Months Before Debut, Movie on Death of Jesus Causes Stir

The New York Times ^ | 8/02/03 | LAURIE GOODSTEIN

[DPB101]

Second New York Times article on The Passion in as many days. Thread from yesterday:

Frank Rich: The gospel according to Gibson

[publius1]

This one is at least a little fairer than Rich's column, though that's not saying much. Interesting--in the odd sense--that the fight seems increasingly not over the film but over Christianity itself, as if Christianity was inherently anti-Semite and intolerant.

Also interesting to compare this pre-reception of Gibson's film from people who haven't seen it yet to the laurels accorded specifically anti-Christian films, e.g., Last Temptation of Christ (Ebert: 4 stars), or The Magdelene Sisters (NPR in a semi-swoon). It's like they've been waiting for an actual Christian film to come along!

It's a little... sophmoric, don't you think? Sort of like college kids out to offend the booboosie, taking themselves ever so seriously?

[DreamWeaver]

I haven't even read this article/post, all I know is that I cannot wait to see this movie & God Bless Mel Gibson.

[Dustbunny]

I don't understand what all the flap is about, sounds to me as though the movie follows the Bible.

What dunce ever thought that the Jews at that time did not play a roll in the crucifixion of Christ.

It happened 20 Centuries ago, 2000 years ago.

Good grief, how could that affect how Christians feel about Jews today.

Talk about rewriting history, sounds to me as though that is what many have been trying to do.

Go for it Mel, I for one will buy and view the DVD every Easter until I die.

[isthisnickcool]

Remember after 9/11 when Americans went to the streets and burned Mosques and killed Muslims? The same thing will happen to Jews after people see this movie. /s off

[quebecois]

"The scholars say the other reason for concern was Gibson's strain of Catholicism. He built and belongs to a Los Angeles church that is part of a growing but fractured movement known as Catholic traditionalism. Considered beyond the pale even by conservatives, these traditionalists reject the Second Vatican Council and every pope since then, and celebrate Mass in Latin."

Absurd accusations of anti-semitism aside, this paragraph is telling. It states numerous things that are doubtful at best. Is Catholic traditionalism really considered to be beyond the pale "even by conservatives"? All of the conservatives that I know are enthusiastic about the movement. I'd like to know who this author considers to be a "conservative". Furthermore, notice how the only time these lefty journalists consider a conservative's opinion to be of any value is when they are using it to attack other conservatives.

Also, to my knowledge, the traditionalists do NOT reject "every Pope" since the Second Coucil. I'm not sure where the author cooked up that idea, but I know of no traditionalists who refuse to recognize John Paul II as the Pope.

The appeal to this "traditionalist" bugaboo is also an attempt to divide Catholics while folks like this author trash our religion. It won't work. Lay off Mel.

I also find it insulting that the author refers to his beliefs as a "strain". As if it is Ebola or some other dangerous virus. The bias is shining through.

Lastly, the author seems to use the phrase "reject the Second Vatical Council" as if its some sort of terrible accusation. Any honest person who analyzes the church since that Council could come to no other conclusion than that it was a total disaster. Anyone who still supports the results of that Council is either clueless or is following an agenda other than one that is pro-Catholic Church.

[gaspar]

Lest anyone think that the leftwing Goodstein would cut Mel Gibson some slack check her other scribblings at: www.fairness.com/resources/by-relation?relation_id=7781

[DPB101]

Seems pointless to me too. Thought this died out a few weeks ago. Guess Mel screening the film to audiences which praised it got the New York Times upset all over. I suppose we will not see the paper comment on this:

MOVIE REVIEWERS BASH CATHOLIC CHURCH
August 1, 2003 | Catholic League president William Donohue commented
today on how movie reviewers assessed “The Magdalene Sisters”...

MiraMax's “The Magdalene Sisters” was released yesterday.

