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/
It is a first, to read Galatians 3:28 as a praise of ignorance.
"big boy?"
Yeah...and I just lost 26 pounds! But you know, back in my "Greek God" days, the girls did like to sing out "Hey big boy!" I liked that!
"It is a first, to read Galatians 3:28 as a praise of ignorance."
Doubtless one more Protestant scriptural innovation! :)
Kosta,
Byzantine/Majority Text (2000) and Textus Receptus (1550/1894) have "ton prototokon". Tischendorf 8th Ed. and Westcott/Hort, UBS4 variants do not.
Of course it does; the issue is not the word or even whether it was a later insertion. Christ was a firstborn as a Jewish legal term, regardless of other siblings. This is another englishism you introduce, when you imply that since Christ was a firstborn, there have to be a "secondborn".
When an American mother introduces her children she might say: "This is Josh, my first...", and even if her speech were interrupted at that point by a malfunctioninig coffee maker, we'd know that she gave birth to more than one child. But that is because nothing legal attaches to being the elder brother in America. To a Jew that would mean an obligation to God and transfer of title. When Matthew mentions "firstborn" it is to underscore that in His earthly genealogy Christ is in the line of King David. Little would he know that 2,000 years later people not familiar with the Jewish law or the working of dynasties would read stuff into it.
-A8
You look at the scriptures?
"When an American mother introduces her children she might say: "This is Josh, my first...", and even if her speech were interrupted at that point by a malfunctioninig coffee maker, we'd know that she gave birth to more than one child."
I like to introduce my oldest, in the presence od my wife and with a perfectly straight face, "This is John, my oldest from my first marriage" 'Course I've only been married once. :)
I don't recall that Paul uses the word for priest in that scripture....
That Thayre that you posted is too cryptic to point either way. If you think it commands "eos ou" being translated as "until" but not "till", why do KJV and Young's literal both have it "till"?
Here is Liddell and Scott on "eos" (see I.6 at link). It says,
6. with Advbs. of Time and Place, he. hote till the time when, c. ind., v.l. for este in X.Cyr.5.1.25; he. hou, f.l. for es hou, Hdt.2.143: freq. in later Gr., Gem.l.c., Ev.Matt.1.25, etc.; he. hotou ib.5.25, etc.; he. pote; how long? ib.17.17, Ev.Jo.10.24; he. tote LXX Ne.2.16 ; he. opse till late, [p. 752] f.l.for es opse, Th.3.108; he. arti 1 Ep.Jo.2.9 ; he. hôde as far as this place, Ev.Luc.23.5.
The emphasis is mine, follow to link for further links. It covers your case, eos followed by adverb ("ou"). It does not fall under the next case in LSJ, indicating "how long?". There is no mentioning of the condition necessarily stopping after the time indicated.
My bet is, if you look up the usage of "eos" and compare it to "eos ou", you will discover that "ou" or "an" simply control the following verb, and no proposition is needed when "eos" controls a noun. Had St. Matthew said "till the birth" rather than "till she gave birth", there would be no "ou". It does not introduce any semantics.
Thank you Alex.
"Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."
The connection between Mary are brothers here is very strong. It is evidence that indicates a high probability that these are in fact Jesus' bros and Mary's sons here. This can not be dismisssed, and stands in the contradiction to the pertual virginity claim. This passage makes the claim highly doubtful.
John 7:3Jesus' brothers said to him, "You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do.
"And it would seem strange that Jude would call himself a brother of James, who supposedly is a blood brother of Jesus according to you,"
I madeno such claim. The above passages absolutely do not contain bros, as in good buddies. The above passages came before that and it's more probable that the bros are bros, not cousins.
Correct, he actually recommended it for everyone.
I beleive Quester pointed to this verse as well.
Look, this has nothing to do with perpetual virginity of Mary because all Jesus does in this passage is to call every Christian his brother. In fact, this is another reason why all the references to "brethren of Our Lord" are problematic.
