The Passion of the Christ - Reflections by Sharon G. Thornton
When James Forbes was asked recently about his reaction to the movie “The Passion of the Christ” he responded with something like: “The issue is really about how will people behave after seeing it.” As we have seen, some have been moved to examine their consciences and live better lives. For example a young man in Texas earlier this week, perhaps identifying with the criminal on the cross next to Jesus, confessed his own crime, that of murdering his former wife. And just a couple of weeks ago a former parishioner said to me “It makes me want to be a better person. But, what about those who see it and are motivated to behave in ways that are harmful to others and themselves?
What about the film’s possible anti-Semitism? There has been much written and talked about whether or not the movie re-enforces the idea that Jews were Christ-killers. There have been concerns raised in the Jewish community about whether or not the movie fuels anti-Semitism. How do we respond to these concerns and fears raised by our Jewish brothers and sisters?
A number of years ago Robert MacAfee Brown, quoted one of Elie Wiesel’s characters:
When a Jew says he is suffering, one must believe him,
and when he is afraid, one must assume his fear is justified.
In neither case does one have the right to doubt his word. Reference 1
Then he added:
When we hear the cry, “I’m hurting” we must take it seriously. And when we discover that the cry really means, “You are hurting me,” we must hear it with utmost seriousness. Reference 2
If our Jewish neighbors are saying this film is offensive to them we must listen to them. Even if we do not understand their fear, we must believe what they tell us is true. And if they tell us we are hurting them by this film, we must pay attention in a very serious way.
Why is this film drawing so much attention at this particular time in our nation’s life?” We have been at war for over two years now, first in Afghanistan, now in Iraq. And certainly we are implicated in the bloodshed that continues in Israel and Palestine. I have some questions about this:
- Do the images in this film in any way merge with the images being formed in our national psyche to justify bloodshed as a way to satisfy conflict?
- Does it perhaps, through the use of “analogical imagination” to use a phrase from David Tracy, replicate the “shock and awe” we are invited to admire, through the reporting of our military displays of force?
- Does this film help grant permission to identify people of Middle-Eastern origin as part of an axis of evil and therefore justify their mistreatment and even annihilation?
- Does portraying the mutilation of Jesus’ body in such a prolonged and graphic fashion help numb the sensibilities of the audience to the ongoing violence in our world and neighborhoods?
My theological concerns are these:
- With such an emphasis on Jesus’ suffering and death, life and loving action in the world becomes eclipsed.
- Just as Jews have resisted artistic representations of the Holocaust, we might exercise a similar kind of restraint regarding crucifixion. There is wisdom in humility before great beauty and radical suffering. There is a danger by so graphically sensationalizing and commercializing the crucifixion of Jesus on the screen we risk trivializing something that has deep historical and religious significance.
- C.S. Song, in Jesus and the Crucified People, focuses less on the merits of Jesus suffering and talks instead about the need to bring people down off the cross. This societal interpretation of atonement points to the ongoing work of mercy and justice that is needed to transform historical injuries and restore people’s lives to their intended fullness and likeness to the glory of God.
- Finally, I have lived long enough now that I have seen too much senseless bloodshed during my generation’s lifetime. I came of age during the Vietnam War. I saw my contemporaries wounded and murdered on the evening news while the National Guard shot and killed protesters to that same war on the Kent State campus. It could have been me. I watched as my President was murdered and then his assassin shot while cameras captured every detail. Some of you remember too. Then followed the murders of Dr. King, Robert Kennedy, Malcolm X, John Lennon, Mathew Shepherd – and you can add to this litany of names. Enough! I resist any and all portrayals of violence that in any way perpetuates or justifies bloodshed and feeds an imagination of nihilism and despair.
Ours is not a religion of death, rather a way of life, of truth of mercy and just relations for all God’s people and all who dwell on earth – including the earth itself.
References
1. Elie Wiesel, The Oath (New York: Random House, 1973), 214
2. Robert McAfee Brown, “Liberation Theology: Paralyzing Threat or Creative Challenge?” in Gerald H. Anderson and Thomas F. Stransky, C. S. P., Mission Trends NO. 4: Liberation Theologies in North America and Europe, (New York/Ramsey/Toronto: Paulist Press and Grand Rapids: WM.B. Eerdmans Publishing CO., 1979), 20