Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by 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/
indeed!
thanks.
But truly I suspect many fears, particularly among children, are "dark imaginings." Some kids get bad dreams from watching certain types of movies.
My list was just a whimsical sampling of things we face in this mortal life which can help us learn to believe and trust God: "hungry lions, dark imaginings of demons under the bed, empty bellies, false prophets, opportunities to witness or demonstrate love of God and neighbor etc."
My two cents...
What we imagine and how we imagine it are images for the observer.. an observation.. Spirituality is indeed how we deal with observations.. Those observations are spiritually discerned..
Quite a test it is being a human.. a spiritual test..
Are you DNA and a DNA'osaur, or spiritual?..
Most of Jesus' parables ask this question..
And Darwin and Dawkins puts it another way, same question..
Your post reminds me of the recent article by Lanza, a noted biologist, who wonders whether reality is actually the result of observation, i.e. that it doesn't exist before it is observed. His musings are a lot like those who believe a tree falling in the forest doesn't make a sound unless someone is around to hear it.
For me, reality is God's will and unknowable in its fullness.
The pride comes from the self-rghteousness inherent in the Protestant OSAS doctrine. We may believe, but we are still subject to deceit by the devil and his temptation, and we are still capable of evil.
If satan went after Christ (not knowing He is God), trying to tempt Him, what makes you think we are immune?
But there is only one prayer that the Lord gave us specifically. That is the only God-given Prayer. I think there is a difference between that God-givne Prayer and those we make up.
My perspective on this is that there are people who make God in their own image and create religion and an expresison of their own prejudices.
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. – James 2:19
Therefore rejoice, [ye] heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. – Rev 12:12
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom [is] as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. – Rev 20:7-10
Blessed [is] the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him. Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren. – James 1:12-16
Fountain of homilies placemarker
Those who are believers will recoil, repent, be ashamed, regret, change ways, ask God for forgiveness, only to fail again and again, and to recoil ever so stronger again and again! It's an ongoing tug of war, a process.
We erupt when someone cuts us off on the way to work, we give in to gluttony, we engage in small talk, draw attention to ourselves, look lustfully at someone's spouse, etc, even though we don't mean to.
Even during the Divine Liturgy all sorts of thoughts well up in our minds and the Fathers spoke about them and we believe those are little demons testing us, so we concentrate on Christ and they disappear as quickly as they came in.
Evil is very much present and active in the world, and ever so drawn to where righteousness abides.
Thank you. Likewise.
Good call. It is absolutely clear that they are referred to as living. I'm not sure of the significance, but I was amazed to see 96 references to the word "saints", and ZERO references to the word "saint".
The words used in Hebrew are not the same as those used for God. The word used by +Paul for the believers is agios (holy), which is the same word used for God. There is a definite distinction.
This is another example of biblical linguistics. Another drastic example is 1 Cor 13:3. All western Bibles say:
This appears in the Greek Majority Text and subsequently ends up in Textus Receptus, and from there on in just about every western Bible.
Older Greek texts use a word that differs only by one letter, and means "to boast" rather than to "be burned."
Thus, instead of kauchesomai the word is kauthesomai; someone misread one single letter as θ instead of χ, and changed the meaning of the whole verse and all the Bibles in the west.
I do indeed. Been there. :)
I didn't know that. So it's perfectly normal for an Orthodoxer to cross at any time upon hearing something especially meaningful to him, and when others do not cross? I've only been to a couple of Catholic Masses in my life and I didn't notice that. All the crossing I remember observing was in unison, once everyone was seated. (But, that could be wrong :)
So the text should read, "and if I surrender my body to be boast"???? No wonder Peter said some of Paul's writings were difficult to understand.
Much appreciated.
crossing when ‘inspired’ is very common in orthodox parishes.
I think you have what the meaning of the word is in the context of Eph. 1:20.
It's interesting that in this discussion of Jesus physically not appearing in multiple locations at once that the contra argument is about what could go on in heaven, not on earth. It seems Scripture gives no examples of Jesus physically being in more than one location at a time on Earth.
How then can his body and blood be all over the place?
The answer is they aren't. The understanding of Scripture that when Jesus is saying "this is my body" is figurative is obviously correct.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.