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).

[what's up]

Interesting point...if she needed a savior, she needed to be saved from sin, eh?

[what's up]

I believe that it's condescending to say that the retarded cannot sin. Their brains are retarded in growth; they are not non-existent. A retarded person still has a will to choose good. Also to choose bad, or sin.

Have you ever heard of the doctrine of original sin? This is the doctrine that states that babies are born in sin....they are not sinless.

Are you saying the Bible is wrong when it states that "all have sinned"? Sounds like you are trying to find examples which prove the Bible wrong.

[what's up]

Thanks...got that. I should have said "The Assumption".

[jude24]

We showed a 4-minute trailer to our Campus Crusade group last Thursday.

One of my friends winced with every lash of the whip, and couldn't bear to watch the pounding of the nails. It affected her that much.

She's still going, though, knowing EXACTLY what it will be.

We definately cannot candy-coat the gospel. Jesus Christ was brutalized. Unfortunately, the cross has become a piece of gold jewelry we put around our necks.

[jonboy]

With all due respect in return, I believe I did. When there is communication there is a responsibility on both sides. The hearers are to try to hear the message in a truthful and unbiased way, while at the same time the communicators should do their best to communicate what they intend to. If there are some in Catholicism who are teaching that Mary is Co-redemptor among them the Pope, we have crossed over into God's territory by the understanding of people like me. It doesn't matter if one says that she is not divine if she is ascribed an ability that is ONLY done by the divine. Mary is what she does, not merely what she is called. If she isn't considered divine, but performs a function that only divinity can perform. She is defined by her actions as divine.

Does the Pope speak for the Catholic church or not? You said: There are some extreme Marians who have lobbied the current Pope to name her "co-redemptrix," but the Magisterium so far has rebuffed them, and I do not believe they will ever succeed in assigning her that status. Yet, the Pope himself apparently believes this. Is he an "extreme Marian" (your words) or infallible? Look at the following quote DIRECTLY from the Vatican Site:

JOHN PAUL II
GENERAL AUDIENCE
Wednesday 9 April 1997

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Continuing our catechesis on the Blessed Virgin Mary, we are considering her cooperation in the redemptive sacrifice of Christ. All Christians are called to cooperate with God as his fellow-workers (cf. 1 Cor 3:9) in spreading the fruits of the Redemption accomplished on Calvary. But the Second Vatican Council reminds us that Mary's cooperation with Christ, unlike that of other Christians, remains "completely unique" (Lumen Gentium, 61), since it forms a part of the very events by which her Son achieved our salvation.

The basis of this unique cooperation is Mary's divine motherhood and her sharing in Jesus' life, culminating in her presence at the foot of the Cross. In God's plan, Mary is the "woman" (cf. Jn 2:4; 19:26), the New Eve, united to the New Adam in restoring humanity to its original dignity. Her cooperation with her Son continues for all time in the universal motherhood which she enjoys in the order of grace. Trusting in this maternal cooperation, let us turn to Mary, imploring her help in all our needs.

Vatican source quote HERE

The new Adam brought spiritual life where the old one brought death. What is the new Eve to bring if not the same? Also, she cooperated in the redemptive sacrifice of Christ, according to the Pope. Put another way she is a participant in redemption, put yet another way, a co-redemptor. Plus, she is ascribed "universal Motherhood." If she is the "universal Mother" spiritually how can that not be divine? In what other way could she be a "universal Mother?" That's what I'm interpreting from the words spoken. If there is a problem it seems to be in how they are being communicated rather than how they are being understood by me and others. Surely you can honestly see that it doesn't take twisting to understand his words in that way?

