www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Why "The Passion" is considered offensive

Here is an interesting article written by Elizabeth Farah entitled, �Mel Gibson's 'The Passion': Most offensive film ever made.� I post only parts of the article as they relate to the main arguments against it. I think Elizabeth hit the nail on the head.

- - - - - - -

Have you heard of the controversy and heated debate swirling around Mel Gibson's yet to be released film, "The Passion"? Just to be clear, I will summarize: Detractors, supposedly leaders of Jewish groups, as well as Catholics and Protestants, are concerned that this documentation of the final hours of Jesus Christ's life and His resurrection "will fuel hatred, bigotry and anti-Semitism." Since this portrayal is arguably one of the most accurate of all movies ever made about any aspect of Christ's life, we should be asking what these concerned "leaders" are saying about the Gospel of Christ.

Are they saying that the Gospels fuel hatred? If they are, they hit the nail right on its head. The Gospels have always fueled hatred against Christians as Jesus Christ very clearly forewarned they would. One would think Jesus' message and mission of truth, love and mercy would inspire all men to a perpetual state of warm and fuzzy mutual affection. But if you actually read Jesus' words, He will disabuse you of that notion in an instant.

�

Yes, Jesus was offensive to all who were unwilling or not yet ready to believe his message. His message was so offensive that mobs attempted to stone Him or throw Him off a cliff because of His teaching and healing. Yes, as Jesus was healing the dying, the lame and the blind, there were men and women desiring His death. What kind of message could elicit this great condemnation?

�

... The problem is this: Today's American can't even see they need salvation! "What have I done? I haven't murdered anyone, have I?" This message of redemption is really, really offensive to a whole bunch of people.

�

Any movie telling an accurate account of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ will and must elicit a stinging rebuke from the world.

�

Accordingly, I declare Mel Gibson's "The Passion" as the "single most offensive movie ever made." It is also the finest and greatest tribute to Christ I have ever seen in film.

You might be wondering why some movies about Christ do not offend as well as this one does. There are a few reasons. For starters, in past efforts, Christ's scourging and torture is left unrealistically brief and inconsequential. "The Passion" is the only movie ever made to show the horrifying brutality of the pre-crucifixion price paid by Christ.

The Old Testament prophetically describes the results of Christ's beating as rendering Him unrecognizable by His own people. Gibson and producer Steve McEveety address this modern omission head-on with the single-most graphic depiction of a true-life torture ever filmed. No, the Gospel is not for the faint-of-heart. This violence was not gratuitous, but appropriate.

�

� Many people today feel particularly offended by Jesus' claim to be "the Way, the Truth, and the Life" and that "no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Anybody can make a film about a great guy named Jesus, an itinerate carpenter-teacher humbly dispensing words of wisdom just like Buddha, Confucius and the Dalai Lama � nobody gets offended, everybody's happy. However, no other recognized spiritual leader in history has claimed deity, nor have they been killed and brought back to life. Jesus drew a line in the sand between Himself and all past and future "spiritual leaders."

�

A third reason this film must be reviled is its lack of condemnation for those who were responsible for Christ's death. Critics, disingenuous or ill-informed, believe that because the Gospel's account of the events leading to Jesus' crucifixion, portray Jewish religious leaders and Jewish mobs as actively involved in Jesus' sentencing and execution, is, anti-Semitic!

Let's see how silly this gets with a little illumination. Jesus, the condemned victim of torture and injustice is ... Jewish. His mom, the virgin, the blessed among women, is ... Jewish. Peter ... is Jewish. Simon, the man who sacrificially and with utterly inspiring abandon, carries the cross for Christ at the expense of pain and suffering, is ... Jewish. Jesus' brother James, the "Marys" who discover Jesus' empty tomb and Joseph of Aramathia � the rich man who offered his pristine sepulcher as Jesus' burial tomb � were all ... Jewish! The religious leaders who argued in opposition to the Jewish religious leaders instigating for Christ's execution were ... Jewish! Matthew, Mark, John, and Paul were all ... Jewish. Could I go on? Of course! Almost endlessly.

