tothesource was invited to a preliminary screening of Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ this last weekend in a private residence. As we settled into their home theatre, the hostess introduced the movie by saying, “I’m not going to say ‘enjoy the film’. This is not a film you enjoy. This is a film you experience.”

She was right. The movie confronts you with the harsh reality of what Jesus went through.

Gibson set out to make a film of the passion of Jesus “like traveling back in time and watching the events unfold exactly as they occurred…as the Bible tells it.” Along the way he has created a work of art. The Caravaggio lighting and earth tone coloration blends beautifully with the dialogue performed completely in Latin and Aramaic. Gibson’s decision to use the ancient languages was a stroke of genius. They not only add to the overall realism of the picture, but their poetic and guttural quality is deeply moving.

Another stroke of genius was casting James Caviezel as Jesus. Best known for playing the lead in the 2002 surprise hit, The Count of Monte Cristo, Caviezel brought a transcendent strength to every frame he was in, which is nearly the entire movie. Certain movies succeed or fail on one casting decision. This is one of them. Caviezel was so consumed by his part he dislocated his shoulder during the filming. Like Gibson, Caviezel comes from a devout Catholic family.

The movie opens in the Garden of Gethsemane and continues through the final hours of Jesus’ life. It is a gut-wrenching portrayal of love-filled forgiveness and hate-filled violence. The film grabs you and never lets you go.

At the end of the film we sat in complete silence for several minutes. No one moved.

The next morning in the Sunday New York Times there was an article by Frank Rich that ridiculed Gibson for making The Passion of the Christ. Rich contends that the controversy over the film may have a negative effect on the film’s impact and box-office success.

For months the film has been at the center of a firestorm of criticism. Critics have castigated Gibson for the hubris in making a movie about the life of Christ. In another article Frank Rich dismissed the film with, “To the extent that there can be any agreement about the facts of a story on which even the four Gospels don’t agree, his movie is destined to be inaccurate.” If we did accept this criteria then no one could speak of the life of Jesus with confidence.

The other main criticism associated with The Passion is the claim that Gibson is anti-Semitic. Christians should be more aware of the very real danger of continued anti-Semitism. The Anti-Defamation League has “grave concerns” about the film according to Rabbi Eugene Korn, the director of the organization’s Office of Interfaith Affairs.

Before ADL Executive Director Abraham Foxman had seen the movie, he told CNN that they are troubled that the film has portrayed “the Jews, the Jewish community, in a manner that we have experienced historically. Seeing passion plays used to incite not only a passion of love in terms of Christianity, but at the same time, to instill and incite hatred of Jews because of deicide.”

On Wednesday night, the 21st of January, Foxman was one of three Jewish leaders who pretended to be pastors in order to see the film. Their verdict? “At every single opportunity, Gibson’s film reinforces the notion that the Jewish authorities and the Jewish mob are the ones ultimately responsible for the Crucifixion.” In response to such criticism, Gibson dropped the controversial scene where Pontius Pilate washes his hands to show he is innocent of Christ’s impending death, and the crowd cries out, “His blood be on us and on our children!” This passage has been interpreted to mean that Jews alone are collectively guilty of Jesus’ death.

Passion Plays, such as the one held in Oberammergau, Germany every decade, were once common throughout Europe. They have on occasion incited violence by Christians against those they call ‘Christ-killers.’ Any attempt to show Jews and Judaism as collectively responsible for the death of Jesus is cause for alarm to current Jewish leadership. It is understandable that the Jewish community would be concerned when the number one box-office star in the world would make a modern film adaptation of the Passion. They know history has an ominous habit of repeating itself when it comes to Jewish persecution.

The Anti-Defamation League position is best expressed by a statement taken from their web site. “Passion Plays are, in general, sources of theological anti-Judaism and do not help to improve the relationship of Christians and Jews.” Such a sweeping statement by the ADL is excessive. People of faith must be allowed to express their faith. There are aspects of all religions that someone else finds offensive. The danger is not the expression of faith but actual acts of discrimination. A reenactment of the passion of Jesus is not the moral equivalence of a cross-burning.

