'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/

[Quix]

Let the dead bury the dead".

annalex:
Saints are not dead.

= = = =

UHHHHH, CHRIST was the one noting that in certain contexts, a Believer should let the dead bury the dead, so to speak.

So, you seem to be saying that Christ was WRONG to have said so?

[Quix]

***OUTRAGEOUS DOUBLE STANDARD ALERT*** ***OUTRAGEOUS DOUBLE STANDARD ALERT*** ***OUTRAGEOUS DOUBLE STANDARD ALERT***

You are trying to single out individuals.

This has NOTHING to do with what the actual teachings of Faith and Morals of the Church.NOTHING!

Its like me saying that because someone in the Lutheran church commits murder -that all Lutherans and their teachings are bad.This would be a foolish and hateful thing to say

I hear this type of stuff from athiest who try and paint all Christians as bad to try and prove there is no God!

You make NO sense, Dear Brother!

The Orthodox already have a perfect church with Christ at its head; 20,000+ protestant schismatic sects many of which have established Christian 'firsts' by allowing abortion, promoting gay clergy, and blessing gay marriage, have neither a perfect church, nor is Christ at their head.
9,095 posted on 02/06/2007 12:38:06 PM MST by kawaii To 9092

Romans even with their faults state clearly that they should NOT be ordained.
:
It is PROTESTANTS doing evil IN GOD'S NAME.
:
9,360 posted on 02/07/2007 8:11:36 AM MST by kawaii To 9341

[QX: CLEARLY ROMAN EVILS are more equal to righteousness than others'! GTTM]

none of these have ever made abominable sins official church doctrine; protestantism has because protestantism is inspired by Satan and exist only to rebel against God's word.
:
9,370 posted on 02/07/2007 8:52:16 AM MST by kawaii To 9365

[QX: SOOOOOO, RC's et al in their lofty hierarchies and magestericals . . . can bloodily obliterate thousands of saints in horribly torturous ways; have orgies; mistresses and illegitimate offpring aplenty; run generally roughshod and dismissively over a long list of Biblical standards and criteria . . . but because they didn't ORDER OR SANCTION FORMALLY ALL RC's et al to do the same, their INDIVIDUAL BUT ORGANIZATIONALLY IMPACTFUL SINS are more equal--more toward righteousness than INDIVIDUAL PROTESTY LEADERS' SINS ARE???? And I'm supposed to think that's logical AND MORE RIGHTEOUS AND CONGRUENT??? GTTM! with tears.]

Certainly Satan could as likely be performing parlor tricks to help prop up his anti-Christian churches.
:
9,388 posted on 02/07/2007 9:54:06 AM MST by kawaii To 9379

[QX: EVEN BONA FIDE HEALINGS via Christians who confess the core beliefs of the faith AND THAT CHRIST CAME IN THE FLESH--THE BIBLICAL STANDARD OF A SOURCE'S CONNECTION TO HOLY SPIRIT--because they aren't Roman or Orthodox, they are automatically satanic. Lovely. UnBiblical. Hogwash. Double standard. Papal orgies and the Inquisition are either not satanic or not satanic enough to be a real terrible thing COMPARED TO REDEMPTIVE HEALINGS LEADING TO SALVATION IN CHRIST THROUGH--HORRORS--PROTESTIES! Something's wrong with this picture.]

Oh Holy Scripture does indeed provide a measure for this; folks who reject the teachings of St Paul for instance are called false prophets by Paul himself.
:
Therefore folks who do this yet proclaim to be prophets cannot be invoking the Holy Spirit.

[QX: AHHHHHHH . . . So, folks who take a contextual perspective and understanding on a minor ambiguous issue are satanic false prophets. Folks who at the top of the Roman heirarchy engage in and support orgies; correuption; unnecessary wars; bloody inquisitions; torture . . . are merely misguided individuals--STILL WITH KEYS TO THE KINGDOM; STILL ADMINISTRATOR OVER AND DISPENSER OF HOLY SPIRIT--STILL INFALLIBLE AND STILL with VERY INsignificant impact on THE CHURCH or THE TRUTH.
:
Right. And the tooth fairy gave birth to the 7 dwarfs in the lap of Santa Claus on a full moon on the Las Vegas Strip presided over by a virgin burro and a chorus of departed doves that the local street people were accustomed to praying to in their drunken stupor. And Hollyweed and the NY Times blessed it and said it was good. IOW, SAY WHUT??? Where's that barf bag]

If they're standing there with uncovered women preaching and trying to claim to be invoking the Holy Spirit they're lying.
:
9,393 posted on 02/07/2007 10:09:59 AM MST by kawaii To 9392

[QX: To paraphrase . . . if the orgy loving popes; the corrupt popes, Cardinals, bishops; the war-mongering popes; the blood loving hierarchy and magesterical are parading their power mongering excesses and evil sins as good enough business as usual . . . and still presuming to tell the serfs what Biblical truth is; and still presuming to have the keys to the Kingdom; and still presuming to assume that they still have God's anointing to lead anything or anyone above sewer cleaners anywhere but hell . . . they're seriously deluded AND lying.]

