Holy Hypocricies (Time critic lambastes liberals who sneer at The Passion and Mel)

Time ^ | Feb. 28, 04 | Richard Corliss

[teresat]

Mel Gibson is truly courageous. The truth is the truth, is the truth, and he had the backbone, will, to stand alone and put such a beautiful moving movie out there. This movie beats anything that I have seen at the movies ever...are we at the endtimes to have such movies as the "Lord of the Rings" and "The Passion"? out near the same time? It reminds me of somewhere I read that near the end times the people who will believe will believe and the people who won't will not hear the truth.

[Lancey Howard]

You know, after re-reading this article I have concluded that Richard Corliss is a very good writer, and his critique is very, very fair. He only has to hope the Hollywood left and the Democrats don't blacklist him.

[radiohead]

This is a wonderful film for both Christians and Jews to view together.

Absolutely. I'm a Jew and took my secular Christian friend w/me today to see the film. (I must admit, I was hoping it would make her a bit less secular.)

We both wept.

[GOPJ]

I'm stunned the guy writes for Time. His stuff is balanced, authentic, and well, conservative. He even likes South Park - a young Republican show... What is the world coming to? Great stuff:

It happens that I like R-rated movies, “South Park,” certain naughty songs and dirty jokes — and, with some strong reservations, “The Passion of the Christ.” And I don’t feel threatened that a lot of people who don’t ordinarily go to movies have flocked to Gibson’s film. Neither should the studios. Religious films could be a tattered genre Hollywood could revive, making a few bucks and a lot of converts to the old magic of movies. At least, it would indicate that liberal Hollywood isn’t afraid of serving up the occasional helping of traditional values alongside its usual smorgasbord of guns, fists, tits and smirk.

[Tempest]

Hmmm rather insightful commentary, interestingly enough.

[js1138]

Did you mean gay in the less attractive sense of the word?

[NYCVirago]

30 years ago many liberals were Christian. Today the bulk of them are secular. The old mainline churches have been hemorrhaging membership and are a pale shadow of their former self. Liberal denominations have lost ground and liberals have lost their former high regard for faith. We've come a long way from the time when Martin Luther King, Jr. could quote effortlessly from the Bible and talk to America in the language of Isaiah and Jesus. Today, that would be regarded as a violation of separation and state. Liberals have more or less lost the capacity to talk to people of faith without sounding arrogant and condescending.

Excellent post! The only religion these liberals believe in anymore is liberalism.

[sarasmom]

Most people who are spiritual lite or decidely secular actually do believe that those who have a firm faith grounded in anscient scripture are foolish.

That does not mean they are correct in their beliefs, nor does it make them theologic experts.Quite the contrary, it displays an incredible amount of ignorance on the whole topic of spirituallity in general, and Christianity in particular.

Kind of like me voicing my opinion on the game of Soccer.I know little about it, and what little I do know I dont like, so my opinion is actually less than worthless on that topic.

It would be refreshing to have the pundits admit their dissinterest and ignorance of a topic, and leave it at that.

[CathyRyan]

BUMP

[Bob J]

As if there wasn't enough evidence, this slams the lid on the notion that Hollywood (it ain't Holywood) is anti-Christian and full of bigots.

[GOPJ]

bump