Bishops Apologize to Mel Gibson Over The Passion

[Classical_Liberal]

The National Catholic Register


Bishops Apologize to Mel Gibson Over The Passion
by Andrew Walther

Mel Gibson’s upcoming film on the passion of Christ was designed to be dramatic. After all, a film spoken entirely in Latin and Aramaic, with few subtitles, needs a lot of action to be better understood.

June 19, 2003 / HOLLYWOOD - Even before the production crew finished packing up their equipment in Italy, where they filmed The Passion earlier this year, a drama of a different sort had begun.

A group of scholars reportedly affiliated with the Anti-Defamation League claimed to also be affiliated with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. After spiriting away an early version of the film’s script, they called it potentially anti-Semitic..............

http://www.catholic.net/us_catholic_news/template_article.phtml?article_id=511&channel_id=1

[Classical_Liberal]

1. Abraham Foxman and this group of Scholars

who clearly misrepresented themselves should apologize next, not to mentioon the editors of the "New Republic"an.

[Wwagsthedog]

2. Atta boy mel. Glad you sent some jobs to Italy.

n/t

[IndianaGreen]

3. This article is total spin that distorts the facts of the case

Like Father Fulco, Father Raymond emphasized “the death of Jesus was caused by sin, humanity’s sin.”

The death of Jesus was caused by the fact he was Jew, sentenced to death for sedition by the much-hated Roman Occupation. "Jesus King of the Jews," the "I.N.R.I." inscription that was nailed to the top of the cross, was a political charge. Jews had no "Jewish" king. Jews had a Hellinized and pro-Roman family putting a Jewish face to the Roman Occupation, think of it as their version of Chalabi.

Pilate was a blood thirsty military governor, whose cruelty became so legendary that the Roman Emperor had to remove him from office.

This article also ignores the fact that a non-righwinger Jewish observer (someone whose name was not David Horowitz, Michael Medvek, and Drudge) was finally able to attend a screening of the film and came out saying that he had serious problems with the incorrect historical portrayal of the Jews of Jesus's time.

Last Updated: Tuesday, 26 August, 2003, 11:35 GMT 12:35 UK
UK Jews voice Gibson film worries

Representatives of British Jews have said they want an "early" chance to see Mel Gibson's controversial film The Passion, about the killing of Christ, according to reports.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews has added its voice to growing concern about how Jews are portrayed in the film, and wants to decide for itself, the Daily Telegraph reported.

The film has already been criticised by Jewish figures in the United States for being "dangerous" and portraying Jews in a negative way.

One US rabbi has said the film had already fuelled dozens of hate letters and calls - although it will not be released for months.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews said they were afraid it could lead to anti-Semitic feeling "by portraying Jews in an unfavourable light, and perpetuating myths which have been refuted by various religious authorities in the past", the paper said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3181553.stm

Last Updated: Tuesday, 12 August, 2003, 08:58 GMT 09:58 UK
Jewish group attacks Gibson film

A leading Jewish group has condemned Mel Gibson's controversial film about Christ, saying it could fuel anti-Semitism.

The Anti-Defamation League is the latest group to speak out against The Passion, Gibson's depiction of Jesus' crucifixion and events leading up to it, saying it was "dangerous".

In a statement, the group said the film showed Jewish authorities and the Jewish mob as being responsible for the decision to crucify Jesus.

<snip>

The Anti-Defamation League said the movie had been seen by Rabbi Eugene Korn, its director of inter-faith affairs.

He said it contained "many dangerous teachings" that Christians and Jews had worked to counter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3143595.stm

Last Updated: Wednesday, 13 August, 2003, 07:14 GMT 08:14 UK
Gibson film 'fuels hate mail'

A US rabbi has said Mel Gibson's controversial film about the death of Christ is already fuelling anti-Semitism, months before it is released.

Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, said the center had already received dozens of hate letters and calls he said were prompted by advance screening of the Gibson-directed film The Passion.

