She wrote:

I saw “The Passion of the Christ” ….

…… as an agnostic. Indeed, the apparently historically accurate suffering Jesus endured was hard to watch, well, because there was a deeper meaning behind it. It’s somehow no big deal to watch other Hollywood films depicting arms and legs blown off and brains splattered all over. Might the directors of those types of non-religious films be abusive toward their girlfriends in far greater percentages?
“The Passion” affected me. It was deeply moving, but it moved me toward a feeling of peace, compassion and forgiveness rather than one of violence, bitterness or revenge. As I tried to hide my tears of expression of those feelings leaving the theater, I noticed many others doing the same.

Which of course makes the analysis here rather nonsensical, IMHO. Gibson’s bizarre, possibly bi-polar/alcohol induced behavior is about as far removed from the mindset of your average Evangelical Christian as Pluto is from the Sun.

“The Passion” was not about violence and abuse, it was about salvation. If this agnostic could get that, most anybody should be able to. Probably one of the most powerful influences on me in the direction of believing.

On the other hand, we’ve got the Black Panthers threatening death to white people and their babies. Apparently we’re to conclude that is is some kind of pervasive, deeper indication of the true mindset of the black community at large.

by Natalie Oberman
*****************
I then responded:

Reply: who knows what all goes on in the human heart?

At one level, Natalie Oberman, your comment is indeed an important piece of testimony challenging my argument. And I know that for many people, the film was moving in just that way.

Whether that proves my argument nonsensical, however, is another matter. The whole nexus of feelings in people’s hearts is rarely simple, with layer often piled up on layer. Look at the faces of the throngs in the main square in Nuremberg, as Hitler spoke to them. Look at Leni Riefenstahl’s great film, THE TRIUMPH OF THE WILL, that expresses the most beautiful and lofty of sentiments, in its depiction of these Nazi rallies. Can we conclude that these portraits of inspiration and nobility of aspiration mean that it is nonsensical to talk about the darkness that lay at the core of Nazism? Can we even conclude that the people in the square at Nuremberg were not having their darker passions stoked by Hitler’s rhetoric?

I think not. And similarly, I think one cannot accept at face value the idea that “The Passion” was not about violence and abuse, it was about salvation.” And what all the feelings were involved in how you were moved is also not necessarily as simple as you suggest.

I’m not saying that I KNOW what was the truth of your experience, but only that there are reasons to imagine that your certainties are not necessarily warranted either.

And indeed, in your comment, you may be providing us with a clue to some of the darker dynamics that go with your commitment to “peace, compassion, and forgiveness.”

You write that “we’ve got the Black Panthers threatening death
to white people and their babies.” As I understand it, this New Black Panther Party that the right wing is making so much of these days is a tiny, tiny, almost to the point of non-existence, segment of the black population. Are there even 20 members in this group, out of a black population a million times greater than that?

On the other hand, Mel Gibson’s PASSION spoke to many millions. And the right-wing CHristian movement has been a significant component of a political force that has given us a war (in Iraq) that seems to have been in part a “Crusade.”

To compare the infinitesimal and the trivial pathologies that may have arisen among a few blacks with the widespread and world-changing pathologies that have arisen on the right, most certainly including a major component of contemporary American Christianity, is not only inappropriate. But even this passing on of this new right-wing meme of black racism threatening white people seems possibly a sign of the kind of world-dividing, hate-oriented viewpoint as Mel Gibson reveals in his rants.

by Andrew Bard Schmookler

***************************

[A short while later, I had second thoughts about part of what I'd written, and I posted this comment immediately after the other.]

Andrew Bard Schmookler
Reply: partial retraction

Upon reflection, I think I’d like to retract my final point in my comment above. As I look more closely at what Natalie Oberman is doing in her own last paragraph –where she mentions ” we’ve got the Black Panthers threatening death to white people and their babies”– and note more fully the context in which she makes that statement (i.e. using it to say, indirectly, that these Black Panthers are NOT indicative of anything larger), I feel it is inappropriate for me to suggest that her mention of this new bogus right-wingmeme (now generally associated with a bogus charge against Obama’s Department of Justice) might have some flavor of her own racial prejudice to it. Based solely on what Ms. Oberman says here, I feel she deserves the benefit of the doubt. And I withdraw my tentative interpretation that leans otherwise.

by Andrew Bard Schmookler

**********************

[A day later Ms. Oberman replied:}

re: a partial retraction

Yeah, that really was over the top Andrew! I'm glad you recognized what my point was, and how ridiculous it was to try and lump me in as well with Mel Gibson. But you revealed your eagerness to make unfounded linkages, I'm afraid.

