Another Scriptwriter for Mel Gibson's 'Passion'? Sister Catherine Emmerich's visions.

beliefnet ^ | 2004? | Laura Sheahen

[dennisw]

Another Scriptwriter for Mel Gibson's 'Passion'? The movie draws from the mystical writings of a 19th-century nun who saw detailed visions of a bloody Passion. ____________________

By Laura Sheahen

How is Sister Anne Emmerich connected to Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ"?

Gibson has said he was influenced by Sister Emmerich's visions as recorded in The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which was transcribed by Emmerich's secretary, Clemens Brentano. Many non-biblical events in the movie can be traced to this book.

Who was Sister Anne Emmerich? Anne Catherine Emmerich was an Augustian nun who lived in Germany from 1774 to 1824. She is remembered for her mystical visions of Jesus' and Mary's lives, recorded in works like "The Dolorous Passion."

She is called "Venerable," a title given by the Catholic Church to holy men and women of "heroic virtue" who have not been beatified or canonized. Bedridden for years, Emmerich sewed clothes for the poor and attracted many followers who sought her advice and healing. Her supporters claim that she bore the stigmata--the wounds in the hands and feet that Christ suffered.

Emmerich has been considered for sainthood. However, it is unclear whether all her writings were her own, according to Mary Francis Lester, editor at TAN Books and Publishers, which publishes "The Dolorous Passion." Emmerich's visions were transcribed by Clemens Brentano, a poet and literary figure who, many believe, extensively embellished what Emmerich told him. Because of the uncertainty, Emmerich's writings are not being included in the Vatican process by which potential saints' lives are researched.

What did Emmerich see in her visions?

As written by Brentano, Emmerich saw visions of the Last Supper and the Agony in the Garden, as well as Jesus' arrest, scourging, and crucifixion.

The visions are quite detailed. "The Dolorous Passion" describes many non-biblical events--such as a conversation between Pilate and his wife--and non-biblical scenes, such as Pilate "reposing in a comfortable chair, on a terrace which overlooked the forum, and a small three-legged table stood by his side, on which was placed the insignia of his office, and a few other things." In Mel Gibson's movie, the role of Pilate's wife is expanded far beyond the gospel's brief mention of her dream. Gibson's Pilate interacts with his wife several times, and she is portrayed as the sympathetic proto-Christian character Emmerich describes.

The visions often draw from medieval legends and travelers’ tales, claims Sandra Miesel, a Catholic journalist who has researched Emmerich. For example, Emmerich describes the cross as being made out of five kinds of wood, as in medieval legend. Emmerich also describes Bible characters with "fantastic clothing and hairstyles that owe more to late medieval German art than to the actual fashions of Antiquity," writes Miesel in an article for Catholic International.

Emmerich's visions of Jesus' suffering are very graphic. There is much more gore in her descriptions than in the gospels. In one vision, for example, Jesus "tottered rather than walked, and was almost unrecognisable from the effects of his sufferings during the night; —he was colourless, haggard, his face swollen and even bleeding, and his merciless persecutors continued to torment him each moment more and more."

Why did Mel Gibson base some of the movie's scenes on "The Dolorous Passion"?

Emmerich's visions imaginatively fill in the gaps of the Passion story. Whereas the gospels devote relatively little space to descriptions of Jesus' last hours, "The Dolorous Passion" envisions them in painstaking detail. The intense drama of her visions may also explain their appeal.

For example, in the gospels, Jesus is shown praying in Gethsemane, but the devil is not mentioned. In Emmerich's visions, the devil tempts Jesus as he prays, saying "Takest thou even this sin upon thyself? Art thou willing to bear its penalty?" In Mel Gibson's movie, the devil also tempts Jesus in Gethsemane.

How are Jews portrayed in "The Dolorous Passion"?

The work shows the utmost reverence and respect for Jesus' followers, and references Mary, for example, as following Jewish customs. It also includes scenes where some Jews protest Jesus' death.

In general, however, the book deals very harshly with Jews collectively. It often describes Jewish mobs as "cruel," "wicked," or "hard-hearted," as in this chapter: "the sight of [Jesus'] sufferings, far from exciting a feeling of compassion in the hard-hearted Jews, simply filled them with disgust, and increased their rage. Pity was, indeed, a feeling unknown in their cruel breasts."

