WELCOME! A place where iron can sharpen iron, where spiritual milk and strong meat may be shared and received by all, where scripture can be expounded, where truth and love may be seen by the world.
To post: email totw@truthonthewb.org from your email address and ask for the password. It will be changed from time-to-time as need arises. Thank you for posting here. God bless.
This is from am official Vatican website. They absolutely gush over this movie. The ONLY reason they would do this is because it is in their favor.
My comments indicated as ==such==
ZENIT - The World Seen From Rome
(My comments in BLUE)
Date: 2004-02-18
"'The Passion' … for Its Author, Is a Mass"
==In other words, they literally sacrifice Jesus again with this film==
Vittorio Messori on Mel Gibson's Work
ROME, FEB. 18, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Vittorio Messori is the first journalist in history to publish a book-length interview with a pope, the multimillion-selling "Crossing the Threshold of Hope" (1994), as well as numerous other works such as "The Ratzinger Report" (1987) and his best-selling "Ipotesi su Gesù" (The Jesus Hypothesis, 1976).
After seeing Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," he wrote the following article for the Italian daily Corriere della Sera and offered the piece to ZENIT for publication in other languages.
* * *
A Passion of Violence and Love
By Vittorio Messori
After two hours and six minutes, the lights flick on again in the little soundproof room. There are only about a dozen of us (I the sole journalist), and we are aware of a privilege. By invitation of Mel Gibson and producer Steve McEveety of Icon Films, we are the first in Europe to see the final copy of this film which just arrived from Los Angeles. The same version that next Wednesday will be in 2,000 American cinemas, 500 English ones, and as many Australian, the version whose expectation has caused a short circuit on Internet sites and which in the first week will recover (the bookmakers say it is certain) the $30 million of production costs.
The Pope himself has only seen a provisional version, lacking among other things the final soundtrack. But, if this evening we are the first, the Italians will have to wait until the 7th of April, the French and the Spanish until June.
When the long list of credits ends, where American names alternate with Italian, where recognition of the municipality of Matera is side by side with that of theologians and experts in ancient languages, where Rosalinda, the daughter of Celentano (the devil) is next to a Romanian Jew, Maia Morgenstern (the Virgin Mary), and the technician presses the light switch, silence continues in the little room.
Two women weep quietly, without sobbing; the monsignor in clergyman's dress who is next to me is very pale, his eyes closed; the young ecclesiastical secretary nervously fingers a rosary; a tentative, solitary start of applause quickly dies out in embarrassment.
For many, very long minutes, no one stands up, no one moves, no one speaks. So, what we were being told was true: "The Passion of The Christ" has struck us, it has worked in us, the first guinea pigs, the effect that Gibson wanted.
For what it's worth, I myself was disconcerted and speechless: For years I have examined one by one the Greek words with which the Evangelists recount those events; not one historical minutia of those 12 hours in Jerusalem is unknown to me. I have addressed it in a 400-page book that Gibson himself has taken into account. I know everything, or rather, I now discover that I thought I knew: everything changes if those words are translated into images of such power to transform in flesh and blood, striking signs of love and hatred.
The Gamble
Mel has said it with pride tempered by humility, with pragmatism kneaded with mysticism which becomes in him a singular mixture: "If this work was to fail, for 50 years there will be no future for religious films. We threw the best in here: as much money as we wished, prestige, time, rigor, the charism of great actors, the science of the learned, inspirations of the mystics, experience, advanced technology. Above all, we threw in our conviction that it was worthwhile, that what takes place in those hours concerns every man. Our eternity is bound up forever with this Jew. If we don't point this out, who will be able to do so? But we will point it out, I am sure of it: Our work was accompanied by too many signs that confirm it."
==Catholic Mysticism = Knowledge for the priests and ignorance for the people==
In fact, on the set much more happened than what is known; much will remain in the secret of consciences: conversions, release from drugs, reconciliation between enemies, giving up of adulterous ties, apparitions of mysterious personages, extraordinary explosions of energy, enigmatic figures who knelt down as the extraordinary Caviezel-Jesus passed by, even two flashes of lightning, one of which struck the cross, but did not hurt anyone. And, then, coincidences read like signs: the Madonna with the face of the Jewish actress with the name Morgenstern which, it was only noticed later, is, in German, the "Morning Star" of the litanies of the rosary.
