MetaCatholic

The Times is currently showing its listing of the fifty greatest movie robots (of the making of many lists there is no end). Its choices and ratings are somewhat odd, and have given rise to a number of comments. The most bizarre omission, however, is Blade Runner, and its many replicants, the most dangerous of which Roy Baty (played by Rutger Hauer) is pictured here.

I saw this with a friend when it first came out, and we were both raving about it afterwards. We were very surprised when most reviewers disagreed with us, and it took a long time for the film to be critically appreciated as we were sure it should be.

Apart from the wonderfully realised dystopian vision, and a very good script, (enhanced, in my view, by the voiceovers of the original) the film used the idea of replicants to explore ideas of humanity in dramatic ways. Surely this tends to be why some of the best robot fiction and film really fascinates us: it probes what we understand ourselves to be. How then, could it be omitted from any list of robot films, when it does this better than any other film in the market?

(Part of a series on the 39 articles of the Church of England, which so far includes an Introduction, Article I, update, Article II, Article III, Article IV)

In one sense, the fifth article, dealing with the Holy Spirit, is a bare minimum of what might be said.

V. Of the Holy Ghost
The Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one substance, majesty, and glory, with the Father and the Son, very and eternal God.

This is a fairly straightforward affirmation of the Spirit as third person of the Trinity, and in its unquestioning adoption of the filioque clause, located clearly within the Western Catholic tradition. I commented in a previous post on the filioque, and don’t have anything new to add to what I said there.

This bare credal statement in some respects is almost the opposite of a great deal of contemporary talk about the Spirit. It may be that my experience of this is atypical, but I would suggest that, particularly but not exclusively among charismatic Christians, and those influenced by them, talk of the Spirit tends to be instrumental, and mainly about empowering the Church or Christians. The language of gift and empowerment has a wide-ranging scriptural background behind it, and there is certainly far more room for talk of the work of the Holy Spirit than the article would superficially suggest. I don’t want to deny the validity of this language. Equally, perhaps more attention to the Spirit as Person might lead to a greater stress on relationship, and less obsession with power.