Great observations on "Calvary'. I found the screenplay to be remarkably written with superb acting performances in the film. For a dark film, it was very spiritual. When someone challenges him and says priest like him are dinosaurs and are no longer really needed. He looks at his dysfunctional and hurting parishioners, and says he is needed now more than ever. His last two acts of kindness are to comfort the morally bankrupt wealthy man and to not run away from his murderer, who was abused as a child. Even though he had his own moment of personal crisis, just like Christ did, he accepts his death with honor to pay for the sins of others. He understand why his murderer is filled with anger, and he is not afraid to make one final attempt to reach him spiritually. What a great movie. I think it serves the Catholic Church well. It is the good priests who you don't hear about. They don't make the news, but in reality, like yourself, the church is filled with honorable men and women.
"Resurrection follows calvary" - There is always a reasons for hope as a Christian no matter how bad the crucifixion. Thanks again for the great reflection Fr. Barron.
I really liked the portrayal of Fr. James. He was willing to meet his parishioners (his "flock") where they were at all times. When the incel guy tells him he's developed intense hatred of women, Fr. James advises him to move to a larger city ("Dublin. London") where women are more readily available. He does not give a speech about the "holiness of chastity" or "God's plan for him". Rather, he assesses the situation and deduces -correctly - that it's better for a sinner to be out there fornicating than harbouring resentment that, by the man's own admission, is already morphing into murderous ideation. When he confronts the African immigrant, he does not come out swinging about the "sanctity of marriage". He's more concerned about whether or not the guy is physically abusive toward his lover, a married woman. And when said immigrant tells him that his "sermon is over", the priest leaves. Lastly, the numerous exchanges between Fr. James and said woman. She's the one he's most concerned with, it seems. Their banter is pretty great - they are both witty, and it's clear he is very found of her. He always takes the direct approach, but does not condemn her; he's more worried about her safety. And sure, she's more than willing to scoff at his fatherly concern, but out of all the parishioners - except for the old expat - she is the only one who does not attack his vocation or the Church, if my memory serves me right. The numerous times when people make snide or outright confrontational remarks about him and the institution he belongs to, he stands his ground, but never fires back with Bible quotes and rehearsed speech. "That's the Church, not me." When his church is on fire: "It's not my church; it's OUR church." He makes a point to always bring the conversation down to their level, to reel it back to their little corner of the world. It's him, not "Catholicism", they have to contend with. During one of his visits to the local bishop, Fr. James retorts: "I think you took that from a book". Clearly, the man believes in God; clearly, he's devoted to the Church; clearly, he's read the Bible front to back. But above all, he has internalized the faith to the point where he does not need to use it as a cudgel when trouble comes his way. Yes, he goes through a moment of weakness near the end, but ultimately, he's given the grace to die an authentic Christian shepherd.
I'm no longer a catholic and from Ireland but I loved your analysis of this incredible movie Bishop. It was a beautiful movie in many ways, thank you for giving your thought on it.
@@JohnFromAccounting Being from where I am I was born into the faith, did the sacraments etc. As I grew past adolescence and into adulthood I still think religion is fascinating but I found I just didn't believe in the tenets of christianity, the supernatural or organized religion in general and didn't want to engage in the hypocracy of pretending that I did. With that said I fully appreciate the power faith has in helping many people through hard times, how central it is to so many people's lives and how many genuinely good people (like the Priest depicted in the movie) are involved in all religions - it isn't for me to tell anyone what they should believe or value in their lives.
Father Barron I pray for you and our brothers in Christ that you get through your Calvary as well. God Bless to all of the Priests who must suffer through our world of today. God's will. Amen.
Hi Father Barron, first a clarification, I am not "Catholic" (at least as far as I know) and certainly as confused as everyone else out there may or may not be regarding matters of religion and whatever God's purpose is or isn't. I'm not even always sure if God has a "purpose". I'm not always certain that there is a God either. Of course that's sort of what "faith" is for I suppose. In any case, congratulations on 10 million views. I think that in itself is a wonderful accomplishment and certainly testament to a great breadth of wisdom and learning. It is also testament to how badly we all want and need guidance in an uncertain and often perplexing world that sometimes challenges our ability to cope, sometimes challenges our ability to understand. Thank you for the opportunity to listen and to learn as well as to disagree sometimes or to feel wrong about things sometimes. In any case, 10 million views is a "milestone" and hopefully there are many more mile stones to come. Best regards,
Just finished watching this movie and needed to seek reviews, being blown away by its message. Bishop Barron's review is my favourite, forgiveness is our most important virtue as humans, absolutely, in my view. Gleeson is perfect for his character of Father James. Together with 'Silence,' these two movies inspire the virtue-driven life of priests..
