← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Walter Yannis
Thread ID: 12766 | Posts: 10 | Started: 2004-03-17
2004-03-17 11:38 | User Profile
This appeared in the the [URL=http://www.catholicexchange.com/vm/index.asp?art_id=22096]Catholic Exchange [/URL] 3/17/2004
I would be interested in hearing the thoughts of my Protestant brothers.
Walter
Mel Gibson sank 25 million dollars of his own money into a film on the sufferings of Christ that he himself jokingly described as the ultimate anti-date movie.
A Golden Opportunity
Everybody in the film speaks a dead language. It was released in February, which is not exactly Prime Time. It was widely prophesied as a career-ending disaster in Hollywood circles. The film has been pre-emptively pilloried as anti-Semitic (even though Gibson films his own hands driving the nails through Jesus' hands to literally drive home the point that it was he ââ¬â and you and I ââ¬â who are the authors of Christ's sufferings).
All this you know if you've been following the controversy surrounding The Passion of the Christ.
But what you may not know is the remarkable spiritual fruit that this film has borne, beginning with the production and now spreading out to both Catholic and Protestant lives that have been touched by it. From the conversions which took place among crew members on the set, to the repeated reports of Protestants stunned by this powerful film, to the non-Christian reviewers who have found themselves confronted as never before by the gospel, this is a film which presents a unique opportunity for Catholics to share the love of Christ and to read the signs of the times as our Lord commands us to do. We are sitting on the threshhold of a golden opportunity, not only to tell the world about Jesus, but to do the sort of "practical ecumenism" that the Second Vatican Council urged in the Decree on Ecumenism:
Before the whole world let all Christians confess their faith in the triune God, one and three in the incarnate Son of God, our Redeemer and Lord. United in their efforts, and with mutual respect, let them bear witness to our common hope which does not play us false. In these days when cooperation in social matters is so widespread, all men without exception are called to work together, with much greater reason all those who believe in God, but most of all, all Christians in that they bear the name of Christ. Cooperation among Christians vividly expresses the relationship which in fact already unites them, and it sets in clearer relief the features of Christ the Servant.
Amazing Ecumenical Events
Things are taking place now which would have been unimaginable a generation ago. So, for instance:
ââ¬Â¢ The head of a prominent Protestant television ministry said to a gathering of more than 500 hundred mostly Evangelical ministers who had just viewed The Passion of the Christ: "This film puts Christ back on our bare crosses."
ââ¬Â¢ Multiplex theatres in some cities in the deeply Protestant Douth debuted the film on up to twenty screens at a time.
ââ¬Â¢ A not-uncommon reaction of Evangelical women to the film is that Catholic reverence for Mary is starting to make sense. As one Evangelical woman summed things up: "I could relate to Mary watching her son die."
ââ¬Â¢ Mel Gibson himself told Christianity Today: "I've been actually amazed at the way I would say the Evangelical audience has ââ¬â hands down ââ¬â responded to this film more than any other Christian group."
ââ¬Â¢ A Guide to the Passion: 100 Questions about The Passion of the Christ, published by Catholic Exchange and Ascension Press, has sold nearly 400,000 copies in the past month, making it the fastest-selling Catholic book in history.
What makes all this so amazing is that The Passion of the Christ is, with a full throat, a profoundly Marian and deeply Eucharistic proclamation of the gospel in a largely Protestant and even post-Protestant culture.
And our Protestant brothers and sisters are loving it!
Mel's ââ¬â and St. Paul's ââ¬â Weird Theology
One reason for this is that the fault lines in our culture have shifted radically. To illustrate, here are a couple of articles which are fairly representative of the mainstream media's ongoing (and futile) attempt to neutralize this movie. Significantly, one is from a "Catholic" writer and one is primarily focusing on "mainline" Protestantism.
Here is Canadian "Catholic" scripture scholar Fr. Gerald Caron who loftily writes in the February 19, 2004 issue of the Globe and Mail:
In Mel's view, God's extraordinary love for humanity is measured by this unimaginable suffering "for our sins." This is the message that is marketed in this movie. This is the "gospel" according to Mel.
It is as if the more blood there is, the easier one will be convinced of the love of God. It is this emphasis on the blood and suffering of Jesus that I find so disturbing. The fact that God would require Jesus to pay such a price "for our sins" may say a lot about how Mel perceives our humanity, but what picture of God are we left with ââ¬â a loving Creator or a sadistic destroyer? Note the scare quotes. It is not the film that Fr. Caron objects to. It is the idea (an idea that just happens to be the teaching of all Christianity, both Protestant and Catholic ââ¬â not to mention Orthodox and Coptic) that Jesus died for our sins. For Fr. Caron, the idea that Jesus died for our sins is the problem. And he actually has the temerity to suggest that this is some eccentric idea of Mel Gibson's and not the teaching of the Church for all time. This will come as news to eccentrics like Isaiah who wrote "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and with his stripes we are healed" (Isaiah 53:5). And it will be a real jolt to weird cranks and fundamentalists like St. Paul who taught that "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures" (1 Cor 15:3) and seemed to be under the impression that this is among the most elementary truths of the entire gospel.
Ah, but there's more where that comes from. The Dallas Morning News, not to be outdone, informs us in its February 21, 2004 issue that not all Christians go for this bizarre "atonement theology" notion shared by strange sectarians like Mel, St. Paul, and, oh, every faithful Christian who ever lived. Nosiree! According to the DMN, there is another view taken by Highly Educated People: "It doesn't make sense to me that God would need to be satisfied by sending His Son to be killed," said Kip Taylor, a religion major at Texas Christian University. "That's a vengeful God and not a God I want to worship."
"My death is no more important than my birth or every day in between. Why should it be any different with Jesus?" said Kelly Webb, after a class on the gospels at TCU. "If all that mattered was His death, why did He spend three years teaching and preaching?" So there you are. There's the odd little "camp" of strange and bloodthirsty "atonement theology" adherents occupied by weirdos like Mel Gibson, the Twelve Apostles and a billion other Catholics and Protestants. And, over here, on an absolutely equal footing that is taken with chin-stroking seriousness by the Dallas Morning News, there's the "camp" occupied by people like Fr. Caron, Kip, Kelly, some profs who Know More Than You Do, and the media elite who are tearing themselves in two in their desperation to find some way, no matter how ridiculous, to make it look like Jesus Christ is not the crucified Savior of the world.
Seismic Shifts
What this adds up to a is a seismic shift in relations between Protestants and Catholics. Frankly, a serious, believing Catholic has much more in common with a garden variety Protestant who affirms the deity of Christ and who hails Him as Lord and crucified and risen Savior than he has with an allegedly "Catholic" scripture scholar who repudiates the elementary apostolic teaching that Jesus died for our sins. Likewise, Protestants are coming to recognize that a Catholic who takes seriously and worships the Incarnate, Crucified and Risen Christ is a much closer brother than the apostate who mouths Jesus-as-social-worker twaddle such as, "Perhaps redemption is found in Jesus' teachings about the kingdom of God. Maybe He came to earth to show humanity how to live ââ¬â to feed the hungry, give shelter to the homeless, to stand in solidarity with the marginalized. Or maybe He died simply for His unpopular, even subversive beliefs rather than for the sin of the world."
That's one of the reasons The Passion of the Christ is so significant. In a way that is literally unprecedented in the history of the Church, we are seeing old denominational barriers crumbling as thousands upon thousands of Protestant Christians respond with visceral force to the work of a deeply Catholic filmmaker. The comment quoted above, about returning Christ to His bare cross is a remarkable breakthrough. Much Protestant piety has (understandably) been fearful of Catholic use of images since many Protestants have feared this is a violation of the Second Commandment ("You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth" (Exodus 20:4)). Coupled with this has been the fear that Catholics are, in some way, forgetting that Jesus is Risen in their veneration of crucifixes.
But now, more than ever before, Protestants are seeing that the command against images no more condemns Catholic use of images than it forbids the film itself. Moreover, they are seeing that a meditation on the sufferings of Jesus no more denies the Resurrection than the actual crucifixion did (or could).
