It's curious that it took the Gazette reporter until the 16th paragraph to identify Gibson as Catholic.
Rich Leonardi | 06.30.03 - 10:44 am | #

Isn't this the stolen script that has already been mentioned as not being the final nor complete story? Then again, would it really matter!
mk | 06.30.03 - 11:26 am | #

I love how he uses the term "Holy Ghost." Another thing to rattle neo-Catholics.

It's kinda sweet that they did not mention the he was Catholic till the middle, like it was incidental.

People will study Mel and Jim and then they'll learn the real deal.

He needs to keep the subtitles off!!!! Don't listen to those dolts....the strange language will heighten people's visual acuity.

The Evangelical laity will shudder to think that Jesus did not speak English and they'll really get scared when they don't see Matthew, Mark, John and Luke furiously writing everything down real-time like reporters.
Tom Coolberth | 06.30.03 - 12:03 pm | #

You need to get out more, Tom. What's "rattling" about "Holy Ghost"? And I daresay Evangelicals will not be shocked at the thought that Jesus did not speak English. Get to know a few Evangelicals before you dismiss them all as wahoos.
Mark Shea | Homepage | 06.30.03 - 12:13 pm | #

1. These are not "mind-readers." They are people who read a script and are basing their comments upon it and upon Mel Gibson's public statements.

2. "Curiously unreasoning" would seem to apply better to those who have not read their critique or responded to the questions they raise.
Bill Cork | Homepage | 06.30.03 - 12:25 pm | #

If the inclusion of subtitles leads to a greater acceptance/viewing of what sounds like an excellent evangelization tool - then they should be included. Recall that the Apostles went out into the street and began speaking in tounges on Pentecost. I don't think Jesus would be offended.
Paul Scheibmeir | 06.30.03 - 1:08 pm | #

I have read other storied that identified Gibson as a "traditional" Catholic, not accepting Vatican II. I have never heard of this "The Holy Family" sect and up till now, wondered whether he was SSPX, which I know is schismatic. What about "The Holy Family"? Is this sect in union with Rome and our Holy Father? Can a faithful Catholic reject Vatican II?
Cary | 06.30.03 - 1:12 pm | #

Gibson's Parish is called Holy Family. It's some flavor of RadTrad. He appears, so far, to have avoided some of the utter nuttiness of his Dad, but I don't know more. I think it's best to wait and see about the film simply because a good artist can often do things that will transcend the limits of his stated philosophy. Gibson's a good artist. So I prefer to wait and see.
Mark Shea | Homepage | 06.30.03 - 1:27 pm | #

Re: the telegraph story

"St Anne Catherine Emmerich"? Has she really been canonized?

Also, I particularly enjoyed the comment that Mel 'sent scripts' to the scholars' committee. I guess he must have consented to robbery. Or something.
mark j | 06.30.03 - 2:43 pm | #

The Telegraph story is by a theological illiterate. Dead Catholic mystic? Must be a saint!
Mark Shea | Homepage | 06.30.03 - 3:08 pm | #

No.
Rich Leonardi | 06.30.03 - 3:58 pm | #

"Can a faithful Catholic reject Vatican II?"

No. (Pardon the double post.)
Rich Leonardi | 06.30.03 - 3:59 pm | #

"I particularly enjoyed the comment that Mel 'sent scripts' to the scholars' committee."

Well, someone in his circle sent it to them. The USCCB has no "plumbers."
Bill Cork | Homepage | 06.30.03 - 4:05 pm | #

Well, if the script was truly stolen off the set and subsequently passed to the ADL and USCCB, I would hardly say that Mel, or anyone in his circle, 'sent' it.
mark J | 07.01.03 - 12:23 am | #

Catherine Emmerich is Venerable not a Saint.

BTW the script WAS stolen. If it wasn't why didn't the ADL sue Gibson for defimation? Why did the Lawyers for the Bishop's apologize?
Why? Because the Catholic League has the facts straight.

The finished Product is all that matters. If it's anti-Semitic (which so far the cercumstancal evidence is against is moving against that view) the bishops will pan it.
BenYachov(James M. Scott IV) | 07.01.03 - 2:44 am | #

correction "which so far the cercumstancal evidence is against that view so far)"
BenYachov(James M. Scott IV) | 07.01.03 - 2:45 am | #

"He attends [M]ass only in Latin" - which I guess is to imply he does not attend Novus Order? Novus Order can be done in Latin, too.

I can't believe the reporter actually adnmitted that many studio bosses and powerful people in Hollywood were Jewish (Gasp!!) How long before Foxman pounces on him for that antisemitic comment !?!

The ADL's strategy is very double edged, must be driving them nuts. On the one hand, they need to fear monger in order to get money; on the other, the bigger stink they raise, the more publicity and interest they generate in the film.
c matt | 07.01.03 - 11:36 am | #

I think the ADL by jumping the gun here is putting their credibility needlessly in harms way.

They should have waited till the movie came out. Or they should have requested a viewing from Mr Gibson. Only one of two things will happen. One, the movie will come out & it will contain some anti-Semitic elements & Mel's career will be history. Two, the movie will come out & contain nothing anti-Semitic & the ADL & their supporters will look foolish. One or the other will happen mark my words.

PS I wish I could get a private viewing of the film myself but I have it on good authority there will be no cross building in the Temple.
BenYachov(James M. Scott IV) | 07.01.03 - 5:12 pm | #

Still more from the Catholic League.

"CATHOLIC BISHOPS DID NOT CONDEMN GIBSON MOVIE



Catholic League president William Donohue spoke today to media reports that misrepresent the sentiments of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on the subject of the Mel Gibson movie, “The Passion”:



“Several media reports, as well as comments made last night on CNN by Rabbi Marvin Hier, claim that the USCCB has branded the Mel Gibson film ‘The Passion’ as anti-Semitic. ‘What I am saying is that four Catholic scholars representing the Catholic bishops,’ offered Rabbi Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, ‘joined five Jewish scholars, unanimously felt there was a great deal of anti-Semitism in the script.’ This account is factually wrong.



“Four Catholic scholars did review the script. But they did so without authorization from the Catholic bishops. That is why the bishops issued an apology to Gibson. Speaking for the bishops, USCCB General Counsel Mark Chopko said, ‘We regret the situation has occurred and offer our apologies.’ Indeed, the bishops have admitted that it would be unfair to judge the movie without seeing it. Moreover, the script was stolen (by whom it is still unclear); it has since been returned to Gibson.



“To continue to attack Mel Gibson for a movie his critics have not seen is bad enough, but to misrepresent the position of the Catholic bishops is worse. Gibson’s foes, including most prominently the ADL and Rabbi Marvin Hier, are patently unfair in their assessments of ‘The Passion.’ Their greatest fear is that because Gibson is a traditional Catholic, he will foment anti-Semitism. Such a perspective completely misunderstands what it is to be a traditional Catholic. It is a prejudice that some Jews need to overcome.”

The ADL does some fine work in going after anti-Semitic slugs. This doesn't appear to be an example of that. I wish they would cut it out. For their own sake.
BenYachov(James M. Scott IV) | 07.01.03 - 5:17 pm | #

Perhaps the Evangelical laity will really shudder when the movie shows Jesus visiting America and preaching to the Lamanites' descendants. After all, no one believes the Gospels are really exhaustive, do we...?
Tom Round | 07.03.03 - 1:22 am | #