Peggy Noonan: 'Passion' and Intrigue- The story of the Vatican and Mel Gibson's film gets curiouser

Opinion Journal ^ | 01/22/04 | Peggy Noonan

[Pokey78]

On the matter of the pope, "The Passion" and the famous papal quote, you are perhaps perplexed. You are not alone. This is a story marked by, among other things, a certain amount of intrigue, and some of it is like something out of "The DaVinci Code."

[presidio9]

And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. -Matthew 16:18

Look: We can go back and forth quoting scripture if you like, but that is really not the point of this website. This is at heart a political forum, and it is incumbant for members of a political movement to show some toleration. Why don't you do us all a favor and keep your religious convictions to yourself?

[Barnacle]

He's not the true "Holy Father" nor the way to Him. Period.

Thank you for your backward @ss bigoted ignoramus opinion.

[over3Owithabrain]

Uhh, my inital response was to a thread article about the pope, for goodness sake! Are you saying that thread should be pulled and all others that mention religion? Ignore my post if you wish, that's all. And get rid of the liberal argument that someone not agreeing with the pope/Vatican is "intolerant". It's beneath you and this forum.

[over3Owithabrain]

Great response. Congrats.

[philosofy123]

Mel Rules! Let us all go in droves on Feb 24 to see this movie, and to make it the most watched movie in the history of this planet.

[Barnacle]

Matthew 23:9 "Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven." -JESUS

OK What do you call your father? (BTW, Dad is synonymous with father.)

[presidio9]

BTW, the Vatican has done quite a bit of denouncing. not the least of which in the last year - Iraq, capture of Saddam, etc. You can spin, insult, and get as defensive as you want. I have no need for the pope, nothing against Christ-loving Catholics.

The only one getting defensive, insulting or spinning is yourself. The idea that the Vatican denounced the capture of Saddam is ridiculous. The idea that the Pope should ever endorse war is equally so. You are free to have "no need for the Pope, (capitalize proper names please)," but your compulision to repeatedly inform the world of that fact is nothing more than a denouncement of those who do. Do you really think anyone here cares how you feel about the Pope? Why, then, do you feel the need to tell us?

[presidio9]

I find it hard to believe that -- having been so scrupulous in the previewing and promoting of the movie to date -- Gibson's folks would play fast and loose with the Pope.

Did you read the article? Nobody played "fast and loose."

[Barnacle]

Thank you. Yours post takes the cake in its own little way too.

[prognostigaator]

true

[over3Owithabrain]

Do you really think anyone here cares how you feel about the Pope?

Apparently you do. Perhaps you shouldn't.

[presidio9]

Apparently you do. Perhaps you shouldn't.

Nope. I care not how you feel about the Pope. It's when you make ignorant justifications that I start to have a problem.

[over3Owithabrain]

You begin a discussion with me by going on a Dean'like spew of garbage, then you expect me to engage you in a logical debate? No thanks.

[Pelayo]

It is part of the general demise of the Church despite having had a great pope for 25 years. It shows how institutions are doomed and cannot speak truthfully.

The Church in its 2000 (1600 according to some fools) year history has survived a HELL OF A LOT worse then a bad PR guy. Your dancing on it's grave is a little early don't you think.

[over3Owithabrain]

I don't need justification. Don't need the pope. Deal with it.

[Romulus]

I understand how you feel, but with respect, I want to ask if you've ever been in a position in which large numbers of people have a serious stake in matters you've been known to speak about. I have, as an institutional equities analyst. I was paid to say things publicly -- things that could have serious financial consequences. I can tell you that no matter how carefully I tried to choose my words, people with an agenda will seize on your tiniest inflection and twist it entirely out of shape if it serves their purpose. I was never in the really big leagues, but I was close enough to know how the game is played by cynical operators who don't give a damn for nuance or subtlety or qualified discussion of possible outcomes. Much less do they care about the speaker's long-term credibility. It is extremely difficult in such predatory circumstances to retain control of one's message in its integrity. There's an unimaginable pressure to be on the record and with the program. Moreover, the bankers, traders, and salesmen who're supposedly your colleagues are watching you like hungry hyenas for a comment that can be profitably misconstrued and exploited.

Did the Pope utter the words as quoted? Probably so. What's more problematic is whether he intended to be quoted thus as his complete and definitive opinion, and whether it's fair that we demand this of him against his will.

[presidio9]

Uhh, my inital response was to a thread article about the pope, for goodness sake! Are you saying that thread should be pulled and all others that mention religion? Ignore my post if you wish, that's all. And get rid of the liberal argument that someone not agreeing with the pope/Vatican is "intolerant". It's beneath you and this forum.

First things first. Putting quotes around a word ascribes them. I never called you "intolerant." "Ignorant," yes. "Intolerant," no.
Second, the article was not about the Pope at all, but about how the media misused the Pope.
Third, you went out of your way to tell us that you have no use for the Pope. Fine. I have no problem with that. Others here feel the same way. I think someone here mentioned a televangelist that I have no use for. If that works as worship for him, who am I to tell him he's wrong. However (and this is where I have the Problem), you went on to try to justify your opinion with an ignorant statement about the Pope's reaction to a war (Catholic leaders have no business endorsing war), a lame theological argument (Jesus himself named the first Pope), and a flat-out lie (the Vatican did not denounce Saddam's capture.

[Barnacle]

Matthew 23:9 "Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven." -JESUS

Don't you get some curious looks when you write "God" in the blank on a form that ask your father's name?

That's when the psychologist says to you, "Right. And, I suppose your name is Jesus, isn't it?"

(Note to those who might think I'm violating the Third Commandment. I think God understands that I am using his name not in vain, but in defense from bigoted and ignorant misuse of His Word.)

[presidio9]

I don't need justification.

Then why did you try three times to come up with one?

[Barnacle]

You begin a discussion with me by going on a Dean'like spew of garbage, then you expect me to engage you in a logical debate? No thanks.

You drew first blood Bozo Boy.