A Freeper Review of The Passion of Christ

Vanity | 2/21/04 | John Fields

[jonboy]

I'm not sure where to start. I'm a fellow Freeper who also happens to be minister. I was invited today to see a screening of the Passion of the Christ at our local theater. I have been fascinated, and you might even be able to say obsessed with this movie ever since I heard about it a few months ago and first saw the trailer (I cried every time I saw it).

Given that I have watched and listened to several interviews and read several news stories about this movie I was as prepared as I thought I could be to watch it. I HAVE NEVER BEEN THROUGH ANYTHING LIKE THIS MOVIE! I sobbed, I throbbed, my Kleenex became a fairly useless mess that occupied the hand not tightly gripping the seat. IT WAS HARD TO WATCH. The cruelty was overwhelming, but approximated what we have a glimpse from in scripture. The violence and horror of what was done to Him nearly overwhelming, but not gratuitous as some have claimed.

As to the charges of anti-semitism, I can understand how a Jew who does not believe that Jesus is their Messiah would be frightened by this film. However, it was NOT anti-semitic. I could just as easily be moved to be against Italians for what the Romans did as I could be against the Jews. If one were inspired to hate the perpetrators if this event, they would be anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, anti-Arab, anti-Japanese, and anti-__________ (fill in your own blanks). I was filled with the grim overwhelming knowledge of my own guilt as much as anything else. As I watched Him writhing in pain, the ribs virtually exposed from the beating that He had taken, as I watched His shoulder ripped out of socket as they stretched his hand to make it to the pre-drilled nail hole, as I watched the blood flowing and the breath ripped from His body from the pain, one thing entered into my mind above all else. I PUT HIM THERE! He could have come down, He could have called in excess of ten-thousand angels. He could have stopped that horrible mockery and evil in its tracks by coming down off of that cross, healing His own wounds, and then saying go to it boys as He releases the angels to take care of business. BUT HE DIDN'T. I am in awe.

I admit that I has moments when I felt like ripping the Jewish and Roman perpetrators apart. How dare they laugh in the face of such agony! How dare they spit on Him! How dare they stand in pompous, arrogant, self-righteous judgment of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords (how dare MYSELF go on sinning after what He did for me)! But as the High Priest is walking away from making fun and mocking. He hears Jesus softly say, taking up precious breath, "Father forgive them, they don't know what they are doing." The High Priest pauses in uncomfortable silence, then walks on. Later, after Jesus has died and the earthquake has damaged the temple and they are very aware that they have done something terribly wrong the High Priest is seen crying out and holding his face in grief and horror.

This movie was about love and forgiveness and about our sin and what God and His Son did together about that sin. It is about the horrible things that men do to their fellow men which can still be forgiven if they will but repent. Some of the Jews were depraved and some were compassionate. Some of the Romans were depraved, and some of them were inclined towards compassion. Anti-Jewish? NO WAY! Besides, the early church was exlusively Jewish. The movie is not about Mel Gibson having some kind of point to prove to anyone, let alone the Jews. It was Mel's passion, a labor of love. Will it profit Him? Unbelievably! Did he do it for the money, not a chance.

Were there any liberties taken with the scripture? Maybe a few. Poetic/artistic license was taken to a degree. There were some scenes with Judas that were extra Biblical, but imaginable. Surprisingly, he was shown as a somewhat sympathetic character, which is something I've felt to a degree for him. I doubt that he was a completely depraved man, he just wanted to speed things along so that Jesus would have to rise to the throne and have to take His true place. When he realized he had been horribly mis-lead he admitted guilt but then went out and killed himself. There was a scene in which the unrepentant thief had his eyes pecked out by a crow. I thought that didn't gel well with the theme of forgiveness and should have been left out. It seemed to represent Divine retribution since the thief had just been blaspheming Jesus. But the cross wasn't about retribution, that will come later at Judgment, it was about mercy.

As to this movie being appropriate for children? That's a hard call. I think it would be best if conscientous parents screened it for themselves first. It is hard enough for mature adults to stomach. However, there is something to be said for exposing young tender hearts to the truth of what He did. Maybe knowing what He did at a younger age would lead to more mature Christians later. Again, it's an individual call.