Likewise, many people are impressed by the way The Passion of the Christ focuses on Mary as a person. Catholics have tended to revere Mary so much that she fades into a plaster saint when artists try to depict her. Evangelicals often have tended to fear Mary so much that she becomes dehumanized in ways that no other mother would be. Some Protestantism has been so skittish of her that she is reduced to a mere "vessel" whose sole function was to act as the means for the Incarnation. Gibson's film renders the great service of showing her as she is: a profoundly human character who loved her Son deeply and whose heart is intertwined with His in a deeply human way. As anyone who has lost a child can relate to, the sword that stabbed Jesus' heart truly pierced hers as well. And a largely Protestant audience is thereby filled with love and respect for her who is the Mother of all the baptized, Protestant as well as Catholic.
God Writes Straight with Crooked Lines
In all, The Passion of the Christ and the unexpected shock waves it has sent through our culture is a remarkable illustration of the old adage that God writes straight with crooked lines. The unlikely collision of a former Hollywood Bad Boy turned Catholic Traditionalist filmmaker with formerly anti-Catholic Evangelicals who are now eager to meditate on a crucifix, all in the service of a film whose Eucharistic and Marian devotion is illustrated with images from Scripture, the Stations of the Cross, and the writings of German mystic, is a confluence that could only happen in America ââ¬â and only with the help of the Holy Spirit. May the Church seize this uniquely Catholic moment and not be afraid to proclaim the gospel to the millions of filmgoers who will be emerging from the theatre, stunned and deeply moved at what may well be the first time they have ever encountered the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Mark Shea is Senior Content Editor for Catholic Exchange. You may visit his website at [url]www.mark-shea.com[/url] check out his blog, Catholic and Enjoying It!, or purchase his books and tapes here.
2004-03-17 19:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]I would be interested in hearing the thoughts of my Protestant brothers.[/QUOTE]
Mel's crucifix (movie) must be the real deal because it has the vampires (Jews) in panic. And, I see the movie as doing much good if it moves Catholics to a more godly and less Politically Correct form of Catholicism. But, I'm still not trading in my bare cross for a crucifix (I haven't seen the movie yet).
Evangelicals often have tended to fear Mary so much that she becomes dehumanized in ways that no other mother would be.
I don't know what it means, other than a jab at Protestants for not deifying Mary.
2004-03-17 20:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Happy Hacker]I don't know what it means, other than a jab at Protestants for not deifying Mary.[/QUOTE]
I'll try to be as objective as possible when I say this, but having been raised a Protestant and now Orthodox, I think Protestants do give the Mother of God far less reverence than she deserves. Now you can argue with that, but if you think about what a special person she was, out of all the women available, to have been selected by God Himself to carry the Christ child. And it wasn't just a random selection, but rather that Mary had the qualities that were satisfactory to God. In her faith and submission to God she became the most important woman in history.
Without the Mother of God as a role model, maybe this is why we see women in some denominations clamoring to fill the roles of men?
2004-03-17 20:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=wild_bill]Without the Mother of God as a role model, maybe this is why we see women in some denominations clamoring to fill the roles of men?[/QUOTE]
No, women in some denominations are clamoring to fill the roles of men because of men utterly failing to fulfill their responsiblities to God, their family and the Church.
2004-03-17 20:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I don't know what it means, other than a jab at Protestants for not deifying Mary.[/QUOTE]
Pace, Happy, to venerate is not to deify. God alone is "worshipped," all sides would agree.
2004-03-17 20:53 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]No, women in some denominations are clamoring to fill the roles of men because of men utterly failing to fulfill their responsiblities to God, their family and the Church.[/QUOTE]
Tex, I'm not going to argue against that point. It is a big contributing factor. But would you disagree that Mary as a role model might be a good thing?
Its an unfortunate thing that in many churches on a typical Sunday, the pews are about 60% women. And I'm not cutting on the women. No, they are where they should be on Sunday morning! Its their men who are still in bed or sitting on their lazy butts at home waiting for some blasted ballgame to come on the TV who are the problem.
2004-03-17 21:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Buster]Pace, Happy, to venerate is not to deify. God alone is "worshipped," all sides would agree.[/QUOTE]
I don't worship Mary. But I do venerate her and pay my respect to her as the Mother of God. I also ask for her prayers just as I would ask for prayers from any fellow Christian.
