Pope Francis – Film Star!

PopeFrancismicrophone

Pope Francis at the Academy Awards  ceremony…

Pope Francis is set to become the first pope in history to play himself in a movie. He will star in the forthcoming film ‘Beyond the Sun,’ which will feature children around the world emulating the apostles, while searching for Jesus Christ.

The idea for the film actually came from Pope Francis himself, who pitched the story to filmmakers at the Hollywood-based AMBI Pictures, which was founded by Andrea Iervolino and Monika Bacardi in 2013. The company released the movie ‘Septembers of Shiraz’ in 2015, which starred Salma Hayek.

The Holy Father wanted to create a movie which would be able to reach out to children in order to spread the Catholic faith. His idea was to effectively portray Gospel passages and fables to youngsters.

Iervolino, who will finance the project, has been producing films since he was in his teens. In fact it all started when the church in his hometown of Cassino, Italy, allowed him to shoot footage inside the place of worship when he was 15. The Italian now says it will be the highlight of his career to work with Pope Francis.

“Our excitement and gratitude toward His Holiness, Pope Francis participating in this film is beyond words. This is not just a movie for us, it’s a message, and who better to have on your side to deliver an important societal and spiritual message than the Pope,” the Catholic News Agency reported.

Bacardi mentioned that the film will be entertaining for families across the globe, while ‘Beyond the Sun’ will also help to raise money for charities.

“It is a great honor for Andrea and I to have the opportunity to work with His Holiness, Pope Francis, to spread the awareness of his message, through this film. We will make a movie everyone involved with can be proud of. Not only will families from around the globe enjoy this film and be entertained, but they will be moved,” she said, according to Variety.

All proceeds from the movie will go to the El Almendro and Los Hogares de Cristo charities, which are both based in Argentina, where Pope Francis hails from. The charitable organizations work with children and young adults who are in need of help and guidance.

However, the Vatican downplayed the role the pope would have in the film.

“The pope is not an actor,” a Vatican spokesman said. However, the AMBI website suggests that the movie intends to “end with an epilogue from Pope Francis telling children how and where to find Jesus,” Reuters reports.

Filming is set to begin in early 2016 on location in Italy.  Source

Comment:

Now, firstly, take a moment to reflect on Our Lord’s promise to be with His Church until the end of time, so we mustn’t despair, and then read this incisive commentary by  Christopher Ferrara, on Pope Francis’ journey from papacy to film star.

Then repeat after me…. “you couldn’t make this stuff up!” 

36 responses

  1. After one has wept, pray. What else to do? This Pope has just gone beyond the beyonds and no true Catholic can possibly follow him.

    • Crofterlady,

      Pope Francis is certainly the worst of the post-Vatican II pontiffs, but in fact we just continue to do what we have been doing these past crisis-ridden years; we accept his words when he speaks the Faith to us, and reject the rest. That’s all we can do… in the hope of cadging a couple of free tickets to the film, if not the Academy Awards ceremony!

    • For somebody who wants to be seen as “humble”, he gets himself into the limelight with amazing regularity. It’s just incredible that he is starring in a film – what on earth will he do next?

  2. “His idea was to effectively portray Gospel passages and fables to youngsters.”

    So by the end of the movie the kids won’t know what is Gospel and what is fable. This is so Modernist, so Vatican II, so Jesuit!

  3. A Rosary Crusade may well be in order. It worked in winning the Battle of Lepanto, and again in Austria where the Communists up and left the country without firing a shot.

    • Theresa Rose,

      A Rosary Crusade is certainly a very good idea – despite the fact that Papa Francis doesn’t like us “counting” prayers. If you recall, he mocked some laity for sending him a spiritual bouquet on his election as pontiff.

    • WF,

      That’s very interesting, indeed. And yes, no sign of the much lauded “mercy” for the guilty parties!

      He should be thanking God he was only pulled over by zealous fans, not assassinated. These royal-style walkabouts are asking for trouble – a disaster waiting to happen.

    • “You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others”

      …unless they’re traditional Catholics that is.