Is this movie Catholic? Yes and no. Those who see the relationship between Jesus and Mary who are Catholic will likely see Mary as divine. Those of us who believe that Mary was a mere woman who was blessed enough to have been chosen to be the mother of the Christ will see the relationship between a mother and her Son. THIS MOVIE IS FOR ALL!!! I can wholeheartedly recommend this movie to others for personal devotion or to touch the hearts of those who are lost. I believe very much that it will be a culturally defining movie and that it will break most IF NOT ALL of the box office records both nationally and world-wide. The Lord will not be silenced. I truly feel He has spoken through this movie. Maybe its His way of saying WAKE UP before He comes again. If it is, this Christian is awake (wiping away tears).

[savedbygrace]

Your question is based on an unsupported assumption. It begs the following question. Must everything Christians do be found in Scripture? The answer is no. That answer can even be found in Scripture:
1. 2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings[ 2:15 Or traditions] we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

Paul made clear in other writings that he wrote as instruction what he had received from the Lord. When he wrote an instruction that came from him alone, he qualified it, saying that this particular instruction came from him, not the Lord.

Regardless of the fact that your principle is wrong and contrary to scripture, here is a good answer from James Akin:
A: Well, aside from the fact that the Magisterium has ruled on the issue and that Apostolic Tradition teaches it (both of which are sufficient to prove the matter), the Bible also teaches it.
In the book of Psalms, which was the hymn book for the Temple in Jerusalem, we sing to those in the heavenly court and exhort them:
"Bless the Lord, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word! Bless the Lord, all his hosts, his ministers that do his will!" (Psalm 103:20-21, RSV, as below)

Speaking to angels in song is not the same as offering prayers to those who have died and are now in heaven. I agree the Bible has many references of people speaking with angels. That’s not the issue here.

The fact that those in the heavenly court can hear our prayers is also indicated in the book of Revelation, where we read:
"And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God." (Revelation 8:3-4)

I agree that angels can hear our prayers. Again, that doesn’t address the issue of offering prayers to anyone but God.

Thus those saints who are angels have a role in presenting our prayers to God in an intercessory manner. (Angels are also saints, as indicated by the fact that the Bible applies the Hebrew word for saint/holy one -- qaddiysh -- to them, cf. Daniel 4:13, 23, 8:13. Thus we speak of St. Michael the Archangel, St. Gabriel, St. Raphael, etc.).

Whoa. I disagree with this. Those who have died in Christ are not angels. You are playing loose with the entries in Strong’s Concordance. Just because there are two different words given in an entry for a Hebrew (or Greek, if in the New Testament) does NOT mean the two words are interchangeable. Qadosh is given in Daniel 4:13 & 23 and qaddiysh is given in 8:13. In some uses, qadosh, which usually means holy, can refer to God, sometimes to the presence of an angel, and sometimes a saint, who is considered holy because God is holy. None of that allows you to conclude that saints are angels.

Since the Ascension of Christ, when Jesus took the Old Testament saints from sheol to heaven, large numbers of humans saints have also been in heaven, and Revelation indicates they also present our prayers to God:
"And when he [the Lamb] had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints" (Revelation 5:8).

They have been entrusted with the prayers of the saints, but this passage offers no indication that any of those prayers were offered to anyone but God.

The twenty-four elders represent the hierarchy of the people of God in heaven (just as the four living creatures represent the hierarchy of the angels of God in heaven), and here they are shown presenting our prayers to God under the symbol of incense (which is, in fact, what incense symbolizes in church, since it is a pleasing smell which rises upward).
One might object, saying, "But maybe those weren't prayers to the saints but prayers to God!" This may well be true. However, a person who says this only digs the hole deeper for himself since this would mean that those in heaven are aware of prayers which weren't even directed to them!

Again, the reference above shows that our prayers are kept in heaven and entrusted to the elders and the four living creatures. That doesn’t dig a hole at all.

In any event, we know that the saints in heaven (whether human saints or angel saints) are aware of our prayers and, based on them, intercede with God on our behalf. Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium all agree.

Being aware of our prayers is different from having prayers offered to them. Again, you haven’t touched on the real issue.