Emmerich's visions of certain actions by Jews are not based in scripture. For example, "The Dolorous Passion" describes "numerous devils among the crowd, exciting and encouraging the Jews, whispering in their ears, entering their mouths, inciting them still more against Jesus." In Mel Gibson's movie, an androgynous devil moves through a Jewish mob as Jesus is sentenced.

Another vision shows Satan whispering to Judas "all the curses which the prophets had hurled upon this valley, where the Jews formerly sacrificed their children to idols."

"The Dolorous Passion" also ascribes this vision to Emmerich: "Whenever, during my meditations on the Passion of our Lord, I imagine I hear that frightful cry of the Jews, ‘His blood be upon us, and upon our children,’ visions of a wonderful and terrible description display before my eyes at the same moment the effect of that solemn curse. ...this curse, which they have entailed upon themselves, appears to me to penetrate even to the very marrow of their bones, even to the unborn infants. They appear to me encompassed on all sides by darkness; the words they utter take, in my eyes, the form of black flames, which recoil upon them, penetrating the bodies of some, and only playing around others."

But author Paul Thigpen, who studied Emmerich while writing a book of meditations on Jesus' suffering, feels it's hard to single her out. "It would be a miracle to have a woman or man who wasn't tainted by anti-Semitism" in Emmerich's day, says Thigpen. "It was so fundamental to their societies."

Do Catholics believe "The Dolorous Passion"?

The work is not widely known among Catholics. It is most popular among traditionalist Catholics, a relatively small percentage of Catholics worldwide.

"The Dolorous Passion" belongs to a devotional category of pious literature that some Catholics find value in. But since works like "The Dolorous Passion" are considered to be private--not public--revelation, Catholics are not required to believe in them.

Emmerich was "imaginative, but her visions are not what really happened in Bible times," says Miesel. The imprimatur on "The Dolorous Passion" does not indicate that the Catholic Church accepts her visions as true, according to Mary Francis Lester of TAN Books.

The view of the Jewish people reflected in Emmerich's writings is not in keeping with Vatican II-inspired documents on relations with the Jews or the U.S. Bishops' Guidelines for Passion Plays.

Will Emmerich be named a saint?

Emmerich's sainthood process was stalled in 1928 because of the uncertainty over Brentano's embellishments. However, some voices--including German bishops--are pressing her cause today. Miesel worries that if she is beatified (the step prior to canonization), Catholics might "think her writings are validated."

Thigpen sees value in Emmerich less for her writings than for her holiness in the face of severe physical pain. "What the Church is focusing on is her heroic suffering, offering up that suffering to God," says Thigpen. "If she is canonized, she would be a wonderful role model for the disabled and those with chronic illness."

[dennisw]

I say this is a major story. This is your extra-biblical source for Mel Gibson's movie. This 18th century nun, Anne Catherine Emmerich, with extensive visions, recorded by another (Bretano), whose accuracy is up for grabs. She is up for sainthood BTW

[dennisw]

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/arizonaliving/articles/0228passionseer28.html

'Passion' scriptwriter: 18th-century nun?

Feb. 28, 2004 12:00 AM


Biblical scholar John Dominic Crossan jokes that if Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ should come up for Oscar consideration, the nomination for best screenplay should go to a little-known 18th-century German nun.

The mystical visions of Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824) are the basis of some of the more stunning, non-biblical scenes in Gibson's movie - from Jesus' confrontation with Satan in the Garden of Gethsemane to the explicit details of his scourging by Roman guards, to a crucifixion scene in which his arm is pulled out of its socket, according to a reading of her work.

Gibson has said that he based his film in part on the visions of Emmerich recorded in The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

"There it is," Crossan says. "Read the book. You could put a camera in front of it. She is the script for the film."

The bedridden visionary, who is said to have borne the stigmata and the wounds of the crown of thorns, is a particular source of contention for Gibson because of her depictions of Jews as bloodthirsty and venal. In The Dolorous Passion, for instance, she "sees" Jewish priests passing out bribes to get people to offer false testimony against Jesus and even tipping the Roman executioners. She also describes seeing Jesus' cross being built in the courtyard of the Temple in Jerusalem.