==Mysterious apparitions?? I’m surprised the “Virgin” did not make a special appearance. Mary is the “morning star”?? That’s a new one on me==
Gibson remembered Blessed Angelico's warning: "To depict Christ, it is necessary to live with Christ." The atmosphere, between the Sassi di Matera and the Cinecittà Studios seems to have been that of the sacred medieval representations, of processions of scourged pilgrims before the relics of martyrs. A 14th-century Thespis' cart, with which every evening, a priest in black cassock, of the type with the long line of buttons, celebrated an open-air Mass, in Latin, according to the rite of St. Pius V. Precisely here, in fact, is the real reason for the decision to make the Jews speak in their popular language, Aramaic, and the Romans in a low Latin, of the military, which wounds our schoolboy ears, used to Ciceronian refinements.
==Yes…poor pilgrims torturing themselves in Penance before “sacred” bits of dead men, believing that by whipping themselves enough they will "earn" forgiveness. That is the basis of catholicism - Grace by your works.==
Gibson, a Catholic who loves the Tradition, is a strong champion of the doctrine confirmed by the Council of Trent: the Mass is "also" a fraternal meal but it is "above all" Jesus' sacrifice, the bloodless renewal of the passion. This is what matters, not the "understanding of the words," as the new liturgists wish, whose superficiality Mel mocks as it seems like blasphemy to him. The redemptive value of the actions and gestures that have their culmination on Calvary has no need of expressions that anyone can understand.
==Again from their own mouths, that the Mass is the actual death of Jesus on the altar==
This film, for its author, is a Mass: Let it be, then, in an obscure language, as it was for so many centuries. If the mind does not understand, so much the better. What matters is that the heart understands that all that happened redeems us from sin and opens to us the doors of salvation. Precisely as the prophecy of Isaiah reminds us on the "Servant of Yahweh" which, taking up the whole screen, is the prologue of the entire film. The wonder, however, seems to me to be verified: After a while, one stops reading the subtitles to enter, without distractions, in the terrible and marvelous scenes -- that are sufficient in themselves.
The Quality
On the technical plane, the work is of a very high quality, so much so that previous films on Jesus might seem reduced to poor and archaic relatives: in Gibson, strategic lighting, skillful photography, extraordinary costumes, rugged and sometimes sumptuous set designs, incredibly convincing makeup, recitations of great professionals supervised by a director who is also one of their illustrious colleagues. Above all, such amazing special effects which, as Enzo Sisti, the executive producer, said to us, will remain secret, to confirm the enigma of the work, where the technique is intended to be at the service of faith. A faith in the most Catholic version -- no accident that it was pleasing to the Pope and to so many cardinals, not excluding Ratzinger, for whom "The Passion" is a manifesto that abounds in symbols that only a competent eye can fully discern. There will be a book (two, in fact, are in preparation) to help the spectator understand.
The pope was pleased by this catholic version of the faith
Very briefly, the radical "Catholicity" of the film lies first of all in the refusal of every demythicization, in taking the Gospels as precise chronicles: The things, we are told, happened like this, precisely as the Scriptures describe it. Catholicism is present, then, in the recognition of the divinity of Jesus which exists together with his full humanity. A divinity that bursts forth, dramatically, in the superhuman capacity of that body to suffer a level of pain as no one before or after ever has, in expiation of all the sin of the world.
But the radical "Catholicity" is also in the Eucharistic aspect, reaffirmed in its materiality: The blood of the Passion is continuously intermingled with the wine of the Mass, the tortured flesh of the "corpus Christi" with the consecrated bread. It is, also, in the strongly Marian tone: the Mother and the devil (who is feminine or, perhaps, androgynous) are omnipresent, the one with her silent pain, the other with his/her malicious satisfaction.
