You have to be kidding.
Gibson has made a ton of trash movies and he’s a public adulterer.
In addition, he’s a mason and rather open about it.
Lastly, let me ask you:
Is this scene from Gibson’s “Passion” in Protestant or Catholic Scriptures?
More of your slanders, and you're one of the chief slanderers here. Here's from the Douay-Rheims Challoner foonotes from around 1750.
[15] "She shall crush": Ipsa, the woman; so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz., the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent's head.
There are in fact two manuscript traditions, and Christ crushing the serpent's head is AS CATHOLIC as OUR LADY crushing the Serpent's head, where in point of fact BOTH did, but had different relationships with the crushing, just as Our Lord was the Redeemer but Our Lady played a role in it.
Yes, Gibson was just giving in to the Prots, because you say so. Then explain the scene where St. Peter, after having denied Our Lord, knelt before Our Lady and called her Mother, begging her forgiveness. You could hear the Protestants cringe halfway across the country just by watching that scene.
Gibson based a lot of the movie on Katherine Emmerich, so that's likely where he got it. So, the scene in the Garden has Satan there tempting him to refuse the Passion, but it was when he rejected that temptation and accepted God's will, definitively commiting Himself to redeem mankind that the symbolism makes perfect sense for Him at that very moment to crush the head of the serpent that had just been tempting him, and then also referring to crushing the head in Genesis as a reference to His Redemption. It works very well in the movie. You can now go ahead and imagine Our Lady crushing a serpent at the exact same moment wherever she was when this took place.
Yes, he's a public adulter, and you're a Pharisaical scuм for calling him out, as your callout is rooted in derision and lack of charity, and not some attempt to "rebuke" him, since Gibson is well aware of his sins, and has mentioned them.
Then of course your Mason crap, where you have those out-of-context photos of him making various gestures. That doesn't make you a "Mason" ... so adding yet another calumny to all the rest. At best he was asked to do that by the photographer and didn't entirely or at all really understand its signficance when he did it. See, that's the kind of interpretation that charity requires. In nearly all photo shoots, it's the photographer calling the shots and telling them how to pose. He was also young in those two. Where he had his hand in his coat pocket, there's a 100 reasons he could have had it there other than intending to make some Masonic gesture. In fact, I often did the exact same thing when I was a seminarian, since it felt like a comfortable place to put my hand, where it was suspended on top of one of the cassock buttons. You see one picture out of context, where the hand was in that position for maybe a fraction of a second as he was possibly in process of doing something else. Finally, the double thumb-index finger sign, given the angle of his hands, looks more like the Italian gesture, which is often doubled up. With the 666 version, you they curl the fingers down more and turn the hand sideways, rather than more palms away form them.
As I said before, this guy and other slanderers need to be banned from this forum, as they give all Traditional Catholics a bad name. Yet nothing is done about it and clear slander is tolerated on a daily basis.
Topic: Mel Gibson's sequel (Read 2472 times)