Mel Gibson - Do Not Make A Movie On
Fatima
By Richard Salbato
Dear Icon
Productions and/or Mel Gibson,
My name is
Richard Salbato. I live in Fatima and helped get the Passion to the Convent
in Coimbra and Mel Gibson's meeting with Lucia.
I now hear
that Icon Productions is going to do a movie on the lives of the children of
Fatima, and mostly Lucia. As one who was converted to the faith by
Fatima, this makes me very happy and at the same time concerned. To be
sure my concerns are well founded. I am
going to copy this email to Sister Celina of the Convent of Coimbra. She
will contact me through Sister Isabelle, and maybe they can tell me if I should
not worry.
What I worry about
is that Icon and/or Mel Gibson has bought the rights to a fiction book called
"Stealing
from Angels" and I am afraid that this might be mixed up with the truth
about Fatima.
I also know that
some of Mel Gibson's close friends are in the Gruner or traditional
crowd. I also am a traditionalist but try to avoid over correcting
problems to the other extreme - which is also heresy.
I have lived my
life in the shadow of Fatima and in the city for 4 years with almost monthly
contact with the convent of Coimbra but I am not an expert on Fatima. And
there are many here in Portugal who claim to be experts on Fatima and are not
(and I can illustrate many printed errors by these people).
There are two experts on
Fatima, the nuns in Coimbra and Father Kondor (some spell it Condor) and both
Icon and Mel Gibson have both of these phone numbers.
I strongly
recommend that you let the convent and Father Kondor review the written
transcript before starting production.
The life of the
children of Fatima, done properly could be the movie of the 20th century and
save many souls, but done with personal opinions of people could actually harm
Fatima.
My hope and prayers
are with you.
Richard Salbato
www.unitypublishing.com
Weekly From Fatima
Icon and Mel Gibson never Responded
The above email was
sent to Mel Gibson and Icon Productions six weeks ago with no response. It was also copied to Mother Celina of the
Convent of Coimbra and to Father Kondor, Postulate of the children of
Fatima. Both the Convent of Coimbra and
Father Kondor thanked me for the letter, and I had a long talk with both
regarding the dangers to the faith if such a film is not made correctly. Needless to say I have defended the movie, The
Passion, in many articles and in fact defended Mel Gibson against attacks
by close friends of mine who thought his motives were suspect.
Although Mel
Gibson's father is a Sedevacanti, (Sedevacanti is Latin for "vacant
chair", meaning that the chair of Peter is empty See Note 1 below) Mel Gibson avoided the
subject during the promotion of his film on the Passion, never saying one way
or the other if he held to the same views of his father. Because I suspected that he might be a
Sedevacantist, I went through a great deal of effort to get the film on the
Passion and Mel Gibson to the Convent in Coimbra to see Lucia. Note 2below My motive was that if Mel Gibson was like his father, a Sedevacantist,
then I must get him and Lucia together because she is so much pro Pope John
Paul II. For this same reason, the
conversion of Mel Gibson, I placed on the front page of my web site the
statement of Sister Lucia,
"He who is with the Holy Father is with God. He who is not with the Holy Father is not with God."
This was done just
for Mel Gibson and before his meeting with Lucia. Mel Gibson in meeting with Lucia called her "incredibly
childlike," and the convent as "pretty austere and spartan." But
he went on to say that he still believes that the full contents of the famed
Third Secret have not been revealed, he said, "I still don’t think we got
all it," but said he did not raise the subject with her. "You can’t
go in there and say, 'So, what’s the Third Secret?'" he explained.
"But I still want to know."
However,
it was his interview on EWTN that made me know that Mel Gibson is a
Sedevacantist. In the interview he said
that he does not believe that the Novus Ordo is a true Mass because the words
of consecration have been changed. Now
if he believes this then he must believe that the Popes who have made this Mass
legal are not true popes, meaning Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul I and Pope John
Paul II. His father holds the view that
Pope Pius XII was the last true pope.
