why?

[reformedfan]

Why does a Roman Catholic Propaganda movie instill such tenacious loyalty among evangelicals, to the shock of Mel, & the fury of RCs?

I just don't understand.

It's a movie, not the gospel, and for sure not the true gospel with its Mariology, transubstantiation, pushing the mass in Latin. Help me understand why this is such a great movie to run out & take unconverted heathens to.




It's an RC propaganda flick, no more, no less.

 

[Foundthelight]

Because all the RC things aside. It shows how the Lord, this innocent lamb, suffered for us. It shows the price he paid to redeem us, slaves to sin. Read Leviticus, then read Ruth. Try to get an understanding of sin sacrifice and the role of the Redeemer in God's plan.

 

[JVAC]

Why does a Roman Catholic Propaganda movie instill such tenacious loyalty among evangelicals, to the shock of Mel, & the fury of RCs?

I just don't understand.

It's a movie, not the gospel, and for sure not the true gospel with its Mariology, transubstantiation, pushing the mass in Latin. Help me understand why this is such a great movie to run out & take unconverted heathens to.




It's an RC propaganda flick, no more, no less.

I did not see it anywhere near Catholic Propaganda. I actually thought it was a little too liberal for me. Mary was not as sorrowful as I would think that she was. Nor did I see that much emphasis put on her, (had I made the movie, I might have put more emphasis on her, and less on Mary Magdalene).

I didn't really like the movie too much myself. It didn't feel right. Of course movies are never as good as the book!!!!

No where in it did I see transubstantiation, if anything, I would have said that it had a lack of Real Pressence in it, or it was severely downplayed. The short Lord's Supper clip was no where near enough to elude to transubstantiation.

I think that you need to take another look at the movie. I could see if you were complaining about the inaccuracies but to claim that it supported transubstantiation and mariology is baseless. After all, he tried basing his Gospel more on John, and Mary was pressent in that Gospel.

-James

 

[Suzannah]

Why does a Roman Catholic Propaganda movie instill such tenacious loyalty among evangelicals, to the shock of Mel, & the fury of RCs?

I just don't understand.

It's a movie, not the gospel, and for sure not the true gospel with its Mariology, transubstantiation, pushing the mass in Latin. Help me understand why this is such a great movie to run out & take unconverted heathens to.




It's an RC propaganda flick, no more, no less.

I've given a good deal of thought to this and I have no wish to offend anyone here, most of all, you reformedfan as the OP. First, I'd like to say that you are entitled to your opinion re: Mary, and so forth. I won't debate those issues here, of course, per the forum rules.
But here is my "take" on the situation in general and I hope you will take what I say as a "fellowship" post only.

1. I loved the film I thought it was a beautiful, thoughtful and considerate treatment of the subject from the point of view of a Catholic

2. My concern is this: that evangelical groups, which in a very general sense, are those who would be most happy to condemn Catholic beliefs, are now touting the Passion as a "witnessing" tool. I doubt very seriously that evangelicals as a whole can appreciate all the Catholic imagery and poetic license that this film contains. I also doubt their ability to interpret it. Although I'm a convert to Orthodoxy, I'm pretty well read in Catholic doctrine and viewpoint, and I had questions for CATHOLICS, after seeing the film. It never entered my mind to ask a Protestant, because it's a Catholic film. I despaired when I saw no Catholics outside the theatre, because I had a burning question. (It's now been answered! )

I am most concerned that these same evangelical groups are more than willing to at once
a) condemn Catholic belief
b)criticize it for not focusing on the Resurrection, along with criticism for the use of other Catholic imagery (notably, the now infamous "baby" carried by Satan)
c) proceed to use it, twisting it into their own interpretation for their own ends.

As an Orthodox person, I do not expect Mel to make Orthodox movies. I expect him to make a Catholic view of the Passion of Christ. I don't criticize him for not reflecting my own opinions. I don't intend to use his film, twisting it into my interpretation to convert others. I simply recommend the film as a beautiful and thoughtful Catholic film

I am tired of seeing evangelicals at the doors of the theatre. Those who should rightly be there are Catholics. I see that the evangelicals who condemn us Orthodox and Catholics for our beliefs are more than happy to use Mel's film to fill their pews. It's disturbing to me.

I hope that an evangelical superstar (Travis Tritt??? ) will decide to make an evangelical film about Jesus that will satisfy the evangelical audience. One can only pray that such a film would not be exploited by the Orthodox or the RC's.

 

[LuxPerpetua]

Okay, I'm not a die-hard Protestant so my opinion is more open than a lot of Protestants but here's my take:

I loved The Passion because it portrays an event that unites me with my brothers and sisters in Christ--not just Catholics but all Christians--since we are all unified in our belief in the overwhelming importance of Christ's sacrifice for our sins. In my opinion, this film does what the Eucharist should: it reminds of us our inherent sin and how Christ, God himself, has bought our freedom with a very heavy price. In the theater I was partaking of this Eucharist with Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc. I know that's a bit sappy, but that's how I feel. With so much division in the Church, it is nice to be able to all remember what we have in common--Christ's blood for our sins.

