I WENT to see Mel Gibson's much debated film The Passion Of The Christ expecting to be disgusted by the violence. But I watched it to the end with a growing despair; not of the film, but of the publicity and critical appraisal of it.

The Passion seemed to me to be a portrayal which can be taken at two levels and to my mind Gibson allows for both interpretations.

The first is the traditional offering to the faithful which I suspect reflects Gibson's personal belief. There is no open mysticism and dogma, but strong implications.

We are left with a sense of guilt that we betrayed and murdered the Son of God who nevertheless sacrificed Himself for our salvation.

The second, and perhaps more universal theme, gives a view of the unity of Jesus with all mankind. It is a message that man's continuing brutality and its sanitisation by the media is particularly dangerous because, in the end, the reality is we inflict these things on ourselves.

The intense suffering and humility of Jesus in Gibson's film indicates He was entirely human yet was much more than He appeared.

Despite the publicity surrounding the film, I counted only 30 people in the cinema, albeit on a Monday night. This amounts to a disconcerting apathy on the part of the typical British public towards a subject that really should concern us. Then there is the publicity which reflects the shallowness of us all, emphasising the blood and gore, analysing Mel Gibson's personal life and denouncing the dialogue because it is not in English.

The protests that it is anti-Semitic, overlooking the obvious cruelty of the Roman thugs and not mentioning the Jews in the film who had compassion and helped Jesus, also give pause for thought.

E Ralph,

Kirkcroft,

Wigginton, York.

Updated: 09:34 Monday, April 12, 2004