annoying and pretends to have such great faith--but it really is a narrow-minded type of faith not borne of real human love and loss. This was a beautiful film--I wish all reviewers had read Shusako Endo's book and Scorsese really did it and the very deep faith questions asked at the heart of it --as just an interpretation as film can do for such a great novel.

[@ryanschultz7022]

I have not watched the movie for all the reasons Joseph talked about. I watched a video of a Catholic defending the Truth and 2 persons defending a movie based on Art. I am highly disappointed that they were defending apostate in the name of Art/movie/interpretation. I am highly disappointed of this review, not based on the review but based on what was said from the reviewers. The new Guest clearly does not know the Catholic faith or certain teachings (I know not which)....... please read Baltimore Catechism/Council of Trent/St. Alphonsus book on Martyrs.

[@edwardclarke7771]

Joe is completely correct and on point with this review. I wanted to see this film, but from what you've all outlined about the plot, I won't see it. I am very disappointed that Scorsese - a fellow Catholic - made this film. Just hearing the plot I feel very offended by this film.

[@justarandomveryintelligent8934]

Edward Clarke they're all actually wrong except for the girl they got wrapped up on their righteous indignation and failed to truly look deeply at it and see the shades of grey. they didn't insert themselves into the story they just retreated into the judgemental Christians that are ruining our ability to spread the faith.

[@luvpinas123]

C'mon, it was intended to be a work of art, and not a papal encyclical.

[@daniellaszlo1930]

If you interpret an artistic film at surface value, that is not the fault of the artist, it is the fault of the viewer for not being intelligent enough... I had not read the books, but I have seemed to come to many of the same conclusions of people who have read the book prior to the film. the character is completely broken at the climax, it is not the voice of Christ, it is his own mind trying to cope with the defeat. It would be absolutely silly to call the movie "Silence" and have the theme of the entire movie discarded to have a divine voice show up at the end to save the day. Not to mention storytellers like Scorsese are beyond the amateur dated trope of the "deus ex machina" . And at the end his wife CLEARLY slips the artifact to him. It is obvious he introduced his beliefs to her, and the fact she risked it just means how important she regarded it or at least respected how important his own faith was; and indeed perhaps he did continue spreading it underground for the rest of his life. But the film also brings up the question, should a physical symbol or a religious artifact be regarded more valuable then fellow human life and soul? Wouldn't it be irresponsible to let those others die after they had been tortured to denounced their faith, if you where given the chance to save them; which in turn gave them the chance to redeem themselves afterwards? I am disappointed this film is doing poorly at the box office, we need more thought provoking art this masterfully crafted.

[@carrisebear3499]

The title of the movie contains the answer; silence. The Japanese were silencing the foreign missionaries to keep their country from splitting apart (the concubine story). Also the priests had to practice their faith in silence, absolute silence. I don't see doubt of faith in this movie at all. I see how God is with you always and he is there with you through the suffering... in silence.

[@eleanorf.8840]

Have to disagree with Joe on this. I've read the book twice (missed it in cinema and have to wait until the DVD comes out :( ) and while it left me feeling kind of hollow and disappointed I think that's it's real strength. Fr Rodrigues is in a situation with no right solution. He can deny Christ, or he can allow innocents to suffer for him. And I think the decision he made was a brave one. It hurt him a lot. He hated himself for it, was cast out by the Church, became an object of derision, lost all honour, and was filled with fear and sorrow over his sin. But he did all of that out of love and compassion for the innocent people who were suffering. He put his own salvation on the line for others, not just put his earthly life on the line but eternal life and all that was dear to him. And once he had apostatised, to go back would have meant going through it all over again, and more innocent people would have been tortured and killed. Would you deliberately do something that would result in the suffering of others? Especially as, when he asks why they don't apostatise, he is told that they already have, many times. So he wouldn't offer them martyrdom, really. They'd be murdered for his faith, not their own, in a way making him a murderer on many counts - especially as they had apostatised and not had the opportunity to repent, so might then be denied salvation, if they were in a state of mortal sin at time of death. Probably deeper than he considered, but by apostatising, he allowed them the chance to return to the faith if they had fallen. And anyway, is not murder a mortal sin as much as apostasy? Silence goes deep into the grey areas, into where there's no right or wrong - or if there is, it's pretty hard to judge. Plus there's the fact that he is a character, not a perfect role model but an example of a human being like any of us. He's a priest. He's a human. He's not Christ, obviously he doesn't know everything or get it right all the time, why expect it of him? He does his best, and struggles with the conflict - to murder the suffering Christians in the pit, or to deny Christ? The only way to avoid this conflict would be to simplify the story, and that would ruin what makes it so great, that it actually does tackle really difficult questions. Rodrigues makes his decision, the audience is left wondering whether it was right or not and what they'd have done in the situation. It illustrates that there are many forms of suffering. It draws attention to the fact that those who do wrong might do it for the right reasons. If one does wrong, but does it unwillingly and for the sake of others, out of love and compassion - the heart of Christ's teaching, more important than any other rules - would God not understand and be merciful? If not - if it is simply a matter of following all of the rules and playing the game right - what separates our faith from any other? You're worried about the message that this film sends, but I'd interpret it as this: things are difficult sometimes. Right and wrong isn't always clear. But you're not alone in your doubt and questioning.