Since even Sedevacantists believe that Popes have the power to change
the wording of the Mass, then they have to believe that these popes were not
real popes. Regarding the words of
consecration see Note 3 below and Note 4
The
truth is that anyone who believes that the Novus Ordo is not a true Mass
believes that there is no legitimate pope in the Vatican and with this believe
they are no longer Catholic. Since I
now know that Mel Gibson is not Catholic I strongly object to his making a
movie about Fatima. All three children
of Fatima were very dedicated to the Holy Fathers, and Lucia was so dedicated
to John Paul II, she offered her last days of suffering for him and spoke his
name at the last moments of her life.
Stealing From Angels
Just ten days after
the death of Sister Lucia Mel Gibson bought the rights to Brian Dullaghan’s
novel ‘Stealing from Angels’, a story of a young Irish man who becomes
connected to the murder of Pope John Paul I and the third secret of
Fatima. ‘Stealing from Angels’ is a
work of fiction that tells the tale of a man who shoulders a huge secret and
trusts no one. The book has received rave reviews and is very popular in
America, not least, in the same vein as The Da Vinci Code, because people can
indulge their desire for church conspiracy theories – especially relating to
the Catholic Church.
Mel Gibson is known to practice pre-Vatican II ‘traditional’ Catholicism and
much was made amid ‘The Passion’ furor of his father’s Vatican conspiracy
theories. That Gibson would buy the
rights to this is proof that he really, really hates the Church. He’s a
confirmed enemy of the Church, despises it with a ferocity.
The author of this book is a classic Catholicism-hater (it’s written in the
first person, with the narrator constantly telling anecdotes showing how stupid
the Church is and expressing personal opinions about how irrelevant and untrue
it is), but the good news, if it can called that, is that there’s nothing new
here at all. It’s the same, old, tired condemnations and lies about the Church
that have been circulating for ages (some back to time of Luther), and which
we’ve already seen a hundred times in recent movies: corrupt hierarchy, too
much emphasis on money, alcoholic, un-spiritual priests who are jerks, vicious
nuns who terrorize their grammar-school students, sleazy politics in the
Vatican. Old, tired stuff.
It develops the whole theme of the Vatican hierarchy supposedly aiding and
supporting Nazism in the 20th century, because they saw it as preferable to the
spread of Communism, of which Nazism was an enemy. Movies have already been
made about this (one with Michael Caine, I think). Of course it makes no
mention of all the lives (Jewish and otherwise) SAVED by the Church and its
underground rescue operations during the war.
It is clear from
his purchase of this that Gibson has real contempt for the clergy and for the
hierarchy. This book is a typical anti-clerical attack. Even though Gibson
suckered many priests into assisting him in making “The Passion” and even more
into promoting it for him, it’s obvious now that he simply exploited them to
serve his purposes. His interest in this book reveals his true attitudes. He
really hates the priesthood.
As for the book’s treatment of Fatima. Now, this is where the author’s really
intense anti-Church sentiments are brought out the most subtly. The narrator of
the book eventually comes to believe (and therefore this is the premise being
promoted by the author) that the apparitions of Fatima, Our Lady’s messages,
and the saintliness of the three seers were totally genuine and totally from
God. But the narrative pits the Church itself –– the hierarchy, the Vatican as
an institution, etc. –– against Fatima. He shows the Church as an evil force
suppressing the truths of Fatima, not following Our Lady’s instructions,
causing Sr. Lucy (who actually shows up as a character in the story) pain, and
plotting the murder of Pope John Paul I because he was ready to reveal the
Third Secret. (By the way, in an incredibly stupid plot twist, the author has
it that the Pope, knowing he was going to be killed, faked his own death, went
into hiding, and is still alive.) The Church is supposedly doing all this
because Fatima threatens its evil political goals and machinations. The point
here is that by identifying Fatima as being of God and from God, and by showing
the Church as being a force against Fatima, the author is depicting the Church
as being against God. The Church is the adversary of God.
This is supported too by the character of Rebecca, the supposedly virtuous
woman who ends up being the narrator’s one true love who helps him track down
and meet Sr. Lucy. This character, a pious theology student, leads him to
change his life (he’s a professional thief) and embrace religion. At the end,
the narrator even has a vision of the Virgin Mary in a hospital. Only the trick
the author slips in is that Rebecca is staunchly anti-Church, anti-Vatican. He
says of her, “She had a strong faith in God but didn’t see a role for the
church”. So again we see the Church as pitted against God. At best, the Church
is spiritually irrelevant, at worst it’s trying to keep souls away from God. At
the end, the Blessed Virgin appears in a vision to the confirmed rejecter of
the Church; apparently she also condones that position.
