|
“THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST”
Paul T. Stallsworth
On Ash Wednesday, on
February 25th on the day that Lent 2004 began, “The
Passion of the Christ” opened in theaters throughout the world and
in Carteret County. As the title suggests, this film presents on
the big screen the passion and death of our Lord, the last twelve
hours of his flesh-and-blood life in this world, the sacrifice
that was for the salvation of the world.
Actor Mel Gibson funded
and directed “The Passion of the Christ.” Since he began
directing films in 1993, Gibson’s works -- “Braveheart,” “We Were
Soldiers,” and “Signs” -- have dealt with heroes who have endured
sacrifice because of their faith. In “The Passion of the Christ,”
Gibson has taken on the story of the greatest sacrifice based on
the greatest faith.
Before viewing “The
Passion of the Christ,” it might be helpful for us to think about
previous films about Jesus and about this particular film.
“Gibson’s ‘Passion’” (First Things, March 2004), by Russell
Hittinger of the University of Tulsa and Elizabeth Lev of Duquesne
University/Rome, will assist us in reflecting.
According to Hittinger and
Lev, there are two types of films about Jesus. First, there are
movies that move beyond the Biblical texts and take extreme
liberties with the story of Jesus. “Jesus in Montreal,” “Godspell,”
“Jesus Christ Superstar,” the “Last Temptation of Christ,” and a
Marxist version of “The Gospel According to St. Matthew” (1964)
are examples of very imaginative retellings of Jesus’ life and
death.
The second type of film
attempts to remain as faithful as possible to the Biblical texts.
“Jesus of Nazareth” (1977, Franco Zeffirelli) was a six-hour,
visual retelling that remains close to the Biblical accounts; and
the “Gospel of John” (2004, narrated by Christopher Plummer),
which is now showing in theaters, is nearly a documentary on the
life and death of our Lord. “The Passion of the Christ” fits into
this second type of film on Jesus. It clearly strives to remain
faithful to the Biblical texts.
Hittinger and Lev also
provide us with descriptions of the movie that will prepare us to
view it more carefully and deeply. They write: “Gibson has taken
an audacious gamble by filling the screen with images that are
undeniably brutal; few will be able to watch the scourging of
Jesus without turning away. Though the movie is fairly
fast-paced, the scourging is long and drawn out, seeming never to
end. It begins with a caning, but just when one thinks, ‘that was
unpleasant but not as bad as I expected,’ the soldiers pull out a
spiked scourge and begin a new round of battering. Later, when
the gates of the city are thrown open for the ascent to Calvary,
we see Golgotha on the horizon and wonder whether we can traverse
that distance with Jesus.”
Given Gibson’s Catholic
faith and his closeness to the Biblical story, it is no surprise
that Mary plays a prominent role: “Though Mary is the person most
affected by these shattering events, she also understands better
than anyone the necessity of what her son must do, and she
consents to his mission and her own role in it. She in turn shows
the audience what they must do. During the scourging, we see Mary
with her head lowered, barely able to support herself as she hears
the incessant beating of her son. As we think to ourselves, ‘no
mother should have to witness such a thing,’ she gathers her
strength, lifts her head, and continues to look. If she can, we
can. Then, in the harrowing...scene at the end of the film, Mary
looks directly out at the viewer as she holds the body of Christ,
reminding us with her glance that we, too, have been witnessing
these events, and that it is now we who are called to bear witness
to what we have seen.”
“[Mary] is paralleled on
screen by Satan...a black-cowled, androgynous bystander. After
the scourging, Satan holds a grotesque child in mockery of the old
Adam, and also of Mary’s eventual [grieving over her son’s body].
Then there is the remarkable confrontation in the film between
Satan and Mary. As Jesus climbs towards Calvary, Satan glides
through the crowd, feeding on the tangible wickedness in the air;
Mary is on the other side of the road, trying to reach her son.
She locks eyes with Satan, as determined as Satan is smug.
Gibson’s disturbing technique of filling the screen with Jesus’
body, almost allowing him to tumble into our laps, is contained
visually only by the fact that Mary constantly touches, holds, and
comforts the corpus. We find ourselves thinking, ‘thank God
someone else will keep this mess from falling onto us.’ ...[No]
other film we have seen has so powerfully depicted” the ways that
Mary relates to all Christians, to the Church. “When she
approaches the cross and kisses the feet of Jesus, the camera
closes in to show her lips covered with the blood of Christ...”
This suggests that the Church, represented by Mary, is blessed
with the sacrament.
Hittinger and Lev
conclude: “The film is so enthralling that perhaps some viewers
will have to remind themselves that it is just a movie and not a
substitute for the New Testament, much less for sacramental
liturgies...familiar to so many Christians during Lent. If,
having seen and endured the film, Christians...can humbly return
to their churches to participate in the spoken and sacramentally
enacted Word, then Gibson’s ‘Passion’ will have proven to be
something even better than what it certainly is -- the best movie
ever made about Jesus Christ.”
From March 2004 St. Peter's Post |
