- Published on
Mel Gibson and the Pope
- Author
-
-
- Name
- Posts
- Posts
-
There comes a time when every tyrant overplays his hand. He gets cocky. What began as a hidden agenda becomes explicit. His carefully masked contempt for his followers erupts into an inflammatory public display of loathing. After years of chafing under the constriction of his own propaganda machine, he exults in casting off the last concessions to human decency. The grandiosity which began as an undeveloped defense against abysmally low self-esteem has been buttressed, rampart by rampart, by the arrogance and entitlement of patriarchal structures, until it has become the armature of a personality, the substitute for a soul.
This moment does not arrive unheralded. There are warnings along the way—shocking encroachments, unguarded moments, slips, near-misses. These are covered up, excused. There are phony apologies, scapegoats, favors called in, threats. Each time that there is a close call where the followers have the opportunity to glimpse the man behind the curtain, but where they fail to interpret correctly what they are seeing and fail to respond appropriately, the tyrant grows more confident, his ego more distended.
Sometimes, the peak of hubris is preceded by a near brush with self-awareness, a close call with accountability... a notable move in the right direction... and then, like a rubber band stretched taut, the backlash into grandiosity: the moment—the spectacle—of full-blown, unmistakable self-revelation. No more disguises, no more concessions. A display of raw power and virulent hatred.
This moment does not arrive unheralded. There are warnings along the way—shocking encroachments, unguarded moments, slips, near-misses. These are covered up, excused. There are phony apologies, scapegoats, favors called in, threats. Each time that there is a close call where the followers have the opportunity to glimpse the man behind the curtain, but where they fail to interpret correctly what they are seeing and fail to respond appropriately, the tyrant grows more confident, his ego more distended.
Sometimes, the peak of hubris is preceded by a near brush with self-awareness, a close call with accountability... a notable move in the right direction... and then, like a rubber band stretched taut, the backlash into grandiosity: the moment—the spectacle—of full-blown, unmistakable self-revelation. No more disguises, no more concessions. A display of raw power and virulent hatred.
That moment has arrived for Mel Gibson, and it has arrived for Pope Benedict XVI. And for each of them, this moment was preceded by what appeared to be the beginning of sanity.
In Mel’s case, there was his DUI, his sexist and anti-Semiitic rant, the mug shot... followed by an apology, an admission of "belligerent behavior" and "despicable" remarks." There was even a stint in outpatient rehab.
It was short-lived sanity. This week, there has been a public disclosure of a series of verbally violent phone calls to his girlfriend, with whom he is co-parenting a baby girl. The phone calls appear to acknowledge a physical assault. The language is racist, pornographic, and deeply misogynist. He may not have known his calls were being taped, but most celebrities of Gibson’s caliber would have exercised some vigilance to protect their assets and their reputation. This time, there are no apologies, no rehab. This time there are counter-attacks, a retaliatory restraining order. This time there is no excuse.
In Mel’s case, there was his DUI, his sexist and anti-Semiitic rant, the mug shot... followed by an apology, an admission of "belligerent behavior" and "despicable" remarks." There was even a stint in outpatient rehab.
It was short-lived sanity. This week, there has been a public disclosure of a series of verbally violent phone calls to his girlfriend, with whom he is co-parenting a baby girl. The phone calls appear to acknowledge a physical assault. The language is racist, pornographic, and deeply misogynist. He may not have known his calls were being taped, but most celebrities of Gibson’s caliber would have exercised some vigilance to protect their assets and their reputation. This time, there are no apologies, no rehab. This time there are counter-attacks, a retaliatory restraining order. This time there is no excuse.
And what about Pope Benedict XVI? This is the same pope who went to Africa with the message that condoms increase the spread of AIDS. This is the same man who sent a confidential letter to every bishop in the Catholic church in 2001, reminding them of the strict penalties for going to the police with allegations of sexual abuse. This is the man who urged these bishops to investigate these cases “in the most secretive way… restrained by perpetual silence… under penalty of excommunication.”
