|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: A Good Friday Flick
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
I will observe Good Friday this year in a university residential college. The students (aged 17-25) do not attend services in our chapel.
I would like to show a movie of some sort around the Easter narratives on the Friday in the common room and I'm wondering if anyone had any suggestions that might be appropriate.
The Mel Gibson film from some years ago is along the lines I'm thinking but don't want to show that one - too violent and has dubious theology.
Or if not fiction, perhaps a good documentary?
Any suggestions?
TIA
[ 30. March 2014, 11:03: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
Mel Gibson's film, The Passion of the Christ, is Torture-Pornography, not fit to be mentioned in the same sentence or paragraph with the words, "Good Friday."
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
Don't suppose they'd be up for Wagner's Parsifal? No, didn't think so ...
How about Pasolini's The Gospel According to St Matthew? Extraordinary movie.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I thought The Day Jesus died by Bettany Hughes was good, but I don't know whether it's available anywhere at the moment. I suspect not.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
How about Pasolini's The Gospel According to St Matthew? Extraordinary movie.
That was precisely what I was going to suggest. The Mission could be another good option, or Romero or Francesco.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
FCB
Hillbilly Thomist
# 1495
|
Posted
A few years ago I went and saw Of Gods and Men on Good Friday. While I won't say that it outshone the Passion liturgy, it came pretty damn close.
--------------------
Agent of the Inquisition since 1982.
Posts: 2928 | From: that city in "The Wire" | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ceremoniar
Shipmate
# 13596
|
Posted
Wow, seeing the harsh realities of Our Lord's Passion apparently bothers some. He did suffer a great deal for us, you know... ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
Posts: 1240 | From: U.S. | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by FCB:
A few years ago I went and saw Of Gods and Men on Good Friday. While I won't say that it outshone the Passion liturgy, it came pretty damn close.
'Of Gods and Men' is a wonderful film, which I agree might well suit your purposes, Evensong.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Thanks all for your replies. Some great suggestions.
Enoch. I like the look of your suggestion alot but it no longer seems to be available on iplayer nor can I find it anywhere on some sort of DVD. ![[Frown]](frown.gif) Can you think of any other way the BBC might make it available??
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
Mel Gibson's film, The Passion of the Christ, is Torture-Pornography, not fit to be mentioned in the same sentence or paragraph with the words, "Good Friday."
Torture pornography. Brilliant terminology! Seems to be an odd facet of society - delight in suffering.
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
Wow, seeing the harsh realities of Our Lord's Passion apparently bothers some. He did suffer a great deal for us, you know...
Well yes it does bother some. As it should. Why doesn't it bother you? Why post an angel icon when it was evil that put Christ on the cross?
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ceremoniar
Shipmate
# 13596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
Wow, seeing the harsh realities of Our Lord's Passion apparently bothers some. He did suffer a great deal for us, you know...
Well yes it does bother some. As it should. Why doesn't it bother you? Why post an angel icon when it was evil that put Christ on the cross?
Because scripture tells us that we should glory in the Cross of Our Lord (Gal 6:14), by which our redemption was gained. Naturally, the human side of us does not ever want to see pain and suffering, but we need to see Our Lord's pain and suffering for the simple fact that every one of us helped to cause it by our sins. We are consoled by His Resurrection at the same time, but never should we ever shy away from reminders of His suffering for us. It helps to keep our sinfulness at the front of our mind because He died for that.
Posts: 1240 | From: U.S. | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
... Enoch. I like the look of your suggestion alot but it no longer seems to be available on iplayer nor can I find it anywhere on some sort of DVD. Can you think of any other way the BBC might make it available?? ...
I don't unfortunately. Google reveals that Bettany herself has a website. There's a contact postal address but not an eddress. I suspect that unless you happen to encounter someone who has a personally recorded video tape or DVD of it, it's the equivalent of out of print at the moment. A pity.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Go with End of Days.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
Wow, seeing the harsh realities of Our Lord's Passion apparently bothers some. He did suffer a great deal for us, you know...
Well yes it does bother some. As it should. Why doesn't it bother you? Why post an angel icon when it was evil that put Christ on the cross?
