Daniel Amos Message Board | Print: The Passion Of The Christ

Posted by dorfsmith on 04-21-2004 at10:54:

quote:

Originally posted by Kaf-N-8ed
Ah, well, I haven't seen The Passion yet...

I probably will see it, but I have no particular sense that it will inform my impression of what happened at the Cross.

I understand the Catholic perspectives that have been given here, familarity with the contemplation of the Passion of Christ makes sense from that point of view. As an Orthodox Christian we spend Holy Week (Mon through Good Friday) thinking about the Passion. But we always look at the passion through the eyes of the Resurrection.

The Cross is a triumph, not a defeat.

The Cross is where Christ "Glorifies Himself" (as it says several places in the Scriptures.)

But from an artistic standpoint, I can understand taking a look at The Passion - all by itself. So, I don't mind if they fail to really mention the Resurrection. That's Mel's artistic liberty. He said what he wanted to say with the movie. I generally like Mel's movies. He has great things to say through them.

It just isn't the historic practice of the ancient Church to concentrate on the Cross as an individual event in isolation from all the rest of the work of Christ. For theological reasons, for pedagogical reasons, for inspirational reasons, etc. the Cross is always looked at "throught he eyes of the Resurrection"

Regards!
Coffee Man

"Christ is Risen!
Indeed He is Risen!"

Good thoughts but I found out something last week that was interesting. My sister went to art lessons and her teacher was a catholic and she told my sister to go talk to the priest about how to draw, paint, etc a cross or Christian picture. You see, my sister had done a brilliant piece and it was all wrong because stuff was missing or in the wrong spot.

The other day I'm reading the san bernardino sun and a Baptist preacher has an ariticle about the passion and he's saying that Mel went exactly by the Catholic rules of art. All his i's are dotted and his t's are crossed. (no pun intended) Big Grin

My point is, Mel used no artistic liberty. He used tradition and legalism that goes over 99% of our heads and only a handfull of traditional Catholic artists and priests get it. There is a lot more there than meets the eye.

Posted by jiminy on 04-21-2004 at13:04:

Dorf-
I dont know that the"Catholc" version of the passion varies much from what other christian groups or individuals see.

(I have not seen the film, so I am basing this on what I've heard)

Yes - the catholic faith rather "breaks down" the steps of the trip to golgotha (with some extra biblical portions- Veronica being one ), and I believe I am correct in saying that Gibson drew from some artistic past to create his visuals, rather than historical accuracy. (the old "Stake" Issue for one...)
but most of the folks I know who have an eye for things similar as me say that it is a visually stunning work-
I DO want to see it, just haven't yet. I hope having grown up in Catholicism (alter boy level) that I could give a perspective based on my past .

Soon-

Posted by dorfsmith on 04-21-2004 at13:10:

I'm talking about small details all the way down the the placement of mary. There is no room for artistic liscence in Catholic art. Shocked

Posted by Mountain Fan on 04-21-2004 at13:39:

quote:

Originally posted by dorfsmith
I'm talking about small details all the way down the the placement of mary. There is no room for artistic liscence in Catholic art. Shocked

I wonder if artists can apply for indulgences too? Big Grin

Posted by Mark on 04-21-2004 at13:54:

Yeah, Protestants are just way better artists.

Roll Eyes

Posted by dennis on 04-21-2004 at14:08:

quote:

Originally posted by Mark
Yeah, Protestants are just way better artists.

Roll Eyes

After John Michael Talbot, it all goes downhill! Tongue

Posted by baxter on 04-21-2004 at14:12:

Yeah. Just look at Tolkien and Flannery sitting in the mud at the bottom of that hill.

Posted by dorfsmith on 04-21-2004 at14:13:

As you all know, I'm talking about paintings and drawings (and in this case a movie) not music. It goes back to Mr. Coffee's comment on Mel Gibson's art Wink

Posted by dennis on 04-21-2004 at14:15:

Thumb Down!

Are you saying a should read more than the last post or two? Shocked

Posted by dorfsmith on 04-21-2004 at14:17:

I would never ask anyone to do that Shocked

Posted by dennis on 04-21-2004 at14:18:

Attention

whew!

Posted by bereal on 04-21-2004 at16:13:

quote:

Originally posted by Mark
Yeah, Protestants are just way better artists.

Roll Eyes

Ha, Mark, you got me LOL! Big Grin

Posted by Mark on 04-21-2004 at16:15:

Thanks.

Yes Catholics do not seem to be involved in "CCM" too much. Perhaps we are better. Wink

Posted by dorfsmith on 04-21-2004 at23:22:

Red Face

Michael Card

Posted by Vox Robotica on 04-22-2004 at08:32:

quote:

Originally posted by dorfsmith
Red Face

Michael Card

Don't you mean John Michael Talbot?

Michael Card isn't Catholic, as far as I know.

~ Vox

Posted by dorfsmith on 04-22-2004 at11:08:

Yes he is...he converted just like Rich Mullins was about to. You can also add First Call to that list.

Posted by jiminy on 04-22-2004 at12:37:

I thought I read the Elephantes were Catholic-
may be wrong

I like Ray Repp- Phil K does at least one of his tunes.

OH - yeah another Great CCM Artist...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
Jim Muglia.

Posted by Vox Robotica on 04-22-2004 at13:33:

quote:

Originally posted by dorfsmith
Yes he is...he converted just like Rich Mullins was about to. You can also add First Call to that list.

Only because I'm obsessive and stuff, I went to the Michael Card Website and looked all over for an endorsement of the Catholic Faith by him. The only mention of denomination that I can find is that he's a reformed Presbyterian, and last I checked, that ain't Catholic. Big Grin

But hey, I've been wrong before.

Big Grin

~ Vox

P.S. - Maybe God took Rich home before he made the full switch to save him all the trouble. Ya think?