Regarding Luther's non-biblical doctrine of "sola Scriptura," the passage that you're thinking of citing from the book of Revelation refers only to the book of Revelation. That's the book that John was writing. John couldn't have been referring to what we now know as the Bible because the Bible wasn't to be canonized for another 400 years. And then that canon was the one including the above passage, not Luther's abridged version. By what authority did Luther remove books from the Bible? Where in the Bible is Luther directed to remove books from the Bible?

No, I wasn’t thinking of Revelation 22:18-19. Here’s the sequence:

1. Jesus told us he does nothing except what he sees the Father doing

2. Paul told us to model ourselves after him, as he models himself after Jesus

Ergo, my ultimate source for how I am to behave as a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Bible (Jesus is the Word.) I don’t read Hebrew or Greek, so the closest translation, in my opinion, is the King James Version. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. I am not a New Testament Only Christian; I refer to the Jewish scriptures as authoritative, but with a slightly different twist. I believe the Law is profitable for our well-being, but no longer needed for our salvation and sanctification. Jesus is the only source for that, through his death, burial and resurrection. The reason is that since Jesus, the covenant changed, and belief and trust in Jesus grants us eternal salvation. Note: the covenant changed, but the Law didn’t change at all.

Anyway, that’s my take, and I’m not going to defend Luther, who in his later years, either became or outed himself as, an anti-Semite. I won’t defend or support an anti-Semite.

[savedbygrace]

Again you misunderstand. Jesus gave us a model for our prayer. In fact, he gave us several. I do my best to follow Jesus' teachings. These are models, or patterns, for prayer. I never intmated that I only prayed scripture. (Though praying scripture can be powerful.)

The man-made prayer I was referring to is one that violates the teachings of the Bible, because it is obviously a prayer TO Mary, who is NOT God. I won't pray in accordance with that.

If the teachings of the Catholic church are not open to debate, then it would appear more like a cult than a religion. I'm sure you don't intend to give that impression, do you?

You seem to be using the same technique that John Kerry is using to stifle discussion of his record. I'm sure you don't intend that either, do you?

[JulieRNR21]

Thanks for your review. I'm sorry the thread turned into a discussion on Catholic doctrine, instead of what you intended - a review of the movie.

I also came on this thread expecting a review of the movie. However, like many others I responded to jonboy's statement that 'Catholics regard Mary as Divine'. Such a blatant falsehood simply could not be ignored.

[jonboy]

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.

OK, let's take a deep breath, I guess I'm a glutton for punishment, but here goes. Will an honest hearted Catholic out there at least acknowledge that the bolded above COULD BE TAKEN by an honest hearted person studying it with no Catholic background as an idication of Mary's divinity? Come on, be honest. SURELY, some of you could see how it could be taken that way.

[jonboy]

I understand what some have said about their rationale for praying to Mary. I can at least grant a degree of logic to it. But given that God says that He shows no partiality,
Romans 2:11 For there is no partiality with God.
and given that there is only one mediator between God and man:
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Why would you think that it is ESSENTIAL to pray through Mary to Jesus to lobby Him on our behalf?
I ask other people to pray for me, however, it is not essential and pre-requisite for me to get through to God and Christ. Besides, how does Mary answer the millions of requests to lobby Jesus without omni-presence being ascribed to her, again, another of God's attributes? Will my soul be saved from death if I DON'T pray through Mary? MUST you pray through Mary or is it optional? If you must, where did the command come from? I haven't seen it in scripture. Again, I'm not picking a fight, I want to hear a rationale that I can understand and appreciate from a Catholic perspective.

[Ohioan from Florida]

Problem: Your fairy tale is not based on scripture. Mary and Joseph had children of their own. How are you supposing Mary got pregnant those times ..??

Your fairy tale is based on assumptions you've made, too. No where in the Bible does it mention that Mary had other children. You are assuming it because you see the brothers and sisters of Jesus mentioned in the gospels. As I explained in other posts, the original language (at first I thought Aramaic, but perhaps as someone else mentioned, it was the Greek) does not have a separate term for first cousins or step-siblings, so it is translated as "brothers" although the actual blood relationship may be different. They were probably close family members of Jesus who were raised together. Don't forget that in the Hebrew religion, if a man died, his own brothers were designated to care for the widow and children.

