As a seventh grader watching it on TV in 1981, I have the searing memory of the upside-down crucifixion and beheading, and for years I wanted to see it again, but could not remember what film it was, or where I could get it. Now it's on DVD.
Since then, I've been through Benet Academy (Benedictine College prep H.S.) and Opus Dei's pilgrimage to Rome documented on my MuSeeks "about" website, where I show pictures of the Mammertime prison (near the Roman Forum) where St. Peter was held prior to his execution. I've taken Dr. Scott Hahn's course on Romans (available on 13 cassettes from Steubenville University in Ohio), and so I am keenly aware of the movie's strengths and weaknesses theologically and historically.
Good: You witness the passion of Peter's faith, and physical trials. I was inspired by his financial ups and downs, his tent-making business, his times of poverty and unemployment. I've wondered how he financed his traveling ministry, ultimately to Rome, and this movie answered a lot. It made me re-visit Acts, Mark and Luke, Psalms, Nehemiah and more. This movie is a great introduction/invitation to revisit your Bible and/or Torah.
Bad (for Catholics and Christians alike): In Romans 3:26, Peter never said you are "justified by faith ALONE". The true translation is "justified by faith APART FROM works"...Martin Luther unfortunately (and purposefully, in order to attack the authority of Christ's Church) created a lot of misunderstanding and division amongst us Christians and Catholics, by mistranslating and misinterpreting from the Latin (and he was no expert in Latin). As a result, too many protestants today think that "works" means you don't need to do any good deeds in this world, if you just have faith alone. That's no good. So abortion or murder is OK, or letting your guard down is OK, as long as you have "faith alone"? Nope. St. Paul meant "works" as the over-burdened rituals his fellow Jewish brethren were performing, such as animal blood sacrifices. You still have to do good deeds and honor the sacraments.
Parts of the film are thus, highly irritating to those Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Anglecan, whom know the truth about Romans 3:26. It is an untruth in the movie, perhaps allowed merely to appeal to a wider demographic whom couldn't tell the difference. But that point is central to the whole story. Paul did not deny the Sacraments in particular (such as Laying of Hands--authentic Ordination--, Matrimony, Baptism, Confession and Communion). You still need those, in addition to faith, or you are missing a big thing.
Also, little is said of St. Peter's wife. I understand Christ called the Apostles to "leave" their families, to "come follow me". In the film, it is subversive to Catholic priestly celibacy, (which St. Peter in Romans discusses at length as the preferred state). The film shows Peter lying in bed with wife, even years after Christ, he should have left her by then. It is an indirect attack on our present Popes, suggesting (contrary to Romans) that celibacy should be dismantled. It has an overall liberal karma which should be offensive to truth.
On the positive side, the movie did show the Authority Peter had over his other Apostles, that there Was a hierarchy...that is Biblical. But why did they not show the Bishop and Priest Ordinations necessary to establish the Church of Macedonia, Galatia, etc.? That too was subversive, suggesting (like many evangelists in business suits today) that anyone and his dog can go start yet another bogus denomination of their own will.
Since then, I've been through Benet Academy (Benedictine College prep H.S.) and Opus Dei's pilgrimage to Rome documented on my MuSeeks "about" website, where I show pictures of the Mammertime prison (near the Roman Forum) where St. Peter was held prior to his execution. I've taken Dr. Scott Hahn's course on Romans (available on 13 cassettes from Steubenville University in Ohio), and so I am keenly aware of the movie's strengths and weaknesses theologically and historically.
Good: You witness the passion of Peter's faith, and physical trials. I was inspired by his financial ups and downs, his tent-making business, his times of poverty and unemployment. I've wondered how he financed his traveling ministry, ultimately to Rome, and this movie answered a lot. It made me re-visit Acts, Mark and Luke, Psalms, Nehemiah and more. This movie is a great introduction/invitation to revisit your Bible and/or Torah.
Bad (for Catholics and Christians alike): In Romans 3:26, Peter never said you are "justified by faith ALONE". The true translation is "justified by faith APART FROM works"...Martin Luther unfortunately (and purposefully, in order to attack the authority of Christ's Church) created a lot of misunderstanding and division amongst us Christians and Catholics, by mistranslating and misinterpreting from the Latin (and he was no expert in Latin). As a result, too many protestants today think that "works" means you don't need to do any good deeds in this world, if you just have faith alone. That's no good. So abortion or murder is OK, or letting your guard down is OK, as long as you have "faith alone"? Nope. St. Paul meant "works" as the over-burdened rituals his fellow Jewish brethren were performing, such as animal blood sacrifices. You still have to do good deeds and honor the sacraments.
Parts of the film are thus, highly irritating to those Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Anglecan, whom know the truth about Romans 3:26. It is an untruth in the movie, perhaps allowed merely to appeal to a wider demographic whom couldn't tell the difference. But that point is central to the whole story. Paul did not deny the Sacraments in particular (such as Laying of Hands--authentic Ordination--, Matrimony, Baptism, Confession and Communion). You still need those, in addition to faith, or you are missing a big thing.
Also, little is said of St. Peter's wife. I understand Christ called the Apostles to "leave" their families, to "come follow me". In the film, it is subversive to Catholic priestly celibacy, (which St. Peter in Romans discusses at length as the preferred state). The film shows Peter lying in bed with wife, even years after Christ, he should have left her by then. It is an indirect attack on our present Popes, suggesting (contrary to Romans) that celibacy should be dismantled. It has an overall liberal karma which should be offensive to truth.
On the positive side, the movie did show the Authority Peter had over his other Apostles, that there Was a hierarchy...that is Biblical. But why did they not show the Bishop and Priest Ordinations necessary to establish the Church of Macedonia, Galatia, etc.? That too was subversive, suggesting (like many evangelists in business suits today) that anyone and his dog can go start yet another bogus denomination of their own will.