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/
Thank you for answering the question.
Obviously, I would have a lot to say about the concept of anathema. But, that wasn't the point of the inquiry. I wanted to hear from a G.O. what it meant.
Again, thank you for the answer.
Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ. Jesus is God. But Mary was not before Jesus. Mary was part of God's incarnation in that her womb bore the Son of God. But, God is eternally preexistant - therefore, to say Mary is the Mother of God throws unnecessary confusion into the matter. Mary is not Divine. She did not contribute to the Son's divinity. She contributed to His humanity in that He became a man and passed through her womb and birth canal in the normal human way.
"Obviously, I would have a lot to say about the concept of anathema. But, that wasn't the point of the inquiry."
I don't doubt you would! :) As a matter of curiosity, what role if any do the dogmatic pronouncements of The Church in the 7 Ecumenical Councils play in your faith?
"Again, thank you for the answer."
You are very welcome!
So the Protestant view is that any womb would have done just fine?
My faith is non-creedal; though I don't think the very earliest of creeds that came out (Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed) etc., would find too much objection (might need qualifying as far as definition of what 'catholic' means etc.,). But we have no formal creed that every church in the denomination adheres to. We do have a statement of faith that the vast majority of churches in the denomination believe in; but it isn't really a creed. Churches are governed at a local level only.
Funny, my 10-year old has no problem with the concept that Mary bore Jesus into the world. That the Son and the Father are one, therefore she was actually God's mother here on earth.
Theotokos is often translated as God-Bearer.
Thanks.
"might need qualifying as far as definition of what 'catholic' means etc.,"
In the canons and dogmatic declarations of the Ecumenical Councils, it means "universal"; it doesn't mean Roman Catholic which is a term which arose sometime after the Great Schism.
But is it a true statement?
I'm interested in church structures, and appreciate your post. If you have a link to your statement of faith, I'd appreciate it.
Also, I can't tell exactly from post, what is it exactly that makes every church part of the same denomination?
thanks..
"But, God is eternally preexistant - therefore, to say Mary is the Mother of God throws unnecessary confusion into the matter. "
B, why do you say that calling her the Theotokos throws in any kind of confusion, unnecessary or otherwise? Are you suggesting that she gave birth to the human person of Christ and not the divine?
"Mary is not Divine"
The Church has never, ever taught that.
Which in English, seems to be the translation that sounds better.
Why?
" That the Son and the Father are one, therefore she was actually God's mother here on earth."
Following your logic God died on the cross?
I can't speak for "all" Protestants but that is my view.
Mary was a mother. But our Lord Jesus existed far before Mary came on the scene. So was she technically the "Mother" of God. No. Not in the sense you mean it.
Denying that Mary is the mother of God is not only *more* confusing, it is heresy, for it entails one of three heresies: either (1) the person to whom she gave birth was not divine or (2) she did not give birth to a person but to a nature, or (3) that she didn't give birth. All three are heretical. The first is either the heresy of Arianism or Nestorianism. The second heresy is Nestorianism. And the third heresy is Docetism.
-A8
Thanks. In what sense do you mean it? Or, i.e., what does "technically" mean in your reply?
If God didn't die on the cross, then that was a mere man on that cross, and you are still dead in your sins. The heretic Nestorius denied that God died on the cross, because he denied the hypostatic *union* of the two natures.
-A8
Then God is mortal and not eternal. That is your position?
God is both mortal and immortal, eternal and temporal.
-A8
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.