Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mel Gibson Slams Da Vinci Code
NewsMax ^ | 05/22/2006 | Carl Limbacher

Posted on 05/22/2006 9:36:23 AM PDT by SirLinksalot

Monday, May 22, 2006 12:44 a.m. EDT Mel Gibson Slams 'Da Vinci Code'

Catholic actor Mel Gibson has slammed "The Da Vinci Code" book and movie for attacking the beliefs that he holds sacred, World Entertainment Network reported.

"The Passion of the Christ" star has been outraged about the thriller's controversial plot concerning Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. [Editor's Note: Get NewsMax's special report "The Da Vinci Con" FREE with Ann Coulter's book, "Godless" – CLICK HERE NOW!]

Gibson says, "What worries me is that people will take this as fact.

"I'm not angry, per se, that it refutes everything I hold sacred, the foundations of my beliefs. The Da Vinci Code is an admitted work of fiction but it cleverly weaves fact into maverick theories in a way that will appear plausible to some."

The angry star was actually the first choice of Dr. Robert Lomas (the intellectual who inspired the Robert Langdon character) to play him. Tom Hanks plays Langdon in the film


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: blasphemy; catholicinsecurity; davincicode; evil; hypocrit; melgibson; ohtheirony; potandkettle
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380381-382 next last
To: frogjerk

You are responding to my #338...now, list the half truths and out right lies in that post.

As far as The Church having made mistakes in the past...the past is not so distant when you consider the facxt that it opted to protect pedophiles withhin its own ranks.

You again equate the Church to Jesus Christ...not one and the same.

One is the Son of God, and the other is made up of a group of sinners...like we all are.

Of the two, only one is infallible.

And it isn't the Church.


341 posted on 05/30/2006 1:29:13 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
The Church was instituted by Christ.

Christ is the head of the Church.

Matthew 16: 17-18

17 Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it."

I believe The Church is infallible on matters of faith and morals.

342 posted on 05/30/2006 1:49:32 PM PDT by frogjerk (LIBERALISM: The perpetual insulting of common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
"I believe The Church is infallible..."

There you have it...missplaced belief.

Only He is infallible.

343 posted on 05/30/2006 2:35:18 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
"In my latest post I stated that the Church is consists of people, all of who are sinners and that the Church has made mistakes in the past." -- You

"I believe The Church is infallible..." -- You again.

344 posted on 05/30/2006 2:39:18 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

My belief is well founded. I believe the Church is infallible in teaching on faith and morals.


345 posted on 05/30/2006 3:37:51 PM PDT by frogjerk (LIBERALISM: The perpetual insulting of common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
"I believe The Church is infallible..." -- You again.

I believe the Church is infallible in teaching faith and morals...I will state it again and I am proud to profess it.

346 posted on 05/30/2006 3:38:44 PM PDT by frogjerk (LIBERALISM: The perpetual insulting of common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
"I believe the Church is infallible in teaching on faith and morals."

How do you defend the Church's policy of protecting known pedophiles in its ranks?

347 posted on 05/30/2006 3:43:42 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
"I believe the Church is infallible in teaching on faith and morals."

How do you defend the Church's policy of protecting known pedophiles in its ranks?

Go research and understand what the doctrine of infallibility actually means. I tell you this because your question has absolutely nothing to do with my statement.

348 posted on 05/30/2006 3:47:06 PM PDT by frogjerk (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
"The Vatican has large investments with the Rothschilds of Britain, France and America, with the Hambros Bank, with the Credit Suisse in London and Zurich. In the United States it has large investments with the Morgan Bank, the Chase-Manhattan Bank, the First National Bank of New York, the Bankers Trust Company, and others. The Vatican has billions of shares in the most powerful international corporations such as Gulf Oil, Shell, General Motors, Bethlehem Steel, General Electric, International Business Machines, T.W.A., etc. At a conservative estimate, these amount to more than 500 million dollars in the U.S.A. alone.

      "In a statement published in connection with a bond prospectus, the Boston archdiocese listed its assets at Six Hundred and Thirty-five Million ($635,891,004), which is 9.9 times its liabilities. This leaves a net worth of Five Hundred and Seventy-one million dollars ($571,704,953). It is not difficult to discover the truly astonishing wealth of the church, once we add the riches of the twenty-eight archdioceses and 122 dioceses of the U.S.A., some of which are even wealthier than that of Boston.

