Ill-advised attacks on Mel Gibson's The Passion may backfire

I have been amazed that the attacks on Mel Gibson's film The Passion, continue unabated long after the film has been acquitted of any shadow of anti-semitism by a broad spectrum of Christian, Jewish, and secular viewers who have been invited to preliminary screenings of the film. In fact, the vast majority of viewers, even those who went in fearing the worst, have been effusive in their praise of the film, many of them confessing that it reduced them to tears.

Despite this, the onslaught continues. The January 18th, 2004 issue of the New York Times, in it's Arts & Leisure pages, featured a malicious piece of mud slinging by Frank Rich, with the innocuous-sounding title, "The Pope's Thumbs Up for Gibson's 'Passion.'" While admitting that he has not seen the film and doesn't know if any of the charges against it are true, Rich impugnes the motives of Gibson and those involved in the promotion of "The Passion," derisively maligning their use of the Pope's personal remark after a private screening of the film, that "It is as it was." Rich writes:

What can be said without qualification is that the marketing of this film remains a masterpiece of ugliness typical of our cultural moment, when hucksters wield holier-than-thou piety as a club for their own profit. For months now, Mr. Gibson and his supporters have tried to slur the religiosity of anyone who might dissent from his rollout of "The Passion."

From another quarter altogether, Rabbi Daniel Lapin has warned that the glut of ill-advised attacks that have come out of Hollywood and the East-coast media establishment are not only unwarranted but mean spirited and may backfire on the Jewish community. Not only does he believe that the charges of anti-semitism made against Gibson's film have been utterly refuted, but he worries about the integrity of those raising such charges:

As an Orthodox rabbi with a wary eye on Jewish history which has an ominous habit of repeating itself, I fear that these protests, well-intentioned though some may be, are a mistake. I believe those who publicly protest Mel Gibson's film lack moral legitimacy. What is more, I believe their actions are not only wrong but even recklessly ill-advised and shockingly imprudent. I address myself to all my fellow Jews when I say that your interests are not being served by many of those organizations and self-appointed defenders who claim to be acting on your behalf. Just ask yourself who most jeopardizes Jewish safety today, people acting in the name of Islam or Christianity?

Again, Rabbi Lapin questions the motives of those-- especially Jewish critics-- who have been attacking the Gibson film:

I believe the attacks on Mel Gibson are a mistake because while they may be in the interests of Jewish organizations who raise money with the specter of anti-Semitism, and while they may be in the interests of Jewish journalists at the New York Times and elsewhere who are trying to boost their careers, they are most decidedly not in the interests of most American Jews who go about their daily lives in comfortable harmony with their Christian fellow citizens.

For the full article by Rabbi Lapin, see his article in National Review (September 26, 2003), entitled Protesting Passion".