Posted on 03/25/2004 12:10:06 AM PST by DentsRun
First let me say that Jesus is just all right with me. And Mel Gibson, whether playing a lethal weapon, a patriot Scot or a silver-tongued Hamlet, has only fans in my movie-obsessed household.
But Gibson as Jesus' savior through his movie, "The Passion of the Christ," poses a moral dilemma. To paraphrase the prince of Denmark: Is he an anti-Semite or isn't he? That is the question.
It's an especially important question for conservatives, who, apparently grateful for a Hollywood movie that feels familiar, if not precisely family-friendly, have embraced Gibson as one of their own. He is the far right's newly anointed one.
A few nights ago, I attended the conservative Media Research Center's Annual Dishonor Awards, an Academy Awards spoof that "honors" the most egregious perpetrators of liberal bias in the media. Featured were several media stars from conservative ranks, as well as "surprise" guests Sam Donaldson and Rush Limbaugh.
Throughout the evening, I was struck by speakers' repeated invocations of Gibson. They were trying to make the point that Gibson was a victim of liberal media bias. At long last, a native-born, movie-star poster boy of their very own.
What's wrong with that? Nothing except that Gibson steadfastly refuses to convincingly distance himself from Holocaust deniers and minimizers. Several times during the past several months, and most recently in an interview with Peggy Noonan for the March issue of Reader's Digest, Gibson has avoided giving a clear answer.
The question of anti-Semitism is not insignificant, and shouldn't need explaining given present circumstances. Things are a little edgy these days, you may have noticed.
When someone of Gibson's enormous popularity, high profile, huge bank account and access to the big screen decides to tackle the most controversial, emotionally divisive story in human history, his message matters.
The movie itself has been thoroughly dissected by now. Some think it's anti-Semitic, some don't. Yasser Arafat says it's not. Phew.
More to the point - at least as one selects bedfellows for the campaign season - is Gibson's intent. Unfortunately, Gibson doesn't make his own best case when asked to clarify his position on the Holocaust. The question is not misplaced given Gibson's family history.
His father is Hutton Gibson, activist, Holocaust denier and author who rejects the Second Vatican Council, when the church revolutionized itself to conform with modernity. In an interview with The New York Times, the senior Gibson said the Holocaust was a manufactured catastrophe arranged by Hitler and "financiers" to export Jews from Germany. Vatican II, he said, was "a Masonic plot backed by the Jews."
And, oh, yes, he says Sept. 11 wasn't executed by al-Qaida hijackers. The airplanes that flew into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were "crashed by remote control."
As a fan of Latin, incense and a certain amount of pomp with my circumstance, I'm sympathetic to people who prefer traditional ritual to vernacular accommodation. I figure if you're going to church, by all means make it High Church. Otherwise, you may as well sit cross-legged in the back yard and ululate in concert with nature.
I'm also sympathetic to the notion that you don't keep revising religious doctrine to ratify new inventions in human narcissism.
But one of Vatican II's accomplishments was to exonerate Jews in the death of Christ. When you reject the notion that Jews shouldn't be held exclusively accountable (we're all to blame, my Roman Catholic friends tell me), along with a denial that 6 million Jews were murdered by the Nazis during World War II, then you begin to seem like an anti-Semite, sort of the way a squat, waddling, web-footed, quacking creature seems an awful lot like a duck.
Both Gibsons subscribe to a Pre-Vatican II Catholicism. And while the son can't be held accountable for the wacky views of his father, the younger Gibson refuses to come out and say what everyone wants to hear: "I love my father, but disagree with him about the Holocaust." Instead, he says, "My father has never told me a lie."
When Noonan pointedly asked Gibson to clarify his position - "The Holocaust happened, right?" - he kinda sorta acknowledged it (he has friends with numbers on their arms and, yes, "atrocities happened"), but otherwise described the extermination of Jews as just so many causalities among many.
Which is to say, Holocaust deniers justifiably might feel that they have their own movie star poster boy. And this may not be the group hug in which conservatives want to participate.
Cronos this is excerptfrom the Columbia Encyclopedia on line:
Related: Ancient History Middle Eastern Biographies
(ântî´ekes çpĬf´ençz) (Antiochus Epiphanes) , d. 163 BC, king of Syria (175 BC-163 BC), son of Antiochus III and successor of his brother Seleucus IV. His nephew (later Demetrius I) was held as a hostage in Rome, although still claiming the throne. Antiochus is best known for his attempt to Hellenize Judaea and extirpate Judaism—a policy that instigated the rebellion of the Maccabees . Antiochus invaded Egypt, which was torn by strife between Ptolemy VI and his brother (later Ptolemy VII), and would probably have conquered that region if the Romans had not intervened in his siege of Alexandria (168). Antiochus was briefly succeeded by his son, Antiochus V, a boy king who was overthrown by Demetrius I. Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, Copyright (c) 2004.
Cronos this is excerptfrom the Columbia Encyclopedia on line:
Related: Ancient History Middle Eastern Biographies
(ântî´ekes çpĬf´ençz) (Antiochus Epiphanes) , d. 163 BC, king of Syria (175 BC-163 BC), son of Antiochus III and successor of his brother Seleucus IV. His nephew (later Demetrius I) was held as a hostage in Rome, although still claiming the throne. Antiochus is best known for his attempt to Hellenize Judaea and extirpate Judaism—a policy that instigated the rebellion of the Maccabees . Antiochus invaded Egypt, which was torn by strife between Ptolemy VI and his brother (later Ptolemy VII), and would probably have conquered that region if the Romans had not intervened in his siege of Alexandria (168). Antiochus was briefly succeeded by his son, Antiochus V, a boy king who was overthrown by Demetrius I. Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, Copyright (c) 2004.
Let's not forget Jehovah's Witnesses (Purple Triangle), and cripples and other infirm people, so-called "criminals" (dissidents without a trial), and many more who were in the same camps as were the Jews.
Mind you, let's not forget that Stalin had Hitler beat in "the killing game" hands down. He murdered 60 million Christians, twenty million more Jews, and a lot of other people I don't have the stats on (not in my head at the moment that is). All in the last 70 years.
There always has been, and until Christ returns there always will be TYRANTS. Just go back a few hundred years and we can talk about the Crusades as well. The RCC burning "heretics" (Jews and Protestants alike, and others), and then we have Protestants burning Catholics, Hindus and Moslems slaughtering one another simply because each wants majority rule. Then today there's also Ireland, and Scotland and England never did kiss and make up (I should know, - I'm Scots, born and bred)... I *could* go on.
If there's one thing this world isn't short of it is hatred and vengeance. Well, that's two things but they fit the same mold. The Jews are a prominent race because of WHO they are and always have been in history. All in all though, we are a pretty pathetic lot through and through. The persecution of Mel Gibson is but one small verse, in a tiny chapter of a very large and hideous book. Man's inhumanity to man is legendary. Personally, I'm tired of it. Maranatha!
In the love and peace of Christ, - Anij.
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.