    • Truly Tragic! The Bishop of Rome, was concerned about the welfare of a child in a wheelchair who potentially risked being injured. Or so the article says:

      “Following a colourful encounter with young dancers and singers, the pope went over to greet the faithful, at which point two arms reached out to grab him.

      The person, who is not seen in the video footage, did not let go, even after the pope lost his balance and fell onto a child in a wheelchair.”

      Editor: well, the report doesn’t quote him as mentioning anything about a wheelchair, merely labelling his fan as “selfish”, and in a very bad tempered way, as well. Maybe he had a point when he said he should be in prison 😀

      • George

        If Francis behaved with the same dignity that all the popes up to and including Pius XII presented comported themselves, then he wouldn’t be put in the position of being dragged over by some looney. The Popes never went around shaking hands with admiring fans and groupies, they moved along offering continuously the Apostolic blessing from a distance. It’s like watching a rock star now. Very unbecoming.

  4. I hope everyone read Christopher Ferrara’s article, linked at the end of the blog article above. It gives an overview of the key events in this pontificate, and from the outset, with the comparison of Pope Benedict’s words on election, and those of Pope Francis, is was clear that Papa Francis was … how can I put it… going to be a very different type of pope – an “un-papal pope” if I can put it like that. So, if you’ve not read it, I strongly urge you to do so.

    • Editor,

      I have now read the Chris Ferrara article and it is really excellent, as always. Right there at the start, Ferrara showed up the difference between Pope Benedict and Pope Francis. There’s just no comparison. Pope Benedict was no traditionalist, that’s true, but he had a sense of the dignity of his office – the two opening statements from the two popes on their election, plus the manner of dress, shows that the difference between Benedict and Francis is the same as that between night and day.

      I just wish Pope Benedict would speak out now – he must, surely, see the scandal his successor is causing?

  5. It seems the more slack you allow this Man the more he is willing to throw out to the secular World. Unfortunately it doesn’t draw them in it just pulls him out ever more . Since the now infamous who I am to judge statement ,that had the likes of Elton John saying”Make that man a Saint and make him a Saint now” the writing was on the wall .

  6. According to Athanasius: “His idea was to effectively portray Gospel passages and fables to youngsters. So by the end of the movie the kids won’t know what is Gospel and what is fable. This is so Modernist, so Vatican II, so Jesuit!

    Seasoned readers of this blog may be aware that the voice here is that of a blogger who is quite prepared to utter historical falsehoods and, when challenged, to persist in error. Mere facts do not matter when there are proddies to be attacked. Equally, when false and misleading translations are challenged, no matter, mere words do not matter when there are proddies to be done down. And there is a little chorus of mindless cheer-leaders liable to pop up with ra-ra noises in support.

    Here, however, it is not mere proddies, it is the Bishop of Rome who is being attacked. He, evil chap that he is, wants to tell children that the Gospels are fables. Modernist, Conciliarist and Jesuitical, according to Athanasius. Kids (children, one imagines, rather than young goats) will not at the end of this evil process be able, Athanasius assures us, to tell the difference between Gospel and fable.

    When it comes to attacking evil proddies, historical lies and mistranslations may be needed. But this utter nonsense about poor old Francis is not even remotely plausible. Jesuits are not that stupid and any fair-minded reader would (given half a brain) suspect a mistranslation. Sure enough, the spokesperson for the film’s production company issued a statement (La Stampa, 2 February) saying Francesco was taking part “in una storia basata sui Vangeli che, attraverso molte storie contenenti il messaggio di Gesù, permetterà ai bambini di tutto il mondo di imparare e comprendere le parabole del figlio di Dio.”

    Now that, la parabola (le parabole), whether Anthanasisus the Great Mistranslator, understands the words or not (and the record on linguistic and historical skills is not impressive), means “parable”, not, not, not “fable”. The script is to be based on the Gospels and is intended to allow children throughout the world to learn and to understand the parables (le parabole) of the Son of God. So they will learn and will understand the meaning of parables. How Modernist!