And Emmerich's 19th-century biographer, the Rev. C.E. Schmoe'ger, wrote about how she had one vision of an "old Jewess Meyr," who confessed to her "that Jews in our country and elsewhere strangled Christian children and used their blood for all sorts of suspicious and diabolical practices."

Gibson, who carries a relic of Emmerich in the form of a faded piece of cloth from her habit, vehemently rejects characterizations of the nun as anti-Semitic.

"Why are they calling her a Nazi?" he is quoted by New Yorker writer Peter Boyer as saying. "Because modern secular Judaism wants to blame the Holocaust on the Catholic Church. And it's revisionism. And they've been working on that one for a while."

[dennisw]

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2004%20opinions/Feb/21%20o/The%20Politics%20of%20Passion%20By%20Joachim%20Martillo.htm

[MEG33]

Did you notice this when you saw the film?How does the film measure up to your interpretations of the gospels?

[dennisw]

I have not seen the film yet. My point here is this is the co-author of PASSION. Sister Anne Katherine Emmerich.

[livius]

The work shows the utmost reverence and respect for Jesus' followers, and references Mary, for example, as following Jewish customs.

I was impressed by the scene where Mary carefully cleaned up the blood - it reminded me of modern Israelis going to clean up the human remains where innocents have been martyred by Muslim bombers.

The tradition of private revelations is a very old one in Christianity. Ideally, the Church then examines the revelations and either permits or condemns, but does not make it mandatory for all Catholics to accept them as true or even know about them.

That said, however, many of the scenes in Gibson's movie are also inspired by the traditional imagery found some of the classic paintings of scenes from the Passion (particularly the great Spanish masters, it seemed to me).

[MEG33]

Have you read the scripture it is based on?

[dennisw]

Have you read the scripture it is based on?

No but Emmerich's visions of the PASSION play as large a part as the Gospels in this movie. They are bloodier, more detailed in the blood spilled and the torture endured. In my humble opinion. And you have not read them. They are on line --->>

http://www.emmerich1.com/DOLOROUS_PASSION_OF_OUR_LORD_JESUS_CHRIST.htm

[docmcb]

The March issue of FIRST THINGS (mine was in yesterday's mail) has an article on THE PASSION that mentions Emmerlich. It's by Russell Hittinger and Elizabeth Lev. They note that "one of Gibson's scenes is taken directly from Emmerlich. After the scourging, Pilate's wife Claudia gives linen cloths to Mary and the Magdalene, which they use to mop up the sacred blood." It's an excellent review, by the way, written after they saw the early version of the film. Major points include:

"Jesus does what he teaches. In the sacred text itself, the last twelve hours contain only the tersest dialogue. The parables have all been spoken. The disciples have slunk away. From here, the question of the Christ is telescoped by Gibson into what we see -- or, more accurately, what we are able to watch."

"Ultimately THE PASSION is about witnessing and bearing witness. On one level, the film is calculated to make us want to turn away and go home. At the outset, Jesus tells his disciples in the garden that he doesn't want them to see him in such a condition. . . Thankfully, as the scenes become harder and harder to watch, the viewer is offered an example, a guide as to how we are supposed to react to the increasingly disturbing images. . . .Mary's face is the most reliable clue to the meaning of the unfolding events."

[MEG33]

I read the interesting list and description of what was in the movie and not in the Bible on the belief net site.

[Use It Or Lose It]

This discussion may or may not merit being moved to the "Religion" section, however, it appears the Emmerich inspirations seem to be the next battle in the assault on Mel Gibson. First, it was anti-Semitism (none there), next the divisive beliefs of Gibson's father (discounted), then the "gore and violence" card (news flash: crucifixion was bloody and violent. Now, the influence of a nun. What next? The naysayers are becoming caricatures of themselves.

The constant drumbeat of criticism and condemnation is being drowned out by the praise and plaudits of the audience for whom Gibson made the movie.

[dennisw]

This discussion may or may not merit being moved to the "Religion" section, however, it appears the Emmerich inspirations seem to be the next battle in the assault on Mel Gibson.......


