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/
Why would the earliest Church liturgies call Mary a virgin if she had other children? She would no longer be called a virgin. The fact that the Church defends this doctrine, calling it infallible, says something about the deeper meaning of Mary's ever-virginity that goes beyond what lies on the surface. To an uninitiated, to one unfamiliar with the mysteries of the faith, Mary's virginity or lack thereof has little meaning. This explains why you argue against it so much - you don't understand its deeper meaning. However, to help you, think of Mary and the Church itself as interwoven. What is said about Mary in Scripture can be said about the Church theologically. The two are used interchangeably by the Church Fathers interpreting Sacred Scripture. Thus, what we say about Mary reflects not only Christology, but Ecclesiology as well.
It wouldn't do to say that the Church is not the Virgin bride of Christ. The faith is a web. Be careful of removing what you don't agree with or understand, as it effects our beliefs on other subjects.
Regards
Thanks for the ping. It's always good to start out the day with a laugh.
They didn't write the book. They didn't determine which books would comprise the Canon of Scripture. They only recognized it after the fact.
And the same to you.
Now lets find something to argue about. ;-)
Would not be. The Triune God exists eternally and predates the Creation. "I was there at the beginning".
A:Do you know when the apparitions started? The earliest I've heard of, that the Vatican looks favorably on, is 1531 in Mexico.
That is completely ignoring Eastern Mysticism (Eastern Orthodox, not Eastern Asian), as well as a large faction in the West that holds to the "Nada" way, such as the Spaniard saint, John of the Cross.
Kosta - could you inform this gentlemen of the Church's spiritual tradition that is so predominant among our Orthodox brothers?
Regard
I was thinking about that earlier and my guess is that the Catholics will insist that Mary bore Jesus in a pre-pubescence state and then immediately went through menopause after Jesus was miraculoulsly delivered in a bloodless and painless supernatural "walk-though-the-uterine-wall" Caesarian delivery.
Hence the title of "unclean" could never have attached to Mary because she never had a period and never had a blood issue.
It's all part of the "Immaculate Hymen" doctrine. Since I suspect that the pope is a lurker, I expect a papal ex-cathedra declaration on this subject any day now.
Do you agree with A-8 that Mary is the one who gave God his begninning?
St. Catherine of Siena had apparitions in the Fourteenth Century that are fully accepted.
http://www.apparitions.org/
If that is true, then by definition, His human nature is not God, since God is eternal and unchanging.
Therefore Mary cannot be the Mother of God.
Apparitions have been known from the earliest of Christian times. St. Augustine (400 AD) classified them into categories: corporal, imaginative, and intellectual visions. The book of Revelation was written under a state of ecstasy. As to the first reported apparition of Mary:
"The earliest recorded Marian apparition was in AD 352 to an elderly couple in Rome. The story goes like this: On a hot August night, Mary appeared requesting a shrine to be built on one of the city's celebrated hills. The following morning, the city awoke to find snow covering the Esquiline Hill. Hence, St. Mary Major, "Church of St. Mary of the Snow" can be found on this hill today. This church is considered to be one of the largest and most important churches dedicated to the Blessed Mother in the Western Church. Since this initial apparition, the number of reported ones has only grown."
As to the Church Fathers, St. Gregory of Nyssa recorded an appearance by the Blessed Mother to St. Gregory Thaumaturgis and St. Ambrose reported a visit while in prayer in the midst of his struggle with the Arian heresy.
God continues to work through Mary and His saints to bring us to Him. Apparitions are one way of giving messages or comfort to the Church under persecution or difficulty.
Regards
"And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, 'Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?'" [Luke 1:42-43]
Note later what Calvin will say about this verse...
And the witnesses of the Church:
"Though still a virgin she carried a child in her womb, and the handmaid and work of his wisdom became the Mother of God" (Ephraim the Syrian, "Songs of Praise" 1:20 [A.D. 351]).
"The Word begotten of the Father from on high, inexpressibly, inexplicably, incomprehensibly, and eternally, is he that is born in time here below of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God" (Athanasius, "The Incarnation of the Word of God" 8 [A.D. 365]).
"If anyone does not agree that Holy Mary is the Mother of God, he is at odds with the Godhead. If anyone asserts that Christ passed through the Virgin as thought a channel, and was not shaped in her both divinely and humanly, divinely because without man and humanly because in accord with the law of gestation, he is likewise godless." [St. Gregory of Nazianz "Letter to Cledonius the Priest" 382 A D]
"When, therefore, they ask, `Is Mary mother of man or Mother of God?' we answer, `Both!' The one by the very nature of what was done and the other by relation. Mother of man because it was a man who was in the womb of Mary and who came forth from there, and the Mother of God because God was in the man who was born" (Theodore of Mopsuestia, "The Incarnation" 15 [A.D. 405]).
"[T]he Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her child-bearing" (Cyril of Alexandria, "Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God" 4 [A.D. 430]).
And even some other charecters you may recognize:
"It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God? thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin." [Martin Luther; "Sermon On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God", 1527]
"It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of His Son, granted her the highest honor... Elizabeth calls Mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary was at the same time the eternal God." [John Calvin; quoted in "Corpus Reformatorum", v. 45, p. 348]
Even the first reformers hadn't totally tossed Christianity to the wayside yet.
Regards
So, prior to Creation - Time, Matter, Space - being brought into being ex nihilo, God was sort of a doublemint Diety, I guess. Our Triune God wasn't Triune?
The divine nature is eternal and unchanging, but the Second Person of the Trinity is not identical to the divine nature. The Second Person of the Trinity has *two* natures, joined in a hypostatic union. And the Second Person of the Trinity is God. Therefore, if you had lived in Nazareth 2000 years ago, and pointed at Jesus and said, "Is that God?", the correct answer would be "Yes, that is God." And if you reached out and touched His arm or His foot, you would be touching God. See my post #1676.
-A8
I already posted previously the relevant Early Church Fathers Comentary from Catena Aurea but such things just end-up being ignored by you.
Here is your brother Baptist D.A. Carson.... The underlying Aramaic is in thios case unquestionable; at most probably Kepha was usd in both clauses (You are kepha and on this Kepha) since the word was used both for a name and for a "rock." The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with a dialect pf Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses
IOW< no matte how many times you assert optherwise, it is both that Kepha is kepha AND Kepha's Confession...
Yes, that's the way I see it too. That is, as it applies to certain THINGS. It cannot apply to any person who is "considered" holy. There is simply no scripture that I'm aware of initiating a "no touch" rule with regard to a person, or any part of a person. (Insert joke here. :)
I am entitled to disagree with Carson.
Jesus didn't say both. It wasn't a plural. The "this Rock" either applies to Peter or Peter's confession. Not both.
I do not take my orders from Man. I take them from Scripture - as Scripture says I should.
*Yeah. He does.
And Saul, as yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, And asked of him letters to Damascus, to the synagogues: that if he found any men and women of this way, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. And as he went on his journey, it came to pass that he drew nigh to Damascus; and suddenly a light from heaven shined round about him. And falling on the ground, he heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me
*Brother, I think your Bible has been tanpered with. You appear to be using one without all of the words. And the words of Jesus are considered crucial by many Christians
*That refers to the Old Testament. Did you know that in the New Testament there is ONE scripturte which refers to what the Catholic Churech wrote and Canonised as the New Testament.
Do you know what that verse is?
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.