Because scripture tells us that we should glory in the Cross of Our Lord (Gal 6:14), by which our redemption was gained. Naturally, the human side of us does not ever want to see pain and suffering, but we need to see Our Lord's pain and suffering for the simple fact that every one of us helped to cause it by our sins. We are consoled by His Resurrection at the same time, but never should we ever shy away from reminders of His suffering for us. It helps to keep our sinfulness at the front of our mind because He died for that.
This is seeming kind of "Purgatorial" to me ... but I'm not a Host, so had better say no more....
Anyway, since it's here right now:
There is a difference between glorying in the Cross (Gal 6:14) and the kind of 'snuff' voyeurism that "The Passion of the Christ" seems to invite. Scripture doesn't go into a great deal of detail about the physical elements of Christ's suffering. I think we should take our cue from that fact and should be wary of elaborating on those details, especially to the gruesome degree exemplified by Gibson's film. Gibson's film, in this respect, represents a radical departure from the witness of Scripture, as well as the Church's Tradition before the High Middle Ages in the West, when meditation on the gory details of the Passion became widespread -- just contrast the restrained way Eastern icons portray the Passion: Here's AN EXAMPLE.
This really is a serious theological issue for me. I think a strong emphasis on Jesus' physical suffering (for example, 45 minutes of flogging) misses the point of the Passion. Lots of human beings have suffered far worse physical mistreatment than Jesus did! But no other human being ever experienced the spiritual agony of bearing the sins of the entire human race. That act of sin-bearing is what should be our focus -- not a bunch of Romans punching, kicking, and whipping a Jewish upstart.
I write all of this without mentioning Gibson's vile anti-semitism.... Well, okay, I just mentioned it! ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
I'm no specialist, but ISTM that Gibson's film was made with a populist, mystical, tragic Catholic sensibility in mind, and lacks the more intellectual approach to Christianity that people here would prefer. But it could be a good choice for a church discussion group. The theological shortcomings of the film would give the group lots to talk about, so long as they could stomach the violence.
Many years ago I went to see 'Jesus of Montreal'. I found it a good film. I can't remember too much about it now, but it has a modern setting and the characters are quite youthful, so the students might relate to that, while also feeling flattered at being asked to watch an art house film! I doubt that the theology is entirely orthodox, but its contemporary, fairly liberal message would appeal to some.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
I found Gibson's The Passion of the Christ to be moving and insightful.
[ETA: I also know of someone who was so upset by it that she ended up in the hospital.]
[ 02. April 2014, 18:06: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Rats, I keep thinking I've read the whole thread, and now I see I haven't...
Once again, TRYING to read the whole thread.
[ 02. April 2014, 18:10: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
I found Gibson's The Passion of the Christ to be moving and insightful.
[ETA: I also know of someone who was so upset by it that she ended up in the hospital.]
I found it a moving film as well, and even asked to receive a copy on DVD.
However, I accept the charge that the torture scenes in it are unrealistic and overdone; if someone had really been scourged to that extent they'd hardly be able to stand up, let alone carry a heavy piece of wood! But IMO the film is hardly aiming at realism, despite the use of an ancient language....
Anyway, I think there are a number of recent films that posit a modern-day Jesus character coming down to urban, deprived Britain. They might be good for stimulating a discussion on the social gospel, and on difficulties the church has in being relevant in these touch environments. But if the students aren't from that kind of background they might find it difficult to relate to that approach.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Roselyn
Shipmate
# 17859
|
Posted
Mel Gibson forgot that thousands of people were crucified. millions of hammer blows were made!!
Posts: 98 | From: gold coast gld australia | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
My wife and I usually watch Jesus Christ, Superstar on Good Friday. It always gets me when the apostles go from singing "Always thought that I'd an apostle" confidently to singing the same words with a note of despair after Jesus confronts them with their failure to remain faithful.
I like Godspell too. "When wilt thou save thy people?" is my favorite song for Good Friday.
[ 02. April 2014, 19:55: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I'm no specialist, but ISTM that Gibson's film was made with a populist, mystical, tragic Catholic sensibility in mind, and lacks the more intellectual approach to Christianity that people here would prefer.