==This movie is “strongly Marian” (focused on Mary)==
From Anne Catherine Emmerich, the stigmatized visionary, Gibson has taken extraordinary intuitions: Claudia Procula, Pilate's wife, who offers, weeping, to Mary the cloths to soak up the blood of the Son is among the scenes of greatest delicacy in a film that, more than violent, is brutal. Brutal as, in fact, the Passion was. The desperate Peter after the denial, falls at the feet of the Blessed Virgin to obtain pardon.
==I thought Jesus pardoned Peter==
I believe, however, that the theological importance attributed to the Madonna, as well as to the Eucharist -- an importance not spiritualized, not reduced to a "memorial" but seen in the most material, and therefore Catholic, way (the Transubstantiation) -- will create some uneasiness in American Protestant churches which, without having seen the film, have already organized themselves to support its distribution.
==Yes, the Protestants should be uneasy, but instead they run TO this abomination==
If two hours are dedicated to the martyrdom, two minutes suffice to recall that that was not the last word. From Good Friday to Easter Sunday, to the Resurrection, which Gibson has resolved by making a particular reading of John's words: an "emptying" of the funeral shroud, leaving a sufficient sign to "see and believe" that the tortured one has triumphed over death.
Anti-Semitism or, at least, anti-Judaism? Let's not play around with words that are much too serious. From my viewing, I agree with the many and authoritative American Jews who admonish their co-religionists not to condemn before seeing. It comes across very clearly in the film that what weighs Christ down and reduces him to that state is not this one's or that one's fault, but rather the sin of all men, no one excluded.
To Caiaphas' obstinacy in calling for the crucifixion (that collaborator Sadducee who did not in fact represent the Jewish people, but, rather was detested by them; the Talmud reserves terrible words for him and for his father-in-law Annas), more than abundant counterbalance is made by the unheard-of sadism of the Roman executioners. The political cowardice of Pilate that leads him to violate his conscience stands counter to the courage of the member of the Sanhedrin -- an episode added by the director -- who confronts the High Priest crying out that that trial is illegal. And is it not John, a Jew, who supports the Mother? Is not the pious Veronica a Jew? Is not the impetuous Simon of Cyrene a Jew? Are not the women of Jerusalem, crying out in despair, all Jews? And is it not Peter -- a Jew -- who, when forgiven, will die for the Master?
At the beginning of the film, before the drama is unleashed, an anguished Magdalene asks the Virgin: "Why is this night so different from any other?" "Because," Mary answers, "we were all slaves and now we will no longer be so." All, but absolutely all: whether they are "Jews or Gentiles." This work, Mel Gibson says, saddened by aggressions to prevent it, intends to propose again the message of a God who is Love. And what Love would it be if he excluded any one?
==God is Love and he will save everyone. I don’t think so.==
Ron Harvey
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
If God is Love he will save everyone - or else he would not be Love.
Your God is monster of evil who will condemn millions to an eternity of suffering. He is not going to be worried about this either because he and all the people in Heaven are going to be 'happy' despite this incredible evil! Hello!
He also invents bizarre rules like;
'A person cannot repent after death even if you are genuinely sorry'
'I am not going to make my presence obvious BUT if a person then does not believe, then to Hell with them'
[There also seems to be another to the effect that unless a person believe all the stuff that you put on this board they will go to Hell. Which means only you will go to Heaven and perhaps not even you because surely you do not believe ALL the nonsense you put out here?]
If God is our loving heavenly father then one day his love will find its way into the hardest of human hearts. Who knows Ron he will probably even have a place for people like yourself who get a perverse pleasure from consigning others to Hell for going against what you, in your arrogance, think to be God's will.
In fact you have lost sight of the single most important thing about the Christian God, namely that he is LOVE. Read the parable of the prodigal son - the elder brother is you.
Q
Email: mgt.harris@btinternet.com
You are wrong. You are a liar. You will be condemned for denying the Lord.
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
No, Ron, the Christian God is a God of Love, and it is you with your hate filled posts consigning just about everyone to Hell with ill concealed glee, who deny him.