    One understands that Lefebvrists hate all the bishops of Rome ever since the one who first sacked (or, strictly, required a resignation from) their hero. Hate them if you must, cast their words in their teeth and assail them ad nauseam with great lumps of tedious stuff from long-dead popes. But do try to keep it honest. When you have so many other reasons to hate them, there is no need to resort to lying translations. La parabola: parable, not fable.

    It is not that you couldn’t make it up. You actually do: I speak to them in parables, for they seeing see not, and they hearing hear not, neither understand.

    • John Dowden,

      That is such a hotch potch of the facts you’ve written there, that I wouldn’t know where to start to correct you.

      You bang on about mis-translations never asking why the original people who published the article didn’t make sure they published the correct translation. It says “fable” in the original RT report, so unless you expect the editor to go double checking every word in every report, you’ve got the wrong target there, but I suspect that’s because you have a beef with Athanasius who knocks your arguments and dodgy history about the Catholic Church for six.

      You are dishonest in everything you say, and it is this sort of lie that catches you out: you wrote – “One understands that Lefebvrists hate all the bishops of Rome (etc)”

      Two things show ignorance there, firstly the use of the Archbishop’s surname to describe those who attend SSPX chapels, when the Archbishop always insisted that he had no “followers”, was merely providing access to the old rite sacraments and secondly, that those who attend SSPX chapels hate any Pope, never mind “all”.

      You are dishonest and unchristian, IMHO.

        • Petrus,

          Well, whatdyeknow… So that rumour is unfounded – that you’ve abandoned us for the Daily Mail blog. Phew! That’s a relief…

          Still, there is that other rumour, seems to be true…

          That, in the words of the old Scots song, you’re “no a man tae throw a word away”

          Not to worry: whether short and pithy, or short and sweet, keep ’em coming. 😀

      • Michaela,

        Setting the personal abuse aside, basic journalism (even for editors) is to check sources. The source given is a Russian broadcaster and for a Russian to try to translate from Italian to English is never going to be easy – the general rule is only ever to translate into one’s own native language. Being alert to likely slips is, again, just basic education.

        The point is that if something looks really iffy, it is worth checking before pontificating. And a senior cleric saying the Gospels are fables is about as iffy as it gets.

        But that is the normal way of approaching a peculiar statement – a mistranslation is likely. What is evident here is that there is such a strong animus against Bishop Francis that if it appears he has said something really peculiar, the technique is to leap on that rather than check it out. Use the mistranslation to score a point.

        So here we have the man attacked for calling the Gospels myths (and misleading children) when he said no such thing, where the remarks are avowedly indirect and the Italian source is Russian. Exactly the same as the technique used to attack Luther in the proddie-bashing thread.

        The puzzle is why people here use dodgy translations when there is more than enough genuine material – something clearly makes people go blind to mere plausibility.

        Now I know mindless loyalists will continue to say black is white regardless but it is worth flagging up errors for any passing reader who might be misled. There is a difference between parable and fable and no end of Lefebvrist huffing and puffing can change that. Old hands will remember “Pravda” where the joke was that everyone knew the Communist Party’s “Truth” was a pack of lies, even the journalists writing the thing. If the party faithful keep defending error and repeat that black is white, “Catholic” Truth is going to contain just as much Truth as “Pravda”.

        • Dowden

          Whether or not Pope Francis said fables or parables, the outcome is most likely to be as I described it for the kids on the receiving end. Thos who have been paying attention to Papa Francis’ interpretations of the Gospel passages thus far in his Pontificate will know that he has a bit of a different take on their meaning than his Traditional predecessors.

          As for Luther, he was formally excommunicated as a heretic by the Church. It is not “proddie bashing” to state this fact. Hopefully it will make the Proddies reflect, pray for guidance and return to the true religion from which their forefathers, Luther included, tragically departed. At least with us Traditional Catholics you’ll get the truth, not a load of old ecumenical human respect that offends against faith and charity. I know you find it uncomfortable, but think of the cure rather than the medicine!

        • “The point is that if something looks really iffy, it is worth checking before pontificating.”

