Actor Jim Caviezel Turns Down $75 Million Dollar Payday (for 'Passion' related promotions)

WENN.com ^ | 5/27/04 | IMDB staff

[sathers]

Movie star Jim Caviezel has turned down the chance to become a multimillioniare by starring in a series of TV commericals-because he wants to stay true to his strict Catholic beliefs.

The actor has become a hot property since starring as Jesus in Mel Gibson's epic 'The Passion of the Christ,' but the 35 year old has turned down a series of deals--worth an estimated 75 million.

He says, 'I think if I had given way on just one scheme, I would have been tempted to do more. It would have been the easiest thing in the world to make that kind of money quickly. That sum would have secured your future, but I would never have been able to forgive myself.'

Among the deals Caviezel turned down was one for a T-shirt company's new 'Heavenly' line of apparel.

He adds, 'I could see the humor in it, but I think I would have upset a lot of people who get something special from the film.

[sathers]

What a testiment to his faith and to his children! I'm not sure I would have the strength to do it.

[Free_at_last_-2001]

What a testiment to his faith and to his children! I'm not sure I would have the strength to do it. - Agreed!

[xsmommy]

ping

[Kerry Crusher]

Kudos to him. He's an inspiration. He's another good article on him ...

http://www.crushkerry.com/article150.html

[sathers]

I believe he also has 2 small childen at home.

He refused to lie naked for a scene with J-Lo in 'Angel Eyes' because of his beliefs as well.

[robertpaulsen]

For those liberals who don't recognize it, this is called "character".

[sathers]

Jim is a guy who talks the talk and walks the walk, no doubt.

[newgeezer]

Filthy lucre ping. ;O)

[princess leah]

That's the kind of character we are missing in our politicians!

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

My utmost respect for that man!!!

[Not a 60s Hippy]

WHAT A “MIRACULOUS” EXAMPLE FOR
THE HOLLYWEIRDS TO LIVE UP TO!

[Polycarp IV]

Catholic virtue in action PING!

[Revolting cat!]

He don't wanna be a celebrity known for being known, spouting pieces of worldy wisdom an any subject to a hungry public? What is wrong with the boy?

[asformeandformyhouse]

That's the kind of character we are missing in our politicians!

Jim Caviezel for President - 2008

[smith288]

Catholic virtue in action PING!

Funny, I would have called it "Christian virtues in action..."

[Christian4Bush]

or those liberals who don't recognize it, this is called "character".

Oh, the libs recognize it all right, just as they recognize it in President Bush, Richard Cheney, and all the other people that Bore called on to resign yesterday.

They recognize it, and hate them for it. Why else would libs attempt to reduce the perception of what does not exist?

[Polycarp IV]

Same thing to us.

[Christian4Bush]

Why else would libs attempt to reduce the perception of what does not exist?

Why else would libs attempt to reduce the perception of what THEY THINK does not exist?

[Stone Mountain]

I'm sure I'll be excoriated for this view, but I think Caviezel should have taken the money and donated it to causes that he believes in. Think of the good that he could do with 70+ million dollars. He could end hunger for an entire city's worth of people. I remember thinking this when the Calvin & Hobbes creator turned down what would have been over $100 million for licensing his creations. Think of the good that one could do for that money. I'm not saying they were wrong for making the decision that they made... but if I were in the position where I had the opportunity to make many millions of dollars off of a creation I made, my moral dilemma would be what to do with the money, not whether or not to take it.

[LS]

I understand your reasoning, but this was the same line Judas used on Jesus when Mary broke the vase and anointed his feet---Judas said, "Why not sell that and use the money for the poor?" Jesus said that her WORSHIP was more important than the money or what it bought.

[Mark in the Old South]

What a great guy, I just want to give him the biggest kiss.

The kiss of Peace.

[Mark in the Old South]

What a great guy, I just want to give him the biggest kiss.

The kiss of Peace.

[Mark in the Old South]

What a great guy, I just want to give him the biggest kiss.

The kiss of Peace.

[rintense]

Wish there were more men like him... specifically in my neck of the woods. ;)

[Aquinasfan]

What a testiment to his faith and to his children! I'm not sure I would have the strength to do it.

Me either. Very impressive.

I don't think he was morally obligated to reject these offers if they were similar to the one included in the article, but his decision shows great piety, and is probably a wise decision, even if he had decided to donate the proceeds to charity.

[Aquinasfan]

Ping.

[montag813]

Think of the good that he could do with 70+ million dollars. He could end hunger for an entire city's worth of people.

HAHAHA! "End hunger"? Sheesh, talk about buying into the Left's propaganda.

[Stone Mountain]

Yes, I guess I'm taking the Judas position here, but I still believe it. There is also a difference in scope here - if that vase had been valuable enough to feed thousands and thousands of starving people, I'm guessing (and I certainly could be wrong) that Jesus would have taken the big view and fed them. Would Mary have worshipped Jesus any less without that vase?

[Stone Mountain]

HAHAHA! "End hunger"? Sheesh, talk about buying into the Left's propaganda.

Ah, I see you didn't bother to read my entire post. I didn't say he could end hunger. I said that he could end hunger for a lot of people. If you don't believe that, I'm not sure what I could do to convince you.