Yup. A definite yup on that. Very few Catholics have read her works. Only the Catholics who are very traditionalist along the lines of Mel Gibson, who spent $5 million to establish an ultra traditional church in Malibu. Way I look at it, Mel is proselytizing the Emmerich PASSION amongst Catholics and Christan to "convert" and pull them to a more traditional Catholicism.

[MEG33]

Read the "Book"before you judge the movie.Do read on the site you have referenced the actual things that are different from the Gospels.Christians of all denominations have praised this movie for what it is.
Love,sacrifice and forgiveness.

For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have have everlasting life.
John3:16

[schaketo]

I went to the theatre yesterday with my wife and viewed the “Passion”. First time I’ve stepped foot in a theatre in at least six years. Not that I have an affinity to theatre movies, I just find most stuff produced today trashy.

Phenomenal. I don’t know how else to describe it. I’ve read the 4 gospels at least four times. Read the entire bible twice. I have never been as moved by the written word as I was by the visualization Gibson produced. The power of the picture, I guess.

My wife and I didn’t speak for probably 10 minutes after leaving the theatre. Absorbing, I guess. We both picked up our New Testaments yesterday evening and began reading again about Christ’s sacrifice for our sins.

Haven’t seen it? You should, regardless of your faith or spiritual journey.

[MEG33]

I have not yet been able to go but shall see it.I am so moved reading the words of those who have seen it.

I am hoping it encourages people,as it did you, to read or reread the Book!

[SJackson]

As far as a battle is concerned, there is none. Although Mel did deny Emmerich as a source when the controversy first erupted (the stolen script), he doesn't anymore. Her visions in "The Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ" are sold as http://www.passion-movie.com/promote/book.html>Book That Inspired... , with Mel's comments.

Clearly the movie isn't a retelling of her visions and doesn't include the most antisemitic aspects. BTW, I don't believe the recounting visions have been accepted by the Church as accurate for decades.

[Captain Rhino]

I'm presently doing some on-line research into the various Catholic catechisms concerning the Passion (with some very able assistance from Freepers over on the Religion Page). Although it is published about 60 years after Sister Emmerlich's death, the Baltimore catechism (1891) (which is used by traditional Catholic Church members) contains a fairly graphic account of Jesus' scouging and crucifixion. Here's a link: http://www.cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/baltimore/bcreed04.htm

One may have influenced the other and both may have influenced him, but Mel Gibson didn't have to depart from accepted catholic teaching to get a graphic depiction of the torment that Our Lord suffered on our behalf.

[Use It Or Lose It]

Although it is published about 60 years after Sister Emmerlich's death, the Baltimore catechism (1891) (which is used by traditional Catholic Church members) contains a fairly graphic account of Jesus' scouging and crucifixion.

Ahhhh...flashbacks! The BC was a staple of "traditional" Catholic education. Of course it influenced Gibson. Did Emmerich's beliefs have an impact on him? Undoubtedly. Does every product of primary and secondary Catholic School education believe, word for word, everything taught to us? Hardly. Does Gibson, as director, have the right to use powerful imagery to evoke emotion, thought and discussion? Yes, for to do otherwise would constitute failure as an artist.

[Captain Rhino]

Does Gibson, as director, have the right to use powerful imagery to evoke emotion, thought and discussion? Yes, for to do otherwise would constitute failure as an artist.

One of the more curious quibbles from the critics surrounds this "taking of liberties." Two that have been pointed out deal with the stepping on the head of the snake in the Garden of Gethsemane (sp?) and the androgynous Satan figure seen throughout the movie. Not scriptural? Certainly. Yet their inclusion let Gibson portray something very difficult to communicate visually, man's long standing struggle with sin and sin's author, the Devil. Sweet, seductive, corrupting, and ultimately disastrous sin; a struggle that started in that other garden, the Garden of Eden, and one which is reaching its climax as Jesus goes to create a pathway to salvation through his death

Of course, had Gibson decided to make Jesus homosexual and set the story in SoHo he would be praised for his "daring artistic vision" by the same herd of braying jack... err... donkeys.