'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/

[blue-duncan]

That's great. Can I use it?

[kosta50]

Please don't tell me that just because you're Greek you know the thought process of every Greek

HD, what Kolokotronis is telling you is anything but that. I am a little surprised that you would think that.

What Koloktoronis is telling you is that you can't learn English from a book. Rather, one has to learn the spoken language used by native-speakers. You can't learn the finesse, the "soul" of any language from a book.

There is something called "idiomatic expression," a sentence or a statement that says one thing but really means something else. To someone who is unfamiliar with the culture in which it is used, such an expression either makes no sense or leads to a wrong conclusion. "Being stoned" in the 1st century Middle East did not mean being "high" on some drug.

Nor does being "high" on some drug mean you are really "up" there! All these are "normal" idiomatic expresisons to English-speakers who do not for a moment confuse the actual words with the meaning.

In my six years spent in Japan, I discovered that most Japanese study English from kindergarten onward and never learn it because they interpret English within a Japanese mindset, grammar and linguistic framework.

One particular example stands in my mind, and it has to do with Lark cigarettes. They were advertised with a simple sentence "SPEAK Lark"

At first, this "language" known as "Japanglish" was startling, but then I realized that it was based on a very subtle misconception based on the way the Japanese language is trustucred (which is very, very different from English).

In Japanese, the word "say" or "tell" does not exist. The closest form to it is "speak." So, rather than market the product in the spirit of the English language as "Say 'Lark'" the Japanese simply translated clumsily from the book (after all speak and say are synonymous in a thesaurus, so they must be interchangeable, right?).

As far as the book is concerned, it is "correct," but to English speakers it is obviously flawed, because raw "book logic" is not the living language.

Hence, Koloktronis's message to you, and the Apostolic Church's point to the Protestants, that one cannot simply read the Book in any language and any culture and "know."

Here is another fine exmaple of what I mean by Japanglish. Enjoy. :)

[jo kus]

You offered no proof of the existence of any doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. If she is the "New Eve" as you say, then she would fall under God's first commandment to Eve, "be fruitful and multiply".

In a mystical sense, she IS! We see Mary as a type of Church, and Mary is our spiritual Mother, just as the Church is our Mother (giving birth to us through baptism and nuturing us through the Word and Sacrament). BOTH bring Christ to us. Mary has been given to us by Christ - He gave her to the beloved disciple. We are ALL His beloved disciple. Who was He giving to us? Mary/Church. Christ established a community through which His graces flow. Even you must admit that the Church, the people of God, has given us the Scriptures and proper understanding of it. Thus, we see that through the Church/Mary, all graces flow. We see the Church/Mary as a virgin, undefiled and wholly committed to Christ. We see obedience and faith in Christ come from Church/Mary. In Scriptures, the Fathers point to various places and see BOTH Mary and the Church - Song of Songs, Genesis 3:15, Rev 12, Luke 1. Really, you probably could make a case that anything with Mary in it can point to the people of God - and vice versus.

With this rough analysis, perhaps you can understand why the Church declares that Mary was a perpetual virgin. It says something about the CHURCH, as well as Mary.

Regards

[adiaireton8]

However that did not relieve her of her duty of devotion to her husband. She was married to Joseph.

I already dealt with that above at posts #213 and #236 in this thread.

-A8

[Petrosius]

Now that I have shown that Catholics do not indeed believe that we inherit the personal guilt of Original Sin I would like to address what it is. Both the Council of Trent and the Catechism of the Catholic Church describe the reatum/fallen state of Original Sin as a loss of holiness and justice. The Orthodox sources that I have seen speak of consequences of the Original Sin, the chief of which is death. Yet they also say, as do Catholics, that Baptism imparts Sanctifying Grace into the soul. The question that I raise is how do the Orthodox view Sanctifying Grace and how does it, or does it not, differ from Catholic belief? Also, what is its relationship with Original Sin?

[Kolokotronis]

"That's great. Can I use it?":

Of course; The Church has for 1400 years or so. What the image shows is +Joseph's doubts about the virgin birth, questioning what he has gotten himself into and what's going to happen to them, all very human reactions, and prompted by the devil shown as an old man in the hair cloak.

[blue-duncan]

You know, when you think about it, he had to be a great man of faith to endure and overcome the doubts and questions concerning the relationship. And if that wasn't enough, Mary's cousin was a part of the priestly class and he had a big mouth counter-culture hippie for a nephew. He could not hide anywhere but in his carpenter's shop.

[Blogger]

The Tribulation period is called the "Time of Jacob's Trouble." The main focus of the Tribulation is NOT the church, but Israel. God is saving His remnant. Israel is the woman in Rev 12.

[annalex]

I still can not make out what your comment is saying.

As a Catholic I do not decide what the scripture means. I ask my Church and the Chruch has the answer. To think that reading and understanding the Scripture is an exercise profitable to an individual outside of the environment of the Church is a uniquely Protestant conceit. We don't do that, as a rule.

[Kolokotronis]

"You know, when you think about it, he had to be a great man of faith to endure and overcome the doubts and questions concerning the relationship."

Indeed he was and rather underrated I'm afraid by many Christians. What a situation to face! Tradition (I know, I know!) tells us that he was chosen by the priests at the Temple for Mary and that he was quite old, about 70 and a widower (which has given rise to speculation that the "brothers" refered to were step brothers. She was an orphan by the time of her betrothal.

