Mel Gibson's Passions

I finally found the sources of the worries that Mel Gibson's forthcoming film The Passion. I hate to admit that the worriers may be right.

At first I dismissed the uproar because a reading of the four gospels pretty much lays the blame for Jesus' execution by crucifiction squarely on the Jews, even thought the Romans actually perform the deed. If you doubt me, read your nearest Bible. There are several good free electronic versions that are as accurate as any print copy on the 'Net. Despite Vatican II, it is hard for the Biblically protrayed Jews to come out of the story smelling of roses. This is a legacy of Constantine the Great, and another story.

That, however, requires that you accept the Gospels (and the Bible generally) as the Word of God in the literal sense. Being a historian in training, I don't subscribe to that particular viewpoint. I see the Good Book more as allegory or even a depiction of what we believe happened. I certainly don't ascribe to the idea that the Universe was created in seven twenty-four hour days, as some do. And I don't beleive that God has used divine influence to keep the Bible free of outside influences. History tells us that this is not true.

More on that some other time. Back to the movie.

The Passion has been noted for its interesting linguistic choices (Latin, Hebrew, and Arameic) and for its graphic depictions of the violence associated with the crucifiction. This last part has a large role in generating the outcry associated with the film. And for good reason.

One scene that may be dropped entirely depicts a Jewish priest casting a "blood curse" on either Jesus or the crowd. there are also scenes where Satan (not even the actual ancient name for the devil, which was Lucifer) is associated with the Jews, not the Romans who are executing Jesus.

Further issues that cause concern that the film may create an anti-semitic backlash include: Jewish leaders passing out bribes to assure Jesus' execution, the construction of the cross temple, Jesus' shoulder yanked out of its socket, and, the cross is dragged face-down through the streets after Jesus has been afixed to it. (Thanks to Dennis Neiwert for these last bits)

None of these last items appear anywhere in the Bible. According to MSNBC, they come from the writings of Anne Catherine Emmerich a 19th century Catholic nun. Gibson's reliance on this material that is not even part of the Bible, opens him and his film up to accusations of anti-Semitism because their only purpose is to inflame the audience. Combined with the depiction of the mob demanding Jesus' execution, it certainly makes it look like the Jews are to blame for Jesus' death.

What is left out is equally important. Vatican II recognized that for Jesus' spiritual mission to be accomplished, he had to die on the cross. Biblically speaking, that was his whole reason for existing as a man born of woman: to buy salvation for humanity with his death.

Again, all of this ignores historical reality. The only people in Jerusalem in the 1st century capable of executing anyone were the Romans. Some scholars claim that there are many problems with the course of events depicted in the Gospels. Here are a couple:

1. There was no tradition of the Romans freeing condemned prisoners at Passover.

2. There are questions about what the term messiah even meant at the time. One school of thought sees it as a military/religious leader. Given that Jesus was the scion of the House of David, and a King in the secular sense, the Roman's could have considered him a political threat.

3. The earliest of the Gospels appears not to have been written until one or two hundred years after Jesus' death, which means that they are not eyewitness accounts. This is based on linguistic and other evidence.

4. The divinity of Jesus was not officially adopted as Christian doctrine until the council of Nicea when Constantine the Great ordered the church to pick a doctrine, and made other "heretical" beliefs illegal. At the same time the sabbath was moved from Saturday to Sunday to coincide with the holy day of Sol Invictus.

5. Other Christian holy days were rearranged to fit with pagan practices, which is why Christmas is in December, not the Spring or Summer.

6. Different versions of the Bible have been edited for political reasons, as well as reasons of "clarity". That's why different denominations use different versions. Not everyone agrees what the words in the Bible actually mean.

I'm not trying to be offensive here, of course. I'm just trying to show that taking what appears in any ancient text as the literal truth can be problematic. The Bible, particularly the New Testament, is a generally good guide for moral living, but like anything touched by mankind, it has flaws. If you believe that the text was divinely inspired, fine, but also realized that mankind has a history of corrupting Good things for its own purposes.

Back to the point. For the last year the furor over the release of The Passion has continued to grow, and now we know why. This movie, which I plan to go see in order to truly understand it, contains some incredibly anti-semitic scenes that do no even come from Biblical texts or accepted Church interpretation. That's why people are upset. People are afraid that this film will have the same effect as some ministers continued teachings that Jews have tails and horns. (Really. My former mother-in-law is Jewish. She went to a conference and ran into someone who stared at her trying to figure out where the horns and tail were. Ricky, being a smart-ass, told the poor woman that she left the in her suitcase because they made travel difficult.)

Posted by Chris at February 6, 2004 08:45 AM