Beautiful Russian Icon of the Christ child and Mary attached.
2004-03-19 10:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Mel's crucifix (movie) must be the real deal because it has the vampires (Jews) in panic. [/QUOTE]
You nailed it, man.
Show them the Gospel, and they'll cringe and flee. That's all we have to do.
Just give them Christ and Him crucified straight up, without a chaser, so to speak, and they'll gag.
Always have, always will.
As to Mary, Catholics don't worship her as we do Christ, but she is deeply venerated. I don't doubt that it must appear to be a fine line from your perspective, but we believe that it is not crossed. Mary is a CREATURE like the rest of us, and so is not worshipped.
From the Catechism:
[QUOTE]970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it."513 "[SIZE=2][B]No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer[/B][/SIZE]; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."514 [/QUOTE]
Here are some additional points from the Catechism that you may find of interest:
[QUOTE]The Immaculate Conception
490 To become the mother of the Savior, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role."132 The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as "full of grace".133 In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace.
491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:
The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135
492 The "splendor of an entirely unique holiness" by which Mary is "enriched from the first instant of her conception" comes wholly from Christ: she is "redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son".136 The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person "in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" and chose her "in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love".137
493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All-Holy" (Panagia), and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature".138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.
Mary's divine motherhood
495 Called in the Gospels "the mother of Jesus", Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as "the mother of my Lord".144 In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father's eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly "Mother of God" (Theotokos).145
1172 "In celebrating this annual cycle of the mysteries of Christ, Holy Church honors the Blessed Mary, Mother of God, with a special love. She is inseparably linked with the saving work of her Son. In her the Church admires and exalts the most excellent fruit of redemption and joyfully contemplates, as in a faultless image, that which she herself desires and hopes wholly to be."
function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it."513 "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."514
971 "All generations will call me blessed": "The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."515 The Church rightly honors "the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of 'Mother of God,' to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration."516 The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an "epitome of the whole Gospel," express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.517
III. MARY - ESCHATOLOGICAL ICON OF THE CHURCH
972 After speaking of the Church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary. In her we contemplate what the Church already is in her mystery on her own "pilgrimage of faith," and what she will be in the homeland at the end of her journey. There, "in the glory of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity," "in the communion of all the saints,"518 the Church is awaited by the one she venerates as Mother of her Lord and as her own mother.
In the meantime the Mother of Jesus, in the glory which she possesses in body and soul in heaven, is the image and beginning of the Church as it is to be perfected in the world to come. Likewise she shines forth on earth until the day of the Lord shall come, a sign of certain hope and comfort to the pilgrim People of God.519
[/QUOTE]
2004-03-19 18:17 | User Profile
As a non-Christian, I have no interest in the various doctrinal wranglings of this thread, though I respect the deeply-held beliefs behind them. What's significant about [I]The Passion[/I], to my way of thinking, is that it's gotten people intensely interested in being part of something from which God's Chosen People are by definition excluded.
Mel Gibson's religion isn't "ecumenism," or "universality" or "judaeo-Christianity" or "interfaith consensus," it's by-God (literally) [I]Christianity[/I]. The Chosen don't want there to be [I]anything[/I] they can't infiltrate and control, especially something as deeply and passionately held as religion. If Christianity becomes for Christians only again, how can The Chosen guide it, subvert it, defang it? And what other aspects of "our" (I use the word loosely) society might slip from their control if Christianity successfully sets a precedent?
That's why this Odinist is 100% on the side of Mel Gibson -- and of any other Christians who take their religion straight and undiluted.
2004-03-20 04:11 | User Profile
The Bible is real, but not a holy book, only a HISTORY book.
Jesus was real and a good man, man made him into a holy man and the son of God.
We create our own Gods and holy saints and put them in a pedestal and then worship them.
We make war in the name of God, but that's only an excuse and not the reason.
Man is afraid of dying therefore he created Heaven, they want to keep everyone scare, so he created hell.
Heaven and Hell is what we create here in Earth, no more no less.
The best way that I can describe what I believe in is "The Force" , from Star Wars, that which is everywhere and is everything.
You must first of all believe in yourself and once you do that then everything else will fall in place.