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/
That is a most excellent point. Another point to consider is that no Apostle picked Paul and Apollos. Yet, they became apostles. So much for that "theory".
Thank you.
Really? Why? This verse, following your application, would suggest there are many priests per church laying hands on people
St. Paul here says that the laying of hands introduced Timothy into the presbytery, that is into priesthood. Or if you want to stick to your linguistic contortions, into the elderhood, -- much sense would that make.
Peter called himself an "elder" in 1 Peter 5:1
No he did not. He called himself sympresbyteros. You translate that, -- you are the one with the dictionary.
husband of one wife
Yes, the Early Church ordained married men into priesthood. Now we don't in the Latin Church. Where do you see a "pickle"?
No it is not. The apostolic succession is from Apostles to bishops, then from that generation of bishops to the next generation of bishops, etc. to our day. In the letter to Timothy St. Paul tells him to do just that, appoint subsequent bishops, as well as priests and deacons.
If memory serves me correctly, a priest cannot get married. If a person wishes to enter the priesthood and is already married, I believe the Catholic Church, in some cases, will allow that.
If one is going to interpret this to be directed at the responsibilities of priests, what I pointed out in Titus 1:5-6 would suggest that all priest may marry and have children. Saying that it is a matter of Church discipline that priests shouldn't marry is effectively saying that Paul, while writing this under the influence of the Holy Spirit, didn't know what was best for the Church. That, to me, is like saying God doesn't know what's best.
The Apostles were not Bishops. Mathias replacing Judas made him an Apostle, not a Bishop.
*You know, as sola scripturists, y'all gonna have to review it more carefully before making unsupportable assertions
Clearly your not reading with enough discernment. The Apostles were not Bishops. They were missionaries.
St Paul was "picked by Christ and then confirmed by Apostles Peter, James, and John -- the "pillars". See Galastions 2. We don't know anything about the consecration of Apollo.
My dictionary says it means "co"elder. One on an EQUAL level. It only validate my point.
Yes, the Early Church ordained married men into priesthood. Now we don't in the Latin Church. Where do you see a "pickle"?
You're no longer following the traditions established by the Apostle Paul. So much for Apostalic tradition.
There is nothing to suggest that Paul was "confirmed" by the group. Paul didn't met them until three years after his conversion. (see Gal 1)
The equality is not necessarily implied by "sym", but indeed St. Peter is priest. Any pope is.
You're no longer following the traditions established by the Apostle Paul
The Pauline advice here is not on a matter of faith but on a church discipline, which indeed changes with the times. The substantive part of his teaching is that priests must lead chaste life.
Three conditions for the plenary indulgenceAnd so the Supreme Pontiff, motivated by an ardent desire to foster in Christians this devotion to Divine Mercy as much as possible in the hope of offering great spiritual fruit to the faithful, in the Audience granted on 13 June 2002, to those Responsible for the Apostolic Penitentiary, granted the following Indulgences:
a plenary indulgence, granted under the usual conditions (sacramental confession, Eucharistic communion and prayer for the intentions of Supreme Pontiff) to the faithful who, on the Second Sunday of Easter or Divine Mercy Sunday, in any church or chapel, in a spirit that is completely detached from the affection for a sin, even a venial sin, take part in the prayers and devotions held in honour of Divine Mercy, or who, in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament exposed or reserved in the tabernacle, recite the Our Father and the Creed, adding a devout prayer to the merciful Lord Jesus (e.g. Merciful Jesus, I trust in you!");
A partial indulgence, granted to the faithful who, at least with a contrite heart, pray to the merciful Lord Jesus a legitimately approved invocation.
(Indulgences attached to devotions in honour of Divine Mercy)
We both agree. I believe it is the Holy Spirit that guides that discernment.
Acts 13:2-3 "As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, "now separate to me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them". Then having fasted and prayed and laid hands on them then they sent them away."
The RCC does not control the Holy Spirit, so the Theory of Apostolic Succession can't be based on an ordination process that is unique to the RCC.
True. The Apostolic succession is intact in the Catholic Church, in the Orthodox Church, and quite possibly in the Churches of the East such as the Coptic Church. It was valid in the Anglican church till 19c, when changes in the Holy Orders introduced there invalidated it.