Its the humanity of +Joseph which so impresses me and which this Nativity icon which The Church has given us demonstrates so forcefully. Sometimes I think that Christians view the Church, through Western eyes, as something run by rigid rules uniformly and rigorously applied with no snesitive understanding of the human situation. This icon shows otherwise. The Church knows that we will have doubts, even the step father of The Lord had them and that's OK. That's why I said I'm not offended that Protestants don't accept our Marian dogmas. Orthodoxy reminds us that our doubts about The Faith are inevitable whether they are purely internal, born of our distorted state, or prompted by external influences like demons. The best any of us can do is pray "Lord I believe; help my unbelief."

[trisham]

The best any of us can do is pray "Lord I believe; help my unbelief."

*************

Wonderful and inspiring post. Thank you.

[annalex]

Israel ... of the twelve tribes.

I don't know of any other woman but Mary who gave birth to Christ, and that is the woman Apocalypse 12 is talking about (see verses 5, 10). She is, of course, the embodiment and perfection of Israel, so your meaning is indeed typologically not incorrect. Another typology there is the Church of Christ.

The anger that marian devotions evoke in the enemies of the Church is evident on every thread like this one. Satan hates Mary because unlike Eve, she chose to do God's will.

The birth pangs described in Apoc. 12:2 are indeed a good reason not to subscribe tot he notion that the Virgin did not suffer the birth pains. Rome does not teach either way. However, note that the entire book of Apocalypse is highly metaphorical and so it is not illogical to see in verse 2 not a reference to physiological pain but rather to the pain of mankind groaning under sin and waiting for the Redeemer.

The Twelve stars are type of the tribes of Israel as well as the twelve apostles.

[annalex]

We Christians can all bind and loose

Keys open gates. The key in Matthew 16 is the key to salvation. Binding and loosing refers to legislation, given first Peter but then the apostles also, and no you were not told to bind and loose, unless you are a bishop and heir of the Apostles, who were given the authority directly.

[annalex]

Augustine and Pope Gregory the Great viewed that the only place for sex in marriage is procreation

We still teach that. So, where does the Church teach that sex is bad?

[blue-duncan]

"The best any of us can do is pray "Lord I believe; help my unbelief."

That should be a required first line in any discussion concerning theological differences among christians.

When you think about it, when the synagogue rulers identified Jesus as the "son of the carpenter" and Jesus as a carpenter, it was a compliment to Joseph's workmenship and his tutoring of Jesus in the trade. Nazareth bring a good sized town at that time must have had many carpenters, but Joseph was known for his trade.

[annalex]

Apparently you are under the delusion that I never read this passage. You are mistaken.

[xzins]

You could be right.

[adiaireton8]

The anger that marian devotions evoke in the enemies of the Church is evident on every thread like this one. Satan hates Mary because unlike Eve, she chose to do God's will.

Exactly. "And I will put enmity between you [Satan] and the woman" (Gen 3:15)

Satan hates Mary also because of envy. Mary is now the most exalted creature, a place Lucifer once had.

-A8

[annalex]

you just ignorred all of the Scripture which says that we have been given the Holy Spirit as believers

No I did not. We are indeed given the Holy Ghost at the sacrament of confirmation (chrysmation to the Orthodox).

I've already said what I think the keys to the Kingdom mean. They are the power to bind and loose

You think that, I know, but it is not what the scripture says.

Salvation is through God alone. It happens one way. Not through church membership. Not through baptism. Not through Eucharist. Not through church attendance or tithing. None of those things. Salvation is through Christ alone. Through faith alone. Exclusive of works - though it will show works as evidence that it has happened.

Salvation is from Christ alone, yes. The rest of what you said is not supported by the scripture, not taught by the Church and is a Protestant extrascriptural fantasy. For example, Eph 2:8 which you cite goes on to say that we should walk in good works prepared for us by God, and when it says that we are not saved of works, it qualified that these are works done for boast or reward. This is consistent throughout Pauline epistles: that work of obligation, or work done for reward, do not save, but that work of charity is necessary for salvation. After all, James 2:24 says it plainly: "Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?". If you twist that into some faith-alone knot, you are following traditions of Luther, and not the scripture.

Regarding security of salvation, you are reading into the scripture what is not in it. John 10 does speak of it. But it does not say that a sinner cannot cast himself out of the hand of God. Nor does it say that the Church may not determine what sin is. In other scripture we read that men do lose their faith and the Church does condemn them to hell (1 Tim 1:19-20, and again Mt 18:17)

Rome did not become supreme until centuries later

I gave you an example of Pope Clement, 2c. dealing authoritatively with the Corinthians. Yes, the power of the papacy grew gradually in response to the Church's need. Turn away form Protestant heresies, and that power will be relaxed.

Your church has lied to You

I can tell you who lied. Luther lied. He invented his stupid theology out of his masturbation habit. He proceeded to spit vomit against the Church of Christ. He mutilated the scripture to fit his error, desecrated churches and monasteries and started 30 thousand para-christian sects. Don't you dare tell me calumnies against my Church. You Protestant background denies you standing.

[Religion Moderator]

Caution: stay with the issues and do not make it personal.