�

Lastly, a particularly bizarre charge is made that Gibson's film inaccurately portrays the Jewish religious leadership and the mob as orchestrating the illegal execution of Jesus. Maybe some of the films detractors haven't read the New Testament Gospels yet. I suggest they do.

Yes! Corrupt Jewish religious leaders whipped up the primarily Jewish mob, to demand Jesus' death. The execution was illegally conducted, Jewish law was broken. The story is therefore not a condemnation of the Jewish faith and its law, but of sin and corruption. All times, all institutions have experienced corruption at the hands of greedy, power-hungry men. Nothing new here � and certainly nothing anti-Semitic.

�

- - - - - - -

The entire article can be read here:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34291

Wouldn't this make a fine homily?

Joe

Thanks Joe,

I read WorldNetDaily everyday and missed this somehow. YOu are right, she has hit society as a whole right between the eyes.

Rose

I believe the campaign against this movie is unfair. I wonder why the self-called "Anti-defamation league" now complains about this movie that talks about Christ, teaches a nouble message with possitive content, while they have said nothing about those horrible movies and cartoons featured by TV enterprises that teach inmorality and bad messages.

Im not surprised that some Protestant and Evangelical sects do not like this movie. This is because this movie presents a message which is very faithful to the Gospel (specialy the Gospel of St. John) but holds a view which is that of the Apostolic Churches (Catholic and Orthodox) and that of the Church Fathers in their opinion about those who condemned and killed Christ.

I know this is just a movie, but this has unmasked those Protestant sects. They react against it because it opposes their liberal establishment. i have been listening to this bad Mexican, leader of an Evangelical sect who saw this movie as the opportunity to start attacking St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Constantine, and so on. He even started talking about the nation of israel as the elected people, etc.

Moreover, it's good that it shows the way Christ was condemned, and how an unjust authority abused its power, no matter if it was Jewish or Roman. This is certainly not meant to attack the modern Jewish people, but to make people think about their daily lives. How many Christ's do we crucify everyday with our bad judgements and attitudes?

In all fairness, I've yet to hear of a single Fundamentalist Protestant minister who's come out against "The Passion". I've done searches on certain televangists who I could envision criticizing the movie, but so far I've yet to see one who has condemned it.

Dear Friends,

I need some help.

Who publishes the WorldNetDaily??

Catholic, Protestant, Left, Right, Center?

I want to know the agenda of this publication.

Thanks guys and gals.

Paul

Ironically the World Net Daily is published by a man by the name of Thomas Nelson, though obviously it's not Thomas A Nelson who owns the traditional Catholic publishing house TAN Books. Judging by some of the editorial writers and books promoted, WND very clearly appears to be fundamentalist Protestant.

What a wonderful article...and yes, it would make a great homily.

Too often the Crucifixes or Icons we look at seem so bloodless and clean that we forget just how much physical suffering our Lord endured for us. We forget those passages in Isiah that talk about His beard being plucked out, the stripes on His back healing us. I read a depiction of the Crucifixion once that sickened me, as it should have. The author described the type of whips that would have been used in the flogging, how long the thorns would have been and how they would have been driven into His Flesh. He then went on to describe three hours hanging by the arms on a probably rough wooden cross, with splinters driving into the already open wounds on the back, and the lack of air...

I have read a few critics panning the Passion because it's so graphic...how come I don't read the same critiques about Freddie vs Jason? How come those horrid teen slasher flicks find no trouble getting theatres to play in, but the Passion is being attacked? This author has definately hit the nail on the head(there is a pun there I think,but it was unintentional)

Vie

Lawrence,

I happened to come across this article simply because of another link provided by another poster. I never read WND before. Are you judging the content or message of the article on the basis of its "fundamentalist Protestant" origins?

I've read about a Latin bishop getting shook up about a bar being named with "Hail Mary" in it, but have yet to read any good articles responding to the negative criticism about Mel Gibson's movie by the bishops. Our pagan society has de-Christianized Christmas and made Pascha into some sort of bunny affair. Christians have a lot of work to "take back" our faith from the Canaanites and the abuse and offense they have flung at us. We are just too numb to know it.

