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/
"Touching that which is holy would desecrate it"
Touching does not desecrate the holy, that which touches the holy, itself becomes consecrated and must die. Look at Joshua 6:19 and what happened to Achan and Ussah. Jesus' holiness was veiled in His incarnation, Phil. 2:6-9, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."
That is not what you are saying. You are not limiting the birth to the second person of the Trinity, you are saying that Mary is the "Mother of God" with not qualification. Mary did not pre-exist Christ. She gave birth the the human incarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity. To say, without qualification that Mary is the "Mother of God" is to imply that she pre-existed the Trinity, that she is the Mother of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, which is the one God. She gave birth to the Son, and then only in a human sense.
So quit your silly games. xzins is not denying Jesus divinity. That is a false accustion and you should know it. If you don't know it then it is an ignorant and idiodtic accusation. Take your pick.
Same to you buddy.
Two can play the "gotcha" game.
Why do Kosta & Adi keep spreading the heresy that Mary is the Mother of the Father?
Why do they deny that the Father is God?
Why do you deny that the Father is God? Why do you spread such heresy?
More gymnastics, BD. Where God dwells is Holy of Holies. Only the Highe Priest can enter. The womb was inteded for God the Word. Holy of Holies was neve rused for or by another man for anything else. If you choose not to believe that Mary's womb was made holy for God only, that's your choice. End of argument.
You have some serious issues imo. Please do not ping me any more.
Jesus is also God wihtout qualifications, except among Arians and similar heretics. Either Mary carried and gave birth to a man or to God. There is nothering inbetween. Basic Triniatrian understanidng does not cause confusion as to which Person of the Divine Trinity was born of Virgin Mary. That seems to exist only in some Protestant offshoots.
It's ok for you to throw heresy charges at others, but as soon as you get called on it, you get sanctimonius.
Quit denying that the Father is God. It's heresy.
Sauce for goose....
Thanks. I tend to get the different councils mixed up in my head if I am not careful. Comes with reading to much at the same time.
We aren't missing the point. We are objecting to the title because it adds confusion. You have to remember, half the world these days doesn't understand the concept of the Trinity, what salvation is, let alone the incarnation. If one says, for example, Mary was the mother of the Incarnate Christ - I can go with that. It puts her in the role of Mother of Christ, who is God - but takes out the Father and Holy Spirit in her role as mother.
What flew 1700 years ago in terms of understanding, doesn't necessarily fly today. People are as Biblically illiterate today as they were then (with the clergy and scholarly types being the ones most exposed to Scripture); and the term "Mother of God" causes more problems than it is worth. It can be said in a more clear manner and needs to be clarified is what i believe Xzins, myself and others are saying. We are not denying Jesus' deity. We are not denying that Mary was Jesus' mother. We are trying to clarify her title so that it doesn't seemingly negate Christ's eternal preexistance.
Dear xzins,
One may certainly say that Mary is the Mother of Jesus. One may also certainly say that Mary is the Mother of the Christ.
However, if one says that Mary is the Mother of Jesus, the Mother of the Christ, but then specifically says she is NOT the Mother of God, then one is denying His Divinity.
If Jesus is God and Mary is His Mother, then she is the Mother of God. Jesus is a single individual, not two. He HAS two natures, but IS one person. Mary is mother of a person, not a nature. The person of whom she is mother is Jesus.
Conversely, if one says that Mary is the Mother of God, one does not necessarily say that she is the Mother of God the Father or God the Holy Spirit. She is only Mother of God the Son.
However, the Church states simply that she is the Mother of God.
This isn't "playing gotcha." This is actually a matter of precision in the use of language, and was critically important in refuting the heresies of Arianism and Nestorianism. Various heresies wished to deny that Jesus was fully God, or wished to separate Jesus the man from Jesus Who is God. By qualifying "God" in Mary, Mother of God, these folks intended to make Jesus [at least a] little less than Who He is.
Thus, the formulation agreed-to by the ancient Church Council, and reiterated unanimously and perenially by the Whole Church was arrived at with great care, to drive home central points of Christology, unambiguously, without wiggle room. The precise language used was very, very important. At least, this was believed nearly universally by the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils.
But what did they know, right?
sitetest
Marlowe, I think you just got called a heretic. With finesse, of course, but the meaning is clear.
"More gymnastics, BD."
Not really Kosta. John 1:14, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." 1 Cor. 15:50, "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." Acts 2:26-27, "Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption."
Jesus had a fully corruptible body (flesh), therefore it could not be holy while on earth. It was only because of the power of the Father at death that it escaped corruption.
We could do without the insults to "Protestant offshoots." You have Catholic offshoots who want to deify Mary literally. They petitioned the Pope to do just that. We can distinguish them from Catholics though (even though in Practice, I 100% believe that the veneration of Mary at the level she is venerated points in that direction).
Most folks don't have a basic "trinitarian understanding".
In this case, when I said "my side", I was referring to Calvinists of my ilk whom you have grown to know and love over these many threads. :) I fully acknowledge that there are good people who are Protestants and don't share my views about soteriology. However, I was responding to a post addressed to me, so I thought it was OK to speak for the extremely consistent views of the MANY Reformers like me on this forum. :)
BTW, while there are certainly some different views about God among Protestants, just as there are among Catholics and the Orthodox, I am not aware of any wide diversity about the concept of Sola Scriptura. People may apply it differently, but then, hundreds of millions of followers of your faith also apply Church teachings very differently. All three of us have our respective ideas about what is correct concerning our faiths, and the fact remains that so many of our respective brethren in faith disregard what we agree with and do something else instead.
It is playing "gotcha" when one says "Mary is the Mother of Jesus" and some yahoo replies: "Why do you deny the divinity of Jesus?"
It's unhelpful and it's just playing games.
It makes as much sense to claim they deny the divinity of the Father.
They are only playing on the broadness of the word "God" in a Trinitarian system.
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.