Posted on 02/26/2004 10:06:37 AM PST by Pyro7480
Last week, I wrote a preamble column about Mel Gibson's new movie, The Passion of the Christ. I said that I was extraordinarily optimistic. In fact, I have never before wanted to enjoy a movie so much.
But I was wrong. Oh, how wrong I was.
I love God and Jesus with all my heart, but for the life of me I cannot embrace this film.
Forgive me if I cause offence, but I have to be honest.
This is some pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic blood cult. It is populated with medieval-type caricatures, screaming out of context, laughing at suffering.
Everyone is gruesome and grotesque, apart from a handful of people such as the Virgin Mary, Mary Magdalene and the apostle John. Mary, by the way, is hardly off of the screen, when in fact she is seldom mentioned in the Gospel accounts.
Herod is some cross-dressing lunatic, the Pharisee leaders, some of the brightest men of the age, are all obscene brutes and the Roman soldiers and the mob resemble crazed gargoyles.
No, no, no! The point has been completely missed. Hate me if you like, but please listen. The point is this:
We would have crucified Him. We would crucify Him. You, me, us. We'd smile, be tolerant and loving, do the right thing as we see it, and crucify Him. Then go home to hug our children and talk about how bad the world had become.
Evil seduces and beguiles. It is frequently attractive. If it was as ugly as director Gibson has portrayed, Jesus would not have had to die in agony. And agony is what it was.
Modern Christians have tended to play down the blood and gore of the Messiah's death. But Gibson compensates to such an extreme that he gives us a virtual fetish.
Indeed, the scene where a Roman soldier plunges his spear into Christ's side is, I am sorry, almost like something out of Monty Python. The soldier and those around him shower in the water and blood that cascades out of Yeshua's body.
I suppose we should not be surprised. Gibson made Braveheart and The Patriot, with all of their disembowelings, throat cuttings and, of course, massive historical absurdities. Somehow I thought he'd be more sophisticated with something this important.
The shame of it all is that we know more about what really happened 2000 years ago now than we have done since shortly after the events actually took place. We think in nuance and truth. Not Gibson. Nor does he appear to have read any of the books written in the past 50 years that make the Gospel story so believable, so fleshy and, thus, so convincing.
One example: Barabas. He was a Zealot leader, possibly a local aristocrat. We read our Hebrew and Greek, know about Essenes, Sadducees and Jewish life and culture. We understand. Yet here he is portrayed as a dribbling psychotic. As are most of the Jews in the movie.
So, is it anti-Semitic? Not really. Jews are generally shown as hideous, stupid and barbaric, but then so are the Romans.
Apart from Pontius Pilate, who is here compassion embodied. The thing is, he was a notorious killer who crucified thousands of people without a second thought.
Movie-making requires subtlety, and The Passion is relentlessly violent and nasty. There is no rhythm, no chance for light and purpose and meaning to shine through.
Yes, meaning. More than pain and suffering, so much more.
The flashbacks seem, with one touching exception depicting Jesus as a child, to be mere attempts to push Catholic eucharistic theology onto the audience.
There are vile moments, resembling outtakes from some remake of The Exorcist. A mob of Jewish children morph into tiny devils with murderous faces. Maggots eat away at a dead mule. Satan creeps around, worms crawling up his nose, carrying a perverse baby with hairy back and adult features. None of this is Scriptural, of course. It is also so, well, so anti-humanity.
I wanted majesty and pathos but was given clumsiness and thumping. Yet God's grace and His love still surround me.
If the movie works for you, I am happy. For me, it is prayer, Bible and a dwelling in a God-given imagination that this hyped Hollywood product can never rival.
Michael Coren is a Toronto-based writer and broadcaster. He can be emailed at info@michaelcoren.com and his web site is michaelcoren.com.
The Gospels tell of five Marys: Mary, the mother of Jesus; Mary Magdalene; Mary the sister of Laza
Matthew has Mary Magdalene and the Mary the mother of James and Joses at the scene of the crucifixion. Mark identifies the two same women at the scene. Luke simply says there were "the women that followed him from Galilee," but mentions no names. The only mention of Mary the mother of Jesus as being at the scene was made in the Gospel of John, along with Mary the wife of Cleophas and Mary Magdalene. This does not mean, of course, that the other Gospel accounts are incorrect in the matter of who was present. The Gospel accounts differ in other respects, too.
There is no mention of any Mary being seen along the route to Golgotha. Catholic tradition may have her there, but not the Bible. I'm not being argumentative, but try to use the Bible as my source in the matter.
Your condescending comment proves my point.
I think the modern "conception" of equality in regards to the sexes is more destructive than helpful.
Have you considered the priesthood?
Micheal should listen to his own words here. I too had to wrestle with alot of profound concepts after seeing this movie, however in the end I realized that alot of my "wrestling" was actually due to my weak faith, not problems with this film. Even after realizing that I still had difficulty in my own internal stuggle, it was a challenge for me to understand all that this movie brought out of me.
Now I am anxious to see it again this weekend. I feel like I have overcome my personal "demons" I hope. This reviewer on the otherhand it is obvious to me has failed at that same challenge. Unfortunately for him he failed in public and in his struggle he typed out and contradictory, scattershot rant is available for all the world to see.
Have you considered the priesthood?
Have you considered that your problems aren't really with the Catholics "long knives" but an internal anger stemming from some sort of War of the Sexes? I understand that is an important issue, however I would suggest you "forgive them their tresspasses" of the Catholic Church's many many faults.
You just sound profoundly bitter and hateful.
So if the exact same movie had been made in the 1950s, it would have been okay?
No problem, really. Just reality. It's a war started by Jesuits who absolutely savaged me in college, where I had the temerity to question them. I cannot begin to tell you the contempt I was subjected to for making 100%s, worse yet for often having the only perfect scores in a 60% men's college. Didn't I know my place? Such nasty glares, such turnings away in disgust, such long knives, day after day. No congratulations, no smiles, no pats on the back. Especially no pats, because heavens, I was an occasion of sin. Nothing more. They had zero interest in what they termed my "immortal soul." I don't think they believed that women had souls at all.
This discussion of Mel's movie has been extremely useful. After five years at FR, I am going to tender my resignation. Equating approval of the Passion with being a good person and worthy conservative disgusts me. Yes, such flame wars are going on on various threads. I don't want to be associated with the religious right any more. I don't want to be part of a pseudo-political movement that thinks it owns the President of the United States. You guys are going to kill him with your demands that he function as some sort of high priest of America. Pity, pity, pity. He's a good man with decent instincts.
"Profoundly bitter and hateful?" Because I don't like priests and didn't care all that much for The Passion? Yes, I'm angry! Name ten Freepers who aren't. But I'm no longer angry about the same things you are.
True. To blame Catholics for universal human failings is just as wrong as blaming Jews for them. It's hard to accept that we are all guilty of this stuff. It's much more satisfying to blame the other guy.
Genesis 3
15. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."
perhaps this......
John 14
6. Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
This is all true, but WHAT mother would NOT be following her son as he marched along to his death?
(There are way too MANY modern mothers that are plopped down in front of the boob tube, soaking up the gospel of Oprah and Jerry, as their children march, metaphorically to THEIR deaths!
http://www.catholic-ew.org.uk/CN/03/031021.htm
Altar girls are to keep the backing of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, it has emerged at a meeting at the Vatican.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.