No doubt God will forgive you because he will know the nature of the personal distress that causes you to be so hate-ridden. But it would be better if you came to terms with yourself before then
Email: mgt.harris@btinternet.com
I will show you just how spiritually blind you are, if you don't mind.
You say that I am the one that is condemning the masses, but you again lie. The power of life and death is in the hands of God Almighty.
Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Can you understand? BROAD is the way and there are MANY on it and they go to DESTRUCTION.
You should not be very concerned with my "hate" as you call it. You should be concerned with the fact that GOD HATES those that hate him. And if you do not obey him, you hate him.
God does not forgive anyone for the "nature of the personal distress" in their souls. He forgives them because they have confessed to the Lord Jesus their sins and they have been cleansed by the blood of the Lamb of God.
Ron Harvey
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
Now, THAT was well-said.
Email: TruthOnWeb@aol.com
A question for you Ken about forgiveness.
First a parable:
A son moves away to another country. After a while,his dad being rather elusive in his communications, he come to think that his father is dead. Later he thinks about his early relationship with his father and realises that he had behaved badly and is truly sorry.
In fact his dad is not dead and he knows of his son's repentance. The father, now old, is about to make his will. The question is, 'Does he cut his son out of the will because of his past misdeeds or does he leave him his portion because he has sincerely repented of them?'
Well I think that the answer is the latter. The son is sorry. If he thought his dad was alive he would ask for forgiveness. The only reason he does not is because he thinks is father dead and that is as much his father's fault as his. The only real criteria for forgiveness ought to be sincere repentance.
The application to Christian doctrine is clear. I do not think that the evidence points to a Christian God. Perhaps I am mistaken. [I am always open to argument] Certainly God's existence is not obvious to everyone as there are plenty of 'men of goodwill' who are unsure about it. Nevertheless like any decent person I am sorry for the wrong things I have done, try to make amends and try not to repeat them. If I thought there was a God who was upset by this, I would ask his forgiveness.
My claim is that a good God would accept this.
If your theology says the reverse, it must be mistaken.
Best wishes
Q
Email: mgt.harris@btinternet.com
Q says, "I do not think that the evidence points to a Christian God."
After all the questions and all the he was told, he still does not see. That means only one thing. He is not destined to see. He is not called. He is blinded and you can not evangelize away the scales from his eyes.
Ron Harvey
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
Oh, I see ... if a person doesn't accept your logic (no matter how poor it is), then he is not accepted (or elected) by God to be saved. Is that what you are saying? First of all, God desires that all come to Him in repentance and doesn't desire anyone to be lost. So the "election" or the "destination" theory that you prescribe doesn't hold up according to the Scriptures. All this means is that you have done a poor job of evangelizing.
Now, it could be that Questioner needs something else or that he has seen all of the evidence but has not chosen to believe. In that case, that is his perogative. But God still desires for Him to be saved. Don't you go around saying otherwise - because it is plain wrong.
I'm afraid that your attitude has pretty much ruined your chances of ever reaching him. You have lost any kind of positive influence with him. Change your attitude, and you might also change your influence to something that would be positive for Christ.
Just something to think about.
Deist
Dear Diest,
I want you to do the same as I did. Ask Q if he believes that Jesus is the Son of God. The answer he gave me lead me to turn away from him.
Yes, God desires that all come to him. "Desires" does not mean "Compels". Masses and masses WILL be lost, whether you like it or not. Not everyone will be saved. If you think so, then you share the same delusion of a good portion of the churched world.
2Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in THEM THAT PERISH; because they received not the love of the truth, that they MIGHT be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God SHALL send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they ALL MIGHT BE ****ED who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
I imagine that this scripture has been abolished or twisted by your church. God sends a delusion on the people in order for him to be justified in ****ing the masses...???...You can be sure of it.
Now I get it...the people hate God because I have done a poor job in convincing them that they should love him. OK
Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are WITHOUT EXCUSE:
1:21 Because that, when THEY KNEW God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
1:24 Wherefore God also GAVE THEM UP to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
1:26 For this cause God GAVE THEM UP unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God GAVE THEM OVER to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
When men turn from God, he turns from them.
