I have not seen the movie but it does seem that it is a very Catholic movie. Movies themselves are in some ways "Catholic" compared to the teaching devices used by Protestants.
I come from a 1950's "mixed marriage." My Dad is Catholic and my Mother is Presbyterian. The Catholics in the neighborhood thought I was weird because I attended public school, and the public school kids thought I was weird because I was Catholic. (Little did they know that I'm just weird, period.) And on top of that we were the only Republicans in the family and the entire neighborhood. That was really weird in northeast Ohio! I took my faith seriously and was an alter boy and was confirmed in the Catholic Church. Moreover, my second cousin is a Roman Catholic Cardinal in the Vatican who has been in charge of "The Propagation of the Faith" worldwide. However, I our home never had a Bible to read until my senior year in public high school when my English teacher made her students buy King James Bibles to read 'as literature' to supplement other books.
Despite the Catholic upbringing, I always liked attending church more with my mother because it was a thoughtful atmosphere where I could learn more about God. It fit me.
My senior year in college I read the Bible myself, and have never been back to the Catholic Church--not because I do not think that it is Christian--IT IS--but because it simply does not fit ME in these modern times when we all are well educated as only the Priests were in the past. Symbols and statues and rote are no longer necessary for most of us to come to understand God, and they often get in the way. Today we can read His word for ourselves and understand complex exposition.
So I found Jesus in the Catholic Church, but personally needed more. The Latin masses I attended in my youth did not equip me to live well or to explain God to others.
So with that background I now very often DEFEND the Catholic Church against Protestants who do not understand it, but I also love and appreciate and participate (in a 'Bible Church') in the Protestant movement that God sent to steer his people.
Most Freepers understand that a solid diet of nothing but television is educationally bad for our society because it wastes time and displaces reading and education of other types. Eventually the viewers become unable to maintain attention long enough to function at all in any type of non-entertaining setting. By the same token, the author's point that most Christians are better off reading and listening to inspired preaching is well taken and should serve as a reminder to Protestant Christians that there is a lot more to what we believe than what it portrayed in this movie.
However, the Catholic Church with its symbolism and ceremony has truly brought many people to Jesus, people who might have no motivation to investigate a dryer presentation of Christ. God brings people to Himself in many ways. Therefore despite the movie's Catholic flavor which can be problematic to some protestants, I hope that this film is very successful in doing helping many unsaved people to discover and accept Jesus. Many evangelical Christians have the sane view and truly as 'unspun' alluded to via his (or her) quote, we Christians should NOT impede those who, like Mel Gibson, are helping spread the goodness of Christ. However, it is good for us to examine carefully the modalities that we use to teach each other, like this film, so that we can be sure that we avoid pitfalls and side effects that might not be obvious at first. That is why I thought this article was interesting--a lot of it is 'right on' for Protestants who also need reminders of the basic of their faith, especially is those reminders are used for their own edification and not to divide Christians; but the article it is at odds with some Catholics and with Protestants who have not carefully thought about the movie. And the reliance on non-Biblical material is good to know about.
Ronzo: I'm not apologizing for post. I'm not that thin-skinned about discussing issues here, and I do not think anyone else is either. It's one Protestant view on the movie. I did not post it to advertise the view, nor to divide, but to promote discussion, and it's done that. Catholic and Protestant Christians need to understand each other and this movie is obviously a meeting ground.
My political posts never seem to get any comments. Maybe I should stick to religion! Thanks for all the thoughtful comments above. I still have not decided whether to go to the movie, but I think the DVD idea may be a winner.
Weirdad
With all due respect, the article you posted for "discussion" about about differing Catholic/Protestant viewpoints in viewing this film was nothing more than an anti-Catholic rant clothed psuedo-scholarly dribble.
