Gus Dddysgrl
Member
He is definitly one of my favorite actors. If his beleifs are near his roles I like him even more. This new movie coming out looks really good and I want to see it. I've seen a couple of trailers and it looks accurrate.
Mel Gibson: A Conservative in Hollywood?
- Thread starter Lone Star
- Start date
- Status
Balog
Member
I'd like to know his feelings on gun control myself. I've not seen any comments from him for or against.
Sigman-
Oh, GOOD point about Tom Selleck and O'Donnell. Those two represent both sides of the issue very well...
I was amused at the post by the gentleman who referred to the "male actress"! Was she/he one of those gays so intent on gaining a presence on TV today, or was that just a slip when you meant to type "actor", which expresses gender, anyway?
I have much of my answer now about Gibson. He seems to have changed. Probably one of those people who lacked solid faith, became aware of the alternative, and embraced it with the gusto of a zealot. He may be a person of extremes. Time will tell if he is now consistent.
I'm not Catholic, but am somewhat aware of the contents of Vatican II. I am baffled as to why, in the 21st Century, services should be conducted in Latin. Perhaps certain portions, for tradition's sake, but the service in general should be in English (in the US). I for one like to understand what my pastor is saying!
Lone Star
Oh, GOOD point about Tom Selleck and O'Donnell. Those two represent both sides of the issue very well...
I was amused at the post by the gentleman who referred to the "male actress"! Was she/he one of those gays so intent on gaining a presence on TV today, or was that just a slip when you meant to type "actor", which expresses gender, anyway?
I have much of my answer now about Gibson. He seems to have changed. Probably one of those people who lacked solid faith, became aware of the alternative, and embraced it with the gusto of a zealot. He may be a person of extremes. Time will tell if he is now consistent.
I'm not Catholic, but am somewhat aware of the contents of Vatican II. I am baffled as to why, in the 21st Century, services should be conducted in Latin. Perhaps certain portions, for tradition's sake, but the service in general should be in English (in the US). I for one like to understand what my pastor is saying!
Lone Star
greyhound
Member
I'll be there opening weekend. Been looking forward to this one for a long time.
I did hear he made a few changes after the intial round of complaints, but nothing too blatant. I want to see it as the filmmaker conceived, not PC'd down to satisfy each and every group.
I did hear he made a few changes after the intial round of complaints, but nothing too blatant. I want to see it as the filmmaker conceived, not PC'd down to satisfy each and every group.
GoRon
Member
Jesus was Jewish, all the apostles were Jewish. If it follows the gospels accurately almost all the people portrayed will be Jewish. The gospel story to a large degree is a Jewish story of the fulfillment of prophesy. To call it anti semitic is silly. Gibsons movies as of late (Braveheart, The Patriot, We Were Soldiers) have been some of my favorites. Doesn't S. Elliott's charecter do some damage with a 1911 in WWS?
Last edited:
Minute_Of_Torso
Member
I have to agree with GoRon about the antisemitism "controversy." In fact, where is the controversy of a story that's been told countless times for over 2000 years?
As a Christian, an asst. pastor, and a theologian here's my take:
I worship a Jew as the incarnation of the living God (the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). I try to pattern my life after the teachings of Jewish Patriarchs, Jewish Prophets, Jewish Kings, and Jewish Apostles. I take, as a matter of daily life, the Hebrew scriptural exhortation to "pray for the peace of Jerusalem." I spend a huge portion of my life trying to persuade people that their only hope of salvation is through a Jewish Prophet/Priest/King, namely Jesus of Nazareth.
I think it's a travesty that the US Government is willing to pursue terrorism to the ends of the earth (which I agree with with constitutional reservations) but that same government tells Israel that it should trade portions of its homeland for peace, and should not use drastic measures to protect their own nation and citizens from terrorism.
I put my money where my mouth is in that I donate money to, among others, organizations that fund the return of foreign-born Jews to Israel, if that is what they desire to do.
I teach Christians who are wishy-washy on the 2nd Amendment issue (or are downright anti-gunners) that Scripture supports the 2nd Amendment based largely on passages from the Jewish Prophet Nehemiah.
How can I be called antisemitic?
I haven't yet seen the movie, but I will on opening night, but if it is scripturally correct, there's no possible way to call it antisemitic. As for the scourges against Jews (inquisition, after passion plays, etc.), I won't apologize for the actions of the Roman Catholic Church (or any so-called church that persecutes the "people of the promise"). . . remember, we had a little thing called the Reformation because of our differences with the Roman Church.
As for Mel Gibson . . . only time will tell. I'll take him at his word for now and wait for confirmation of that through his long-term actions.
