'The Nativity Story' Movie Problematic for Catholics, "Unsuitable" for Young Children

LifeSiteNews.com ^ | 12/4/2006 | John-Henry Westen

[Pyro7480]

'The Nativity Story' Movie Problematic for Catholics, "Unsuitable" for Young Children

By John-Henry Westen

NEW YORK, December 4, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A review of New Line Cinema's The Nativity story by Fr. Angelo Mary Geiger of the Franciscans of the Immaculate in the United States, points out that the film, which opened December 1, misinterprets scripture from a Catholic perspective.

While Fr. Geiger admits that he found the film is "in general, to be a pious and reverential presentation of the Christmas mystery." He adds however, that "not only does the movie get the Virgin Birth wrong, it thoroughly Protestantizes its portrayal of Our Lady."

In Isaiah 7:14 the Bible predicts the coming of the Messiah saying: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel." Fr. Geiger, in an video blog post, explains that the Catholic Church has taught for over 2000 years that the referenced Scripture showed that Mary would not only conceive the child miraculously, but would give birth to the child miraculously - keeping her physical virginity intact during the birth.

The film, he suggests, in portraying a natural, painful birth of Christ, thus denies the truth of the virginal and miraculous birth of Christ, which, he notes, the Fathers of the Church compared to light passing through glass without breaking it. Fr. Geiger quoted the fourth century St. Augustine on the matter saying. "That same power which brought the body of the young man through closed doors, brought the body of the infant forth from the inviolate womb of the mother."

Fr. Geiger contrasts The Nativity Story with The Passion of the Christ, noting that with the latter, Catholics and Protestants could agree to support it. He suggests, however, that the latter is "a virtual coup against Catholic Mariology".

The characterization of Mary further debases her as Fr. Geiger relates in his review. "Mary in The Nativity lacks depth and stature, and becomes the subject of a treatment on teenage psychology."

Beyond the non-miraculous birth, the biggest let-down for Catholics comes from Director Catherine Hardwicke's own words. Hardwicke explains her rationale in an interview: "We wanted her [Mary] to feel accessible to a young teenager, so she wouldn't seem so far away from their life that it had no meaning for them. I wanted them to see Mary as a girl, as a teenager at first, not perfectly pious from the very first moment. So you see Mary going through stuff with her parents where they say, 'You're going to marry this guy, and these are the rules you have to follow.' Her father is telling her that she's not to have sex with Joseph for a year-and Joseph is standing right there."

Comments Fr. Geiger, "it is rather disconcerting to see Our Blessed Mother portrayed with 'attitude;' asserting herself in a rather anachronistic rebellion against an arranged marriage, choosing her words carefully with her parents, and posing meaningful silences toward those who do not understand her."

Fr. Geiger adds that the film also contains "an overly graphic scene of St. Elizabeth giving birth," which is "just not suitable, in my opinion, for young children to view."

Despite its flaws Fr. Geiger, after viewing the film, also has some good things to say about it. "Today, one must commend any sincere attempt to put Christ back into Christmas, and this film is certainly one of them," he says. "The Nativity Story in no way compares to the masterpiece which is The Passion of the Christ, but it is at least sincere, untainted by cynicism, and a worthy effort by Hollywood to end the prejudice against Christianity in the public square."

And, in addition to a good portrait of St. Joseph, the film offers "at least one cinematic and spiritual triumph" in portraying the Visitation of Mary to St. Elizabeth. "Although the Magnificat is relegated to a kind of epilogue at the movie's end, the meeting between Mary and Elizabeth is otherwise faithful to the scriptures and quite poignant. In a separate scene, the two women experience the concurrent movement of their children in utero and share deeply in each other's joy. I can't think of another piece of celluloid that illustrates the dignity of the unborn child better than this."

See Fr. Geiger's full review here:
http://airmaria.com/

[Mad Dawg]

Seriously. What do you all make of the "Diversities of gifts" passage. From here it LOOKS like each of you claims all the important, high ranking, gifts for himself, the headline getting, order-giving gifts. The behind the scenes order obeying gifts receive little publicity. While, as far as I know, every EO or RC in this conversation, none being clerics, is asserting that others have nobler gifts than we and that we are sometimes called to obey people we don't necessarily like or agree with.

YOU all appear to be arguing for the right to do as you please. It's a position I'd be uncomfortable to occupy.

[Mad Dawg]

If as you claim, she was born without sin, and the only other person, born without sin was Christ, then they are either both divine, or, neither of them is. Which is it?

What kind of an argument is that? Adam and Eve were without sin -- for a while there. You think they were divine or that Jesus wasn't? Which is it?

[1000 silverlings]

Neither Adam nor Eve was conceived by human birth, and there was no original sin before Adam. When you get an argument ping me, lol

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Spiritual sacrifice is a hard saying for many to understand

And far less easily manipulated by men and earthly powers.

[1000 silverlings]

Fruits and fruitcakes.

[Running On Empty]

No one is conceived by human birth. Conception comes before birth.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Yes, just tonite on cable tv I see something referencing "Our Lady of the Angels". What the heck is that? Our lady of the Immaculate Heart. Our lady of Guatemala, our lady of the Atonement (what is that?), our lady Queen of Peace, our lady of Lourdes, our lady of fatima, our lady of the immaculate conception, our lady of the Assumption, our lady of perpetual virginity, our lady of the lake, (lake?) wasn't that King Arthur? It is very bizarre.

CULT OF THE VIRGIN MARY
PSYCHOLOGICAL ORIGINS
by Michael P. Carroll

[Marysecretary]

The garbage is coming not only from protestants, my dear. RC's and EO's have certainly thrown their share of it.

[Mad Dawg]

Tell me why you say this when it isn't true.

Let's examine this.

• We talk about what's in our hearts. They say that they know better than we what's in our hearts.
• We put up references to the official teaching of our church and to the distinction between latria and dulia. They mock them and return to saying that, whatever account WE give of ourselves, they know better what we are doing than they do.
• Then, they make assertions about matters of fact which are easily shown to be false. When this is pointed out, they mock or attack the credibility of those pointing it out.
• Instead of reasonable argument, they repeat themselves over and over again, using Scripture like charms or incantations.
• When invited to work together and to reason together, they accuse us of "parsing".
• and so forth....

I think the answer to the question of why they say things which they know not to be true is easily seen. If I say it, I'll be told I'm being personal. But this is not rocket science.

And in the meantime we should do a little sandal shaking toward the most egregious of those who hold the truth in contempt and have managed to persuade themselves that they way to show loving concern is to belittle, mock, and deride, and be glad to find real brothers and sisters, not all of whom are RC or EO, in these and similar threads.

[Marysecretary]

Me, too. I bind spirits I recognize in other people and even in my own illnesses. And I loose truth and the power of God onto people when necessary. Jesus said greater things than HE did will His disciples (us) do.

[Marysecretary]

Yeah, I was really shocked when Pope John thanked Mary for saving him when the assassination attempt failed. He should have been thanking God almighty for saving him, not Mary. Cheez.

[Mad Dawg]

Actually I disagree. I have been told I was bearing false witness and endured the suggestion that I was lying from the more militant of the Protestants -- and then I was told I was petty for minding.

I've seen some Protestant threads. There was one sometime back wondering if belief in predestination led to laziness. Some Protestant was effusive in his graciousness when I suggested that it could be energizing to think that one was destined for bliss because of God's love. I tried to stick to the topic and to consider the question and t respect the questioner.

I think WITH GREAT AND IMPORTANT EXCEPTIONS the Prots have returned evil for good. Forest Keeper has been one of the few who seems to have been interested in understanding.

[Marysecretary]

I don't think that's true, Mad Dawg. God has given every believer spiritual gifts which He expects us to use for the Kingdom of God and the Body of Christ. I haven't seen anyone here bragging about their gifts, really, just pointing out that there are certain ones they have and can use from time to time. Love, Mxxx

[Mad Dawg]

YOU made the equivalence between divinity and sinlessness. I took what you said and used it. When you made that equivalence you did not mention anything about time or conception.NOW when the weakness of your original argument is made clear, you add some stuff. What exactly is your argument, if you have one.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Since you're referencing a post made to me I believe I can respond to your accusations...

we should do a little sandal shaking toward the most egregious of those who hold the truth in contempt and have managed to persuade themselves that they way to show loving concern is to belittle, mock, and deride, and be glad to find real brothers and sisters

No Protestant on this thread "holds the truth in contempt."

No Protestant on this thread is belittling, mocking or deriding another FReeper (although it could appear that your post here does the very thing you decry.)

And there is a world of difference between criticizing a poster and criticizing an aberrant theology.

God willing, Protestants will continue to preach the truth of the Gospel and the clarity of Scripture and the accomplished salvation by Christ risen, regardless of personal slights and impious criticisms thrown their way.

[Marysecretary]

When in doubt, ask the Holy Spirit, not some church who might not have the right answer to begin with.

[Mad Dawg]

Hi MS, Which part isn't true, please? I'm certainly not disputing that God has given every believer gifts as you say. I don't get what I said that you diagree with. Help me.

[Mad Dawg]

Believe what you like. Do not ping me. Do not write me. Do not say I bear false witness.

[Marysecretary]

I will always try to obey God when I know He's telling me to do something. If you read my reply carefully, you will see I said I would be willing to cover my head if He asked me to, as He did one of the women in our church whose head was covered for several months until He said she could stop. I have no problem with obedience when I know it's from God and not from a legalistic way of looking at things.

[Marysecretary]

No, but some of these folks here are. There are certain things written in the Bible that were for the day in which they were written, not now. It's hard to figure out sometimes which is which but I maintain that God is much more interested in my heart attitude than in my hat.