[goldstategop]

You know its just a movie. I can't for the likes of me understand why liberals are apoplectic over it. They told Christians to calm down after The Last Temptation Of Christ came out. Whatever you think of Jesus having been married and having a family in an alternate reality, its hard to see people getting excited about a crucifiction scene. I mean there's more graphic violence in Hollywood's other productions than there is in that one scene in Mel Gibson's movie. And I can't imagine why it would lead people to go out and lynch Jews. Maybe its just me but the Left seems to have a problem with people professing sincere religious beliefs today.

[OpusatFR]

Maybe they can even the field by showing that horrendously offensive Catholic bashing Princton exhibit that desecrates the Sacred Heart and other sacred images. The Dean at Princton stated ~it was doubtful whether other religions could be slammed like that (moslem)...but we have to viewpoint appreciation, don't we?

Wouldn't that just even the films message for the left.

After all, we do have to show our viewpoint. We do have that right, don't we?

[Neever]

Aren't we all forgetting something? Hasn't Hollywood told us for years that movies don't influence people to be violent?

If people contend that this movie will incite anti-Semitism, then they must concede that all movies have the power to influence behavior.

As for myself, I don't have a problem with it. I plan to see the movie. (I'm also a pastor.)

What offends me the most is that these dry-boned, whited sepulchres like the prof from Union Theological get off on telling the general public what it is to be Christian. I know some of them, as I attend a well-known seminary myself. These clowns are ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Their religion is Theology. They need a good dose of repentance and humility.

Perhaps this film will awaken some folks to the paradox of the crufixion. The cross is at once horrific and awesome. It displays the wonder of God's love and the depravity of humankind all at the same time. We all need to experience its transforming power, from the Jew, to the Muslim, to the Christian.

[goldstategop]

Making a pro-Christian film is politically incorrect. Making a film that shows Islam in a less than flattering light is also politically incorrect. So if you want to uphold Western values and face down the Islamokamikazi barbarians you're damned for trying to present the unvarnished truth and let people decide the matter for themselves.

[narses]

Ping.

[aruanan]

Months Before Debut, Movie on Death of Jesus Causes Stir

It would be disturbing if it didn't cause a stir. The movie must be seriously challenging worldviews to cause this much of a stink. Remember than even in the first three decades, Christians were referred to as turning the world upside down. Of course, that it provokes a reaction doesn't necessarily have anything to do with its facticity--viz the Catholic nuns protesting The Life of Brian when it first came out.

[jaime1959]

>> These organizations were wary because they had spent years drafting guidelines for ridding passion plays of anti-Semitism. Some of these same scholars had consulted on the overhaul of the world's most famous passion play at Oberammergau, Germany. <<

Hmmm, sounds like the kind of revisionism you'd see at MiniTru.

If Mel had done a version that blamed right-wing Christian fundamentalists for the Crucifixion, they'd all be happy.

[Dataman]

This one is at least a little fairer than Rich's column, though that's not saying much. Interesting--in the odd sense--that the fight seems increasingly not over the film but over Christianity itself, as if Christianity was inherently anti-Semite and intolerant.

It seems a bit bizarre that Jews have to be reminded that in the beginning even the Romans considered Christianity to be a Jewish sect.

[Dataman]

You know its just a movie. I can't for the likes of me understand why liberals are apoplectic over it.

Their furor indicates that they don't really believe that Jesus Christ was just a man.

[Dataman]

Their religion is Theology

Their religion is bad Theology

[peteram]

It happened 20 Centuries ago, 2000 years ago.

Here's what I don't get - the detractors (many of whom are theologians) are missing one VERY important point. We Christians believe that Christ had to die at the hands of the unbelievers of the time in order to fulfill prophecy to take away our sins. Christians (I feel) could nor would EVER be angry at the Jews for this because it was prophesied and fulfilled as God's will.

IF they miss THAT point, then I don't trust THIER knowledge of scripture.

[DPB101]

Once upon a time, I wanted to go to Union Theological. God must have been watching over me to prevent that mistake.

Any comments from your congregation about the film you can share? Are people aware of it?