However, Christians must be careful here. There is reason for real concern by the ADL. The usual rebuttal to the charge of Christian anti-Semitism is that Jesus was Jewish and all of his initial followers were Jewish so how can rational Christians honestly believe Jews are inferior or evil? But for hundreds of years, in almost every Christian country, some did believe exactly that. These facts did not stop Christian persecution of Jews in the past. The question of anti-Semitism can not be dismissed with this over-used generalization. Gibson’s film itself must be considered on its own content.

Some key questions regarding the film’s possible anti-Semitism are, “Was Caiaphus’ decision to push Pontius Pilate into crucifying Jesus overemphasized and portrayed as irrational hatred?” “Was Pilate portrayed as a compassionate and reasonable person who was outmaneuvered by the cagey Jewish leadership?” “Did Gibson disproportionably select those gospel texts that most emphatically place the responsibility for the decision to kill Jesus on the Jews?” And finally, “Is the conflict portrayed as Jews vs. Christians or does the struggle take place within the Jewish community?”

Regarding all four of these questions perhaps even more care could have been taken. But is the film anti-Semitic in its emphasis? Certainly not. Caiaphus insists that those who wish to defend Jesus must have their say. He demands to hear with his own ears blasphemy from Jesus. Though tight lipped throughout his trial and crucifixion, here Jesus seems intent to set his own death into motion. He answers Caiaphus that he is the Christ. He knows he is boxing Caiaphus in with his words. Caiaphus rips his robes and proclaims Jesus guilty. The film, by using this event as the inciting incident, gives Jesus the rightful role of protagonist. Jesus knew that for Caiaphus, blasphemy was considered the greatest sin, one punishable by death.

And there is another point to remember. Gibson is not a theologian. He is a filmmaker. A very successful one. He knows, like all students of good film know, that the protagonist must make the key decisions that drive the plot line. From the vantage of film structure it was not Caiaphus or the Jewish leadership that killed Jesus. It was not even the bloodthirsty Roman soldiers who beat him to near death and then nailed him to the cross. It was Jesus himself who made the decision to lay down his life.

The vitriol surrounding this movie puts into question the larger culture issue of pluralism; namely can we live well with others while holding fast to our own core beliefs? This means allowing others to express beliefs that are troubling or at odds with our own. All of us are a bit too sensitive when it comes to our worldview. This is certainly true of many Christians. In this case it may be true for some in the Jewish community. Strong dialogue should be encouraged. But when it crosses over into condemnation that seeks to dismiss or silence those with whom we disagree then everyone suffers.

To facilitate much needed communication Icon Productions, Mel Gibson’s production company, plans to convene meetings with significant Jewish leaders over the next 30 days.

So how will the film do? Entertainment publicist Michael Levin told the Washington Times that, “This film has all the makings of a (box-office) bomb.” Mr. Levine will almost certainly be proven wrong. The distributors of The Passion of Christ, New Market Films, plan to open the film on 2,000 screens across the nation on Ash Wednesday, February 25th. If they secure additional financing the number will increase to 3,000 screens, which is considered broad distribution. They are hoping for strong box-office revenues in the first two weeks to propel the film into must-see status.

All of this controversy has not hurt preliminary ticket sales. Bob Berney, the president of New Market Films, said of the demand that he “knew it would start building and building, but now it’s like a tsunami.” Church groups have been ordering large blocks of tickets, and ticket chains have set up toll-free numbers to take advance orders.

Once you see the movie I believe you will agree with me it is not about who gets blamed for killing Jesus. Christian faith teaches that we all do. In the film there is a series of graphic close-ups of a Roman hand holding a hammer, driving the spikes into Christ's hands and feet. The Roman hand was Gibson's. It is his only acting role in the film.

At the end of the day the film is not about the passion of Mel Gibson or the New York Times or the Anti-Defamation League. The movie is about the passion of Christ.