The comment about "the more intellectual approach to Christianity" probably isn't directed at my comments on Gibson's film, but at the other alternative film ideas. But....
I'm not advocating a more "intellectual" approach to the Passion. I'm advocating one that I see as both more scriptural and more historically orthodox. To be a bit "over-the-top": Jesus as Jewish hamburger is heretical.
Frankly, the "populist, mystical, tragic Catholic sensibility" of Gibson's film really is a Late Medieval innovation (tied, not coincidentally, to the rise in violent anti-Judaism in the same period).
I was disheartened, when the film first came out, that so many American evangelicals embraced it -- precisely because the film represents such a deviation from the way Protestants have traditionally approached the Passion. American evangelicalism really is losing its Reformation moorings.
--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ceremoniar
Shipmate
# 13596
|
Posted
Every "bible flick" ever made is the product of its director's vision. As such, every film (both vesrions of King of Kings, Greatest Story Ever Told, Jesus of Nazareth, etc.) all include details that go beyond those listed in scripture, which are admittedly relatively few in number. Otherwise, why make it? We already know the story and how it turns out. Obviously, Gibson being a Catholic, this is his vision, which was heavily influenced by the writings of mystics, such as
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich.
I don't recall a similar dissection, either in here, or on the media in general, of other Christ films. I don't recall people challenging every detail of The Greatest Story Ever Told, even though there were plenty of elements that went beyond the gospel accounts (not to mention odd celebrity cameos, such as John Wayne as the centurion who said, "Truly this Man was the Son of God"). Yet, for some reason, people seem to claim such "lack of scriptural basis" as a reason for rejecting The Passion. It seems that the knowledge that the film was a Catholic version causes greater criticism than usual, apparently because Catholic sources are utilized. Don't mean to make this a purgatorial matter, but some of that seems to be a Catholic-Protestant thing.
Prior to the film's release, some may recall that there was great outcry that the film was going to be anti-Semitic. This rumor circulated for months, though no specifics were ever offered as to exactly what comprised the anti-Semitic elements. Apparently if the film indicated that the chief priests and pharisees were Jewish, or that the Jews cried out, "Crucify Him!" then that was being anti-Semitic. Yet once the film came out, those accusations disappeared overnight and were replaced by charges of excessive gore. That seemed to carry the day more effectively, especially among Protestants, who historically have shied away from graphic depictions of the passion. This amazes me, I will admit, and I don't get it.
Despite being raised as an Anglican (becoming RC as a college freshman), I never understood how Christians of any stripe might wince at details of the Passion of Our Lord. Someone here mentioned the Eastern churches, how their icons were not so graphic as medieval Catholic depictions. This is true, of course, but neither have I seen Easterners grimace at Catholic Passion art, prayer books, meditations, etc. Protestants, yes. Some claim that the flogging scene was excessive. (45 minutes, did somene claim? It was not that long.) It did show forty lashes, which while not specifically enumerated in the gospels, was a very common number. As for how ambulatory any of us would be after forty lashes in the ancient world, I am not competent to say. I imagine that some of us could still walk, while others could not.
Our Lord had nails hammered into His hands and feet. He was scourged. He was slapped around. He carried His Cross. He fell and had to be helped along. He was dehydrated. Our sins, and the sins of all, past, present and future, caused this to happen. When one watches this film, it is not to delight in random Hollywood violence, as is the case with so many films, but to be reminded of what Jesus Christ the God-made-Man, endured for our salvation. Of course some martyrs were tortured even more extensively, but their suffering and death would have been meaningless without Our Lord's. Neither did their martyrdom redeem us. His did. The weight of His Cross and Passion was caused by us all--and now we don't want to be reminded of this reality even, say, once a year?
Posts: 1240 | From: U.S. | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:
I'm not advocating a more "intellectual" approach to the Passion. I'm advocating one that I see as both more scriptural and more historically orthodox. To be a bit "over-the-top": Jesus as Jewish hamburger is heretical.
Frankly, the "populist, mystical, tragic Catholic sensibility" of Gibson's film really is a Late Medieval innovation (tied, not coincidentally, to the rise in violent anti-Judaism in the same period).