Rabbi Hier's comments follow Tuesday's comments by Jewish group the Anti-Defamation League that Gibson's film was "dangerous" for portraying Jewish authorities and mobs as being behind the decision to crucify Jesus.

"Are there any manifestations of hate so far? The answer is an unequivocal yes," Rabbi Hier said. "We have had hate mail in the past ... but never in spurts like this."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3146565.stm

[Classical_Liberal]

4. So what

saying he died for humanities sin is clearly not antisemitic. To claim it is is defamation. You could make that claim of 90% of the churches in this country, including the liberal ones. "He is the Lamb of God, he takes away the sins of the word" If it is spin it is as old as christendom. The ADL should change its name to PDL.

I'll bet Gibson's film shows the Roman crucifying Jesus complete with the epitaph King of the Jews.

The Rabbi is a representive of ADL which is headed by right winger Abraham Foxman, who is good friends with Ralph Reed.

Known non-right winger Rabbi Lerner of Tikkun reviewed the film and saw nothing untoward.

[IndianaGreen]

5. To show that the Jewish people demanded that he be executed

is a distortion of history, and it is the sort of thing that even the Catholic Church under Pope John Paul II has worked very hard to moved away from.

Are you even aware that Gibson belongs to a radical movement that has condemned everything the Catholic Church has done since Vatican II, and that has their Masses in Latin?

[Classical_Liberal]

6. Bull

Pope JP II has never moved away from the notion Jesus died for our sins. Stating firmly that Jesus died for our sins rather than because of the Jews was the vatican II reform in question. You are the one that is spinning this story from whether his film is antisemitic to whether Christian Theology is accurate, which has nothing to do with squat. All religion believe in miracles. The old testiment is not historically accurate either. We evolved from simpler life form and I don't believe God wrote the 10 commandments. There is no atrcheological evidence of Moses, Joseph, David or Solomon. There is no evidence of an invasion of Canaan. I don't launch a Jihad over it.

I don't care whether they have thier masses in Latin. That is why most of the traditionalists left.

It is also completely absurd to say this film generated hate mail.

[IndianaGreen]

10. No, that is not what I am talking about

I am talking about whether the Gospels give an accurate portrayal of the role of the Jewish people in the arrest, trial, and execution of Jesus by the Roman occupation. There is plenty of historical evidence to support the view that the authors of the Gospels did not want to reveal the role of the Romans, nor the nature of the sedition that Jesus was charged with.

The Catholic Church has said that the Gospel accounts have been misinterpreted and have been used for the blood-libel of blaming Jews for Jesus's death.

If you were to step out of the box, and did a little bit of research on the historical period in which Jesus lived, you might even appreciate how delightfully subversive Jesus really was.

Allow me to illustrate. I am sure that are aware of this famous story from the Gospel of Mark, Chapter 12:

Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn't we?"

16 But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. "Why are you trying to trap me?" he asked. "Bring me a denarius and let me look at it." They brought the coin, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"

"Caesar's," they replied.

17 Then Jesus said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."

Now, if you knew nothing about the historical context, you would accept the conventional view that Jesus was merely saying that we must obey civil authorities and blah, blah, blah.

If you knew the historical context, you would immediately recognize Jesus's answer as a very clever putdown of the Roman occupation.

Why did Jesus ask about the portrait on the coin? That's like asking whose face is on the one dollar bill. Jesus knew full well that it was the portrait of Caesar. He wanted to set up the stage for the next brilliant comment.

Jesus was an observant Jew. As all observant Jews that had not been Hellenized and had collaborated with the Roman occupation, he believed that the only King that Israel had was God. God was the ruler of Israel. The kings of Israel were chosen by God to rule in His name.

When Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's, he was speaking as a Jew. Caesar gets nothing! Caesar is the pagan ruler of a foreign occupier, and as such he is owed nothing! God is everything!