[Professional Engineer]

Passion Ping

[fortunecookie]

WHAT A “MIRACULOUS” EXAMPLE FOR THE HOLLYWEIRDS TO LIVE UP TO!

And the rest of us!!

What a guy!! I look forward to more of his movies and a chance to let my dollars speak to Hollywood for me.

[LS]

"Would Mary have worshipped Jesus any less without that vase?"

Apparently Jesus thought so. Jesus warned that "the poor you have with you always." He also reprimanded the "rich young ruler" who had tithed all his life and had done good deeds, because he wasn't willing to part with his money to worship Jesus.

[SuziQ]

Think of the good that one could do for that money

I'm reminded of the scripture passage where Jesus says "The poor will be with us always"...

Jim Caveziel was concerned about the ramifications of such trivializing of the "Passion", no matter what could have been done with the money.

[Quix]

WOW--INTEGRITY SUCH THAT FAITH WINS OVER MAMMON!

PRAISE THE LORD AND HATS OFF TO THE MOVIE STAR!

[Stone Mountain]

Apparently Jesus thought so. Jesus warned that "the poor you have with you always." He also reprimanded the "rich young ruler" who had tithed all his life and had done good deeds, because he wasn't willing to part with his money to worship Jesus.

I don't see what that has to do with making Mary worship Jesus any less without that vase. Sure, the poor you have with you always, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to help them. He reprimanded the rich young ruler, not for being rich, but for not worshipping him. I see these as different issues... Mary worshipped Jesus and would have done so with or without that vase.

[Stone Mountain]

Jim Caveziel was concerned about the ramifications of such trivializing of the "Passion", no matter what could have been done with the money.

I certainly agree with that. I'm just saying that there is a moral case to be made for taking the money... As I mentioned before, just because the poor will always be with us doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to help them...

[sathers]

Mel Gibson took his reciepts and built a church in California.

[Drawsing]

a moral case for taking the money...

Yes, there is a case to be made. But it is the wrong one. The end does not justify the means in this case. Helping the poor is a good thing. But compromising other Godly principles to accomplish it is not a good thing. The tone of your argument also seems to indicate you are attaching importance to the sheer amount of money as if I could compromise for 70 million but it would be wrong if I did it for just 20 dollars. The only principle you would be following there would be, "Money Talks." or "Anybody can be bought."

[SAMWolf]

Maybe there is hope for Hollywierd after all.

[big'ol_freeper]

*ping*

[LS]

Well, I'm the first one to say people should be rich so they have something to give away; and I firmly believe Jesus Himself DAILY practiced giving to the poor---otherwise, how could He demand that we do something He never practiced? But I also think JC is right here. Once you start that, it becomes a type of prostitution that you can always rationalize as "well, I'm giving the money to the poor." If that's the logic, then a prostitute who gives money to the poor is "walking with God." No, the Bible says that it is as important where the money comes from as it is how it's used. I won't push this too far---especially since it's not my money :)

[Kerry Crusher]

Good idea. Caveizal for Prez. He's a good man.

[NYer]

In an interview with EWTN, Caviezel was asked if he worried that speaking out with such "audacity" about his faith might antagonize the powers that be in Hollywood and the media, and possibly prevent him from rising to superstar status. The soft-spoken actor answered with more audacity.

"I’m here for a reason," Caviezel said, "to express, to preach to the nation that this is God — this is who our God is, Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. And for saying that, yeah, it could be death, but ‘to live is Christ and to die is gain.’ [Philippians 1:21]

You know, at worst, you die a martyr or you lose your career. Then I lose the career. Then that’s the way it’s supposed to be. I’m not going to do one more film than I’m supposed to do."

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list

[Kerry Crusher]

Strange as it sounds, Pam Anderson has actually turn her life over to the Big Guy. Again, maybe there's hope for Hollyweird.

[Stone Mountain]

Yes, there is a case to be made. But it is the wrong one.

How wonderful it must be to be certain of all things moral...

The end does not justify the means in this case. Helping the poor is a good thing. But compromising other Godly principles to accomplish it is not a good thing.

I don't see that Caviezel appearing in advertisements compromises Godly principles. Do you believe that everyone who appears in advertisements compromises Godly principles?

The tone of your argument also seems to indicate you are attaching importance to the sheer amount of money as if I could compromise for 70 million but it would be wrong if I did it for just 20 dollars. The only principle you would be following there would be, "Money Talks." or "Anybody can be bought."

Well, I see a difference between 20 dollars and 70 million. That doesn't mean that I believe that anybody can be bought. But you would have to be a fool not to see the difference and reflect on what that difference means.

Perhaps if you could tell me exactly what would be immoral about Caviezel doing an advertisement, I might be able to reply to it. As it is, you seem to making the assertion that Caviezel doing advertisements is inherently immoral, and then, of course, it is easy to say that one shouldn't do immoral things for any reason. Why is it immoral?

[Hildy]

I understand what you mean, but that would mean compromising his beliefs. Compromise is failure on the installment plan.

[fella]

The devils road is a broad and easy road to follow until the end but the Lords' road is narrow and difficult to travel but its' end is far better.

[Let's Roll]

He's very special.

[FrankR]

"... my moral dilemma would be what to do with the money, not whether or not to take it."

Yeah...right.