I was disheartened, when the film first came out, that so many American evangelicals embraced it -- precisely because the film represents such a deviation from the way Protestants have traditionally approached the Passion. American evangelicalism really is losing its Reformation moorings.
Most religious blockbusters don't claim to be 'scriptural and historically orthodox, do they? They want to entertain ordinary folk rather than impress theologically trained people.
And from what I've read, American evangelicalism of the revivalist type has moved quite far from Reformed Protestantism. As I've said on another thread, there are some commentators who see a number of similarities between American evangelicalism and a certain sort of Catholicism. I suppose the evangelical response to this film is proof of that.
Anyway, I agree that Gibson's film probably isn't the best choice for this group of young people.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Most religious blockbusters don't claim to be 'scriptural and historically orthodox, do they? They want to entertain ordinary folk rather than impress theologically trained people.
True enough! But the problem is that people who are not "theologically trained" often get a lot of their "theological" education from these things.
In any case, Gibson actually asserted that his film was "scripturally and theologically orthodox" (although not in those exact words) -- which makes it fair game for criticism precisely because it isn't "scripturally and theologically orthodox," at least in my rarely very humble opinion.
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533
|
Posted
What Ceremoniar said. Everything.
quote:
Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:
In any case, Gibson actually asserted that his film was "scripturally and theologically orthodox" (although not in those exact words) -- which makes it fair game for criticism precisely because it isn't "scripturally and theologically orthodox," at least in my rarely very humble opinion.
Gibson is a Catholic Traditionalist. From that point of view the film was certainly orthodox. From that point of view certain Protestant beliefs would be considered unorthodox. It's worth remembering his beliefs fall into the mainstream of historic Christianity and are largely that of the largest body of Christians today so to criticize his orthodoxy from an evangelical Protestant point of view is a little like a Chicagoan criticizing the pizza in Naples.
That said, if The Passion of the Christ is too challenging for the sensibilities of Evensong's students (which is understandable) I would suggest renting or borrowing Zeffirelli's Jesus of Nazareth and showing the scenes dealing with Holy Week. I like both films but Jesus of Nazareth is more restrained compared to The Passion.
My other suggestion would be to show The Miracle Maker which, despite being made with stop-motion animation, is surprisingly good.
--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"
Posts: 1988 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Go with End of Days.
The Arnie film?
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Dubious Thomas
I must say, I'm a little cynical about the importance of theological orthodoxy, since few churches take the dissemination of theological ideas among the laity seriously. It's not Gibson's job to teach people what they haven't learnt in their own churches or in their homes!
Where teaching is available films can be a useful tool, but I wouldn't expect any film to satisfy the theological criteria of a particular denomination. Indeed, since the likelihood of being entirely satisfied on that score is relatively small, it's probably best to choose a film based on other criteria: artistic merit, popular appeal, cultural appropriateness, target age group, etc. After all, as I said, even dodgy theology can be used as a teaching point. But a boring/violent/incomprehensible film will still be all of those things regardless of its theology!
[ 02. April 2014, 23:56: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:
Gibson is a Catholic Traditionalist. From that point of view the film was certainly orthodox.
You'll get no argument from me about this. But, as I've already pointed out, the Catholicism of "Catholic Traditionalists" like Gibson is itself a historical innovation. The High Middle Ages really weren't that long ago relative to the centuries that went before.
quote:
It's worth remembering his beliefs fall into the mainstream of historic Christianity....
Including, alas, the anti-semitism.
quote:
...and are largely that of the largest body of Christians today so to criticize his orthodoxy from an evangelical Protestant point of view is a little like a Chicagoan criticizing the pizza in Naples.
Size matters? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I pointed out above that my criticisms were based on Scripture and Tradition. I understand that present-day Roman Catholics like to think that they have a "lock" on authentic Tradition, but to many of us invincibly ignorant non-RCs, it is pretty clear that Roman Catholicism went "off the tracks" in the Late Middle Ages. Insofar as Gibson's film does represent standard RC views of the Passion, it exemplifies how non-Traditional those views are. Again, I'll suggest, compare Gibson's film with Eastern icons of the Passion and you'll see that the ancient Tradition is to be very restrained in portraying the physical elements of Christ's suffering. You can also look at this image, which is probably the oldest extant representation of the Crucifixion.
