Posted on 02/25/2004 10:58:29 AM PST by Fury
"In their coverage of The Passion, the predictably contrarian website Salon.com turned to the Rev. Mark Stanger, one of the pastors at the trendy Grace Cathedral, an Episcopal church in San Francisco. "100 percent Hollywood trash," is how he described it. What was his advice to moviegoers? "I'd say don't bother. I think it's a big bore. I think a 5-year-old who has to get cancer surgery and radiation and chemotherapy suffers more than Jesus suffered; I think that a kid in the Gaza Strip who steps on a land mine and loses two limbs suffers more; I think a battered wife with no resources suffers more; I think people without medical care dying of AIDS in Africa suffer more than Jesus did that day. I mean, I don't want to take away from that, but this preoccupation with the intensity of the suffering, I think, has no theological or spiritual value."
God help Rev. Stranger. I fear for the flock that this man tends to. Absoluteley breathtaking his comments.
Mea culpa
I just got back from the movie and feel this way exactly. The last thing I was thinking even know (an hour later) is about the Jews or Romans but of Jesus Christs sacrafice for all of us. Wont be taking my kids ages 8 and 11. Most adults should be able to handle the gore of the sacrifice but its difficult. Gibson does break up the Gore with poignant scenes. Just incredible.....this is the picture of the year and I have no idea how the academy is going to deny Mel and James Carviezal their awards. Just awesome acting and directing. What a story, retold in a time when most needed. THANKS MEL : )
God help us all.
Had Jerusalem been peopled by the likes of the good reverend, NCS types and NYT movie reviewers the crowd calling for the Crucifixion of Jesus would have been half again as large.
I think my wife summed up my feelings at the moment when she said, "I don't want to see this, but I will."
You haven't met the office liberal where I work. When asked if he would see the movie, he said he would "when Mel makes a movie on the Inquisition"
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Romans 1:17
Sounds like the flock needs to look for a new shepherd...
The question people should be asking is "Why are people making accusations of anti-Semitism when they know there is no anti-Semitsm?"
For some, they make the charge because they are simply ignorant.
For some, they repeat the charge simply because they have heard someone in their desired social group make the charge.
For most of the others, they make the charge due to their hatred of Christianity. Instead of labeling all of the haters as liberals, Christians should take a closer look at who actually is making the charges and understand where the hatred arises.
In their coverage of The Passion, the predictably contrarian website Salon.com turned to the Rev. Mark Stanger, one of the pastors at the trendy Grace Cathedral, an Episcopal church in San Francisco. "100 percent Hollywood trash," is how he described it. What was his advice to moviegoers? "I'd say don't bother. I think it's a big bore. I think a 5-year-old who has to get cancer surgery and radiation and chemotherapy suffers more than Jesus suffered; I think that a kid in the Gaza Strip who steps on a land mine and loses two limbs suffers more; I think a battered wife with no resources suffers more; I think people without medical care dying of AIDS in Africa suffer more than Jesus did that day. I mean, I don't want to take away from that, but this preoccupation with the intensity of the suffering, I think, has no theological or spiritual value."
http://www.carm.org/misc/crucifixion.htm
http://www.holytrinity.ok.goarch.org/Interesting%20Stuff/Special%20Communication%20Plus%20Picture.html
http://www.frugalsites.net/jesus/scourging.htm
http://www.intermirifica.org/lent/passion4.htm
Scourging of Jesus
At the Praetorium, Jesus was severely whipped. (Although the severity of the scourging is not discussed in the four gospel accounts, it is implied in one of the epistles (1 Peter 2:24). A detailed word study of the ancient Greek text for this verse indicates that the scourging of Jesus was particularly harsh. (33) ) It is not known whether the number of lashes was limited to 39, in accordance with Jewish law. (5) The Roman soldiers, amused that this weakened man had claimed to be a king, began to mock him by placing a robe on his shoulders, a crown of thorns on his head, and a wooden staff as a scepter in his right hand.
(1) Next, they spat on Jesus and struck him on the head with the wooden staff. (1) Moreover, when the soldiers tore the robe from Jesus' back, they probably reopened the scourging wounds. (7)
The severe scourging, with its intense pain and appreciable blood loss, most probably left Jesus in a preshock state. Moreover, hematidrosis had rendered his skin particularly tender. The physical and mental abuse meted out by the Jews and the Romans, as well as the lack of food, water, and sleep, also contributed to his generally weakened state. Therefore, even before the actual crucifixion, Jesus' physical condition was at least serious and possibly critical.
