LA Rabbi Asks Mel Gibson to Reconsider Jesus Film

Reuters ^ | 3-7-03 | Anon

[Pharmboy]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A prominent Jewish leader on Friday asked actor Mel Gibson (news) to make certain that his new film on the last 12 hours in the life of Christ does not portray the Jews as collectively responsible for the crucifixion.

Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean and founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said he was concerned because an article to be published in the New York Times Magazine portrays Gibson as a traditionalist Catholic opposed to the reforms of Vatican (news - web sites) II.

Heir said, "Obviously, no one has seen 'The Passion' and I certainly have no problem with Mel Gibson's right to believe as he sees fit or make any movie he wants to. What concerns me, however is when I read that the film's purpose is to undo the changes made by Vatican II."

He said that Vatican conclave was convened to deal with several critical issues, including the rejection of the notion that the Jews were collectively responsible for the death of Jesus.

"If the new film seeks to undo Vatican II ... it would unleash more of the scurrilous charges of deicide directed against the Jewish people, which took the Catholic Church 20 centuries to finally repudiate," he said.

Gibson is completing the self-financed film on the last 12 hours in the life of Christ and a friend of the Gibson family is quoted as telling the Times that Gibson will graphically portray the intense suffering of Christ, "perhaps as no film has done before." Gibson is directing the film.

The friend, Gary Giuffre, a traditionalist Catholic, also said that the film will lay the blame for the death of Christ where it belongs -- a reference that some traditionalists believe means the Jewish authorities who presided over his trial, the article said.

A spokesman for Gibson had no comment, saying he had not seen the article. Sources close to the actor said Gibson's religious views and those of his family were known.

Discussing his film in a recent TV interview, Gibson was asked whether his account might particularly upset Jews. He said, "It may. It's not meant to. I think it's meant to just tell the truth."

[mvpel]

I am not slandering the United States by any means, and I entirely agree with you that Jews here are safer than they've ever been in exile.

But given that, it's by no means 100% - consider the vandalism attacks on synagogues, and the story of the U of Michigan student who was assaulted while walking down the street in that paragon of tolerance, Ann Arbor.

[katana]

Uh, Rabbi, with all due respect none of this (Vatican II) is any of your business. As a practising Protestant, nor is it any of mine. That being said, everything I've heard and read about this film makes me want to see it the first day it is released.

[Gumdrop]

What? Is the name of ROME a dirty word now? Nothing that you posted has any relevence. Let's stay on the mesaage, OK? Group guilt is an erroneous philospohy, as it tends to negate the blame which ought to fall upon the true perpetrators. The "Jews" are not all to blame for the death of Jesus. Only the specific pharisees who plotted against him, Annas and Caiphas, and the Roamn Empire which allowed such an injustice to occur.

And, we are not innocent either, because Jesus carried the sins of the entire world (past, present and future) upon his shoulders, and He died to save us all.

[Dr. Frank fan]

I think it's a unique idea..

That it certainly is... ;-)

It would make for either a terrible or a really powerful presentation. Going to take allot of work to keep people interested this way.. I think he's up to it.

But why should anyone try to be "up to" doing something so stupid in the first place? Why not make a film with no lighting, is he "up to" that?

All I'm saying is that it makes no sense to hide the meaning of the dialogue of the characters from the audience. What harm could it do to allow the film company to put little white words at the bottom? No one is ever forced to read subtitles.

[Jhoffa_]

All I'm saying is that it makes no sense to hide the meaning of the dialogue of the characters from the audience.

Oh, I didn't think of it like that..

When I heard about it, my first thought was that he wanted people to be in a vacuum.. so they would be completely focused on the images. Like traveling back in time and witnessing these events first hand.

I think it would be very powerful if he pulls it off. A real gripper.

OR, it will completely flop. I don't see much room for a middle ground between the two.

Feast or famine, imo.

[jd777]

Christ was killed by the agents of an invading army. I think that is relevant...

[Spirited]

"Jesus WAS a JEW,,,,,"

Not only was Jesus a Jew, so were all the other players except the governmental authorities.

The disciples were Benjamites (but because their tribe was made part of the Kingdom of Judah they are Jews as to national name). [In fact, Jerusalem was not in the territory of Judah but in the land allotted to Benjamin.]

The sole exception among the disciples was Judas who was a Jew (of the tribe of Judah and the KINGDOM of Judah). I am wondering who is going to begin the notion that he was actually of Emphraim,Gad,Simeon,Reuben, Dan or any of the other ten tribes (which constituted the Kingdom of Israel, a completely different nation than the Kingdom of Judah).

This episode causes me to wonder whether these are the same sources which have beleaguered Gibson in the media and his family as well. I do hope he has the courage to go on. It is his integrity which seems to have been put at stake here.

Since we have the writings of multiple contemporaries as historical evidence of what happened, one wonders what kind of revisionist history is being called for.

[Campion]

Jews didint start getting killed until Catholicsm emereged.

This is pure, anti-Catholic, bigoted cr*p. Four words: Pharaoh, Haman, Titus, Vespasian. Study your history. One and half million Jews, at least, died in the Roman conquest of AD 70. The Catholics, such as there were, were huddled in a little town in modern-day Jordan, trying not to look too obvious lest they suffer the same fate.

[Just mythoughts]

Interesting attempt to try and make this about us, the sinner and killers of Christ.

Further study will show you that to ignore the last three scriptures of Isaiah 52 ignore exactly what and why this was written and what its purpose was.

I will lay out for you the purpose of these words, however, further study must be done to find that words used in this translation have different and more narrow as well as empathic meanings. Also how that these words weave in the other scriptures of the Bible Old and New and must be read in that context to understand.

There was an appointed time for Christ to come in the flesh, and sin not, be killed, all written of before. Christ never said those born after His death were His killers. Oh, He made it clear that we are in fact and deed sinners, however, before He offered repentence to those not yet born and sinned, Note: IPeter 3:18

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the Just for the unjust, that He might brings us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

v19 By which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison,

20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

Not even here is it written that those souls held prisoners back to Noah were called killers, yet those souls who would, in the spirit were offered salvation prior to anyone else.

Isaiah 52:13-53:12 MESSIAH'S PROPITITORY WORK. (Intorversion.)


As coming to fulfil the LAW which was in His heart (PS. 40:6-8).

Isaiah 52:13-15 GENSIS. The Divine counsels concerning Messiah, summarizing Ch. 53 as a whole.

The counsel, "Let Us make" (Gen.1:26), answering to the counsel here, Let Us redeem.

Isaiah 53: 1-3 EXODUS. Messiah taking His place with the nation.



Isaiah 53:4-6 LEVITICUS. Messiah's Relation to Jehovah. His personal work of atonement, the basis of the whole. Jehovah's dealings with him in the Sanctuary.

Isaiah 53:7-10 NUMBERS. Messiah's relation to the earth: finding a grave in it.

Isaiah 53:10-12 - DEUTERONOMY. The outcome, fulfilling the Divine counsels according to the Word. The first member (GENSIS), is shown to be a summary or epitome of the whole by the following arrangement.

52:13. Messiah's presentation
52:14. His sufferings.
52:15 His reward.

53:1-3. Messiah's reception
53:4-10 His sufferings.
53:10-12 His reward.

[xzins]

Interesting attempt to try and make this about us

I have no idea what the above means??????

[Spirited]

"Since Jesus Christ was the Perfect Lamb, the Perfect Sacrifice, who was the priest making the offering?"

Hebrews 9 will give you the answer. In verse 12 (quoted below in KJV) Paul shows him functioning as the *High Priest with "his own blood" entering into the holy place and there obtaining "eternal redemption for us".

"12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us."

A reading of the entire chapter will give you a better concept of the whole picture. Add to it the following:

* Hebrews 4:14
Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.

[Cvengr]

Thanks, time for me to reread the New Testament.

Funny how most of these principles I kept in intuition, yet when pointedly queried, I wasn't certain and had forgotten the source. Thanks especially for the quotes.

