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/
Yeah that's what I meant. ;-)
Thanks FK, I really could not have said it as well.
Kosta I didn't respond because I've been very rushed with business lately and it "seemed" like you wanted to play semantics rather than look at the broader issue.
Thanks for the response which I take to be both honest and sincere. I appreciate that.
"I still have a hard time and cannot accept the praying to departed saints or to Mary. That is just wholesale contrary to my whole understanding of Scripture and of my experience with Jesus, The Father and Holy Spirit. I cannot imagine a common ground on that in the RC or Orthodox directions."
That's fair. I rather doubt I have ever heard any Protestant, aside from some Lutherans and Anglicans say otherwise. As I mentioned some posts back, I think that sort of devotion simply isn't for you guys and it is, at least to an extent, unfair of us to think you'd take on our mindset when it comes to these matters. The same pretty much goes for veneration of icons. If you are interested, I posted a thread on icons by +Gregory Palamas (14th century) which does a good job of explaining what we are about when it comes to icons.
"It sounds like you are asserting that every Orthodox congregation is balanced and healthy and focused exclusively and wholesale on God, His will etc. I'm exceedingly skeptical that that's true."
LOL!!!!!!! You're talking to a Greek, my friend. We are the worst sinners in Christendom. Parish Councils tend to look at the parish like their Greek restaurants and treat the priest like he's the hired cook! Every Sunday at communion time we pray a prayer in which we declare ourselves to be the chief among sinners. In our mindset, The Church is a hospital for sick souls; its just where we belong and we proclaim Christ "Physician of our souls and bodies!" And so we go to the Divine Liturgy, attend the services and devotions, public and private, try to follow a prayer rule and when we fall down, we repent, get up and try some more to die to the self and focus on Christ.
"Sometimes we get in trouble doing what we do best far too much. Sometimes it's a relatively initially small pride that satan gets amplified and then all kinds of evil slid in on. It's usually human stuff that gets rationalized as justified according to this or that belief, tradition or custom of men. . . . and sometimes even true doctines are used to hide all kinds of evil."
Absolutely. Pride, which is at base what you are describing, is a very, very deadly sin. If anything takes "the eye of the soul" off Christ and focuses it fast on the self, it is pride.
And who is in charge of the "official truth" of the Bible?
Well, if you want to consider it a "gift," that's fine. I could say it's something else, but I'll leave it at that. This doesn't change the definition of the word, gift. I will not quote dictionaries on this. The meaning is self-evident. A gift must be free to be a gift.
when WM speaks of the "free gift" of grace, he makes a legitimate distinction because God does not give us that grace with any expectation of performance of anything from ourselves The phrase "free gift" used biblically comes from KJV. It does not exist in the Greek original. It is yet another example of "alternative" reading of the Bible and assuming that it was there all along.
The word used is actually charisma. If anything, undeserved mercy is a closer translation. As such, I am not sure it is unconditional. God pardons us, but with a caveat.
My point, however, remains. That is - that sanctification is not an important issue in OSAS theology BECAUSE justification is completed and not ongoing. There is no point for perseverance in such a scenario. There is no need to be exhorted towards being virtuous. While such people may become virtuous by Christ's abiding presence, it is a secondary consideration and theologically unimportant to the whole idea of justification and salvation - since it is already done.
Sanctification is all-important to those who have the assurance of their salvation ... because it is where we are. Is is what we have been saved to.
Old things are passed away ... all has become new.
We glory in our new lives ... ever grateful that God has rescued us out of darkness ... into His marvelous light.
We have begun ... our everlasting lives ... as the children of God.1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:So long as I have saving faith, ... my works will reflect that faith.
10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
Agree. As such, when one's works are "bad" or "sinful", can we presume that that person's faith is failing or faulty? Can [that] faith save him? (James 2:14) And thus, if salvation is already a done deal, how can we read James' rhetorical question? To me, salvation is NOT done in the distant past, but is ongoing. Initial justification is the first step towards the Kingdom, not the end.
There are times when our lights do not shine so brightly as they should ... and I agree that, in such instances, our faith is not so strong as it should be.
Thankfully, God does not demand perfect faith from us, for if He did ... who could stand ?
It is at these times that God may chasten us, as a father chasteneth his sons.Hebrews 12:5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:God takes our faith, weak or strong, ... and helps it, ... matures it.
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
...
11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
When we are weak ... then He is strong.Mark 9:23 Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.
24 And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.
25 When Jesus saw that the people came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him.
26 And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead; insomuch that many said, He is dead.
27 But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him up; and he arose.
Thank you, no apology necessary. I understand people get busy with other issues. You are under no obligation to reply to any of my posts, but I sure like to hear from each and every one of you, even if we disagree.
I was not "playing." but semantics are important. One word can change the whole meaning of a book.
I thought I answered your question. 2 Philippians 2:13 explains that if one is led by the Holy Spirit, they are on the right course because both the willing and the doing of the elect is determined by God. If a man is led by some other force or by his own will, he is lost.
And further, if a man is truly led by the Holy Spirit, that man most likely will not be grieving the Holy Spirit with heavy sin, again, because the spirit of God now resides in him. As a man is sanctified by the Holy Spirit, he desires to sin less and less.
None of us knows the names of the elect, but a man can be assured his name is among them because the Bible identifies those who possess Trinitarian faith in Jesus Christ as His children.