My criticism of Roman Catholicism would be best compared to a a critique of Chicago pizza for deviating from the Neapolitan original. RCs have the crust wrong. The sauce is too thick. The cheese is wrong.
In any event, I wasn't criticizing Gibson's film from the point of view of Protestant evangelicalism. I was criticizing Protestant evangelicalism for failing to be either Protestant enough or evangelical enough in relation to the film, which is so alien to classic Protestantism.
....
Oh, and, I love the Zeffirelli film! Despite his being Roman Catholic, the film conforms well to the scriptural and traditional criteria I consider important. It's a classic icon in film form. It's a shame that it has been eclipsed by Gibson's gorefest.
--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
Wow, seeing the harsh realities of Our Lord's Passion apparently bothers some. He did suffer a great deal for us, you know...
Well yes it does bother some. As it should. Why doesn't it bother you? Why post an angel icon when it was evil that put Christ on the cross?
Because scripture tells us that we should glory in the Cross of Our Lord (Gal 6:14), by which our redemption was gained. Naturally, the human side of us does not ever want to see pain and suffering, but we need to see Our Lord's pain and suffering for the simple fact that every one of us helped to cause it by our sins. We are consoled by His Resurrection at the same time, but never should we ever shy away from reminders of His suffering for us. It helps to keep our sinfulness at the front of our mind because He died for that.
Precisely. Good Friday reminds us of our sin that crucified our Lord. That is not an occasion for Glory. That is an occasion for repentance.
It's the resurrection that is the occasion for Glory.
Without the resurrection, there is no Glory.
Naturally, how one sees the cross all boils down to one's particular atonement theory. I would not show a film that hinted at penal substitution.
[ 03. April 2014, 00:08: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Go with End of Days.
The Arnie film?
Yep
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Dubious Thomas
I must say, I'm a little cynical about the importance of theological orthodoxy, since few churches take the dissemination of theological ideas among the laity seriously. It's not Gibson's job to teach people what they haven't learnt in their own churches or in their homes!
Sorry -- it feels to me like we're talking past one another somehow.
On the "dissemination of theological ideas ideas among the laity," I agree with you that few churches do a good job of this. All churches should strive to do better. But I am not clear on what this has to do with my criticism of the Gibson film.
As for it not being "Gibson's job to teach people what they haven't learnt in their own churches or in their homes," I agree. But let's be clear: Gibson assigned himself that job! He wanted to convey to people his theological ideas and clearly wanted people to embrace them. Am I not allowed to be troubled by that fact, given how strongly I disagree with Gibson's ideas? I don't want people to form their view of the Passion from this film, for reasons I have already set out. I don't want pastors to have to "un-teach" what people get from this vile film.
quote:
Where teaching is available films can be a useful tool, but I wouldn't expect any film to satisfy the theological criteria of a particular denomination.
Neither would I. But I'm not clear what this has to do with my theological critique of the film, or my criticisms of religious communities for tossing their traditional views out the window in order to embrace Gibson's film.
If evangelical leaders were all enthusing about the new "Noah," couldn't I say something like this: "Um, you do realize, don't you, that this film presents ideas that are directly contrary to what you teach your people, don't you? Do you really want their ideas about the Flood influenced by this film?"
But, I am not saying that a film has to agree 100% with my beliefs for me to appreciate and recommend it. I happen to love both "The Mission" and "Romero," neither of which I "agree with" 100%, because I think both films beautifully, accurately, and effectively convey fundamentally important Christian ideas -- and they do it in an "entertaining" way, although neither film is "fun" in a simple sense.
But if I see a film as fundamentally contrary to things I strongly believe, I'm, not going to "endorse" it to people who are looking for a film that will provide religious inspiration. So, Gibson's anti-semitic bloodbath is a film I would rather people didn't bother with. They can do many better things with their time -- like read the biblical accounts and meditate on icons of the Passion.