[Cvengr]

I have my doubts about the explicit phrasing of the statement and I suspect an adversary could turn such a statement against Scripture deceptively.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that in God's plan, He has provided a way for us to have a relationship with Him and today we understand that to have been paved by the cross and His Ressurrection.

But let's also consider how Jesus Christ, the Son doesn't know the time or hour of the second coming, only the Father knows.

Likewise, my impression is that when the Son came the first time, he indeed came to receive His people, but they were not willing (Matt 23, Luke 13).

Likewise, which is more valuable, the gold or the altar upon which it is offered? The covenant made available to man by His unlimited sacrificial atonement for sin allows us as wretched sinners, to repent and then have relationship with Him, through the Sacrifice of Christ. The sanctity of the God provides value to the death of Christ and then His Ressurection. The focus of Jesus Christ then was upon obedience to the Father, rather than placing Himself at the head of the table as a sacrifice to others.

Jesus Christ doesn't even refer to Himself as God, but as the Son of Man,..not to refute His position, but to render glory to the Father and not to exalt Himself. Likewise, had his focus merely been to become the sacrifice, His focus would have been upon His position rather than upon those whom He came as Messiah, but He could not interdict upon their volition and remain humble. In this fashion, it was the Jews who rejected their own.

Again, I note, I'm not judging the Jews for their behavior, but I do understand historically that these things occurred with full volition available to the Jews of that time. It also fulfiled Prophecy and laid the groundwork for future Prophetic events.

Our focus obviously isn't upon the Jews for their actions, but rather upon the sacrifice and grace of God.

Isn't it interesting how some who seek to be called Rabbi, are more concerned with not being perceived as being responsible for the death of Christ, than they are in recognizing the covenants made available in the New Covenant?

[Cvengr]

"12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us."

In conjunction with my above post, I need to slightly rephrase myself to better or more accurately express the point.

Jesus Christ had the Law in His heart, therefore I agree, as he said, nobody other than himself took His life, rather he offered it as the sacrifice according to the Law for the sins of many.

The point I make is that when He acted as that sacrifice and rendered His spirit to God the Father, His focus was upon fulfilling the Law, out of grace and love rather than focusing upon Himself to become the sacrifice.

Thanks again for the link. Coupled with the passages in Isaiah and Psalms, it's been a very good study.

[Cvengr]

I think we agree,...and I've learned a bit through the thread.

Jesus Christ gave His life, not taken by any other,...He had the Law written on His heart, so He was aware of the situation, but focused on obedience to the Father, was Man and God, as displayed in th sense of "Why hath Thou foresaken me!

Issue of Jews or Gentiles being responsible for the death is a bit moot with respect to the emphasis of His plan and His action, His Sacrifice, His glory, His obedience, and fulfillment of Scripture.

I suspect there is some rich aspects of the sceario related to the behavior of the Jews at the time so I don't discard that bit of history entirely. I suspect it might offer another approach towards acknowledging the position of Christ interlinked in Prophecy.

[William Terrell]

Right. I don't think Jesus was anything close to what we think of as a "victim".

[Spirited]

Judas Iscariot the Jewish betrayer of the Christ, fulfilled a prophetic purpose,too. His end is carefully revealed to us by Divine direction. (Matthew 27:3-10)

Incidentally, according to the Law they said they served the Jewish leadership was prohibited from having such a trial by night. It was only one of the first of THEIR laws which they broke in the entire affair.

I cannot help remembering 2 Samuel 24 when King David (as leader) numbered the people of both Israel AND Judah against the advise of Joab and the military leaders the wrath of G_d was expressed. G_d did not kill David.....
but subjects of the King until David intervened. In view of this and other illustrations in the Word I suspect one cannot certainly know what course the Father may have taken in the case of the murder of His innocent Son.

That the exchange of His blood was freely given to atone for my death deserving sin is certain, however. That only that blood can redeem is just as sure and that it is an unmerited gift is absolute.

In whatever languages, I pray that Gibson is empowered to portray it with unmistakable, unescapable, impacting reality. We all need to be confronted with that kind of truth whether we like it or not.

