Mel Gibson Attacks Vatican

NewsMax.com ^ | 9/13/02 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

Actor Mel Gibson, a staunchly orthodox Roman Catholic who will play Christ in an upcoming movie, says the Vatican is a "wolf in sheep's clothing" and that he doesn't believe in the present-day Church as an institution.

Gibson, who calls himself an "old-fashioned Catholic" devoted to the Latin mass and pre-Vatican II Catholicism told the Italian newspaper Il Giornale that he believes in God and is happy that his only daughter has decided to become a nun.

In Rome to film "Passion," a new film about the final hours of Christ's life, Gibson, 46 recalled that he had a stern Catholic upbringing as a youngster in Australia, where he attended Catholic school.

"My love for religion was transmitted to me by my father," he told the newspaper. "But I do not believe in the Church as an institution." Gibson said he has a private chapel at his home in Malibu, Calif., at which mass is celebrated every Sunday in Latin.

The replacement of the Latin liturgy by vernacular languages has caused many Catholics such as Gibson to seek out parishes where the Latin mass is celebrated on Sundays. The Vatican allows Latin masses but requires permission to be granted by local bishops.

Vatican II rules permit local bishops to apply for so-called "indults" - exceptions that allow mass to be celebrated in Latin. In recent years there has been a growing movement to restore Latin as the language of the mass. Adherents point to the fact that the pope continues to say his private daily mass in Latin

Gibson's objections to the post-Vatican II Church echo those of the members of the Society of St. Pius X, which broke away from Rome partially because of the abandonment of the Latin or Tridentine liturgy. It has chapels scattered around the U.S., where the liturgy is the pre-Vatican II Tridentine mass celebrated in Latin.

In the U.S. the Society claims it has 43 priests, 60 seminarians, 15 priories, 98 chapels and 26 schools.

According to Britain's Times. Gibson and his wife, Robyn, have been married for more than 20 years. He is fiercely protective of his seven children (six sons and one daughter, who he says wants to be a nun, which he is very happy about). He says he was attracted to the story of Christ's last hours before the crucifixion because it is "the drama of a man torn between his divine spirit and his earthly weakness."

In the Garden of Gethsemane, on the road to Calvary and at Golgotha, Gibson said, Jesus is often described as being calmly resigned to his suffering and death despite St. Luke's account of Christ's agony in the Garden of Olives, where he underwent an attack of hematidrosa - where victims sweat blood as a result of profound emotion or great fear.

Gibson says, "my Jesus will be shaken by his human suffering. Real blood will flow from the wound in his side, and the screams of his crucifixion will be real as well."

Catholic sources told the Times that Gibson sought the advice of theologians and prelates in Rome for his film and that the actor has strong views on divorce, abortion and contraception.

[patent]

What percentage of independent parishes have you investigated to arrive at your blanket statement?

First of all, my “blanket statement” was hardly a blanket statement. I said two things:

Many of these independent Churches are sedevacantists, feeneyites, etc.

and

However, I have yet to find an “independent” Church that was in communion with the Pope.

The first said “MANY” not “ALL.” This is not a blanket statement. The second was a statement of my experiences, which notably omitted any claim I was talking about all independent parishes. You may wish to try to exaggerate my statements to help your argument, but don’t expect me to play along with your twisting my words.

Second, I have checked with enough I’m comfortable with the above statements, and have found no exceptions so far. Do you know of a single parish you’d like to offer, that claims independent status, is not actively negotiating to return, and yet you think is not schismatic? How about ones that are negotiating to return?

If the pastor of an independent parish attempts to become "non-independent" with each bishop of the (arch)diocese in which the parish is located, is that pastor really "not in communion with Rome"?

If the pastor is working on regularizing the situation my normal course would be to withhold comment on him. I would leave it to the Bishop. Either way, I pray he is successful, and that his ordinary will give him the flexibility to practice the traditional faith under the ordinary’s jurisdiction.

How do you define "in communion with Rome"?

LOL. In communion with the Pope, is that better? Picky, picky.

How about if the Pope himself recognizes the achievement and effort of this priest?

Isn’t one of the traditionalist critiques of this Pope that he is often to cozy with schismatics and those of other faiths? I believe he has recognized the achievement and effort of many people, many of whom are not in communion with him.

How about if the priest prays sincerely daily for the local ordinary?

I pray daily for many people, that does not mean I am in communion with them. I don’t see how this is terribly relevant. The Society priests pray for the Pope at Mass, but that doesn’t change the fact that he called that situation a schism, and his word on that is final.