Another reason that points to the idea that Jesus did not have any blood relatives other than Mary was that at His death, He gives John the responsiblity of looking after His mother, Mary. If Jesus had other brothers and sisters, as you say, then this would not have been necessary. Jesus as Mary's son had to designate someone to take care of her. If she had other children, Jesus, again, would not have done this. There would have been no need.

[CyberAnt]

YOU SAID: "Flame away if you want to, but don't expect me to respond. This is my opinion. You can have yours"

MY RESPONSE: ...

[Ohioan from Florida]

A relative of mine has a large statue of Mary situated in the corner of the living room. Statue of Jesus...nowhere to be found.

I'm surprised by your comment. Does this relative have no crucifix? No pictures of Jesus anywhere? Of course, not all Catholics adorn their home with articles of their faith, but in my home, the likenesses of Jesus are in every room downstairs, and my bedroom. They outnumber the images of Mary 8 to 1 (I just took a tally to be sure I wasn't overestimating). I did not include 4 pictures/statues of the two of them together (Mary holding Jesus as a baby or the Pieta). I also have scripture passages and prayers, and a few pictures of angels. I don't inspect everyone's home when I visit, but I have rarely found a Catholic home without a crucifix of Jesus, at the minimum. Perhaps your family members are nominal Catholics, I don't know. But your charge that Mary is given higher esteem than our Lord by Catholics is nothing short of outrageous!

I'm glad I left the Catholic church.

How old were you when you left? How long had you been practicing the faith? I know a lot of people who are surprised when they return to the Catholic faith. They can't believe what they've been missing all that time!

All this dependence on fallible men as popes and extra-Biblical sources never led me close to God.

I'm sorry you had such a bad experience with Catholicism. It certainly comes through in your commentary. However, it could possibly have been that maybe you didn't have quite the shining example from your elders just as much as the Church at-large.

Then I learned how to study the Bible and everything changed.

I credit my Protestant counterparts for teaching me about Bible study as well, but it has not taken me one step further away from the Catholic faith. To the contrary, it has only confirmed the things I've been taught as a Catholic.

[Ohioan from Florida]

Please reread your scripture. It does NOT say "until after", it says "until" and those mean two different things.

Likewise, the term "firstborn" is used to indicate the child that first came from the womb. It does not indicate whether or not there were subsequent births. It refers to only the first. An only child would be considered the firstborn. The designation was normally made to indicate the rights of inheritance.

[Ohioan from Florida]

I can understand that you could misinterpret what that means. However, because Catholics are taught that only the Trinity are divine, we don't get the meaning mixed up.

IMHO, whoever started the rumors about what Catholics believe (way back whenever) is probably happy that the misinformation continues. Isn't it possible that Satan is behind the whole thing, not wanting us to get along? FWIW, I don't have a problem with my Protestant counterparts UNTIL they want to trash me and my beliefs. Then I will try to defend my faith, without trashing theirs, to the best of my ability. We probably all have friends, co-workers, family even, that are from different faith backgrounds. As in the story of the good Samaritan, and the woman at the well, I believe that Christ wants us to treat each other kindly, no matter our backgrounds. We do Him a disservice when we try to tear each other down.

[Ohioan from Florida]

I'm a little surprised that no one has answered you yet.

Why would you think that it is ESSENTIAL to pray through Mary to Jesus to lobby Him on our behalf?

It is NOT ESSENTIAL! Mary is an intercessor, not the mediator.

Besides, how does Mary answer the millions of requests to lobby Jesus without omni-presence being ascribed to her, again, another of God's attributes?

If we are made in the image of God, aren't we all ascribed some of His attributes? About omni-presence specifically, I can't tell you, but I do think that when we pass on to the next life, we are not constrained by the elements we are here on earth. Whether or not Mary is omni-present, I don't know where you're getting that from. I don't have a good explanation for you other than that. Life and the after-life are still a mystery to me.

Will my soul be saved from death if I DON'T pray through Mary?

I think that would depend on your relationship with our Lord. Praying to Mary does not assure anyone that their soul will be saved from death. Prayer to Mary is optional; there are no commands as such. At least not that I'm aware of.

[Ohioan from Florida]

I wasn't sure when I typed that post last evening that I would have the energy to respond, so I didn't want to offend anyone by not responding. I have had a cold for a couple days and my energy level is a little low. Sorry to offend you by giving a response.

