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/
>> Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!
Excellent tag. And, I will continue to do so each and every day.
"I think that disgust with the church of that era led the reformers to throw out all the past as well."
That's pretty much my theory too. Add to it that the Latin Church certainly preached then as it did until, well into our lifetimes, that +Basil and +Athanasius and +Ignatius and +Gregory and +Maximus, etc etc etc were all Catholics in the sense of Roman Catholics and that The One Church is co-extensive with the Roman Church and only the Roman Church (something it sort of still teaches) and one can readily see why, in confusion, they might have rejected beliefs and practices that there was no need to reject at all in an effort to root out Romanism.
Thanks, Gene.
They deserve our prayer.
"Whose sperma are you hinting at?"
It's a very simple question. Gen. 3:15 say there will be enmity between the seed of the serpant and the seed of the women. Is the seed of the woman referred to here by God, Jesus?
Does the Septuagint version of Gen. 3:15 have the personal pronoun "she" or "he"? The Vulgate says "she."
I should have added that the virgin bringing forth her child while remaining a virgin is just as much part of the miraculous sign given to King Achaz by Isaiah as the virgin conceiving.
Kolokotronis: New for me too, Padre. I've never heard such a foolish thing
You have been taught that Thetokos delivered thrugh a birth canal?
The LXX says "he."
I appreciate what you have said but that doesn't explain the listing of the names of the brothers. It also does not explain the double use of adelphos for brothers and sisters. If they were talking about cousins, one word would have sufficed for male and female, especially when we have a word for cousin in Luke.
All of the other uses of the word in the New Testament are for members in a believing community, Israel or the church.
I expect you are refering to what I have marked in boldface which means "her seed". The personal pronoun She does not appear in the passage; your, refering to the serpent and "he " and "his" refering to, I think, mankind.
"You have been taught that Thetokos delivered thrugh a birth canal?"
How else? Has my education been deficient in some manner?
I was referring to the subject for the verb that is translated as "will crush." In the Vulgate, it is "ipsa conteret," "she will crush" the serpent's head. This translation has an important role in the Catholic idea of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Where do you get that from?
Gen. 3:15.
Neither is ignorance. Fishermen are not known for their academic prowess, or even literary skills. They knew the truth, not by education, but by inspiration.
LOL.
I do n't see anything about Jesus there.
"I was referring to the subject for the verb that is translated as "will crush." In the Vulgate, it is "ipsa conteret," "she will crush" the serpent's head. This translation has an important role in the Catholic idea of the Blessed Virgin Mary."
Ah, well the Greek is pretty clearly referring to "her seed" (masculine) bruising his heel on the serpent's bruised head. The Greek doesn't seem to say that the woman will bruise her heel.
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.