Mel Gibson

[dairygirl4u2c]

I was wondering if any of you looked into mel gibson's claim about the Pope not being truly Catholic. I haven't since I don't consider the Catholic Church true to begin with but was wondering if you all did? And what did you find?

And what evidence ensures you to know he's wrong about his beliefs? Is it just faith that he's wrong or is there anything more substanitive?

Edited February 23, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c

[Dave]

Mel Gibson seems to be a sedevacantist, which means he doesn't consider the current pope or the last few popes to be true popes. In other words, he believes that the papal seat (sede) is actually vacant (vacante).

[dUSt]

I've never heard of Mel Gibson denying the authenticity of our current pope. It's a pretty big accusation. Can you site your source please? Provide a quote and source of Mel Gibson saying that John Paul II is not Catholic. Until you do, I'll just dismiss it as anti-Catholic rhetoric.

[God Conquers]

Ya, I doubt he ever actually said that.

[Oik]

Not only would I concur that what is being claimed against Mel Gibson is false,

I can also site sources (straight from the horses mouth) that explictedly say that Mel Gibson is indeed Roman Catholic.

However, I believe that the attacks on Mel Gibson are actually an effort to discredit the Catholic Church.

[foundsheep]

During his interview with Diane Sawyer he sited papal encylicals about anti semitism being a sin. I think people are confusing him with his father.

[Dave]

Y'all might want to take a look at this old thread: Mel Gibson and Sedevacantism

[dUSt]

Y'all might want to take a look at this old thread: Mel Gibson and Sedevacantism

Still, it would be nice to see something directly from Mel's mouth that he denies the authenticity of JPII. Until we do, all we're doing is speculating and spreading rumors. From dairygirl's post, it appears that in fact she has seen something to that affect, so I'd like for her to provide a source.

[God Conquers]

It would be even nicer if there were something directly from his mouth to this effect:

"I Rep the Pope"

[vianney]

yah it wold be nice but he totally dodged the question when diane sawyer asked him. He said he was a Catholic who does everything like they did before the changes in Vatican II. I will let you interpret that for yourself.

Vatican II allows for the Tridentine mass so he cant be talking about that.

And Weber who is tight with Hahn said that Hahn said that Mel todl him he was a sedevacantist.

[DojoGrant]

I have a friend at Franciscan University in Stuebenville who works for Dr. Scott Hahn, who saw The Passion of the Christ with Mel and talked with him personally afterwards. Dr. Hahn asked him if he believed that John Paul II was the legitimate head of the Church, and he said no. He asked if he was certain that this was true, and after pausing, responded, yes.

[cmotherofpirl]

When Mel himself comes out and says hes a sede, then he is a sede.

[dairygirl4u2c]

I know Dr. Hahn throuh a friend too! He's a neat guy.

Dr. Hahn asked him if he believed that John Paul II was the legitimate head of the Church, and he said no. He asked if he was certain that this was true, and after pausing, responded, yes.

So you see he is a sedvacantist.

But regardless of if he is or isn't, that's not really my point. My point is to ask you all how you know the sedvacantists are wrong and you are right. I was just using Mel as an example.

Is it faith in itself or is there something more?

Edited February 24, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c

[Aloysius]

because throughout history there was never a break in the line of succession ever since Peter appointed Linus Pope just before he was taken away to be killed. And since i have faith in Christ, i have faith in His words that the gates of hell won't prevail against His Church which is ONE and VISIBLE, and i know out of facts that the Historical Church traces its lineage from John Paul II to Peter himself, i mix that faith and reason and realize, hey wait a sec they're wrong cause that is against historical Christianity and therefore it is against the Church which is undefeated and undefeatable against the gates of hell.

[Ellenita]

I believe the attacks on Mel Gibson are actually an effort to discredit the Catholic church.

And without a doubt to attack and discredit the film itself which clearly is going to have a powerful impact on people who see it....although we have to wait another month before it opens in the UK, I've read a number of reviews about it which I trust and I am certain it will be used to draw people to Jesus in a way that they have never responded to before - either through becoming Christian for the first time or through re-awakening and deepening their faith. It's an important film because it's a powerful medium for reaching people who might not initially pick up a bible or read someone else's conversion story, and of course there are people who would rather the film didn't have that sort of impact! How easy it will be to focus the attention on whether or not Mel Gibson is a sedevacantist, rather than on The Passion!

It would appear that what ever Mel Gibson personally thinks, he has remained as true to the account of The Passion as possible and for that he should have our respect.