In commenting on The Passion, my friend Bill Park, who is, not incidentally, a man of wide learning and profound Christian faith, made what I considered an interesting and entirely plausible point: That by concentrating exclusively on Christ’s physical suffering, Mel Gibson had left out the theological context—Christ’s divinity, Christ’s teachings—that make the suffering meaningful. (In my posting, I quoted excerpts of a review Bill has written.) But all weekend, the emails streamed in.

About four-fifths of my correspondents described the effects The Passion has had on them personally. One saw the movie last week, then returned to church yesterday for the first time in years. Another went directly from the theater to visit his mother, who is ill and living in a nursing home, because the film made him want to spend time with her. Another explained that the film has helped him to pray the rosary. Still another, a widow, said the film reminded her that Our Lady understood the suffering she had endured as her husband lay dying of cancer. There is no gainsaying personal experience such as this. Something powerful and wonderful is going on here.

But the remaining one-fifth or so of my correspondents wrote to me in terms of abuse—any critic of The Passion is “spiritually blind,” to quote one of the milder of these emails, or, to quote another, “an ass.” Now, here at the Corner we all get a lot of nasty emails on every subject. But vitriol in defense of the Prince of Peace?