I wonder - does anyone have more detail about the famous actor’s beliefs than Alex Beam does? Regarding Gibson’s new movie “The Passion”, about the death of Jesus (in which all characters will speak their native languages, i.e. Jesus-Aramaic, Romans-Latin, with subtitles), Beam writes:
I have not been able to find the interview at nyt.com.
Granted, that’s his dad and not Mel, but is there any more detailed info about the movie’s creator that might affect how the movie is seen? Should it matter?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/gibson.asp
Snopes does a little piece on Mel, Mel’s dad, and the movie, but I don’ty know if it gives any more info than you have.
The search feature is your friend:
Mel Gibson’s Pa–Nuttier Than a Stuckey’s Log!
Gibson denies Jesus film is anti-Semitic - ADL wants to review film before release
He’s a Catholic wacko, not a fundie one. There is a difference.
“Whatever Gibson’s intentions, the film will be perceived as anti-Semitic…”
I’d say it matters not Gibson’s ranking in the tiers of “fundie wackos”, the anti-Gibson’s are already showing their colors. And if you can’t join 'em, beat 'em.
More power to you, Mel.
Actually, Guin, Gibson’s not really a Catholic. If he rejects Vatican II and places himself among the sede vacantists, then he’s really a latter day sort of more-Catholic-than-the-Pope Protestant.
One of life’s ironies, I suppose.
Oh, I’m well aware he’s not really a Catholic. But I’m just saying he’s not a fundie.
Okay, I’ll bite. What’s the difference?
What does it matter what Mel’s views are? His views are his own, and the movie should be judged on its own merits.
If Mel Gibson does have wacky religious views and they end up slanting the movie, then we’ll talk.
There are quite a few significant doctrinal differences between Catholicism and fundamentalist Christianity. The authority of the Pope is an obvious one. They also have quite a few differences in interpretation of scripture and in liturgy.
I meant the differences in fundamental whackoness that Guin referred to, perhaps too obliquely. I’m well aware of the differences in their mainstreams.
I don’t get the objection to the movie. The movie may or may not be anti-semitic, Mel Gibson may or may not be a jew-hating anti-semite. But evidence that Mel Gibson’s father is anti-semitic is certainly not evidence that Mel Gibson himself is anti-semitic. And as for whether the movie itself is anti-semitic, shouldn’t we–oh, I don’t know–watch the movie first?
The objection seems to be: “Some traditionalist christians blame the jews for killing Jesus. Mel Gibson is a traditionalist christian. Therefore, the movie he is making is anti-semetic.” I’m sorry, but the premises do not support the conclusion.
Or is the essayist claiming that any movie about the death of Jesus will be PERCIEVED as anti-semitic, no matter what the content of the movie is? If so, why is he blaming Mel Gibson for other people’s misperceptions? If Mel Gibson makes an anti-semitic movie, bad for him. If Mel Gibson makes a non-anti-semitic movie and people scream and moan and get upset about it, bad for them.
What I’m saying is that Gibson isn’t a fundie, he’s a Catholic-well, a Sedevacantist, but still, he’s far from being a fundie.
From what I’ve seen/read, Gibson is a practicing Catholic with strong beliefs. Whether or not he would be classified as a “whacko” probably depends on one’s views towards Catholocism in general. I wouldn’t, but that’s just me.
Jeff
Oh? Has he been excommunicated, Guin? Or is he simply not YOUR type of Catholic?
It never fails to amaze me how eager liberal Catholics (the type who paint themselves as tolerant, inclusive, and eager for “dialogue”) usually are to drum out those Catholics who don’t agree with them.
Because he isn’t. I’m not a practicing Catholic myself.
HOWEVER, at the very least, he and his father have said that the Pope is not legit, that they do not accept him. They are self-avowed Sedevacantists-which are considered heretics by the Catholic church.
You can toss accusations of “liberal Catholics” all you want, but that’s what they believe.
Mel Gibson is a devout traditional Catholic and I don’t question his faith or love for Our Lord. Here is a recent article concerning Mel and his “Passion” screening the other day in D.C.
It’s rather amazing to witness such opposition to this project. Before it’s release, it’s already sifting the wheat from the shaft. I anticipate it will be a powerful witness and Libertarian and I are looking forward to viewing “The Passion”.
Please, let’s not trash a man and his character. If you don’t want to view it, don’t, and leave it at that.
Gibson screened his movie for a bunch of religious types a couple of days ago, and they raved about it. Jack Valenti (president of the MPAA) said he phoned Kirk Douglas and said, “This is the movie to beat”. Others said that it left them sobbing. All of them said that they saw no anti-semitism in it at all, and this was a group of people who are quite strong defenders of Jews and Israel.
I think the jury is still out as to what kind of movie it will be, but I don’t for a second believe Mel Gibson is anti-semitic. When asked about it, Gibson said, “My views and my work have been part of the public record for 30 years. I challenge to find any statement I have ever made that discriminates against anyone based on race or creed”.
Fair enough. Unless his detractors can actually dig out something along those lines, then the man is simply being libeled. Sure, it’s dad is wackier than a tree full of monkeys, but how many people here have a parent or two that say things that make you cringe? Judging Mel Gibson by listening to what his father has to say is ridiculous.
The sede vacantists, Old Catholics, and other rejecters of Vatican II drum themselves out, astorian. If Mel Gibson doesn’t accept the magisterium of the Church or the authority of the Pope, he’s not a Roman Catholic. Just like Episcopalians, Eastern Orthodox Christians or any other of our separated brethren. I don’t think Guinastasia meant anything pejorative by that.
Opus Dei, the Legionnaires of Christ, and other groups are very conservative, but no liberal Catholic (in which group I place myself) could say that they are “not Catholic”. The ones who say “bye-bye, Rome” are.
Exactly, slow. There are plenty of right-wing Catholics who are legitimately Catholic, just like there are plenty of left-wing Catholics who are legitimately Catholic. However, there are those who go so far on either direction that they cease to be genuinely Catholic. They ipso facto excommunicate themselves when they step outside the Church and rebuke it.