Beautiful job Father Barron. Brought me to tears when I saw this movie. You scored a hole in one with this video and the other recent ones. These words will only help bring back so many that had given up on The Church and are now looking back because of the recent meeting.
I haven't even heard of this film, but I most definitely want to see it now! Seems like a powerful film. Thanks Fr. Robert Barron for the review and most of all, making me aware of it too! God Bless.
I loved that movie. I remember watching it without knowing what I was really watching and being blown away with the ending. I kept thinking it was about the seven deadly sins. Now I must watch it again. Thank you ✝️
Many priests at cua and in my community are encouraging this film.... Hard to watch.... But so telling. Thank you for your wonderful insights!! Br. Nicholas
Great analysis! Calvary is a film that has touched me deeply, I have seen it several times in my life, its music is amazing (in fact it is because of Patrick Cassidy that I had the immense pleasure of being revealed before this film) and it has a diversity of readings... but this reflection on forgiveness that you do in this analysis is just what I needed to hear. Right now I am trying to cultivate forgiveness, for my father, who has committed acts that have hurt me very deeply. For now, we are apart, but some force deep down within me, calls him, it tells me that it is necessary to FORGIVE... and I don't know how... so I ask God every morning and every night to teach me. I'm in the process of cultivating FORGIVENESS. And now that you talk about this, it has inspired me even more... It's true, forgiveness must be one of the greatest (if not the greatest) of human virtues. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
This may have been the most 'Christian' film I've ever seen. It's so much more about the spirit of Christ, the meaning of His teachings and His life, than any of the shallow, smug nonsense - such as the 'God's Not Dead' series of movies. It's not an 'easy' watch, but then, neither is the general behavior of our fellow humans on a day-to-day basis. And, oh! what a perfect finale.
wow, great analysis this is one of my favourite Irish films But I never picked up on the forgiveness thing, I used to think it was about the priest wanting the church to be forgiven. But I like your interpretation that he was imploring his daughter to forgive the killer and she does, with a look. Incredible.
Ironically, I think Harte would have been one of the few parishioners who attended Father Lavelle's funeral. For all of his taunts and barbs, you could tell Harte also had a grudging respect for Lavelle. He might have made a couple of mean-spirited wisecracks over Lavelle's coffin, but Fiona would have seen through his bullshit.
Very good. The struggles of most people I know, and my own struggles are due to lack of sincere forgiveness. This really, truly hurts the blossoming of other virtues like sharing. Yes, The Light of Christ shines in the darkness of all the pain in the world, which always gives hope; and His Merits keeps all the good happening in a dark extremely hurting world. Thank God for those who are like the priest in this movie. One day God will show us why this 'post modern,' moral relativistic time in history, where objective truth of The Laws of Nature from The God of Nature has been so denied. It is really a throwback to cultures like The Roman Empire, which crucified Jesus Christ. And this widespread acceptance of sin, so pervasive, and the under laying cause of the culture of death; and so much sense of hopelessness giving addictions not only to opioids, but to striving for power, money, pleasure, and prestige --- often rationalized with working for the common good and a 'I need these things,' mentality to accomplish my goals. Sometimes, even in the name of Christianity. Yes, we need more of a sense of working with virtue, for virtue. Over the decades, even so much in the history of The Church, vague terms like 'social justice,' as something to work for, but is so much considered secondary rather than along side salvation - we have lost much of our 'saltiness.' Without forming common virtuous goals, nearly enough, then wonder why so many leave the Church. Governmental institutions, and other institutions which sometimes directly or indirectly oppose objective moral truth have been given so much power over people because of this. And the playing at heartstrings honey speech persuasive rhetoric has influenced more and more over the last several generations. God help us! The Church flourishes in poorer nations, because they struggle with governmental constraints, but resist being perceived as an arm of the government. One day, we will see clearly what the prophets of the 19th and 20th centuries revealed as dangers that we are currently immersed within.
Review; I wished I would've seen the movie before I watched this review [re-view] da! I did buy it but now I already know the ending, sigh...... He's dead on though. Forgiveness is underrated and it is difficult but not impossible.
