Actor Jim Caviezal: Snubbed by Hollywood after playing Our Lord in “The Passion of The Christ”

James Patrick “Jim” Caviezal, born 26th September 1968, is an American actor who is best known for his role as Jesus Christ in the 2013 film, The Passion of the Christ, an experience that left a deep impression on him. In 1996, Caviezel married Kerri Browitt, a high school English teacher. They have adopted three children with special needs. They are both devout Catholics and they are active in the Pro-Life campaign. Caviezel has been a featured public speaker at various religious venues since the release of The Passion of the Christ.

“The Passion of the Christ” star Jim Caviezel details how Hollywood turned its back on him after portraying Jesus. (Getty Images)

From The Blaze

Jim Caviezel, who portrayed Jesus Christ in the 2004 film “The Passion of the Christ,” opened up in a recent interview about how Hollywood snubbed him after his portrayal of Jesus.

“All of a sudden I stopped being one of five most popular actors in the studio, and I hadn’t done anything wrong. I just played Jesus,” Caviezel told Polish film critic Lukasz Adamski.

Caviezel added that everyone has their cross to bear, and that judgment is waiting for everyone.

“Was I personally affected by this rejection? Well, everyone has their cross to bear,” he said. “The world changes … but I will not be in this world forever. Neither will the producers from Hollywood. At some point, everyone will have to answer for what they have done.

Caviezel portrayed Jesus when he was 33 years old and said he believed that it meant something for him to portray Jesus at the same age that he was crucified, and didn’t consider it a coincidence that the two shared the same initials.

“Don’t you tell me it was a coincidence!” he said. “There are no coincidences. I keep hearing about ‘accidents’ and ‘strokes of luck.’ Secularization affects the entire world, including the USA. Only atheists believe in coincidence.”

He continued, and affirmed his faith by calling out naysayers who are of the world, and not just in this world. “There are no coincidences for God,” he said. “Even when God resurrects the dead, they will say it happened by accident.”

The actor noted that despite working in Hollywood, it never tainted his faith — on the contrary, it made it stronger.

“I’ve never forgotten that the name of Jesus is above all else,” he said. “It is also the most controversial name of all times. Love is controversial and he impersonates love. Jesus was telling the Romans about love and they killed him because of that. ‘Who is that man to tell me what kind of person I’m supposed to be?’ – they asked arrogantly. He was betrayed by his own people and abandoned by everyone. My duty was not only to show it all on the screen. My real duty is to live in accordance with the gospel every day and to give witness to the truth.”   Read on…

Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you” – (Matthew 5:11-12).


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Actor Jim Caviezal: Snubbed by Hollywood after playing Our Lord in “The Passion of The Christ”

  1. Faithfully, Desperately says:

    Lovely post 🙂

  2. johnhenrycn says:

    Cinematic and theatrical portrayals of Jesus’ face are unseemly.

  3. toadspittle says:

    “Cinematic and theatrical portrayals of Jesus’ face are unseemly.”

    Maybe, like our beloved Muslim brothers, we should condemn these portrayals as utterly sinful, and so consign their exponents to eternal damnation.
    …And justifying the beheading of the perpetrators.
    Not that we Catholics even dream of doing horrid hings like that any more.
    Nowadays,, we turn the other cheek. A bit, anyway. We are relatively nicer.
    We have learned to keep our heads, in fact.

    Catholics seem to endorse the exact opposite by stuffing their churches full of the most debased, unseemly, and vulgar statues and paintings imaginable.
    All this is clearly “unseemly, “Excellent word – and spot on, here.
    As usual, with JH – I entirely agree. The portrayals certainly are unseemly.
    …How could they possibly not be?

  4. johnhenrycn says:

    Figurative art is in a different category. It can be bad art, but it’s not objectionable in and of itself. My view is that representations of Jesus’ face by living people on stage and screen are presumptuous and borderline blasphemous, not to mention the risk that even a very good actor may later be found to have a secret life full of moral turpitude, thus forever ruining people’s memories of his fictional depiction of Our Lord.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s