Posted on 03/13/2004 3:35:47 AM PST by KQQL
The pope has declared "there is nothing anti-Semitic" about Mel Gibson's blockbuster film "The Passion of the Christ."
Amid continued criticism of its depiction of Jews, Vatican spokesman Joaquín Navarro-Valls called the film on the final hours of Jesus' life "a cinematographic transcription of the Gospels. If it were anti-Semitic, the Gospels would also be so."
Navarro-Valls said Pope John Paul II would have criticized the film if it were bigoted against Jews.
The spokesman made his comments in reply to Riccardo Di Segni, chief rabbi of Rome, who had asked the Vatican for a formal condemnation of the movie, which has grossed more than $200 million in the U.S. since its Feb. 25 release.
William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said this will now settle the issue for most Catholics.
"Naturally, there will always be some, most especially dissident theologians, nuns and priests, who will reject the Vatican's understanding of the film," he said. "But then again they have a long track record of rejecting lots of things the Vatican says. It would be a mistake for the millions of Catholics who have embraced this movie to allow the dissidents to distract them from the beauty of the film."
Donohue acknowledged, however, the Vatican's judgment of the film may not sit well with some Jews.
"That would be unfortunate, because the last thing Catholics want is bad relations with Jews," he said. "Those Jews who find the movie problematic should be treated with respect."
Donohue said because of the history of mistreatment by many Christians, it is not surprising some Jews would be wary of a film about the death of Jesus. An honest dialogue between Catholics and Jews cannot proceed if Catholics pretend there isn't honest disagreement about the movie, he emphasized.
"At the end of the day, however, disagreements between Catholics and Jews need not take on any greater significance than the ordinary family quarrel," said Donohue. "It is up to the major players on both sides to see to it that our common friendship transcends any discord about this matter."
Navarro-Valls was at the center of a controversy in January over whether the pope had given his personal approval of the film, stating, "It is as it was."
Despite denials by the Vatican, Gibson insists he had written permission to publicize the pope's comment.
If it were anti-Semitic, the Gospels would also be so."
i.e., ".....it is, as it was."
I wonder what that ad hoc committee of Christian and Jewish biblical scholars convened by the ADL and the Bishops' Conference are going to say now--that the Vatican is wrong? All those Catholic priests and Sisters and Catholic scholars who claimed the New Testement was anti-Semetic are they going to start calling the Vatican anti-Semitic too? Actually, I wouldn't be suprised.
The various rationalizations that "we all killed Jesus," or that "Romans killed Jesus," or that "only Jewish high priests have blood on their hands" etc. are in disagreement with Paul's own words blaming "the Jews" for the death of "Lord Jesus and the prophets."
Really? Well, it mattered the makers of Christianity, like Paul, like Chrysostom, and so on. It's only of late that Christians seem to take a politically correct view and deny and contradict what the New Testament clearly states -- that the Jews killed Jesus.
Rather than admitting that we don't accept what the Christian Bible says, or that we don't really agree with it, because that would be blasphemy, we selectively ignore those parts of the Bible which are too offensive for to deal with. By saying that "the Gospels" are not anti-semitic, we are really not lying; just not telling the whole truth.
Really? Well, it mattered the makers of Christianity, like Paul, like Chrysostom, and so on. It's only of late that Christians seem to take a politically correct view and deny and contradict what the New Testament clearly states -- that the Jews killed Jesus.
Actually, ... what is clear from the New Testament is that a collaboration between a few Jews leaders and a few Romans (Gentiles) resulted in the crucifixion of Christ. If either faction had not been involved, history would be different.
I think that such as this demonstrates the fundamental fact that Jesus died for the sins of, both, Jews and Gentiles.
In light of such, there is no reason to hang the blame for, even, the immdediate circumstances for Jesus' death upon the Jewish people. After all, since when has it been appropriate to blame an entire people for the acts of a few.
If such is appropriate for the Jews, then it is no less approppriate for the Gentiles, who were represented by the Romans.
Such as this, of course, leads to the larger truth ... we all are guilty ... every one of us.
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.