FWIW, it was quickly pointed out that because that is not official doctrine, or dogma (I can never keep track of the difference) this obvious inconsistency doesn't matter. I'm sure all you lawyers understand these fine points of distinction. I'm just part of that "old school" that expects consistency.
LOL. IIRC, part of the RC's consternation with the movie that began this thread was that it portrayed Mary experiencing pain during childbirth. From the original article above...
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."
Yep, it is difficult to keep track of all the inconsistencies. Today's dogma is tomorrow's discarded movie review.
It is good for a chuckle isn't it.
Careful though, it seems that lately our RC posters have been getting a bit edgy. :-0