And yet... and yet... There was that moment of seeming sanity. In June, the Pope finally made an apology that appeared sincere. He spoke of his shame and sorrow to the victims. From St. Peters itself, he begged forgiveness from God and from the victims... and he promised to do "everything possible to ensure that such abuse will never occur again." Wow... asking forgiveness...? "Everything possible...?" That sounds like some serious change. But, as with Mel, it was just enough of a taste of reality, of right-sizedness, of accountability, to send him scampering back into the fortress of infallibility.
And yet... and yet... There was that moment of seeming sanity. In June, the Pope finally made an apology that appeared sincere. He spoke of his shame and sorrow to the victims. From St. Peters itself, he begged forgiveness from God and from the victims... and he promised to do "everything possible to ensure that such abuse will never occur again." Wow... asking forgiveness...? "Everything possible...?" That sounds like some serious change. But, as with Mel, it was just enough of a taste of reality, of right-sizedness, of accountability, to send him scampering back into the fortress of infallibility.
This week the Pope has issued the revisions to the Vatican’s internal laws. He is doing this in the wake of exposure of an international epidemic of child rape by Catholic priests. The revisions streamline the procedures for investigating and disciplining priests accused of child sexual abuse, forgoing full ecclesiastical trials, which are time-consuming. Now, this might seem like a proactive response… until one notices what is missing:
These new revisions have no mandate to report the abuses to civil authorities. This is the touchstone of the priesthood scandals: being above the law, family secrets, privileging the prestige of the institution over the safety of the children. Earlier the Pope had begrudgingly issued a directive to report cases to the police in localities where the law mandated it... which seemed to signal a new openness on the part of the Vatican. These revisions make clear that the bottom line is still "what happens in the confessional stays in the confessional."
The second glaring omission is the "one strike" policy that victims have been demanding. "One strike" means that after one offense, a priest would be removed from office. Doesn't seem to be a lot of ask in light of the fact that we are talking about a criminal assault on a child... but, no, the Vatican's new policy is pretty much the old policy. Pedophilic priests can be moved quietly to new parishes, to new countries, to new and unsuspecting communities.
These new revisions have no mandate to report the abuses to civil authorities. This is the touchstone of the priesthood scandals: being above the law, family secrets, privileging the prestige of the institution over the safety of the children. Earlier the Pope had begrudgingly issued a directive to report cases to the police in localities where the law mandated it... which seemed to signal a new openness on the part of the Vatican. These revisions make clear that the bottom line is still "what happens in the confessional stays in the confessional."
The second glaring omission is the "one strike" policy that victims have been demanding. "One strike" means that after one offense, a priest would be removed from office. Doesn't seem to be a lot of ask in light of the fact that we are talking about a criminal assault on a child... but, no, the Vatican's new policy is pretty much the old policy. Pedophilic priests can be moved quietly to new parishes, to new countries, to new and unsuspecting communities.
n light of these omissions, it is most likely that this speeded-up, in-house trial procedure is intended to facilitate cover-ups, rather than result in justice for the victims.
These Vatican revisions are a huge F-you to the thousands of victims and their families… as well as to the faithful members of the Church who drop their hard-earned wages in the collection plate every Sunday, and who have had to bankroll the settlement of these child abuse cases to the tune of several billion dollars. They can now understand that their donations will continue to enable crimes against children and protection of perpetrators. The Vatican has decided that, steep as these settlements are, they are still more expedient than turning the criminals over to the police. Because, of course, the safety of the children is not factored in. The cost-benefit analysis is all about loss of prestige vs. cost of protecting prestige.
Okay, that’s blatant enough, but, in a breath-taking display of hubris, the Vatican revisions go one better than their “stay the course” policy on protecting pedophiles. They lump the ordination of women priests in with the raping of children. That’s right. Recognizing the spiritual commitment of women who feel called to the priesthood is considered by the Vatican to be as heinous and as morally bankrupt, as damaging, and as dangerous as raping a child. Wow. The Church will deal as harshly with ordainers of women as they will pedophilic criminals. Well, actually, more harshly. Because, of course, they protect the pedophiles.
