www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Cleveland Diocese WARNING: "The Passion"

This is true, Sharon. But unfortunately, if Christians wished that nobody took offense, then they should close the Gospels right now. Isn't this what many anti-Christians want?

Paul wrote about this potentiality long, long ago:

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:

"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."

Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

or since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things -- and the things that are not -- to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God--that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord." (1 Cor 1:18-31)

The CROSS will always offend.

As for the movie, we shall see. At least it is not as offensive as TV programs depicting Jesus French-kissing Mary Magdalena (read: he couldn't keep his hands and lips off her) - or - Mary, the mother of Jesus, getting it on with some Roman soldier (read: Mary was impregnated by him - an old story recycled for today's viewers). That the content of His message usually gets lost is only understood (read: Jesus and his mother were just two oversexed individuals). We've learned not to watch such documentaries in our house anymore. My question to you is: Where-o-where were our bishops to challenge such suggestive and impressionable documentaries? Where were the warnings?

Joe

Perhaps the ADL believe if they repeat the Big Lie often enough (that the movie promotes hatred) people will actually stay away for fear of being labelled anti-semites. Already the Diocese of Cleveland seems to be falling into step with there plans, and the other day I overheard two women at my library expressing there misgivings about the movie because in there words it was "supposedly" anti-Jewish.

Who's opinion do I trust ? Well on one side we have Mel Gibson who openly professes his faith in Jesus Christ, and on the other we have the ADL who reject Jesus Christ and openly admit to being offended by certain passages in my Bible.

This so ridiculous.

If you are worried about the movie being perceived as anti-semetic tell every Jew you know that the movie IS anti-semitic then they'll be sure to go watch it.

Then, after seeing it, they will say, gee that movie wasn't anti-semetic. :rolleyes:

Paul

Paul,

Good point.

Want to get someone's attention? Whisper.

Want to get everyone interested in something?
Tell them they don't need to know.

Want people to speak out?
Tell them that they are to be seen and not heard.

Want to drive up box office sales?
Allow the naysayers criticize the movie to no end as anti-whatever.

Joe

Dear Joe,

Remember when the Vatican used to "condemn" movies? Those movies became blockbusters, especially among Catholics.

Then the church wised up and came out with a gentler rating system.

I love being Catholic. :p

Paul

I wished I lived in Cleveland...not only do I plan on seeing the movie, I also plan on wearing the Star of David that I have worn with my Cross for years...let someone try to accuse me of Anti-semitism, especially someone from the ADL, an organization that has accused both Orthodox and Hasidic Jews of anti-semitism as well as being an organization where the majority of it's Jewish members are atheists.

Vie

ADL-bashing and the suggestion that there is a conspiracy to make Gibson's movie a vehicle to prove the existence of anti-Semitism are reprehensible.

Lawrence,

"(Open profession of) faith in Jesus Christ" is now the criterion for trust? Absolutely! The Reverend Ian Paisley comes to mind, or Father Coughlin, perhaps Archbishop John Ireland!

Give me those - all of whom profess or professed faith in Jesus Christ - over "the ADL who reject Jesus Christ" any day. The nerve of a Jew (or any non-Christian) to reject One Who is not, in their mind or in the teachings of their faith, a Messiah!

Vie,

Can you support your assessment of the religious beliefs of a majority of the ADL's Jewish members? I've known many and virtually all were observant Jews. Do you think that it's not possible to be an Orthodox or Hasid and, at the same time, be anti-Semitic? Some of the most virulent anti-Catholicism I ever heard has been from Catholics - and self-hatred is among the nastiest you'll ever encounter.

If I were a member of the Jewish faith or race and reading this thread, I'd hardly be complacent that this movie won't be the excuse for anti-Semitic rhetoric or activity.

Neil

Neil

The ADL has already proven itself to be an organization that consistently takes an anti-Christian stance. They have strenuosly objected to various Passion Plays and now Mel Gibson's movie, because of certain Gospel passages they deem to be offensive. As for myself, I would rather offend the ADL than my Saviour who said (St Mark 8:38) "For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes with the holy angels in the glory of his Father."

Hmmm.

I think quite a number of us who do not belong to the ADL would also find a number of passion plays to be offensive - as well as Scripture quoted out of context, or used to incite.

I think it's a bit of a reach to call the ADL "anti-Christian." They're not exactly my cup of tea, but I recognize the need that brought them into existence.

As far as I know, neither passion plays nor any movie are counted as part of the Deposit of Faith - at least not so far.


Sharon

Dear Sister Sharon,

AMEN!

Don

By the way, did the icon arrive? How is it?

Sharon

I never meant to even imply that Passion Plays or the movie the Passion were part of the deposit of faith, however the mere suggestion that a dramatic recreation of Great Friday based on Gospel accounts, must be censored in the interests of political correctness, is to me clearly anti-Christian.

If a dramatization were done of the Nativity, I would expect that the accounts in St Matthew and St Luke be used. For the Crucifixion of Our Lord I would likewise expect to see the script come from the Four Gospels. A harmonious account taken from the Matthew,Mark,Luke and John takes nothing out of context.

Don,

Some silly delays, but I have every expectation of seeing it soon - hopefully!

Sharon

Dear Friends,

Well, I think that it really is incumbent upon Christians and Christian scripture scholars to make more abundantly clear what the New Testament means when it refers to "the Jews."

As the Bible gurus here will doubtless confirm (and doubtless applaud me loudly for saying so ), the "Jews" mentioned in the Gospel is not a blanket reference to the Jewish people.

The "Jews" are, in fact, those among the Jewish leadership who opposed Yeshua.

And not all those among the Jewish leadership opposed Yeshua, as we know.

The fact is also that, in history, Passion Plays in Europe have actually provoked riots in which Jews were not only bad-mouthed - they were killed.

This particular genre, the passion play I mean, whether done on stage or in a movie, does evoke nasty memories among some - including Catholic leaders who know the nasty historical past involving this genre.

I think that, to some extent at least, the reaction against this movie is just this.

That most reprehensible term "Christ-killers" has been applied to the Jews for centuries by Christians - by Christians who otherwise did nothing to attack the Jews but simply bore them ill-will because somehow they thought their religion IMPLIES that faith in Christ and ill-will toward the Jews go hand in hand . . .

We Christians (and ultimately I'll let God judge if I am or not) have done a lousy job of explaining what the New Testament attitude toward the Jews really IS.

It is far from negative, to be sure, as St Paul demonstrates.

Personally, I would be happier if some movie producer comes along one day and does a movie about the Jewish roots of Christianity, its development from within Judaism, the Judaic practices of the early Apostolic Church of Jerusalem, Paul's perspective on Judaism etc.

I think a movie or a documentary like that would do much more to advancing the cause of better mutual understanding between Jews and Christians.

The involvement of the Jews in the Passion and Death of Christ is one aspect that I think gets way too much attention.

The Eastern Church certainly does not emphasize the Passion to the extent the West does - as if to eclipse the Resurrection.

Mel Gibson is a nice guy.

But I wish Christians today would seize upon the opportunity to understand their own Jewish roots and connection to the Old Testament in terms of what we, as Christians, truly are - an excommunicated Jewish sect.

Put that in your censors and smoke it!

Alex

RE: Harmonious account.

It will be interesting to see how the movie actually harmonizes the four accounts.

Was there any mention given where the Passion movie will begin?

Joe

Alex,

Excellent points! For the early "Christians" did NOT see themselves as beginning a new religion, but being the inheritors of true Judaism.

After 70 AD, the many Jewish groups vying for an orthodox interpretation of Judaism disappeared. We were left with primarily the descendents of the Pharisees or scribes and the "Poor" followers of the Nazarene. Some even think that the Synoptic Gospels follow the themes of the Jewish Hexateuchal lectionary (which included the book of Joshuah).*

I think a movie about the Jewish community before 70 AD is warranted. But, unfortunately, that will include the brutal stoning of Stephen and murder of James. More fuel for the fire?

As for the Christians being an excommunicated sect, Alex is right. Though many believe that that event was more of a process that occurred at different rates in different areas, the Jewish-Christians were eventually expelled from the synagogue - and a curse against them was included in the Jewish morning prayers. This explains John's use of "the synagogue of Satan" and "the Jews" (Jewish leaders). Context is always important. When pejoratives are used to refer to mosty one group of people within a larger group, then it is important to consider that. St. John Chrysostom was no different than the Evangelist John when he referred to the road to Hell being paved with the skulls of bishops. Does that make bishop John anti-Christian?

Joe

* The Lectionary Theory has always been intriguing to many scripture students. It may explain why we have no Old Testament readings in our own lectionary. The Gospels became the new interpretation of the Torah. Didn't the Jews introduce the readings of the Prophets when the reading of the Torah was once banned? Prophetic readings were chosen based on the 'theme' of the banned Torah lection. Just a thought.