[ 03. April 2014, 00:48: Message edited by: Dubious Thomas ]
--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Roselyn
Shipmate
# 17859
|
Posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QB] Dubious Thomas
few churches take the dissemination of theological ideas among the laity seriously.
Why do you think this is so?? can we change this/? What have you done to change this? Any clues?
Posts: 98 | From: gold coast gld australia | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Dubious Thomas
I quite understand that if Gibson's film is reprehensible to you then you're unlikely to recommend it. I didn't realise quite how much you hated it!
As for Gibson wanting viewers to 'embrace' his theology having watched the film, that does sound strange to me. I know that some evangelicals hoped it would be an evangelistic tool, but was Gibson really hoping to create more Catholics this way? Maybe you're right. Perhaps the only way to avoid such ulterior motives is to watch religious films made by non-believers!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
Let's just pick Luke, because that's the gospel I've been in most recently, allowing that this may be the evangelist most reluctant to dwell on the gory bits.
22:6 the men began beating him
23:32 they crucified him
23:44 It was now about noon, and darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon (to get the duration of the torture)
That is it. That is all the gore one can wring out of that account.
I'll grant you that "to mock" and any arrest of an insurgent in first-century Palestine probably implies more than just words and gentle custodial treatment.
I'll also grant you that some of Gibson's grisly depiction is in the nature of his cinematic medium, not proper to a first-century account committed to precious papyrus.
I grant you, in addition, that his leave-no-drop-of-blood-unfilmed approach encourages him to perform an unseemly mushing together, in a deracinated additive exercise, of each grim detail from each of the four gospel accounts. Fine. That's his method.
However, when the Orthodox do this, with much the same motivation it seems to me, even they, during reading of the twelve gospels at matins for Great and Holy Friday, read out the lessons as from distinct gospels and not as an undifferentiated gemish.
I'll grant that there are certain pieties comfortable with a shockingly bloody corpus on a blood-soaked cross, with bloody knees on crawling penitents, with passion plays that go far beyond the texts, with flagellanti, and with all the rest of the genre. Someone up thread has observed that all this is unknown in the Orthodox Church and is a modern, late-mediaeval innovation in the West.
I'll grant that the Stations of the Cross is an invitation to meditate deeply on the passion of Christ, one that is well-subscribed in my own parish.
Finally, I'll grant that you might call my English piety frigid for its recoil at this glee-full, almost vainglorious, reveling in the striped and bloody skin. Bonhoeffer rebukes us that there is no cheap grace.
After all that, to support a film from a notorious anti-Semite, a Hollywood type, an actor and producer whose filmography is replete with all the shocking techniques he retreads in this film (the Mad Maxes, the Lethal Weapons, Apocalypto, Machete Kills, Get the Gringo, Payback--let's just forget Chicken Run please), to support a film from such an actor/producer that consistently throughout its length over-freights the narrative with blood and gore and explicit detail not found in the source texts, is just titillating theological fraud.
Perhaps you were moved by it, perhaps some were converted by it, perhaps you think it fits comfortably into your orthodoxy, but that film remains a fraud.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
Someone up thread has observed that all this is unknown in the Orthodox Church and is a modern, late-mediaeval innovation in the West.
That was me! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) I'm glad someone read it!
Yeah, "torture porn"! ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
And, it is Torture Porn. Did I forget to say that?
No.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Sadism is perhaps another apt term.
<tangent alert> I was at an atonement theology seminar the other day and one of the professors pointed out the majority of New Testament atonement understanding is based on sacrifice.
He said that once sacrifice became obsolete in Christian culture and the old understandings of it were no longer coherent, a new understanding was introduced - that of penalty and punishment. THIS was something most non-sacrifical societies understood. Hence it became infused with the traditional, older understanding of sacrifice in such atonement theologies like penal substitution.
I thought it was a blood good point and perhaps relates to something of development of the medieval western tradition Dubious Thomas speaks of above.
</tangent>
[ 04. April 2014, 10:33: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Go with End of Days.
Totally! How better to end the Millenium but with the ultimate confrontation between Ahnold and Beelzebub!