Honestly, it does take my breath away. I don’t know why, because this is the Church that brought us the witch-burnings and the Inquisition, that murdered people for reading the Bible in English, that tortured Galileo for attempting to explain Copernican theory... The church that banned divorce, abortion, birth control. The church that, in the brilliant words of Stephen Frye (yes, check out his speech!) is run by "extraordinarily sexually dysfunctional people" who label gays and lesbians perverts. Really, nothing they do or say should surprise me. But this did.It really took my breath away. Women consecrated to spiritual leadership are on a par with child rapers. Wow.
The cards are all face up on the table now. For Mel and for the Pope.
Mel Gibson’s ex-wife has come forward to support her husband. She is supporting him, even though he left her for a younger woman, left her after nearly three decades of marriage and seven children. Left her after her standing by him through the DUI, through allegations of infidelity, through all the controversy around his bizarre religious practices. She wants the world to know that there was never any physical abuse in the marriage, that he was a wonderful husband and father. She tells us she is coming forward for the sake of her children. In other words, she is protecting what is left of her investment in those three decades.
Will the women of the Catholic Church, including the mothers of potential rape victims, also want to protect their investment? Will they be remembering the cherished rituals and rites of the Church, their hours of devoted service, the relationships and the community of the Church? Will they be willing to overlook the hatred of these revisions, and to see them as having no relation to their experience?
Because there is nothing more to wait for. The façade has been removed. The naked, gloating face of misogyny and child-hating is staring the world in the face, defying interference. They don't even have to pretend anymore. Celibate men are entitled to sexually exploit children, and women will not be allowed to interfere.
It’s not about Mel Gibson anymore. It’s about the people who would continue to hire him, support him, defend him, see his movies. It’s not about the Pope anymore. It’s about the people, and especially the women, who would continue to believe in, to support, to belong to, and to contribute to the Catholic church.
There is nothing more to wait for. Really. This is the bottom line. Believe it.
These Vatican revisions are a huge F-you to the thousands of victims and their families… as well as to the faithful members of the Church who drop their hard-earned wages in the collection plate every Sunday, and who have had to bankroll the settlement of these child abuse cases to the tune of several billion dollars. They can now understand that their donations will continue to enable crimes against children and protection of perpetrators. The Vatican has decided that, steep as these settlements are, they are still more expedient than turning the criminals over to the police. Because, of course, the safety of the children is not factored in. The cost-benefit analysis is all about loss of prestige vs. cost of protecting prestige.
Okay, that’s blatant enough, but, in a breath-taking display of hubris, the Vatican revisions go one better than their “stay the course” policy on protecting pedophiles. They lump the ordination of women priests in with the raping of children. That’s right. Recognizing the spiritual commitment of women who feel called to the priesthood is considered by the Vatican to be as heinous and as morally bankrupt, as damaging, and as dangerous as raping a child. Wow. The Church will deal as harshly with ordainers of women as they will pedophilic criminals. Well, actually, more harshly. Because, of course, they protect the pedophiles.
Honestly, it does take my breath away. I don’t know why, because this is the Church that brought us the witch-burnings and the Inquisition, that murdered people for reading the Bible in English, that tortured Galileo for attempting to explain Copernican theory... The church that banned divorce, abortion, birth control. The church that, in the brilliant words of Stephen Frye (yes, check out his speech!) is run by "extraordinarily sexually dysfunctional people" who label gays and lesbians perverts. Really, nothing they do or say should surprise me. But this did.It really took my breath away. Women consecrated to spiritual leadership are on a par with child rapers. Wow.
The cards are all face up on the table now. For Mel and for the Pope.