      "Some idea of the real estate and other forms of wealth controlled by the Catholic church may be gathered by the remark of a member of the New York Catholic Conference, namely 'that his church probably ranks second only to the United States Government in total annual purchase.' Another statement, made by a nationally syndicated Catholic priest, perhaps is even more telling. 'The Catholic church,' he said, 'must be the biggest corporation in the United States. We have a branch office in every neighborhood. Our assets and real estate holdings must exceed those of Standard Oil, A.T.&T., and U.S. Steel combined. And our roster of dues-paying members must be second only to the tax rolls of the United States Government.'

      "The Catholic church, once all her assets have been put together, is the most formidable stockbroker in the world. The Vatican, independently of each successive pope, has been increasingly orientated towards the U.S. The Wall Street Journal said that the Vatican's financial deals in the U.S. alone were so big that very often it sold or bought gold in lots of a million or more dollars at one time.

      "The Vatican's treasure of solid gold has been estimated by the United Nations World Magazine to amount to several billion dollars. A large bulk of this is stored in gold ingots with the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, while banks in England and Switzerland hold the rest. But this is just a small portion of the wealth of the Vatican, which in the U.S. alone, is greater than that of the five wealthiest giant corporations of the country. When to that is added all the real estate, property, stocks and shares abroad, then the staggering accumulation of the wealth of the Catholic church becomes so formidable as to defy any rational assessment.

      "The Catholic church is the biggest financial power, wealth accumulator and property owner in existence. She is a greater possessor of material riches than any other single institution, corporation, bank, giant trust, government or state of the whole globe. The pope, as the visible ruler of this immense amassment of wealth, is consequently the richest individual of the twentieth century. No one can realistically assess how much he is worth in terms of billions of dollars."

Excerpt from "The Vatican Billions" -- Avro Manhattan


349 posted on 05/30/2006 3:52:44 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
In 1864, Pope Pius IX "infallibly" declared that the idea that people have a right to freedom of conscience and freedom of worship is "insanity," "evil," "depraved," and "reprobate". He also declared that non-Catholics who live in Catholic countries should not be allowed to publicly practice their religion. In 1888, Pope Leo XIII "infallibly" declared that freedom of thought and freedom of worship are wrong. These encyclicals are available on-line. [Note 4 gives addresses for them.]

The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) produced a document entitled "Declaration on Religious Liberty" which states that all people have a right to freedom of religion. [Note 5]

Now I certainly agree with the idea of freedom of religion. However, it totally contradicts the "infallible" declarations of Popes Pius IX and Leo XIII. It also contradicts the anathemas of the Council of Trent, the killing of "heretics," the Inquisition, the burning of people who translated the Bible into the language of the common people, and the persecution of Protestants.

Freedom of religion also contradicts modern Canon Law (1988). Canon 1366 says that parents are to be punished with "a just penalty" if they allow their children to "be baptized or educated in a non-Catholic religion". The reference to baptism shows that this refers to Christian religions which are not Roman Catholic. [Note 6] (During the Inquisition, "a just penalty" included things like torture and being burned at the stake. The Inquisition was based on Canon Law.) (See the article "Hunting 'Heretics'".)

Here the Catholic Church is on the horns of a dilemma. If it says that people have a right to freedom of religion, then it admits that it is not infallible. If it says that it is infallible, then it admits that it really does not believe that people have a right to freedom of religion.

The Catholic Church can claim infallibility, or it can claim that it has seen the error of its ways and it now supports freedom of religion. But it can't have it both ways.

Source

350 posted on 05/30/2006 5:00:10 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Tinfoil sites


351 posted on 05/30/2006 5:43:05 PM PDT by frogjerk (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

Discuss the content.

Point out where the content is wrong.


352 posted on 05/30/2006 5:45:59 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
The pope, as the visible ruler of this immense amassment of wealth, is consequently the richest individual of the twentieth century.

This is incorrect. The Pope doesn't really own much. This is like saying the President of the United States is the richest person in the world because he leads the wealthiest nation on earth.

353 posted on 05/30/2006 5:46:19 PM PDT by frogjerk (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Another error stated by you and your source. You do not have "freedom of religion" if you are Catholic. Catholics are bound by marriage to raise their children in the Catholic faith. I see no problem with this.


354 posted on 05/30/2006 5:48:48 PM PDT by frogjerk (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Can. 1366 Parents, and those taking the place of parents, who hand over their children to be baptized or brought up in a non-Catholic religion, are to be punished with a censure or other just penalty. -- Our Catholic Faith

" This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom." -- DECLARATION ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM DIGNITATIS HUMANAE ON THE RIGHT OF THE PERSON AND OF COMMUNITIES TO SOCIAL AND CIVIL FREEDOM IN MATTERS RELIGIOUS PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON DECEMBER 7, 1965

Which is it?

355 posted on 05/30/2006 5:52:56 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

"You do not have "freedom of religion" if you are Catholic."

" This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom." -- DECLARATION ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM DIGNITATIS HUMANAE ON THE RIGHT OF THE PERSON AND OF COMMUNITIES TO SOCIAL AND CIVIL FREEDOM IN MATTERS RELIGIOUS PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON DECEMBER 7, 1965

Are Catholics not considered to be "human persons"?

356 posted on 05/30/2006 5:55:09 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Please state a couple of reasons for me why I should stop being a Catholic.


357 posted on 05/30/2006 5:58:53 PM PDT by frogjerk (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

I'm not saying that you should, I am discussing the doctrine of infallibility.

I'm just getting warmed up.

I think however, that you should believe in Him, not the Church.

He is infallible, I am about to prove to you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Church is not.

I already have actually, prove them fallible once, and the whole concept is destroyed.


358 posted on 05/30/2006 6:01:14 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
"I'm not angry, per se......."

The angry star

good grief.....

359 posted on 05/30/2006 6:04:41 PM PDT by eeevil conservative (I am your worst nightmare. I am not a racist, terrorist, or nativist. I am an AMERICAN, & I Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
Are you actually using this as a source? The source you site is supposedly written by Mary Ann Collins an ex-Nun. Too bad she doesn't know her history and too bad the elusive ex-Nun cannot prove she even exists.

"She" can't even get the date right on Pope Pius IX right off the bat...1870...NOT 1864. This site is rife with the same old evangelical misinformation spread all over the Internet.

From: http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2005/10/reflections-on-papacy-papal.html

James Cardinal Gibbons

"You will tell me that infallibility is too great a prerogative to be conferred on man. I answer: Has not God, in former times, clothed His Apostles with powers far more exalted? They were endowed with the gifts of working miracles, of prophecy and inspiration; they were the mouthpiece communicating God's revelation, of which the Popes are merely the custodians. If God could make man the organ of His revealed Word, is it impossible for Him to make man its infallible guardian and interpreter? For, surely, greater is the Apostle who gives us the inspired Word than the Pope who preserves it from error . . .

"Let us see, sir, whether an infallible Bible is sufficient for you. Either you are infallibly certain that your interpretation of the Bible is correct or you are not.

"If you are infallibly certain, then you assert for yourself, and of course for every reader of the Scripture, a personal infallibility which you deny to the Pope, and which we claim only for him. You make every man his own Pope.

"If you are not infallibly certain that you understand the true meaning of the whole Bible . . . then, I ask, of what use to you is the objective infallibility of the Bible without an infallible interpreter?

"If God, as you assert, has left no infallible interpreter of His Word, do you not virtually accuse Him of acting unreasonably? for would it not be most unreasonable of Him to have revealed His truth to man without leaving him a means of ascertaining its precise import?

"Do you not reduce God's word to a bundle of contradictions . . . which give forth answers suited to the wishes of every inquirer? . . .

"Is not this variety of interpretations the bitter fruit of your principle: `An infallible Bible is enough for me,' and does it not proclaim the absolute necessity of some authorized and unerring interpreter? You tell me to drink of the water of life; but of what use is this water to my parched lips, since you acknowledge that it may be poisoned in passing through the medium of your interpretation?

"How satisfactory, on the contrary, and how reasonable is the Catholic teaching on this subject!

"According to that system, Christ says to every Christian: Here, my child, is the Word of God, and with it I leave you an infallible interpreter, who will expound for you its hidden meaning and make clear all its difficulties.

"Here are the waters of eternal life, but I have created a channel that will communicate these waters to you in all their sweetness without sediment of error.

"Here is the written Constitution of My Church. But I have appointed over it a Supreme Tribunal, in the person of one `to whom I have given the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,' who will preserve that Constitution inviolate, and will not permit it to be torn to shreds by the conflicting opinions of men. And thus my children will be one, as I and the Father are one." (2:108-110)

360 posted on 05/30/2006 6:23:49 PM PDT by frogjerk (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380381-382 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson