Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mel Gibson: $5 Mil to Fringe Church (FOX attacks "antiquated Catholic ideology")
FOX ^ | Friday, February 20, 2004 | By Roger Friedman

Posted on 02/20/2004 5:46:17 AM PST by Behind Liberal Lines

Mel Gibson's put his money where his mouth is. By now everyone in the world knows he's spent $25 million to make "The Passion of the Christ" and promised nearly $25M more to market it.

But what you may not know is that Gibson has also put up $5.1 million so far to run his own personal church near Malibu.

Last year Christopher Noxon wrote in The New York Times that Gibson had donated $2.3 million to make Holy Family Catholic Church in Agoura Hills, California a reality. Holy Family rejects the universally accepted teachings of the Second Vatican Conference and chooses to stick with antiquated Catholic ideology.

Bu it turns out that Gibson has donated a little more than twice that amount to Holy Family since 1999, according to federal tax filings. And that's not counting 2003, since the most recent report has not yet been filed.

Gibson and his wife Robyn are listed in federal tax records as directors of the Holy Family Catholic Church. The church is run out of Gibson's Icon Production company offices, with an Icon employee responsible for keeping the church's books.

The Gibsons' tax-free donations to Holy Family are made possible by a charity they established called the AP Reilly Foundation, which is named for Mel's late mother. The foundation was created on October 29, 1999 for the sole purpose of creating the church.

The church, by the way, has an unlisted phone number, keeps its address a secret and has asked those who have the information not to release it.

Gibson is no stranger to controversy when it comes to voicing his opinion about his religious beliefs. In a 1992 interview with the Spanish magazine El Pais, his comments about homosexuals — which cannot be printed here — caused an international stir.

In the same interview Gibson talked about the fact that his brand of Traditionalist Catholics did not subscribe to the Second Vatican Council's 1965 rulings on various subjects including who was responsible for the death of Jesus Christ.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholicbashing; catholiclist; christianlist; clashofcivilizatio; medianews; presstitutes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 321-333 next last
To: Maximilian
I stopped going to Mass when I saw a woman, a teenage girl do a "guest spot" on the altar reading from the bible. Actually, stop isn't the proper term, I got up and walked out never to come back again.
I didn't leave the Catholic Church, the new liberal agenda Catholic Church left me.
The only woman that belongs on an altar is for sacrifice in a bad, horror movie.
101 posted on 02/20/2004 7:44:12 AM PST by olde north church (American's aren't more violent, we're just better shots!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: olde north church
The only woman that belongs on an altar is for sacrifice in a bad, horror movie.

Amen.

102 posted on 02/20/2004 7:49:10 AM PST by hobbes1 (Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: olde north church
The only woman that belongs on an altar is for sacrifice in a bad, horror movie.

LOL. But there's truth in the humor. The liberal poofters in the Catholic Church are trying to lead the Church down the same road as the liberal poofters over in the Episcopal church, ordaining lesbians and so forth.

103 posted on 02/20/2004 7:51:47 AM PST by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
Three cheers and thanks to Mel Gibson. I always did like him but now more than ever.
104 posted on 02/20/2004 8:01:42 AM PST by Samizdat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
The acceptance or rejection of Vatican II is immaterial to the status of any individual Catholic. The Council taught nothing binding by dogmatic decree. The declaration on the Jews, moreover, was nothing new. The council merely repeated what had been said countless times by popes and councils throughout the Church's history. The Council of Trent, for instance, also made it clear that the Jews were not collectively responsible for Jesus' death. But critics of the Gibson film like to think this means Jewish leadership 2000 years ago had nothing to do with Jesus' death--which is altogether false historically. Friedman is confused on this and needs to be set straight.
105 posted on 02/20/2004 8:02:41 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"No one in the Catholic Church is empowered to build his own chapels or separate himself from the Pope"

But one can understand why in a crisis some do when the Pope and his bishops are dangerous to the faith.
106 posted on 02/20/2004 8:08:44 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
'You need a dog. You'd be a much happier and nicer person.'

(hmmm...so,..what's Your excuse?)

107 posted on 02/20/2004 8:10:55 AM PST by harbingr ( 1st vulture said to the 2nd vulture...'To Hell with waiting around,...I'm going to Kill sumthin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"It is not common among mainline Catholics to reject Vatican II. Those who do reject it likely number less than 5% of active Catholics"

Your statistic is nuts. Millions of Catholics rejected Vatican II by voting with their feet and walking out of the Church altogether.
108 posted on 02/20/2004 8:15:17 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
No one in the Catholic Church is empowered to build his own chapels or separate himself from the Pope, which Gibson has done.

If I lived in the diocese of Los Angeles and had the werewithal to do so, I'd build a chapel and pay a priest to come say Mass for me, too. It's utterly ironic that a chapel that isn't recognized by a Catholic diocese dominated by flaming homosexuals is somehow "out of the mainstream," isn't it?

The term "mainstream" ought to scare the daylights out of sincere Christians these days, considering Christ's admonition about the "narrow gate" to eternal life.

109 posted on 02/20/2004 8:16:15 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Technically, Gibson's church is "fringe," since it is not in union with the Los Angeles archdiocese and is outside the Catholic mainstream.

Okay, but you and I both know that when the "fringe" label is applied to something, especially in a religious conversation, it is media speak for nuts-o and looney.

110 posted on 02/20/2004 8:17:47 AM PST by O.C. - Old Cracker (When the cracker gets old, you wind up with Old Cracker. - O.C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
I too would like to see some kind of solid evidence, beyond the clearly ignorant and uninformed author of this Fox News piece, that Gibson's chapel is associated with the Society of Pius X.

The Pope has said that Catholics have the right to petition their bishops for an indult to celebrate the so-called Tridentine Mass in their dioceses, or the Novus Ordo in Latin. And the Vatican has indicated that ordinarily bishops should routinely give such permissions unless they have good reasons to deny them.

The Church has always recognized the right of wealthy people to have private chapels, provided that they clear it with the bishop and follow the proper forms. It may not seem fair or democratic, but there it is. Noble and wealthy households in England and Europe frequently had their own chapels, and probably still do. Vide "Brideshead Revisited."

My aunt, with permission from the Archbishop of Boston, set aside a former bedroom in her house as a chapel. It was duly consecrated. From time to time priests who were friends of hers celebrated Mass there in the house, and there was no odor of schism in it. One priest who frequently visited was on Cardinal Law's staff.

I understand that Mel Gibson's father may or not be a sedevacantist and a bit of a nutcase. But I have seen no definite evidence that Mel Gibson is. Is his chapel authorized by his diocesan ordinary? Has the bishop forbidden him to use the chapel? If he had, I imagine the news media would eagerly have seized the opportunity to tell us. I suspect that the bishop may not LIKE what Mel is doing, but if he has given his permission, or refrained from forbidding it, that would suffice.
111 posted on 02/20/2004 8:18:15 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philosofy123
Arnold’s dad was a Nazi. He was a policeman, and took no part in the persecution of civilians.

Hunter is a classic antisemite and holocaust denier who has made his views known publicly for years. He should be condemned.

112 posted on 02/20/2004 8:18:21 AM PST by SJackson (Visit http://www.JewPoint.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
The "fortress mentality" you decry was actually a refuge from the world's corruption. Now the Church is as worldly as the secular culture, thanks to Vatican II--and just as corrupt.
113 posted on 02/20/2004 8:20:14 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: steplock
I am not one of those religious "nuts" but I am truly believing that the Book of Revelations is in the final process

Oh, pa-shaw! Over the past 2000+ years has there ever been a generation who didn't believe their's was the "end of days"? The late 19th c. Brits were sure that Gibbon's "Decline and Fall..." applied to them.

So instead of Revelation, may I suggest Ecclesiastes 3:1-8? ("To everything there is a season...")

114 posted on 02/20/2004 8:21:34 AM PST by yankeedame ("Oh, I can take it but I'd much rather dish it out.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #115 Removed by Moderator

To: sinkspur
St. Athanasius was excommunicated by Pope Liberius in 352 AD, and yet look which one was canonized.
116 posted on 02/20/2004 8:25:38 AM PST by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: dixiepatriot
I disagree. It's one thing to deny that the Holocaust happened. That's holocaust denial. It's quite another thing to question the "6 million" figure that is often quoted. I'm more concerned with historical fact than "offending" people.

Hutton says it didn't happen, that engineering the Holocaust was technically infeasable, and that 6 million Jews simply moved from Poland to Brooklyn and LA, or his alternate version they went to Israel, emigration being the source of the Holohoax, in Hutton's opinion. His firmly held opinions should be condemned, not minimized.

117 posted on 02/20/2004 8:26:03 AM PST by SJackson (Visit http://www.JewPoint.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"An SSPX Mass is valid, though it is illicit to attend one, when an Indult or Novus Ordo Mass is available."

Wrong. Here is what Msgr. Perle of Ecclesia Dei has stated in a letter of January 18, 2003: "In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X...If your intention is simply to participate in a Mass according to the 1962 Missal for the sake of devotion, this would not be a sin."

Nothing about indult Masses or anything else. It's a matter of the individual's personal devotion. One reason behind this letter is the private acknowledgement--however grudgingly acted upon--that the SSPX is not in schism and is not a separate church or religious sect, that it is an internal institution of the Church herself. You need to get up to snuff on this.




118 posted on 02/20/2004 8:34:35 AM PST by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
I take it I agree with you on this. Frankly, I don't think it makes an awful lot of difference whether 6,000,000 or 5,500,000 Jews were murdered in the Holocaust. To say that it never happened, or to minimize its significance, is another matter.

I also don't see why it detracts from the significance of the Holocaust to point out that maybe 4,000,000 Catholic Poles were killed in the same camps, purely because they were Catholic and Polish, or that between them Hitler and Stalin managed to kill more than 50,000,000 people in war or prison camps by the time the war was over. The Holocaust was still staggeringly evil, and it detracts nothing from it to say, as Mel Gibson evidently did to Peggy Noonan, that it was not the only evil committed in those days.
119 posted on 02/20/2004 8:35:29 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: ultima ratio
The "fortress mentality" you decry was actually a refuge from the world's corruption. Now the Church is as worldly as the secular culture, thanks to Vatican II--and just as corrupt.

Amen!! The Church went from being timeless to being "modern".

120 posted on 02/20/2004 8:38:14 AM PST by yankeedame ("Oh, I can take it but I'd much rather dish it out.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 321-333 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson