Did the Vatican endorse Gibson's film or didn't it? (Rod Dreher column)

Dallas Morning News ^ | 1/22/2004 | Rod Dreher

[sinkspur]

Whom do you trust, Hollywood or the Vatican?

That used to be an easy call. Not anymore.

This week, we see that either top officials of Mel Gibson's production company are manipulative deceivers or the top aide to Pope John Paul II and the papal spokesman is.

Everybody agrees on this much: In early December, The Passion of the Christ co-producer Steve McEveety provided a recorded version of the controversial Gibson film about the death of Jesus to Monsignor Stanislaw Dziwisz, the pope's longtime secretary, for the Holy Father's viewing. The monsignor returned the film to Mr. McEveety and said he had watched it with the pontiff.

On Dec. 17, Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan, a conservative Catholic, reported that John Paul's stated reaction to the film had been: "It is as it was." The source for the quote? Mr. McEveety, who said he got it from Monsignor Dziwisz.

John Allen, the respected Holy See correspondent for the liberal National Catholic Reporter, came out the same day with the same report, from his own Vatican sources. Mr. Allen quoted an anonymous senior Vatican official saying, "The Holy Father watched and enjoyed the film. His comment afterward was, 'It is as it was.' "

John Paul's approval of the film means a great deal, in part because, given the pope's commitment to atoning for the church's anti-Semitic history, it helped allay fears that the film would perpetuate anti-Jewish stereotypes.

But one week later, an unnamed "senior Vatican official close to the pope" gave an interview to Catholic News Service in which the official said, "There was no declaration, no judgment from the pope."

And then last weekend, after harsh criticism by a New York Times columnist, Monsignor Dziwisz gave a rare, on-the-record interview to CNS, in which he said, "The Holy Father told no one his opinion of this film."

So, if the monsignor is telling the truth, Team Gibson not only are liars but world-class jerks, inventing a quote and attributing it to the Holy Father for the sake of marketing their movie. The filmmakers, though, stand by the original story.

Here's where things get interesting.

On Tuesday, someone close to the Gibson camp leaked to me an e-mail to Mr. McEveety purporting to be from papal spokesman Dr. Joaquin Navarro-Valls, whose first language is Spanish. It was date-stamped Dec. 28.

The e-mail restates the official spokesman's backing the Noonan account and ends: "I would try to make the words 'It is as it was' the leit motive [sic] in any discusion [sic] on the film. Repeat the words again and again and again."

If this e-mail is authentic, it's proof that Dr. Navarro-Valls not only confirmed the accuracy of the initial reports but also encouraged the filmmakers to use the quote extensively in promoting the movie!

I e-mailed Dr. Navarro-Valls a copy of the Dec. 28 missive. "I can categorically deny its authenticity," he e-mailed back.

A Gibson spokesman declined to discuss the document on the record.

Interestingly, Ms. Noonan reported in her Dec. 17 column that when she asked the spokesman if the pope had said anything more than "It is as it was," he e-mailed her to say he didn't know of any further comments. She sent me a copy of that e-mail, which came from the same Vatican e-mail address as the one to me and to Mr. McEveety.

So where does this leave us?

To agree with the Vatican's story, you have to believe that not only would Mel Gibson's crew invent the pope's quote but also that it would dare to use such a lollapalooza of a lie to sell a film.

You have to believe that the ruse would involve both Mr. McEveety and Ms. Noonan fabricating e-mails from the papal spokesman.

And you have to believe that the independent reporting by NCR's John Allen, which didn't rely on a movie source, was trumped up.

Here's what I think: The pope was quoted accurately, but, for some reason, Vatican officials became uncomfortable with it. So they changed their official story. If doing so makes honorable filmmakers and journalists, Catholics among them, come off as sleazebags or dupes – well, that's life.

If that's the game the Holy See is playing, that's a crying shame.

[sinkspur]

What a mess!

[sinkspur]

Here's Dreher's take. Some good people hung out to dry by unscrupulous churchmen.

It ain't the first time.

[maica]

Peggy Noonan also has a column on this mystery today in OpinionJoournal.

[rdb3]

And if he doesn't endorse it, so?

[sinkspur]

And if he doesn't endorse it, so?

That's no longer the issue.