OK. Here is one supersition you guys share with Islam: Sola Scriptura.
:
9,577 posted on 02/07/2007 2:47:56 PM MST by annalex To 9575

[QX: Uhhhhh . . . . were all the papal excesses, hierarchical corruptions, orgies, inquisitions, bloody unnecessary wars . . .
--superstitions;
--convenient new dogma for the moment;
--new revelations;
--new interpretations;
--new messages from the Mary-carrier pigeon/telegram/email-to-Jesus connection;
--new concensus declarations from the magesterical;
--WHAT???]

The similarity with Islam is in the beleive that all things necessary for salvation are contained in a certain sacred text. The said text is, of course different for the Protestants and for the Muslim, but the faulty principle is shared.
:
9,590 posted on 02/07/2007 3:28:05 PM MST by annalex To 9579

QX: The similarity with Islam is in the beleive that all things necessary for salvation are contained in a certain sacred text.
:
AS OPPOSED TO: Contained in a certain sacred text clarified, inferred, extrapolated and assumed upon by the magesterical for the safety of the serfs; PLUS
:
the consensus pontifications of the hierarchy and magesterical--some centuries when they bothered to take time out from their orgies;
:
the popes--some centuries when they bothered to take time out from their bloody war mongering;
:
The Committees for the preservation of the faithful when they ran around the countryside torturing and literally shredding and burning alive true saints;
:
(the list could go on about how pure and righteous all the components necessary for salvation have ALWAYS BEEN--UNCHANGEABLE AND UNCHANGED SINCE THE ASCENSION--within the TRUEST TRULY TRUE AWESOMELY RIGHTEOUSLY TRULY TRUE RC CHURCH) Where's that barf bag again.

The teachings on faith and Morals and many other things in the Catholic Church remain the same for over 2000 years. NO CONFUSION!
:
Sorry Dear Brother ,this is just the TRUTH
:
9,639 posted on 02/07/2007 5:30:19 PM MST by stfassisi To 9638

QX: Given that we are all living epistles . . . and that our lives do teach whether we think so or want so, or not . . .
:
The RC edific's teachings on MORALS have most definitely CHANGED WHOLESALE during many centuries when it was a widely demonstrated horrible characture of hell much more than anything resembling the TRUTH, MAJESTY AND MORALITY OF THE GOSPEL.
:
Sorry Dear Brother ,this is just the TRUTH

Enough, I have a loom contraption to tinker with.

[1000 silverlings]

Give no heed to anyone who makes up things, like scripture and who accuse the brethen.

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them .

[Quix]

Forgot to ping you to my pontification on an important double standard bunch of stuff.

[Quix]

True.

Though I still have a bias that a lot of lurkers on the fence deserve

an answer to a lot of the nonsense.

[1000 silverlings]

Oh I agree completely, when it's profitable for teaching.

[annalex]

The final say is God's and God's alone

I told you I agree with that. You just formulated what is wrong with Sola Scriptura.

[1000 silverlings]

Well I think "by judging" we will be held up as an example. We who never saw believe anyway, while those who had closer relations with God may have encountered their difficulties.

[Quix]

True, true.

[1000 silverlings]

God says that His word is perfect, and by perfect, He means sufficient, just as His grace is sufficient.(2 Cor 12:9)

Psalm 19:7

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

[1000 silverlings]

By the way, John1:1 defines the Trinity, can't get more perfect than that.

[1000 silverlings]

Even Peter, after walked with the Lord and witnessing the Transfiguration, states that even so, there is a more sure way of knowing the Lord, and that is through the written Word

1 Peter

1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

1:18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

[annalex]

How can it be plain in the scripture when it runs afoul of basic Roman Catholic soteriology

First, there is nothing in your post to challenge the scriptural basis for the doctrine of purgatory. I am tempted to just leave it at that, with a remark that you do not understand Catholicism well enough to point out contradictions.

But since there is obviously interest on this thread in understanding Catholicism better, I will explain. It is true that generally no one knows who is saved and who is lost except at the end of one's life by the faithful himself. It is likewise not known if a saved soul is in purgatory or has already made it to heaven. Further, the very concept of purgatorial fire existing in the temporal domain measurable by time is a popular piety: it is helpful to think of it that way, but it is not a dogma of the Church.

