Posted on 08/11/2003 12:23:58 AM PDT by DPB101
Film about Christ raises concerns of anti-Semitism
But Gibson defends 'Passion' as an
authentic crucifixion account
By AMY WESTFELDT
Associated Press
New York - Those who have seen Mel Gibson's film about the final hours of Jesus Christ have called it beautiful, magical, and a great and important work.
Those who fear "The Passion" could fuel anti-Semitism, however, until this weekend hadn't been allowed to see the film. Seven months before its release, this extraordinary vanity project is stirring passions over Gibson's exclusionary screenings and the potential for a negative depiction of Jews.
On Friday, it was shown in Houston to an audience that included for the first time an official from the Anti-Defamation League, which fights anti-Semitism. Audience members signed confidentiality agreements before attending the screening.
"We still have grave concerns," Rabbi Eugene Korn, director of the ADL's Office of Interfaith Affairs in New York, told the Houston Chronicle in Saturday's editions.
Not just Jews are concerned. The film was first questioned by a nine-member panel that included Christians. Gibson is a member of a Catholic movement that rejects the Vatican's authority over the Catholic church.
The action-movie star and Oscar-winning director of "Braveheart" has spent nearly $30 million of his own money to produce, co-write and direct "The Passion," starring Jim Caviezel as Jesus and Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene. Filmed entirely in Aramaic and Latin, it has yet to secure a distributor.
According to the official Web site for the film, "The Passion" may not reach theaters until June.
In recent weeks, the actor-director had been building support with invitation-only screenings for film industry insiders, conservative commentators, evangelical Christians and sympathetic Jews.
Ted Haggard, president of the National Evangelical Association, saw a screening in June with about 30 evangelical scholars. The scholars are very strict about adherence to scripture, so Gibson "had no assurances that we would be friendly toward that movie."
But Haggard loved it. "I thought it was the most authentic portrayal I've ever seen."
However, critics of "The Passion" - who have not seen the film - worry that it will attract millions to see a violent, bloody recounting of the crucifixion that portrays Jews as a frenzied mob eager to watch Jesus die.
"For too many years, Christians have accused Jews of being Christ-killers and used that charge to rationalize violence," said Sister Mary C. Boys, a seminary professor on a committee that read an early draft of the script. "This is our fear."
While Gibson said "The Passion" will be the most authentic account ever of the crucifixion, Boys said the script presented the Jews as more culpable than the Romans who executed Christ.
It only recounts the last 12 hours of Christ's life, she said, and therefore lacks the context to explain the Jews' portrayal.
In a June statement, Gibson denied that he or the film were anti-Semitic: "My intention in bringing it to the screen is to create a lasting work of art and engender serious thought among audiences of diverse faith backgrounds (or none) who have varying familiarity with this story."
As I said, you haven't limited your argument to American demographics, but have engaged in the rather well-worn tactics of screaming about Jewish bolsheviks and Freemasons, and how natural it is that Jews should be "resented". Stop trying to convince yourself you're using invisible ink ;).
If you people want to believe Mel Gibson's film is anti-Semitic, and that the Catholic Church was anti-Semitic, and that anything anybody says to the contrary is anti-Semitic, then to hell with it
Need to be spoonfed, do you?
The film isn't antisemitic. And contrary to what our little brown-uniformed friends would have us believe, the expressions of worry didn't originate with the Jews, or the ADL. According to Gibson, the first ones to protest the movie (and actually follow up by setting malicious reporters on his family) was the Catholic church, whom he consulted first. However, all the heat generated by one article being posted over and over again by people with an agenda may be a Nazi's wet dream.
The Catholic church was antisemitic (and rabidly so) for quite a few centuries. CWI, an English Christian organization has this short take on the Vatican and antisemitism:
VATICAN. Most "Christian" anti-Semitism has been of the Catholic variety. Relations between the Vatican and Hitler were cordial and until the papacy of John XXIII the Good Friday liturgy contained anti-Jewish references. Since the second Vatican Council, however, there have been significant changes in Catholic-Jewish relations.
The problem I have is, if you read the article, this is accusing modern American churches of teaching these same shameful lessons. The article contains this quote:
For too many years, Christians have accused Jews of being Christ-killers and used that charge to rationalize violence
This line implies, with the word "have" instead of the word "had", that this is an ongoing problem. It is not. They are trying to create a problem that American churches at the very least has come to terms with since the beginning of this century.
Yes, there are still Jews who still see Christians as people who blame them for Christ's death. There are also blacks in this country who view white people as their former masters and demand compensation.
Neither view is right, and neither view should be allowed to be put forward without challenge.
No, Jewish people don't approach me with these accusations, in fact all of my Jewish friends are very curious about this movie and have no fear that I will suddenly persecute them. But as you read articles about this movie, many Jewish "spokespeople" make these kind of paranoid, irrational statements.
They haven't seen it, and yet the next Spanish Inquisition could start due to the fact that "the Church" keeps teaching these anti-Semitic lessons. These accusations against "the Church" are false and I see no reason why Christians should not be able to openly state they are false.
Just as Jewish people have the right to raise concerns, Christians should have the right to challenge false statements. Or is that comment Anti-Semitic?
Isn't it amazing that certain anti-semitic types concern themselves with everything Jewish, from the ADL, to the Weisenthal Center, to Jewish organizations on campus - you name it, but nobody is to question Mel Gibson's film. :)
Is that from the newspaper article supposedly written by Churchill, which appears no place on the official Churchill website, but is of concern to and is quoted at David Irving's site? I wonder at what others sites I will find that quote...:)
What's more true, is that FR is the occasional pitstop for anti-semites who use just about any occasion, lately this film by Mel Gibson, to drag out all the anti-semitic canards. It's a really a shame, as this site is for the most part a pleasant gathering place for Conservatives of all religions and colors. As it should be.
No longer occasional, apparently it a cultural part of the background chatter. I guess it's good to have our nazi poster back again. After the Cubs win, I'll stop back and see what progress the thread has made.
Jews were important in the Russian revolution but were purged more and more as communism matured. After 1927-1930 you can lay Russian communism right at the doorstep of ethnic Russians. They took a few ethnic minorities into the inner circle and ruling classes. Stalin of course was Georgian. But by and large Russian communism was run by Russians and Russians have none to blame but themselves for their suffering.
The point that I don't see made in any of this plethora of articles about this movie's supposed anti-semitism is that Jesus was Jewish. How can a people who worship a Jew be anti-Semitic? They might be anti-Sanhedrin or something like that, but anti-Semitic?
Now, I understand that in the middle ages, the Europeans blamed the Jews for Jesus' death, and persecuted them for it, buy my point is that such conduct is irrational and historically erroneous. It was a tribal instinct of an illiterate peasantry. What does that have to do with the truthful depiction of the facts surrounding the death of Jesus Christ?
Are we Anti-Christian to make movies like "JFK", or historical pieces about Lincoln, RFK, MLK ? Didn't you know, the Christians killed them all. They founded slavery in the US, killed off the Indians, colonized the world, and whenever anyone makes a movie about that, it's clearly anti-Christian, regardless of how historically accurate it is.
Or maybe it's not anti-Christian to depict Christians doing something bad to another Christian, because it is not attempting to make the point that Christians or Christianity itself is bad.
Same with Gibson's movie.
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.