[@lalumierehuguenote]

Eleanor F. you are completely wrong. wrong !! use your brain or ask god for insight for now you speak as the devil

[@eleanorf.8840]

Kendhal, what part of what I've said is wrong? Do please tell me, because as far as I am aware, everything I said is in keeing with the teaching of Jesus. It is a complicated situation, and I did endeavour to employ both my brain and insight from God in understanding it. I can attempt to explain my reasoning further if you wish.

[@lalumierehuguenote]

Eleanor F. "Fr Rodrigues is in a situation with no right solution." False. "He can deny Christ" Are you serious ? "And I think the decision he made was a brave one." What you think is irrelevant to the truth. Thing is he apostatized. He reject God like Peter did. And if you had been more careful during the movie you would have seen that Scorsese suggest what Rodriges did was wrong. Picture this: you have a task force that go into an enemy country. They get caught and the enemy manages to have them fight for them and get paid for that. Thus the task force betrays it's own nation, its own people. So as not to die.. It's selfish. Do you get the point ? You cannot reject God just to end the suffering of others. It's nonsensical. Surely all the martyrs through the centuries knew that as well. I am not even mentioning the fact that he sued the rest of his life not showing his faith (if he still had it).. Fact is the situation was not complicated but he allowed Satan to tell him lies to feel better.

[@eleanorf.8840]

I say that Fr Rodrigues is in a solution with no right solution. Perhaps that is wrong; there is a right solution, but one that God alone knows. The way I see it, he has a choice between denying Christ with his lips, or with his actions. Jesus said "whatever you do for the least of these, you do for me". This shows the importance of caring for the weak and helpless. By allowing them to be murdered (unwillingly) for him, he is failing to care for the weak and helpless, as he is exhorted to do simply through his Christian faith but even more through his ordination - he is entrusted with the care of souls, to allow the apostate Christians in the pit to die in a state of mortal sin is to condemn their souls. Perhaps his decision is wrong, but there are arguments in favour of it as well as against it. As for your disbelief at the statement "he can deny Christ", that is a statement of possibility. Clearly as he went on to do just that, he was CAPABLE of denying Christ, which is what is meant by the word "can". "What you think is irrelevant to the truth." God alone knows the truth, so all I can express is what I think, and the same applies to you. I'm uncertain what you mean to express with your reference to St Peter. Peter was chosen by the Lord, in the full awareness of what he would do. He was not rejected for weakness, but was in fact chosen to become the head of the Church. The Church descends from a weak human being who denied his faith through fear and then repented and was forgiven. Christians are not expected to be perfect; challenged, yes, but like Peter we will inevitably fall short. We all live through grace. How can one condemn a man who falls short, as Peter himself did? Would one condemn Peter himself, though our Lord did not? Your illustration relates to a far simpler situation than the one at hand, in which the soldiers betray their country to save their own lives. I have related at length in this and my original comment just some of the many factors involved in Fr. Rodrigues' decision, but the most basic difference between this situation and your illustration is that Fr. Rodrigues' betrayal is not to save his own life. The martyrs again are a very much simplified example with limited relevance to the situation at hand. What do their deaths have to do with alleviating the suffering of others? Would you consider dying for Christ to be on the same level as murdering for Christ? His failure to show his faith through the rest of his life is a different matter, not one I would condone. I would respond to it with sympathy, however, because Rodrigues is sad and broken, lost, and quite probably depressed. It is easy to condemn from outside, I suspect it would be far harder to do better in practise. I pray that none of us ever find ourselves in a situation where we are so tested, because it's easy to pass judgement and much harder to actually face those decisions.

