Catholic League looks at movie “2012”

From The Catholic League:

November 4, 2009


Catholic League president Bill Donohue speaks to the way Catholics and Muslims are treated in the upcoming film, “2012”:

When we got word recently that the movie “2012” depicts the Vatican being blown up, along with the famous statue from Rio, Christ the Redeemer, we were unmoved. Why? Because this occurs during the end of the world in a massive destruction. This kind of sensationalism, we reasoned, is standard fare for director Roland Emmerich: he is the guru of the “blow ‘em up” genre of movies. But now we’ve learned that while Catholics get theirs, Muslims are spared. Out of fear, of course.

Emmerich is more than a coward—he is a liar who has it out for Catholics. Last year, he was quoted saying, “I would like to erase all nations and religions.” Not true. He is quite content to live with Islam, even though he readily admits it is a religion of terror. When asked why he did not show the destruction of Kaaba, the religious structure in the Grand Mosque in Mecca, he said, “I wanted to do that, I have to admit. You can actually let Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have…a fatwa.”

So why was the Sistine Chapel designated for destruction? “We have to show how this gets destroyed….I am against organized religion.” Emmerich lies again. He is not against Islam.

After bragging that the movie shows the Sistine Chapel falling on people’s heads, Emmerich explains the moral of the story: “Never pray in front of a big church. Pray by yourself.” He lies again: Muslims who want to pray in front of a mosque are safe. That’s because, as Emmerich sees it, they’re known to kill those who offend their religion.

Every time I say Hollywood hates Christianity, especially Catholicism, my critics cringe. But they never offer evidence that I’m wrong.

Contact Sony Pictures Entertainment chief Amy Pascal:
Susan A. Fani

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Melody says:

    Well at least he’s an honest bigot…

  2. Random Friar says:

    I think we should all mail him one chicken feather each and a note “Mighty brave of you to attack those who do not issue fatwas.”

  3. stgemma_0411 says:

    Ok…so…would Mr. Donohue rather that atheism reign supreme? I just don’t get the point of this. It’s like he’s throwing a tantrum.

  4. KievanCatholic says:

    I find it interesting that the first teaser trailer showed a Tibetan monk/ monastery getting blown away by a tidal wave. And, the clip of the dome of St. Peter’s rolling and squishing the faithful like ants seriously irritated me.

  5. totustuusmaria says:

    I don’t fault him at all for not putting the muslims in the film. He said that he wanted to and that he planned to, but that everyone else told him that they weren’t willing to risk their lives because of it. He rethought it and decided not to do it.

    I think this is a testament to the moral superiority of Christianity. We aren’t going to kill him even though he blows up icons of our religion.

    It makes sense to me why he should be afraid, and I think Mr. Donohue is off his rocker for trying to make a big deal of this.

  6. The point is that, if he’s going to be that afraid of one religion, he should quit taking his anger out on other religions and priding himself on how hip and brave he is.

    Simply from a filmmaking point of view, it’s wrong to unbalance your movie by sparing a certain group for non-thematic reasons. From a political point of view, it’s wrong to point out that you are afraid of one group and attacking all the rest; it encourages Islamic nutcases to make further demands on you, secure in the knowledge that you will cave, and thus endangers your friends and family for the rest of your life. Ethically, it’s indefensible.

  7. Faustina says:

    If I’m not mistaken I do believe there are two books by Catholics which end with the explosion of Rome — Lord of the World and Fr. Elijah.

  8. Fr_Sotelo says:


    I think Totustuusmaria has a good point. The film director cedes a compliment to our Faith in his interview when he says he blows up Catholic stuff because Catholics will let him get away with it. It might not be ethical of him to do this, but it certainly is practical if the director wants to live to enjoy any profits from the film.

    The ones who should really be outraged are the Muslims who try hard to do an extreme makeover of the Islamic image. This film director makes no bones about spreading the stereotype that Muslims issue edicts to assassinate, while Christians can take it all in stride.

  9. Nerinab says:

    I know Bill Donohue is not everyone’s cup of tea, but I have to admire his perseverance. This man is like a dog with a bone and never misses an opportunity to point our hypocrisy. Which I think is the point of his statement. I saw this trailer back in the summer and I was pretty upset. My kids, who were with me at the time, didn’t like it much either. They certainly recognized that every Catholic symbol was being destroyed and that bothered them greatly.

    The director has stated that he is “against all religion.” His movie ignores the religion of over 1 billion practitioners. Apparently he is less against some religions than others.

    I find it interesting that people have sympathy for Mr. Emmerich and his cowardly attack on the Christian faith, yet are repulsed by Bill Donohue’s defense of that faith.

  10. bookworm says:

    I agree that Emmerich’s comment really should be taken as a backhanded compliment to Catholics — he doesn’t have to worry that the pope, the Knights of Columbus or the Blue Army or Opus Dei is going to issue a fatwa against him and everyone else involved in the movie.

    Also he probably didn’t want to be responsible for triggering riots or other demonstrations against the movie in which innocent people would be killed — remember the Danish cartoon controversy, or even the violent protests against a movie called “Mohammed, Messenger of God” back in the 1970s?

    Yes, I am one of those who sometimes has problems with Bill Donohue’s approach, it’s almost as if he wants Catholics treated with the same kind of politically correct victim mentality that he condemns in others. But he does have good intentions and brings to light many egregious attacks on the Church that would otherwise be ignored.

  11. bookworm says:

    Faustina, you should have prefaced your comment with a great big “SPOILER ALERT” :-)

  12. Supertradmom says:

    I hope all Catholics boycott the movie and encourage their adult or not so adult children to do so as well. Money speaks louder than words in Hollywood.

  13. romancrusader says:

    I’ve had it with all this 2012 crap. 2012 will be sunrise in America if we get rid of the usurper. It isn’t a matter of having “no time” for organized religion, it is a matter of having a rabidly hate filled passion AGAINST Christianity. He did NOT portray similar venom against Islam in his film and he makes a point of letting people know that he considered it and decided against it. He’s a bigot. Plain and simple. And a hypocrite since the religion that poses the biggest threat does NOT get a condemnation from this man. Actually, this IS the way it’s going to be……only MUSLIMS will be allowed their religion!

    Hollywood, the propaganda arm of the Great Satan, knows they are a prime target of Islamic fanatics. It is only a matter of time. In a deliberate effort to appease these savages Hollywood promotes Islam and mocks the U.S. and its religious values.

  14. edwardo3 says:

    As an Art historian who has studied the construction of the barrel and dome of St. Peter’s, seeing the preview is really funny. First of all when and if the dome should ever collapse it will be because the chains holding the barrel together have failed (They were last rebuilt and extras added during the reign of Leo XIII due to failure). The outward thrust of the weight on the barrel will make the barrel collapse exploding out while the dome will implode into the trancept. Also, the elongated nave, which Michelangelo would hate, of the Basilica would never allow the entire dome and barrel for fall into the square, it’s simply too long being almost the same length as the height of the dome and barrel. The movie is a joke and that’s what we should treat it as.

  15. Jordanes says:

    Faustina said: If I’m not mistaken I do believe there are two books by Catholics which end with the explosion of Rome—Lord of the World and Fr. Elijah.

    In “Lord of the World,” Rome is “nuked” by the Antichrist about halfway through the book. (Benson of course wrote long before the invention of nukes, but his description of the superpowerful bombs fits what we would call nukes.) The book ends with the Second Coming of Christ during a Eucharistic Procession amd chanting of the Tantum Ergo led by the last Pope near the Valley of Armaggedon in the Holy Land.

Comments are closed.