Jesus's view was the view held by all Jewish patriots that opposed the Roman occupation, and it would become the rallying cry of the Zealots at Massada four decades later.

[camero]

12. And I thought the moral to that story

was that money is Caesar's invention (man's) and life was God's invention.

[IndianaGreen]

15. Nope!

It was a political statement.

People forget that Palestine was a police state comparable to the most brutal occupation imaginable. As in Iraq today, there were daily demonstrations of defiance against the Romans. The Romans were extremely harsh in how they dealt with Jewish terrorists (that term was not in the lexicon at the time, but it would have been used had it been).

Pilate was particularly known for staging provocations in order to lure the population to demonstrate, and getting the justification to use lethal force. This was one of the reasons he was sacked as Governor.

[Classical_Liberal]

17. It could be interpreted either way.

.

[Classical_Liberal]

14. I know the historical context

but Mel's story even if ahistorical should not be automatically deamed antisemitic. Switching the goal post to a lesson on "The Historical Jesus" won't change how silly that is.

[IndianaGreen]

19. Well, I am not alone in being concerned about Mel Gibson's film

Here are a couple of press releases:

Attention mods: Press releases from NGOs are not subjected to copyright provided that they receive full attribution and are not misquoted

August 12, 2003

WIESENTHAL CENTER URGES MEL GIBSON TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE PASSION;

Jewish Human Rights Group Receives Flurry of Phone Calls and Hate Mail Accusing Jews of Killing Jesus

Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean and founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center said that the controversy over Mel Gibson’s yet-to-be released film, The Passion, has generated an unprecedented wave of hate mail and calls to the Jewish human rights group over the Center’s endorsement of changes to the film proposed by Christian and Jewish scholars.

Included in one of the letters that the Wiesenthal Center received soon after the film was screened in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the writer said in part, “…What this tells me is that you do not want the real truth to be shown on a public setting that will remind millions of Americans that the jews were in fact totally responsible for the death of Jesus Christ.”

The letter continued, “I don’t endorse terrorism of any kind but the odds are that some of these enlightened folks will go for the throat of you jews and some of your offices of hate such as the ADL main office in New York, or maybe even the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Every time I hear of a suicide bomber killing jews in Israel I think to myself YES!”

“We fully understand that the crucifixion is central to the belief of more than a billion Christians and in no way do we want to impede Mr. Gibson’s right to make a film,” said Rabbi Hier. “However, we urge that he make some of the changes suggested to him by the distinguished group of Catholic and Jewish experts in the field to help ensure that the Jewish people are not yet again falsely singled out as being responsible for the death of Jesus,” Hier concluded.

The Center is also seeking a dialogue with leading Christian leaders to discuss the matter further.

http://www.wiesenthal.com/social/press/pr_item.cfm?ItemID=8058

Press Release

ADL Statement on Mel Gibson's 'The Passion'

New York, NY, June 24, 2003 ... Throughout history Christian dramatizations of the passion, i.e. the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, have fomented anti-Semitic attitudes and violence against the Jewish people. During the past forty years the Roman Catholic and most Protestant churches have issued pastoral and scholarly documents that interpret the death and resurrection of Jesus in their historical and theological contexts. These churches repudiate the teachings that gave rise to Christian accusations that Jews were "Christ killers." They make clear that correct Christian readings and applications of the New Testament must avoid provoking or reinforcing anti-Semitic attitudes and behavior.

In light of the numerous media accounts of Mel Gibson's upcoming film, "The Passion," the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) joined with the Secretariat of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in April, 2003 to assemble Jewish and Catholic scholars to evaluate an early version of the movie's screenplay (the names of the committee's nine scholars appear below). Both offices were in communication with representatives of ICON Productions, including Mel Gibson himself, who indicated their willingness to consider the scholars' suggestions.

ADL thanks the scholars for their work and ADL fully stands behind their report. The committee unanimously agreed that the screenplay reviewed was replete with objectionable elements that would promote anti-Semitism.