[@milovarquiel]

Then what about Peter who deny the son of God? By your logic he didn't deserve the love of Christ when he revived by third day. Catholics say God speaks through us and our actions, that's when we learn he is not silent. Then letting other people suffer because maybe they're not catholic or have comitted sin is God talking through us? Then where you leave the message of love and more important forgiveness that the bible speaks of? Where you leave the message from: Matthew 25:45 "‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for Me.’" How can death be the best result in this life, when God says that life is the gift he gave to man.

[@egothanv6458]

RODRIGUES

[@sanctus4639]

Egothan V Yes! That was making me cringe 😂

[@joshuadyke2257]

Please, please do more skits, we are all dying to see them, please do one on how Catholics struggle with non-Christian people or something, anything, just put out a skit.

[@ElRifrawad]

" Somebody would dare to have the voice of Jesus encourage apostasy" Well you were right about one thing, you really have no clue about "camera''(ie cinema)...one word: SYMBOLISM. One should know that not everything that is seen(heard) on screen actually happens in the movie. And please realize, especially when viewing Scorsese films, that whenever something feels too "simple" or "gullible" in the movie, then you have seen it WRONG and shallowly...A veteran catholic film-maker is way beyond the point of adding a simple "Jesus dub" to simplify his story...please for your next film review, try to read in between the lines because cinema, especially with a man like Scorsese is anything but a simple "story". On a side note this film requires multiple viewings to fully interpret it and for me is a beautiful piece of art-work, and what most of you said that it being bad because of having "multiple interpretations regarding different viewers" then please let me pitch in that the greatest movies are the ones open to interpretation. Cheers.

[@kylefosnaugh4148]

You go Joe! way to defend the faith. I agree with you 100% I fell in love with this movie in the begging. It showed the Importance of the Sacraments and The Traditional Latin Mass, which i love. I feel that this movie betrayed me, It took a character that i loved and trusted, and made him do terrible things. All the while it seemed as if the movie praised him for doing those terrible things. I talked to my Priest about the ending and he said that "you can never have evil means accomplish a good end."

[@tswindell9496]

Kyle Fosnaugh i think the priest in the movie had the problem, the Japanese christians had the right mind frame and strong in faith

[@kevfoda]

The girl is a terrible example of how horrible the movie is to people of faith. It teaches that a Christian is able to still be faithful while denying Christ over and over again. That man was not a Christian at the end. He denied Christ until his death. The relativism of our modern age is clouding people's minds. People think that there it is completely normal to have a dissonance between what you believe and the way you act, but the Bible is completely against that. "By their fruits you shall know them." Matthew 7:20. Rodrigues gave fruits only while he was persecuted, but after he completely sold out Persecution is the burden of the Christian. We find it wrong nowadays to say that someone is not a Christian but that is Biblical, "Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven." Matthew 10:32

[@alymay0303]

this was a great review! I really enjoyed hearing your perspectives on it! By the way, these panel discussions would make great podcasts, as I was listening to this on my commute to school lol

[@juanmontejo8295]

I haven´t watched the film yet, but I have one question regarding the "bad good guy" Father Garrupe: does he commit apostasy? Because as far as I know he is depicted as kind of counterpoint to Father Rodriguez, so it would be interesting to know if he walks the same way of his fellow priest.

[@NewCatholicGeneration]

Nope, he refuses to apostatize dies a martyr. It's implied that during interviews with Fr. Garrupe and Rodriguez, that the inquisitors thought Rodriguez had the potential to turn so they used Garrupe's death as part of the mental manipulation/torture.

[@thedrzoidberg4559]

Good to see you guys making film reviews and continuing with the channel. Great stuff.

[@michaelaratnam6517]

One thing that caught my attention... Mother Mary was totally absent in the narrative... except for the rosary that was broken up as soon as it showed up.