This film has also sparked a lot of interest in Christianity among non-Christians. This is always a good thing.

I didn't get this sense of heavy Catholicism that you spoke about in the film. The other Protestants that I've spoken with have felt the same way: we all thought this film was very well done and well received.

So, why did I like The Passion? I liked that for once in a very long time I could go to a public movie theater and not be accosted with sex, strong language, and anti-Christian bias. I liked that I could witness this reminder of Christ's passion with my brothas and sistas in Christ without having to be a part of their particular church. I liked that it has reminded me personally of what I'm worth to God. I liked that I can share my spiritual experience with other Christians and they understand, and that non-Christians are wondering what all the hub-bub is about. I'm not sure how any of that could be thought a BAD thing.

 

[LuxPerpetua]

I did not see it anywhere near Catholic Propaganda. I actually thought it was a little too liberal for me. Mary was not as sorrowful as I would think that she was. Nor did I see that much emphasis put on her, (had I made the movie, I might have put more emphasis on her, and less on Mary Magdalene).

I totally agree with this! I felt the same way and this was the only thing that struck me as odd.

~~~~
I also wanted to add that I don't care if non-Christians become Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox as a result of this film so long as they become part of one of the branches stemming from Christ's vine . . . but maybe that's just me.

 

[LongingForLight]

I did not see it anywhere near Catholic Propaganda. I actually thought it was a little too liberal for me. Mary was not as sorrowful as I would think that she was.

If this is too debate-y to be a fellowship post, my apologies. But since The Passion *is* just a movie, I hope everyone will see this as just my opinion.

It's kind of funny - I've talked to a number of Catholics who said that the only part of the movie where they cried was the part where Jesus falls and Mary runs to him (with the flashback to his childhood). I'm one of those people.

I think Mary's suffering was portrayed as being great, but nobley borne because she understood that this was God's Will, and she had already accepted God's Will 33 years before when the angel announced that she was to be the mother of Christ. I actually found it harder to look at the actress playing Mary-watching-her-son-suffer than to look directly at Jesus' suffering - perhaps because it is more comprehendable.

On the other hand, I don't think *any* movie could capture the *full* extent of the suffering of Mary, or that of Christ. She saw not only her son being crucified, but also the Son of God - she knew who he was. And had to trust that God's Will was being done. How can Hollywood capture *that*?

 

[LuxPerpetua]

Why does a Roman Catholic Propaganda movie instill such tenacious loyalty among evangelicals, to the shock of Mel, & the fury of RCs?

Are Catholics actually mad at me, a non-Catholic, for seeing this film and liking it??? Hmmm.


And, dear Reformed brother, why are you so adamant against Catholics when you are commanded to love your neighbor--especially your siblings in Christ's blood? Just a thought.

 

[kern]

I have no idea what the original poster is talking about when he says "fury among RCs". I havent' seen anything to suggest that RCs consider this a "catholic" movie that protestants shouldn't enjoy. It sounds like he's living in an imaginary world where every Catholic is anti-Protestant and every Protestant is anti-Catholic.

-Chris

 

[Reformationist]

LuxPerpetua, very well done in post #5. That was a great example of Christian charity.

God bless

 

[JVAC]

If this is too debate-y to be a fellowship post, my apologies. But since The Passion *is* just a movie, I hope everyone will see this as just my opinion.

It's kind of funny - I've talked to a number of Catholics who said that the only part of the movie where they cried was the part where Jesus falls and Mary runs to him (with the flashback to his childhood). I'm one of those people.

I think Mary's suffering was portrayed as being great, but nobley borne because she understood that this was God's Will, and she had already accepted God's Will 33 years before when the angel announced that she was to be the mother of Christ. I actually found it harder to look at the actress playing Mary-watching-her-son-suffer than to look directly at Jesus' suffering - perhaps because it is more comprehendable.

On the other hand, I don't think *any* movie could capture the *full* extent of the suffering of Mary, or that of Christ. She saw not only her son being crucified, but also the Son of God - she knew who he was. And had to trust that God's Will was being done. How can Hollywood capture *that*?

As far as I'm concerned Catholic Opinions are everybit as acceptable as Protestant Opinions.

Also, I agree that no film is going to come close, I am just dissapointed that everyone else got "moved" by this movie, but I didn't. It isn't that I don't like the movie, it just was real awkward for me. I am going to see it again, hopefully it will be different the next time.

The whole movie was pretty short, and it didn't focus on the things I thought it would, like the women comming Easter Morning with perfumes and such, or at least start with the Last Supper. I remember coming out the movie wondering how many people now think that Jesus invented the table? (wink)

I do love hearing all the different view people are taking from the movie though, it is very interesting.

-James

 

[LuxPerpetua]

Don't worry JVAC! My hubby, also a devout Christian, wasn't as moved by The Passion as I was either, but he doesn't get as emotionally caught up in films and literature as I do. Don't let your inability to get emotional while watching this film be a litmus test for your faith. Maybe if you see it again you could do a lot of prayer, Scripture reading, and Christian meditation on the passion before you go to see the film. Also reading about the imagery of The Passion film on OBOB might be a good idea to get you into the mindset. Hope this helps!

 

