Search



Comments

« Power outage a secret government conspiracy • Home • CD burning in Orrum, NC »

Anti-Semitic Passion

• Christian Pop Culture , • Religious Intolerance

Mel Gibson's Passion discussed by Cathy Young in Reason:

One reason for these apprehensions is that Gibson belongs to a "traditionalist" Catholic movement which rejects the 1965 reforms; his father, a prominent member of this movement, has been quoted as saying that Vatican II was the result of a Jewish-Masonic plot. Moreover, a favorable early report on the film, based on an interview with Gibson himself, said that the film script had drawn on the writings of Anne Catherine Emmerich, a 19th-century nun who described her purported visions about the last days of Jesus. Among other things, Emmerich claimed that the cross on which Jesus died was built in the Jewish temple on the orders of the high priest.

Jesus Christ Beyond Thunderdome

Mel Gibson may be one of them, he won't say: Vatican II: Jewish-Masonic conspiracy

Mel Gibson says his wife may be going to Hell: Mel Gibson: extra ecclesiam nulla sallus

Richard Evans Lee
August 21, 2003 •
BlinkList • del.icio.us • Digg it • Furl • ma.gnolia
RawSugar • Shadows • Simpy • Spurl • Yahoo MyWeb
Top↑

Comments

Anti-semitism is ugly. However, for reasons I don't understand, anti-Catholicism seems to be fair game these days. I really don't think that anyone who claims this movie is in any way anti-semitic have seen this movie.

Posted by: jstro | November 2, 2003 3:04 PM

In fact, jstro is partially correct. Mel Gibson and his publicists have deliberately kept the film from those they think may be hostile to its message. This includes much of the Jewish and Catholic establishment as well as the vast majority of film critics. When he did screen the film for a panel of theologians and scholars, 4 of 5 had negative comments specifically regarding its treatment of Jews. Only one panel member was Jewish. At least one was Catholic. I'm also a bit concerned at the meaningless message that while anti-semitism is ugly, anti-catholicism seems to be fair game. They are both ugly but claiming that Mel Gibson's film is or might be anti-semitic, or even that the Catholic church might bear some responsibility for the holocaust isn't anti-Catholic. This is a dangerous conflation.

Posted by: charles dodgson | January 17, 2004 2:26 PM

Regarding "the Passion", I'm not sure I understand why Mel's personal views are such an issue. If the movie is based exclusively on the gospel writings, then the movie will show that the Jewish leaders plotted to have Christ killed. Pilate gave them a chance to have Jesus released and saved from death, but the angry crowd (of Jews, I presume), chose Barabbas instead. This is all in Matthew chapter 27. Having said that... John chapter 10 shows Jesus declaring no one takes His life from Him, but He willingly laid it down. So... The overarching plan of God (according to the Bible), is that Jesus would die (God killed Him, effectively), but the Jewish leaders are the tools God used to cause that to happen on the earth. I am anything but anti-semitic, but the movie is based on a historical record that has been around for 2000 years. This is simply the way it was. The Jewish leaders plotted to have Him killed. Any other conclusion is changing the gospel record. What is the point of making a movie about Jesus if you don't use the gospel record as it is? I'm confused and open to criticism.

Posted by: Greek Geek | February 19, 2004 11:31 AM

To Mel Gibson: As a person whose only ties to Judiasm, like so many others, are to destroy all attempts at beginning a new Jewish persecution, I am outraged at your support of that excrement you call a movie , the "passion". Whatever lunatics aided in the crucifixtion of Christ and 245 others in 0 B.C. has absoultely no bearing on the guilt or innocence of millions of Jewish people 2000 years later. Bur it will cause antisemitism, and that is why I and millions of other Jewish people will fight you, at the polls against Bush and otherwise - because of the insane antisemetic rhetoric you bring out. You should be much more preoccupied with the "passion" of the 5450 "fathers" that sexually molested children in the last 50 years. SHAME ON YOU!!

Posted by: vayis | February 20, 2004 2:30 AM

What is the point of hashing over that tired old story? Who isn't familiar with the Jesus myth, and why was film wasted on it?

Posted by: Anachro1 | February 20, 2004 6:26 PM

I feel that this movie can only be anti-semitic if you allow it to be. From what I know, God has alway taught love for ones neighbor. What they have done, what their people have done, what their beliefs are, etc should have no bearing on this love. Jesus, himself, willingly accepted his fate. When one of his servants draws his sword to defend Jesus from being arrested, Jesus tells him to put it away, saying "for all that take up the sword will parish by it." I do not believe you can call yourself a Christian and still hate the Jews. Maybe this movie does show the Jewish people as cruel, but that is no excuse to hate them. Jesus forgave the Jews. How could a Christian, a follower of Christ, not forgive them?

