Krauthammer: "Gibson's Blood Libel"

Washington Post ^ | Mar. 5, 04 | Charles Krauthammer

[churchillbuff]

Gibson's Blood Libel

By Charles Krauthammer Friday, March 5, 2004; Page A23

Every people has its story. Every people has the right to its story. And every people has a responsibility for its story. ...[snip]

Christians have their story too: the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. Why is this story different from other stories? Because it is not a family affair of coreligionists. If it were, few people outside the circle of believers would be concerned about it. This particular story involves other people. With the notable exception of a few Romans, these people are Jews. And in the story, they come off rather badly.

Because of that peculiarity, the crucifixion is not just a story; it is a story with its own story -- a history of centuries of relentless, and at times savage, persecution of Jews in Christian lands. This history is what moved Vatican II, in a noble act of theological reflection, to decree in 1965 that the Passion of Christ should henceforth be understood with great care so as to unteach the lesson that had been taught for almost two millennia: that the Jews were Christ killers.

[Jeff Chandler]

So I'll just say, strike one, and you get more than one.

Dittos. Krauthammer can't always be right. All I can say is "Oy vey!"

[drlevy88]

er... krauty is also alleged to be a gun-banner.

[giotto]

What a lowlife creep.

On the contrary, Krauthammer is one of the clearest thinking, most articulate conservative voices in the media. I can almost always count on his insight on difficult issues. For him to deliver this stinging indictment of the movie is enough to make me stop and think. Since I haven't seen it yet, I will suspend my judgement until after I do. But to call someone like Krauthammer a lowlife creep merely tells me you've never read him before this article.

[Porterville]

Who cares, the talking heads are so out of touch- in it only for the money and the shoulder rubbing. It is on par with the churches that never speak out about the evils of liberalism and the homosexual status in fear of losing their tax-exempt status.... all a damn disgrace. I have a new found respect for the street pastors who tell people their going to hell, at least they aren't driven by cash.

[Paleo Conservative]

Krauthammer has spent too much time at the WP if he really believes what he has written.

I've noticed several Jews conservatives considered the movie antisemitic. They are Mona Charen, William Saffire, and Charles Krauthammer. They seem to see blame for Jesus' death attached to all Jews while Christian reviewers have tended to seem blame either the high priests and Romans or all mankind.

I haven't seen the movie yet, but most of the reviews I've heard don't consider it antisemitic. I've heard that the violence is rather grusome and that perhaps Jesus as depicted in this move shed more blood than a human body has. I've also heard that if you didn't know much about Christianity and the New Testament it would be difficult to understand why anyone was mad enough at Jesus to subject him to the punishment he received. There just wasn't much information about what had occured prior to the last 12 hours of Jesus life. Perhaps Mel Gibson is saving that for other movies.

[hellinahandcart]

This is the first time I've ever read anything of his that I did not largely or totally agree with.

Me too, wow. This hurts to read.

[reg45]

How does the so called anti-semetism of "The Passion of The Christ" square with the fact that JESUS WAS JEWISH?

[wardaddy]

Good for you.

Does anyone have a list of the non-detractors?

Medved, Lapin.

I heard Jerry Bruckheimer supported it. I know he's no pundit but he is a film sage and gutsy to stand up for Gibson.

I would like to hear more good news on this dust up.

[drlevy88]

It must indeed be a temptation. I pray that Gibson doesn't let his faith in Christ cool off due to this, and I mean it seriously.

[GretchenEE]

Gibson's personal interpretation is spectacularly vicious. Three of the Gospels have but a one-line reference to Jesus's scourging [In God's economy, in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. Three are enough for God the Father]. The fourth has no reference at all. In Gibson's movie this becomes 10 minutes of the most unremitting sadism in the history of film.

The bloodthirst of Christ's tormentors and murderers is very accurately prophesied through the Old Testament: two examples are Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53, but there are others; and the agony Christ suffered is likewise covered in these ancient texts. Gibson didn't just the Gospels as his only historical reference; he used the Old Testament prophecies and historical facts about scourging and crucifixion. Since when is it anti-Semitic to use accepted historical facts to re-tell history?

Further, Scripture states clearly that the devil left Jesus after tempting Him (unsuccessfully) in the desert to return "at a more opportune time." One could scarcely characterize the Garden of Gethsemane as anything other than a more opportune time.

filmmaker whose public pronouncements on the Holocaust are as chillingly ambiguous and carefully calibrated as that of any sophisticated Holocaust denier.

HOGWASH. Mel emphatically stated in a recent prime time interview with Diane Sawyer that the holocaust happened and that millions of Jews died in it.

Kraut lost it here, IMO.

[Porterville]

It is a good movie, a really good movie- his high faluten living has caused him to turn soft.

[wardaddy]

CBB,

Has Chuck not gone on record being in favor of gun control in the past?

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[MissAmericanPie]

Typical blaming of Christians for the actions of Hitler who was deeply into the occult.

[stands2reason]

You are more tolerant than I am. I am beyond disappointed. And I'm not even a Christian. Up 'til now he was one of my three favorite pundits.

[drlevy88]

For him to deliver this stinging indictment of the movie is enough to make me stop and think.

It's a spiritual clash. The movie is divisive. As the gospel is supposed to be.

[wardaddy]

Kinda of odd isn't it?

[RiverDrifter]

Looks like Jews are so self-centered they think the movie was about them - not Christ. They cannot get beyond them, them, them, them. Which, goes to prove, they do not believe that Christ is the Savior - they believe he was only a man and horribly resent the fact they are shown killing him. Why would they care if Christ was only a man? I suggest the author quit worrying about how Jews are depicted and worry about what Jews believe about Christ. I would think this would be far more important than whether or not the world thinks they were Christ-killers. The "world" does not offer eternal life.

We have a winner!

[MEG33]

I am sorely troubled by Kraut's attack.I have saved some of his writing as I consider him so right most of the time.I am sad.Christ was a Jew,his followers were Jews,his Disciples were Jews.

[stands2reason]

Joel Siegel gave it a good review and saw no antiSemitism in the film. And he's Jewish.