I did not find it cryptic. Long. Hard to sort through. But once you found your verse, it was pretty clear.
Why did KJV and Young's literal say 'till? I don't know. Neither one change the meaning.
Lots of context to see what the verse(s) mean(s). It is my strong belief (having not even consulted a commentary or such to get someone else's opinion), having studied the text(s) in Greek and English that the fact that Mary and Joseph had a normal relationship including procreation with one another is self-evident. You disagree. Let the reader decide if there is a case there.
Whether it is an insertion isn't even the point - since Luke 2:7 also includes the phrase.
It isn't an Englishism when I looked it up in the lexicon. What is a prototype? It is the first in a line of items.
Prototokos came from two Greek Roots.
Protos- which has these meanings:
1) first in time or place
a) in any succession of things or persons
2) first in rank
a) influence, honour
b) chief
c) principal
3) first, at the first
And Tikto meaning:
1) to bring forth, bear, produce (fruit from the seed)
a) of a woman giving birth
b) of the earth bringing forth its fruits
c) metaph. to bear, bring forth
So Mary gave birth to either her:first in time or place,
in any succession of things or persons, highest ranked, her chief, principal, or most influential Son. This is Jesus in relation to Mary.
Are you including the Peshitta Syriac? IT is found there as well.
Not a praise. Just a call to recognize that all Christians are equal in Jesus' eyes so just because one is a Greek Speaker doesn't mean the debate ends when the Greek Speaks.
King James was by all intents a Catholic in Anglican clothes. He was HIGHLY SYMPATHETIC to Catholicism. His mother was killed over it. Politically, he had to be Protestant. But in his heart, he was Catholic - as were some of his children. Of course, one needed jump on the Protestants too hard for making the political situation so strict. Bloody Mary wasn't exactly the nicest person to live through - and while Elizabeth killed as many people in her reign as Mary did - Elizabeth's reign was far longer so on average hers was much less bloody.
Anyway, back to Mickey Mouse Translations. My least favorite is the NIV. It's only redeeming value is that it is very readable and makes Paul's letter seem like actual letters. But as a translation, it is not very good.
KJV is my favorite. I grew up on it. It hasn't always used the best interpretation of certain words; but I haven't seen it resort to making up meanings. Any "mistakes" referred to before were likely printing errors or word order or something to the effect of the sinful Bible - talk about an oops.
The KJV Committee didn't avoid Priest at all. They just didn't translate presbuteros as priest. Again, another quite legitimate translation. I do not see in my lexicons where presbuteros ever means priest. Just don't. I looked it up after you mentioned it.
But, there are plenty of times where priests are referred to in the KJV in both testaments. We are even called priests. So, I don't really see an concerted effort to ban mentioning priests - especially when I can't find presbuteros meaning priest at all. Maybe another lexicon has priest as a possible meaning. Mine doesn't.
1 Timothy 4 isn't really the function of a priest. Also the word was presbuterion. Per Strongs: Presbuterion Neuter of a presumed derivative of presbuteros; the order of elders, i.e. (specially), Israelite Sanhedrin or Christian "presbytery."
The NT Greek Lexicon says it is body of elders, presbytery, senate, council
of the Jewish elders
of the elders of any body (assembly) of Christians and that it is presumed to derive from presbuteros which means:
elder, of age,
the elder of two people
advanced in life, an elder, a senior
forefathers
a term of rank or office
among the Jews
members of the great council or Sanhedrin (because in early times the rulers of the people, judges, etc., were selected from elderly men)
of those who in separate cities managed public affairs and administered justice
among the Christians, those who presided over the assemblies (or churches) The NT uses the term bishop, elders, and presbyters interchangeably
the twenty four members of the heavenly Sanhedrin or court seated on thrones around the throne of God
Do you have any lexicons that actually translate it priest. I've been looking for them. I do not see any .
I just lost 26 pounds too! Doing Weight Watchers.
As to the Galatians reference - you know well what I was hitting at.
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.