ya gotta love it that scholars was put in quotations. i did have newsmax below dirt level, but now i think i’ll let them rise to the level of pond scum.

I was wondering if and when Mel’s Catholicism would be attacked. Thanks to Mr. Auster for bringing the attack to our attention. Incredible is the idea that the Gospels are anti-Semitic. Unless there are alternative dimensions, I don’t see how Christ’s fellow Jewish martyrs can be thought anti-Jewish. I hope Mel casts conservative Bruce Willis in an important role.

Probably (and unintended by Mr. Gibson) the pre-release publicity will make the movie a huge hit, assuming it is a good movie. I don’t like his gratuitously violent Lethal Weapon movies, but he is talented.

“ya gotta love it that scholars was put in quotations. i did have newsmax below dirt level, but now i think i’ll let them rise to the level of pond scum.” — Abby

Abby, you think re-writing the four New Testament Gospels in order to make them PC is something any serious, reputable, or competent scholar would contemplate, undertake, or approve?

Posted by: Unadorned on June 14, 2003 03:44 AM
“you think re-writing the four New Testament Gospels in order to make them PC is something any serious, reputable, or competent scholar would contemplate, undertake, or approve?”

of course not. why do you ask?

The ADL basically considers all genuine Christianity to be anti-semitic - hence the pressure to have the scripture re-written according to their PC dogma. The only type of “Christian” acceptable to the ADL are those who go along with the Jesus Project. I read a comment by a Jewish conservative urging fellow Jews to leave the ADL because the ADL’s actual religion is now leftism, not Judaism - it may have been Don Feder, but I don’t remember for sure. The ADL has all the credibility of the NY Times.

Of course, it’s interesting to note that the US Council of Catholic Bishops has apparently given its offical blessing this kind of pernicious nonsense. Maybe the revised scriptures will shed new light on adult-child sexual relations - pedophilia will be shortly delared a virtue! My sympathies go to the faithful Catholics who are having to endure this evil.

I heard about the attack on Mel Gibson’s “Passion” months ago. There was an article in the N.Y. Times about him, Catholicism and his father. Many are trying to smear him with comments his father is alleged to have made on various occasions about Jews, int’l conspiracies, the Federal Reserve (I think) and other assorted topics. I look forward to this film and I admire Gibson for sticking to his guns in Hollywood. I’m not Christian (I simply fear God, believe the Old Testament and read the New Testament for edification) but I hate to see Christianity assualted by the forces of oblivion. America is a Christian country, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Without it, our civilization is crumbling.

Gibson’s father isn’t just alleged to have made way-out statements on Jews. He’s made them—including Holocaust denial. He seems to be a Catholic in something like the Fr. Fahey mold.

I believe Hutton Gibson may be a sedevacantist rather than a Catholic:

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/5353470.htm

You mean those who believe there hasn’t been a real Pope since the Pius XII died in 1958? But they haven’t formally denied the Pope’s authority and broken with the church, have they?

In any case, if a non-Catholic may be allowed an opinion on the matter, I tend to agree with them. When you read the writings of Pius XII, you’re in the atmosphere of the classic Christian teaching. Everything since then has been varieties of liberalism.

“But they haven’t formally denied the Pope’s authority and broken with the church, have they?”

I don’t think a uniform “they” exists, so there are potentially as many answers as there are seddys. There are some less radical trad groups such as the SSPX whose status is less clear. In general I think a seddy is like a protestant in that he expects more than he is personally entitled to demand from the formal human institutional parts of the Church, and thinks that some perceived error or other failure on the part of the Church releases him (the individual) from Her authority.

An actual loyal Catholic views the Papacy in much the same way a loyal monarchist views the monarchy. A given individual king may be an abject failure, an idiot, or whatever. The monarch nevertheless exercises legitimate authority of some limited scope (circumscribed by law, by lower authorities such as the aristocracy, etc) over subjects, and failures in individual monarchs do not invalidate the monarchy as an institution that transcends individuals. Enemies of the monarchy as an insitution take advantage of various kinds of failures in individual monarchs — specious claims by particular monarchs of tyrannical absolute authority of limitless scope, personal moral failings, etc — to attack monarchy as an institution and replace it; typically with liberal freedom and equality, at least in the past several centuries.

i just went and seen the movie this evening and i thought it was a great movie, mel gibson really out done his self on this movie,i really loved it and will go see it again if i get the chance.i think every one should go see it if they want to know what christ went through for us.thank you MR.GIBSON AND GOD BLESS YOU.
SINCERLY
DONITA BREWER