The entire thesis of the article can be honestly and succintly summed up as thus:
Evangelicals should NOT go see "The Passion" because it's a blantantly Catholic movie (and somewhat heretical as well, as far as Evangelicals are concerned...). "
That, sir, is hubris of the first magnitude. If his point were to just point out the Catholicism inherit in the film, and to warn Evangelicals to be careful of those points, that I could except as a RATIONAL and THOUGHTFUL starting point of discussion. But telling us that he thinks Evangelicals should NOT even SEE the film BECAUSE ITS CATHOLIC (the HORROR!!!) goes way too far.
For the record, I spent half my life faithfully attending Catholic church, but did not find Jesus there, because no one pointed him out to me--It's literally that simple. A big crucifix on a wall with Jesus still hanging by the nails is a wonderful starting point for contemplation IF you fully understand his life and his message. Sadly, most of what I got out of Catholic church is why they are the ONE TRUE CHURCH. Those debating points were drilled into my head with great care. As for Jesus? If I learned anything about him, it was almost by accident. I honestly learned more about him watching religous movies on TV than I did from my own church. However, I realize not all Catholic churches were like the one I grew up in, and many take great care in portraying the reality of the person of Jesus to their parishoners.
But thanks to the Catholic traditon of the stations of the cross, I did learn something about Jesus and when I saw "The Passion," I immediately recognized that Mel was basing the whole movie on the stations of the cross. For that little bit of Catholic tradition, I'm very thankful.
So I'm in total agreement with the author when he says it's a very Catholic film. To me it obviously was.
However, he doesn't just say that this is a "very Catholic film." He says that since this is a very Catholic film, Evangelicals should not go see it! On that point, I strongly disagree. It is also extremely obvious by the tone of this article that he's quite fearful that some bird-brained evangelical will be totally confused and lost after watching the film, and may even start attendig mass or something. THE HORROR!
I'm very surpised how you can be so blinded in not seeing how incredibly insensitive and insulting that is to Catholics, espeically, like me, you having been one yourself. The author isn't just pointing out that there are differences in evangelical and Catholic theology; but he's telling his audience that by their being a Catholic theological perspective, this is a dangerous movie for evangelicals to go see! (and we both know from experience that when it comes to CORE beliefs about the person Jesus, there are NO DIFFERENCES, or so little difference between Catholics and evangelicals as for it to be completely trivial.)
Haven't you seen the posts from Catholics stating this is a Catholic bashing article? Do you think they are just being "thin-skinned?" It's so obviously anti-Catholic, so very self-evident, that it amazes me how anyone can't see it! It is offensive, there's no ifs, ands or but's about it. When an evangelical scholar goes and writes an article that makes Catholic theology look like pagan idol worship; don't you think someone who's Catholic might find that a bit offensive?
Let's put the shoe on the other foot: Let's say a Catholic scholar reviews "The Jesus Movie" and tells Catholics they should not go see it, because it was made by evangelicals and showcases their schismatic, apostate theology. Would that be a good article for discussion about differences between evangelicals and Catholics? Having a scholar go off and berate evangelical theology then say "lets discuss the differences," after your own particular theology is held up to be heresy? My, what a good idea. Wish I thought of that. I'll have to use that method the next time I go out doing street evangelism: "Hey, your church's theology SUCKS! Let's talke about it..."
My condemnation of the article STANDS.
My demand for an apology to all the Catholics who were RIGHTLY offended by this piece of tripe, STANDS.
By the way, the National Association of Evangelicals, who represent over fifty evangelical denominations, were actively promoting this movie by providing a banner ad and link on their own evangelical website. Now that's something to be commended.
Also, every big-wig evangelical I know: Dr. Dobson, Chuck Colson, Joesph Stowell, Bill Hybels, Billy Graham, etc., all enthusiastically promoted this movie, without ANY RESERVATIONS. Obviously, they must need some lessons from the evangelicals on this thread, for they didn't see the obvious attempt "The Passion" makes to recruit new members to the Catholic Church and distort and confuse the theology of evangelicals.
Finally, how about a thread that talks about the SIMILARITIES between evangelicals and Catholics? Wouldn't that be a much more Christian and loving thing to do? Wouldn't that accomplish much more for the Kingdom of God than the divisive rant that you posted?