Replies

Dear SJackson,

"In Judaism would encompass a specific acknowledgement of the wrongs, directed to those who were harmed, as well as a sincere effort to undo the damage done. I'd be surprised if Christianity views it much differently."

Typically speaking, for Catholics, sacramental forgiveness and absolution are obtained through the use of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Specificity of sin is only absolutely required in the Confessional. For a verbal insult, an apology to the specific individuals is nice, and may even be required as part of the penance imposed by a priest in the Confessional (although I'm not even sure that that could be required). It would be hard, in my own view, to wring from Catholic moral theology or pastoral practice that Mr. Gibson would have some absolute requirement to apologize generally and publicly to Jews for his anti-semitic statements.

Generally speaking, through the Sacrament of Reconciliation, the sinner reconciles with God, through the priest acting in the place and with the authority of Jesus Christ, and reconciles also with the community, through the agency of the priest acting as the pastor and leader of the community. Through ordination, the priest is made capable of being a channel of Divine forgiveness, and through the priest's position of authority in the Church hierarchy, the priest may act in the name of the community.

A perfectly acceptable and appropriate penance for a penitent who confesses sins like this may be to say some specific prayers, and make sure he gets to his AA meetings every night.

In that his comments weren't made publicly, but rather to a few individuals trying to arrest him, it seems harder to me to hold him accountable to a more specific public apoolgy. The details of his arrest and his statements were made public was beyond his control, and likely not in accord with his wishes.

As well, I don't know what personal apologies that Mr. Gibson has made in person, directly, to the arresting officers, but at this time, he may be prevented from doing so by legal issues. As it was, I was surprised that his attorneys let him say as much as he did.

As to whether or not Mr. Gibson is anti-semitic because his father is anti-semitic, I have my doubts. Frankly, the fact that when he got drunk this all came out suggests to me that part of what drove him to drink was the discrepancy between his love and admiration for his father and his inability to love and admire some of the bile that pours forth from his father.

Wine doesn't exactly give truth, but may point to repressed conflict. I think that's what we're seeing here.

I've experienced this a little bit in my own life, even if I'm not an alcoholic.

sitetest

Frankly, the fact that when he got drunk this all came out suggests to me that part of what drove him to drink was the discrepancy between his love and admiration for his father and his inability to love and admire some of the bile that pours forth from his father.

He abhors his father's anti-semitism, yet exhibits the same anti-semitism himself? Odd, that.

I simply find it implausible that a person under the influence will, out of the blue, suddenly develop a bigoted streak.

Gibson has and will endure humiliation being the focus of discussion, derision, compassion, etc. He will never be viewed the same again, no matter what he says.

I wasn't addressing the religious aspect of his transgression, which is his personal responsibility, rather the secular, his responsibility to those he harmed, which has become a public issue. We may disagree on this. His future actions will likely give us a clue. As to the other thread, I'm not that interested in what will likely become a *issing contest between Foxman and Donahue. I'm not that big a fan of either, they're both publicists, not religious figures, and this issue has already achieved a prominence it doesn't deserve.

BTW, this has nothing to do with his films.