Incidently, if the Pope or whatever group could allow such a thing to happen that was or could be considered wrong, on what basis do you accept so many of the other teachings and traditions that came about in the same way? Many Catholics have been outraged at various rulings down through the years, yet, when those generations died, the teachings were still left. This cannot be denied, Mel Gibson himself doesn't hold to some of the officially stamped Catholic teachings and I'm sure that there are other honest minded Catholics who feel the same way. Doesn't that at least cause some doubts in the area of infallibility? How can you not feel extremly frightened and insecure about what should be and what shouldn't, what is and what isn't? I have my Bible and sometimes that can be difficult enough, but I can't imagine having to keep up with everything else and still have peace of mind. I'm not against Catholics. I'm for everyone who are honestly seeking after the truth. But please don't accuse me of not giving both sides to my understanding, that seems to imply dis-honesty and I have no reason to be anything but as honest as I know to be.

[bonfire]

"Even if this had turned out to be the most poorly made movie of all time, I would have paid $10,000 and walked bare-foot through glass to see it, just because of Abe Foxman and the others who launched such an ugly and vicious campaign to smear Mel Gibson and traditional Christianity."


YES!!! One of the best posts EVER, IMO!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

They had no choice.

Amen. Which is why Judas, though "sympathetic," is burning in hell.

And why the unrepentant thief's eyes were torn out.

"Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy; and whom He will, He hardeneth." -- Romans 9:18.

The Cross is mercy, but the Cross and Jesus's life and sacrificial death were ordained from before time. All life came into being because of Christ's triumphant Resurrection. It's not a result of anything temporal; it is the purpose of existence.

The more I read about Gibson's film and hear from his interviews, I'm encouraged by his righteous testimony that God's will is all there is.

Mel Gibson is a courageous and powerful voice for God's eternal and sovereign purpose. All glory to God.

[hunter112]

And, I'm sure, you'll be first in line to announce the success of this film - no?

Nope, not me, I'm not Christian (or Jewish), and frankly, if the movie were a commercial success, it would amaze me. I don't see this as the kind of movie that people who usually line up to see them would want. I think there will be an influx of Christians driven by the controversy, then there will be a drop-off, with local ministers and priests having to spend time both from the pulpit and out of it trying to put the violence in context.

Let's face it, the harshness of Christianity that was a staple of Middle Ages observances is largely lost today. Our US culture mentions Christmas and Easter, and spends most of its time talking about a guy in a red suit, and a rabbit, than about hardships of life in the time of Jesus. This movie will come as a terrible shock to people who are familiar with only the very simple watered-down basics of Christian belief.

How would you define success? Box office? DVD sales? The converted?

Well, clearly, the box office and DVD sales are quantifiable numbers, as opposed to trying to figure out how many are moved in what ways by the film. Hollywood has financial benchmarks for defining success, and even if the box office doesn't pan out, I can see the DVD market being a possible success, surely there are many who will want to have this in their collection, and try to implore those they wish to convert to watch it.

Don't be surprised if it has the opposite effect on some folks. The kinds of cruelties depicted in the movie are as far removed from Americans' daily lives as the tortures in the Third World's dungeons are. Many of us just have no frame of reference to relate to for this, and some will choose to block it out.

[Coleus]

Here are the top 50 Catholic websites in the world, ranked in order of popularity according to Alexa's TrafficRank software>>

what's the link for that?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Initially I was concerned there might be too much violence in this film, considering the lack of explicit Scriptural support.

But after the torrent of denials and obfuscation that has dogged this film, maybe it's better to come down on the "explicit" side. The world tries mightily to dull the shining of the Cross.

Perhaps a sudden jolt is what we all need.

[jude24]

What lack of explicit scriptural support?

[4Godsoloved..Hegave]

I see your point, but even in the Garden, He was able to pray to the Father.

On the cross He cried, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me."

That, to me was the ultimate sacrifice. To be forsaken of the Father, for me, so that I would not have to be forsaken.

---

AMEN dawn! By the power of the Holy Spirit that truth has gotten me.

From the beginning Jesus always abided with the Father. Through all His temptations God was with Him, but at this point hanging on the cross, at the moment he bared all the sins of His people, God had to leave Him...Jesus was alone for the first time ever. We don't know the depth of the pain He suffered at that moment. By the grace and mercy of God we don't know it. Even those who hate God, deny Him, despise Him, do not know the pain of seperation from God....yet.

