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/
So say a great deal of others who disagree with your beliefs.
Again, what now?
Then they disagree. My faith is not determined by majority vote but by the Word of God.
How do I know you're not one of those crying "Lord, Lord.." and teaching a false Christianity?
See my previous post to Blogger. The Church teaches today essentially what Aquinas taught, perhaps with some accents put differently. One has, however, to bear in mind that chastity and concupiscence are terms of art here.
Because I believe what He has said and that belief has resulted in a desire to love Him and serve Him all of my days.
OK, these do indicate that all men are generally sinners. We consider Mary and a few others an exception to the broad statements you quote.
I understand.
But why should I believe you are teaching true Christianity? Many, many others, no doubt sincerely, say "I believe what He has said and that belief has resulted in a desire to love Him and serve Him all of my days."
And yet, they teach quite a different view.
You shouldnt' believe me blindly.
Search the Scriptures, for in them you will find eternal life. Compare what I say with Scripture, if I lie from a Scriptural standpoint feel free to reject what I say.
I do not stand on my opinion alone though. I try to back up everything I say with Scripture. There are those who disagree with me, sometimes genuinely and sometimes because they just haven't searched them themselves. But, though I was raised in the faith, I did not take everything I was taught for granted but searched Scripture myself to see if there was a basis for my belief. I am not rigid in my interpretations. If I can see how someone could have a different interpretation, I allow room for it (within the context of Scripture, of course). That's why I say that Scripture STRONGLY IMPLIES that Mary and Joseph had a normal relationship as husband and wife rather than stomp my foot and say my view is the only view. I've been told that I have NO Scriptural support for the belief that Mary and Joseph had any sort of normal husband-wife relationship. Such a view is not honest with the evidence I present and I dont' respect it. I would respect someone saying "that is one possible interpretation, but this is how I see it." I could still disagree, but have respect for the person and their opinion because they looked at the issue seriously and were not just blind parrots of their church's teachings.
I have a great deal, with the Holy Spirit even. And I disagree fundamentally with what your conclusions.
For now, I'm trying to focus in the general sense on pure practicality of how True Christ and True Christianity is to be known among all the competing Sola Scripturists.
How does Sola Scriptura work? It's not working in our case, or in the cases cited above.
How can you say it works? I honestly don't get how.
It means that all men specifically are sinners.
You have no scriptural or apostolic authority to back up your claim that Mary never sinned. Thus she must be included in the "all" in Romans 3:23 and Romans 5:12. She must also be included in the "none" in Mark 10:18 and if she herself claimed to have no sin, then she would have to be numbered among the deceived in 1 John 1:8.
She called Jesus her savior. If she were without sin, then she would be without a need for a savior.
Unless you can come up with some scriptural references to Mary's perfection, we really don't have anything further to discuss on this issue.
Many can and do blindly parrot Calvin or Benny Hinn or any of dozens of Church teachings. No difference here, blind parrots come in many colors.
You have no scriptural or apostolic authority to back up your claim that Mary never sinned. Thus she must be included in the "all" in Romans 3:23 and Romans 5:12. She must also be included in the "none" in Mark 10:18 and if she herself claimed to have no sin, then she would have to be numbered among the deceived in 1 John 1:8.
She called Jesus her savior. If she were without sin, then she would be without a need for a savior.
Yep.
Both. I think you missed the quote from St. Augustine at the end.
The doctrine of Justification is what separates Protestants from the churches at Rome and their Orthodox cousins
Thank God! I wish the Protestants would realize their grave error and return to the Church. The Protestant teaching that Christ's perfect righteousness is imputed in some completely escaped even the earliest Christian theologians.
Yet, despite numerous heresies that popped up in the first 1,500 years of Christianity, none was even close to Protestant "imputation" theology.
I suppose, the Protestants would quip that none of the Fathers knew the Bible as well as Luther or Calvin, or that God simply decided to wait 1,500 tears to create His 'real' church. LOL!