[what's up]

I don't know if they have crucifixes...perhaps...perhaps not. My point was there are no statues of Christ. They are extremely devout Catholics. And my family was extremely devout growing up, particularly my father who prayed with us every night, and was the epitome of gentle, and who was educated in a Catholic school.

However, the problem is the lack of solid answers Catholicism provides, and rarely leads into true Bible study. As some of your answers indicate; you do not refer to the scripture. Many Catholics on this thread I've noticed say things like "I can't imagine Joseph doing this" or "Can you imagine God doing this" instead of referring to what the scripture says. The scripture clearly states what many here refuse to believe, yet the Catholics prefer to believe otherwise.

This is why I chose to leave at age 18. It is also why none of my 7 siblings worship any longer in the Catholic church. Also, my father no longer worships there and he was the most devout of all.

If Catholics would teach and debate more from the scriptures they would make more sense on doctrinal issues, instead of relating on an emotional level. Taking intensive Bible study full time for 5 years made me even more glad of my decision to leave the Catholic church. I was never satisfied there as a child and have had not even an inkling of a desire to return.

Oh, and that family that has the prominent statue of Mary? Another of their 10 children has now chosen the Protestant faith. It has disturbed my devoutly Catholic aunt and uncle, but maybe they should consider not believing any longer the perfection of Mary and such and begin teaching their children that only one has sinned in history as the Bible over and over states in Old Testament and New.

[CyberAnt]

I'm not offended. You said you had your belief and I have mine. We don't agree. I'm quite certain God has not fallen off His throne over it.

End of discussion!!

[jonboy]

THANK YOU! You did EXACTLY what I wanted. You answered my questions in a considerate, thoughtful way without ascribing ulterior motives to me or talking down. I appreciate that more than you can know.

Another question: If praying to Mary for intercession is not required or commanded, nor mentioned or in any way alluded to in scripture either by inference or example, why do you suppose so many Catholics do it? Also, if it IS important for salvation, why or how do you think it was left out of the Bible (answer this question only if you are taught that it IS important for salvation)?

I know that most Catholics rely on tradition quite a bit, have you ever seen any real or seeming contradictions between scripture and Catholic tradition? If so, how did you deal with it or how WOULD you deal with it.

Thanks for an interesting discussion, I'm learning a lot from this.

[Ohioan from Florida]

Sorry to be so long in getting back, I had to let the kids tend to some schoolwork on the computer. I'll do my best to answer your questions, but I'm sure others can also add in what they know if they'd like. Since I'm not a theologian or anything like that, let's just say you are getting MY opinion based on what I've learned about my Catholic faith. I try to stay with what I've been taught, but like any other thing, I know my knowledge isn't perfect. Always learning more, but I like it that way.

I understand the Bible as God's written Word, that it is mainly about the history of salvation for man. All that we really need to know for our salvation is in there. That's why the details of Mary are not in there, because they aren't essential.

Catholics have the Holy Tradition as handed down to us through the years. The way I understand it is that before the Bible was compiled into the form that it is now distributed, it was handed down by word of mouth from the apostles. We call it the apostolic tradition. So the oral traditions have always been an important part of the faith.

You know that not every minute or even year of Jesus' life is documented in the New Testament, nor could it be. There are materials that were circulated widely as the apostles moved on and preached the Good News. Over the years, the works have been collected, and some have been lost. This is probably all stuff you already know, but just in case, I wanted to include it. This is the main reason why Catholics do not rely on only the Bible for our faith. We have the gift of this oral tradition that fills in some of those gaps.

So we have stories that we've heard about all these people who were close to Jesus in His lifetime on earth. Most of them we call saints. We believe that they are especially blessed by God. Some of the stories include things like "the way of the Cross", in which we are taught after Jesus' death, Mary went through the different "stations " that Jesus did during His Passion. We celebrate these mainly on Fridays during Lent (because Jesus died on Good Friday). It is a way to remember what Christ endured for us on a regular basis. The thing is that traditionally it is done as a group during Lent, like I said. However, it can be performed any day of the week, any time of the year.

