Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Passion' shakes North Jersey clergy to the core
The Record of Hackensack ^ | 02.29.04

Posted on 02/29/2004 5:59:33 PM PST by Coleus

'Passion' shakes North Jersey clergy to the core


Sunday, February 29, 2004

One Catholic priest in Morris County was so appalled by Mel Gibson's "The Passion of The Christ'' that he described the film as "religious barbarism.''

But a Protestant minister in Harrington Park was so moved that afterward he drove to a park, where he prayed and sat silently for almost an hour.

Meanwhile, a rabbi from River Edge said the movie could bring Jews and Christians closer, despite the film's insistence that it was the Jews who pushed for the execution of Jesus.

Arriving in theaters last week on Ash Wednesday, "The Passion's'' harrowing vision of the final 12 hours of Jesus' life has struck a nerve in the landscape of American faith, inspiring countless believers, polarizing others, and giving fresh focus to interfaith activism.

The bloody, two-hour movie has outraged some Jews with its portrayal of the Jewish high priests as vicious, scheming power barons. And it has turned off some Christians who believe the film's sole focus on Jesus' violent death misses the essence of Christianity.

The film has also delighted millions of conservative Christians - who showed their growing clout by packing theaters coast to coast, helping make the movie a box-office bonanza.

Yet among clergy, the movie's supporters and critics can't be neatly divided along denominational lines.

The Rev. Jack Lohr, a pastor in Franklin Lakes who preaches a liberal brand of Christianity, said the movie startled him personally and raised fundamental questions for all Christians.

"For us who claim to have taken up the cross to follow Jesus, the film challenges any convenient or comfortable reading of the cost of discipleship,'' said Lohr, of the Presbyterian Church at Franklin Lakes. "I shall never again be able to sing the sweetly sentimental lines of 'The Old Rugged Cross' without a dreadful sense of irony.''

And the pastor at one of the most progressive parishes in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Paterson said the film woke him up to the realities of Jesus' death in a way that trumped years of Bible readings.

"It made me realize I've had a pretty sanitized view of what Christ did for me,'' said the Rev. Kevin Downey of St. Mary's in Pompton Lakes. "I've read the story so much, and felt I knew the story so well, that after a while, you take it for granted.''

One thing's for certain, "The Passion'' isn't going away. The movie took in $23.6 million on opening day, a box office showing that suggests the film could wind up in the same esteemed league as such screen classics as "Ben-Hur'' and "The Ten Commandments.''

But unlike those earlier religious blockbusters, "The Passion'' draws razor sharp theological lines that attract and repel.

The movie dwells almost entirely on Jesus' torture and execution, emphasizing that he chose death on the cross to bring salvation to mankind. The movie's violence is now notorious. Jewish leaders call for his death, mocking and spitting on him. Then Roman soldiers take over, whipping him over and over until the flesh is ripped from his back. Finally, his hands and feet are nailed into the cross.

The Rev. Kenneth Lasch, a veteran Catholic priest, said he was repelled.

"I saw it as religious barbarism ... in my opinion, God did not send his son to die,'' said Lasch, of St. Joseph's Church of Mendham. "God sent his son to live, to be faithful. And in being faithful, it cost him his life.''

Lasch, who saw the movie Thursday, also said the film's uncompromising, in-your-face approach reflects a growing divisiveness and belligerence within the major religions.

"As I was sitting at the end of movie I thought, 'This is not bringing us together,''' he said. "This is increasing the separation.''

Others share his fears.

Rabbi Neil Borovitz said he couldn't help but think about "Fiddler on the Roof,'' the classic musical about life in an Eastern European shtetl. The show, which had a revival open on Broadway the same week "The Passion'' reached the theaters, ends tragically with pogroms against the Jews.

"It was the claim of the Jews killing Jesus that inspired people to slaughter thousands of innocent people,'' said Borovitz, of Temple Sholom in River Edge. "I think Mel Gibson has taken a similar approach in this movie, and it's very bothersome.''

