Mary Magdalene, or Mary of Magdala

Movie Review: The Passion of the Christ

Of all the movies I’ve seen, and I’ve seen a lot, this is perhaps the most brutal.

But that’s the point then, isn’t it?

This movie written, directed, and produced by Mel Gibson is the story of the last 12 hours of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, the final day of his Passion. Many reviewers (Newsweek, for example) misunderstanding the title, have been disappointed that this movie did not show the larger context for the life of Jesus. There are other movies that do this. Many today think that “Passion” means enthusiasm or drive, or even romantic love. But passion comes from the Latin word for “suffering” and this is a movie that is about, and only about the sufferings Jesus experienced leading up to his death. The Via Dolorosa that he traveled along the way is not a flowery path, but the “Way of Pain.”

This movie is a cultural event:

The film is vivid in its depiction of the beating and scourging of Jesus. It is much more unflinchingly visceral than other movies we’ve seen on the subject, and much more realistic of the flagellation systematically done by Romans. See my article on Good Friday at http://www.billpetro.com/holidayhistory/hol/easter/friday.html

Some have found the violence gratuitous. I did not. We have had movies like “Saving Private Ryan,” “We Were Soldiers” (a Mel Gibson movie), or the incredible HBO mini-series “Band of Brothers.” Those who where there historically said they were realistic. Historians who have studied and describe crucifixion would find this film accurate. During the flagellation scene, there Jesus’ blood everywhere. As you watch it, some even gets on you, if you let it.

I find it ironic that with movies like “The Last Temptation of Christ” which many faithful found blasphemous, critics urged viewers to look at with an open mind. “The Passion,” that many faithful find accurate, many critics have already made up their minds about, some without having seen the film, others before the film was finished.

Some critics have said that this movie encourages anti-Semitism and will foment hatred. But their hatred is already inside them. In one flashback that is particularly prescient Jesus is speaking to his disciples in the Upper Room, hours before his betrayal and trials, and says to them “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated me before it hated you… if they persecuted me, they will also persecute you” (John 15: 18-21.) Mel Gibson, when asked, “Who killed Christ?” answered “I look to myself” and indeed, the hands that hammer the spike into Jesus’ hand in the movie are Gibson’s. We see complicity and suffering, sin and forgiveness… none more than our own. The Romans in the movie are efficiently savage in their scourging, but we do not hate all Italians. No one can come out of this movie without being moved. I left feeling my own sense of culpability, as would anyone viewing the movie who is not without sin. As Karl Barth said, “He did not die for the sake of a good world, he died for the sake of an evil world.”

That there is a debate over this movie should not be surprising. From the beginning Jesus has divided people. The New Testament records Jesus as saying, “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10: 34.)

Now, to the movie itself:

In the first scene, Jesus prays in the Garden of Gethsemane. I’ve stood in that Olive Press Garden, though not in the lonely night. Here Jesus is alone and tempted by Satan while his disciples sleep. The figure of Satan appears many times throughout this movie, depicted in a chilling androgynous way. Satan challenges Jesus, mocks his mission, counterfeits his goodness, and twists Judas ultimately as Beelzebub -- which means “lord of the flies.” At the end Satan’s fate is depicted.

- Is this film a faithful depiction of what the Gospels say happened on Good Friday? Yes.

- Are there things in the movie that go beyond what the New Testament says? Yes. But there is nothing that contradicts the New Testament record.

- Are there a number of traditions depicted that go beyond the Gospel record? Yes. One example is the appearance of the Shroud. I won’t give away more.

There are a handful of historical difficulties, but they are trivial and I won’t quibble about them here. Gibson did not make this as “a historical documentary… [but] contemplative in the sense that one is compelled to remember… in a spiritual way, which cannot be articulated, only experienced.”

There is one, however, that should be discussed, if only because the subject of Mary Magdalene has gotten so much coverage in the recent best seller “The DaVinci Code,” a novel renowned for its page-turning intrigue but remarkable for its paucity of historical scholarship.

In this movie, Mary Magdalene is prominently featured, along with Mary, the mother of Jesus during the time of the Crucifixion. The New Testament also describes her as the first witness to the resurrection of Jesus. But this film goes one step further, during a flashback, and identifies her as the woman caught in adultery in the John 8, and brought before Jesus for stoning.

First, the Gospel doesn’t identify the woman as Mary Magdalene, or even as a prostitute, merely as a woman caught in adultery. But was Mary Magdalene even a prostitute?

Mary Magdalene, or Mary of Magdala, has often been depicted as such, but not from the beginning, and the New Testament doesn’t explicitly say so. Luke 8: 2 describes her as one of many women whom Jesus had healed of evil spirits and sickness.

Since the fourth century, however, she has been portrayed as a prostitute and public sinner who, after encountering Jesus, repented and spent the rest of her life in private prayer and penitence.

Eventually, the final identification of Mary as public reformed sinner achieved official standing with the homilies of Pope Gregory the Great (540-604 AD). Gregory's identification of Mary as a repentant sexual sinner appealed to the popular imagination and led to an effort to reconstruct her history from the Scriptures. Indeed, Gregory combined the three “Mary’s” of the Gospels, three separate people in the Eastern (Greek) tradition, into this single Mary, (1) Mary Magdalene. Also, (2) Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus and Martha mentioned in Luke 10: 38-42 and John 11: 1-45, and (3) the unnamed woman 'who was a sinner' and who, according to Luke 7: 37-50 began to wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head, and kissed his feet and anointed them with ointment'.

Since the 14^th century, the word “magdalene” has meant former or reformed prostitute. Why was she thought of as a prostitute? Magdala, a hamlet on the west of the Sea of Galilee, was where Roman troops were garrisoned. Troop towns often have prostitutes associated with them. Mary was from Magdala, a town of ill repute. It is likely that that association rubbed off on her.

The cinematography, inspired by the immediacy of the images of Caravaggio, the groundbreaking late renaissance painter, was fabulous. The music by John Debney is luminous. The haunting vocals are penetrating and evocative. I’ve often said that a great soundtrack can make a movie great. And a mediocre one can make detract from a movie. This is a great soundtrack to a great movie. Debney has been involved in a number of recent scores, including “Elf,” “Bruce Almighty,” and episodes from TV’s “Star Trek: The Next Generation” and “Deep Space Nine.” His theme here is reminiscent of some of the more moving scenes in “Gladiator” or the martial strains of “The Lord of the Rings.”

The flashbacks as a whole are brilliant. These images counterpoint events in the present Passion with other events in Jesus’ life. Some are touching and poignant, others feature words Jesus used that predict the Passion and are full of meaning and wonder.

While this is a brutal movie, it ends with hope. I will not say more as to ruin the ending for those who haven’t read the book. In centuries past, people built cathedrals to glorify God. Mel Gibson does the same in our own era in this, his magnum opus.

Of all the movies I’ve seen, and I’ve seen a lot, this is perhaps the most beautiful.

But that’s the point then, isn’t it?

Bill Petro, your friendly neighborhood historian