From the Rector's Desk

Dear friends,

The recent film The Passion of the Christ caused a great furor about the making of Biblical epic movie productions. Some of you remember my article about that film, in which I express some reservations about the use of film as an appropriate medium for conveying the stories of the Bible. If you want to reread that article, find it on the website www.stjvny.org by going to our homepage and clicking on the icon at the right of the page which reads “Read Father Prator’s film review of ‘The Passion’.”
But I recently saw a movie which is my idea of a Bible movie. It was called The Young Adam, based on the novel by Alexander Trocchi, adapted for the screen and directed by David Mackenzie. One does not often see Scottish films, but this is one, filmed in and around Glasgow and set in that period between the end of the second world war and the coronation of Elizabeth II. That period of time was one of intense poverty in Britain. Rationing of almost all food and staple items made life very cold, hungry, and deprived in that land.

I don’t know if the writer intended to make a film about original sin, but he surely did, and did a fine job of it. The film’s major character is a ne-er do well, amoral young man who works on a barge at the Glasgow harbor and lives with the owner of that barge. He seduces the barge owner’s wife and later material in the film show that his immorality is even deeper than that. In a series of beautiful, moving flashbacks, we are told that the young man is responsible for leaving a woman drowning in one of the canals. This woman, with whom he was having another affair, is simply “dusted off” like an unwanted accessory and he walks away, discarding her purse in a nearby trash container and throwing others of her things into the river up current a bit. And then, to carry the matter even further, when another man is arrested and tried for the crime of her murder, he refuses to come forward to clear the accused and achieve justice. He settles for writing an anonymous letter to the court, but delivering it too late for it to be considered as evidence in the legal proceedings. (English courts were then and are now considerably different

from American judicial procedure and some of those differences are jarring and puzzling to an untrained American eye. )

The thing that the writer does is to redefine grievous sins. He begins with adultery, in this case more than simply immoral sexual relations, but having such relations with the wife of a man who is trying to help him get on his feet—the young man clearly has a different posture in mind and he casually cuckolds his older benefactor. But there is more depth to this man’s immorality, and the penetrating examination continues. Not only is he an adulterer, but he is also one who casually allows a woman to die. The sinful nature of neglect and indifference is drawn out clearly and reminds us of those occasions when our neglect allows something awful to happen to another when, with some effort, we could make a difference. I kept remembering the time when a prominent senator walked away from a woman drowning in his car sinking slowly into the waters off the coast of Massachusetts. Much immorality is a result of indifference and neglect. And then the sin of failing to speak up for justice. This one really disturbed me; perhaps the writer is touching something I know deeply to be my own sin. When another person is arrested for the murder of the young woman, the young man coolly ignores the injustice and, in fact, attends the trial as a spectator, suggesting that perhaps in some way, this man has always been only a spectator in life, seeking those things which amuse and titillate him, ignoring those persons and events which call for commitment and response.

So what is sin? Yes, it is adultery, but also ingratitude and manipulation. It is killing, but also casually allowing a suffering world to pass by with indifference. It is failure to stand for anything of value, but also that casual spectatorhood which chracterises so much of life in our days. We watch people’s lives fall apart on “reality television.” We wring our hands about the plight of inner city children, and yet do nothing about it—not even helping to get them good educations or saving them from violent and abusive parents. Perhaps the greatest sin is that of being the casual spectator. The sin of disengagement; the sin of being a spectator.

That’s who the young man in the film turned out to be and it is his detachment and his casual self indulgence which define sin. And this is my kind of Bible movie, folks.

It may be out soon on DVD; if it is, it deserves a good watch.

Faithfully,




The Rev’d Lloyd Prator
Rector