Today’s entry provided by Martha Stokes, who has a really nice [brain]:
I really got a lot out of [The Passion of the Christ]. I sort of went into it with a lot of apprehension, not really knowing what to expect, and knowing my expectations were probably unrealistic. I was concerned that it would be so gratuitously gruesome I wouldn?t be able to handle it, or that it would assert an agenda that was un-Biblical, which would be upsetting. Instead, Gibson created a film that is an accurate, evangelical screening of the Gospels. It?s still just a movie, made by men, and it still has faults, but it also communicated a very important message in a way that only a visual media can.
One of my favorite running aspects in the film was the effect Jesus had on people he had direct personal contact with. From the disciples, to the Roman soldier whose ear he healed, to Pontius Pilate, to Mary Magdalene, to the man who helped carry the cross, each person who encounters Jesus individually is profoundly affected. When he looks a person in the eyes, it is immediately apparent that they are not the same. No matter how they felt about life or the person of Jesus of Nazareth before, their view is shifted profoundly be encountering him. So much so that the man who had to be forced to help carry the cross, who was desperate for the Romans to remember that he was innocent, carrying the cross of a condemned man, has to be beaten away from Jesus when they reach the hill. In the course of several hours? walk, this pathetic, condemned, humiliated, mutilated man has reached him, and made him an ally. Gibson has assembled a group of actors who interact so effectively on screen that the impact Jesus has on these people is unspoken yet undeniable.
Of course I have heard plenty about how the movie is too violent, or too hard on the Jews, or any number of other criticisms that distract from its real message. It?s a controversial film. It undeniably asserts Jesus? divinity. There is no objective presentation of the facts that leave you to make up your own mind. At least within the world of the film, where even an un-believing movie-goer will suspend their disbelief for a couple of hours, Jesus is the true Son of God. This film asserts the message of the cross, and the cross has always been a controversial topic. Paul wrote to the Corinthians that ?the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing.? No matter how well constructed the film is, or how hard believers shout about the truth, there will always be people who can?t comprehend the Message and will allow themselves to be distracted by violence and accusations of anti-Semitism. The real controversy isn?t whether or not Mel Gibson hates Jews, or whether or not he had a ?right? to make such an evangelical film. The real controversy has been going on since the early church, and it?s about people?s inability to understand the suffering and death of a divine being, who had the power to free himself all along. This movie hasn?t caused any new controversy; it?s only forced the existing controversy into the mainstream where it should have been all along.
No matter what else is said about the movie, there?s one thing I know for sure. More people talking about Jesus today then there were before this past Wednesday, and that is a very good thing.
~~
Martha Stokes
Meredith College class of ’04