Satan! You are the Lord of Evil and the mortal adversary of our Lord Jesus Christ! Big Mistake! Blam!
Actually, Adeodatus' suggestions are very good ones (I've not seen the Pasolini but it's on my 'to do' list). Or you could always go with the Beeb and show Ben Hur. Which would allow you to discuss as to whether Messala really was hitting on Charlton Heston. And, to be fair, the bit when our Lord looks up at Ben Hur on his Via Dolorosa always makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gildas:
Totally! How better to end the Millenium but with the ultimate confrontation between Ahnold and Beelzebub!
Satan! You are the Lord of Evil and the mortal adversary of our Lord Jesus Christ! Big Mistake! Blam!
Years ago, the American TV comedy show, "Mad TV," did a wonderfully offensive spoof that mashed "Terminator" together with the the story of Christ's crucifixion. The Terminator came back to A.D. 30 to prevent the crucifixion, terminating Judas, Pilate, and thousands of Romans. Jesus got quite annoyed and resurrected them all so that he could get on with his mission. At the end, the Terminator is seen standing in the crowds on the way of the Cross as Jesus goes by. He looks directly at the viewer and says (in that memorable Austrian accent): "Don't worry! He'll be baahck!"
I consider this one of the most inspiring versions of the "Passion" ever produced!
--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Few churches take the dissemination of theological ideas among the laity seriously.
quote:
Originally posted by Roselyn:
Why do you think this is so?? can we change this/? What have you done to change this? Any clues?
In many cases I think both priest and people are fairly tolerant of the status quo, and the set-up we (normally) have creates the expected outcome. But we're unlikely to break down the clergy/laity divide and remain part of the mainstream, so many things are likely to remain the same.
OTOH, there are a few remaining theological colleges and religious writers with books to sell who'd love to see more engagement from the laity, I'm sure! It's a shame that church leaders don't do more to promote in-church or ecumenical debates, and courses and books that might help Christians think the about the challenges that face them today. In my city I have seen courses and discussion groups reach the attention of congregations, but we could do with more.
I think more materials need to be created for people who haven't necessarily had a university-level education, and for people who don't always learn very well from reading (semi-)academic books. Perhaps we need a blend of hands-on work, videos, extracts from famous books, blogs, outdoor events, etc. - things to appeal to people with different learning styles and experiences.
And sometimes you do have to start with popular resources - even 'The Passion of the Christ' - simply because people are more comfortable with what they know. But that doesn't mean they can't be taken on a journey towards something else.
[ 05. April 2014, 22:40: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Dear Shippies,
As ever, you are an incredibly intelligent resource and I thank you all from the bottom of my heart for all your most excellent suggestions. Nowhere else I know of could produce such an excellent array of suggestions ( I love this ship! )
I now have a short list and would prevail upon youse for a bit more information before I watch all these fillums in full ( my time is very limited ):
My shortlist:
1) Rosa Gallica officinalis' Manchester Passion
2) Adeodatus' Pasolini - Gospel According to St Matthew
3) Beeswax Altar's End of Days
My question: What is the atonement theology of each?
Also, Adeodatus: I'm inclined to Pusolini's rendition because it seems it might tell the story most closely - yet do you really think a black and white, slowish ancient classic will appeal to this age group? I'm unsure.
Thanks again!
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
My shortlist:
1) Rosa Gallica officinalis' Manchester Passion
2) Adeodatus' Pasolini - Gospel According to St Matthew
3) Beeswax Altar's End of Days
My question: What is the atonement theology of each?
...
Can't speak for End of Days. I'd never heard of it before the reference on this thread. From Wikipaedia, it doesn't look my sort of film.
However, I suspect neither of the other two either have one or would have been asking that question. They're both trying to tell the story in a way that resonates both with the watcher/viewer/those present and the particularly collection of social and political messages the writer(s) wanted to get across.