[Cvengr]

I would say God was in control, but also that the Sanhedrin, Pharisees and Romans fully intended to murder him by any method independent of righteousness.

[Aestus Veritatis]

The following is not meant to evade our responsibility for the Crucifixion in any way, for I pray daily: O my God, I am heartily sorry and beg pardon for all my sins, not so much because these sins bring suffering and hell to me, but because they have crucified my loving Savior Jesus Christ and have offended Thy Infinite Goodness. I firmly resolve, with the help of Thy grace, to confess my sins, to do penance and to amend my life. Amen.

The personal responsibility that we all share has been beautifully expressed by others in previous posts. However, I am forced to wonder if anyone has consulted their Bible regarding the responsibility of the Jews, esp. the Gospels of St. Mathew and St. John. Maybe parts have been removed from recent printings. It seems strange that no one has mentioned the passages that are of greatest concern to Jews and most pertinent to this discussion.

The first line of the posted article reads: “A prominent Jewish leader on Friday asked actor Mel Gibson to make certain that his new film on the last 12 hours in the life of Christ does not portray the Jews as collectively responsible for the crucifixion.” I believe the Rabbi is probably most concerned about St. Mathew’s account of the Passion, given that Gibson is striving for biblical accuracy. “And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing; but that rather a tumult was made; having taken water, washed his hands before the people saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man: look you to it. And all the people answering, said: His blood be upon us, and upon our children.” (Mat XXVII, 24-5).

Origen comments that “This blasphemous prayer continues to this day, and will continue a protracted curse upon the Jews, and upon their posterity.” St. Jerome makes the same comment. St. Chrysostom remarks, “Behold the insanity of the Jews! Their passion and pertinacious obstinacy will not suffer them to see and understand: they draw down curses upon themselves in these terrible imprecations: his blood be upon us and our children. Still the God of all mercies did not literally comply with their impious prayer. For, of these children he selected some for himself; amongst the rest even Paul, and many thousands who were converted at Jerusalem.

Chapter XIX of St. John’s Gospel must also be very worrisome for the Jews: “Pilate, therefore, saith to him; Speakest thou not to me? Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and I have the power to release thee? Jesus answered; Thou shouldst not have any power against me, unless it were given thee from above. Therefore, he that hath delivered me to thee, hath the greater sin. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him. But the Jews cried out, saying; If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar’s friend. For whosoever maketh himself a king, speaketh against Caesar.” (v. 10-12).

Commentary on v. 11: Witham -- “Some expound this of Judas; others, rather of the high priest Caiphas, with the Jewish council; for they could not be ignorant that Jesus was their Messias, having seen the miracles Jesus did, and knowing the predictions of the prophets.” S. Chrys. Hom. Lxxxiii. in Joan.—“Lest any should think, from what our Saviour had said, that Pilate was not in fault, in this place, he here adds, that he that had delivered him up, had the greater sin. God, indeed, had permitted it; but still these instruments of his death were not without fault.” St. Augustine, tract 116 in Joan – “Christ had been delivered into the power of Pilate through envy, and Pilate was about to exercise that power through fear. But though this last motive of fear can never justify anyone, who condemns the innocent, yet still it is much more pardonable than the motive of envy, which was the incentive of the Jewish multitude.”

All quotations and commentary taken from the Douay-Rheims New Testament with Commentary compiled by Rev. Fr. Geo Leo Haydock, 1859.

From these verses it is clear why the Rabbi is concerned about a biblically accurate presentation of the Passion. The Jews invoked responsibility for themselves and their posterity beyond that which we all share, due to our sins. This is the “collective responsibility” that Vatican II suppressed and which the Vatican has labored to erase from the minds of Christians. Understandably, the Jews and the Vatican would prefer that Christians not notice these verses as they contradict the post Vatican II teaching regarding the Jews. I believe this is their real worry, rather than it being an incitement to harm Jews. I fear more for the safety of my Jewish friends (as do they) due to the actions of the Israeli state.

[Deb]

Saw your uncle/cousin/whatever at SAG awards tonight. He was at the "Chicago" table and wore shoes. He was very shiny. I gave him my dessert and said it was from you.