Posted by: Eric | February 24, 2004 5:09 PM

One of the purposes of a good film is to incite emotion in the viewer(which is quite lacking in most films I've seen). The story of Christ is a story that does just that, whether the story is true or not is irrelevant. To all of Christendom(whom Gibson is targeting), It has been the source of plenty of emotion for a couple thousand years.

Posted by: Eric | February 24, 2004 8:37 PM

If the film simply describes visually that which the New Testament describes verbally, then the film is no more nor less "anti-semitic" than the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. To be against these Gospels, to refer to them as merely "myths" or "lies," risks the label "anti-Christian." This is how some Jews feel, although they don't like to say so publicly. For some Jews, apparently, Jesus is known simply as "The Great Imposter." To be an imposter presumes that the person "poses" as something he is not. If Jesus simply "posed" as the Messiah, when in fact he was not the Messiah, then How is it that Jesus (1) died such a cruel death, and (2) went on after death to become the focus of the world's most potent and populous religion? In short, if Jesus was not the Messiah, as the Christians claim, then Why is it that the most powerful religion in the world - Christianity - bears his name and worships his person? Can 2 billion plus people really be wrong on something like this? Are 2 billion Christians simply saps? Or do we have a core basic belief which for 2,000 years has proven to be true and enduring? On the other hand, If Christian belief is indeed true and enduring, and if the four Gospels are accurate, then why have the Jews so constantly rejected their message? The point of the film is not to blame modern day Jews for the mistakes of their ancestoral leadership. However one result of the film must be to draw into focus modern day Jewish belief as it relates to Jesus. This, apparently, is something they don't like to discuss openly. We hear a great deal about "anti-semitism." However the anti-Christian attitudes of many vocal Jews regarding this film are coming to the surface. Shall we discuss these?

Posted by: scott | February 25, 2004 2:36 PM

Not having yet seen Mel Gibson's controversial new movie, I cannot say that it IS, or IS NOT, anti-Semitic. I don't wish to dismiss Jewish concerns lightly; the history of Jewish-Christian relations in the last 2000 years- and particularly the uses to which depictions of the torturous execution of Jesus have been put- have not been such as would leave me feeling terribly assured and confident, if I were Jewish (I do rather wish, though, that a film or drama would not be automatically *assumed* to be hateful and bigoted before even having been seen, merely because it deals with the toucheous subject of the Christian Cross). What I can say with a great deal of confidence as a committed Christian, is that when such anti-Jewish sentiment infiltrates Christian belief and teaching, it no longer remains Christian. "Christian Anti-Semitism" is an entirely unjustifiable oxymoron. There are several reasons why: 1. Jesus Himself, and all of His first followers and supporters, were Jews. Granted, the teachings and beliefs they promoted may be considered unorthodox, even blasphemous, from a Jewish point of view, but the fact remains they were of the Semitic people. They were born to Jewish mothers- the traditional definition of a Jew. The social world they lived in was permeated by Judaism; they were reared in Jewish homes, and raised in Jewish communities Culturally and ethnically they were Jews, and there is every indication that they thought of and identified themselves as such. And the Christian who despises Jesus' people, the people from among whom He came, despises Jesus Christ. 2. Romans 11 tells us, in the most forcible language possible, that God has NOT rejected His people, the Jews; moreover, that we who are Gentiles enjoy the gift of salvation not as a birthright, but ONLY as the guests, or "ingrafted branches", of the people Israel. According to our own beliefs, as Christians we have the immense privilege of sharing in the Covenant blessings of God's own special chosen people. At our own gravest peril do we sever our roots, the benefactors to whom we owe so great a spiritual debt- and those whom the God we worship calls in His word, "the apple of His eye, His portion and cherished possession". 3. You have probably heard it before- but it is not until we truly understand and appropriate this that we can claim to know the Gospel, the message of Christianity. It was not the Jews, it was not the Romans: it was SIN that sent Jesus to the cross. Your sin, and mine. Every person who has ever sinned- that's everyone- bears a personal responsibility for that death. Yes, the Gospels tell us that there was a mob which was directly involved in clamoring for the crucifixion. And as these events took place in Jerusalem, naturally that crowd would have been Jewish. If these same events had taken place in Beijing, Dublin, Paris, Tokyo, or New York, the mob would have just as certainly been Chinese, Irish, French, Japanese, or American. The Jewish people do not hold any sort of monopoly on violence and vindictiveness. As to the "Chief Priests, Pharisees, Sadducees and Scribes (Teachers of the Law)", who plotted against Jesus and manipulated that crowd, they might be ANY religious elite with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. There are Priests and Pastors, Ministers, Missionaries and Evangelists today who would in all likelihood do no differently. We cannot single out any one people-group to bear moral responsibility for Jesus' crucifixion; we dare not disassociate ourselves from those who carried out the act, who scourged, mocked, deserted, fled, betrayed. In the view of the Gospels, we are all culpable. And Jesus prayed for us all, "Father- forgive them".