Here are a few examples of the anti-Catholic rubbish the book presents:
- Disparages St. Peter’s Basilica as “extravagance and utter decadence… Would
Jesus Christ ever have endorsed such a use of resources?” (p. 60)
- Of the Spanish Inquisition: “the country that gave a completely new meaning
to the word pain.” (p. 93)
- Describes nuns: “This was at a time when nuns were nuns, mean, nasty, and
vicious”. His Catholic schooling was “under their regime of terror”. (p. 80)
- Condemns and
ridicules the Sacrament of Confession on p. 115.
- Speaks glowingly of Freemasonry and describes its members as “God-fearing”
and “moral” (p. 43)
- “Holy water was the best con of all.” (p. 16)
- “…the stories of Jesus are just that, stories.” (p.61)
- Describes his fantasy of being a gladiator and “relieving the scrawny
Christian of his life.” (p. 54)
- Of the Vatican: “How could men who demand that the rest of us Catholics
adhere to the teachings of Christ be such thieving bastards?” (p. 49)
Examples like this pepper the entire novel. It’s a dreary, ugly, not very
well-written book rehashing the same old accusations against the Church we’ve
heard a million times before. It also exhibits the typically confused,
inconsistent thinking which is characteristic of Church-haters who believe they’re
religious and think they know something about God and/or morality but actually
have no idea what they’re talking about.
Though the author presents Fatima in a reasonably favorable light, the whole
story line of the book is so utterly ludicrous, and the author’s purpose is
already fully served by his pitting Fatima against the Church. The story even
takes place in 1978 and earlier, so there’s absolutely no mention of Pope John
Paul II, the assassination attempt on the anniversary of Fatima, the publication
of the Third Secret a few years ago, etc, all of which would be germane to the
book’s subject.
The only thing interesting about any of this is that Mel Gibson, by buying the
rights to this book, has thoroughly given away his true sentiments. He despises
the Church, and it would appear therefore that “The Passion” was for him a
calculated step in a long-term plan to discredit it and destroy people’s faith
in it. But this novel doesn’t present
any original accusations or lies about the Church. It won’t mislead anyone who
isn’t already misled.
Yes it will make a
great movie for the dollars it will generate but it will harm Fatima, the
Church and God to make a dollar just like The Da Vinci Code did.
Richard
Paul Salbato
Note 1 -
Sedevacanti is
Latin for "vacant chair", meaning that the chair of Peter is empty.
They imply that the possibility exists that there could be a long period of
time in the history of the Church where there is no Pope at all. This does
happen during the time between popes, but can never happen during a time when
the people believe there is a pope but there is not. This is what they are
implying. If God could allow this, then that would make it possible for one to
question the legitimacy of every pope. The truth is that there can only be an
anti-pope when there are two popes. There cannot be an anti-pope when there is
only one pope. Nor will God allow the Church to exist without a pope because
where the pope is there is the Church, where the pope is not there is not the
Church.
Note 2 -
Dear Lourdes,
Father Louse Kondor
has expressed that the Convent of Coimbra in Portugal, the home of Lucia of
Fatima, would like to see the movie, "The Passion of the Christ" by
Mel Gibson. It is now showing in
Portugal and being received very well.
Because all Carmelite Convents are cloistered, they will never be able
to see the film at the theaters, but it is my hope that they can see it during
the Lenten Season before Easter. If
this is possible contacts can be made though Father Kondor and any arrangements
can be done though him.
Father Louse Kondor
is the postulate for the canonization of the children of Fatima, and the
spokesman for Fatima. He is the
go-between between Lucia and the Holy Father.
Any communication between the Vatican and Lucia goes through Father
Kondor. For those of us who live in
Fatima, he is the final word and the ultimate authority.
If this is possible
contact Father Louse Kondor by phone for details. From America the number would be 011-351-249-531-282. I am sure because this is the Lenten Season,
press will not be permitted.