But Borovitz also holds out hope. He attended the movie Wednesday with Catholic and Protestant clergymen that he has known for years. And he points to a fresh round of interfaith activism in Bergen County that will make "The Passion'' the main topic of conversation. On Thursday in Teaneck, for example, two scholars, one Catholic and one Jewish, will speak to religious educators and clergy on the complexities of the crucifixion story and how to explain them to students and other lay people.

Borovitz said he respects the story of the Resurrection as the central narrative of Christianity. But he said Gibson has told the story in a provocative, manipulative, and mean-spirited way.

"I feel much more comfortable with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops or the National Council of Churches teaching this story than I do with Mel Gibson,'' Borovitz said. "But Mel Gibson is going to reach more people than they will, and that's what concerns me.''

Many pastors found the movie so compelling they're seeing it again.

The Rev. George Kaden, of Community Church in Harrington Park, saw the movie Wednesday and drove to Van Saun Park in Paramus for 45 minutes of reflection. He is seeing the movie again today with his family.

"It's a film that challenges us to look in our own hearts and ask ourselves about our relationship with God,'' Kaden said. "Each person has to come to grips with what they are seeing and what they are wrestling with in their personal life.''

Others said the movie is transforming the season of Lent, the period of introspection that began on Ash Wednesday and culminates on Easter Sunday.

The Rev. Steve Giordano will preach about the movie in his sermon today. Giordano, of Clinton Avenue Reformed Church in Bergenfield, cited the movie's opening scene in which Jesus decides to face the cross rather than run from it.

"That's the same question that we face at the beginning of the Lenten season,'' Giordano said. "Are we going to accept the challenge of making a significant spiritual season, or is it just going to be business as usual?''

This article contains material from The Associated Press.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: New Jersey
KEYWORDS: catholiclist; christianlist; crucifixion; gibson; kennethlasch; lasch; melgibson; mendham; movie; priest; thepassion; thepassionofchrist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 241-247 next last
To: Coleus
Wow. Causes separation? Can you say wheat and chaff?
161 posted on 03/01/2004 11:22:36 AM PST by The Grim Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sarasmom
Frankly, I would not be surprised that this priest does some further study, reading, and reflection --- possibly even taking another look at the movie --- and significantly changes his opinion. If he did, he would not be the only person to do so.

It has been made clear to me that there are many theologians who have been startled at this honest depiction of The Passion, and they have to take time to study and discover how they have been misled by their prior studies. For now, they only have their initial knee-jerk reactions that are making the press. Wait for later reflections for a real gauge.
162 posted on 03/01/2004 11:24:54 AM PST by AFPhys (((PRAYING for: President Bush & advisors, troops & families, Americans)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RonHolzwarth
This then is probably the most likely reconstruction:

Jesus cries out: My God, my god, why hast thou forsaken me?

A Roman takes pity on Jesus and offers him some drugged vinegar (perhaps in response to his comment).

Jesus receives the vinegar, cries out: Father into thy hands I commend my spirit. It is finished, and yields up his spirit.

You are engaging in the classic fallacy of the argument from silence. Just because one gospel account doesn't include the words another one does doesn't mean the words were never spoken. It just means the writer didn't report them for whatever reason.
163 posted on 03/01/2004 11:25:12 AM PST by frgoff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
"I saw it as religious barbarism ... in my opinion, God did not send his son to die,'' said Lasch, of St. Joseph's Church of Mendham.

Then his opinion is wrong.

164 posted on 03/01/2004 11:27:24 AM PST by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
in my opinion, God did not send his son to die,''

Acts 2:22/24

Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

I wonder if some of these so-called clergy people ever read the Bible.

If this is what is passing for spiritual leadership, the end is truly upon us..

Don't trust anyone... read it for yourself.

