[Greapyjeory]

Dear Richard,
In your latest post you write; "Anything that will get people talking about the Lord is a good thing in our opinion because we dearly want for their sake for them to be introduced to Him." This I find to be a troubling idea, also reflected in the media reports about what different churches are doing with this movie. Richard- our main effort as Christians is not to 'get people talking about the Lord' or to 'introduce them' to Christ. Many who listened to Him when he preached or who had just heard about Him 'talked about Him.' But as the Gospel informs us, "many turned away." Our main effort is that people listen to Christ and have faith; and without conversion faith is impossible. It is in this sense that we could at least question the assertion that Mr Gibson's movie actually does faithfully represent the Gospel of St John; the Gospel is not simply an historical narrative, a 'story' which we can then transfer to a movie screen. It is the true image of Christ as revealed by & within the Church thru the Holy Spirit; and it is also that Christ Who seeks to draw us to repentance. Only to the degree that the representation of this Gospel image is true as the Church defines it should this be taken as being equal to what the church offers to us. Again I question the extent that this movie Christ is truly Christ and I question whether by watching this movie one is any closer to true conversion which after all must involve a long-term struggle of repentance.
Of course it is possible that someone may eventually truly find Christ thru this movie- I do not discount the possibility; but still is it not true that this movie then could only at best serve as a 'threshold' experience something which may lead one to the Church but could not possibly replace it? And I suppose that is the point here- usually conversion or strengthening of the faith is accomplished from within what is fully of the Church- using what is from outside of the Church to convert others must be handled with great sobriety & discernment- otherwise exactly what are we converting people to? Thus it is my feeling that we must be very careful Richard about saying that this movie, "is His desire as well."
You do Richard bring up many interesting points concerning what is useful for bringing people to faith; in my own poor mind just to get some clarity I have come up with a kind of 'formula'.1)there is what is from fully within the Church; normally this is what should be used to bring people to the Church. 2)there is what is not from fully within the Church but which is morally helpful; with discernment this may be used. 3)the two should never be confused.
I do not think you should confuse Mr Gibson's movie & Tolkien. Remember that a basic claim for the integrity of Mr Gibson's movie is that it is an authentic representation of the Gospel; Tolkien never claimed this for his books.
Lastly when you brought up the issue of 'images' and 'seeing' I remembered the advice of St Nikodemos of Mt Athos; "Guard your sight well then for it is more refined {ie. than the other senses}...But those images which we have impressed upon our imagination through our eyes, and curious eyes at that, we either cannot wipe them out at all or we can only after much time & great effort." Movies are not equivalent to the Holy Gospels.
In Chrsit- Fr R