Now you are referring to a HISTORICAL LINEAGE which in no way would confer special powers on those in this line.
I would disagree twice.
But first, yeah generally not only priests but deacons can't marry once they're ordained.
I don't think the Titus passege works either to permit or to forbid priests marrying after ordination. Clearly they may BE married, no question there. But I don't think it goes either pro or con on marriage after being ordained.
As I read it Paul is telling Titus about what to do in a particular place at a particular time. I would need the text to say it should always and everywhere be like this before I would think such a piece of advice to be meant for the church to follow at all time. So I don't think we know better than God.
I will see if I can find the article. It was in the past year that Benedict declared the indulgence.
Here you go...
POPE DECLARES PLENARY INDULGENCE FOR DECEMBER 8
Vatican, Nov. 29 (CWNews.com) - Pope Benedict XVI has declared a plenary indulgence for Catholics who honor the Virgin Mary on the feast of the Immaculate Conception, December 8.
In a November 29 announcement, the Vatican said that Pope Benedict has declared the indulgence to mark the 40th anniversary of the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council. The announcement indicates that the Pope "when he renders public homage of praise to Mary Immaculate, has the heartfelt desire that the entire Church should join with him, so that all the faithful, united in the name of the common Mother, become ever stronger in the faith, adhere with greater devotion to Christ, and love their brothers with more fervent charity."
A plenary indulgence, as Pope Paul VI explained in Indulgentiarum Doctrina in 1967, is "a remission before god of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilty has already been forgiven." Indulgences can be decreed by the Pope or, under certain restrictions, bishops. The faithful can obtain indulgences for themselves or for the souls in Purgatory.
The indulgence declared by Pope Benedict may be obtained by those who "participate in a sacred function in honor of the Virgin, or at least least offer open testimony of Marian devotion before an image of Mary Immaculate exposed for public veneration, adding the recitation of the Our Father and of the Creed, and some invocation to the Virgin."
The announcement indicates that those who are ill or otherwise unable to fufill the normal conditions "may obtain a plenary indulgence in their own homes, or wherever they may be, if, with the soul completely removed from any form of sin, and with the intention of observing the aforesaid conditions as soon as possible, they unite themselves in spirit and in desire to the Supreme Pontiff's intentions in prayer to Mary Immaculate, and recite the Our Father and the Creed."
The decree issued on November 29 by the Apostolic Penitentiary, announcing the indulgence, also lists the usual conditions: sacramental Confession, Eucharistic Communion, prayer for the intentions of the Pope, and the removal of attachment to sin. The decree is signed by Cardinal James Francis Stafford and Father Gianfranco Girotti, the penitentiary major and regent, respectively, of the Apostolic Penitentiary. The issue of indulgences, and some abuses of the Church's authority in that realm, became a topic of heated controversy during the Protestant Reformation. The Church's teaching was clarified by the Council of Trent in 1545 to avoid future abuses.
Originally indulgences were issued as a substitute for the often severe penances that were common in the early centuries of the Church. Although the Catholic Church has always claimed the authority to issue indulgences for special occasions or for certain prescribed pious acts, public interest in gaining indulgences has lapsed in recent years. Pope John Paul II made a conscious effort to revive interest in this power of the Church, as has Pope Benedict XVI.
Earlier this year, Pope Benedict granted a plenary indulgence to those young people who participated fervently in the World Youth Day celebrations in Cologne in August. Pope John Paul II had declared plenary indulgences for the Jubilee Year 2000 and again for the Year of the Eucharist, which ran from October 2004 to October 2005.
http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=62865
Annalex, the woman in Genesis is NOT Mary. You only see that because of your view of Mary and the false teaching of your church concerning Mary. The woman in Revelation 12 is Israel. Many comments I have seen on this thread appear to be Israelophobic. Israel is God's chosen. Christ is the King of Kings and the King of Israel as David's seed. The 12 stars are representative of Israel and the Sun and Moon of the parents of the children of Israel. The reference comes from Genesis. You ignore it because you want to justify your "veneration" of Mary with Scripture. You have NO Scriptural support for praying to Mary or any other mere human. You may have tradition, but Scripture is NOT on your side on this one.
Are you Catholic or orthodox?
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.