165 posted on 03/01/2004 11:28:07 AM PST by Outer Limits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Celtjew Libertarian
I'll reply with part of my note to Fr.Lasch:

"I hope that was an inaccurate quote, or that it was incomplete and that your intent was distorted. The Catholic Church has always maintained that Jesus' Immaculate Conception was necessary so that He would be the Perfect Sacrifice for the reconciliation of our sin. The Passion as brutal, and the movie accurately portrayed the barbarism visited on victims by the Roman torturers, as is easily supported by contemporary documents. True, the Gospels leave much to the imagination of the reader, much as
Scriptures do not describe the gory details resulting from a "stoning".

166 posted on 03/01/2004 11:28:34 AM PST by AFPhys (((PRAYING for: President Bush & advisors, troops & families, Americans)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: js1138
No, the Bible doesn't claim anything of the sort. It's a written record of revelations, eyewitness accounts and historical events that was assembled into a single volume around 400 AD by a Catholic council, and later re-arranged into a Protestant version by Luther, Calvin and some others.
167 posted on 03/01/2004 11:28:58 AM PST by frgoff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
These are good things.

The Church (the body of all believers) needs a thorough shaking to get the dust and fleas out.
168 posted on 03/01/2004 11:31:23 AM PST by k2blader (Some folks should worry less about how conservatives vote and more about how to advance conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
"It made me realize I've had a pretty sanitized view of what Christ did for me,'' said the Rev. Kevin Downey of St. Mary's in Pompton Lakes. "I've read the story so much, and felt I knew the story so well, that after a while, you take it for granted.''

In an odd, troublesome way, the horros of 9-11 are being sanitized by the liberal media and the tagedy is all but forgotten by too many people.

I hope Mel does a movie about the horror and the horrific deaths that occured on 9-11 so people see the truth of the evil of terrorists and the necesity of fighting terrorism.

169 posted on 03/01/2004 11:33:31 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frgoff
I suppose you are correct, but it is rather common for FReepers to claim that the Bible text is without error. If it is in fact simply the recollections of witnesses, written down decades after the fact, by people who were not themselves eyewitnesses, that would explain a lot.

But claiming that would upset a lot of people.
170 posted on 03/01/2004 11:33:46 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
"I saw it as religious barbarism ... in my opinion, God did not send his son to die,'' said Lasch, of St. Joseph's Church of Mendham. "God sent his son to live, to be faithful. And in being faithful, it cost him his life.''

And this idiot calls himself a priest? There is a disease out there and its starting to infect all Christian sects. The fact that this moive was so popular shows that the Christian masses today, like the Jewish masses in 31 A.D., are rejecting the leadership of the power-brokers in their own mainstream faiths.
171 posted on 03/01/2004 11:34:45 AM PST by ZULU (GOD BLESS SENATOR McCARTHY!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vigilo
He was done in my his OWN PEOPLE!!!

He "threatened" their power.

172 posted on 03/01/2004 11:39:30 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: js1138
But claiming that would upset a lot of people.

As well as being complete speculation with no evidence to support it. :0)

173 posted on 03/01/2004 11:44:47 AM PST by Skooz (My Biography: Psalm 40:1-3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: js1138
You'll get no argument from me on that. There are a lot of biblicists in Protestant circles. (A biblicist is a person who comes dangerously close to worshipping the Bible).

If you've ever seen a Willow Creek church service, they start with a prayer to their bibles.

The problem comes from a sola scriptura mentality. If you base your authority solely on the Bible, then it has to be a complete, inerrant work. If you base your authority on the papal tradition like Catholics, or on modern-day prophets like Mormons, then an incomplete Bible is not a stumbling block at all.

Catholic teaching maintains that the tradition of the church fills in the biblical gaps. Mormon teaching maintains that modern revelation fills in the gaps. In both viewpoints, the Bible is simply one MORE record of God's dealing with man, not the ONLY record and not the final word.

To my mind, those are the only two tenable positions, since the Bible is so obviously an incomplete work.
174 posted on 03/01/2004 11:48:49 AM PST by frgoff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: frgoff
On the contrary, the Bible contains every answer to every spiritual question. As a spiritual document, it is complete and perfect. It is utterly without flaw.
175 posted on 03/01/2004 11:51:15 AM PST by Skooz (My Biography: Psalm 40:1-3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: AFPhys
"Jesus' Immaculate Conception"
Please note that the Immaculate Conception refers to Mary, who was conceived without sin (preserved from original sin). Jesus was conceived by the Power of the Holy Spirit, a Divine Conception.