[ufonium2]

Honestly, how could this movie be seen as "pushing the mass in Latin"? Yes, some people in the movie spoke Latin, namely the Romans. That's the language Roman soldiers and officials would have spoken, and likely the language Jews would have spoken when conversing with Romans. It was a multi-lingual society, of which one of the languages was Latin. So, it was a multi-lingual movie, with some characters speaking Latin.

I saw the movie, I'm not Catholic, and I saw nothing that smacked of "Catholic Propaganda." Jesus had a mother. She was there when He was crucified. That's in the Bible. Jesus also said "This is my body," not "This symbolically represents my body" so if you saw that as transubstatiation (more accurately, Real Presence) propaganda, maybe you should reconsider why you disbelieve the Real Presence. I have no interest in arguing transubstantion here (or anywhere else) but it seems to me that you are offended by things spoken by Jesus in the Bible, and that's troubling.

 

[Acceptance]

Don't worry JVAC! My hubby, also a devout Christian, wasn't as moved by The Passion as I was either, but he doesn't get as emotionally caught up in films and literature as I do. Don't let your inability to get emotional while watching this film be a litmus test for your faith.

Great post, my boyfriend wasn't 'moved' by it either (I on the other hand... )

I just want to say it again:
Don't let your inability to get emotional while watching this film be a litmus test for your faith

Very well said!

 

[Marissa]

I don't understand why anyone, RC or otherwise, would suggest this is a witnessing tool. I don't know a single atheist that took something out of this movie. It was made by a christian for christians. There is no message about the Lords love, about why he had to die for us and where to go from there.

It's kind of funny - I've talked to a number of Catholics who said that the only part of the movie where they cried was the part where Jesus falls and Mary runs to him (with the flashback to his childhood). I'm one of those people.

That's interesting. I'm not catholic by any means (I grew up on "Catholics aren't going to heaven" doctrine), but this movie had the same effect on me. All the way through I was wondering when we were going to get to the crying bit (because everyone has said they cried from the start) and the only time I really felt my heart breaking was the scenes with Mary.

Her presence is biblical and her reaction as a mother is what we'd all expect so I can't link that to encouraging Mariology. I have no desire to attend a catholic church, I have no desire to pray through (or to) Mary, and I don't think of Mary with a higher opinion than I did the day before I saw the movie. I simply comprehend (as much as any childless woman can) what it must have been like for her to watch her son go through such a death. It would have been heartbreaking. Her reaction was what made it "real" for me and bought home exactly what Jesus was doing for me, more than the whippings and the crucification scenes.

I don't really see this as a Roman Catholic movie. I see it as a Christian movie. I honestly believe that Mel Gibson was moved by the holy spirit to make this film, and it's fit to be watched as it is by all christians whatever their denomination.

 

[Acceptance]

Honestly, how could this movie be seen as "pushing the mass in Latin"? Yes, some people in the movie spoke Latin, namely the Romans. That's the language Roman soldiers and officials would have spoken, and likely the language Jews would have spoken when conversing with Romans. It was a multi-lingual society, of which one of the languages was Latin. So, it was a multi-lingual movie, with some characters speaking Latin.

As a side note/question...wasn't the movie spoken in Aramaic?

 

[Marissa]

Both Aramaic and Latin were used.

 

[Acceptance]

Interesting...I didn't know that...thanks for the info

 

[ethereal hope]

Before this movie was released, almost everything I had read about Mel Gibson indicated strongly that he was not a Roman Catholic, but rather 'catholic'. His family broke with the RCC 40 years ago (Vatican 2), and just a year ago Mel said, "[Vatican II] corrupted the institution of the church. Look at the main fruits: dwindling numbers and pedophilia." (Time, January 27, 2003)

I think what makes this movie HUGE is that it's a religious movie without apologies, and even without big stars, and yet is a HUGE record-setting box-office hit. Religious movies just don't do well when competing with the regular fare, so just that people bought that many tickets shows that there IS an interest for spiritually-inclined movies.

Of course, my BIGGEST hope is that the world has an interest in Jesus first and foremost. His Passion was the biggest event in world history, as our human calendar attests.

 

[bigsierra]

Why does a Roman Catholic Propaganda movie instill such tenacious loyalty among evangelicals, to the shock of Mel, & the fury of RCs?

I just don't understand.

It's a movie, not the gospel, and for sure not the true gospel with its Mariology, transubstantiation, pushing the mass in Latin. Help me understand why this is such a great movie to run out & take unconverted heathens to.




It's an RC propaganda flick, no more, no less.

What is unevangelical about studying Mary
Mariology is the study of Mary
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mariology&r=67

transubstantiation - Does difference of belief about the mechanics of the Lords table make you an enemy - non brother to someone who believes differently

mass in Latin - Do services in foreign languages scare you for any other reason than that many RCC services used to use Latin in Mass?
My boss went to a parochial school and learned Latin. If you knew latin, would it still be so scary?

I don't understand your beef
What I don't understand even more is why you would think this movie pushed those things.

Do Protestant movies push gay female pastors, just because some denominations find that acceptable?