[@jmctigret]

Bishop Barron has a great review on the movie Silence.

[@erikravey8313]

I think when you watch this movie with St. Ignatius' degrees of humility in mind it changes everything.

[@wolfgar45]

The pendant is actually included in the book. It came from his friend who later on gets captured and tortured along with his family. Also it said at the end when the officials asked rodrigo who's now okada whether he has tried to convert kichijiro he said he hasn't. So he was pretty much lost in the end.

[@Avionne_Parris]

I absolutely agree with Joe's perspective!!! I was severely disappointed with the ending and to know that Andrew Garfield's character renounced in the very end after all the persecution endured by the Japanese martyrs... I also see Madison and Ned's point of views... David always has amazing insight!!! Great panel discussion guys!!! Missed Renee but Madison was a great addition!!!

[@genekang8729]

That's real life, though.

[@Avionne_Parris]

Not necessarily because if you truly know what you have and truly believe in what you believe you will NEVER renounce for anyone... I understand that I cannot speak for anyone but myself so I see your point.

[@squall6789]

If you wouldn't publicly renounce Christianity after seeing people beheaded and tortured in front of your very eyes you're a terrible person.

[@Avionne_Parris]

First of all, you don't even know me and I am NOT a terrible person!!! Second, Luke 9:26 says, "For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed when he comes in his glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels." Third, I would hope that NOTHING would cause ANYONE to renounce their Christianity because I want to go to heaven to be with Jesus forever and me denying Him on earth would definitely jeopardize that wish. Fourth, God is in charge of everyone so those people beheaded and tortured because of their faith would be rewarded in heaven for their perseverance. Many saints were martyred and they will rank with those saints. Finally, at the end of day, we all have free will and intellect, so whatever choice you make, it yours to make and you will have to deal with the consequences. God bless!!!

[@squall6789]

I only said you had to PUBLICALLY renounce it, in your heart, and your God's, you're faith will remain. If there's some reason that won't hold up, then worst case scenario, it's just one more sin on your list of things to be forgiven for, and you would be forgiven because you never meant what you said!

[@michaelaratnam6517]

Writing this from INDIA.... If St Thomas and St Francis Xavier and St John de britto thought the way Rodriguez did I wouldn't be a Catholic writing from India 🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳... !!!

[@sanctus4639]

I am currently working on a review of this film. I'll link to your review and channel at the end of it. But my review will have a different take from Joe's. God bless you all!

[@DixeyTricks]

Joe derailed this review, took the film way to personally and was way to precious - of all the things you find offensive, this?

[@lindsey3088]

Great discussion and multiple perspectives. I do have to say though, Joe was spot on!

[@Jenniemo112]

I read this book many years ago. My heart was so troubled. My head literally hurt. I couldn't understand what had happened. What would God say, what would He feel if I was Father Rodrigues and He was on that beach with me? If I recall correctly, in the book, only Father Rodrigues had to trample and the captured Christians would be set free. I could refuse the Japanese authorities but I knew that if I did that it would destroy me. I couldn't live with myself. Would He condemn me if I did what Rodrigues did? The book ends with Kichijiro seeking out the former priest, wanting to repent. Together they pray. I now think the ending depends on how you see God.

[@ladybuggoneforeign4748]

I get the idea about "interpreting movies differently" but when the main character objectively apostatizes over and over again until the end of his life and we have no evidence of him secretly spreading the faith, there's not really anything to "interpret" with that. A beautiful work of art can still be objectively condemnable. Just because the work is beautifully done, does not redeem the message it sends. And the message is loud and clear. The movie is questioning whether you can condemn his actions given the circumstances. Short answer: yes, you still can and must. Terrence Malik's movie A Hidden Life (based on Bl. Franz Jaegerstaetter's saintly example) perfectly illustrates this. "I cannot believe that just because one has a wife and children, one is free to offend God." You could say one is not free to offend God just because he is put in charge of a suffering and persecuted flock. We are not condemning the man, as only God can. But we are condemning his actions and this movie's message. It's a dangerous movie for those who are not well-formed and securely grounded in their faith- which is the VAST majority.