Posted by: MeiLinPo | February 25, 2004 6:45 PM

Although the movie does not seem to be intended as anti-Semitic, the way that it was designed leaves a lot of room to instill such thoughts to the already misguided. For example, it doesn't show that the disciples were Jewish. Why doesn't it show where Jesus taught in the synagogues? Does it show us that Romans crucified many Jews who were innocent, aside from Jesus? Furthermore, why use Greek names in the subtitles, or is it unacceptable that Christ actually had a Jewish name which goes with his heritage. Why not say, "Yeshua said to Keifa" rather than Jesus said to Peter. Why does it add unbiblical facts about Jesus being beaten by the Jewish officers before being brought to Pilate, as well as Pilate asking "Do you always punish your prisoners before they are judged?" This is not in the New Testament. So even if it was not meant to be anti-Semitic, which I believe it was not, the slanted viewpoint of the teller of the tale may be seen in the things which were chosen to focus on.

Posted by: Biblelearned | February 26, 2004 3:35 PM

Although the movie does not seem to be intended as anti-Semitic, the way that it was designed leaves a lot of room to instill such thoughts to the already misguided. For example, it doesn't show that the disciples were Jewish. Why doesn't it show where Jesus taught in the synagogues? Does it show us that Romans crucified many Jews who were innocent, aside from Jesus? Furthermore, why use Greek names in the subtitles, or is it unacceptable that Christ actually had a Jewish name which goes with his heritage. Why not say, "Yeshua said to Keifa" rather than Jesus said to Peter. Why does it add unbiblical facts about Jesus being beaten by the Jewish officers before being brought to Pilate, as well as Pilate asking "Do you always punish your prisoners before they are judged?" This is not in the New Testament. So even if it was not meant to be anti-Semitic, which I believe it was not, the slanted viewpoint of the teller of the tale may be seen in the things which were chosen to focus on.

Posted by: Biblelearned | February 26, 2004 3:35 PM

So, where is the anti-semitic violence?

Posted by: Roger | February 27, 2004 1:43 PM

What an incredible movie. I will bet that most of the critics of this movie have not seen it yet. I have seen many interviews on television with leaders in the Jewish community that have admitted to not seeing the movie but have been openly critical of it. Several have seen it and still are terrified. I cannot help but see a parralel between them and the leaders of the Sanheidran in the Passion of Christ. Some saw the miracles and still condemed him. Others did not and hated him just as well. I say just go and see it. Judge for yourself. The struggle I have is explaining the beauty of the horror Jesus had to go through. In the movie, Mary runs up to Jesus after the cross drops the second time. Jesus looks at his mother and says, "Mother...See I make all things new." Love you guys.

Posted by: Raymond | February 28, 2004 2:55 AM

Oh pleazzzzzzzzze, Everytime something is brought out and it doesn't please the Jewish Community it's marked anti-semitic. People, you're really overdoing it and I think you've have had enough attention, so do move on, please and do stop using the Holocaust as a have-pity-with-me-potion whenever it suits you...Everybody hurts, not only Jews.

Posted by: Ibeke | March 19, 2004 7:20 AM

Tha Catholic Church condemned anti-semitism a long time ago. The Passion is not anti-semitic.

Posted by: Philadelphia Eagles | August 28, 2004 9:36 PM

How do you feel?

Feel free to share your feelings about Anti-Semitic Passion. Please stick to the theme of the entry. Disagreement is fine. Homophobia, racism, and kindred expressions of hatred will be deleted. This site is one of my hobbies. I genuinely enjoy hearing from people and hate moderating or killing comments. Forthright disagreement is fine as long as it is civil.
My thanks,
Richard

Monthly Summaries

March 2007, February 2007, January 2007, December 2006, November 2006, October 2006, August 2006, July 2006, June 2006, May 2006, April 2006, March 2006, February 2006, January 2006, December 2005, November 2005, October 2005, September 2005, August 2005, July 2005, June 2005, May 2005, April 2005, March 2005, February 2005, December 2004, November 2004, October 2004, September 2004, August 2004, July 2004, June 2004, May 2004, April 2004, March 2004, February 2004, January 2004, December 2003, November 2003, October 2003, September 2003, August 2003, July 2003, June 2003, May 2003, April 2003, March 2003, February 2003, January 2003, December 2002, November 2002, October 2002, September 2002, August 2002, May 2002, April 2002, March 2002,

Recent Posts



Thematic Archives

Powered by
Movable Type 4.0

Syndication


Edifying Spectacle
Index
Christian Pop Culture , Religious Intolerance
Anti-Semitic Passion
Top of page