As a Christian, an asst. pastor, and a theologian here's my take:
I worship a Jew as the incarnation of the living God (the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). I try to pattern my life after the teachings of Jewish Patriarchs, Jewish Prophets, Jewish Kings, and Jewish Apostles. I take, as a matter of daily life, the Hebrew scriptural exhortation to "pray for the peace of Jerusalem." I spend a huge portion of my life trying to persuade people that their only hope of salvation is through a Jewish Prophet/Priest/King, namely Jesus of Nazareth.
I think it's a travesty that the US Government is willing to pursue terrorism to the ends of the earth (which I agree with with constitutional reservations) but that same government tells Israel that it should trade portions of its homeland for peace, and should not use drastic measures to protect their own nation and citizens from terrorism.
I put my money where my mouth is in that I donate money to, among others, organizations that fund the return of foreign-born Jews to Israel, if that is what they desire to do.
I teach Christians who are wishy-washy on the 2nd Amendment issue (or are downright anti-gunners) that Scripture supports the 2nd Amendment based largely on passages from the Jewish Prophet Nehemiah.
How can I be called antisemitic?
I haven't yet seen the movie, but I will on opening night, but if it is scripturally correct, there's no possible way to call it antisemitic. As for the scourges against Jews (inquisition, after passion plays, etc.), I won't apologize for the actions of the Roman Catholic Church (or any so-called church that persecutes the "people of the promise"). . . remember, we had a little thing called the Reformation because of our differences with the Roman Church.
As for Mel Gibson . . . only time will tell. I'll take him at his word for now and wait for confirmation of that through his long-term actions.
horge
Member
Mel Gibson's turn of faith finds doubt among some of you?
I find it not the least bit surprising that renewed faith in Christ comes hand in hand with a respect for an individual's choice for armed readiness to defend the innocent.
Humility does not dictate upon others.
Nor does Christian love.
A desire to dictate unarmed weakness upon all cannot come from the Divine, nor can the desire to usurp the natural, God-given rights of people to defend themselves and their loved ones from evil. Such designs are the foul work of the Beast and its minions.
Jesus rebuked Peter for taking up arms at Gethsemane --because Peter was interfering with what God Himself had ordained (Peter had failed to realize just exactly WHO Jesus was) and not because Peter was willing to defend the innocent by feat of arms.
Where love and self-sacrifice --the mightiest of weapons in Creation-- can be made to protect the innocent, we practice what Christ preached.
But for those of us poor sinners still striving to skilfully wield love and self-sacrifice with patience and (above all) long foresight, then hard handtools must serve.
---
Lone Star,
Ave!
I'm a Catholic Christian, and while I have even less corporeal connection to the Latin mass than any Caucasoid, I happen to find God in the old Latin Tridentine format as much or moreso than in the present Standard Mass.
The sect to which Mel Gibson belongs has been branded heretic by local bishops for its rejection of Vatican II, and yet many, many Catholic Filipinos spurned their leaders and attended the "heretic" Latin masses.
Maybe it's because we know the mass format by heart.
Maybe it's because we know a little Spanish, and Latin owns the former as an heir.
In the old Tridentine, the priest more visually leads the congregation in praying TO God, and venerating the Holy Sacrament as part of the flock, as opposed to a priest peforming as a star actor of sorts on stage for an audience.
---
Back to Gibson's film being "anti-Semitic"
Catholic Passion Plays always depict the bloodthirsty mob demanding Jesus' death as Jewish, and protray Jesus and the apostles as Jews themselves! What are we supposed to do? Sugarcoat and pretend the mob was atheistic? The point was that Jesus was killed by his own people!
That's us, especially Christians.
As part of public Passion plays, the audience/congregation is made to play the part of the 'mob', shouting out "Crucify him!!" repeatedly. The congregation is thus made personally aware they/we are ALL 'guilty' for Christ's death, since after all, he died for us all.
"Anti-semitic"?
Conceited madness.
horge
I find it not the least bit surprising that renewed faith in Christ comes hand in hand with a respect for an individual's choice for armed readiness to defend the innocent.
Humility does not dictate upon others.
Nor does Christian love.
A desire to dictate unarmed weakness upon all cannot come from the Divine, nor can the desire to usurp the natural, God-given rights of people to defend themselves and their loved ones from evil. Such designs are the foul work of the Beast and its minions.
Jesus rebuked Peter for taking up arms at Gethsemane --because Peter was interfering with what God Himself had ordained (Peter had failed to realize just exactly WHO Jesus was) and not because Peter was willing to defend the innocent by feat of arms.
Where love and self-sacrifice --the mightiest of weapons in Creation-- can be made to protect the innocent, we practice what Christ preached.
But for those of us poor sinners still striving to skilfully wield love and self-sacrifice with patience and (above all) long foresight, then hard handtools must serve.
---
Lone Star,
Ave!