The basis for righteousness is in repentance that comes from the heart. The Lord's Prayer makes it clear that we cannot expect forgiveness unless we have forgiven those who are indebted to us.
There is nothing "imputed" in the Lord's Prayer. It tells us what we must do in order to ask for forgiveness. To those who sincerely repent, to those who fit the Beatitudes the rewards are rich in the heavens. Are you poor in spirit? Are you merciful? Are you pure in heart?
God erases our disobedience and makes us righteous; our imperfect obedience to the Commandments is made perfect with God's mercy. To the Orthodox, justification is no different than sanctification. The more just we are, the more sanctified we are, and vice versa.
But we don't know that we are made perfect until the end. That's why the Beatitudes are in the future tense, in case you didn't notice.
You need to lift the veil over your eyes and see the message clearly in its proper context – and tense.
I have already said.
John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
When Christ spoke, when the Apostles spoke, they pointed not to tradition but to Scripture.
Consider the following
Daniel 9:2
in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from the Scriptures,...
Matthew 21:42
Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures:
Matthew 22:29
Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
Mark 12:10
Haven't you read this scripture:
Luke 4:21
and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."
Luke 24:27
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
Luke 24:32
They asked each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"
Luke 24:45
Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.
John 2:22
After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.
John 5:39
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,
John 7:38
Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him."
John 19:37
and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced."
John 20:9
(They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)
Acts 1:16
and said, "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus—
Acts 17:2
As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,
Acts 17:11
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
Acts 18:28
For he vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.
Romans 4:3
What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."
Romans 10:11
As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
Romans 11:2
God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don't you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel:
Romans 15:4
For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.
1 Corinthians 15:3
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance : that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, (Incidentally, this is the first creed)
Galatians 3:8
The Scripture foresaw
Galatians 3:22
But the Scripture declares
Galatians 4:30
But what does the Scripture say?
1 Timothy 4:13
Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching.
2 Timothy 3:15
and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
James 2:23
And the scripture was fulfilled
James 4:6
But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says: "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble."
1 Peter 2:6
For in Scripture it says:
2 Peter 1:20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
2 Peter 3:16
He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Here is what Scripture says about Tradition"
Micah 6:16
You have observed the statutes of Omri and all the practices of Ahab's house, and you have followed their traditions. Therefore I will give you over to ruin and your people to derision; you will bear the scorn of the nations. "
Mark 7:4
When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles. )
Mark 7:8
You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."
Mark 7:9
And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!
Galatians 1:14
I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers.
Yes. I know. And we get something quite different from reading scripture.
Now what?
I guess you would not include the Apostle Paul in your list of early Christian Theologians, huh?
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. (Romans 4:5-7 KJV)
Agreed. And everyone is accountable for their own beliefs - even more so when you have the Word of God so freely available. I don't agree with everything that John Calvin, Martin Luther, or even my own church teaches. Yes there are differences. But on the essentials, most Protestants are unified. Salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone. The trinity. The virgin birth. These kind of basics which are found in Scripture. We may disagree on tongues, or mode of baptism, or even on the efficacy of Communion (which I know you would consider an essential - but we are discussing Protestant unity), but on essentials that make the difference between "saved" and "not saved." We are unified. It doesn't matter to your salvation if you believe you were elected or not. That is a secondary issue. It does matter what you believe about Christ and Him crucified.
She was filled with grace. That's the same as saying she was made sinless. The Orthodox hold that this happened at the Annunciation. The Catholics hold that it happened at her conception by her parents. Either way, she was made sinless the same way as we are made sinless through God's grace.
Our disobedience is made into obedience. Or as +Augustine puts it "[A]ll the commandments are considered fulfilled when whatever is not fulfilled is forgiven." [The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 60, Retractions, p.81]. We believe that once she was filled with grace she chose not to sin.
We are all made sinless by grace. That does not mean she didn't sin, it merely means that God has declared her righteous by her faith. The same as he declared Abraham righteous by faith.
Tell me kosta, are filled with grace? Are your sins forgiven? Are you righteous in God's eyes?
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.