Perhaps the situation is not as cut-and-dry or black-and-white as you like to perceive.

I disagree. The only situation in which it is arguably not cut and dried is in the case of the priest trying to regularize the situation, and even then one withholds comment out of charity, not necessity.

patent  +AMDG

[jjm2111]

My brother and I used to joke before the internet that priests would call 1-800-SERMONS for their homilies. If the sermon was a few steps above abysmal, we said they ordered the Platinum Edition.

I really think there is such a service because my Mom told me that she was talking to her sister one Sunday about the bad sermon she had heard that morning. My Mom described it and my aunt (who lives across the state) said she heard the same one.

[patent]

There was] the temporary suspense of the function of Ecclesia Docens [teaching Church] as about 80 percent of the bishops fell into heresy.

First of all, this statement refers to Bishops, not the clergy overall, nor does it include the Pope. Your statement refereed to the clergy overall, and is contradicted by your own quote which indicates the clergy stood firm. Second, it is well known that many of the Bishops only fell into this heresy under force, and recanted as soon as that threat was lifted. While that does not speak well of their character, it is hardly the same thing. Few contend that a confession of faith elicited under torture or threat of death is a true confession.

patent  +AMDG

[patent]

The colorado one is where Father Berry is, has been and will be based for some time.

patent

[BibChr]

Goodness, what a snotty, supercilious response TO a nice, friendly posting, WRITTEN BY someone who evidently hasn't closely read either of mine. Maybe if you actually read the text in Luke. (More closely than you read my postings.)

No, this time you're totally off the mark.

Dan

[patent]

Same as the changes to the wording in the vernacular in the Consecration of the wine into the Body and Blood of Christ in the Mass. The wording is heretical and as such does not confect at least that part of the sacrament as always taught by the Church and especially declared by the Council of Trent and Pope Saint Pius V in "De Defectibus". See also Saint Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica, III, Q. 78, A.3.

Read it, it doesn’t support your position, neither does trent or Pope St. Pius V.

patent  +AMDG

[xJones]

I disagree, if anyone can pull this off in a respectful manner, it is Gibson. Theres no telling how many seeds can be planted as a result of this film. I look forward to it.

Great point. In a time when Islamics claim to be making so many new converts, this movie is a good idea and Gibson will make an excellent movie.

[patent]

Hmmm so bishops don't count to you.

Noooo, that isn’t what I said. I said that the priests are also clergy, not that the Bishops aren’t clergy.

Or Pope Liberius who even though he did not formally apostasize did accept the "semi-Arian" formulation about the Divinity of Christ.

You mean while being held captive and subject to all the abuse? Pope Liberius stayed firm in the light of all the attacks. Athanasius ran to Pope Liberius time after time, and obeyed his instructions, stayed subject to his jurisdiction, and his rulings. Time after time.

By the way, St. Robert Bellarmine, Docotor of the Church, states that SAINT Felix II DID become the true Pope during this time, with Liberius regaining the papacy upon the death of Felix.

Never heard that, quote please!

I seem to reacall in the past your denying that the clear condemnations of Pope Pius XI against participating in false ecumenism and in false worship with non-Catholics, communicatio in sacris, is applicable in any way to the never-ending antics in what purports to be the "church" today.

I seriously doubt I said any such thing, and would love to see you produce a quote from me contradicting a quote from Pius XI. I have no doubt that in your mind you recall something though. That seems common.

Which is why it is best to resort to photographs with the irrational types:

Ah, personal attacks, always the last refuge!

patent  +AMDG

[wideawake]

There was a case in Hawaii in which several Catholics in Honolulu, disgusted with the liturgical abuses, asked the CDF's permission to attend SSPX Masses as an alternative. The CDF responded by granting them permission after ascertaining that no parish in the diocese could be counted on to provide liturgical orthopraxis to the faithful and that the local ordinary would not comply with the GIRM.

Which prompts the question: why not just correct the abuses?

As to who is to certify - well you and I both know that anyone who has read the GIRM can simply compare the liturgy they see with what the GIRM prescribes and determine whether certain blatant abuses are taking place or not.

[ELS]

The second was a statement of my experiences, which notably omitted any claim I was talking about all independent parishes.

OK.

You may wish to try to exaggerate my statements to help your argument

No, I don't mean to exaggerate your statements. I saw your second statement as implying the conclusion that since you hadn't encountered any independent parishes that are in communion with [the Pope], that there aren't any. (See response above.)

Do you know of a single parish you’d like to offer, that claims independent status, is not actively negotiating to return, and yet you think is not schismatic? How about ones that are negotiating to return?

I know of one independent parish that is actively negotiating with the local ordinary and is not schismatic. I will be glad to FReepmail you the information, but I'm not going to post it on a public forum.

I believe he has recognized the achievement and effort of many people, many of whom are not in communion with him.

Now who's "twisting words"? I asked "What if the Pope himself recognizes the achevement and effort of this [Catholic] priest?" Does the Pope recognize the achievement and effort as a Catholic priest of those who are not in communion with him? I doubt it.

If the pastor is working on regularizing the situation my normal course would be to withhold comment on him.

Since you don't know how many pastors of independent parishes may be working toward regularizing their situation, it is at least slightly inconsistent for you to choose to not follow your normal course.

I disagree.

If the difference between right and wrong was always easy to distinguish, then we wouldn't need moral theologians.

[patent]

I know of one independent parish that is actively negotiating with the local ordinary and is not schismatic. I will be glad to FReepmail you the information, but I'm not going to post it on a public forum.

Please freepermail me. I am curious though, if the priest is still not regularized, why is he not schismatic? I think I would agree that one could suggest he no longer has the schismatic mentality, depending on what he was asking for in the negotiations, but it seems to me that the issue is at least vague.

Now who's "twisting words"? I asked "What if the Pope himself recognizes the achevement and effort of this [Catholic] priest?" Does the Pope recognize the achievement and effort as a Catholic priest of those who are not in communion with him? I doubt it.

You didn’t say as a Catholic priest, so I didn’t understand that, sorry. What did the Pope say?

If the pastor is working on regularizing the situation my normal course would be to withhold comment on him.

Since you don't know how many pastors of independent parishes may be working toward regularizing their situation, it is at least slightly inconsistent for you to choose to not follow your normal course.

No. If I know that the person is taking steps then there is evidence that he may or may not be planning to stay schismatic. If there is no evidence to the contrary though, it is my normal course to assume one who acts outside of the Church’s communion is in fact outside it. I also don’t know what Orthodox priests, Lutheran ministers, etc. are working towards entering the Church, but I regard them as schismatic (as they regard me) because all the evidence points in that direction.

patent  +AMDG

[Domestic Church]

"Particularly given the absolute dearth of adverts, I can only conclude that the focus of the film with regard to "Product Placement" was married priests. "

Touche, Askel5...and married priests would splinter the Church.

[ELS]

What did the Pope say?

From leprechaun9's reply #15 (I confirmed with him that he and I are referring to the same priest):

This priest was recognized by the POPE in a special papal citation for his dedicated service and devotion to his priestly vocation three years ago.

nb: leprechaun9, I flagged you because I quoted you, not to drag you into this discussion.

[Federalist#34]

but Paul didn't say, go ahead and break the 2nd commandment. There is a standard Biblically for how God is to be worshipped. Concern about religious art is indeed, passe in our postmodern culture, but I don't see how we can read the clear language of the passage I cited and think that a film or artistic portrayal of Jesus doesn't violate this.

That is the baseline of my concern, and the pop-culture part of it extends from that.

[Caleb1411]

Others may come closer to God as a result.

. . . as many who have watched the Jesus video have. Granted, Campus Crusade for Christ's Jesus video is not a splashy Hollywood production, but an accurate, well-made Gibson film could be an instrument in the Lord's hands.

[A2J]

but Paul didn't say, go ahead and break the 2nd commandment. There is a standard Biblically for how God is to be worshipped.

What Paul was saying is that he didn't care about how the gospel was preached but the fact that it was. Apparently, he knew that even selfish renditions of the gospel are powerful enough to bring people to the truth. In other words, they make people more thirsty to find the truth in Jesus Christ.

I would be interested in reading what your definition of the Second Commandment is relative to worshiping God. In your opinion, what is the "Biblical standard" of worship?

Concern about religious art is indeed, passe in our postmodern culture, but I don't see how we can read the clear language of the passage I cited and think that a film or artistic portrayal of Jesus doesn't violate this.

I appreciate your concern, but I doubt seriously that Gibson would star in such trash movies as "The Last Temptation of Christ," which demean the uniqueness of Christ as well as attack His diety.

I see this as a potentially honest portrayal of Christ the God/Man.