I'm a Catholic Christian, and while I have even less corporeal connection to the Latin mass than any Caucasoid, I happen to find God in the old Latin Tridentine format as much or moreso than in the present Standard Mass.
The sect to which Mel Gibson belongs has been branded heretic by local bishops for its rejection of Vatican II, and yet many, many Catholic Filipinos spurned their leaders and attended the "heretic" Latin masses.
Maybe it's because we know the mass format by heart.
Maybe it's because we know a little Spanish, and Latin owns the former as an heir.
In the old Tridentine, the priest more visually leads the congregation in praying TO God, and venerating the Holy Sacrament as part of the flock, as opposed to a priest peforming as a star actor of sorts on stage for an audience.
---
Back to Gibson's film being "anti-Semitic"
Catholic Passion Plays always depict the bloodthirsty mob demanding Jesus' death as Jewish, and protray Jesus and the apostles as Jews themselves! What are we supposed to do? Sugarcoat and pretend the mob was atheistic? The point was that Jesus was killed by his own people!
That's us, especially Christians.
As part of public Passion plays, the audience/congregation is made to play the part of the 'mob', shouting out "Crucify him!!" repeatedly. The congregation is thus made personally aware they/we are ALL 'guilty' for Christ's death, since after all, he died for us all.
"Anti-semitic"?
Conceited madness.
horge
NewShooter78
Member
I'm not a religious person, but I plan on seeing this movie as well. It's not playing at too many theaters, so I might have to go way out of my way to see it, but hopefully not. I like Gibson's movies as of late, and if he has changed his life around and has found a new faith to live by, then more power to him.
bjengs
Member
The film is really being pilloried here in Los Angeles. I have heard nothing about Mel's general rejection of Vatican II being an indicator of supposed anti-Semitism. I have only heard a gamut of weak, hysterical arguments expressing make-believe fears of anti-Jewish hate crimes in the making. I don't seem to recall a big outcry during the release of Schindler's List in regards to a predicted upsurge in anti-German sentiment.
I have also heard ignorant comments by Jewish leaders calling upon the Pope to decry the movie - as if the Pope spoke for all Christians!
I have heard every old tactic in the book of the kind we have gotten used to hearing in regards to our rights to keep and bear arms. An especially despicable example happened just this morning on KNX-AM. A fellow by the name of Sam Rubin praised Gibson mildly for his comments during the Sawyer interview to the effect that "if you don't like the movie, please feel free to walk out." But Rubin was very emphatic that the notion that church groups would be bringing teens and pre-teens to see such a violent film would be (precise quote here) "nothing short...[melodramatic pause]...of child abuse." And those were the very last words of his review.
I appreciate those who are willing to give the detractors the benefit of the doubt, but it is very clear that there is an agenda in place. To say that a teenager viewing a faithful rendition of Scripture is "child abuse" is nearly the same as saying that a teenager reading the Scripture for himself and coming to understand Christ's suffering would also be "child abuse." Despicable.
I have also heard ignorant comments by Jewish leaders calling upon the Pope to decry the movie - as if the Pope spoke for all Christians!
I have heard every old tactic in the book of the kind we have gotten used to hearing in regards to our rights to keep and bear arms. An especially despicable example happened just this morning on KNX-AM. A fellow by the name of Sam Rubin praised Gibson mildly for his comments during the Sawyer interview to the effect that "if you don't like the movie, please feel free to walk out." But Rubin was very emphatic that the notion that church groups would be bringing teens and pre-teens to see such a violent film would be (precise quote here) "nothing short...[melodramatic pause]...of child abuse." And those were the very last words of his review.
I appreciate those who are willing to give the detractors the benefit of the doubt, but it is very clear that there is an agenda in place. To say that a teenager viewing a faithful rendition of Scripture is "child abuse" is nearly the same as saying that a teenager reading the Scripture for himself and coming to understand Christ's suffering would also be "child abuse." Despicable.
bjengs
Member
Also, I wanted to point out to those of you who wish to support the film, opening weekend is the most important weekend. Its success during this period will determine how many screens carry it the subsequent weekends. Luckily, the film opens on Ash Wednesday which adds a couple of days...
BowStreetRunner
Member
vacitan II was a series of reforms that the vatican handed down in the 60's i believe
one of its most visible effects was the mandate that masses be said in modern languages of the area
one of its most visible effects was the mandate that masses be said in modern languages of the area
Gordon Fink
Member
I think that shielding kids from reality is a form of child abuse—well, a disservice at least—but plenty of people are all for it.
~G. Fink
grnzbra
Member
Speaking of Signs and Lethal Weapon, let's not forget all the ban handguns signs prominantly displayed in the police department scenes in the later Lethal Weapon movies. I'll believe he's not anti when I see him and Tom taking on Rosie.
w4rma
member
I like Mel Gebson alot. The guy is a thinker and he dislikes the Bushs about as much as I do.
