The problem with Goldberg's contention that a truthful depiction of the Crucifixion must necessarily be anti-Semitic is that such a statement perceives the death of Jesus from the wrong end of the telescope. I'd agree with you, though I didn't get that message from his column, rather the fact that antisemites will use the film as ammunition, not Gibson's fault, because, in you're words, they're at the wrong end of the telescope.
Gibson, by the way, is not "quasi-heretical."...
I noted that comment too. I doubt Goldberg is qualified to make that assessment, nor am I. Furthermore, it's none of my business, it's between Gibson, other Catholics and the Church.
This is one of the problems I have with this entire controversy. A depiction of the Crucifixion that follows the Gospel narratives is none of the ADL's business. Neither is Gibson's private faith. Neither is what his father happens to believe. This is, on the surface, a smear campaign. Those who attack the film on the basis of Gibson's religion and his father's beliefs and their own aversion to the Gospel narratives--without even having seen the film--are obviously standing on thin intellectual ice. They cover themselves by grandiose claims of fear of anti-Semitism but these do not justify what they are doing--attempting to destroy a film's reputation before it even sees the light of day.