Faith in face of Celluloid

NEW FILM ON CHRIST
Text of the news report today in the DNA newspaper of Mumbai and the full text of my emailed response to their questions earlier in the week. The DNA ignored the pith of the response, as possibly it did of the other Chuirch spokesmen it quotes, possibly because it did not suit newspapers seeking controversy with no reference to facts or truth.
New film may spark crisis of faith
DNA Mumbai, Sunday, November 25, 2007 09:45 [IST]

Clergy says Hollywood will confuse the faithful about what to believe: Bible or movie By Anjali Thomas
If Jesus had a grave, he’d be turning in it. Even though he was believed to have been born somewhere between 6 and 4 BC, controversy still dogs his footsteps. Even as the dust from the attacks on Shekhar Kapur’s movie Elizabeth: The Golden Age begins to settle, a new controversy is rearing its head.
The party in question is Hollywood, and the bone of contention is a $20 million movie, Aquarian Gospel, which will portray Jesus as a wandering sage who visited India, lived in Buddhist monasteries, and fought the evils of the caste system. And no, this is not the work of an overactive Hollywood scriptwriter’s imagination, but based on a book The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ, written in 1908 by Levi H Dowling. Dowling claimed to have based his research on early manuscripts like the Akashic Records, which document the life of Jesus Christ between the ages of 13 and 30 - something the Bible only touches upon.
“It’s easy to exploit religious history for media purposes, and I’m sure that this movie is a potential box office hit,” says Father Myron Pereira, director of the Xavier Institute of Communications.
“There is lots of literature on Jesus, like the gospel of Thomas and Philip that are not part of the official canon. In the ancient world, the fact that something did take place took second place to the meaning of what took place. It was only later that fact was sifted from fiction, and canonised. The Gospels place their emphasis on Jesus’s message, not on the personal details of his life. Writings which have not been validated by the Church are called Apocryphal scrolls, and are concerned with the sensational elements of Jesus’s life, often fictitious,” he adds.
The movie will be shot using actors and computer animation in the style of Beowulf and 300. Director Drew Heriot has been quoted as saying the film would “follow Christ’s journey to the East, where he encounters other traditions”.
Hollywood is glamourising a theory that has been around for centuries. In 1894, Nicholas Notovitch authored The Unknown Life of Christ, where he wrote about Jesus recuperating from a broken leg in a monastery near Ladakh. German author, Holger Kersten’s book, Jesus Lived In India examines the evidence of Christ’s life in India and the Middle East.
“Aquarian Gospel is another in a long line of controversial books and movies, many of which have stirred up a storm, but have died down without affecting the Christian faith,” says Rev Babu Joseph, spokesperson, Catholics Bishop Conference of India. He adds that serious Biblical scholars claim no hard evidence to suggest that Jesus came to India.
When it comes to entertainment, it’s a question of creative licence. In response to the criticism that Elizabeth was an “anti-papal travesty”, director Shekhar Kapur told DNA, “I am a filmmaker, and what is the use of making films that do not evoke any kind of reaction.”
There has always been a clash between freedom of expression, the media and the arts, and traditions and beliefs that people hold sacred. Dr John Dayal, president of the All India Catholic Union says, “Hollywood is not the most pious institution in the US.” He adds: “I have always maintained that the Censor Board and government institutions have to take suo motu action if they wish to. They should not pass the buck to the Church, nor should the Church allow itself to be caught in a ‘damned if we say yes, and damned if we say no’, situation. The Indian law is clear - no one can hurt a community’s feelings, nor should anyone do or depict anything that can provoke tension between communities.”
According to both Rev Joseph and Father Myron, the film will come as a shock to the average Christian not properly initiated in Biblical literature. “They will begin to doubt what is true and what is not, which is never a good thing,” says Rev Joseph.
------------------
DNA,. Mumbai, questions to and answers from Dr John Dayal
Member, National Integration Council, Govt of India and President, All India Catholic Union {Founded 1919, representing the 16 million Catholic Laity in India]
Question 1. This is the third or fourth movie which will in a way be 'attacking' or 'probing' into Christian beliefs. The others were Da Vinci Code, Last Temptation of Christ, and Elizabeth. What do you make of Hollywood's take on this? Do you think that Hollywood is taking too much of a creative license with the Bible?
Answer: Hollywood is not exactly the most pious institution in the US, and the American First Amendment on Freedom of Expression has nothing to do with it. Please remember that when Hollywood wants to, it can have its own policing and its own moral code. It was Hollywood that hounded Communists that once banned black men being shown in love with white women in support of prevailing codes against miscegenation and in support of the prevailing racist mood. Though it has made Old Testament films, it also has, as has Europe, made many films that apparently seem to portray Jesus in all too human a light, none of which can be supported by textual material from the New Testament.
Hollywood makes films which it hopes will make money. They range from the anti spiritual film called the Exorcist, on to many others. Films such as The Last Temptation of Christ have had some critical, but no financial success, though critics too, by the way, have been generous to such films as apparent expressions of the freedom of the media. Regarding Shekhar Kapoor and his film Elizabeth, the Christian community need hardly be bothered. When a few European churchmen speak of this matter, they do so in the backdrop of the Catholic Protestants schism of the past. The issues today are different – they relate to issues of combating racism, of gender justice, of relating to sexual preferences, and on getting rid of ghosts of the last two centuries or more. Queens and princesses, living or dead, are the stuff of entertainment now, not of strife.
By the way, there is a a long tradition in Hollywood for the Faith groups to have their own codes – not censorship – and their own rewards for films they approve so their followers are well guided. If you do not like the film, don’t go and see it, and certainly don’t buy a ticket to make the producer rich.
Question 2. How will the new movie, based on the Acquarian Gospel affect the church, and more importantly, the average Catholic? Will there be protests as we have seen in earlier movies?
Answer: As I said during the controversy on the Da Vinci Code, I have always maintained that the Censor Board and government institutions have to take Suo Moto action if they wish to. They made the rules, they have the powers. They should not pass the buck to the Church, nor should the Church allow itself to be painted into a corner in a “damned if we say yes, and damned if we say no” situation. The Indian law is very clear. No one can hurt people’s feelings, Christians, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, nor should anyone do or depict anything that can provoke enmity or tension between communities.
But there is no scope for anyone to do a private moral or theocratic policing. I am against any bigoted protests or moral policing, especially by the Church. And in our faith, of course, there is no place for violent protest at all.
I cannot – ands even if I could, I certainly would NOT -- issue a fatwa to anyone to have or not to have a protest, but I can all but guarantee that even if there is a protest somewhere, they will remain very peaceful.
Question 3. Is there any truth in the fact that Jesus came to India and used the knowledge that he got in his teachings?

Answer: There is nothing in the Bible about this. Or in any other book. There are no corroborative texts of that time to sustain any such thesis. Mahavira and Buddha were born five hundred years ago, stood against what we today call Brahmanism. Buddha’s influence must have spread along the Silk route and the road to Damascus and to Rome. Having travelled in those parts, I can tell you the curly locks of the Buddha and his flowing robes as depicted in a million statues are strikingly evidence of Hellenic influence on Buddha’s followers, at least the writers and artists of the time. The drapery came from the near West! Silk and thoughts traveled in both directions.

Unlike perhaps today when there has been such bigotry, those must have been times of great intellectual ferment and great intellectual democracy and communication. Aristotle, Plato, The giants of Egypt and Rome and China, and why not great men of India, breathing the same air, give or take a few centuries are part of the exchange of ideas and thoughts. If silk can travel across continents, why not thoughts. Paper certainly did.

But at the end of the day, one looks for tangible evidence -- and there is none.

By the way, may I also comment on other occasional stories in the media of the grave of Jesus in Kashmir. If there is indeed a grave remotely traceable to the first century AD, I hope it is empty. To me, Christ has risen to come again. The grave is empty, wherever it is.

My faith does not depend on such issues.

Hollywood of course specializes in fiction, and in fictionalizing truth. But if research proves an interaction between Christ and India in the years before his private ministry, the years that he spend wandering, it will only go to further strengthen my faith as it will be added evidence to prove the historicity of Jesus. Jesus is a historical figure. Of how many others can this be said?