Both of my parents and all of my older relatives went to Catholic Schol in the 30's and 40's and none of them were taught anything like the notion that all Jews or Jews generically were responsible for the death of Christ. They were taught that The Pharisees and Saducee bore considerable responsibility since Christ was a direct threat to their authority (and because the Pharisee were worried about the potential Roman responce to what they saw as a call for a kingdom on Earth), but that the entire matter was pre-ordained and necessary for Human salvation.
By the way, they were also taught that Judas could have escaped damnation for turning over Christ if he had repented and shown faith rather than committing suicide
I hear what you are saying about the occassional nun though. My dad had a creep who was a communist (yup, even back then). Used to make her English class read and report on articles in the PM. Dad never considered abandoning Catholocism because of her, though - he just got really good at making fun of communists.
Cost him a summer of school to make up for the flunking she gave him, but he always felt it was worth it...
On opposite sides of the political and religious spectrum (in fact they fought one another, didn't they?), yet both came together to oppose Jesus? Interesting. Also interesting how you don't mention the Romans who actually performed the crucifiction.
So if both these groups bore "considerable responsibility", then if violence occurs specifically because of the Gibson movie, will you restrict blame to only those who commit the violence or will you be more generous in apportioning blame? As a supporter of the movie - and one who appears unconcerned about the sensibilities of the movie's critics (the ones who restrict their concerns to the possibility of violence) - how will you feel and what will you do? WWJD?