To all,

Mel Gibson's movie will probably say more about the who and what about Jesus, who was crucified, than any warm and fuzzies who spend more energy being politically correct.

The Passion narratives are the longest narratives in the Gospels. If movies are a popular medium of communication, then we owe a lot to Mel in portraying those narratives correctly. No Passion movie will ever be perfect since none of the Evangelists are in total agreement on some of its details. But if we allow society to ecclipse the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord further with its Easter Bunnies, any honest attempt to portray the message of the Passioin in our Gospels is a plus.

Jesus was handed over by a traitor, he endured a kangaroo court style hearing(s), was whipped, carried a cross, and was nailed to it, and later died a gruesome death on a place called "the Skull."

If cop shows on TV can depict rape scenes, abductions, hostile robberies, theft, obstruction of justice, and drunk drivers, then we can depict one of the worst cases of injustice.

"The Passion" movie is no life of Brian. Its time to take back what the pagans have mulled to a pulp with their ridicule and debochery. The movie is a story of true sickness for a sick society. Wouldn't it be wonderful if it became a box office hit, surpasing Freddy and Jason?

Joe Thur

Since no one here has seen this movie yet, perhaps we should all reserve judgement and further comment until we actually do see it and have something substantive to discuss rather than allegations and counter-allegations.

Friends,

While WorldNetDaily is Protestant it certainly is not Fundamentalist. Often our perspective is colored by our environment. While a Protestant minister I used to get confused about the distinctions between Orthodox and Roman Catholic. They all wore colorful but strange costumes and all priests were celibate, right?

Protestant Fundamentalism is a particularly irritating form of Protestantism. Some fundamentalists we might even consider very liberal or modernist.

WND does not fit that pattern. Its spirit is rather ecumenical as Protestant websites go.

Dan Lauffer

Diak,

I agree with you on not judging before the movie is released. I don't like speculation either.

Alas we live in a world opposed to Christ and his gospel. These "anti Christs" try to destroy/corrupt anything good. Christians have to respond to these enemies of the gospel to protect and make the gospel (Passion) available to a world hungry for Christ. We must expose the lies and ridiculous speculation about the Passion. We must not remain silent and let evil triumph.

Peace,

Paul

I have to see the film when it comes out. It is hard to speculate about a work one has not seen.

A lot of talk has been made about speculation. Yes. None of US have seen the movie.

The article I posted has more to do with the criticism of any attempt to accurately portray the Passion. The criticisms we have heard so far are not just for movies. Its for anything that promotes Jesus Christ.

The issue of anti-Semitism is a big charge levelled in other areas regarding the Gospels and Jesus' crucifixion.

A number of those who are leading the charge against Mel Gibson's movie have not seen the movie either.

I know of no other movie or topic that has brought so much protest BEFORE the movie has been seen on the big screen. This, and not necessarily the criticism OF the movie itself (or how accurately it portrayed the Passion narratives), is the issue.

So what exactly is the offensive nature of the movie (or the topic). Our culture, however far removed from God or post-Christian it now is, will have to deal with an event that has been so sugar-coated and twisted that, yes, Jesus will NOT be recognized - even by those who consider themselves Christians.

Even our very own churches have dumped the Matins service with the reading of the Twelve Passion Gospels. Can't we spend at least one hour with Him? For some: NOT!

BTW, can you imagine the outcry of "insensitivity" a movie producer would get if he or she would attempt to make a film called "The Life of Mohammed" in the genre of "The Life of Brian?"

Joe

Relecting on this protest against "Passion"
I realize that I shouldn't be surprised. Our Lord told us that he did not come to bring peace but a sword. He also said Christians would be hated because of the gospel.

In Jesus and Mary,

Paul

And what would that number be, approximately? Criticism from the ADL came after a viewing of the movie. Others, including Catholic bishops had their opinions informed by review of scripts. It is very unlikely that any of us has had the same access, and therefore, have the necessary information upon which a cogent criticism of the movie or its critics could be made. And to see this criticism as persecution strikes me as self-indulgent.