In like manner, we learn a lot about Mary from the oral tradition. We learn that she was a most prayerful woman and that she was very close to God. You could say that He was the whole focus of her life, everything she did, she did to please Him. We are taught that because Mary was the mother of Jesus, and that because He honors His mother (as in the commandments), that it is perfectly appropriate to turn to her when asking for help with any concern, in the same way that you would talk with a friend about your concerns. You see, fear of the Lord is one of the earliest things we are taught about God. So, although we know Jesus was loving and forgiving, God the Father is also perceived as mighty and powerful, sometimes even angry. You can see where we get that from the Old Testament, can't you? It's like God is someone who you cannot dare approach. And since Jesus is God, too, well, I think it sort of spills over to Him, too. That's why Mary is seen as this comforting mother who wants to take care of her children. Although she is holy, we feel that she is approachable, all the time. So we have these traditions where praying to Mary is seen as very helpful. It's not essential for our salvation. Not at all. I think sometimes Catholics have this extreme guilt factor driven into them, and so approaching Jesus in prayer, well, we still do, but it's always nice to know that Mary's there, too.


As to the other part of your questions, I have taken seven years of intense Bible study (BSF if you've ever heard of that). I read many books about my faith, including writings from the various saints (Augustine, Teresa of Avila, are a couple), and books on church history, the Shroud of Turin, etc. There's so many resources, you never get bored! Through my different types of study, some scriptural, others historical, I have to tell you that I have not found contradictions between scripture and Catholic tradition. I've found that the scriptures enhance and expound what I've been taught. When I think I find a contradiction, I pray about it. I ask God for His Wisdom in understanding it. Usually, before much time has passed, He allows me to understand the Scriptures. I guess I keep studying until it makes sense. Well, to be honest, it doesn't always make perfect sense, but that's when I hand it back to God. I figure that if I understood it all, I would be God, and I'm not, and so there are some things I just have to leave in His hands.

Sorry, this is more long-winded than I intended, but I guess I didn't know how to put all that you learn growing up into just a few paragraphs. You could literally write pages about this stuff if you were so inclined.

[ladyjanes]

Your review was heartfelt, passionate, and sincere. I look forward to seeing the movie with eagerness and dread. I think every Christian who views this saga will do so with a feeling of soaring gratitude and overwhelming guilt; I can't imagine its being otherwise. Thank you for taking the time to write your compelling critique.

[jonboy]

You weren't long-winded at all, and I'm a preacher, I know long-winded. Thank you for your thorough heart-felt treatment of your religion, I have grown from it. I believe that we all grow from having our faith and belief tested.

[restornu]

That is the point I feel is that we all including those yet to be born, put him there.

All of us have to go through the refiners fire as our test here on earth.

The Lord knew that and none of us alone would beable to over come our sins.

Jesus the Christ was perfect and showed us the way and paid the price for our rescue.

I am so thankful at last including me will have a chance or the knowlege and depth to know what the redeemer did to save and make it possible for us to pass through these portals to return some day!

I am sorry that this secular element continues to create fear in our Jewish bothern. This secular thead has been ruleing the roost for century. I really think they fear that Judah will recognized their Messiah, and the Ciaphas gang hold will be broken!

ZECHARIAH
http://scriptures.lds.org/zech/summary

Zech. 13
The Jews shall gain forgiveness at the Second Coming—They shall ask Jesus: What are these wounds in thine hands?—The remnant, tried and refined, shall be his people.

Zech. 14
At his Second Coming the Lord shall fight for Israel—His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives—He shall be King over all the earth—Plagues shall destroy the wicked.

I long for and will rejoice when Judah (Jew) and Israel(Christian) will be one!

When all our eyes are open than the John Kerry's, Clinton's and other sociopath, secular humansit will no longer have the power they once had!

[sneakers]

"Is this movie Catholic? Yes and no. Those who see the relationship between Jesus and Mary who are Catholic will likely see Mary as divine."

Excellent review, jonboy. I only want to clarify, as a Roman Catholic, that Mary is, in no way, "divine" to Catholics. Blessed? Yes. Worthy of honor? Yes. But not divine. Jesus Christ, alone, can claim that. I haven't read all the comments, so I'm sorry if this has already been hashed over (as I expect it probably has, lol!)