He's *extremely* conservative, but, unlike the right-wing, it is my understanding that he doesn't support using the law to enforce his strict religious views onto everyone else, which sort of makes him liberal.
He's *extremely* conservative, but, unlike the right-wing, it is my understanding that he doesn't support using the law to enforce his strict religious views onto everyone else, which sort of makes him liberal.
ReadyontheRight
Member
Hooo boy! Religion AND politics! w4rma -- Where in the world do you get this stuff?
Well -- I gotta go out with the right-wing posse and round up some athiests for church.
From my understanding, even back on the lethal weapon sets there was lots of bickering and hostility between Mel and Glover. My lord, glover must have leftist propaganda requirements written in his movie contracts, I swear. I've also noticed that the 'action hero' guys usually have some slant to varying degrees toward the 'RIGHT'. Stallone, Willis, hell even ah-nold for a while, there. He shoulda stuck to acting, IMHO.
Nevertheless, its good to see Hollywood rankled by the likes of the good guys.
Nevertheless, its good to see Hollywood rankled by the likes of the good guys.
Gibson said that he had his conversion due to the fact that he was a top Hollywood Star, all the booze, drugs, parties and women he could have, and yet he was miserable...even suicidal.
He said he came to the realization that he needed answers and he couldn't find them alone...
Rick
He said he came to the realization that he needed answers and he couldn't find them alone...
Rick
Andrew Rothman
Member
[hijack]
Tee hee! Are you going by accent? Make sure to add Obi Wan, See Threepio, and most of the rebel leaders.
And of course Darth Vader was voiced by James Earl Jones, with a rich, melodic, yet decidedly American accent.
[/hijack]
Tee hee! Are you going by accent? Make sure to add Obi Wan, See Threepio, and most of the rebel leaders.
And of course Darth Vader was voiced by James Earl Jones, with a rich, melodic, yet decidedly American accent.
[/hijack]
Mr. James
Member
sigman,
Vatican II was an Ecumenical Council of the Catholic church convened by Pope John XXIII in 1962 and adjourned by Pope Paul VI in 1965. As BowStreetRunner says, its most visible effect was the replacement of the traditional Latin Tridentine Rite Mass with the Novus Ordo Mass, celebrated in the vernacular. The actual effects of the second Vatican council went far further, and are still reverberating today.
An admittedley biased take on Vatican II:
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/v1.html
The documents adopted by the Council:
http://www.rc.net/rcchurch/vatican2
As to The Passion of the Christ, this represents Mr. Gibson's meditation on the Passion of Jesus, the Christ. It is a faithful - and faith-filled - rendition of the last 12 hours of Jesus's life, as recounted in the synoptic Gospels. As such, you may take it or leave it. The film, and its producer, have been slandered for fostering anti-Semitism, for encouraging "pogroms." But as others have noted, all the principal players, with the exception of Pilate, are Jews including, of course, Jesus himself and his disciples. The entire point of the film is not the culpability of Jews in Jesus's death - it is the culpability of each and every one of us through our sinfulness.
I read recently that when Rembrandt painted The Raising of the Cross, he used his own self-portrait for the face of one of the Roman soldiers present. His point was that he bore personal responsibility for the Agony, the Scourging, the Crowning and the Crucifixion. So, too, with Mr. Gibson's latest effort. Who killed Christ?
We did. I did.
Vatican II was an Ecumenical Council of the Catholic church convened by Pope John XXIII in 1962 and adjourned by Pope Paul VI in 1965. As BowStreetRunner says, its most visible effect was the replacement of the traditional Latin Tridentine Rite Mass with the Novus Ordo Mass, celebrated in the vernacular. The actual effects of the second Vatican council went far further, and are still reverberating today.
An admittedley biased take on Vatican II:
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/v1.html
The documents adopted by the Council:
http://www.rc.net/rcchurch/vatican2
As to The Passion of the Christ, this represents Mr. Gibson's meditation on the Passion of Jesus, the Christ. It is a faithful - and faith-filled - rendition of the last 12 hours of Jesus's life, as recounted in the synoptic Gospels. As such, you may take it or leave it. The film, and its producer, have been slandered for fostering anti-Semitism, for encouraging "pogroms." But as others have noted, all the principal players, with the exception of Pilate, are Jews including, of course, Jesus himself and his disciples. The entire point of the film is not the culpability of Jews in Jesus's death - it is the culpability of each and every one of us through our sinfulness.
I read recently that when Rembrandt painted The Raising of the Cross, he used his own self-portrait for the face of one of the Roman soldiers present. His point was that he bore personal responsibility for the Agony, the Scourging, the Crowning and the Crucifixion. So, too, with Mr. Gibson's latest effort. Who killed Christ?
We did. I did.
- Status
