In thinking through the historical controversy between Protestants and Roman Catholics over the Second Commandment and its application to pictures of Jesus, I've tried to bring the principal contributions of that controversy to bear on Mel Gibson's, The Passion of the Christ, cautioning my own congregation and readers carefully to consider that the method and purpose of this movie is not primarily to teach, but rather to lead the viewers to worship our Lord in the midst of His Passion. Thus, I argue, this is the very thing our Reformation fathers denounced as a violation of the Second Commandment: We are not to use images of any Member of the Trinity as helps in worship.
It's interesting that most Protestants have, in the present, argued in defense of Gibson's movie with almost exactly the same arguments as Roman Catholics used against Protestants at the time of the Reformation.
So what ought we to conclude from this?
Yes, the Reformers might have been wrong and it may be new light has come to Protestants today that allows us to see the errors of the Reformers' position. If so, then the following excerpt from a Roman Catholic priest, himself citing Pope John Paul II, will not be cause for alarm, but rather hope.
Here follows a summary of the historic Roman Catholic position on this matter. And if you can't read it all, at least read the second-to-last paragraph in which Cardinal Castrillon says he'd be willing to exchange a few of his sermons for scenes from The Passion of the Christ--it's a telling quote to end on, isn't it? And for the record, I remain convinced the reformers--not Roman Catholics or Orthodox--are rightly dividing the Word of God in this matter.
(Note: Although early on in the Reformation Luther was critical of the images of the Roman Catholic church, later he came to tolerate, and even embrace, those images. So although most Protestants have rejected images in worship, Lutheran practice is closer to that of Rome herself.)