Peace†

[jonboy]

Concerning original sin: please show me, aside from Catholic Tradition, why you believe in that? Two scriptures come into mind against the idea.

Ezekiel 18:19-20 (19) “Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity?’ When the son has practiced justice and righteousness and has observed all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. 20“The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

Romans 7:8-9 (8) But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died;

The Ezekiel passage is pretty clear. I shows that none are guilty for what another has done. I do not bear guilt from Adam. I am still under the same sentence of human dying that He was because it lasted for all of time. But I will be resurrected and God will take care of that seeming little inequity. As to the Romans passage, it says that Paul was alive at one time APART from the law. In context it means that he was alive spiritually before Law came (seemingly morality in this case). When the law came Paul died spiritually./ If the death he was referring to was spiritual (which it had to be because he certainly wasn't talking about his physical death), then the life he had before was spiritual as well. Since all sin brings about death, and you cannot be said to be spiritually alive if you have even one sin outside of Christ. It means that Paul COULD NOT have received and been guilty of another's sin since he was alive APART from the Law AND apart from Christ. All infants are innocent and free from the taint of ANY sin, as was Paul.

If you believe the scriptures (which seem to be quite clear to me), then how could you say that if tradition teaches original sin that there is no contradiction?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I only meant that the Bible doesn't graphically recount every minute of the 12 hours, gasp for gasp.

The Gospels spend more time on Christ's life and teachings than on his death for a reason, IMO. The triumph is not so much in His unbearable suffering as it is in the empty cross of His Resurrection.

But like I said, sometimes we need help reading between the lines.

[Yaelle]

BTW Yaelle, you hold a special significance for me in that my first post on Free Republic was to you.

Oh, wow! What were we talking about? I have had months and months where I don't post either, and then sometimes I post every day. When was it? I wonder to whom I first posted...

[GOP_Proud]

I don't see it as the same thing at all. I see asking my friends to pray about something as no more than praying myself.

Though I am Protestant I have a family of cousins that I grew up with who are Catholic. I spent the summer months on their farm and was required to attend mass with them while I was there. Though we didn't discuss religion very much, when we did, I was always left with the impression that Mary had a seat of high regard with them...more than me. My goodness, the most famous prayer, after the Lord's, is the hail Mary. That's what I mean. While I respect her for being the mother of Jesus, she was a "mere" mortal as I am. I don't think she has any MORE influence than I. That's the difference.

In the Catholic church, Mary is not taught as divine, true. I know that from my own experience. However, she does hold a very special place above you and me. That's where I beg to differ.

[cpforlife.org]

"Interesting point...if she needed a savior, she needed to be saved from sin, eh?"

Well I'm not Canadian, but if eh means "is that correct" then yes Mary did need to be saved from sin.

And because God knew she would answer yes to Gabriel and agree to be the mother of Christ, God saved her from being tainted by original sin. By God's gift to her she was full of Grace and she never sinned.

what's up, I have one question for you: If you were the Second Person of the Trinity about to take on the flesh of humanity, would you choose to prepare a worthy mother?

[JulieRNR21]

I do not want to get into a Biblical debate with you or to dispute your view regarding 'original sin'.

As a Catholic I believe that my 'original sin' sometimes called the 'inclination to sin'' (passed on to all humans through the fall of Adam & Eve) was cleansed by Baptism and I was brought to a 'new life' in Christ Jesus.

Mary was exempted from this 'original sin' because she was chosen to carry the Son of God. We refer to that gift she received as her 'Immaculate Conception'.

Jesus is our Savior and the promised Redeemer who saves us from sin and death through his Sacrifice on the Cross in which he died for all our sins.

[cpforlife.org]

Sorry about that,

If you go to http://www.newadvent.org/ and scroll, links to everything I pasted will be in that order including the top 50.

Interestingly, http://www.newadvent.org/ is #2, Vatican.va is 1, and EWTN.com is 3.

The encyclopedia is truly awesome.

[Coleus]

oh, ok, thanks, I was looking for it on alexa!

Lots of good sites. It would probably take a lifetime to read them all.