Based upon the scholars' analysis of the screenplay, ADL has serious concerns regarding the Mr. Gibson's "The Passion" and asks:

• Will the final version of The Passion continue to portray Jews as blood-thirsty, sadistic and money-hungry enemies of Jesus?

• Will it correct the unambiguous depiction of Jews as the ones responsible for the suffering and crucifixion of Jesus? Will it show the power of the rule of imperial Rome-including its frequent use of crucifixion-in first-century Palestine?

• Will the film reject exploiting New Testament passages selectively to weave a narrative that does injustice to the gospels, that oversimplifies history, and that is hostile to Jews and Judaism?

• Will it live up to its promise "to tell the truth?" To do so, the final product must rid itself of fictitious non-scriptural elements (e.g. the high priest's control of Pontius Pilate, the cross built in the Temple at the direction of Jewish religious officials, excessive violence, Jews physically abusing Jesus before the crucifixion, Jews paying "blood money" for the crucifixion), all of which form an inescapably negative picture of Jewish society and leadership.

• Will it portray Jews and the Temple as the locus of evil?

ADL also welcomes the statement issued on June 17 by the four Catholic academicians in the group that can be found here. This statement explains the complex issues regarding dramatizing the passion in terms of official Roman Catholic teaching, and provides sound guidance for evaluating any presentation of the crucifixion.

For filmmakers to do justice to the biblical accounts of the passion, they must complement their artistic vision with sound scholarship, which includes knowledge of how the passion accounts have been used historically to disparage and attack Jews and Judaism. Absent such scholarly and theological understanding, productions such as "The Passion" could likely falsify history and fuel the animus of those who hate Jews.

Specific recommendations to remedy the numerous anti-Semitic elements in the script have been conveyed to Mr. Gibson's ICON Productions. Mr. Gibson has said that his film is not anti-Semitic. We hope that is the case. ADL stands ready to advise ICON Productions constructively regarding The Passion to ensure that the final production is devoid of anti-Semitic slander.

(The Ad Hoc Scholars Committee consisted of Dr. Mary C. Boys, SNJM Skinner & McAlpin Professor of Practical Theology, Union Theological Seminary, New York; Dr. Michael J. Cook, Sol & Arlene Bronstein Professor of Judeo-Christian Studies, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati; Dr. Philip A. Cunningham, Executive Director, Adjunct Professor of Theology, Center for Christian-Jewish Learning at Boston College; Dr. Eugene J. Fisher. Associate Director, Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; Dr. Paula Fredriksen, Aurelio Professor of Scripture, Boston University;Rev. Dr. Lawrence E. Frizzell, Director, Institute of Judaeo-Christian Studies, Seton Hall University, East Orange, NJ; Rabbi Dr. Eugene Korn, Director, Office of Interfaith Affairs, Anti-Defamation League; Dr. Amy-Jill Levine, Carpenter Professor of New Testament Studies, Vanderbilt University, Nashville; Dr. John T. Pawlikowski, OSM Prof. of Social Ethics, Catholic-Jewish Studies Director, Catholic Theological Union, Chicago).

Related Materials:

Passion Plays in History and Theology

ADL Letter to Mel Gibson

The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/Mise_00/4275_00.asp

[Classical_Liberal]

20. Since nobody in the public has seen the film

explain how the film caused it? Rabbi Lerner of Tikkun saw no inferences that "the jews" killed Jesus. Nobody would have even heard of it were it not for the shit fit over a film they are trying to censor. The Simon Weisonthal Center also spread the McKinney shit smears, which is just like ADL. Neither has apologized for their participation in that artificially generated witch hunt. How do you know this isn't a witch hunt for faux antisemites as well?

[IndianaGreen]

22. Gibson has been screening the film to selected audiences

all of the rightwingers: Pat Buchanan, Matt Drudge, David Horowitz, Michael Medvek, as well as a large audience of Evangelicals gathered at a football stadium in Denver.

