THE PASSION OF CHRIST

Holy Saturday Morning:

Here's an article I wrote that appeared during Lent 2004 on CATHOLIC EXCHANGE. It dealt with film: The PASSION of the Christ, but ultimately dealt with Christianity in general. It may be apropos today since Christianity has taken a few lumps lately from God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens and The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.

Speaking recently in Spain, at the University of Valencia, Dawkins said that Pope Benedict is "stupid, ignorant or dim."

Yet as Gerald Warner, columnist with The London Telegraph, wrote: "Not even Pope Benedict XVI's worst enemies have ever accused him of being stupid. The pontiff's awesome intellect and academic record have discouraged his most disparaging critics from pursuing that line of attack. Now, however, the man [Dawkins] possessing the mother of all intellects has expressed his contempt for the Pope's cerebral limitations."

At any rate, here's the article:
http://catholicexchange.com/2004/02/13/93695/

The Passion of The Christ: A Different View February 13th, 2004 by John W. McMullen

Seeing how everyone seems to have an opinion concerning Mel Gibson’s film The Passion of The Christ, even before it has been officially released, I thought I would add my drop of reflections to the accumulating ocean of verbiage.

Is This All a Fiction?

There have many critics — even some Catholic critics — of the film, but most have not experienced the film. I have not seen the film either, but my thoughts will deal with the criticisms themselves.

One of the major criticisms hurled against Gibson, as well as all Christians — indeed against the gospel itself — is that the gospel accounts do not portray a historical passion. In other words, these critics — even some theologians — question the veracity of the passion narratives themselves. The critics argue that the gospel texts were not written to portray history; therefore, the entire birth, ministry, passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus are called into question.

However, these same scholars will point out that Saul of Tarsus — the notable Pharisee and ardent opponent of the gospel message of Jesus who oversaw the martyrdom of Saint Stephen — wrote his epistles 30-plus years before the first gospel was penned. In reading St. Paul's texts, however, one reads of the passion, death, and resurrection of Christ. Therefore their own scholarship appears to betray their argument against the historicity of the gospel passion accounts.

In the early Church the memory of Jesus' suffering and death was the focus of our redemption. An entire third of the Gospel of Mark is devoted to the passion and death of Christ. The early Christian writings also portray the passion as an actual event. Even non-biblical writers at the time, such as
Flavius Josephus, chronicled the crucifixion and death of Jesus. The testimony of the early church community is clear. This Jesus was crucified — and rose again. How else does one explain the Christian sect's continued existence, born from the life and teaching and death of an obscure rabbi, condemned by Rome and put to death upon a cross? The story of Jesus' resurrection and its effect upon world culture is undeniable.

A Different Jesus?

It is in the death of Jesus that believers experience salvation since He took our sins upon Himself. If this belief is what is in question, then perhaps we are thinking of a different Jesus than the Jesus Christ of our historical faith — one of the critics' own construction.

To those critics, especially Catholic, who doubt the historicity of Jesus' salvific death upon the Cross, I really don't know what to say. Saint Paul himself railed against Jesus until Jesus appeared to Him on the road to Damascus. The rest is history.

Yet the same critics claim that the Gospels are tainted with the virus of anti-Semitism. If the Gibson film is anti-Semitic, then Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan were tainted with anti-German hatred and should have likewise been condemned.

When I was a younger man, and the movie Jesus of Nazareth aired every holy week, I didn't so much get the idea that the Jews were responsible for Jesus' death. If anything, I was concerned that viewers might draw a parallel between the religious leaders of the Sanhedrin, the Pharisees and Sadducees, and those of the Catholic hierarchy and clergy.

I am curious why films such as Dogma and Stigmata which challenged not only Catholicism, but the entire Christian faith, went noticeably unchallenged, while a film that depicts the heart of the Christian faith and the heart of the liturgical year — the paschal mystery and the holy triduum — has been so vilified?

If the gospel accounts do not truly represent an historical reality, namely, the passion, death, and resurrection of Christ Jesus, then, in the words of Saint Paul, we are to be pitied indeed.
All of Christendom Witnesses to This

What of the millions of Christians throughout history who have meditated upon the Via Crucis, the Via Dolorosa, the Way of the Cross? Were they duped into believing a myth? What of the millions of devout Catholics and others who have prayed the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary which follow Christ in His final hours of agony to procure for us our salvation? Was it all one great campaign of propaganda propagated by Constantine and his meddlesome mother, Helena? If we can no longer rely upon the truth of the Gospels, are we now to abandon them? And with them, Jesus Himself? I think not. And with me stands all of Christendom.

The witness of the martyrs and their blood is the seed of our faith. In the words of Gamaliel, a Pharisee and rabbi at the time of Jesus, when speaking about the entire Jesus movement: Be careful what you are about to do. for if this endeavor is or this activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself. But if it is of God, you will not be able to destroy it; in fact, you may even find yourself at war with God (see Acts 5: 33-39).

A Nazarene carpenter turned preacher who was crucified by the Roman government should have never been remembered. Yet He is the man most depicted in the history of art (and His mother is the most depicted woman), and His life had such an effect upon the world scene that time was literally divided in two. What is it about this man that requires of us to make a decision? In the words of many, either He is the Lord, a liar, or a lunatic. We each must decide who He is.

Jesus is as controversial today as He was when He walked the earth. “Come to Me, all you who are weary and find life burdensome. I will refresh you. Take My yoke upon your shoulders and learn from Me, for I am meek and humble of heart; and your souls will find rest, for My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Mt 11 28-30). With such a statement, then either Jesus was an egomaniac or God in the flesh. As for those who claim Jesus was merely a good moral teacher or only a social reformer, His own words betray Him. He did not come simply to teach. He came to save that which was lost. The very name Jesus in Hebrew is rendered “Yahweh Saves.” No wonder He is called Savior.

May His passion be ours as we both evangelize and wait in joyful hope for His coming again in
Glory.