Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'The Nativity Story' Movie Problematic for Catholics, "Unsuitable" for Young Children
LifeSiteNews.com ^ | 12/4/2006 | John-Henry Westen

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/


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholics; christmas; mary; movie; nativity; nativitystory; thenativitystory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 16,241-16,256 next last
To: Forest Keeper; blue-duncan; Dr. Eckleburg; adiaireton8; HarleyD; AlbionGirl; xzins; wmfights
"Yes indeed. In addition, this scripture directly contradicts the opening words of the Protoevangelium of James:"
_____________________________

Again the Bereans are an example of how we should respond to any new belief.

It's surprising that so much doctrine and ritual can be created around a document that all scholars acknowledge is a forgery. FWIW, I believe it speaks volumes that NONE of the Apostles thought to write about Mary and any "special" powers she possessed.

Mary is clearly a special person in our faith, but it diminishes her to create a mythology around her that just isn't true.
321 posted on 12/06/2006 7:08:24 AM PST by wmfights (Romans 8:37-39)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

Comment #322 Removed by Moderator

To: blue-duncan

and Jesus was baptized too


323 posted on 12/06/2006 7:13:30 AM PST by Nihil Obstat (viva il papa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: sandyeggo

I freely admit it, I cry every time I read it....


324 posted on 12/06/2006 7:22:35 AM PST by mockingbyrd (Good heavens! What women these Christians have-----Libanus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

During the reign of Justinian. I've forgotten the exact year. How pray is the relevant to whether or not Origen is a sound source? Again, look at his works yourself, and you will surely confirm the judgement of the Council that he was a heretic.


325 posted on 12/06/2006 7:23:32 AM PST by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: Nihil Obstat

See post #310


326 posted on 12/06/2006 7:25:56 AM PST by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

See 286.


327 posted on 12/06/2006 7:35:42 AM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan

How do you know that Mary just wasn't "being obedient to the law"? You must admit that her pregnancy was like no other.


328 posted on 12/06/2006 7:36:18 AM PST by Nihil Obstat (viva il papa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan
The original point that you were trying to make (in 283) was to show that Mary undergoing the purification rite shows that Mary was impure. But the example of Jesus being baptized by John shows that just because one undergoes a rite of cleansing, this does not prove that the person undergoing the rite was unclean. Therefore, Mary's undergoing the rite of purification does not show that Mary was impure or unclean.

-A8

329 posted on 12/06/2006 7:40:41 AM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan
There isn't any question that she was impure according to the law; not virtually impure, actually impure

"Impurity" in the Mosaic legal sense isn't a moral failing. Proof: God can't command anyone to sin, yet he commands various practices that cause legal impurity. Childbirth, for example. The burial of the dead, for another.

330 posted on 12/06/2006 7:40:49 AM PST by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
The miracle is Jesus' sacrifice and resurrection. That is where Christian's should be focusing attention.

That's a rather strange comment. The Incarnation is a prerequisite for the "sacrifice and resurrection"; indeed, some commentators would say that it's the initial part of the sacrifice. It's certainly one of the central mysteries of the Christian faith.

Paul seems to have no problem writing a beautiful meditation on the Incarnation in Phil 2:5-11, and another one as a major theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

331 posted on 12/06/2006 7:47:35 AM PST by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: Nihil Obstat; Campion

She was being obedient to the law because she was impure from the birth. She had a male child,

Luke 2:22-24, "And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
(As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)
And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons."

Lev. 12:1-4, "And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled."

It does carry with it moral impurity for the need for purification arises out of sin. That is why there is the proscription against touching any hallowed thing or entering the sanctuary.

Gen. 3:15-16, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children..."


332 posted on 12/06/2006 7:55:13 AM PST by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan
It does carry with it moral impurity for the need for purification arises out of sin.

Assertion isn't proof. God commanded childbirth; God cannot command sin.

333 posted on 12/06/2006 7:57:19 AM PST by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan; adiaireton8

see post #329


334 posted on 12/06/2006 7:59:17 AM PST by Nihil Obstat (viva il papa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
"I've forgotten the exact year. How pray is the relevant to whether or not Origen is a sound source? "
________________________________

I'll try and find out the year the Fifth Ecumenical Council occurred. It's interesting because so much seems to have developed after the fact. During his life Origen ran Christian schools, was noted for his faith and wrote at great length. As a result, he offers a lot of insight into what the thinking was in his day (182 - 251 AD).
335 posted on 12/06/2006 8:04:32 AM PST by wmfights (Romans 8:37-39)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
"I've forgotten the exact year."
_____________________________

I found it (Wikepedia) the Fifth Ecumenical Council was from May 5th to June 2nd 553 AD. It was 300 years after the death of Origen. I'll have to read up on "Origenism".
336 posted on 12/06/2006 8:14:34 AM PST by wmfights (Romans 8:37-39)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: bornacatholic
The phrase Christian Doctrine about Mary sounds a little bit like an oxymoron. Christian doctrine deals with properly knowing, loving, and serving the true God, the Blessed Trinity. Christian doctrine does not, as far as I know, deal with adding new deities to the pantheon by elevating one human being in status to the point where she is a de facto fourth person in the Trinity. A goddess who serves as a counterweight to the Second Person of the godhead.
337 posted on 12/06/2006 8:15:01 AM PST by TomSmedley (Calvinist, optimist, home schooling dad, exuberant husband, technical writer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: TomSmedley
The phrase Christian Doctrine about Mary sounds a little bit like an oxymoron. Christian doctrine deals with properly knowing, loving, and serving the true God, the Blessed Trinity.

Do you affirm the Nicene Creed or not?

-A8

338 posted on 12/06/2006 8:22:32 AM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8; Nihil Obstat; Campion

"Therefore, Mary's undergoing the rite of purification does not show that Mary was impure or unclean."

That would be true if she did not not deliver a male child in birth. Her having conceived seed, and born a man child, by the Law, rendered her impure and unclean. Jesus was sinless. His baptism was in obedience to the Law in that He identified Himself with sinners so as to become the "sin bearer" and as evidence to John that Messiah had come.

John 1:29, "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God."

The pain and sorrow of childbirth was the judgment for sin.

"Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children..."


339 posted on 12/06/2006 8:25:42 AM PST by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan; Campion; Nihil Obstat
That would be true if she did not not deliver a male child in birth.

No, the argument that I gave in 329 is sound (i.e. the premises are true, and the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises), whether or not Mary gave birth to a male child.

-A8

340 posted on 12/06/2006 8:27:59 AM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 16,241-16,256 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson