Mel Gibson's Catholicism

Some committee of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is not the Catholic Church! And even at that all the story reports is hearsay. Tempest. Teapot.

 

I declare, some of you point out the most trivial matters and make them into zepplins.

God bless,

Grant

 

Here is something to think about from Vatican II in 1965:

“Even though the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ (see Jn 19:6), neither all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his passion. It is true that the church is the new people of God, yet the Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy scripture. Consequently, all must take care, lest in catechizing or in preaching the word of God, they teach anything which is not in accord with the truth of the Gospel message or the spirit of Christ.

Indeed, the church reproves every form of persecution against whomsoever it may be directed. Remembering, then, its common heritage with the Jews and moved not by any political consideration, but solely by the religious motivation of Christian charity, it deplores all hatreds, persecutions, displays of antisemitism directed against the Jews at any time or from any source.

The church always held and continues to hold that Christ out of infinite love freely underwent suffering and death because of the sins of all, so that all might attain salvation. It is the duty of the church, therefore, in its preaching to proclaim the cross of Christ as the sign of God's universal love and the source of all grace.”
Second Vatican Council October 28, 1965


http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/research/cjl/Documents/Nostra%20Aetate.htm

[ June 10, 2003, 12:38 AM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

Some committee of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is not the
Catholic Church! And even at that all the story reports is hearsay.
Tempest. Teapot.

Yup.............when countered they'll deny their own sources..!!

Anything to keep the Beast Pulsating

 

So, who here is looking forward to this movie? I sure am!

Any non-Catholics bothered by the fact that it's being made by fervent Catholics? If so, why?

 

Charming. Simply charming.

Tempest. Teapot. Anger. Rage. Hatred. Yawn.

 

I am in. I'll be there.

 

Am I missing something here? This is the "Church's uproar?"

The article says that the U.S. Conference of Bishops was critical of the film and sent a letter saying such. Doesn't sound like much of an uproar to me.

Tempest in a teapot? More like mountains from molehills.

 

I don't see why the Anti Defamation League would even care - harldy anyone could watch the thing!

 

I don't see why the Anti Defamation League would even care - harldy anyone could watch the thing! </font>[/QUOTE]It is the most well-known story in the world, after all...

I'd hate to have them all speaking 21st century English, with the Roman authority figures speaking with British accents and the roustabout characters speaking in Bronx or Hood. No, the language decision was perfect, even inspired!

 

So now the movie is inspired? WoW! This is an uproar!

Anyway, the language decision wasn't perfect: if it's to be realistic they ought to throw some Greek in there, especially if they want the dialogue to be in the exact words that Jesus said - I mean, the language God chose to write the Bible in was Greek, so that's as exact as it gets.

But my point was that the average American isn't going to go see a movie all in Latin (and Aramaic), or if they do, they aren't going to understand hardly any (if any) of it. This is more like a movie for linguisists and Roman Catholic and Anglican priests.

Plus, who would want to see Mel Gibson portray Jesus? I don't even want to see Mel Gibson portray himself. He really stunk in We Were Soldiers.

 

Sola: You have never been inspired? I guess not. Mel Gibson isn’t doing it for the money. He is doing it out of love. He expects it to not be well received by most. Mel Gibson is not portraying Jesus himself. He is not even in the movie.

God Bless

 

Mike said the language choice was "inspired" not "inspiring," hence my sarcastic question "So now the movie is inspired?" but, It's good to hear that Mel aint playing Jesus himself.

 

I am!

Neal

 

So Singer, to you the worldnetdaily.com is a Catholic source?

Strange thinking, I must say!

 

I really have to wonder about all these guys who claim to be able to correctly interpret Scripture (that was written in a different language and then translated to English, that was written in a vastly different culture than ours, that employs idioms vastly different than those we use, etc., etc...) while they are incapable of correctly interpreting a single sentence, written by a cultural contemporary in English.

"No, the language decision was perfect, even inspired!"

This sentence clearly says that the language decision was inspired; not that the movie was inspired.

Does anyone else tire of this kind of sloppiness?

Or is it just deliberate?

 

I certainly plan on seeing it, with my husband.

 

Joseph Farah,(World net Daily) I believe is a Roman Catholic. But the point is that there is division in the RC church over many issues of which this is one. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you serious? This is a flap over a movie...you act like it's a huge division in doctrine. Talk about over stating things.

Your slip is showing!

LaRae