I still can't help speculating about who murdered Father James's dog. I could believe Jack when he claimed he was innocent. He was clearly unstable, but he didn't strike me as being hateful enough to do something like that. Simon and Brendan, on the other hand, were miserable and mean-minded in smaller, pettier ways than Jack. I can see one of them (or perhaps both) intentionally slaughtering an old dog just to inflict emotional pain on Father James.
What do you think the montage of different parishioners engaged into sin right after the murder seen was meant to represent? Here's another movie for you to review about a priest in a barren parish, Noëlle (2007).
Very interesting to see a priest discuss a film that can be viewed as either pro or anti christian, and give a pretty objective answer. Being Irish, the general consensus is that 'the church' is closed minded and repressive, and there is a lot of truth to that. It's interesting that this man, Fr. Barron can give a review that is fairly objective, unaffected by bias. I do not believe personally, I live in a country (Ireland) that has been devastated by the abuse of the Catholic church but I'm very much aware that not all members are adventitious monsters, maybe these people should come forward, present their views on the benefits of Christianity, acknowledge the horrors of its history. I think, regardless of whether or not you believe, religion can be a good force for a person, but at the same time, someone can be good without it. Ultimately, religions, or Catholicism more specifically needs some reform, and the censorship of the 'decent priests' needs to be stopped. I'm sure Fr. Barron won't read this, but if so, I would be very interested in discussing relevant topics in a civil manner.
But ..... what about the abuse of children, the lack of closure, the shame, the dire consequences on them and their families. Obviously this victim’s solution was wrong. But in a system which had and continued to fail him and so many others....... my heart bleeds. I know it’s fiction in this film but for many this was very close to the truth.
Great review ... but I suspect many of your fans, Fr. Barron, will find this film deeply disturbing. It doesn't play nice with contemporary Catholic cliches. Nevertheless it's a brilliant film.
There's nothing edgy about the film, it's just another failed attempt to see Catholicism through the lens of a load of old secular clichés. Fr James is a depiction of its author, not an alter christus. We're instead left with just another poor soul who's had the realm of God stripped from his horizon; one who daren't share his hand-ringing faith with his sheep; who instead encourages them to sin (e.g. telling a porn-addicted man to get laid), which vaporises his discussion of 'forgiveness' and 'mercy'; who's, of course, a widower, because it's the only way a neo-Freudian can depict a 'good guy' taking up the white martyrdom of priestly celibacy; who reserves his most stern rebukes for his fellow priest (who's predictably cast as an effeminate, money-grabbing, confession-gossiping, suck-up) and who patiently listens to just about every vacuous attack ever made against the Church, while he reacts with outrage to the mere mention of human suffering (reflecting his complete lack of an eschatological outlook) with the closing scenes not being a meditation on resurrection but instead a twisted variation on penal substitution theory in which all priests become collectively guilty for sexual abuse and must pay for the sins of the few before they can be forgiven for what they haven't done (made all the stranger by the fact that, as the likes Jenkins, Plante, Daniels, Allen etc. note, Catholic priests are no more likely to abuse than other clergy or, indeed, than non-clergy). With regard to my own profession (despite the comparative prevalence of abuse), I find it unthinkable that someone would make a film about a faultless teacher being killed by the victim of another teacher’s abuse because they think teachers should somehow collectively pay for their suffering; it is only when it is directed at the Catholic priesthood that such bizarre logic becomes palatable to the general public... No, Flannery O'Connor this ain't.
***** I think you're saying you disagree with Fr. Barron's review. You appear to do so in a way that confirms my point. By the way, I've met plenty of Catholics who respond to Flannery O'Connor in just the way you respond to this film, though they are far less articulate than you.
***** It's definitely interesting how a single movie can stir such radically diverse interpretations. I haven't seen the movie (I don't watch a lot of movies or TV anymore). I definitely hear what you say, the tragedy of a good priest paying for the transgressions of a bad one sounds like a very emotionally stirring plot. In a more "traditional" film (say one produced back in the 1930s-40s) the ending would usually be a happy one (or perhaps "inspiring" would be a better word) where the killer is caught before the priest is killed and good triumphs without as much ambiguity and sacrifice. The entertainment industry of today is less strict in terms of what is allowed to be shown than it was back in the 1930s and 40s. Many movies now often put us at greater unease than before and have the effect of sobering us or even scaring us. I don't know if that is a good thing or bad thing but it seems to be the price of less censorship on the part of the entertainment industry. Or perhaps it is more a testament to how confused and uncertain our society has become since then. But "Cavalry" sounds like an interesting movie. For those who like to go to movies and such things it sounds maybe like a "must see".
