    |
|
||
|
||
|
|
|
Can
this tale be presented in a valid way? Mel Gibson's soon-to-be-released movie, The Passion of the Christ, is best understood in the tradition of the Passion Play -- dramatic interpretations of Jesus's death that have long been a source of distress to the Jewish community. By portraying Jews as the evil, bloodthirsty killers of Jesus -- and thus enemies of God and all Christians -- Passion Plays have contributed to the presence of anti-Semitism in Western culture. Indeed, Adolf Hitler praised the Passion Play at Oberammergau in Bavaria, which dates to 1633, saying that it was "vital that it be continued ... for never has the menace of Jewry been so convincingly portrayed as in this presentation of what happened in the times of the Romans." In recent years, Christians who acknowledge the historic role of churches in fomenting anti-Semitism have turned a critical eye to the way that Jews and Judaism are depicted in liturgical and educational material. Christian sensitivity in these areas has fostered significant changes in traditional doctrine and practice on the part of both Roman Catholics and Protestants, such as those stemming from the Second Vatican Council's landmark 1965 document Nostra Aetate and the 1994 Declaration of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to the Jewish Community. Indeed, the producers of the Oberammergau Passion Play, working with Jewish advisers, unveiled a revised version several years ago. The Gospel accounts themselves portray Jews in negative terms (a subject on which there is a lengthy bibliography), so it is worth considering whether one can present a play or movie that is faithful to the sacred Scriptures and message of Christianity without denigrating Jews and Judaism. Is the role of the Jews as portrayed in the New Testament central to the foundational Christian message that Christ suffered and died to atone for the sins of humanity? The challenge to anyone staging the Passion today is how to treat the anti-Jewish aspects of the biblical texts. Do they constitute a major theme? Are they exaggerated or embellished to make them even more prominent and negative? In this regard, the Gibson film is problematic. Gospel accounts are used selectively and are embellished and exaggerated. For example, Matthew 27:24-25 states: "So when Pilate saw that he could do nothing, but rather that a riot was beginning, he took some water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying 'I am innocent of this man's blood; see to it yourselves.' "Then the people as a whole answered, 'His blood be on us and on our children!'" In the history of Christian anti-Semitism, this passage serves as a biblical warrant for holding all Jews at all times responsible for the death of Jesus. Augustine, John Chrysostom, Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther all used it in this way. Yet this particular material occurs only in Matthew. It is not found in Mark, Luke or John and is thus not essential in depicting Jesus' death. The decision to include it in a rough cut of the movie that I viewed Jan. 21 was a conscious choice by Gibson. It has since been announced that this material has been removed from the version to be released in theaters. Whether it will be included on a director's-cut DVD remains to be seen. The film contains numerous scenes that are not found in the New Testament. According to all four Gospels, after Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane, he is taken by (Jewish) guards to the high priest. In the movie, the guards escorting Jesus brutally beat him and, at one point, throw him over a bridge. The only reason he does not crash onto the earth below is that his chains excruciatingly wrench him to a halt inches from the ground. This episode appears nowhere in the New Testament. It is drawn from the visions of a 19th-century nun. Not one of the Gospels provides any information about what, if anything, occurs on the way from Gethsemane to the high priest. It is conceivable that those who arrested Jesus might have abused him, but it is not the only option. It is equally plausible that those guards were sympathetic, even reluctant, to carry out their duty and escorted Jesus to the high priest gently and with dignity. The point is that the Gospels do not report this. It has been added by the filmmakers. Although it certainly heightens the suffering of Jesus, which probably is why Gibson added it, it is at the same time an unnecessary embellishment and exaggeration of Jewish mistreatment of Jesus. These are but two examples of many. They highlight the central problems of any attempt to dramatize the Passion. First, most viewers -- even those who are familiar with the Gospels -- will find it difficult to discern which biblical texts have been retained and which have been omitted. There probably will be even greater confusion about what is biblical and what has been added by the filmmaker, either from his own imagination or from other sources than Scripture. This latter point is particularly damaging to Gibson's claim to having made a historically accurate film. Second, by not giving context for the event and the circumstances under which the Gospels were written, the film creates the real danger that the legacy of Christian anti-Jewish prejudice will be passed on to another generation. Christians need to understand and acknowledge that this story, which lies at the heart of their faith, has contributed to centuries of pain for Jews. Recognizing that fact need not diminish the power and meaning of the suffering of Jesus for Christians. Indeed, separating the Passion from its anti-Jewish history is a way of modeling the love for humanity that both Judaism and Christianity affirm. Conversely, Jews need to understand why Christians find the Passion to be a moving and religiously significant story. The release of The Passion
of the Christ occasions a "teachable moment." We are fortunate to live
in an era in which Jews and Christians agree about the importance of fostering
mutual respect and understanding. There are rich resources available to
both scholar and layperson that deal directly with these complex historical
and theological issues. We should make use of these in fostering interfaith
dialogue. The excitement engendered by this film's release invites Jews
and Christians to address these matters frankly from the pulpit, in the
classroom and in meetings of clergy associations. Christians, especially,
must honestly confront the history of anti-Judaism that is tied to the
Passion. We should not miss this opportunity.
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