The folks viewing TPOTC were not there to quench their lust for violence and abuse. Rather, in spite of the violence, which was an important element of the story, they were there in solidarity with the victim of it, and in admiration of how He dealt with it. The hero, the loved and revered character in the movie was beaten. The villains in the movie were the ones dealing the blows.

I honestly don't follow your logic in attempting to tie the movie via Mel Gibson's outbursts to today's Evangelical Christians. You seem to think they were somehow a key driving force in us going into Iraq. I don't remember that being the case, but I do remember many high-ranking non-evangelistic Democrats giving impassioned speeches urging us to do what must be done in Iraq, to varying degrees. I remember 75% approval (ABC-WaPo poll 4/30/03 "Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush's handling of Iraq situation") of our invasion in the early days of falling statues and being greeted as liberators. Evangelical Christians may or may not have approved of the whole affair in significantly greater percentages than the population as a whole, but it seems to me that it was more a case of America at large being behind the effort, that is until things started to go sour.

But even given that Evangelicals backed the war effort, and had some disproportionate influence, is this somehow an indication that they're lusting for violence and death? That they're echoing Mel Gibson mindlessly spewing at his girlfriend? Well maybe their support was based on the ultimate goal of an end to violence. Both to Saddam's own citizens and to innocent Israelis being blown up for the rewards he was sending to their families. An end to his support for terrorism region-wide. I'm really quite confident that Evangelicals were no more comfortable with any of the deaths in Iraq than they were with seeing their savior pummeled. But there are other factors at work here, besides the violence itself.

Was FDR responding to Evangelicals when he committed us to war resulting in hundreds of thousands dead? Was LBJ responding to Evangelicals when he escalated the war in Vietnam? Or, as possibly with Bush, were they doing what they felt had to be done to insure the security of the country?

Meanwhile, apart from war, where death and violence do usually happen, it seems the left is where the Mel Gibsonish behavior is always at.

Boisterous and violent anti-war marches, brimming with posters depicting Bush as Hitler, his head being cut off, etc. Yes, explicitly calling for his death. Nary an Evangelical to be found as you scroll down the page and view all the lovely, "peaceful" sentiments.

G-8, G-20, G-whatever protests around the world featuring burning cars, massive property destruction and all kinds of general mayhem.

Pro-illegal immigration marchers break windows and spray-paint graffiti. Jerry Falwell Jr. reportedly did not attend.

Students violently rioting against cuts in education budgets. These are not Tea Party folks. These are not Evangelicals.

Unions terrorizing private citizens at their homes. Again, not an Evangelical to be found anywhere.

And last but not least, the New Black Panther Party openly calling for the death of white people, their babies, and the police. Definitely not an indication of the greater sentiment in the black community. However, have you seen/heard a gangsta rap video/song lately? My son has, and sadly he's now no longer a friend to the police, or believes they're friends of his. And I do believe there ARE significant ties between the Panthers of old and new to Farrakhan, thus to Reverend Wright, and thus to our President. Wright essential echoes the NBPP in a somewhat more refined manner. The NAACP may, I repeat may, have lobbied the justice department to drop charges against any and all folks named Shabazz. But this is just a bunch of stuff that happened, and means nothing -- of course.

But no I kid. --- I don't really think it's reasonable or sensible, or fair, to attempt to link the NBPP with the black community as a whole ... but I DO think it makes actually MORE sense than what you Andrew have tried to do regarding Gibson and the mindset of Evangelical Christianity. Which is to say, not a lot. --- IMHO.

Natalie Oberman

**********************

[Which evoked this from me:]

Reply: so, violence and hate in our times is mostly on the left

Ms. Oberman, you are making me reconsider my retraction.

I recall something Jesus said about motes and beams.

Take a look at opinion polls around the world over the past half century: even our long-time friends perceived that the U.S., previously considered mostly a benign force in the world, had become the greatest threat on the world stage.

And as for the role of right-wing Christianity in supporting the most lawless and lying American presidency in American history, and the most imperialistic in at least a century, it seems that you were perhaps not paying attention to the real workings of power early in this decade.

Perhaps you were distracted by all that union-instigated terrorism, all those unruly students, all those foreigners who don’t belong here acting like vandals, all those fringe protesters acting up while the world economy got stacked to give more to the haves of the world at the expense of everyone else.

This is the kind of worldview that runs counter to what Jesus taught, and modeled. You seem to have aligned yourself with the principalities and powers, and against the kinds of people that Jesus himself hung out with.