Mel Gibson has been a problem for Catholics. There is no doubt that The Passion of the Christ was a rgeat movie and helped to depict not simply the final moments of the Lord's life, but also portrayed - and, in doing so, maybe helped non-Catholics understand - the Catholic devotion to Christ's Passion.
But Mel has not been a good poster child for Catholicism. First there was the drunk driving accompanied by ant-Semitic slurs. Then there was news of the divorce and a pregnant girlfriend. Mind you, these are real issue sthat plenty of Catholics experience. But if there comes a time when it's gone too far, it's now:
Actor Mel Gibson is said to want to marry his girlfriend in a Christmas ceremony. Insiders say Mel may have pulled some strings at his family-owned breakaway Catholic church, to arrange a secret anullment of the marriage.
The National Enquirer is reporting that he did, in the hopes that the annulment would eventually be recognized by the Catholic church.
The Enquirer stated that the annulment was approved by Gibson’s breakaway Catholic congregation, and it isn’t officially recognized by the Catholic church.Catholic Bishops denied Mel’s request for an annulment but his father, Hutton, 90, led a tribunal that annulled the marriage, a family insider revealed.
The tribunal was attended by loyal congregation members of Gibson’s private, independent church, the Holy Family Chapel in Malibu, about a month after Robyn filed for divorce.
Hutton Gibson presided over the hearing and granted his son’s annulment request after Mel presented “evidence” that the union was never a true marriage, even though he married Robyn in a Catholic ceremony in Australia in 1980.
“Especially important was Mel’s description of how he felt pressured into the marriage in the first place because Robyn was pregnant,” maintained the family insider. “Those feelings indicated to Hutton that it couldn’t be a true marriage, and so he felt it must be invalid.
“After the discussion ended, Hutton pounded his fist on the table and said, ‘It is clear that this union did not have what it takes to be a true marriage!’”
Just like all those annulled Kennedy marriages. But the difference is that the Kennedys, somehow, got an ordained Catholic Bishop to present the matter to the proper tribunal in Rome to obtain the annulment. Joe Kennedy might have thought himself above the law, but he did not annul his children's marriages.
No, the word of the day is simple for Mel and Hutton: heresy.
16 comments:
Key: "National Enquirer"
I never can understand how a Catholic marriage can be annulled when there are children. Don't they become bastards then?
This is the National Enquirer so don't fire up the auto da fe just yet.
Jay Leno asked Mel if he was going to get married again and Mel answered "why would anyone do it twice?" which doesn't jive with this.
To DM, no the kids don't become bastards.
Fried,
Actually, the National Enquirer has a very good track record for veracity!
I disagree. Do you read the rag regularly? There are of course the odd stories that the tabloid researches and gets mostly right like with John Edwards. But most of their stuff is either entirely made up or based on a rumor and then embellished.
I think this story is based on the speculation of Mel seeking an annulment, but the National Enquirer writers don't know enough about Catholicism to craft a believable scenario. Plus Hutton is a Rad Trad so he may not agree with any annulment of his son's marriage let alone act as a marriage tribunal himself.
Actually, before the early 20th Century the kids would have been considered bastards (which is why Elizabeth I was so PO'd with the Church. Not being a legitimate kid meant she would lose the throne.) Being a bastard would have been an impediment to ordination too. But all this was made moot (I think by Pius XII or John XXIII).
BW Is it heresy or apostasy?
Mike,
I thought about that, since the actions could fall under both apostasy and heresy. What's your thoughts?
Elizabeth I was illegitimate to the CC because the pope upheld the validity of the marriage of Henry VIII to Catherine of Aragon. The C of E annulled Catherine's marriage, so Elizabeth was legitimate in Anglican eyes, but so was her older sister Mary, the product of the "annulled" marriage. That's why Mary succeeded her brother Edward VI to the throne before Elizabeth.
I think the prohibition on ordaining bastards originated in the middle ages when clergy were raising their sons to be priests who would then inherit church property.
My understanding is heresy is to teach differently from the Church but to remain a member (until one was kicked out). Apostosy is to leave the Church (& signing up with someone else?).
I think this is one of those questions needing a Jebbie to answer (or at least a Nehru collar).
If this is true, the Mel has Hutton as his Cranmer. Do we call him Mel VIII now?
Sorry Father, I don't think so. The follwoing just doesn't have the same ring as the original:
I'm Mel the eighth I am
Mel the eighth I am, I am
I got married to the widow next door
She's been married seven times before....
Hate to ask a stupid question, but if Mel allegedly got an "annulment" on the grounds that he felt pressured b/c his g/f was pregnant...
And now he allegedly wants to marry his current g/f, who is pregnant...
How long before we see a lather, rinse, repeat?
A divorce doesn't make children illegitimate. Neither does an annulment. An annulments states that the SACRAMENT never took place; not that the marriage never took place.
A divorce takes place in a civil court. An annulment takes place in an ecclesiastical court. The church does not have jurisdiction over the civil portion of a marriage.
In many parts of Europe, there are two marriage ceremonies--witness Prince Rainier and Princess Grace of Monaco. Their civil marriage took place on April 18. The church marriage took place on April 19. Their official anniversary is April 18.
If I am incorrect on any of this, I would like to be corrected.
Nutty celebrity dads. And then there is Joe Jackson. I smell another reality show.
I wanted to respond to DammitWoman: That is what my mother always called us - so you might think so - but actually, the children don't become bastards - they are legit. Mel's kind of a bastard though - I never got the idolatry which followed him after The Passion of the Christ.
Kasia, I could be wrong, but I don't think it's enough for the fiancee to be pregnant. So Mel's situation would be different with the current pregnant g/f vs when he was in his early 20s.
Based on an unauthorized biography of Mel Gibson written several years ago, the Gibsons might have good grounds for an annulment. They had a very short engagement period and a quickie marriage ceremony in the back of the rectory. According to this biographer, Mel acted pretty depressed when he announced he was getting married to his friends at the pub. The biography made it sound like Mel was acting out of obligation to be the good Catholic boy that his father raised him to be.
Since Americans can get annulments for more trivial reasons, I don't think Mel will need to pull any strings or rely on his father to get one.
I've been through the nullity process and yes, marrying while pregnant is a reason to grant nullity. (uh, not that that happened to me - we were deemed immature and lacking discretion as we were 18 and 20)
Post a Comment