Mesh, one of my favorite people in blogdom and fellow member of the chattablogs family, has written a challenging post on the upcoming The Passion, by Mel Gibson. He writes:
"The Passion is simply a traditional Passion play put on a screen. It meets all the requirements: it is a celebratory dramatization of Christ's death, designed to inspire love and respect in the faithful, and conviction and repentence in the previously unconvinced.And Passion plays are, make no mistake, a fundamentally anti-Semetic medium, in a way that the Gospel records and the orthodox understanding of the crucifixion are not."
His argument is interesting. The passion play has the effect of distancing the viewer from the crucifiction in such a way as to make the viewer a kind of passive, objective member of the audience. When we watch this particular kind of passion play, we inevitably see ourselves on the side of Jesus (one of my favorite parts of Mesh's post is in the beginning when he recounts watching a passion play at his charismatic church, and by the end, ends up imagining himself in the crowd, fighting to save Jesus, only to be beaten down by the soldiers, and then later comforted by the comely and beautiful Mary Magdalene! Beautiful!). We do not see ourselves in the story, in other words, as the accusers, the Jews or the Romans who killed Jesus. Rather, we inevitably identify with, and even end up rooting for Jesus.
Yet, the function of these stories for the church is not give us the glib comfort of feeling that had we been there, we would've done differently. Rather, the story of Christ's death is to show that he was rejected for us, by us.
I will always remember, from a class I took in college on the persection of the church, how on Easter Day, a church in Europe would require Jews to stand at the cathedral door. As the congregation exited the church, each member would actually slap the Jew in the face, in retaliation for their involvement in the Savior's death. One Prince once wore an iron glove, and when he slapped the man, he broke his jaw. It's a strange place to be, as a people, when the story can be told and even celebrated, and yet be so utterly and wholly misunderstood.
Posted by scott at August 21, 2003 03:03 PM | TrackBackGreetings,
> ... We do not see ourselves in the story, in other
> words, as the accusers,the Jews or the Romans who
> killed Jesus. Rather, we inevitably identify with,
> and even end up rooting for Jesus.
> ...
> Rather, the story of Christ's death is to show
> that he was rejected for us, by us.
During Holy Week, many Catholics participate in the reading of one of the Passion passages from the Gospels.
The congregation will speak the parts of the Jewish people/crouds.
*We* say the parts that include “Crucify him!”
Despite, or perhaps because of the sins of the Church in regards to accusing the Jews, we definitely get the message during the Easter season that we are part of the reason Jesus was crucified.
James T. Savidge, Friday, August 22, 2003
Posted by: James T. Savidge at August 22, 2003 11:17 AMWe should be careful to make the distinction between passion plays being anti-Semitic in nature versus certain individuals reacting in an anti-Semitic way when viewing them.
To have an anti-Semitic reaction to the Passion would be the height of ignorance and arrogance. But for the death of the Son of God who came as a Jew, we would not have escaped God's wrath. What about the Roman soldiers, Pontius Pilate, Herod? They were our Gentile representatives, so to speak, and were just as complicit in the perpetration of Christ's death.
These worries all beg the question really. The thing is, Christ's death was/is a good thing. Through his death, we were saved from death. Joseph's words in Genesis ring true as to God's purpose in using evil for good, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives."(Genesis 50:20)
These are good points to make as this issue is raised and it surely presents a wonderful opportunity for the Gospel. I suspect that most opposition against this movie stems from the assertion of the reality of Christ's existence and that many will use the anti-Semitic complaint in an attempt to add legitimacy to their dislike of the movie and in order to mask their truer motives.
Posted by: Joseph at August 22, 2003 06:23 PMRegarding Mel Gibson's "The Passion Of The Christ" and the accusations of anti-Semitism: If it is faithful to the biblical report as I heard it is, then I seriously doubt that the movie is anti-Semitic.
To hate the Jews and blame them for killing Jesus is silly. To blame the death of Jesus on the Jews is a little like a murderer blaming the gun for killing his victim. The Romans are like the bullet: they actually carried out the execution. The Jews (note: a specific group of Jews during that period of time--not all Jews) are like the gun: they prompted the execution.
But WE--YOU AND I--are like the murderer: it was for OUR SINS that Jesus died. WE are the real reason He came to this earth as a man, submitting and humbling Himself to become one of His creatures, and gave up His life--VOLUNTARILY--for us all on the cross, to die a criminal's execution. This is something He planned from the beginning of time, and He foretold of the event many times in the Old Testament. So He wasn't just a hapless, helpless victim: He did this voluntarily, FOR US. He suffered in our place so we wouldn't have to.
Why did He do this? Because He LOVES us, and He wants us to live with Him forever in Paradise.
So now the choice is up to us: we can either accept His payment for our sin, or we can pay it ourselves.
Posted by: Jeff J. at January 28, 2004 11:39 AMAnything that is "Christian" has always been persecuted and will continue to be. Those in darkness hate the light. We need to pray for them, that whatever is blinding them will be removed, and there will no longer be a veil over their eyes.
Posted by: Peggy Kelly at January 28, 2004 08:41 PM"I will always remember, from a class I took in college on the persection of the church, how on Easter Day, a church in Europe would require Jews to stand at the cathedral door. As the congregation exited the church, each member would actually slap the Jew in the face, in retaliation for their involvement in the Savior's death. One Prince once wore an iron glove, and when he slapped the man, he broke his jaw."
Did George Galloway tell you that one? It had to have been him. Only he is capable of such rejections of reality.
No, it was in a history book. WHo is George Galloway? You're saying that those events never happened? I'll try to dig up the source.
Posted by: scott cunningham at February 19, 2004 01:21 PM