Mel Gibson’s ex-wife has come forward to support her husband. She is supporting him, even though he left her for a younger woman, left her after nearly three decades of marriage and seven children. Left her after her standing by him through the DUI, through allegations of infidelity, through all the controversy around his bizarre religious practices. She wants the world to know that there was never any physical abuse in the marriage, that he was a wonderful husband and father. She tells us she is coming forward for the sake of her children. In other words, she is protecting what is left of her investment in those three decades.
Will the women of the Catholic Church, including the mothers of potential rape victims, also want to protect their investment? Will they be remembering the cherished rituals and rites of the Church, their hours of devoted service, the relationships and the community of the Church? Will they be willing to overlook the hatred of these revisions, and to see them as having no relation to their experience?
Because there is nothing more to wait for. The façade has been removed. The naked, gloating face of misogyny and child-hating is staring the world in the face, defying interference. They don't even have to pretend anymore. Celibate men are entitled to sexually exploit children, and women will not be allowed to interfere.
It’s not about Mel Gibson anymore. It’s about the people who would continue to hire him, support him, defend him, see his movies. It’s not about the Pope anymore. It’s about the people, and especially the women, who would continue to believe in, to support, to belong to, and to contribute to the Catholic church.
There is nothing more to wait for. Really. This is the bottom line. Believe it.
7 Comments
It's mind-blowing, isn't it? I have spent the last few years researching the roman catholic church for a book that I'm writing about the Beguines of the middle ages. I am continuously flabbergasted by the blatant greed and disregard for human life perpetrated by these supposed religious leaders. I recently learned form a nun that 80% of the 2,000 nuns and ex-nuns interviewed had been sexually abused by a priest at some point in their careers. (The Silence We Keep: A Nun's View of the Catholic Priest Scandal. Written by Karol Jackowski) A couple of years ago, I went underground for my research and became an "inquirer" at a convent for 14 months. I learned a lot, to say the least. The convent was a long way from NWMF., but with just as many dykes. LMAO It's fun to see you on Facebook, Caroline. It's been a long time since Campfest....xoKelly Conway
Thank you for this excellent summation, I just hope you are right and that Benedict XVI has really overplayed his hand and so openly betrayed Catholic women that they will choose to not support his brand of misogyny any more.
Thank you!!!! Yours is an excellent analysis, bridging pop culture and religion revealing how the two reinforce one another, and how the two can reveal what should be self-evident truths of oppression on many levels. Can't wait for the Sacred Synapsing to begin!!!!! C U in August : )
Mel Gibson's ex-wife is an Episcopalian and the kids were baptized in the Episcopal Church.
I have not contributed to the Catholic Church for years. I tithe in other ways. But when Elizabeth Schussler-Fiorenza was asked why she was not leaving the Church if she disliked JP2 so much, she answered, 'The pope has to leave the church, not I.'As a Catholic, I know that We Are The Church. The pope and the Vatican at the moment are warts or boils on the Body of Christ.I understand your outrage. I share it. But I want to be there when some of it crumble to help rebuild the whole of it. In the meantime, I take a breath of fresh air by attending masses said by an Anglican woman priest, a friend of mine, whose bishop gives her a lot of headaches because she is a woman and a priest, and he cannot stand it.Blessings.
Dear Carolyn,I've never heard of you before but a friend of my partner sent her the link to this article on Mel Gibson and Ratzinger (I find it extremely difficult even to refer to this man 'Pope' Benedict). My partner is away helping to direct an Ignatian 8-day retreat at a Catholic retreat centre. She gave a "theological reflection" at the homily time at Mass a couple of days ago(as a layperson, and woman no less!). As a woman, she is not, NATURALLY, allowed to be ordained as a priest -- we won't even speak of the fact that she is in a lesbian relationship, something that has to be at least an 'open secret' or she would be fired from her spiritual director job. By all accounts, hers was far and away the best homily of the retreat. A priest came up and playfully asked her when she WAS going to be ordained, to which she replied: 'You do realize that [by even uttering such a thing] you are committing a serious "crime against the faith?" He nodded gravely.I was Carmelite nun for 23 years. (12 of them as novice mistress and finally as prioress, although that finished off what was left of my health after struggling for years with increasingly reactive forces in a community I originally entered because the famous superior of this probably most prominent Carmel in the English-speaking world wrote books encouraging an open, thinking Church respectful of women, but increasingly as time went on she became 'in' with the local bishop, and we younger sisters were then criticized and ostracized for speak and think in the very way she had taught us to think and speak during our novitiate training.Needless to say, as a lesbian in an actual (committed,loving, mature, permanent relationship blessed by God, I hope and believe) lesbian relationship, I am no longer welcome in the Catholic church -- indeed, I am actually automatically excommunicate due to my living arrangements. But, like Elizabeth Schussler-Fiorenza, when asked by my incredulous friends and bewildered non-Catholic observers why I bother to remain a committed, Mass-going Catholic, I reply that it is for the heretics to leave,not me. By 'heretics' I refer to our current Pope and the majority of bishops and Vatican officials, and they are heretics in the strictest technical sense, setting themselves up as they do against those two forums which are higher than any authority in the Vatican up to and inc. the Pope himself: (a) the teaching of the last solemn ecclesiastical Council, Vatican II, whose pronouncements and spirit trump any personal opinions and pronouncements promulgated even by the Pope; and(b) a Catholic's private conscience, which no power on earth can gainsay and which no less a personage than Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger himself declared to be sacrosanct if it is in conflict with than any official Vatican teaching, even one promulgated by the Pope himself (includng HIM-self,of course!). These absolutely fundamental cornerstones of Catholic teaching down the ages are routinely and cynically ignored and/or flouted by Pope Benedict and his Curia on a regular, if not a daily basis. So, as I say, with Elizabeth Schussler-Fiorenza, my answer to those who wonder why I remain a Catholic, I say: it is for heretical popes and greedy, venal bishops, cardinal, and curial officials to leave the Church, not me. Or, as a Canadian moral theologian who lost his teaching faculties for his brave stands on certain ethical issues like birth control and homosexuality, put it more bluntly when asked the same question: "Hell, it's not their [ie the Vatican's] Church, it's MY [ie the people's] Church".Thank you with all my heart for your articulate expression of the real truth about the present situation in the Church. You have my poor prayers and support in your work of speaking the truth in the midst of a Babel of confusing voices.Paula
Where is it written that lesbian relationships are ' blessed by God' ?If you have such a problem with the catholic church,and it is far from perfect,why not simply walk away,or start your own church, which would be I presume run by women and in fact would rewrite the history of Jesus to be..." In fact a woman "Why do you feel threatened by men,and indeed feel the need to vilify men, please enlighten me, I do not understand it.OK I accept the fact that warcrimes against women happen in every war,the scum rises to the top very quickly in any war,that's why it is so hideous, the true saddist types that quickly rise to power say in the gestapo or Saddam's war counsel,etc,et al.I also openly accept the wrongdoings of male priests, not only in the Catholic church...but in fact every church from the Davidians of Waco to Jonestown and all in between.But the fems and the lesbos want to have their pound of scrotum.It is relentless, I have had it thrust upon me for all of my male adult life, this hatred of the male, and if it is a male of religion, double the hatred.I grew up in the Catholic faith and see people fall away from it all around ... but at the same time I see people yearning for some spiritual guidance and sense of yearning for meaning in the big picture... modern tribalism is rampant...it seems to me a lot of people are willing to believe in anything as long as A) There are no rules of decency and discipline and B) Take men out of the picture.Which brings into discussion the meaning of Jesus...does one believe in Jesus...does one believe in the last supper ?Why did Jesus select men as his deciples ?Were there women at the last supper ?Some say yes...others no.I believe women feel threatened by these matters.What does concern me is the form of campaign women with women want to wage against mainstream..why ???This is the first time I have stumbled across this website and would be impressed if this post was actually posted...and commented on.Love to all... Jay.