The Passion of Christ
by The Rev. Cn. Mark Stanger
Last week, I attended a special pre-screening of Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, set for commercial release on February 25th.
Charges of anti-Jewish content, gratuitous gore (giving it an R rating), and general fuzziness of concept have not been good omens for Mr. Gibson's self-financed, idiosyncratic portrayal of the final hours of Jesus of Nazareth.
I would not recommend the film to a devout Christian, skeptical Jew, or avid Hollywood buff. My fairly traditional Catholic 76-year-old mother, who accompanied me, found it "plodding" and the protracted violence of the torturing of the captured Jesus turned her stomach; she lasted till the end in order to see Gibson onstage, interviewed by the local pastor. (Telling about it at bridge later that week would be quite a trump card, worth any temporary discomfort.)
As a life-long Christian and lover of Jesus and the implications of his life and death for humanity, I found the film dull, trashy, and historically and biblically unsound. It's potentially as harmful to Christians as it may be for Jews.
The determined effort to give a patina of historical authenticity (which could be challenged on many essential points) is expressed most obviously by the use of Aramaic and Latin. Mr. Gibson, in the interview, said it was to add an air of "mysterious reality". Maybe so, but putting another language into a film doesn't necessarily add to its historical accuracy or truthful storytelling.
More disturbing was his second reason for the language barrier. He compared it to a film depicting ferocious Vikings descending with all their barbarous intent and weaponry on a peaceful village. "To have them step off the ship, ready to attack, but speaking English, would diminish the sense of such a frightening confrontation. The same goes for those who put Jesus to death." Apart from the logical inconsistency (the speech of Jesus and his followers was also subtitled, after all), the idea that more brutal terror would be evoked by non-English speakers strikes me as chillingly xenophobic.
The film's anti-Jewish bias magnifies what the Christian scriptures do indeed contain: a growing discomfort between this wild new group of Jews for Jesus and faithful mainline Jewish groups of that time and place. But having the temple high priest Caiaphas as the prominent cheerleader demanding crucifixion unduly villainizes him and the faith tradition he represents. The focus on Pilate's hand-washing (only in Matthew's account) reinforces the perception that the "blame" is laid squarely on the Jews. This is, of course, preposterous and offensive to Jew and Christian alike: Christian theology -- and even a bit of this fragmented film -- affirms that the death of Jesus was freely accepted and necessary. Complicity in his death is shared by the Roman occupying power (the charge and the sentence were theirs), religious traditionalists (who happened to be Jewish), an out of control mob, and, most significantly, by the weak and spineless disciples of Jesus.
Mr. Gibson's larger bias, regrettably shared by thousands, is that the Gospels have been diluted of their power by "revisionists" -- his disdainful word for the past two generations of faith-filled, critical scholars of the texts, including the startlingly enlightened and coherent official principles for biblical interpretation promulgated by the assembled bishops of the Roman Catholic Second Vatican council of the 1960's. Gibson further dismissed the idea that the gospel writers had "agendas", a concept that puts him firmly outside official Catholic teaching and all of mainstream Christian biblical interpretation. That wholesome tradition recognizes the very definite theological, pastoral, and spiritual agendas of the written gospels, not as eyewitness accounts, but as theological works (faith-filled screenplays, if you will) to answer questions and express divine truths in a particular time and place. The late Fr. Raymond Brown, in his masterful two-volume The Death of the Messiah or his profound little booklet A Crucified Christ in Holy Week, far outshines this $30 million piece of bizarre and lurid propaganda.
The violence-induced "R" rating is compared by the film's promoters to the same rating given to "such fine films as Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan." The biblical accounts are supremely less wanton and morbid. The Gospel writers straightforwardly and soberly state that after arriving at Golgotha, "There they crucified him." Only Hollywood, or an overactive and distorted religious imagination, would add such details, literally ad nauseam.
When the pastor-interviewer tried to commit him to doing more biblical films, Gibson squirmed and wisely said, "there are a lot of good stories out there." Indeed, the greatest literature and films often illuminate the mysteries of human suffering, redemption, salvation, forgiveness, brutality and betrayal, renewal and resurrection. For "religious" inspiration, it's often best to skip Hollywood altogether and find a generous group of praying believers. Or go for Hollywood's best and noblest offerings. The Passion of the Christ is not among them.
-- The Rev. Cn. Mark Stanger
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.