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/
Yes, God knew my destiny before He created me. Yes, if God didn't want me created he wouldn't have created me. And yes, I was created for my destiny. Furthermore, I would say this falls under the definition of omniscience. But I would most definitely disagree with your previous statement that omniscience equates to double predestination. It's quite tempting but I won't speculate here...
We believe, since God is Love, that all His purposes are Just. (Justice being one form of Love.)
Uh-huh. But omniscience (something I believe about God) does not equate to double predestination (something I don't believe about God). :-)
I'm going to have to limit any further responses due to time constraints, my job, my life, speculation about some things, etc...
"Hawaiian Shirt"
And I thought we could at least get through one week without bashing Rick Warren, my wrong!
Was that before time. If so, did everything happen at once? ;-)
And my point is that God knew you'd go to that grocery store even before creation. Had he NOT started THIS CREATION, then you would not necessarily have gone to that grocery store. But, since He did create THIS CREATION, that means your going to the grocery store has been locked and loaded just waiting to happen from the very beginning.
Actually, I was bashing Rick Marlowe, who, long-time resident of California, started the trend that Rick Whasisname stole.
That there was a beginning of time (space/time) was the most theological statement ever to come out of science.
Measurement of the cosmic microwave background radiation showed that the universe is expanding, therefore space and time had a real beginning, i.e. big bang theory which is nearly universally accepted.
That inflationary model demands it - and no physical cosmology defeats it (multi-verse, multi-world, ekpyrotic, cyclic, hesitating, imaginary time, etc.) For all their efforts, all these models have merely extended the beginning to an undetermined prior event. And all of them rely on pre-existing geometry for that event. Time is geometric.
In the beginning, God created...
The bottom line is causation. In the absence of time, events cannot occur. In the absence of space, things cannot exist.
Causation requires geometry (space/time) - there must be an uncaused cause of causation, i.e. God the Creator.
If I say to you, "Where were you when I entered college?" that might mean that you did not exist at that time.
But, it indicates that I pre-dated that time.
That still doesn't negate my choice to go to the store. That still doesn't mean I couldn't do otherwise.
It just means God know what the end result would be.
You are so much smarter than me, sister.
If God caused time to come into being, then what word do we use to describe God prior to that big bang....
Existed?
One view of creation and the big bang is of broken symmetry, a geometric concept.
It is more of a way of looking at it than it is a testable hypothesis.
Precisely.
If God knows you will change your mind 20 times before going to the store at 7 PM tonight, is there any possibility that God will be wrong and that you will end up not going to the store? (or at a different time?)
Existed?
And Jewish mystics use the term Ayn Sof which roughly means that from which all being emerges and into which all being dissolves.
But I prefer God's Name, I AM.
So true. Personally, I don't think we can 'think' our way through it.
Or as Rumsfeld would say: "there's some things you know, some things you don't know and some things you know you don't know and some things you don't know you don't know."
The set of things we can know about God is small but precious.
Did they count time when you went to college? Other than that, I find no other way to harass you here.
But, it indicates that I pre-dated that time.
We're in agreement.
I agree that much of my life has not yet happened (I'm hoping anyway :>) I agree that I will make many decisions that have never before been made and that they are first time decisions.
At the same time, I know that God knew what they would be, and that none of them will be other than what He knew would end up being the case.
That is BOTH "free will" and "predestination."
Indeed.
Nope, I do believe God is omniscient.
And that I still am faced with real choices and that what I do matters.
In the absence of space, things cannot exist.
There ya go.
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.