'The Nativity Story' Movie Problematic for Catholics, "Unsuitable" for Young Children

LifeSiteNews.com ^ | 12/4/2006 | John-Henry Westen

[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/

[annalex]

high value on Scripture

.. serves me very well too on this thread.

[1000 silverlings]

Quite fetching.

[annalex]

Do not make it personal

Nothing personal, I merely was making a reference you how you want to read it. I, in fact, can see why, and so does Kolokotronis.

[Blogger]

Matter of opinion.

[annalex]

So you don't believe in the Bible Alone either? Good.

[1000 silverlings]

As I said there is no difference. The Word is Jesus, Jesus is the Word. Belief in One is belief in the Other.

[annalex]

Why, the two quotes from Jonh show that there are things that are of Christ not described in the Scripture, but communicated to the Church. The third quote, from 2 Timothy says that all (all, mind you, including the parts Luther threw out) scripture is inspired and profitable for the education of the clergy.

The Sola Scriptura remains an extrascriptural superstition.

[annalex]

That is the Afghani Northern Alliance beret.

[annalex]

As I said there is no difference

As scripture says, there is. See those two quotes form John again.

[Blogger]

"How I want to read it" is how it reads. If it says the church is the pillar I am fine with that. I take Scripture as it reads and in its full context. I don't try to read into it what I can not find in Scripture. If Kolo goes back to our private freep mail he will see that it was initially an inquiry. Later, I did advocate that it was possibly God. Nevertheless, you weren't a part of the original discussion and therefore have nothing to say concerning my motivation.

[Kolokotronis]

"I realize that this does not make your point go away. LOL! So, perhaps in this light the RCs have a point that the Orthodox did not face the same "market competition" that they faced. (I don't know, I've just seen that said.) Anyway, if that is true, then Orthodoxy simply wouldn't qualify for the comparison. If it's true that the vast majority of Orthodox of that time were never even exposed to other interpretations, then the hierarchy could be confident of the laity taking an Orthodox interpretation."

Not even close, FK. The East up to and into the ninth century was riddled with heretical notions and sects all vying for the allegiance of the laity. The Eastern Fathers and bishops constantly exhorted the people to read the scriptures as a bulwark against heterodoxy. So far was the Fathers and Eastern hierarchs could see, Orthodoxy was fully supported by the scriptures. The marketplace of religious ideas was bustling in the East, FK. Now its possible, even likely, that by keeping the scriptures out of the hands of the laity the West avoided the heresies we experienced in the East. But Orthodoxy, with the same theology and ecclesiology as the West for at least 900 years and virtually the same ever since, triumphed. There was no reformation in theology, ecclesiology or praxis. I think its possible that keeping the scriptures from the people for as long as the Latin Church did may well have lead to the Reformation when "Word leaked out", but the different theology, ecclesiology and praxis of the Protestants, in my opinion, owes far, far more to a desire "not to be Rome" than anything found in the scriptures and my support for that position is what the Eastern Church looked like then and now.

[1000 silverlings]

First of all, they are in the scriptures to start with. Secondly the whole bible is one continuous story of the working of the Holy Spirit before and after Jesus. Secondly, all things were made by him, for him, so of course they are greater than the world itself. God gave man a complete bible, enough for him. To seek outside what God has given you (let alone make it up)will have consequences.

[Kolokotronis]

"If Kolo goes back to our private freep mail he will see that it was initially an inquiry."

That's true, Alex. It was just a question, nothing more. B and I enjoyed the exchange outside the durm und strang of this thread.

[annalex]

What you give me is your opinion, but you cannot show me from scripture that it is the case.

[Kolokotronis]

"That is the Afghani Northern Alliance beret."

Sneaky Turks, putting an Afgani beret on an Anatolian Shrove! Typical! PO, PO, PO!

[annalex]

Blogger somehow implies that I ascribe a sinister motivation to him. I do not, and moreover, I came around to see his viewpoint on that, from the purely grammatical standpoint.

[stfassisi]

You Said
"A lot of us are convinced that Holy Spirit guided Luther in a lot of respects.
Thankfully"


Perhaps you should re-think this,Dear Brother

THE JEWS AND THEIR LIES
by Martin Luther
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/luther.htm

Facts about Luther
http://www.tanbooks.com/doct/facts_luther.htm

...And do you even realize that by removing the books that Luther removed from the Bible it reaks havoc on the Typology of Scripture,some that is part of the Typology of the Divinity of Christ.

Here is an example...
Deut. 4:2; 12:32 - the Lord God commands that we not add or take away from His word - Rev. 22:18-19 - Jesus so commands us not to add or take away from His word.

Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam. 2:6 - the Lord kills and makes alive again and raises up - John 5:21 - the Son raises and gives life.

Deut. 32:39 - neither is there any that can deliver out of God's hand - John 10:28 - nor shall any pluck out of Jesus' hand.

Deut. 32:43 - rejoice, ye heavens, with Him, and let all the angels of God worship Him - Heb. 1:6 - the "Him" is Jesus the Son.

[MEGoody]

So i suppose in the previous sentance where Paul states men should pray uncovered or dishonor God he means men should shave their heads?

I gave you scripture, which you claim to follow. Do with it whatever you like.

But the fact remains, based on scripture, unless 'their' women are bald, you are in error.

[1000 silverlings]

Here is scripture, thanks for asking:

1 Corinthians 2

1And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.

2For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

3And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.

4And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

5That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

6Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

7But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

8Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

9But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.

[Captain Gates]

Speaking of going outside the scriptures, I'm trying to understand the RCC's sanctioning of evolutionary theory to include mankind arising from evolutionary processes(with the caveat that God reserves creative authorship of the soul). I am TERRIBLY SORRY if this seems an attempt to hijack(who on earth coud highjack THIS thread), but I am sincerely looking into the CC and want to ask the quorum of Catholic brothers and sisters in the room!