You would know this had you read the stories I have posted in support of my argument about Gibson. The fact that you have said nothing about this, tells me that you don't care about discussing this topic in a rational manner, and are more comfortable shouting slogans.

I am wasting broadband with you.

[Classical_Liberal]

33. I thought you said Rabbi Korn

was liberal.

[IndianaGreen]

36. Strawman argument

Pathetic, truly pathetic!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=292646#293346

[Classical_Liberal]

38. You bash a straw and accuse me?

on top of witch I am a waster of bandwidth which you prove by opening this thread in a new window.

[Classical_Liberal]

41. I asked you an honest question

I asked you an honest question since "The Simon Weisonthal Center also spread the McKinney shit smears, which is just like ADL and neither has apologized for their participation in that artificially generated witch hunt. How do you know this isn't a witch hunt for faux antisemites as well?"

Now instead of nitpicking over whether showing the film to screened audiences represents a release to the public, or whether I am a disrupter or a reader of newsmax(against the rules) why don't your answer it?

Maybe it concerns me to see people falsely accused of things. Maybe that is the reason Ann Coulter pisses me off. she accuses liberals of being traitors.

[Clete]

8. Yeah, but they're not considered heretics

and are recognized as true Catholics by the Vatican. If I am not using the right words, feel free to correct me, but I'm sure you get the gist of what I am saying.

[regnaD kciN]

26. Citation, please?

Known non-right winger Rabbi Lerner of Tikkun reviewed the film and saw nothing untoward.

I see no mention of the film on the Tikkun web site, nor does a google search of "michael lerner," "the passion," and "mel gibson" yield anything relevant. Could you please provide a reference for your claim?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

7. IndianaGreen you said, "Jews had no "Jewish" king." then who was..

Solomon and David?

[IndianaGreen]

9. This was under the Roman occupation, ElsewheresDaughter

Israel had become a Roman province, with Roman garrisons to keep the Jews in check.

Go to the library and check some books about the Zealots and that period leading to the rebellion of 70 CE.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

11. King Herod?..and i have read plenty on that period in history...be nice

[btsom]

13. So much for free speech, huh?

Free speech is all well and good... until somebody doesn't like what the other guy is saying.

Gibson stayed extremely true to the biblical account of Christ's last day. Period. And no, he doesn't belong to that group. His dad does. Get a clue, pal.

[Classical_Liberal]

16. Mel donated money

to build a traditionalist church in Miami. He admitted he is a Catholic Conservative. However VII wasn't just about the Jews. Most of those who opposed it were upset over vernacular mass, and nuns no longer wearing habits.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

18. Classical_Liberal exactly & the removal of the Tabernacle from the Altar

and placing it off to the side...this is still a big issue in many parishes of VII

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. I'm Not A Theologian

but if somebody didn't kill Jesus there would have been no resurrection and no Christianity....

It seemed to work out nicely for everybody....

[regnaD kciN]

21. Consider the source...

This article comes from the National Catholic Register. There exists a publication known as the National Catholic Reporter (emphasis mine), which is known as a prominent and even-handed conveyer of news in the Roman Catholic world. The National Catholic Register (once again, emphasis mine), on the other hand, is a right-wing traditionalist rag that can be counted on to take the most conservative, triumphalist tack possible on every issue it touches. In my opinion, they are banking on the similarities between the names of their publication and the Reporter to give themselves a credibility they don't deserve...almost as if the Freepers had decided to put out a newspaper titled the New Yark Tymes. ;-)

[Classical_Liberal]

23. This very article was also published in the reporter

Even if they conservative and triumphalist it doesn't make them antisemites.

[IndianaGreen]

24. You got a link?

You have posted a lot of stuff on this thread, but other than the original questionable source (when was the last time that bishops apologized for anything, i.e., Boston, sex crimes?) that started this thread, you have only posted unsubstantiated allegations, and your own POV, without any supporting evidence.

