Replies

The acceptance or rejection of Vatican II is immaterial to the status of any individual Catholic. The Council taught nothing binding by dogmatic decree. The declaration on the Jews, moreover, was nothing new. The council merely repeated what had been said countless times by popes and councils throughout the Church's history. The Council of Trent, for instance, also made it clear that the Jews were not collectively responsible for Jesus' death. But critics of the Gibson film like to think this means Jewish leadership 2000 years ago had nothing to do with Jesus' death--which is altogether false historically. Friedman is confused on this and needs to be set straight.

I have a hard time understanding Jewish objections to the film. I thought at first that they were offended by Gibson's leaving in the speech by Caiaphas in Matthew which was turned by the ignorant into a belief in "blood libel."

But now that it's been taken out, that doesn't seem to have improved matters.

Do they object to the teachings in the Gospels about the Sanhedrin requesting that the Romans crucify Jesus, period?