The issue now is the Vatican's shabby behavior, having proudly told some prominent Catholics what the Pope said, they're now trying to pull the rug out from underneath them, rather than just acknowledge it.

Why? They don't want the Pope's words used to commercialize anything is the likely excuse.

If that's the case, why say anything in the first place? Did Navarro-Valls and the pope's secretary not think that this would get out and be used as an endorsement?

Some denseness there.

[Always Right]

But one week later, an unnamed "senior Vatican official close to the pope" gave an interview to Catholic News Service in which the official said, "There was no declaration, no judgment from the pope."

Let's see, we have a few named people and a unnamed source that confirm it happened, and we have one unnamed source that denies it happened. So far the proponderance of evidence points to Gibson telling the truth.

[rdb3]

Why? They don't want the Pope's words used to commercialize anything is the likely excuse.

If that's the case, why say anything in the first place?

Now that's a germane question.

[theDentist]

Sounds to me like some P.R. firm retained to create publicity for the movie overplayed it's hand. No big deal, I was gonna see it anyway.

[ClintonBeGone]

I'm still baffled on what the big deal is? Is it the Vatican can give Mel cover for the attacks coming from Jewish groups? If so, I hardly think the Vatican, given its history, is much help.

[OldFriend]

All this publicity is to Gibson's advantage.

[steplock]

Just another attempt to discredit Mel Gibson, The Passion, and the Holy Bible by the left wing radicals we have corrupting this country. Why do we bother even discussing this slime? The time for discussion is over.

[Gorjus]

And if he [the Pope] doesn't endorse it, so?

That's no longer the issue.

Ah, but that is exactly the issue. Instead of the news being focused on the Passion of Christ, it's become focused on men. Focusing on the opinion of a man - the Pope - was the first step away from Jesus. Focusing on whether it was accurately reported, was yet another, and now the issue is on who is lying since someone must be. Step by step, the story is moving away from Jesus.

And it all started from thinking the opinion of one man was so important it outweighed the truth itself.

[tpaine]

The issue now is the Vatican's shabby behavior, having proudly told some prominent Catholics what the Pope said, they're now trying to pull the rug out from underneath them, rather than just acknowledge it.
Why? They don't want the Pope's words used to commercialize anything is the likely excuse.
If that's the case, why say anything in the first place? Did Navarro-Valls and the pope's secretary not think that this would get out and be used as an endorsement?

Some denseness there.
5 -sinky-


________________________________


And I see some sort of denseness in your reaction, sink.
People make mistakes. -- No one is infallible, correct?

[sinkspur]

Focusing on the opinion of a man - the Pope - was the first step away from Jesus

Take your Catholic bashing elsewhere. Nobody's interested.

[sinkspur]

Just another attempt to discredit Mel Gibson, The Passion, and the Holy Bible by the left wing radicals we have corrupting this country.

That sounds like boilerplate from some conspiracy mag.

I don't see what it has to do with the issue.

[sinkspur]

People make mistakes

And most people acknowledge when they've made them. The Vatican just zips its lip and lets people like Peggy Noonan get painted as a liar.

[reed_inthe_wind]

"Here's what I think: The pope was quoted accurately, but, for some reason, Vatican officials became uncomfortable with it."

I think the same, the Pope was quoted accurately - so relax and go see the movie.

Does the Vatican need more disciplined public speakers - it looks like it does. Quoting the boss in public is a nono. I bet the movie was so emotionally wrenching that Monsignor Stanislaw Dziwisz lost his composure.

[Roughneck]

>>>I'm still baffled on what the big deal is?

Me too. The Bible says what it says about The Passion of Christ. I hear that Gibson was true to the account in the bible. If so, critics may as well call God Himself anti-semetic if that is the "charge".

I'll be seeing it.

[tpaine]

Lifes a bitch..

[NutmegDevil]

Is 'It is as it was' a common way in Italy/Poland to say - "Hey! The Pope saw the movie & it would be inappropriate to tell you if he liked it or not?" That statement does not tell me very much as English (American version) is my first language. Or perhaps the Pope's personal secretary wanted to say something inane and over/understated the Pope's reaction - without realizing whatever he said would be repeated for world-wide consumption? 'It is as it was' sounds like it could be taken from an eulegy given by the parish curate who had never met the deceased.