Anti-semitic Mel

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Actor Mel Gibson, breaking his silence on his controversial film depicting the last 12 hours in the life of Jesus Christ, denied on Friday that his movie was anti-Semitic and insisted the film is "meant to inspire, not offend."

Gibson's comments were contained in a statement announcing that the Roman Catholic Church has agreed to help his production company, Icon, retrieve copies of an early draft of the movie script that Icon says was obtained without permission by a "deep throat" working for an ad-hoc group of Catholic and Jewish scholars.

Jewish leaders in particular have raised concerns that the movie, titled "The Passion," might portray Jews as collectively guilty for Christ's crucifixion.

Catholics have expressed worries that Gibson might use the film to challenge church teachings.

Their concerns were sparked by a New York Times Magazine article portraying Gibson as a traditionalist Catholic opposed to reforms of the Vatican II Council of the 1960s, which among other things rejected the belief that Jews were collectively responsible for the death of Jesus.

Gibson previously has said little about his movie, which was shot in Italy and contains dialogue only in Latin and Aramaic with no English subtitles. Gibson directed and co-wrote the film, which does not yet have a distributor.

In his first public comments about the film since the controversy began, Gibson said, "neither I nor my film are anti-Semitic ... Nor do I hate anybody -- certainly not the Jews. They are my friends and associates, both in my work and social life ... Anti-Semitism is not only contrary to my personal beliefs, it is also contrary to the core message of my movie."

He added that the film is "meant to inspire, not offend. ... For those concerned about the content of this film, know that it conforms to the narratives of Christ's passion and death found in the four Gospels of the New Testament."

The film's producer, Steve McEveety, said that while critics have a right to their opinion, "no one has a right to publicly critique a film that has not even been completed, let alone base their critique on an outdated version of the script which has been illegally obtained."

Icon said it learned in late March that a draft of the script "was taken by an individual referred to as "our Deep Throat" and surreptitiously circulated without permission to members of the interfaith scholars group.

The bishops conference has disavowed any involvement in obtaining the script or in preparing a confidential report on its review by the scholars group.

But Mark Chopko, general counsel for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement apologizing for "this situation" and advising the scholars group that the draft screenplay is "not considered to be representative of the film and should not the be the subject of further public comment."

A spokeswoman for the Anti-Defamation League acknowledged that its director of interfaith affairs, Rabbi Eugene Corn, was a member of the ad-hoc group, but she denied knowing how the group obtained the script. She said ADL officials have asked Icon to review the film with them in advance.

Mel Gibson ia great actor......

I think that the film''The Passion'' will be good to watch.

Calling him 'anti-semetic' is all wrong ....History is in the past ........
You cannot change history to satisfy certain people and their beleifs!
There will always be people that go against what is 'truth' and what is not truth just for satisfying the majority of people,or for that matter the minority!
History is there for the benefit of all people.....not just to remind us of what happened......but to show us the significance of that time in history.
Mel Gibson I'm sure was or is in no ''wrong doing '' making the film ''The Passion'' as he based it on close to true accounts of the life of Jesus Christ(from what I heard)........if it offends some people(I dont see why it should .....as it is history!)then it should be people that decide on what is right or wrong .....and left for all people to make that desicion on their own......
I mean........do we have a say in what is shown on tv or if it offends some viewers???
No we dont.........If one wishes to watch a show then one does......one has the option of turning their tv set off ......or if it offends one so much......throwing it out the window!(as long as one is aware that there are no people out side.......bottom floor is ok! )

What I mean is that ''The Passion '' seems to have gotten a few bad remarks because it supposedly will offend certain people........
Well, I think that it should be left for the people to decide if that is the case........and then most likely the majority does not in any way mean it is anti-semetic.......because history is history......what happened as a true occurance should not offend or mislead just to please a majority or a minority of people!
.........You cannot change history .
History whether it offends one or a few and is of true significance of past should be left as that.......
There are many things that offend me from the past and I'm sure there are people out there that certain things offend them.......Can they be changed?
No ..........it is the past and hopefully we learn from the wrongs in the past and not repeat them....
I say good luck to Mel Gibson .......and he has rights as any other person has rights!
helen

Its strange actually because the idea even 100 years ago that a person had a right to vote was only under the conditions that they were landowners, this pretty much covers most if not all cultures.

I would consider that the restrictions with respect to who had a right to be heard in those days was much more with respect to elders and priests, as well as
heads of state.

No one else really had a right to be heard.

Any thoughts?

But one comment on this...

Jewish leaders in particular have raised concerns that the movie, titled "The Passion," might portray Jews as collectively guilty for Christ's crucifixion.

Catholics have expressed worries that Gibson might use the film to challenge church teachings.

Duh? They can be concerned all they want, but basically it's true.... As for challenging the teachings, any true portrayal of Jesus would challenge the teachings, as his Jesus was not for an organized clergy (hell, they basically collaborated in his death, so go figure)....