Posted on 03/11/2004 3:05:51 PM PST by PeoplesRep_of_LA
Rome's Jewish Community Wanted the Film Condemned
VATICAN CITY, MARCH 11, 2004 (Zenit.org).- A Vatican spokesman says the film "The Passion of the Christ" cannot be considered anti-Semitic without also regarding the Gospel the same way.
Joaquín Navarro-Valls made this statement in response to a request from Riccardo Di Segni, chief rabbi of Rome, who, after seeing the film Tuesday, asked that the Vatican condemn it officially.
The film "makes us go back to a period before the Second Vatican Council," the rabbi contended.
In statements published today by the Roman newspaper Il Messaggero, the director of the Vatican press office said: "The film is a cinematographic transcription of the Gospels. If it were anti-Semitic, the Gospels would also be so."
"It must not be forgotten that the film is full of 'positive' Jewish personages: from Jesus to Mary, from the Cyrenian to Veronica, including the moved crowd, etc.," Navarro-Valls stressed.
"If such a story were anti-Semitic, it would pose a problem for the Judeo-Christian dialogue, because it would be like saying that the Gospels are not historical," he said. "One must realize the seriousness of these affirmations."
That there have been no official statements does not mean that the Church condemns the film, Navarro-Valls said.
In fact, he said, the film "has nothing anti-Semitic about it. Otherwise, it would have been criticized" by the Pope and by his aides in the Holy See. The Holy Father saw the movie in December.
Navarro-Valls referred to a Vatican II declaration that pronounces itself against anti-Semitism.
"The declaration 'Nostra Aetate' was issued by the Catholic Church and, if it has not reacted in this case, it means that it has seen no reason to do so," he explained. "Otherwise, the hierarchy would have spoken out -- either the Vatican or the local episcopates."
Navarro-Valls revealed that some time ago, Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, came to Rome to make contacts in the Vatican on the issue.
"Archbishop John P. Foley, president of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications, replied: 'I don't see anything in this film that can be considered as anti-Semitic,'" the Vatican spokesman continued.
"The secretary of the Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, Father Norbert Hofmann, explained to [Foxman] that the Church has pronounced itself against anti-Semitism with the declaration 'Nostra Aetate,'" he concluded.
Well, the Gospels don't change - - and they say that the religious leaders in Jerusalem condemned Christ to death. According to David Kinghoffer, writing in the LA Times, the Talmud says the same thing. It's not "antisemitic" to depict the passion story on film - - - but it IS anti-christian to suggest that doing so should not be allowed.
Please point out the verses that say that. I don't remember that -- and I hear the Passion story recited every Palm Sunday (with a different Gospel used each year on a four year cycle)
Good question, he may have. Certainly Lenin did, and he was surrounded by JEwish Bolshies - - but that's no reason to blame other people who happen to be Jewish (just as the insanity of some Christian bigots in past centuries shouldn't be used as a blood libel against Gibson or other Christians today)
So what do you want - - a movie that's sympathetic to the religious authorities who (according to the Gospels, Josephus and the Talmud) condemned Jesus to death? Does that mean you think they did the right thing?
Now isn't that ironic ...
Are you saying that exposure to Christianity is a bad thing because it might lead to antisemitism?
I have a theory but it is only a theory. Gentiles who hear the Gospel of Yeshua of Nazareth (including the survival and restoration of the Jewish people in the land of Israel), and reject it, are more prone to antiSemitism than people who have never heard it at all (provided they have not been exposed to another ideology or religion that condemns Jews (Nazism, Islam)).
I suppose you think the Irish Catholics wandered the globe looking for each year's best vacation spots ...
Please explain the difference. Are you, or are you not saying that it is a bad thing for people to learn the Gospel?
Ooops.
Another one.
So, my friend, are you saying, as a Jew, that exposure to the Gospel is potentially harmful?
I'm not a Roman Catholic, so I guess you could say I "oppose" it -- because it assumes doctrines (about the RC Church being the only true church) that I don't buy. As for the plank in Vatican II that says the crucifixion can't be blamed on the Jewish people, that's a no-brainer. I never heard it so blamed - - neither the Nicene Creed nor the Apostles Creed say anything of the kind. (The former says Christ was crucified "under Pontius Pilate" and the latter just says he was "crucified, dead and buried." ) Indeed, I'd be interested to see a Roman Catholic document - - or one from any other denomination --- pre-Vatican II or post Vatican II that blames the Jewish people (as opposed to some religious authorities in Jerusalem in AD 33-36) for the crucifixion. I've never heard of such a document, and I think it's a red herring.
Yes, I did read the article. Did you ?
When convenient, Hitler and his Nazi henchmen dredged up the anti-Semitic writings of an elderly Martin Luther to justify their hatred for Jews.
Medieval Sourcebook: Martin Luther (1483-1546): On the Jews and Their Lies, 1543
I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that those miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews and who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them. I would not have believed that a Christian could be duped by the Jews into taking their exile and wretchedness upon himself. However, the devil is the god of the world, and wherever God's word is absent he has an easy task, not only with the weak but also with the strong. May God help us. Amen.
Grace and peace in the Lord. Dear sir and good friend, I have received a treatise in which a Jew engages in dialog with a Christian. He dares to pervert the scriptural passages which we cite in testimony to our faith, concerning our Lord Christ and Mary his mother, and to interpret them quite differently. With this argument he thinks he can destroy the basis of our faith.
This is my reply to you and to him. It is not my purpose to quarrel with the Jews, nor to learn from them how they interpret or understand Scripture; I know all of that very well already. Much less do I propose to convert the Jews, for that is impossible. Those two excellent men, Lyra and Burgensis, together with others, truthfully described the Jews' vile interpretation for us two hundred and one hundred years ago respectively. Indeed they refuted it thoroughly. However, this was no help at all to the Jews, and they have grown steadily worse.
They have failed to learn any lesson from the terrible distress that has been theirs for over fourteen hundred years in exile. Nor can they obtain any end or definite terminus of this, as they suppose, by means of the vehement cries and laments to God. If these blows do not help, it is resonable to assume that our talking and explaining will help even less.
Therefore a Christian should be content and not argue with the Jews. But if you have to or want to talk with them, do not say any more than this: "Listen, Jew, are you aware that Jerusalem and your sovereignty, together with your temple and priesthood, have been destroyed for over 1,460 years?" For this year, which we Christians write as the year 1542 since the birth of Christ, is exactly 1,468 years, going on fifteen hundred years, since Vespasian and Titus destroyed Jerusalem and expelled the Jews from the city. Let the Jews bite on this nut and dispute this question as long as they wish.
I've been on scores of The Passion threads and the flavor of some of them, the comment on some of them, remind me of Martin Luther's. I find that quite sad.
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.