"O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee" Miraculous medal intercession
176 posted on 03/01/2004 12:08:54 PM PST by UnRuley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
Some spiritual questions not clearly answered by the Bible:

Is baptism essential for salvation?

Is the atonement limited and irresistable or unlimited and resistable? (This nature of the atonement is THE foundational tenet of Christianity, and the Bible cannot be used to answer this simple question.)

Is baptism to be administered to infants?

What is the proper mode for baptism?

Is priesthood authority universal among believers or restricted to specific individuals?

Will there be a rapture?

Faith alone or faith+works?

These are profound spiritual questions over which numerous Christian denominations have formed. The Bible is of tremendous worth for what it does contain, but it is simply non-rational to maintain the Bible is complete and inerrant, especially when the Bible itself demonstrates it is NOT complete (it references several books it does not contain). Like I said before, this is only a problem for people who derive their sole authority from the Bible. I'm not one of them.
177 posted on 03/01/2004 12:17:19 PM PST by frgoff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: All
I'm probably preaching to the choir here but... ;-)

I was baptized and raised Greek Orthodox.
While I can't say that I'm much of a practitioner of Christianity at this station of my life, having been raised in the culture/faith has given me at the least, a respect and reverence for the 'story' and importance of what Jesus did (whether I believe in the actual, physical resurrection).

Having said that and having placed myself outside of the 'Ultra-Conservative', Born-Again etc... et. al. movement(s) I honestly cannot see where these charges of Anti-Semitism are coming from...

Here we have the character, Jesus; The prophet who turned the established, beaurocratic, if you will, order on it's head.

That this established, beaurocratic (theocratic) order happens to be Jewish is inconsequential (to me).

For me, the beauty of the story is in highlighting humanity, the essence and goodnesss (dare I say the holiness) as embodied by Jesus, and it's eternal struggle against the machine of the 'mob' and the 'established order'... And it's requirment to sacrifice itself in that struggle so that others may free themselves from this machinery... (oh well... just my opinion. and that's a 'pre-Matrix' opinion! ;-)

Back to the charges of anti-semitism...
I suppose that certain viewers will take prejudices into this movie (e.g. followers of other faiths might think that ALL christians are of the 'Born-Again', 'Ultra-Conservative' type and are consequently of the 'Jews killed Jesus' camp) PLEASE NOTE: I am NOT saying that the above statement is what I believe but what I'm sure many people of other faiths may.

In addition, to the aformentioned potential prejudice there is indeed the other 'flip-side' of the real 'Jews killed Jesus' variety who will infact reinforce their belief of that particular prejudice...

Is the movie inherintly Anti-Semitic?
No.
No-One can take a completely objective approach to this movie.

Their (and my own) prejudices/misconceptions will be magnified but the movie itself simply tells the story as it was written.


Ah well, I apologize if the post is of the extremely ranting type...

just my two cents.

178 posted on 03/01/2004 12:27:43 PM PST by anka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: frgoff
Every one of these questions is answered in the Bible. Every one.

But, often the biblical answers stand in direct opposition to traditions which have sprung up over the ages. THAT is the problem.

A deep and reflective (and open-minded) reading of the Bible, guided by the Holy Spirit, will answer every one of your spiritual questions. But, that takes time and effort.
179 posted on 03/01/2004 12:31:25 PM PST by Skooz (My Biography: Psalm 40:1-3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: independentmind
Lasch, who saw the movie Thursday, also said the film's uncompromising, in-your-face approach reflects a growing divisiveness and belligerence within the major religions.

I love all this talk of "divisiveness" -- the animus between Christians and Jews, let alone Catholics and Protestants, is at an all-time low in this country. Yet these libs are worried about divisiveness.

180 posted on 03/01/2004 12:34:02 PM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 241-247 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson