"The word 'no' is the way you keep your commitment to the people you have already said 'yes' to."
- Phil Schroeder
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
I watched Diane Sawyer?s interview with Mel Gibson on Prime Time Live last night. Here are some thoughts:
1. Is Diane completely humorless? She sat there, stone faced, throughout the entire interview. Was this supposed to look like journalistic integrity? I realize her long silences and stoic demeanor were probably meant to make Gibson look like a laughing ass, or perhaps they were meant to keep him talking until he put his foot in his mouth. Neither occurred, I don?t think. Instead, she looked rude. Couldn?t she crack a smile at jokes that were funny that had nothing to do with the controversy? It was like she had to look hard so no one would accuse her of anti-Semitic sympathy or something.
2. On the Panel of ?Experts?:
Oh, how happy I was to see an actual evangelical scholar in the panel, not some foot-in-mouth specialist the media often turns to as evangelicalism?s ipso facto spokesperson (think Falwell, Robertson, Franklin Graham). The expert present was Darrell Bock, a fine Bible scholar and a heck of a commentator. It is a shame the program turned to him exactly twice, each time for one or two sentences. They gave the majority of screen time to the Jewish and Catholic scholars (probably for valid reasons). It would have been cool to hear more from Bock, though.
3. On Abraham Foxman:
Okay, the head of the Anti-Defamation League flat-out said Mel Gibson was not an anti-Semite. So if he?s the one leading the charge, the one all of Gibson?s detractors are appealing to for authority, can they at least follow suit and acknowledge that Gibson is not an anti-Semite?
Also, Foxman said he didn?t think the film was anti-Semitic. To repeat: Abraham Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, said he didn?t think The Passion of the Christ was anti-Semitic. And he saw the film. He wasn?t invited, but he snuck into a screening.
But here?s the catch: Foxman thinks you are a latent anti-Semite. That is, if you happen to be a Christian.
Foxman says that after the screening of the film he attended, the audience was split into two groups: those who sat there in stunned silence and those who sat there weeping uncontrollably. Foxman says this scared him.
Argggghhhhh!
This is just a clear case of someone who doesn?t ?get? what Christ?s sacrifice means to those of us who have received it as forgiveness for our sins. If Foxman thinks any of those stunned or crying people had then or will have thoughts about ?the Jews? or anything related, he is off his rocker. They were stunned and/or crying because the death of our Savior affects us emotionally and spiritually and physically toward further respect and love and adoration and devotion to our Lord (not toward hatred for any group).
Foxman and friends will have to answer for two things:
a) Every year, thousands of Passion plays are held in churches across the country. Why no outbreak of anti-Semitism after such presentations?
b) Do they really want to alienate (and accuse of racism) the largest coalition of non-Jewish support for the nation of Israel and the plight of modern Jews? Evangelicals/fundamentalists are unmatched in their support for the nation of Israel. Are these the people you really want to accuse of anti-Semitism? Get real.
4. Bombshell:
The only piece of (apparently) valid criticism of the film came from an unlikely source. The criticism was that Gibson?s film provides no context for Jesus? death. What the man said was that the film gives no reasons for why Jesus would be killed. The man said that the Gospels depict Jesus at odds with the Jewish leaders of his day and at odds with the Romans by leading a movement that focused on himself as King (because if Jesus is King, Caesar is not). This is the material reason for Jesus? betrayal and crucifixion. This critic said that the film appears to show the betrayal and death of Jesus divorced from the motivations behind those acts; the average viewer, who thinks of Jesus as a good and kind man, a nice teacher who went around ?patting babies on the head? (the critic?s words), would be utterly confused as to why people suddenly hated him so and wanted him dead.
Those of who know the Gospels won?t be confused by this. And while I think this is a bit of a stretch in terms of actually having a substantial obfuscating effect on others unfamiliar with the Gospels, I think the criticism makes a somewhat valid point.
Who offered it? None other than John Dominic Crossan, one of the leading revisionist scholars, member of the Jesus Seminar, and a guy I consider an outright heretic. This is the guy who said that not only did Jesus not rise again after his death, his body was probably thrown on the garbage heap to be torn apart by stray dogs and buzzards.
So imagine my surprise that his brief appearance on screen consisted entirely of things I had a hard time disagreeing with.