Edifices like the church in Rome seek to obscure the clear distinction that God gives to those who are (and always have been) His.
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." -- Titus 3:4-7"But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
May it have been predestined so. 8~)
LOL!!!!!!! You're talking to a Greek, my friend. We are the worst sinners in Christendom. Parish Councils tend to look at the parish like their Greek restaurants and treat the priest like he's the hired cook! Every Sunday at communion time we pray a prayer in which we declare ourselves to be the chief among sinners. In our mindset, The Church is a hospital for sick souls; its just where we belong and we proclaim Christ "Physician of our souls and bodies!" And so we go to the Divine Liturgy, attend the services and devotions, public and private, try to follow a prayer rule and when we fall down, we repent, get up and try some more to die to the self and focus on Christ.
= = = =
That above I can join in on wholesale and without reservation.
Thanks.
Also your later about pride.
"That above I can join in on wholesale and without reservation.
Thanks."
You're welcome! :)
Who's in charge of Biblical truth!??!!
WELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL HARUMPH!!!
me, me, me, me, me, of course!
/satire; joke with a point; down, boy; down.
GRRRRRUFF yourself!
LOL.
uhhhh . . . I still vote for Holy Spirit . . . but since He's not all that concerned with my vote and has the role anyway . . .
Because we are human, we must honestly try even if we honestly fail. Then, we do what you so aptly say "repent, get up and try" again until the last day. There are no real saints among us.
That's not what I asked, Quix. I asked who's in charge of the "official truth" of the Bible.
If the Holy Spirit were the One in charge of man's "official truth" of the Bible we would all be on the same sheet of music.
In any particular believer, assurance isn't assured, but it is assuredly available. God's promises in scripture tell us that we may have assurance, but that doesn't mean that all believers apprehend this truth. It doesn't affect one's salvation, but it is a gift from God to those to whom He reveals it. I am sure there have been some who professed assurance and then lost confidence. We all have moments of weakness from time to time. But again, it doesn't affect salvation. I am also sure there have been some to profess assurance and been wrong. They were never saved.
I think something that has not been said about icons and images and statues is along the following lines.
It is, in my experience of myself and idolatry, extremely difficult
Thg object--icon, image, statue--is NOT God.
He wants direct unfettered access to our hearts, minds, spirits--dialogue 'walks' in the cool of the evening that Adam lost and Christ shed so much Priceless Blood to restore.
Yeah, tricky--He's invisible--our mind's eye doesn't focus on nothing very well.
But substitutes will NOT do. They are an insult to Him and to the direct dialogue He seeks, requires of us. He may indulge 'kindergarteners' or the truly pure of heart from time to time--occasionally because of poor teaching or they've known nothing else or there's some special situation involved or some such. But it is NOT a habit He delights in.
Actually, it's not just objects that He has such an attitude toward.
IT IS ANYTHING THAT BECOMES A HABIT, RITUAL, REPETITION--A SET OF HOOPS THAT WE JUMP THROUGH AND THEN EXPECT XYZ VENDING MACHINE RESPONSE FROM HIM--EVEN IF IT'S JUST HIS SMILE OR ANSWERED PRAYERS.
He's NOT a vending machine and He did NOT create us to be robots, either.
Imagine your only child--your most precious son. You come in from a hard day at work and rush to his room--for heart to heart touching base. He's playing video games. Without looking up or pausing his pulsing finger pushing . . . he says
Hi Dad.
You eagerly ask about his day; his classes; his sports . . .
Without pausing his finger flicking on the joystick or looking up, he mutters--yeah, fine, ok. usual. You?
You share a bit about your challenging day and ask him some more meaty questions. He says:
You, know, Dad, I'm really busy--here--trying to beat my best score--talk to this icon--err--this ball team pic from last week. I'll kind of listen.
IT'S NOT THE SAME.
It's NOT an intimate dialogue walk in the cool of the evening in the garden or across the table with coffee and deep looks into the invisible eyes of God the Father. It's NOT the same.
There's inescapable added distance--no matter how facilitative the icon/image/statue was once or even twice.
Most importantly, God said THOU SHALT NOT.
But I believe the REASON He said that is the distance. He deplores the distance between us and Christ died to erase it.
So then we go out and buy some klunky object or make one--and reinstall the distance. And we think He's pleased?
I understand what you're saying. Still, I think it is biblical. I'm referring to Proverbs 26:4. Let's say somebody identifying as a Christian follows another Christian around on different threads, replies to posts but not the content of what was actually written, and then asks why their questions weren't answered? Repeat this over and over. Sometimes our time is better spent on more productive endeavors and asking people to stop responding to you is the last resort.
Thankfully, God does not demand perfect faith from us, for if He did ... who could stand ?
Indeed, thankfully we are in a familial covenantal relationship with God. We don't expect perfection from our own earthly children, and neither does God. We are under the Law of Love and Grace.
As you know, I have always enjoyed talking with you. It has been my pleasure to discuss these issues with someone who has such a love of God and Sacred Scriptures. Praise God for men such as yourself.
Take care,
Brother in Christ
If the Holy Spirit were the One in charge of man's "official truth" of the Bible we would all be on the same sheet of music.
= = = =
No. Because we don't all hear and obey flawlessly.
That's true directly.
That's true with whatever organizational, priestly, pontifical filters and administrators of supposed representations of Holy Spirit truth. It's true in all cases; all contexts; all groups; all structures.
1 Corinthians 2:2
For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
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.