          Homosexual and female clergy are much more than iffy in light of Sacred Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. Ever thought of checking that out with a view to abandoning Anglicanism and coming home across the Tiber?

          To quote you: “If the party faithful keep defending error and repeat that black is white,” then it is no more honest than “Pravda”. It works both ways, Dowden.

        • Dowden,

          Give it a rest. You do talk baloney. As for your wounded claims of “personal abuse” – I’ve just been catching up with the blog after a lengthy absence beyond my control, so to speak – and after reading your nasty comment directed, yet again, at Athanasius, you have a darn cheek to accuse anyone of personal abuse against you. If I could have five minutes alone with you in an empty room, you’d have good reason to claim personal abuse. Trust me. Or rather, don’t trust me, at least not in an empty room.

          I’m sick of your ridiculous and highly superior rants about “mis-translations” and the rest, especially your crackpot claim that I double check every word in case it’s a mistranslation – for heaven’s sake, I’m writing for a blog, not a research paper for a PhD. Gerragrip. And I am particularly sick of your self-evident determination to push your own (Anglican and anti-Catholic) agenda, with no intention of taking into account anything we say to you.

          You are not a Catholic and you have no genuine interest in Catholicism, and since we are not remotely interested in ecumenism, let alone Anglicanism (while respecting the many very kindly and well intentioned Anglicans in the land) I really don’t see any point in continuing this pretend conversation.

          You come across as extremely anti-Catholic and since life tends to be very short, even if one makes it through the first very dangerous nine months, I think it’s time we said our goodbyes, don’t you? I do hope you agree, but we’ll never know because you’ve abused our hospitality – and our Catholic religion – for the last time on this blog. From now on, your comments will disappear into thin air. Well, at first they’ll disappear into the moderation box and if they are genuine contributions, may be (I repeat “may” be) released. Otherwise, Phase II will be implemented and your comments will disappear from the face of cyberspace altogether, before you’ve had time to say “Keep Calm and Believe Catholic Truth”.

          Assuring you of our prayerful good wishes, there’s nothing left to say except…

          Goodbye, Dowden… With bells on!

    • Whoa Johnnie, ” assail them ad nauseam with great lumps of tedious stuff from long-dead popes -Do you mean all that great doctrine the Church treasures and we so unworthily inherit??

  7. Now Olaf it’s strange that you should say that because I, for one, simply inwardly groan and zone out of Dowden’s ridiculous claims. He hasn’t the proverbial clue and doesn’t want to know the truth so I cannot understand why editor entertains him.

    • Helen,

      “Entertain [Dowden]”? You kidding me? HE’S the one doing the entertaining. He’s a scream – you have to give him that! Never encountered anyone before with his skill at getting the wrong end of the stick – and pointing it, most of the time, at poor Athanasius.

      Anyway, he’s gone now. Joined the other numpties in no-troll land… 😀

      • Editor

        Just as well I don’t have a masochistic streak or I would be missing Dowden already. Well, now I can put away my pile of Latin and Oxford dictionaries and come back to the stuff that really matters to souls.

  8. At any rate, back to the topic at hand…(thank you for the latest exorcism, Editor!)

    “…which will feature children around the world emulating the apostles, while searching for Jesus Christ.”

    Just wanted to point out, Pope Francis, that if the children around the world are going to emulate the Apostles, then they won’t be “searching” for Jesus Christ, they’ll be baptized into His Mystical Body, grow up strong in the Faith, and end up teaching and converting all nations. Who knows, with any luck, some of them will become priests and do plenty of baptizing themselves….

  9. RCA Victor

    But that would require proselytising, which Pope Francis forbids. Not much likeness to the Apostles there, I would say. No, I’m afraid that under Pope Francis in particular, the Church Militant is set to become the Church mute, not that there’s been much Militancy since Vatican II anyway, excepting the liberal, revolutionary assault on truth, which continues apace with unprecedented boldness and aggression.

    • Theresa Rose,

      I saw that the other day – yes, Pope Francis is incredibly earth-bound, that’s for sure. If only he worried half as much about the spiritual poverty of millions of souls across the world, it would be a start.

%d bloggers like this: