1

‘Revolutionary Christianity and Neo-Marxism:

In need of an opponent-ally?’

Silvia Caramella

Centre for Research in Media and Cultural Studies

Sunderland University

Conference “Marxism Matters”

University of Sunderland 17th

April 2012

Two Philosophical roots of the Christian-Marxist dialogue.

‘As long as I asked people to help the poor, I was called a saint. But when I

asked the question: why is there so much poverty? I was called a

communist’(Löwy 1996: 74). This famous declaration made by Dom Hélder

Câmara (1909 - 1999), the late archbishop of Recife, summarises the vocation

of revolutionary Christianity, whose aim is to change ‘the basic economic,

political, social and cultural structures and conditions of life in this world’

(Bonino 1976: 8). It is opposed to a more conservative approach to Theology,

which tends to transcend the mundane reality in focusing more on a spiritual

eschatology; it is characterised by an inter-confessional and inter-faith

emphasis; and is in a constant dialogue with the contemporary culture.

The intellectual roots of revolutionary Christianity can be found within a

specific theological tradition, which crosses different eras and countries, such

in the works and life of Thomas Müntzer (1489 – 1525) or Robert de

Lamennais (1782 – 1854). However, it is from Marxist philosophy that

revolutionary Christianity has received, in the second half of the 20th

Century,

one of its greatest challenges (Sargent 2009). In fact, it is when Marxist

2

philosophy has paid favourable attention to the religious - setting aside

generalised condemnations - that the alliance has been truly productive for

theology, though not without limits, divergences and sometimes

disagreements.

Two of the most important lines of thought which contributed to a renewal in

Christian reflection and action, originate – amongst others - from two

European Marxist philosophers: the German Ernst Bloch (1885-1977) and the

Italian Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937). The first not only influenced the

theology of Liberation, Post-Colonial, Black and Feminist theologies, and the

theology of Hope, but also inspired a new attitude towards education and

cultural action, systematised by Paulo Freire (1921-1997). Simultaneously,

the literary critique put forward by Gramsci in his ‘Prison Notebooks’ (1985

[1950]) was applied by some Marxist filmmakers, such as Pier Paolo Pasolini

and Liliana Cavani, in their personal readings of the historical Jesus or Christ-

figures. This stimulated a rich debate about theological approaches to the

filmic Christ and contributed to theological/ideological criticism in Film

Studies and Theology, which is prolific, though in need of a fuller

systematisation (Martin & Oswalt 1995; May, 1997).

From Ernst Bloch to Paulo Freire. The global journey of the Philosophy

of Hope.

The publication of the monumental work ‘The Principle of Hope’ (1986),

written by Ernst Bloch between 1954 and 1959, has had such a huge

3

influence in theology that Pannenberg argues that its magnitude is

immeasurable (Pannenberg 1971: 237-238). The unorthodox German Marxist

stressed the utopian and messianic aspect of Marxism and established a

philosophical link with Christian theology, seeing in the latter a hope for

redemption that Marxism could bring back into a revolutionary perspective.

Bloch’s esoteric and biblical language, closer to an Old Testament prophet

than an atheist philosopher, did not help to gain a positive reception for his

magnum opus. Rejected by purists and ignored in Britain and United States

(Zipes 1997: 3), Blochian philosophy was however well received by the very

thinkers who were supposed to be overcome. In fact, the Lutheran theologian

Jürgen Moltmann (1926 -), who is still today one of the most respected

Christian thinkers, wrote his work Theology of Hope (1967), a large part of

which is based on a theological answer to Bloch’s system (Godfrey 1987:

230). Atheistic eschatology, the concept of history as a this-worldly tension

between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’, was reclaimed and readapted by

theology, which included this world in the realm of the metaphysical.

Messianic Marxism was transformed by Moltmann into a Christian

revolutionary attitude. As the German theologian writes in the introduction to

his work, ‘Christianity is eschatology, is hope, forward looking and forward

moving, and therefore also revolutionising and transforming the present’

(Moltmann 1967: 16). Soon after he explains why and how: ‘That is why

faith, wherever it develops into hope, causes not rest but unrest, not patience

but impatience…Peace with God means conflict with the world’ (Ibid. 1967:

21).

4

Thus redemption and liberation were no longer an expectation (or a mere

illusion, for the non-believers) for the afterlife, but the incarnation of a

process already begun in history, and needing to be nurtured in this world.

The next step was made by another German theologian, the Roman Catholic

Johann Baptist Metz (1926 -) who, following a similar investigation to

Moltmann’s, proposed the collective and tangible character of hope in a more

political sense. Indeed, hope for Metz meant political struggle (Moylan

1997:101; Okuma 2007: 51). Though influenced by Bloch’s philosophy, both

Moltmann and Metz were able to give independent theological weight to their

works, never falling into a lack of metaphysical substance:

Both Metz and Moltmann were strongly influenced by this approach to philosophy and to

reading the history of messianic movements, particularly Judaism and Christianity. They

initiated an extended dialogue with Bloch in their own writings, and sought to appropriate

some of his central themes for the Christian tradition. Yet their work was always self-

consciously rooted in their respective theological influences. Although Bloch, with the

Frankfurt School, directly affected their understanding of the theological task, they were not

attempting to simply construct a religious edifice around materialist atheism. Rather, they

began from their theological agenda.

(Paeth 2008: 21)

Although influenced by Marxist philosophy, their theological depth and their

intellectual independence, together with a strong demand of aggiornamento

(updating) from the Churches (Vatican Council II began in 1962), have

contributed to a successful expansion. The birth of Political Theology spread

remarkably widely into new branches of theology, and what was at first

Bloch’s utopian Marxism became one of the most important contributions to

contemporary Christian thought. Metz’s methodology and/or theory

5

developed in the five continents into Liberation, Black, Feminist and Post-

Colonial Theology (Schüssler Fiorenza 2011: 48; Sindima 2008: 65).

Due to the political and economical situation of their countries in the 1960s,

often under the yoke of dictatorship, Gustavo Gutiérrez and other Latin

American liberation theologians were more openly influenced by Marxism,

and not only by Ernst Bloch’s ‘Philosophy of Hope’. The Latin American

theologians are among those who have received more attention both from

religious hierarchies (often hostile) and the secular world, especially for their

political commitment to the poorest of the poor. Though the accusation of

privileging Marxism to the detriment of theology brought the resistance of

some scholars (Nava 2001: 13), the encounter with Marxism has been

explicitly invoked (Sargent 2009: 263; Frei Betto 1986). Notwithstanding

differences on the evaluation of this theological current, it is undeniable that

they have hade a critical - but constructive - approach to Marxism. Liberation

Theology did not simply pay lip service to revolution; it brought it about.

With regard to Bloch’s influence on Liberation theologians, Moylan argues

that these Christian leaders have been able, more than the original ‘audience’

of Marxist hope, to achieve practical results:

In the work of the Latin American liberation theologians, especially, Bloch’s articulation of

the power of the utopian function resists closure by any ideological position…They have

dialectically taken the utopian function to a new moment in the history of the human struggle

for justice and fulfilment. Rather than simply exposing the failings of this unorthodox

Marxist and cynically accepting the status quo of a world informed by anti-communism and

dominated by transnational capitalism, they have dared to challenge that pervasive system in

the name of a future that draws on the best of both Christian and Marxist praxis. Their

critical strategy is not a backward, nostalgic opportunism, but rather an embracing of a

revolutionary process that is still emerging from and beyond the limits of Western discourse.

(Moylan 1997:118)

6

As mentioned above, the Roman Curia never appreciated any kind of attempt

to underline the points in common between Christianity and Marxist

philosophy, and they have often shown their dislike for the alleged ‘Marxist

appropriation’ of the historical Jesus.

As early as 1979, John Paul II, the Polish Pontiff – a strong anti-Marxist, for

obvious personal reasons (he came from Soviet-controlled Poland) – clearly

pointed out the official opinion of the Holy See, on the occasion of his

address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate in

Puebla (Mexico): ‘In other cases people claim to show Jesus as politically

committed, as one who fought against Roman oppression and the authorities,

and also as one involved in the class struggle. This idea of Christ as a

political figure, a revolutionary, as the subversive man from Nazareth, does

not tally with the Church's catechesis’ (John Paul II, 28/01/1979 online).

Following this, two official documents signed by the former Prefect of the

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now

Pope Benedict XVI, the ‘Libertatis Nuntius: Instruction on Certain Aspects of

the “Theology of Liberation”’(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

06/08/1984 online) and the ‘Libertatis Conscientia: Instruction on Christian

Freedom and Liberation’ (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

22/03/1986 online), wrote the last word on a potential integration of

Liberation Theology to the approved teaching of the Church, and the starting

point of its exclusion from the orthodox teachings.

7

However, despite a methodical and persistent silencing of Liberation

Theologians (such as Leonardo Boff and Jon Sobrino), their intellectual

legacy is still present and active, not only in the American continent, but in

numerous singular and collective projects which show their bond with the

Blochian Philosophy of Hope through their commitment to social issues.

The rejection of the hegemonic capitalist culture, with its anti-humanism and

ignorance of the destiny of the most disadvantaged - now part of the social

teachings of most of the Christian Churches - and the struggle for human

rights is vibrant in several Christian organizations, such as the Catholic

Worker Movement (which has more than 200 communities around the

world), openly anti-capitalist and anti-bourgeois (Ludlow, Catholicworker,

online), or the British Christian Socialist Movement, with a presence in all

regions of the UK.

These examples are not a mere nostalgic memory of the French worker

priests of the 1940s or of some heroes of the past decades, such as Oscar

Romero, Rutilio Grande or Camilo Torres. In fact, it is possible to find, even

within the English-speaking world, more than one point in common with neo-

Marxism. Some recent debates hosted by the British Christian magazine ‘The

Tablet’, in the last months, have dealt with the failures of capitalist society

(Finn, The Tablet 11/02/2012), gay marriage (Beattie, The Tablet 10/03/2012)

and the social cuts made by David Cameron’s Government (Studzinski, The

Tablet 31/03/2012), showing interesting points in common with left-wing

culture, which includes what can be called a neo-Marxism, now free from

ideological dogmatisms. Moreover, ‘The Tablet’ often makes public the

8

results of surveys which do not receive much publicity from the rest of the

Christian media, showing that the ‘flock’ is often non-conformist with regard

to the official teachings, whether of Roman Catholic or Church of England.

For instance, the magazine informed its readers that recent surveys carried out

by two different associations (ComRes- Catholic Voices and YouGov), about

gay marriage, show that more than 50% of people of faith support same-sex

unions (Frymann & Adams, The Tablet 16/06/2012).

The political arena seems to be, even today, the preferred place in which

committed Christians and Marxist activists can find a strategic alliance for the

fulfilment of their respective goals through specific common agreements.

However, it also seems a reductive field: it would be interesting, for instance,

to enlarge the focus to include Ecology, Cultural Studies and Media

Education. Though the starting points are different, this does not necessarily

mean that both systems of thought do not share the same attitudes or

assumptions with respect to power structures and dynamics.

The above examples do not mean that the associations or the scholars quoted

have publicly, or indirectly, manifested a kind of affiliation with Marxist

philosophy: however, we can see that Marxist thought and progressive

Christianity still have some intellectual and political affinities, which deserve

to be investigated. As for the past decades, it is not necessary for a committed

Christian to be a Marxist; in the same way, Marxists thinkers do not have to

show theoretical interest in theology as did Ernst Bloch. Nonetheless, the lack

of communication between scholars and researchers who show they are

9

walking the same paths, but in parallel, can be a lost opportunity for both

parties.

Ernst Bloch and other Marxists truly contributed to the renewal of Christian

culture, just as Christian scholars and activists were enriching to Marxist

thought. Religion is frequently portrayed as an obstacle to integration, but

ignoring the liberationist character of Christianity can be a dangerous

intellectual omission, and a superficial evaluation on the part of neo-Marxist

philosophers engaged in the analysis of contemporary reality.

Paulo Freire, another committed Christian whose philosophy and pedagogy

are indebted to Ernst Bloch (Giroux and McLaren 1997: 138), wrote his

‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’ (1993 [1970]) with the aim of helping his native

Brazil. However, Freire’s appeal for a more democratic approach to

education, as a post-hierarchical interchange of knowledge and culture

between the educator and the educated, is still - more than forty years later – a

point of reference for many Christian and non-Christian educators all over the

world (McLaren & Leonard 1993). Freire’s pedagogy has multiple

applications, and even in Media Education its recovery is urged by scholars.

For instance, Kellner advocates this, especially because of the apparently

‘democratic’ and open-access aspect of new technologies:

‘New multimedia technologies enable group projects for students and more of a problem-

solving pedagogy à la Dewey and Freire than traditional top-down teaching models. If

students are to access information, engage in cultural communication and production, and

gain the skills necessary to succeed in the new economy and culture, they are compelled to

acquire enhanced literacies, to work cooperatively with others, and to navigate new cultural

and social terrains.’

(Kellner 2002: 97)

10

Media Education, and more specifically the use of films and audiovisual

productions, are related to the second line of thought we have considered

here: i.e. the literary critique proposed by Antonio Gramsci, and translated

into images by filmmaker Pier Paolo Pasolini, which contributed to Christian

film criticism and opened new ways to pastoral activities.

Marxism, Theology and Film: the reception of Gramscian literary

critique through Pier Paolo Pasolini.

In the same period as the Blochian influence on Evangelical and Catholic

Theology, the literary critique elaborated by Italian Antonio Gramsci

influenced, amongst others, some filmmakers who used the representation of

the historical Jesus or other Christ-figures to present their cultural revolution

through films. Within a series of Italian films which combine Marxism and

Christ-figures, such as ‘Francis of Assisi’, directed by Liliana Cavani in

1966, or ‘The Working Class goes to Heaven’, directed by Elio Petri in 1971,

one in particular has had the intellectual strength to open new horizons for the

critical approach to Film Studies from within Theological Studies. This film

is ‘The Gospel according to Saint Matthew’, directed by Pier Paolo Pasolini

in 1964: considered by Christian professionals in Film Studies the perfect

masterpiece, it has been, in fact, a kind of watershed in Theology and Film

(Baugh 1997: ix). Pasolini called his ‘Gospel’ a ‘popular cultural work in a

11

Gramscian sense’ (Macciocchi, L’Unità 22/12/1964). Indeed, when Gramsci

wrote about literary critique in his ‘Prison Notebooks’, he argued that, to be

valid for the philosophy of praxis, literary criticism ‘must fuse the struggle

for a new culture (that is, for a new humanism) and criticism of social life,

feeling and conceptions of the world with aesthetic or purely artistic criticism,

and it must do so with heat and passion, even if it takes the form of sarcasm’

(Gramsci [1950] 1985:95). The philosopher underlined the role played the

intellectuals as constructors of a new culture, more than the focus of scholars

on culture’s existing content (Stender Clausen 1973: 47). Pasolini applied this

formula literally to his film, because he fused his Marxist approach with the

original gospel structure and language, and this encounter produced a new

culture. The result of this contamination (in a Gramscian sense) was

beneficial both to a Christian approach to film and to Left-wing intellectuals,

surprised by the revolutionary charge of the Jesus portrayed by Matthew the

Evangelist. The same director testified that he was inspired to undertake this

production after reading without interruption Matthew’s entire account, when

he accidentally found a copy of the Gospels in the bedside drawer of a hotel

(Baugh 1997: 94).

The script of Pasolini’s film was composed of the original words of the

Gospel: the director did not add a word, or a scene, to the biblical text. But

this faithfulness to the sacred scriptures was presented with a new aesthetic:

the Christ was the young anti-Francoist Spaniard Enrique Irazoqui, Saint John

the Baptist the real poet Mario Socrate, Simon the Zealot the philosopher

Enzo Siciliano, and the writer Natalia Ginzburg played Mary of Bethany.

12

Thus, the Pasolinian aesthetics showed, using the very words of the

evangelist, a working-class Christ who fights against dictatorship, a Christ

who is tender with the poor and severe and merciless with the rich. The

community presented by the film is one in which the wise and prophetical

voices are those of intellectuals.

Rohdie explains the politicization of Pasolini aesthetic as a kind of

dichotomy-analogy within history. He thus re-established a link with the

Gramscian proposal:

Analogy and imitation, then, were political tools as well as aesthetic techniques. It was

commitment and beauty brought together and used to expose and criticise the present and

decry the loss within it of the beautiful...He reproduced an ancient purity by the analogy,

which always presupposed a gap, and which was a tool of beauty and an instrument of

politics. It made the two spheres of politics and aesthetics alike without compromising either.

It was an accomplishment that neither the avant-garde not the politically committed had been

able to realise. The main constituents of the Pasolinian analogy were time and history

(1995:164).

The Jesus proposed by the Italian filmmaker was clearly a human and

historical figure: in his original plan, the resurrection was not intended to be

filmed: only the advice of a priest friend, wishing to avoid any censorship,

convinced the Italian filmmaker to add this scene1. In addition, the English

translation of the title does not correspond to the original Italian version, with

the omission of the adjective ‘Saint’ from the title. The Gospel of Pasolini is

the Gospel of Matthew the man, and not the Saint of the tradition.

1 As declared by Mons. Francesco Angelicchio in an interview conducted by RAI (Italian Television)

journalist Rossella Alimenti, on the occasion of the 90th

anniversary of the birth of Pier Paolo Pasolini.

Rome, Centro ELIS 05/03/2012.

The interview is available online at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RKi8cmqf_w

[accessed 19/06/2012].

13

Nevertheless, the this-worldly and Marxist interpretation of the divine

challenged the non-secular viewer.

When the film was released, Christian scholars read it as the perfect synthesis

of how the historical Jesus can be embodied by contemporary culture and

what he can mean for humanity, despite the ideological differences.

Fr. Virgilio Fantuzzi, the film critic of ‘La Civiltà Cattolica’, the cultural

review of the Jesuit Italian Community, remembers in an interview to the

Vatican Radio how he discovered, as a young religious, Pasolini’s work on

the sacred scripture; and how this provoked in him aesthetical and religious

emotions. ‘I started to think (after the screening of ‘The Gospel’) that if a

Marxist and atheist man is able to give me an emotion, not only aesthetical

but also religious, this means he is not so far from me, as he thinks. And for

this reason I decided to contact him: to tell him this’ (Fantuzzi, Pagine

Corsare, online, 03/11/2005).

This time, indeed, the Church’s hierarchy did not reject the film as

blasphemous and disrespectful to the religion they had done with the previous

‘La Ricotta’ (‘Ro.Go.Pa.G.’, 1963), censored by the Italian state. Even

though ‘The Gospel according to Saint Matthew’ depicted the historically

‘subversive and revolutionary character of Christianity’ (Moravia, Pagine

Corsare, online, 04/10/1964), it eventually presented to theologians a

different filmic face of the Saviour, who was not longer the white and

bourgeois hero of Hollywood. This ‘Gramscian piece of work’, officially

shown to the eight hundred bishops assembled in Rome for Vatican Council

II provoked a ‘burst of applause’ (Baugh 1997: 97) , and won both the Jury’s

14

prize at the Festival of Venice and the OCIC (International Catholic Film

Office) Prize. The Catholic institution’s statement offers an interesting

explanation of its decision to award the Italian unorthodox director, which

relates the artistic merits to the socio-economic reality:

The author, without giving up his own ideology, has faithfully translated, with simplicity and

piety, often very movingly, the social message of the Gospel, in particular love for the poor

and the oppressed, while sufficiently respect the divine aspect of Christ…For the simplicity

of its style and thanks to the humility with which the director presents the various characters,

this work is far superior to earlier, commercial films, on the life of Christ…Though the

director has given the impression of interpreting the Gospel within a historical human

dimension, the Jury was sincerely moved by the strong representation of the social teaching

of Christ which is of particular relevance today

(OCIC, as quoted in Rohdie 1995:162)

Thus, analogously to Marxist Bloch’s contribution to social and political

Theology, a Marxist interest in Christianity once more produced a positive

reaction from scholars committed to social issues, and reminded Christians of

their vocation to the common good. Again, this reaction was transformed into

mutual benefit.

On the one hand, films like Pier Paolo Pasolini’s ‘Gospel’ contributed to

Christian understanding of films through the lens of specific ideologies.

Gramsci’s thought entered the canon of Film Studies and Theology thanks to

this world-famous masterpiece, to the extent that today a theological reading

of a film should not disregard the ideological element, because films are

essential resources in Religious Education and catechesis. For instance, the

Jesus presented by the Marxist Pasolini is profoundly different from the one

depicted by Mel Gibson (‘The Passion of the Christ’, 2004), who used extra-

15

biblical sources, such as the visions of 18th

century Catherine Emmerich,

collected from Clemens Brentano and not free from anti-Semitic elements

(Pieper, Jewish-Christian Relations, online, 01/06/2004; Anti-Defamation

League, online, 24/06/2003).

Christ-figures like Babette in Gabriel Axel’s ‘Babette’s Feast’ (1987) are not

conveying the same meaning as the Bess in Lars Von Trier’s ‘Breaking the

Waves’ (1996); so the Jesus representation of Pasolini has nothing in

common with the blue-eyed Christ of Franco Zeffirelli (‘Jesus of Nazareth’,

1977). Once again, Marxist philosophy has given to theology a useful

toolbox, an instrument of dialogue and investigation. As above mentioned,

considering that films are a compulsory methodology in Religious Education,

we can easily deduce the importance of the use of meanings through images.

On the other hand, ‘The Gospel according to St. Matthew’ can also be

considered as a paradigm of how Christian culture and heritage can enrich

Marxist thinkers and artists, with a series of analogies and accounts that show

aesthetical efficacy and emotional strength.

Conclusions: From Bloch, through Pasolini, to Steve McQueen?

On several occasions, Pasolini affirmed his fascination with the points in

common between Marxism and Christianity, and invoked, for his fellow

intellectuals, a more open-minded attitude to the religious world. The

director’s intentions in ‘The Gospel’ were in a sense an act of re-consecration

16

of reality (Stack 1969:83), and an attempt to promote dialogue with the

Christian-Left, especially in his native Italy:

The point is that I have contributed to the dialogue…Groups of Catholics have now emerged

on the left of the PCI (Italian Communist Party) – the phenomenon of Don Milani2, the

Catholic left: these are very important phenomena in Italy…What I am interested in is the

emergence of advanced Catholics like Don Milani, so I cannot feel that my efforts towards

the dialogue were fruitless.

(Stack 1969: 97)

To dialogue with an interlocutor who shows affinities, one must be open to

listening, and evaluating the contributions brought by the opponent-ally.

Pasolini defended his point to a group of French Marxist intellectuals during

the presentations of The Gospel, a meeting marked by their harsh reaction

against the ‘catholicity’ of the film. In fact, he insisted that he wanted to

create a connection between those who believe and those who do not…The discourse

essentially concerns this: the religious problem becomes ideological. Catholicism must be

able to be conscious of social problems, and so too must Marxism face the religious moment

of humankind. There will be always an irrational, religious moment, and the improvement of

social reality will frame the religious part of life.

(Macciocchi, L’Unitá 22/12/1964)

As Marxist philosophy has been crucial for revolutionary Christianity, the

revolutionary aspect of Christian faith and culture can be equally useful for

Marxist scholars: Theologians, Biblicists and Christian Film scholars can add

2 Don Lorenzo Milani (1923 – 1967) was an Italian Catholic priest who founded the democratic school of

Barbiana (Florence) and denounced the inequality of education system in his book ‘Letter to a Teacher’.

His progressive ideas were considered too radical from his contemporary Catholic hierarchy who, in

several occasions, tried to silence him. The works of Don Milani were amongst the best valued texts of

the Italian students’ movement in the 1968.

17

their specific knowledge of media content and Film analysis. Western culture

is still thinking in a Christian way: especially in films, the figure of the

mediator, the saviour, the crucified, is often present, more or less

symbolically. Filmmakers like Lars Von Trier in Denmark, or Terrence

Malick in US, show up the ‘false assumption that religion has declined in

importance in the modern age’ (Martin & Oswalt 1995: 121). The

Postmodern era, the multiple meanings of cultural productions, now more

fragmented in their presuppositions, surely represent new challenges for

intellectuals, but also valuable new resources and languages.

One of the most interesting young filmmakers, the Englishman Steve

McQueen offers, in my opinion, a very good starting point for a double

Marxist-Christian common reading of contemporary reality, as depicted by

the English artist, with further reflections on socio-political issues. In fact,

both ‘Hunger’ (2008) and ‘Shame’ (2011) have content and symbols which

could refer, sometimes polemically, to the Christian-Socialist tradition. In

‘Hunger’, the long sequence of the dialogue between the Irish Priest and

Bobby Sands presents a polemic self-identification of the IRA activist with

Christ’s Way of the Cross. During this conversation, the hunger-striker lists a

series of reasons for the sacrifice of his life, whilst a fixed camera frames, as

in a painting, this delirious political-theological declaration to a man of the

Church who opposes him, but is still humanly sympathetic.

More subtly in ‘Shame’ (2011), McQueen uses the synecdoche of sexual

addiction for describing the lost of human soul in a world dominated by

consumerism. The co-redemptive action of the two main characters, who are

18

brother and sister; the (unconscious or wanted?) aesthetical depiction of

Sissi’s attempt of suicide as a ‘Taking Down from the Cross’; and the

shocking ‘Descent into Hell’ of Brandon, a less blessed Dante Alighieri lost

in the circles of hell during a night of unbridled researching for sex, are just

three of the most evocative images. Described as ‘a suffocatingly moral piece

of work’ (Clarke, The Irish Times, online, 13/01/2012), ‘Shame’ offers a

‘puritanical’ approach that both Marxism and Christianity often show in front

of a morally unlimited consumerist society.

Is the passion of Bobby Sands as depicted in ‘Hunger’ a controversial theo-

political self-giving which can recall contemporary human exploitation? Can

we read ‘Shame’ as a metaphor for an appeal to a new economy? Is

McQueen’s film aesthetic a revisited Gramscian literary critique? Eventually

the answers to these questions could come from a renewed dialogue between

neo-Marxism and Christian Film critic.

Silvia Caramella

____________________________________________________________

References

Anti-Defamation League (24/06/2003) ‘Statement on Mel Gibson “The

Passion”’ [online]. Available from:

http://www.adl.org/presrele/mise_00/4275_00.asp

[accessed on 22/06/2012].

Babette’s feast (1987) Directed by Gabriel Axel [film]. London: MGM.

Baugh, Lloyd (1997) Imaging the Divine. Jesus and Christ-Figures in Film.

Kansas City: Sheed and Ward.

19

Beattie, T. (2012) ‘Homosexuality and the Church. Can Marriage ever

Change?’ in: The Tablet, 10/03/2012, p. 5.

Bloch, E. (1986) The Principle of Hope. London:Blackwell.

Bonino, M. A. (1976) Christians and Marxists. The Mutual Challenge to

Revolution. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Breaking the Waves (1987) Directed by Lars von Trier [film]. Santa Monica:

Lions Gate.

Clarke, D. (2012) ‘Shame’ in: The Irish Times [online] 13/01/2012. Available

from:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/theticket/2012/0113/1224310178183.h

tml

[accessed 20/06/2012].

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (06/08/1984) ‘Instruction on

certain aspects of the “Theology of Liberation”’ [online]. Available from:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_c

faith_doc_19840806_theology-liberation_en.html

[accessed 19/06/2012].

______________________________________ (22/03/1986) ‘Instruction on

Christian Freedom and Liberation’ [online]. Available from:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_c

faith_doc_19860322_freedom-liberation_en.html

[accessed 19/06/2012].

Fantuzzi, V. (2005) ‘Un’Analisi del Vangelo secondo Matteo’, in: Pagine

Corsare [online]. Available from:

http://www.pasolini.net/cinema_vangelo_fantuzzi.htm

[accessed 19/06/2012].

Finn, D. K. (2012) ‘Crisis of Capitalism. Making Markets Moral’ in: The

Tablet 11/02/2012, p.12.

Francis of Assisi (1966) Directed by Liliana Cavani [film]. Roma: RAI

(Radio Televisione Italiana).

Frei Betto (1986) Fidel y la Religión. Madrid: Geasa.

Freire, P. (1993) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Continuum.

Frymann, A. & Adams, S. (2012) ‘Churches unite against Same-sex

Marriage’ in The Tablet, 16/06/2012, p. 28.

20

Giroux, H. A. & McLaren, P. (1997) ‘Paulo Freire, Postmodernism and the

Utopian Imgination: a Blochian Reading’ in: (1997) Daniel, J.O. & Moylan,

T. (1997) (eds) Not Yet. Reconsidering Ernst Bloch. London: Verso.

Gramsci, A. (1985) Selections from Cultural Writings, in: A. Forgas, D. &

Nowell-Smith, G (1985) (eds). London: Lawrence and Wishart.

Godfrey, J. J. (1987) A Philosophy of Human Hope. Dordrecht: Martinus

Nijhoff Publishers.

Hunger (2008) Directed by Steve McQueen [film]. London: Icon Film

Distribution.

Kellner, D. (2002) ‘New Media and New Literacies: Reconstructing

Education for the New Millennium’ in: Lievrouw, L. & Livingstone, S.

(2002) (eds) The Handbook of New Media. London: Sage.

Jesus of Nazareth (1977) Directed by Franco Zeffirelli [film]. London:

Carlton Visual Entertainment.