My overall reaction to the interview was that Gibson handled himself well. He responded to nearly every criticism thoroughly and convincingly. He admitted that this is his perspective on the Gospel accounts, that he is showing what he wants to show. He was, for the most part, in good humor, candid, and forthright. I think that after last night, the critics of Gibson and his film have even less support for their persistent attacks. It?s starting to look anti-Christian to me.
Trackbacks:
Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/968.
Comments on "Thoughts on the "Prime Time Live" Mel Gibson Interview":
3. Andy the Geek
- 02/17/2004 6:28 am CST
I was in the shower for most of the interview, but my wife did offer this to me:
(Paraphrased, of course...)
Sawyer: Don't you think that this movie will cause many to hate Jews?
Gibson: I watched Schindler's List...I don't hate Germans.
4. Don Curtis
- 02/17/2004 6:30 am CST
I liked the interview and I liked Gibson's confidence in his Lord and in the film. He did make one slip though. To the nearest I can reconstruct this he said, "Paul in the gospels says, 'Hold on to your traditions!'" Now I mix up words like this all the time do not believe that Mel actually thinks Paul wrote any parts of the gospels. However, one of the tensions in the New Testament is the need to let go of traditions rather than holding on.
Except for that remark, it was a great and enjoyable interview.
BTW: The Alpha Course is offering a kit to host a dinner, video, and discussion to help answer questions arising from this film. Please visit: http://www.alphausa.org/askwhy for more information. I have conduct nearly 10 Alpha courses (of which the video in this kit is a part) and appreciate the program very much.
5. jen
- 02/17/2004 6:38 am CST
Don, my uncle came to Christ through an Alpha course a couple of years ago. I had never heard of it until he mentioned it.
6. Jen Speaks
- 02/17/2004 6:57 am CST
I thought Mel Gibson was great last night. I could pick theological nits with him all day long, but what matters most is that he gets the basic point of Jesus Christ. And his movie, The Passion of the Christ, reflects that. (For those who don't know, ...
7. Quaid
- 02/17/2004 6:57 am CST
Diane "Second worst Journalist on TV" Sawyer
Who, in your opinion, beats her out? I could think of a few suspects . . .
8. LilacRose
- 02/17/2004 7:34 am CST
Joshua Claybourn, Jen and Jared at Thinklings comment on it. I think Gibson did really well. I thought Diane Sawyer...
9. Michael Asbell
- 02/17/2004 7:39 am CST
I thought the interview went very well for Mel Gibson. I, too, noticed Diane Sawyer’s stone-faced stoicism. I think she was afraid–afraid of appearing sympathetic to any perceived anti-Semiticism that might be lurking out there. I also think she was afraid to be drawn in by Gibson’s charm. Her answer was to be brick wall who asks questions. It worked, but it didn’t look good on her.
I think Gibson handled the question of anti-Semiticism well. I think it is interesting that people now seem to be saying that they don’t think Mel Gibson is anti-Semitic and that the film is not anti-Semitic, but they still want to use the film as a platform to talk about anti-Semiticism.
One thing is clear: The film is not about race relations. It is simply a Christian portrayal of the crucifixion of Jesus. But that doesn’t matter to some because they can still use it to drum up support for their agenda. If my job was to educate people about the evils of anti-Semiticism, I guess I would do the same. To the man who only has a hammer, all problems become nails.
All indications are that Gibson has created a masterpiece on the passion of our Lord. The film looks to be art, meditation, and devotion all rolled up in one. Gibson is following a very old tradition of meditating on the passion of Jesus. As a spiritual discipline it is supposed to be a way of drawing closer to the Lord, a way of becoming like him by sharing in his suffering. By making this film, Gibson was meditating on Christ’s passion and inviting his viewers to do so as well. Did you see how he answered when asked of his cameo appearance? When asked if that’s his hand holding the nail, Gibson immediately pointed out that it was his left hand, his treacherous hand. Think he’s mediated on that much?
10. jen
- 02/17/2004 7:51 am CST
His "sinister hand," is what he said. And then repeated it in Latin.
All indications are that Gibson has created a masterpiece on the passion of our Lord. The film looks to be art, meditation, and devotion all rolled up in one.
Yes.
14. jen
- 02/17/2004 9:38 am CST
Sinister and treacherous are similar, I only remembered because I was struck by the word picture it gave me when he said it and then repeated it in Latin. It made me recall the Satan figure he uses in the movie. Chilling.
15. Kenny
- 02/18/2004 2:52 am CST
I flipped back and forth between that interview and another show and I am afraid I might have caught something out of context which I would like clarified.
Near the end, what was the question when Mel answered somehting like..."I think anybody can get to heaven, even NON-CHRISTIANS, it's just easier for me." Does anybody remeber that? IT was in a different setting than the nromal interview becasue Mel was wearing different clothes.
If it isn't clear, my question is, does Mel believe John 14:6?
16. leon
- 02/18/2004 2:57 am CST
I also thought Gibson did a fantastic job. The only time I felt him "waffle" was a part filmed at a different time where he was along side the actress who played Mary. The question was something like, "So are Christians the only ones who go to heaven?"
His response could have been more Biblical, in my opinion, but instead said something like, "According to my faith, I have the easiest path." I don't know how that reconciles with Jesus's words, "...and no one comes to the Father but by me."
All in all, I give praise to God for Mel and what he's doing. Lives will be changed.
17. Jared
- 02/18/2004 3:20 am CST
This is a prime example of a time we should remember that Mel is not "one of us."
He is a Catholic, and when I heard those statements, I didn't really flinch, because I think they are in perfect harmony with Catholic teaching.
Mel says he has the "direct ticket" to heaven because he is Catholic. I assume he thinks evangelicals and other non-Catholic Christians will have to do some time in Purgatory but can make it in to heaven afterwards. I suppose "righteous" Jews and Muslims would take a little more time, but they too could make it to heaven after a time of purging.
This is why Catholics pray for the dead, etc.
So Mel's statements, while obviously unbiblical to us, are in step with Catholic teaching. Which is why I think we need to be very careful how we promote this film, and still more careful how we promote Gibson. He's not an evangelical Christian, and we should not treat him like he's one of our spokespeople.
That said, I do believe he's a Christian, and I fully expect to see him in heaven. He'll just be surprised how quickly I got there. ;-)
(Also, somewhat ironic, is that Vatican II clarified a lot of this stuff about Jews/Muslims/Protestants "making it in." Vatican II teaches, as far as I understand it, that non-Catholics can make it into heaven, that even non-Christians can make it into heaven. So while Gibson's brand of Catholicism rejects Vatican II, he at least accepts some of the stuff they clarified, I guess.)
18. Jared
- 02/18/2004 3:41 am CST
Back in Comment #4, Don Curtis wrote:
To the nearest I can reconstruct this he said, "Paul in the gospels says, 'Hold on to your traditions!'" Now I mix up words like this all the time do not believe that Mel actually thinks Paul wrote any parts of the gospels. However, one of the tensions in the New Testament is the need to let go of traditions rather than holding on.
I meant to respond to this yesterday, but forgot.
When I heard this, I just assumed Mel was referring to 2 Thessalonians 2:15. I just assumed he misspoke when he said "Gospels." But this is the reference I think he was referring to, and so it's not his own invention.
Of course how he interprets that verse -- applying hundreds of years of Roman Catholic tradition -- is debatable, to say the least.
19. Daniel
- 02/18/2004 4:02 am CST
There are some good posts about this interview over at getreligion.org. That blog, BTW, is one I think you guys should consider linking here at Thinklings. Just my opinion though, check it out for yourselves.
20. Jared
- 02/18/2004 4:25 am CST
Just checked it out, and I really liked it. Considered it added to the roll.
21. Ricky Vandal
- 02/18/2004 5:09 am CST
I came across the discussion of Mel Gibson's movie Passion of Christ. Some argue it's anti-semitic. Now John Kerry is Jewish. The movie is said to be very intense and anti- Semitic and set to be a huge box office success. I was wondering if Dean and Edwards see the movie as a deus ex machina, that's going to destroy the Kerry candidacy and that's what they were waiting for and not so much Kerry's intern problem
22. jen
- 02/18/2004 6:18 am CST
What Jared said regarding Mel's comments about non-Christians making it to heaven. I took his statement to mean he was saying that Catholics get there first, therefore non-Catholics was what he meant.
Also, when Mel referred to Paul's gospel, I took that to mean that he considers the whole New Testament the Gospel (which it is). That was my speculation on what he meant anyway.
24. alison
- 02/19/2004 3:57 am CST
Jen,
I thought Mel Gibson was putting non-Catholic Christians in the same category as buddhists. I taped the program, so I'll have to go back and watch it again, but my recollection was:
Diana: So what about buddhists and other non-Catholics.
Mel: I think they could get there eventually (I'm not sure if he's talking about long stays in purgatory or universalism).
Obviously I am paraphrasing here, but it goes along with what he said about his wife in an earlier interview -- something to the effect that she's a better person than he is, but since she is Episcopalian instead of Catholic he doesn't know if she's going to heaven. He said it would be very unfair if she didn't make it, but he's not the one who wrote the rules.
By the way, you've seen the movie. What do you think about children under 12 or 13 seeing it? I'm fairly sure it's too violent for me.
25. jen
- 02/19/2004 2:17 pm CST
Ya know, Alison, I'm rereading my statement and I don't know what I was trying to say. :lol:
Wait! I just saw a trailer! Mixed in with ads during CSI. Very cool.
26. Darren
- 02/19/2004 5:59 pm CST
Mel's hint of universalism wasn't the best presentation of the Gospel I've ever heard, but overall the interview went very well. He did a good job of defending the film.
Jared, I agree with everything in your post -- 'cept I had a hard time taking Crossan seriously, knowing who he is. He's become the default "Bible scholar" for virtually every mainstream program that deals with these things (especially when it's related to the gospels). Unfortunately the producers of such programs don't seem to recognize that many (most?) of New Testament academic scholars don't take him seriously.
As for the universalistic comment -- I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. It sounded more to me like a contemporary equivocation than an educated statement of Catholic theology. (As for Purgatory, only saints avoid it entirely according to Catholic theology. Mel probably expects to be spending some time there.)
Darren
28. Mike Thompson
- 04/17/2004 11:16 pm CDT
I loved The Passion Of The Christ. I saw it the first weekend it was out and I took my 9 Year Old Son and my Mom to see it this past Saturday. It was as moving a movie as I have ever witnessed. I broke down and cried both times but especially when they nailed Jesus to the Cross in the second viewing today. It was very moving for all of us. My son Adam is going to make a Profession of Faith soon. He is a very bright 9 year old boy who was moved by this movie. It was my intention for him to see this and understand exactly what our Lord Jesus did for the whole world. The only thing I have heard about Mel Gibson's views that I have not agreed with was the statement to Diane Sawyer that non-Christians can make it to Heaven. This is simply not true. Jesus clearly says that "No one comes to the Father except by Me". The Passion has been a blessing to me and my family and has helped give me a second wind for the times ahead. I love Jesus Christ and he is my Savior. I have been a believer in him since 1971 at age 6. My heart has been filled with His Holy Spirit ever since. I know that He has saved me and that I will live in Heaven with Jesus and God and the Holy Spirit and my Christian family for all time. I am looking forward to the 1000 year Millenium reign of Christ on the Earth. To live on this Earth as it was meant to be for 1000 years is something that I long for. I want to say to you Lord, "Thank You for saving me and my family and for loving us and blessing us as you have. I Love You very much and I always will. Amen!"
Sicerely,
Mike Thompson 4/18/04 4:19 AM
Huntsville, Alabama
DOB 2/8/65
29. Shrode
- 04/18/2004 12:56 am CDT
Dear Mike,
Thanks for posting. We're glad to meet you.
And I'm just wondering, how is your 9 year old doing after viewing this movie? Was he disturbed? Is he having nightmares?
With you we rejoice that your name is written in heaven.
Luke 10:20
God bless you.
We saw the same things. Foxman wasn't the only one who said Jews were fearful - it was said by a couple people. And I was completely suprised to hear from his own lips that he doesn't think Mel or the movie is anti-Semitic. If he's been saying that then why isn't it being reported correctly? *My tongue is firmly in cheek*
About the criticism of Crossan, I can see his point as well. I can't speak for Mel Gibson, but I hope that people with contextual questions will turn to the Gospel accounts for the answers they seek.