[@WS-tj7zp]

the only solution to the persecution endured was to cut down trees, carve out swords, and fight back. Dying in battle would have sucked less than the torture anyway. "YOU CAN TAKE OUR LIVES, BUT YOULL NEVER TAKE OUR FREEDOM"

[@adrianapalmela5491]

First of all I'd like to thank you all for making this platform for young catholics to gather and discuss ideas, I love the job your doing and I hope you keep at it!! Being from portugal and catholic I was immediately drawn to this movie, I just watched it today because my university is very sadistic and we have exams from the beginning of January until Today... Growing up catholic and going to a catholic school when in History we disced the evangelization it was always highlighted how the portuguese had a great roll in it because of their navigating the world and discovering routs and new land, but it was never mentioned how hard it was and we were extremely shelter from the harsh reality of it (at least in my school, the made it look really easy and that everyone could do it). So I was delighted to learn the truth of the prosecution of those courageous people who sacrefices their lives for the faith, both converts and Priests alike. I do agree though that the ending was not the one I was expecting or would of liked to see, Wene I saw it I thought that on the one side the voice of christ saying it was OK might be to show the unmeasurable love He has for us despite all we do and that he is always with us no matter how long we go astray. On the other hand it might be interpreted as its just fine to renounce your faith and sining is ok ... Once again I love the work you do, and I would like to know if you might consider visiting Portugal, more specifically Fatima this year for the 100th anniversary? Lots of love from Portugal

[@NequeNon]

To the whole team. Well done guys, very well done. I think the end, with the distinction being made with "tragedy" shows what this film is: a sign of contradiction. Why? Because people with the Faith will interpret this as a Tragedy (in the Aristotelian sense). People who know not the Faith will see it as a Comedy (always in the Aristotelian sense). Fundamentally the narrative of the Bible/Gospel is a Greek Comedy. As such, you may argue that this movie is an anti-Gospel. I will add, the scene of the Apostacy devastated me...it represented me when I sin. My heart broke to see me on screen listening to the voice of false conscious, the voice of Satan, the voice of the Anti-Christ win me to commit grave evil...two weeks after having watched this movie, I am still devastated. One need not ask "what would I do in a similar circumstance" because everytime one sins mortally one renounces Christ. This is the drama of a Catholic life. I feel as if someone hollowed my core out with a blunt knife and laid it all out in front of me. That is how I felt leaving the Cinema in tears and physically unable to utter a word.

[@ronfai5357]

omg soooo dramatic... Maybe you need to sin more particularly sin of the flesh. (get laid) just chill out and enjoy life. ill tell you all what hell is. Hell is regret over not living life as fully as you could. your reward is life, this life, here and now. don't waste it.

[@NequeNon]

Ron Fai well, you really don't know anything about me to say something like that. But, this life is not a reward, it is a gift, neither you nor I deserve it. The next life has something of a reward to it and so the only way to "waste" this life is to sin. Think of it: if one lived his life here on earth according to his own will (for example: in accordance to the flesh as you suggest), what would the first second, the first moment of realization of failure in Hell be like? Or as Jesus said: what good is it to gain the whole world and lose his soul?

[@ronfai5357]

+equitem Why do you guys think that a persons will is wrong or bad or against goodness. My will is love, I rather help people then hurt them. I rather love then hate. I believe that is true of all. The only person we can trust to grant us eternity is ourselves. Christians say good deeds dose not entitle us to paradise and that we need to have Jesus. Jesus spoke of love for all, love for enemies and forgiveness of sins. He told us to forgive ourselves and others. Where did Jesus say that you have to accept me as your savior and confess your sins only. Jesus spoke of love for the world, this world. We are all capable of doing this and if we did you would see that this world is truly paradise. I don't want to gave to wait for death to bring something I have already. Live a life of love and we won't need heaven.