John Paul II (28/011979) ‘Address of His Holiness John Paul II to the Third

General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate’. [online] Available

from:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1979/january/docu

ments/hf_jp-ii_spe_19790128_messico-puebla-episc-latam_en.html

[accessed 19/06/2012].

La Ricotta – Ro.Go.Pa.G. (1963) Directed by Pier Paolo Pasolini [film]

London: Eureka Entertainment.

Löwy, M. (1996) The War of Gods. Religion and Politics in Latin America.

London: Verso.

Ludlow, R. ‘Catholic Worker Positions’ [Online]. Available from:

http://www.catholicworker.org/aimsandmeanstext.cfm?Number=201

[accessed 19/06/2012].

Macciocchi, M. A. (1964) ‘Cristo e il Marxismo’ in: L’Unità, 22/12/1964.

Martin, J. W. & Oswalt, C. E. (1995) (eds) Screening the Sacred. Boulder:

Westview Press.

May, J.R. (1997) (ed) New Images of Religious Film. Kansas City: Sheed &

Ward.

McLaren, P & Leonard, P. (1993) (eds) Paulo Freire. A Critical Encounter.

London: Routledge.

21

Moltmann, Jürgen (1967) Theology of Hope. On the Ground and the

Implications of a Christian Eschatology. London: SCM Press.

Moravia A. (1964) ‘Recensione del Vangelo secondo Matteo’ in: Pagine

Corsare [online]. Available from:

http://www.pierpaolopasolini.eu/saggistica_Vangelo-recensMoravia.htm

[accessed 19/06/2012].

Moylan, T. (1997) ‘Bloch against Bloch: The Theological reception of Das

Prinzip Hoffnung and the Liberation of the Utopian Function’ in: Daniel, J.

O. & Moylan, T. (eds) (1997) Not Yet: Reconsidering Ernst Bloch. London:

Verso.

Nava, A. (2001) The Mystical and Prophetic Thought of Simone Weil and

Gustavo Gutiérrez. Reflections on the Mystery and Hiddenness of God. New

York: State University of New York Press.

Okuma, P.C. (2007) Empowerment of the Catholic Laity in the Nigerian

Political Situation. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Paeth, S. R. (2008) Exodus Church and Civil Society. Public Theology and

Social Theory in the work of Jürgen Moltmann. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Pannenberg, W. (1971) Basic Questions on Theology. Collected Essays, Vol

2. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Pieper, F. (2004) ‘La Pasión de Gibson: Una Vuelta a las Tradiciones

Alemanas Antijudías del Siglo XIX’ in: Jewish-Christian Relations

01/06/2004 [online]. Available from:

http://www.jcrelations.com/La__Pasi__n__de_Gibson__br_una_vuelta_a_las

_tradiciones_alemanas_antijud__as_del.1789.0.html?L=2&page=2

[accessed 19/06/2012].

Rohdie, S. (1995) The Passion of Pier Paolo Pasolini. London: BFI.

Sargent, L. T. (2009) Contemporary Political Ideologies. A Comparative

analysis. Belmont: Wadsworth.

Schüssler Fiorenza, F. (2011) ‘Liberation Theology’ in: Schüssler Fiorenza,

F. & Galvin, J. P. (2011) (eds) Systematic Theology. Roman Catholic

Perspectives. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Shame (2011) Directed by Steve McQueen [film]. London: Momentum

Pictures.

Sindima, H. J. (2008) The Gospel according to the Marginalized. New York:

Peter Lang.

22

Stack, O. (1969) Pasolini on Pasolini. London: Thames & Hudson.

Stender Clausen, Jǿrgen (1973). ‘Antonio Gramsci e il Concetto di Nazional-

Popolare’, in: Revue Romain, 8 - 1973.

Studzinski, J. (2012) ‘Wealthy Donors. Give Givers a Chance’ in The Tablet,

31/03/2012, p.12.

The Gospel According to Saint Matthew (1964) Directed by Pier Paolo

Pasolini [film]. London: Eureka Entertainment.

The Passion of the Christ (2004) Directed by Mel Gibson [film]. London:

Icon Film Distribution.

The Working Class goes to Heaven (1971) Directed by Elio Petri [film]. Los

Angeles: New Line Cinema.

Zipes, J (1997) ‘Traces of Hope: The Non-synchronicity of Ernst Bloch’in:

Daniel, J. O. & Moylan, T. (eds) (1997) Not Yet: Reconsidering Ernst Bloch.

London: Verso.