So if you're looking for one that's an 'orthodox' representation of Christus Victor, one of the various versions of substitution or whichever model you want to prefer or avoid, I suspect that's the wrong question to ask of them. I also suspect it's too subtle a demand to make of a narrative film if you are choosing it as suitable for a predominantly unbelieving audience.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144
|
Posted
I love Pasolini's film! I have used it once in undergraduate teaching -- and had a sense that my students didn't quite "get" it. It is very much a product of 1960s Italy, and reflects the cultural politics and political culture of its time and place. Still, I think it is engaging and visually attractive, even in black and white. The Jesus of the film, played by a non-professional Calabrian actor, is "different" from the usual portrayals -- this guy really is a Mediterranean peasant. He has an "edge" to him. One of my students grumbled that he seemed very "angry" -- which didn't fit her personal image of "gentle Jesus meek and mild." I confess, I like my Jesus angry!
The film is based on and is very faithful to Matthew's Gospel.
I don't think the film really has an "atonement theology," except that it uses the language of Matthew's atonement theology where that is part of the dialogue.
There is also a subtext of "Marxism" in the film, since Pasolini was a Marxist -- but that actually resonates with the "revolutionary" subtext of Matthew's Gospel: Jesus is on a collision course with the ruling authorities -- one of the best bits of the film is Jesus' Matthew 23 "rant" against the scribes and Pharisees. So, maybe the "atonement theology" has a bit of "revolutionary martyr" to it.
I think there is potential for some really fruitful discussion to come out of viewing this film.
So, I recommend it, with the caveats mentioned above.
--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
I thought End of Days was a hoot, but I assume that Beeswax Altar was being facetious when he recommended it.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I also suspect it's too subtle a demand to make of a narrative film if you are choosing it as suitable for a predominantly unbelieving audience.
Atonement theology may be subtle but it is insidious and forms absolutely the basis for any portrayal of the Easter story.
I watched the Pasolini last night. Compelling and well done (albeit too angry a Jesus for me as Dubious Thomas says) but I don't believe it will be appropriate for this primarily indifferent and unbelieving audience. I did like it's sticking to the text of Matthew very closely.
Having watched that ( and my 17 and 18 year old boys rolling their eyes whenever coming into the room) I think I've done an about face on the whole fiction thing.
I'm thinking a documentary might be the way to go in this context. Our college has almost all the top students from each high school in the state in our first year. Most are studying Law, Medicine, Science, Engineering and Commerce.
So. My latest thinking is the BBC 1 documentary Son of God. It starts off pointing out there is historical evidence for the existence of Jesus outside the Bible (which many younungs these days don't know and think the whole story is made up)
Anyone have an opinion on that?
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ecumaniac
Ship's whipping girl
# 376
|
Posted
Gibson's Jesus Chainsaw Massacre is definitely torture porn. It's not very good torture porn, needless to say.
I second someone's recommendation upthread of Jesus Christ Superstar, especially if you can get hold of the most recent UK production. I'm going to be spending Good Friday on a plane, so I might load that onto my iPod.
--------------------
it's a secret club for people with a knitting addiction, hiding under the cloak of BDSM - Catrine
Posts: 2901 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Dear Shippies,
As ever, you are an incredibly intelligent resource and I thank you all from the bottom of my heart for all your most excellent suggestions. Nowhere else I know of could produce such an excellent array of suggestions ( I love this ship! )
I now have a short list and would prevail upon youse for a bit more information before I watch all these fillums in full ( my time is very limited ):
My shortlist:
1) Rosa Gallica officinalis' Manchester Passion
2) Adeodatus' Pasolini - Gospel According to St Matthew
3) Beeswax Altar's End of Days
My question: What is the atonement theology of each?
Also, Adeodatus: I'm inclined to Pusolini's rendition because it seems it might tell the story most closely - yet do you really think a black and white, slowish ancient classic will appeal to this age group? I'm unsure.
Thanks again!
I suggested End of Days only half seriously. On the other hand, using a standard Hollywood shoot em up to demonstrate the atonement can work very well with college students. When I taught a class in comparative religion, I used I Am Legend to teach Rastafarian theology. It worked amazingly well. You could use End of Days to discuss views of the atonement ranging from classic ransom theory to Luther's exchange variation to Aulen's Christus Victor and even the currently en vogue theories based on the philosophy of Rene Girard.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
