The Passion

[Ed Toner]

this is not about the Holocaust, but it is about Revisionism per se.

Moderator, if you think this is not a proper topic, I will understand.

http://www.realnews247.com/mel_gibson's ... sion_1.htm


MEL GIBSON'S THE PASSION
PART ONE
A TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OF
THE CRUCIFIXION DRAWS FIRE FROM CHRIST DENIERS
A REAL NEWS 24/7 STAFF REPORT

The Jews freely rejected Christ before Pontius Pilate, as they freely
reject Him today. God the Father drew good out of evil then, as He does
now, but the rejection was and is against the order of the world and
therefore evil.
-Father Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., The Mystical Body of Christ & the
Reorganization of Society

During his long and storied motion picture career, Mel Gibson has often
portrayed warriors, from the two historical figures, William Wallace, a
medieval Scotsman who stood up against England (Braveheart) and Lt. Col. Hal
Moore, an American fighting in Vietnam (We Were Soldiers), to a duo of
fictional soldiers: a young Aussie used as cannon fodder by the British in
World War I (Gallipoli) and American during the Revolutionary War (The
Patriot). With the possible exception of Moore, who was a professional
military man, they are men who did not seek war, but had been thrust upon
them.

Many of Gibson's other characters, while not engaged in combat, were
nonetheless besieged with great personal conflicts: a reporter who finds
himself stuck in Indonesia on the eve of a Communist takeover (The Year of
Living Dangerously), an officer who leads the crew against the ship's
tyrannical captain (The Bounty), a disfigured recluse (The Man Without a
Face), the victim of a MK Ultra-style mind control experiment (Conspiracy
Theory), a minister who fights an alien invasion and a crisis of faith
(Signs) and men seeking to avenge murders of family members-a father
(Hamlet) and a wife and child (Mad Max).

Mel Gibson's latest film finds him again under attack, but this time the
attack is a real one. It centers on his latest project, The Passion, a movie
that will approach Christ's last twelve hours with an emotional intensity,
striving for authenticity and unflinching gaze upon His unspeakable
sufferings that no previous film about the Redeemer has ever approached. But
if the enemies of the Cross have their way, this work of profound spiritual
vision may never be seen-at least not in a form its creator would approve of
or, perhaps, even recognize. If they have their way, Gibson's Passion will
be the Greatest Story Never Told.

When Gibson announced last summer that he was preparing to film in Italy, he
was met immediately with opposition. Some of the controversy was built-in
the almost Quixotic nature of the project, some of it was not.

The first contrarians were those who scoffed at his plans to make the movie
using exclusively dead languages (Latin and Aramaic) and, to make matters
worse, not include subtitles. Gibson understood their skepticism:
"Obviously, nobody wants to touch something filmed in two dead languages.
They think I'm crazy, and maybe I am. But maybe I'm a genius."

Second, some critics objected to the intense violence-an odd protest, given
the standard fare of ultra-realism in cinema these days, including Gibson's
Oscar-winning epic, Braveheart. (Well, this may end up being far more
intense than that bloodbath, since Gibson has warned that some viewers may
have a hard time staying to the end.) The third thing that rankled some
observers, and one that would presage a far greater furor to come, was the
realization that this version of Christ's Agony and Crucifixion would
reflect the staunchly traditional Roman Catholic beliefs for ..................