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/
Even more so when talents are not gifts or skills.. but weight, a weight measurement.. Like a talent of gold.. which is/was the weight of the King in Gold.. This parable was a Jewish idiom about weight measure.. Amazing that so many have no idea what this parable means when its so important TO THEM and their future..
I personally experienced this as one event, though I am still "growing up into Him Who Is My Head," but obviously we are all uniquely made, and God our Creator, who knew us before forming us in the womb, knows just what each one of us requires to come to and walk by faith, and that is His desire, "that we know Him, and Jesus Christ Whom He has sent, for this is Eternal Life." Gifts can be given, but until they are received they are of no consequence. God, the Father of Lights, is "the giver of every good and perfect gift," as well as the One who "gives sight to the blind," and "opens ears."
Love to you both in Christ Our King.
Lovely. Thank you very much.
Even if coming at it from a bit of an angle, I can agree with the first part, and I fully agree with the second part. Is it accepted Orthodoxy, then, that election by Divine foreknowledge is not correct? That surprises me, as I do not remember having heard of another explanation of the verses that discuss election and predestination.
“Is it accepted Orthodoxy, then, that election by Divine foreknowledge is not correct?”
No. The Greek Fathers always explained election in terms of divine foreknowledge. What I was demonstrating is what one can do applying logic to divine mystery.
Yes, I fully agree. That is, to the extent I understand what you all are talking about. :) I see "perfect" as being a very relative term. We can talk about a perfect "thing", such as a car. Such a car would never rust, never need repairs, and would never wear out in any way. That is static. OTOH, we could talk about "perfect" as being an action in a particular circumstance, or better, a perfect application of a perfect idea in a particular circumstance. That is dynamic, and involves what we might perceive as "change".
For example, Israel faced many different enemies in the OT and in many cases the God-led solution to "perfect" victory was different. In one case the answer was to "plague" the enemy into submission. In another, it was to kill every living member of the whole community of the enemy, including animals. In another, it was to kill only one (Goliath). In each case, the results were roughly the same, victory for Israel, but they were arrived at by extremely different means. I submit that all were "perfect" solutions given the circumstances. That includes the zillion number of variables that God factored into each solution that are well beyond our comprehension.
Therefore, it is not correct to say there is one "perfect" solution for every enemy faced (along with a myriad of other examples). It IS dynamic, as I think your point is, and the standard against which perfection is measured is God's essence, through His will. When God wanted perfect victory for the Israelites, that never changed, it always happened. It was the application of that desire which changed, according to God's perfect will.
When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; (James 1:13)
God does not test us. (James 1:13)
As eternal God, Christ eternally receives the Spirit from the father, and He eternally sends the same Spirit of love to the Father. There never was a time when the Word, Incarnate or not, was without the Spirit.
Christ's divine nature was sufficient to guide Jesus into the desert.
Thank you A-G. Honestly, quoting wjhole paragraphs from the Bible does nothing to me. Please summarize the point you are making with a reference in parenthesis, or if you are going to quote, quote only the releveant sentence.
Father, Son and the Holy Spirit are eternally connected. There is no time when the Word, in Flesh or not, receives the Spirit.
Christ's baptism, by the way, is another issue. He Who was without sin had nothing to repent for. That whole section treats Christ as man and not God and Man in one Person.
Who says God is doing the testing.. God is merely allowing the testing to happen.. as he allowed Satan to be in the Garden of Eden and right over your shoulder.. A spirit seeks its own level.. and will find it.. Thats WHY we are here..
Jeremiah 1:4-5 - The word of the LORD came to me, saying, Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart;
Oh, that makes God a "relative term," FK. Brilliant.
James does.
God is merely allowing the testing to happen..
Merely allows it? In Job He actively plans with Satan what is to be done and what is not to be done.
And with Abraham? There was no Satan there as far as I know. The testing was done by God and God alone.
So James is WRONG?.. No big deal all of the Apostles were wrong at some point.. Paul set them straight about the gentiles for instance.. Can you be wrong?..
Nothing can be hidden from God.
Our motives are ever known to Him - whether what we said and did was out of love for Him or for ourselves or for some thing or some one.
There are so many examples in Scripture - such as the sorting of the sheep and the goats, the prodigal son, the good Samaritan, the workers being sent into the field at different times of the day and receiving the same compensation, various stories from the history of Israel and so much more. But here are a few of my favorites:
Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: - Luke 6:37
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. - Matt 7:2
For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. - Romans 2:12-16
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. - Matt 7:21-23
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. - Matt 5:21-22
God already knows but what we "are" will be known by all especially ourselves.. Degrees of Heaven and degrees of Hell will be the reward.. I believe.. maybe "CONTEST" is a better term..
I suspect kosta50's objection is that God is not tempting us per se.
And I agree that God is not doing it to us, we are doing it to ourselves. His justice is perfectly glorious.
I was filled with the Spirit in the beginning when I first heard my Master's call - and then I quenched Him for a number of years - repented, surrendered and was filled again.
Self-will is a snare. If we want to do it "our way" - He'll let us, and we'll fail.
With regard to Western Christianity, and based on what you know of Reformed theology, why would you say that we believe that we share in the Divine Nature? Unless there is some angle I am not thinking of, which is possible, I can't imagine that. Also, how would you explain the difference between Western created grace, and Eastern uncreated grace? I don't understand why created grace (whatever it is) is "quantifiable", and why that would make it not Divine. While I do not think in terms of created vs. uncreated, I know that grace is Divine.
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.