[Classical_Liberal]

28. How about CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Movies/08/11/film.the.passion.ap/

[IndianaGreen]

32. You don't even read the sources you quote!

This is from the CNN story (which was posted in DU at the time-check the archives):

On Friday it was shown in Houston to an audience that included for the first time an official from the Anti-Defamation League, which fights anti-Semitism. Audience members signed confidentiality agreements before attending the screening.

"We still have grave concerns," Rabbi Eugene Korn, director of the ADL's Office of Interfaith Affairs in New York, told the Houston Chronicle in Saturday's editions.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Movies/08/11/film.the.passion.ap/

You said in one of your posts on this thread that no one had seen the film yet. Yet here is the source that you quote saying clearly so.

This is what you said:

Classical_Liberal (1000+ posts) Sun Sep-07-03 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #19

20. Since nobody in the public has seen the film

Edited on Sun Sep-07-03 06:22 PM by Classical_Liberal

explain how the film caused it? Rabbi Lerner of Tikkun saw no inferences that "the jews" killed Jesus. Nobody would have even heard of it were it not for the shit fit over a film they are trying to censor. The Simon Weisonthal Center also spread the McKinney shit smears, which is just like ADL. Neither has apologized for their participation in that artificially generated witch hunt. How do you know this isn't a witch hunt for faux antisemites as well?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=292646#293197

You are just disrupting this thread and you have nothing constructive to offer. Give it up!

[Classical_Liberal]

34. I said no one in the public had seen the film

which is true.

[IndianaGreen]

37. You're the weakest link

Good bye!

[Classical_Liberal]

39. Not until you buy me a ticket to see the passion

. Since anyone can apparently see it. Matt Drudge and Co must have sent them hate mail.

[IndianaGreen]

25. BTW, Newsmax has picked up what appears to be a rightwing PR

effort to defend Gibson. Is Newsmax your source also?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/6/17/143235.shtml

And don't tell me that you also consider that rightwing wacko William Donohue. of the Catholic League, as a reliable source! You might as well quote Opus Dei as a source!

[Classical_Liberal]

29. No

but this isn't right vs left anyway. Abe Foxman is a fellow republican voter along with Donhoe.

[IndianaGreen]

27. Actor Gibson's olive branch to US bishops (July 2003)

Actor Gibson's olive branch to US bishops

Actor-director Mel Gibson paid a quick visit to the US bishops' headquarters building in Washington on Monday, a month after the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and Gibson's Icon Productions were involved in a confrontation over Gibson's new movie The Passion.

Gibson met with Monsignor William Fay, the Bishops' Conference general secretary.

"It was a surprise visit," said Fay, who had been notified of Gibson's arrival about an hour before it happened. "He wanted the visit to make clear that there was not" any animosity, he said of Gibson.

<snip>

Gibson was in Washington to oversee a screening of The Passion, which Gibson financed with his own money. The film, whose dialogue is entirely in Latin and Aramaic with no subtitles, has yet to find a distributor.

The same day as Gibson's visit, William Donohue of the conservative Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights criticised a scholarly essay in The New Republic which takes a dim view of Gibson's film.

http://www.cathnews.com/news/307/138.php

[Classical_Liberal]

30. Both my stories were printed after yours

. Maybe i mistook the reporter, but unless you can prove the facts of the story are wrong, your still being silly.

[regnaD kciN]

31. No, it doesn't make them anti-Semites...

...but it also doesn't make anything they print particularly reliable, IMHO. Putting credence in an article from their publication is about the same as believing any political story published in the Washington Times, if you ask me.

[Classical_Liberal]

35. The apology on the part of he Bishops was widely reported.

. Do a google search.

[lazarus]

42. Since this has turned

Into a flamewar pretty much between two people, I'm locking it.