February 22, 2004

FUNDAMENTALIST CHEERLEADING FOR GIBSON’S PASSION – AN OXYMORON (2/22/04)

For whatever it is worth, I stand by my assertion that Gibson’s Passion will not spark a new wave of anti-Semitism. My argument is not deeply philosophical, simply process of elimination: Anti-Semites will remain anti-Semites. Folks who are not predisposed to anti-Semitism will not be swayed.

I will be viewing the film with a religiously- and racially-diverse audience. A Christian colleague and I will then review it and respond during a Q&A session. Only upon seeing the film will I be able to judge whether the film is inherently anti-Semitic, that is, (a) whether it portrays the Jews in a particularly damnable manner, especially in a manner even more damnable than the Gospels themselves do, and (b) whether it emphasizes the Jews’ collective, eternal guilt for Jesus’s death. Again, though, whether the film is anti-Semitic or whether the film will foment anti-Semitism are two entirely different issues, two entirely different sets of dynamics.

One question, however, keeps burning in my belly. It has not been discussed much, but it goes to the basic spiritual, intellectual and historical honor of the Passion's most passionate advocates. Gibson is a self-admitted radical Catholic. Should it not strike someone as ironic, even a little weird, that the biggest backers to Gibson's movie are not Catholics – who seem at best to be ambivalent about the film – but Fundamentalist Protestants?

Fundamentalist Protestants are in bed with a radical Catholic on matters of Christian doctrine and its proliferation? Anyone who remembers seventh-grade World History should instantly recognize the oxymoron. From Henry VIII and Martin Luther onward, Protestants have not, to put it mildly, gotten along real well with Catholics, and vice versa. After all, why was Bloody Mary called “Bloody”? What of the centuries of carnage up to this very day in Northern Ireland? No one would minimize the Jewish blood that Christians spilled throughout Europe, but I dare say that Catholic-Protestant bloodshed comes in a close second.

The differences between Catholics and Protestants, to be sure, manifested themselves in countless political, geographic, cultural and sociological ways. But, the origin of the disputes in elementary church doctrine are undeniable: the divinely-ordained supremacy of the Pope, the significance of the wafer-and-wine upon consecration, the nature of the sacraments, the priesthood, the liturgy, even the text of the Lord’s Prayer.

More significantly, the Catholic and Protestant approaches to Biblical understanding, interpretation, even translation, substantially diverge. Moreover, the Catholic interpretive tradition has evolved in a relatively orderly fashion, always being subject to the scrutiny of Church doctrine, while the Protestant interpretative tradition ranges from absolute literalism to liberal academic inquiry.

Centuries have passed, and the bulk of Catholics and Protestants have made peace with each other, occasionally uneasy, but peace nonetheless. As one would expect, however, animosity and hostility still drive the attitude of Fundamentalist Protestants toward Catholicism. Go to the websites and see how salacious their hatred of Catholics still is: They are damned. Their doctrines are false. Their worship is idolatry. Their interpretation of the Bible is heretical. The Pope is the antichrist. The Vatican conspires for world domination. Catholic political aspirants will be puppets of Rome. The Jesuits plotted with the Nazis to mastermind the Holocaust. How often have I heard a Fundamentalist preacher refer to “Christians, Catholics and Jews,” inferring that Catholics are not even genuine Christians?

Some time ago, a Fundamentalist institution honored one of the most vituperatively militant anti-Catholics, Rev. Ian Paisley, with a Doctorate of Humanities. The same institution would allow on campus neither Jerry Falwell nor Pat Robertson, whom most of us consider staunch Fundamentalists, because they engaged in dialogue with Catholics. That very institution is now one of the most vociferous cheerleaders for Gibson’s film.

This is precisely the oxymoron: A significant segment, perhaps a majority, of Fundamentalist Protestants think that Catholics are a bunch of hell-bound heretics who subscribe to false doctrine. Likewise, radical Catholics like Gibson have little regard for the integrity and salvation of the Protestants. Yet, somehow in this lunatic world, the most fundamentalist Fundamentalists are actually turning to a fanatical Catholic to teach the world “the Truth” about Jesus and his sanctifying death.

What forked tongue declared this alliance? Let us momentarily put aside emotionalism and the specter of a new wave of anti-Semitism. Does this oxymoron not speak volumes about the basic spiritual, intellectual and historical dishonesty of a brand of Fundamentalism that is capturing the souls of people who might otherwise aspire to a more sublime level of Christian authenticity? What is wrong with this picture?


No comments: