Gibson's Passion forced to find sanctuary

Scotsman.com ^ | February 29, 2004 | Gerald Warner

[ultima ratio]

Look at the interesting way this controversy mirrors what happened in 33 A.D. Judas betrays Christ and delivers him over to his enemies; somebody betrays Gibson and steals his manuscript, handing it over to his enemies; Jewish leaders condemn Jesus, Jewish leaders condemn Gibson; Pilate washed his hands after first siding with Jesus, the Vatican washes its hands after having praised Gibson's film; the disciples of Jesus deny him out of fear of an angry mob, the bishops deny Gibson's film out of fear of bad p.r.

[Maximilian]

Am glad you like our Archbishop. He seems like a good, faithful, no-nonsense cleric to me.

Atlanta -- home to a wonderful FSSP parish that allows you to participate fully in the traditional Catholic sacramental life of the Church. I believe it's called "St. Francis de Sales." You should look it up.

[livius]

which won him Time magazine Man of the Year.

You're right, this is rarely a good sign.

[ultima ratio]

You have a beautiful soul--it shines in how you express yourself. No need to apologize. I've got a lot of apologizing to do myself--much more than you.

[lainde]

bttt

[AgThorn]

Excellent piece .... I do take a position on this paragraph though:

Religion should be nice. It should have no doctrines, since that would create division. There are no moral absolutes, no objective truths. In an ideal world, you should not be able to put a cigarette-paper between a Catholic and a Buddhist. Since we are all going to Heaven, regardless of our conduct on earth, what is the point of all this violence on Calvary? Of course, we need some ritual and collective spirituality: so, let’s go and hang some cuddly toys on the railings of Kensington Palace. What we need is a one-size-fits-all, syncretic religion, centred on the United Nations; an ethical code that does not restrict us from the perpetual gratification of all appetites.

He wrote this after talking negatively about the RCC after Vatican II. I would say that all of the above negatives are NOT part of Vatican II, but rather the current Pope and his reaching out to every faith in the world and pretending we are "all going to heaven" ... I don't recall that ever being the message of Vatican II.

[AnAmericanMother]

Oh, I'm familiar with St. Francis de Sales, over in Mableton. The parishioners have worked with all their might to transform a little plain vanilla red-brick former Baptist church into a beautiful sanctuary. There is a serious disconnect between the exterior and interior of the church . . . when you open the door it's like you've entered another world.

It's just that I have a former Methodist husband, and we are going to have to break him in easy. (His mother is a Catholic, but he was raised Methodist because his dad's dad was a Methodist minister. I was privileged to know him, and he was honestly a saint.) It took me almost ten years after we were married to get him to join the Episcopal Church . . . so I can be patient!

[independentmind]

Fabulous. Thanks for posting it.

[Unam Sanctam]

Now you are accusing the Pope of being Pontius Pilate. Give me a break!

[Maximilian]

I don't recall that ever being the message of Vatican II.

Then I guess you don't recall "Dignitatis Humanae" on religious liberty and "Unitatis Redintegratio" on Ecumenism and "Nostra Aetate" on relationships with non-Christians and even "Gaudium et Spes" on the Church in the modern world which said that now we would embrace the world.

[Unam Sanctam]

Pity no Catholic bishop has gone on record in equally enthusiastic vein. <>/i>

Several bishops have spoken in favor of the movie, as mentioned above (and I would add Cardinal Pell of Sydney to the list). Once again, I see you are trying to use this move to trash the legitimate authorities of the Church and to tar everyone in the hierarchy with the same brush.

[Unam Sanctam]

Religion should be nice. It should have no doctrines, since that would create division. There are no moral absolutes, no objective truths. In an ideal world, you should not be able to put a cigarette-paper between a Catholic and a Buddhist. Since we are all going to Heaven, regardless of our conduct on earth, what is the point of all this violence on Calvary? Of course, we need some ritual and collective spirituality: so, let’s go and hang some cuddly toys on the railings of Kensington Palace. What we need is a one-size-fits-all, syncretic religion, centred on the United Nations; an ethical code that does not restrict us from the perpetual gratification of all appetites.

This statement is neither an accurate reflection of Catholic teaching or the teaching of the current Pope. It is slanderous of you to claim that it is.

[Maximilian]

It's just that I have a former Methodist husband, and we are going to have to break him in easy . . . so I can be patient!

Patience is always a good thing, and you seem to be on the right track. But if you really want to convert your husband, only sanctifying grace can do it. This is both Catholic and protestant theology. So go to the source where sanctifying grace is actually available, go to the fountain of graces, the traditional Catholic sacraments.

In contrast, there have been several threads recently about how real men head for the exits screaming whenever they are dragged inside a modern "liturgical service."

[Desdemona]

I just saw this film this evening and confess I couldn't watch certain parts, although I heard them.

If one truly believes, there is nothing to be afraid of in this film. Finally, someone in the medium took a serious stab (no pun intended) at this subject and make it work to the point where you sit in that theater and wonder how any parent could watch their child endure that. It was literally like being a spectator.

BTW, my bishop was very much looking forward to seeing this film. He is a very sincere and good man. Very orthodox, too.

[AnAmericanMother]

They will be trampled by yours truly on the way out the door.

We have to get my husband to the sanctifying grace or the grace to my husband. Like Dickens's beefsteak, he "must be humored, not drove." After 27 years of marriage, I know just about how far and fast he can be led. Eventually I will get him into range, and the Good Lord will do the rest.

[Maximilian]

This statement is neither an accurate reflection of Catholic teaching or the teaching of the current Pope.

Let's see now, let me rack my brain, which pope was it who tried to place an honorary red cardinal's hat on Hans Urs von Balthasar, the teacher of "universal salvation"? Was it Pope Leo XII? No, I remember, it was just a couple years ago, and it was Pope John Paul II. We can thank divine providence that von Balthasar dropped dead just 2 days before the ceremony, so his heretical teachings were never crowned with this papal sanction.

And let me think, who was the pope who appointed Cardinal Kasper to the most visible position in the entire Vatican hierarchy where he can travel around the world telling people of all religions that there is no need for them to become Catholics? It was pope John Paul II. He's the one who picked Cardinal Kasper and placed him in that job.

And who was the pope who convened the 2 scandalous Assissi meetings? It was the same pope as the 2 questions above, and the same pope who is still proclaiming that "ecumenism" must be the guiding principle for every action of the Church.

[Unam Sanctam]

By the way, I heard two separate what you would call "Novus Ordo priests" of the new "Post-Vatican II Church", which of course is a new religion, recommended seeing the Passion, so you can take your Catholic Church bashing and shove it.

[Maximilian]

We have to get my husband to the sanctifying grace or the grace to my husband. Like Dickens's beefsteak, he "must be humored, not drove." After 27 years of marriage, I know just about how far and fast he can be led. Eventually I will get him into range, and the Good Lord will do the rest.

LOL. But what is "Dicken's beefsteak"? This reference doesn't ring a bell.

[RobbyS]

Men like Gilson and Maritain cannot be held up as typical and they were bitterly disappointed by what passed as Thomism by 1960. If anything destroyed the "Thomistic foundation" of Catholic philosophy, it was the dablers in the stertile neo-Thomism of the 1950s, which was so absorbed with jargon that it could not bother to
make itself clear.