Gibson's passion film 'too Catholic'

Belfast Telegraph ^ | 19 March 2004 | Alf McCreary

[presidio9]

THE controversial Mel Gibson film 'The Passion of the Christ' has been dismissed by the Evangelical Protestant Society as a 'Catholic' interpretation of events which "does not present the Gospel".

Wallace Thompson, secretary of the Evangelical Protestant Society, said the film displayed "an un-Biblical fixation on Mary, the mother of Jesus. None of this should surprise us, for both Mel Gibson and Jim Caviezel, who plays the part of Christ, are enthusiastic devotees of the traditional teachings of the Church of Rome."

He further claims that Mel Gibson "belongs to an ultra-conservative Catholic group which does not recognise the reforms of Vatican II, and celebrates Mass in Latin".

Mr Thompson says that "this malign influence of Rome ought to cause all evangelical Protestants to reject The Passion of the Christ" and refuse to be swayed by the subtleties of the alleged arguments in favour of it.

Sadly, however, it will be welcomed and praised by many who ought to know better."

Mr Thompson also says that the film is "extremely violent", and that "anyone who watches it will be shaken and possibly terrified by its graphic and bloody scenes."

[presidio9]

It was not my intention to get into a theological discussion on this thread, so I'll be moving right along with the following question: Do you pray for the dead? Why?

[Havoc]

Sorry, I saw the nun outfit she was wearing - insignificant. I don't see the idolatry that one would expect to see if it were centered on Mary ala the Pope's
blasphemous prayers that I've heard quoted. This centers on Christ. Rome should be glad Mel didn't present their doctrine of the Eucharist in all it's splendor. He'd have gone broke.

[presidio9]

There's no player-hating going on from this end. I merely stress the importance understanding the reasons for why you do things. If you are praying for the dead, but you were not aware that there was Biblical precedence, you should probably look for it. Just a suggestion...

[presidio9]

i am sad for them... they have no regard for Mary... do i think we should worship her? no

Please keep in mind that Catholics do not think that either.

[Mamzelle]

It does help the evangelical to go to the libary and thumb through some books on Medieval and Renaissance artwork before going to the movie--it helps to put some of the rawness and harshness of Gibson's crucifixion imagery into perspective in Catholic tradition. He took it right off the walls of the great cathedrals--

[kailbo]

No, the dead's fate is sealed. Either they believed and accepted the truth or they rejected it and no amount of praying that I do can change that.

[presidio9]

ala the Pope's blasphemous prayers

Why do you feel that it is necessary to say something like this?

[aruanan]

I would have just seen it as the director further humanizing the events and personalizing them by showing them from the perspective of one actual participant, the mother of Jesus' human nature: Mary.

In fact, a lot of the horrific impact was made intelligible to us through its effect on his mother. As far as some non-Catholics complaining about the concept of Mary being the mother of God-- though not divine, Mary's the only mother God ever had. As the Spirit-filled Elizabeth shouted upon the arrival at her home of the newly-pregnant Mary:

"Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"

[presidio9]

No, the dead's fate is sealed. Either they believed and accepted the truth or they rejected it and no amount of praying that I do can change that.

So, as long as you are not praying for your departed loved ones, you are practicing your religion rationally. God Bless you for that.

[hosepipe]

[ there would be no need to pray for the departed, as we are instructed to do numerous times in both the Old and New Testaments ]

As we are instructed to NOT DO... in OT and NT...

[dangus]

>> That's not to take sides in that argument, but to remind you that Protestants in Belfast really hate Catholics. And, I'm sure, the feeling is mutual.<<

Oh, it is mutual! "Catholics" in Belfast really hate Catholics too! Let's drop the religious labels. There's godless, heathen Limeys fighting Marxist narco-terrorist Micks, OK? Ain't a one of'em ever heard of Christ.

(Me, I'm descended from a Limey Cat'lick!)

[presidio9]

I see these as largely misunderstanding.

That is, of course, the basis for all Protests against Catholicism.

[BibChr]

Yes; "Jesus is Lord" is kind of a common belief among Christians.

By definition, anything that had a mother isn't God.

Jesus has two natures. The one that had a mother isn't God. The one that is, didn't.

Dan

[dangus]

>>On St. Pat's Day, I was talking to mother. And she mentioned our Protestant ancestors in Belfast, and that she wore green in honor of them.

>>I reminded her she should have worn orange. LOL

That's why I was glad Syracuse avoided the NIT!

[TRY ONE]

"an un-Biblical fixation on Mary"

As a Protestant and one who still recommends people to see the movie, I agree with the allegation.

The specific issue is that Mary is used in several instances in the movie as the substitute Holy Spirit. Mary follows Jesus throughout the crucifixion process and Jesus looks to Mary several times for his energy rather than to His Father. That is good theater but not Biblical. Also, it shows Mary suffering with Jesus even to the point of having His blood transferred (splattered) to her. That allows the Catholics to pray to (and even "worship") Mary --- a real no-no for Protestants.

[hopespringseternal]

There's no player-hating going on from this end.

Could have fooled me. You have a chip on your shoulder, and you are being evasive when there is no need. I simply asked for a reference with no pretense and your response was rude and condescending.

[Aquinasfan]

He's Catholic, influenced, by his own admission by catholic nonscriptural mystic writings.

Which is why Catholics aren't even required to believe any of these additions. However, none of the additions contradict Scripture, as far as I know, and some of them add quite a bit. I'm thinking of Mary wiping up Jesus' blood, for example. Other elements derive from Catholic Tradition, like the Stations of the Cross.

To make Christ's Passion into a movie it was necessary to add some extra-Scriptural dialogue. It seemed to me that Mel added as little as possible.

[BibChr]

Wait -- are you on my "do not respond" list?

(c;

[dangus]

>>He's Catholic, influenced, by his own admission by catholic nonscriptural mystic writings.<<

Aye, that 'e is. The pagan pro'lly celebrates the 4th of July, too! (An' he pro'lly does, beene 'ow 'e's a N'yorkah, not an Aussie as mos' peep' b'lieve.)

Jes' 'cause 'tain't in da good book dun meen 'sevil, aynuh?

[kailbo]

That is good theater but not Biblical. Also, it shows Mary suffering with Jesus even to the point of having His blood transferred (splattered) to her. That allows the Catholics to pray to (and even "worship") Mary --- a real no-no for Protestants.

Jesus' blood was also transferred to the Roman soldiers who beat him. Does that mean catholics should worship them as well?