Considering the
great graces coming from this film, it is my personal opinion that this will
not be the last contact with this convent and the Gibson people.
Richard P. Salbato.
Note 3 -
Let us look at the
words, "for many" or "for all". In the Maronite Rite there
are 22 Anaphoras, (the most ancient in the Church), and in one of these
Anaphoras it states, "for all men", and has always stated it this way
for a thousand years. In one of the ancient Coptic Rites, instead of "This
is My Body", it states, "This is the Body". Should we say that
these two formulas have resulted in the bread not becoming the Body of Christ
for the last thousand years?
Can you say that
Christ did not die for all, and therefore "for all" is not
theologically correct? Of course not. (2 Corinthians 5:15) "And Christ
died for all." (1 Timothy 2:6) "Who gave himself a redemption for all
---" (1 John 2:2) "not only for our sins but for those of the whole
world."
But does this
make the "transubstantiation" invalid? No! The last Doctor of the
Church, Alphonsus Maria Liguori, (History of Heresies), states that the words,
"This is my body" and "This is the chalice of My blood" are
all that are necessary for a valid Consecration. So said also: St. Thomas
(Summa Theologica - Part III, Q 78, A.3 and Q 60, A.8) and the Council of
Florence. Even a Masonic priest, who does not even believe in the true presence
of Christ, will produce transubstantiation by these words.
Note 4 -
I too prefer the
Tridentine Mass and in fact worked very hard to get a permanent presence of the
Tridentine in Fatima and, in fact, got
permission for the Society of St. John Cantius to take over one of the best churches in Fatima for
daily Tridentine Masses here, but for some reason the Society rejected the
offer. But in preferring the Tridentine
I do not go so far as condemning the Novus Ordo as being not a true Mass, which
is heresy. The reason I chose the
Society of St. John Cantius is that they promote reverence in the MASS but will
offer both the Novus Ordo the way it should be offered and the Tridentine.
Therefore I know that they are not in heresy but like me prefer the Tridentine.
Important Comments
from Readers: -
I assume that
Hutton Gibson is a sedeprivationist, which is something less than a
sedevacantist. Is like SSPX but maybe a little more extremist. They think that
post-conciliar popes are so bad that we don´t have to obey what they say, thus
we don´tt have to be in stretch union with their clergy.
Some of them think
that the Novus Ordo is valid, some of them think is invalid. Usually the
sede-privationist don´t think that is a valid mass.
I think Mel Gibson won't
answer not because he is bad guy, but because it is very difficult to contact a
Hollywood movie star. Usually it´s not their fault but of their
representatives, who think that they are the rulers of the world just because
they work with Hollywood movie stars. I know a lot of catholics have written to Gibson
to ask him for things, movies, etc. and they have received no response at all,
to me that's understandable because he can´t answer to all of them.
Regarding that
Gibson said that sister Lucy was "incredible" childlike wasn´t a bad
commentary from mr. Gibson: actually, it was a PRAISE, because Mel Gibson
HIMSELF is incredible childlike !!!! Yes ! I have seen many
documentarys of him since many years ago and Mel Gibson is not just
"childlike"... he is a clown! -not like Robin Williams- but he is
that way, a very happy and enthusiastic man. Co-actors have said of him that he
has "teenage habits", and I think that this is because
he has many children (seven, actually), and he plays with them and consequently
he has to be like them. Here in Mexico we say that if you want to be always
young, you have to be between young people, teenagers. You have to be
always with them.
Regarding that
interview you heard on EWTN, I would have to ask you to reconsider when you heard
it or if you understood well. It is very strange to me that now he does not
believe in it because it seems, as far as I know, that Mr. Gibson
some time before shooting The Passion was really a sedevacantist, but then, he
realized he was in a mistake and later he collaborated with the whole Church, even
with the Legionaries of Christ themselves, to get help in his many obstacles
regarding this movie. Even the Holy Father was involved.
But sad, in these
horrible times, I am sure that many Novus Ordo Masses are really null and void,
because of their lack of obedience to guidelines of the Holy See. I do not
think Our Lord would transform in a Doritos-like wafer or coffee with His
Precious Blood !
I hope I help.
Thanks for reading and God bless you.
Miguel.