Quote:
Originally posted by greeklawgirl
The Catholic Church recanted that teaching in 1969, but not all Christian churches held that belief. The Orthodox Church has always venerated Mary Magdalene as the "Apostle to the Apostles" since she was the first to whom the Resurrection was revealed in 3 of the 4 gospels. Mary Magdalene was, along with John, one of the most faithful and beloved of the disciples. As far as I know, the Gospels don't dispute that--its the "spin" that was later put on M.M.L.J. and Paul's letters that caused her downfall.
|
My point was that it had to be recanted at all. Vatican II just the same as Paul's letter and its later use by the Church. It put the Church in line with the politically held views of the church in its day. Don't be surprised if you see the Catholic Church finally approving female priests in the near future -- and don't worry, I'm sure they'll find some Biblical premise to do it that was there all along.
Back to the original question -- It's pretty darn funny. You have these Christian folks railing on about how decadent Hollywood is and how they've 'finally' been recognized as a viable market for movies and that this is just the tip of the iceberg. They justify the violence and gruesome depiction of Christ's final 12 hours as necessary for portraying the truth. Yet they disapprove of a Hollywood director using the same types of effects to give life to a script?
On the other hand, you have Hollywood/media types decrying the film as antisemitic, overly violent (compared to Terminator, etc?) and so on. How many of these same folks made money off of promoting ethnic stereotypes and branding them as "entertainment"?
In my opinion, both groups are being blindly idiotic. Hollywood should apologize to Mel Gibson and as for these religious folks, if they really disapprove of the stuff Hollywood puts out, they should stick to only watching the Vegitales.