response 113 of 306:

Feb 25 14:47 UTC 2004

Re: #108. That's interesting, Twila. What is it about Latin that you feel is
important? I take it Methodists give services in Latin?

response 115 of 306:

Feb 25 15:49 UTC 2004

I have always been an admirer of tradition. When I was very small, I saw a
Latin Mass, and it impressed me as being so wonderfully redolent of something
that stretched back 2000 years. Alas, my parents were athiests, so I could
not enjoy (or be cursed) by a parochial education, and my early romanticized
yearnings for religion remain roseate and unviolated to this day. Of course
I know that just because it would tie into all of the medieval and earlier
people who shared the experience would make it no better or worse than one
in English, but it would feel so much more ...

In sober fact, I'm a Methodist because I like the doctrine and I chose to be
one when I was  sixteen. The things that John Wesley wrote are close to my
own beliefs. (And afaik there are no Latin or High Church leanings in
Methodism.)

response 117 of 306:

Feb 25 17:58 UTC 2004

I'd be interested in any feedback that folks here want to share
after seeing "The Passion".  Probably won't be going myself --
I've decided to give up Mel Gibson movies for Lent.

response 119 of 306:

Feb 25 20:23 UTC 2004

I have an idea for you jiffer:

You know how the churches are renting out the theaters so the church-
goers can go together?  Well, maybe you could go down to the local 
strip-joint or bar and get them to do the same thing.  Might keep the 
zealots out!

response 121 of 306:

Feb 25 22:36 UTC 2004

It was quite ... overwhelming. I had two reactions, simultaneously -- the
first was my brain checking off the familiar elements ("Will none of you wait
with me?"/"Lord, let this cup pass, but thy will be done" etc. etc. etc.) with
occasional lyrics from Jesus Christ Superstar interposing themselves at the
appropriate points, while the second was busy beign overwhelmed by the sheer
brutality of the action. I wasn't sure I could sit through it, since I don't
DO violent movies, but I managed to only hide my eyes at two points -- the
extra -long and ultra-violent scourging,which I am very sure would have been
fatal in and of itself in the end, and the nailing of his hands and feet to
the cross, which was also ultra-violent. I am still in a kind of shock, since
we left the movie about an hour and a half ago. I know that I'm different
since I saw it, and that it may be one of the most moving and immersive
experiences I've ever had at a movie. I do not recommend anyone under 17
seeing it.

About the anti-Semeticism charge -- I didn't see that. There were vicious
Jews, but also vicious Romans, and both brands of vicious seemed to be those
in soldier's gear rather than the "man on the street". It might be called
anti-soldier more appropriately, if you had to describe it. (Caiaphas and the
Sanhedrin did come off as more anti-Jesus than Herod or Pilate, but even the
Sanhedrin had people in it who objected and were trying to derail the
proceedings.)

response 123 of 306:

Feb 26 00:32 UTC 2004

Powerful, Brutal, moving  are the words that come to mind.

It was not the bloodiest or most viloent movie I have ever seen, but it isn't
something I would bring the weak of heart to see.

Teh scenes all seemed very actual to me.  Not fake or corny as some come off.
Teh tender scenes were very well done.  The brutality of the soldiers (both
jew and roman) was well done.  The attitude of the soldiers was well done as
well, some were leaders, some followers, some excited by the action, some
disgusted.

The mob scene also was well done.

None of the actors or their reactions seemed out of place.

Very well done.

response 125 of 306:

Feb 26 00:48 UTC 2004

Based on my lack of familiarity with the anti-semetic text I mentioned, I
doubt I would find much either, even if I was looking. That doesn't mean
it isn't there, however. Rather than looking at the issue subjectively,
why not do a little research to see what objective evidence exists? I
think if certain non-biblical scenes are reproduced from an anti-semetic
text, then I think that is pretty powerful *objective* evidence. 

response 127 of 306:

Feb 26 01:07 UTC 2004

Gibson says, "There were no Norwegians in Jerusalem."  Sounds self-
serving, but actually he's right.  Jesus and the crucifixion were a 
Jewish thing, with the Romans either washing their hands of it or else 
contemptuously doing what they were ordered to do.  If we're to believe 
the Gospels, most of what Jesus said either quoted or alluded to Jewish 
scripture, or else was a direct reaction to Jewish traditions he 
considered corrupt.  It isn't what you put in your mouth that condemns 
you, it's the words that come out of your mouth.  Those words are by a 
Jew addressing other Jews.  Norwegians definitely wouldn't get it.

Having said that, I have to add that even Gibson apparently understands 
that there are 2,000 years of intervening history and an ocean of 
Jewish blood that can't be ignored.  

response 131 of 306:

Feb 26 03:28 UTC 2004

Churches were much more effective at controlling the public when 
their leaders didn't fall for and believe in the crap they poured 
down the open throats of the masses.  I think the modern day ruling 
classes allow and even promote flourishing religiosity because it 
makes it easier for them to manipulate the system to their own 
benefit.  Of course, now those ruling classes are the capitalists 
rather than the church primates.

It's a lot easier to titillate and sell "happiness" to a society of 
sexually repressed true believers than to a society of people who 
are actually spiritually unburdened and well adjusted.

response 133 of 306:

Feb 26 03:36 UTC 2004

Your premise is ridiculous on its face.  

response 135 of 306:

Feb 26 07:54 UTC 2004

In regard to going to the strip joint, they belong to those churches.  

I also don't want to see the movie since I will be going to weekly sessions
of Stations of the Cross, and would be rereading the text to the point past
reverance.  

I have also concluded that I may have seen about 75% of the movie due to news
stories, interviews and those the-making-of specials.  I may as well save
$8.00 or so on going.

response 137 of 306:

Feb 26 17:38 UTC 2004

Ignore tod, bru - he's just picking a fight, and it's not worth your time to
type the text.  He's not going to pay attention anyway.