Ron Harvey
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
Wow! Now that is being judgmental! Let me guess, you haven't successfully brought anyone to Christ lately using that technique .. huh? Dude, he was just asking some questions. How about trying a new technique instead of condemning him, try answering his questions! Wow, what a concept!
Do you have children? If you do, do you treat them the same way when they ask you a question about Jesus or God? "You liar!" ... wow, that is just unreal!
You are really showing the love of Christ in here - NOT!
Deist
First off...Mr Q. is not sincere in his questioning. I have received personal e-mails from Q where he drops his mask. He is not a christian and he is not seeking guidance on seeking the Lord. He is an intellectualist and his only interest here is...ready for this???...intellectual masterbation.
Hebrews 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God (of Love).
Neither you nor I can bring anyone to Christ. No man cometh to me but the Father draw him.
No children, thank God. This is the generation when they will say blessed are the paps that never gave suck.
Do you know that the Bible says to avoid foolish questions? Read 2 Tim. 2:23
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
Ron,
Must you use such crude remarks? "Intellectual Masterbation"? I know the Questioner and his seeking is genuine. He just has some difficult questions for you to answer ... that's all. So instead of accusing him of evil (or your version of it), why not try to address his questions? Jesus did!
Now, about you saying that no one can bring anyone to Christ ... if that is the case, then why even bother evangelizing? If it is impossible for anyone to be successful in bringing anyone to Christ, then why are we commanded to be "soul-winners"? I don't know what Bible you are reading but it certainly isn't the Bible that I nor most everyone else reads.
It probably is good that you don't have children, for the sake of the children. Your non-loving, un-forgiving, accusatory language, and a just plain bad attitude is definitely not fitting for fatherhood. Thank goodness that our Heavenly Father is not like that. Do you even have a wife? Does she believe the same as you do? Do you get along with anyone here? After reading some of the things you post, you seem to have an anti-social problem. Do you really believe the stuff that you post or are you just playing games with us? I'm just curious.
Can I ask you a question? Does your mother know that your gay? .... that kind of a question we are to avoid because it is obvious of the person's intent. However, when a person is asking questions concerning Christ, God, Salvation, etc., then the person is seeking. They may begin to mock, but if you can effectively answer their questions, they will not be able to find anything to mock anymore and would eventually accept.
Make sure that when you quote passages that you keep them in context. Just a helpful hint.
Deist
Dear Diest,
Believe what you will. I tried to answer his questions. More questions was the only response. He is an imposter. I wish I had saved the emails he sent to me. He has no interest in Christianity. He does not believe in Jesus. Go ahead and drag him to the Living Water. You will not be able to make him drink. Jesus said "You did not choose me, I chose you".
I did not say that it is impossible to bring someone to Christ. Only him that has been chosen from the begining of the world will be saved. Yes...that's called predestination. I assume you hate it. In fact, when you are preaching to those who are not chosen, you are casting your pearls to swine (especially nowadays). Do you remember the scripture that says it would be better that he had never known the way of righteousness, than to know the truth and turn from the holy commandments.
I beg to differ...I would be a very good father, had I any children.
Had a wife...she divorced me when I got saved and told her that her lesbian, goddess worshipping, pagan friends were not welcome under my roof any more. Throwing out all the evil music, books and the TV probably didn't help either.
You do not know the whole nature of God, it seems. he does hate (the doctrine of the Nicolaitans Rev. 2:15)(and Esau hated before he was born {good example of predestination}), he does refuse forgiveness (Heb. 12:17 where Esau could not get God to forgive him), and God does accuse (called Israel the most rebellious house).
I do not get along with most. The reason is that I do not compromise the Word of God. I believe what I say. I can back it up and defend it against all zeal. I do not play games with anyone about anything. You and I are at the end of this world. There is not time for fun and games. We have no time to waste. Those who refuse to wash their garments and iron out all the wrinkles will be refused entry into the wedding. The door of grace will soon be closed and no one outside the door will be allowed in.
Other questions to avoid:
What church do you go to?
How do you baptize?
Are you pre-trib or post-trib?
Will the pope be the antichrist?
Is there really a Lake of Fire?
Ron Harvey
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
But even so, the suggestion that we 'need' the Puritans - we late twentieth-century Westerners, with all our sophistication and mastery of technique in both secular and sacred fields - may prompt some lifting of eyebrows. The belief that the Puritans, even if they were in fact responsible citizens, were comic and pathetic in equal degree, being na ve and superstitious, primitive and gullible, superserious, overscrupulous, majoring in minors, and unable or unwilling to relax, dies hard. What could these zealots give us that we need, it is asked.
The answer, in one word, is maturity. Maturity is a compound of wisdom, goodwill, resilience, and creativity. The Puritans exemplified maturity; we don't. We are spiritual dwarfs. A much-traveled leader, a native American (be it said), has declared that he fins North American Protestantism, man-centered, manipulative, success-oriented, self-indulgent and sentimental, as it blatantly is, to be 3,000 miles wide and half an inch deep. The Puritans, by contrast, as a body were giants. They were great souls serving a great God. In them clear-headed passion and warm-hearted compassion combined. Visionary and practical, idealistic and realistic too, goal-oriented and methodical, they were great believers, great hopers, great doers, and great sufferers. But their sufferings, both sides of the ocean (in old England from the authorities and in New England from the elements), seasoned and ripened them till they gained a stature that was nothing short of heroic. Ease and luxury, such as our affluence brings us today, do not make for maturity; hardship and struggle however do, and the Puritans' battles against the spiritual and climatic wildernesses in which God set them produced a virility of character, undaunted and unsinkable, rising above discouragement and fears, for which the true precedents and models are men like Moses, and Nehemiah, and Peter after Pentecost, and the apostle Paul.
Spiritual warfare made the Puritans what they were. They accepted conflict as their calling, seeing themselves as their Lord's soldier-pilgrims, just as in Bunyan's allegory, and not expecting to be able to advance a single step without opposition of one sort or another. Wrote John Geree, in his tract 'The Character of an Old English Puritane or Noncomformist (1646)': 'His whole life he accounted a warfare, wherein Christ was his captain, his arms, praiers and tears. The Crosse his Banner and his word [motto] Vincit qui patitur [he who suffers conquers].'
I am honored by being call a puritan
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
Everything that you said could also be said of the Nazis. Only one little problem ... Nazis committed the attrocities of Auschwitz. Just as the Puritans committed the attrocities at Salem.
Don't try to flatter yourself. "Pride goes before a fall".
Deist
This last post of yours is very revealing of your nature and character. I can honestly say that I am glad that I have never met you in person. People like you give Christianity a very bad name.
I hope that one day you will change your heart and see the terrible errors of your ways.
Good-day!
Deist
Dear Diest,
My nature is that of the Christ you claim to know. My character is as his. You better not ever meet me. I would level you to the ground like Jesus did to the disciples when he said "Oh ye of little faith" and like when he upbraided them for their unbelief and like when he was walking on the water and he would have passed them by. I would have no problem calling you a whited sepulcher. I would hit you with the word of God so hard it would make your head spin. But still, you would not repent of your errors. You highminded...
Christianity is SUPPOSED to have a bad name. Why did Jesus say YOU WILL BE HATED OF ALL--ALL--ALL MEN. Woe unto you if all men speak well of you. If I please men then I can not please God. Ask yourself, if you have the guts, why the salt has lost its savor.
Ron HArvey
Email: rsnm10@hotmail.com
You preach more lies ...
You said ... "Christianity is SUPPOSED to have a bad name. Why did Jesus say YOU WILL BE HATED OF ALL--ALL--ALL MEN. Woe unto you if all men speak well of you."
God says: Proverbs 15:20 ... Phillipians 4:8 ... and 1 Timothy 5:10.
Read and repent!
Deist