[@NequeNon]

Ron Fai, first off, thanks for your comment. Secondly, there are very admirable and good qualities in the intentions you just mentioned and I don't want to suggest anything that thwarts those noble, admirable and wholesome aspirations. There would be a lot to to unpack in what you said that I won't be able to do here. I'll leave the justification/salvation issue aside, but it does sound to me like you're repeating a more protestant version of justification than a Catholic one. Catholics, as Jesus is recorded as expressing several times, believe in meritorious works which contribute to one's own salvation (and others). There would be much more to say here... However, I'd invite you to look up a little bit about a bedrock and fundamental doctrine of Original Sin. Briefly stated, the consequences of original sin do not render the intellect and will of Man completely deprived, but rather wound them. One need not be a believer to come to know this. I believe it was CS Lewis who said that the doctrine of Original Sin (or rather it's consequences) is the most obvious of all Christian teachings, that he came to appreciate it even when he was an atheist. We have tendency to move our will to selfishness and to do evil like a car whose steering always goes off. If not rectified by a conscious will to change direction, the car will eventually drift into the ditch. If unaware of the problem, the same result will happen. Think of it another way, you rightly said that Jesus gave us a message of Mercy. Well then, if our intellects were so clear and intuitive, why did He need to tell us? If our wills did not have this tendency to do the wrong thing, why did He die crucified though He was innocent? I'd love to continue this, especially on some findings of human psychology (you might like to look at the Lucifer effect by Dr Philip Zimbardo). But I think the greatest resource for understanding this very important doctrine is in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) which effectively expresses a Catholic understanding of human anthropology. Here's the relevant passage: www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p7.htm Give it a read, I'd be keen to hear what you have to say about it:)

[@marywarren8357]

Ron Fai: You speak the words of the devil, whether you know it or not. "Live a life of love and we won't need heaven." Only the devil tries to deceive with such pretty words. Get thee behind me Satan....

[@roberteleneke9631]

No one brought up the fact that this has to do with the atomic bomb doping on Nagasaki.

[@tompalm64]

Good panel discussion I agree with Joe to a large extent. I feel like Scorsese made it for himself and his conflict with his faith. It's interesting that Hollywood hasn't embraced the film probably because it deals with the Catholic faith and not in a "negative." You guys should check Bishop Barron's review of the film. He has some very good insights into it.

[@sophiagomez5619]

Your faces on the thumbnail said everything than needed to be said XD And then Joe with his notebook XD I felt the tension behind that notebook.

[@gerryvyti4256]

Interesting to see a more merciful perspective vs a more doctorine focused perspective towards the characters in the movie

[@alexalex88088]

Also, you guys should check out these Eastern Christian films: "Ostrov" (The Island), The Priest San, (Pop) The Priest, The Monastery, Mysteries of The Jesus Prayer, Forpost www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=19597.0 theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/films-for-orthodox-christians/ trisagionfilms.com/videos/

[@sofkitty878]

Joe a baby fr

[@wildhias6195]

really like your stuff and perspectives, but Joseph scares me to be honest, he looks like the funny one in a boy band, but he sees everything through the narrow lens of perceived catholic orthodoxy, he would have been a very busy inquisitor

[@tswindell9496]

wildhias wow. Judgemental much? LeAve joe be

[@CatholicGaming]

I have not watched the movie, but it sounds like Fr. Rodrigues is going against when Jesus said, "No man can serve two masters." If anything he was doing this.

[@amsrremix2239]

Catholic Gaming yea you definitely need to watch the movie before you open your mouth

[@joeadantona]

My friend, Steve the Missionary, did a great video on the right and wrong questions to ask in watching Silence. I heartily recommend it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqCoXpZslNR8r7M

[@watcherofthewest8597]

Silence was a movie I wanted to better than it was as a whole. Scorcese is so talented, some things he will always do well. The guy who didn't give it a review I don't really understand. It seems his argument is that art that depicts apostasy can only depict it as an ultimate, unforgivable sin, or else it is somehow justifying reasons for it? The movies point, is a portrayal of an extreme situation in which faith is tested and conflicts and paradoxes that can arise. The guy being offended, at worse is displaying anger at something in the hopes of being perceived as more pure or righteous and, at best, is saying there is a theological limit on the art that can be produced.

[@Wiillyum]

Great review guys! Definitely 100% agree with Joe. You can never commit evil for the sake of good, it's not morally acceptable. Although we can learn from this movie as Christians, the average movie goer will be deceived. The enemy is very smart in twisting the truth. Evangelisation is about sharing the truth and love about the Gospel and you cannot share what you don't have. True discipleship is all or nothing. The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church. Love this channel by the way. Keep on doing what you guys are doing. Be that light in this world. May God love you and our lady protect you.