We do not know if our prayers for the dead are applicable every time. The dead soul may be truly dead in hell, or in heaven and not requiring our prayers in either case. We pray because we want cleansing of saved souls, when possible, if possible.

We do have two kinds of relative knoweldge and relative assurance. First, we know of the salvific, transforming efficacy of the sacraments of the Church. We then know that one properly dispatched by the Church to his rest is on his way to heaven. Second, we know that the Church is capable of scrutinizing a particular life and upon evidence of miracles it worked as evidence of its santification, the Church can confidently canonized this man saint, who then will hear our prayers and pray for us in heaven.

Your puzzlement would have been well placed if we considered good works salvific alone. Then the disposition of the worker would not have mattered and the works being an objective fact could lead us to objective conclusion of the state of the departed soul. Works in life would be purchasing salvation in the afterlife. But of course works are salvific inasmuch as they draw our heart to Christ, and here is the great mystery, the mystery of the Beatitudes: blessed are those whose works, albeit objectively poor, are done in Spirit.

Are Christian beliefs like this, beliefs shrouded in mystery, superstition? Fools think so. But we see wintesses in heaven.

[annalex]

What did God leave out [in 2 Timothy 3:16-17] that you find "necessary for salvation?"

You asked a similar question earlier on this thread, and I answered then: the scripture does not contain its own table of content so that we know what books are inspired and what is not from the scripture itself; the scripture does not instruct us in proper liturgy; it leaves important for salvation doctrines stated in a way that allows for misinterpretation if the scripture is left as the only guidance. As one example I gave baptism of children.

More narrowly, this passage does not say anything about the perfection of the laity at all, and it does not mention either perspicuity or self-sufficiency of the scripture outside of the Holy Tradition and the magisterial teaching.

[Running On Empty]

I appreciate the courtesy of your reply.

It's uplifting.

[stfassisi]

Like it or not, Dear Brother,the actual written teachings on Faith and Morals has NOT Changed.
If one lives their lives by these teaching they would likely become a Saint.

The problem arises when man elevates himself above these teachings and there have been many that have and still do.

The Catholic Church founded by Christ Himself teaches incredible LOVE if its followed 100%.

Just look at the lives of the Saints and you will see that they held firm to these teachings,some of them even until death.


Here are a few examples....

Respect for Human Life
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7Z.HTM

Respect for the Dignity of Persons
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P80.HTM

The Love of Husband and Wife
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P86.HTM

Offenses Against the Dignity of Marriage
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P87.HTM

Love For the Poor
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P8F.HTM

If you ever could find it to reach beyond your pride and read what the Catholic Church actually teaches,you would understand
That is what I will pray for in my prayer for you, Brother.

I wish you a Blessed day!

[blue-duncan]

"Are Christian beliefs like this, beliefs shrouded in mystery, superstition? Fools think so."

I think I get it now. What is considered "mystery" in Roman Catholic thinking is considered "superstition" in Reformed thinking. Sort of like what one considers eccentricity in themselves they look on as deviancy in others.

Speaking of oxymorons, how about this, "relative assurance"?

[annalex]

I made two posts in succession, one more critical of your reading than the other. Yes, I now (9402)see it as a grammatical possibility, based on the observation that "zondos" is in the same inflection as "stylos" but "zontos" is very unlikely to apply to the Church, as it is a common attribute of God. I still think that the absence of "tou" in front of the "stylos kai edraioma" makes these two modifying the closest noun, "ekklesia".

Yes, there are references to God as rock, and certainly to Christ as a variety of architectural objects, including Christ as foundation of our faith, but here we have two candidates, Church and God, and of the two it is the Church that more readily invites the architectural metaphore.

No, of course the other reading does nothing to Catholic eccleseology either.

[Quix]

Thanks for your kind msg.

I pray the same for you and yours.

History can be an interesting topic!

It's been a while since I've read good historical accounts of the whole sweep of the Roman edifice.

But I contend that the teachings HAVE changed. Sometimes dramatically for however many decades.

Of course, there are wonderful Roman belivers and I praise God for them. But, to paraphrase Christ . . . I don't pontificate about the ones doing it right in my congregation, denomination (if I were in one), or any other including the Roman group.

And, the double standard and denial and blindness are not righteousness enhancing qualities, traits, habits.

I don't understand--other than sociologically, psychologically and demonically--the blindness about one's organization's past.

Sanitized histories may be fine for certain contexts . . . but they don't wash as far as Heaven is concerned.

Blogger?

[annalex]

gets its life from the Word of God

Very true. It remains a prooftext against scripture divorced from the Church as pillar and foundation of truth, my original point.