+Asher Lev I disagree re: your point "a twisted variation on penal substitution theory": the point the film includes is not an implied higher offense rate within the Church or demonising all priests as the same, but instead the issue of unconfronted endless institutional protection of offending priests at multiple levels within the organisation. Human beings inside the Church repeatedly made the calculated realpolitik call to sweep these abuses under the rug and preserve its image above all else to maintain its standing in society as a leading moral authority, frequently at the cost of more abuse. This very real point is alluded to at multiple points in this film: The offending priest is old/dead and escaped justice, the Garda referring to another "problem" priest who was above the law (Olde Ireland) and got quietly moved to another parish to reoffend, his chastisement of his fellow priest's lack of integrity, the remote detachment the main character admits to on becoming aware of the abuse and cover-ups. The main character is the peoples only interface with and outlet to the Church. This review makes the point that a true Shepard knows his flock and is hardnosed yet tactful enough to gently guide them to better places. Where was this noble leadership within the Church at it's and our darkest hours? Its deep moral failures have left this good priest down. These are among the questions his parishioners are now finally free to discuss in contemporary Ireland (due to gradual decline of the Church as the second form of government and societally unquestionable authority) and that he faces while continuing to do his good work. The exploration of his position is what makes this film culturally significant.
Hi Bishop Not sure if you still check these comments but I want to know what you think about this. Could this movie be a sort of lamentation for the Irish people? Many Irish no doubt feel abandoned and cynical about the Church. Even if the filmmakers are atheists, could this movie almost be an elegy for a Church that loves the people of Ireland? Thanks
You have to be an Irish catholic to get this film 100% properly were a different breed of catholic it's hard to explain how deeply ingrained in the psychy Catholicism is
It sounds like a great movie, and certainly Father Barron's review paints the character of the priest as one I'd certainly like to encounter. However, I wonder if this type of priest is only capable of existing in fiction. Nowadays, priests tend to be involved in any number of social projects, usually in an administrative capacity. There's simply no time to visit individual parishioners, even the ones that show to Mass every week can hardly count on knowing the priests at their church as anything more than a dispenser of the Sacraments, easily replaceable with any other priest (which, in fact, he likely will be in a couple years when he gets reassigned). The Church, as it is now constituted, is systemically incapable of having her ministers respond on a personal level to any in the parish beyond the privileged and the well-connected. Rather than entice people with the image of a priest who can only exist in the fantasy of fiction, why not present the relationship-free model of parish life as it actually is and find a way to make that attractive?
Absolutely right, but the irony in your last sentence is layers deep. On the other hand, perhaps a movie like this can be a prophetic word to the Church today, showing us all exactly what we know we will never find in our parishes: a priest who "smells like his sheep." And the prophetic word in this film is implicitly a word of judgment.
irksome1 Sorry, but what you call a "fantasy" is actually a reality. I've known many priests that go out and serve all of their parishioners. Society has changed throughout the centuries, and a priest must adapt to the place he lives. A small parish priest will obviously know his parishioners better than a large parish priest.
1:00 the poster says "wickedly funny"... It had wicked dark humor, surely, but that sort of gives off the wrong impression of the movie, no? Anyone else?
As a Catholic I really hated this movie, when they killed off the priest's dog that was the final straw for me. You can get a point across without showing so much sin and bad behaviour on screen for a shock factor. I hardly saw God in any of this movie. My opinion may be unpopular but then again I don't care.
It seems like a better ending would have been that the priest has a son rather than a daughter, who is deciding whether or not to enter the seminary. At the end of the movie, we see some years later, the son now a priest at the prison, making a special appointment. And the movie ends with the son hearing the murderer's confession.
The movie is a tragedy, like the ancient Greek ones and Shakespeare's , like Hamlet. Dante called his poem "La Comedia", as it begins badly with him lost in a dark wood. He is encountered by Virgil, who is sent by a chain of heavenly women like St. Lucy and Beatriz, and is guided through hell, to reach the mountain of Purgatory which is outside Jerusalem and finally to be taken to Paradie, therefore a happy ending. Later it was called "The Divine Comedy". The Christain story is not a tragedy, thanks to Christ's resurrection and there is hope for us all. We all like a happy ending and rightly so.
Does forgiving requires asking for forgiveness from the forgiven? As human has to ask forgiveness from the forgiving God for his forgiveness to be complete.
Was honestly surprised by this reaction. I went to a preview screening with its star and director present, finding in the discussion afterward that there wasn't any grappling with theology behind the scenes (in other words, actual faith is lacking in this production's motivations). So, for example, even if it feels meaningful for the priest to be dressed in a traditional cassock, in reality, the overwhelming impression is that it was aesthetic opportunism: "he looks dark and menacing in that robe, let's use it!" Moreover, the basis of the film is an utterly humanistic point of view, less interested in forgiveness for those grossly cliched rural Irish peccadilloes, moreso contemporary outrage as usual against conservative judgment, advocating unquestioning tolerance in its place. In other words, accountability is totally outside of this world, while the priest goes about grumbling indecisively, deeply tormented with doubt, and a loss of faith. And the larger picture too is that the filmmakers primarily found their motivation in that headline-grabbing, dramatically easy, priest child abuse scandal afflicting the Roman Catholic church continuously (and sin altogether, because humanity is imperfect). If we take a big step back and see this film as a whole, it is really a sort of Tarantino-inspired carnal delight at seeing bloody, violent chaos ensue as the ultimate murderer is avenging his childhood molestation. Using all the tools of dramatic manipulation available in cinematic storytelling, we are led to cheer, concluding that homicidal vengeance is an reasonable consequence of the other sin. From a faithless humanist's point of view, if people would just stop judging and being so hypocritical, we wouldn't be "forced" to retaliate: because we are naturally good. And the priest's function is restricted to tolerance of the perfect human inside. That makes everything easier. Simply put, this was not a film to celebrate -- and what an unfortunate twist if you got fooled by its intentions.
Another thing that should be noted is that the director and star likely didn't write the screenplay - which could easily have intended this type of symbolism. The director and actors are part of the art. They contribute to it but they are not its totality.
Why such effort to exempt central thinkers from the production team? Films are finalized works of art that ultimately have something to say in finished form, and the fulcrum of this screenplay's whole structure/point of view is what I criticized above. Moreover, the idea that people will re-interpret something meant another way is elementary: we are still left with what the creators tried to do, and whether there is a meeting of minds with their general audience. In this case, certainly! Problem is, it's what I said: focusing inward, not toward the revealed divine.
In fairness to Fr. Barron, I doubt he was taken in. He's evangelizing. He's introducing a real Christian perspective to what may well be otherwise run-of-the-mill secular poppycock. The film may not stand much for Christianity (I don't know, haven't seen it), but Fr. Barron will and does. I think that's the point of his film reviews. He's trying to catch lost sheep.
Regardless of the movie critique Father, I must protest your disregard of the many images of The Good Shepherd as an "effeminate Jesus" because that critique of traditional art lacks merit! I should not have to remind you after your series? that Art is more than the image and Christian Art is more than portraiture! If Jesus is shown meek and mild it because he is that. If he is shown as the Sacred Heart for example it would be dross to lament the imagery as un-biologically sound! The icon stands on its own and is meant for contemplation not just realistic interpretation. I often applaud your theology but I am afraid that your art-history needs some polish!
On the topic of "effeminate", I'm curious, now. When I have been in hospitals I often see a picture of Jesus as a kind of "comforter". They seem to depict Jesus solely in a mode of being kind and caring and in a non-judgmental posture. Of course in the Bible Jesus also makes judgments, casts out demons and other things. When the clergy talk about an "effeminate" Jesus is that the sense that is being talked about? I don't understand what is meant by an "effeminate" Jesus? I'm completely confused about such things. Would someone cite a picture or painting that depicts an "effeminate" Jesus for my own reference? Thank you.
Gary, Jesus in Art is often shown as kindly etc and so he is. In the History of Art in the western tradition Jesus is often shown as somebody with a beard, long hair, red robes, sandals etc and of almost a Raphael type design. In many peoples opinions (and here I disagreed with Fr Barron) such "art" fails to show Jesus in manly sovereign marshal or masculine attire or appearance. To some people Jesus is about these qualities so they underestimate the tradition of artistic flair and design. It is akin to the Catholic image of The Sacred Heart being replaced artistically by images of The Divine Mercy. The argument is not a theological one but an Artistic one and it is not really suggesting that Jesus is effeminate in the literal but of "too pretty" or Made up like a Hollywood idol? I simply think such notions are artistic drivel and depending upon individual preferences -rather akin to suggesting Picasso is not proper art because it does not resemble Constable or vica versa. I hope this helps with your query?
KaiseRex42 What would be an example of a "non-effeminate" Jesus, then? Most of the pictures I see depicting Jesus are of him with long hair, beard, robes, sandals, etc. Does it also have to do with facial expression, maybe?
I completely disagree with this analysis. The film is a criticism of the Catholic Church. Father James represents the complacency of the church. He appears good. He is likable. The characters in the film acknowledge his goodness. We, the audience, find him likable, intelligent, and kind of endearing. The church is good, right? They are people of god after all, they seem nice enough. Right? However, every encounter he has throughout the film, every challenging question asked of him, he offers nothing but trite platitudes. To the man who was molested, James says nothing. To the prisoner who asks if god made him this way, and if god understands him, James says, "if god can't understand you, no one can." It's the opposite of an answer. To his daughter who asked him if she would be sent to hell if she killed herself, he answers, "god is great, and his mercy is unending." Again, this is just a non-answer. A flowery "I don't know, maybe." In the same day, the writer confides that he would rather kill himself than grow old and experience cognitive decline. James gets him a gun. The whole "suicide is a sin" doesn't add up, even to James. To the bartender who asks why the church doesn't address the sins of the bankers and politicians who steal from the people, James says nothing. Just that they are sinning. He offers no solution, no action. To the gay man who was molested, he says nothing. To the french woman who lost her husband, he says "it's unfair." However, she turns out to be wiser than he, and say that it's not unfair. She got to be happy with him, and his death is just part of life. In the end, when Jack asked if James cried when he read about all the sex abuse within the church, James says no, he didn't. He felt disconnected from it. James is the Catholic Church. They both acknowledge bad things happen, but they don't help. They don't have any answers. They seem to care, because they say they care. But they do nothing. James represents an abhorrent institution that washes its hands of responsibility, even for sins committed under its own roof. Lastly, his comment about forgiveness being the most important virtue... He says this because he is the church. Can't the church's victims just forgive? That's why the church preaches so strongly of forgiveness. They wrong so many, they couldn't thrive without convincing their donors that forgiveness is the ultimate virtue. "We don't have answers, we don't have solutions, but forgiveness is the ultimate virtue. You do forgive us, don't you?"
It is interesting how someone can read something and be so completely "off." But I guess we can only interpret starting from what we have inside. We see through our own lens. But let's not confuse the distorted or myopic nature of our lens, with the outward reality.
I don't know how i feel here .. If we forgive someone of something .. that helps us pull away from evil actions .. that other wise we might commit and so we stay at away from sin .. So she forgave him fine and it might help her stay away from sin for awhile but the dude taking a life is the point thats maybe important here ... He's going to hell .. He's not going to repent in any worth while manner and since god only can forgive and save him that seems to be the tragedy here .. I can understand the importance of jesus and Gods forgiveness but a human's forgiveness is more self serving and has no power ... Instead of thinking your doing something right in god eyes by not getting even with the man evil action .. she should try to bring him to repentance. The priest is in good stead with God and maybe has been saved if you believe what we read in the word as she should know ... so maybe she should care less about her self and more about the hell bound dude ?
It’s deeper than that. The forgiveness of the murderer will break open the heart just a crack so the Holy Spirit can climb in to break the shell to true vulnerability, repentance, and redemption. This is the miracle of Christ…and the triumph of evil for all eternity.
This movie was a pretentious piece of crap. To brand it a dark comedy is the ultimate cynical poke in the eye to what Bishop Barron wants to believe about this film. There is nothing virtuous or Christian about forgiveness with no hope. No repentance. The sacrifice of a good MAN is not the same as what occurred on Calvary. A mere MAN cannot give glory to the fallen. The payment of sins for others has been accomplished. There is no need or saving grace in a mere man to die for the sins of others. This is pure hubris, not Alter Christus. There was no green shoot, no resurrection in this movie, forgiveness was meaningless in this movie. It was not even rectifying for the few (2) that gave it.
