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/
Also it is apparent that Paul and James are in at least as much authority based on the meeting in Jerusalem.
Amen. And to a certain degree, the Incarnation itself is a God-mandated anthropomorphism. God not only took on the characteristics of humans; He BECAME human for the very reason of experiencing our humanity so as to witness to exactly what He was saving us from -- the immense burden of our sins.
Why else would God do this to His Only Beloved Son if not that our sins are a most severe offense against His Holiness, righteousness and justice? Why does God's love manifest itself in a blood sacrifice, in this brutal manner, if not that it is 'required' by God's justice?
Amen. Our own judicial system didn't just rise up from the foam of happenstance. It's based on the Biblical injunctions of responsibility and redress, acquittal and condemnation, of judgment.
The glory of our salvation is that the responsibility is all ours and the redress is all His. We are acquitted by His standing in our place, taking on the punishment rightly due us, so that we may stand blameless before God.
To misunderstand or ignore the penal substitution of Christ's redemption is to miss the point of the Scriptures entirely. It is the very heart of our salvation and what we give thanks for. It is the way God created His creation to be.
Yep. I was going to say John would have been a better choice than Peter. 8~)
Who can read John and not understand?
Actually, I like Nathanael/Bartholomew. They are listed but looks like they kept their heads down and didn't cause any trouble. I try real hard to emulate them...... sometimes.
I don't think so.
Last I checked (the upper range of the IQ scale):
up to 115 is "normal"
116 - 139 is "superior"
140 - 149 is "gifted"
150 - 200 is "genius"
I haven't seen the list since about 1985, so this may not be exact, but it's close.
Keep in mind, this scale is on a bell curve. So while the upper range may appear quite large numerically, the number of people who actually test in that range is quite low by comparison.
Sola Scritura does not mean there are many paths; it means there is one path and we are to diligently strive to know it.
You continue to miss the point of Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura testifies to the singular truth of God and that that truth is found in Scripture because the Holy Spirit resides there and will instruct the elect. The elect's earthly instruction can be a circuitous route, just like Paul's, but the elect should be "certain that eventually their election by God will catch up to their lives in real time," as b-d once said so well. And the elect will know their election by the indwelling Holy Spirit who guides them through the Scriptures, sanctifies them, comforts them and leads them in righteousness.
Sola Scriptura does not mean everyone understands everything in the blink of an eye. It means we are to search the Scriptures and be confident that therein we will find our salvation.
To deny that the Scriptures contain all we need to know of God is to deny the work of the Holy Spirit.
Yep. It was a time of dispersal. Christ sent the apostles out as sheep to the slaughter. But at every moment, Christ was the only head of His church.
FWIW, I would add that all doctrine, dogma, beliefs must be consistent with what is written in Scripture.
It seems pretty obvious why those on the other side don't "get it". If they did they would have to clean up their own house.
Amen!
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." -- 1 John 4:1
I don't mean to be flip with this, but like I wrote (maybe not to you) a few days ago, I have not studied St. Anselm's theology in sufficient depth in order to discuss it. Regarding the Eucharist as sacrifice, it is one and only, perfect sacrifice of Christ. We do not re-sacrifice, but we bring ourselves to that one sacrifice through the Mass. Our purpose therefore is the same as Christ's purpose, so whether God "demanded" the sacrifice as you insist (there are verses to the contrary, as you are aware), or Christ offered it as an expression of His love to us, -- as is the proper answer, -- the fact that we participate int he Eucharist is neither here or there in that.
And so far, I have not seen "Protestant falsehoods" illustrated on any essential matters.
I made several posts on this thread, most to you, regarding the two falsehoods: the notion that Bible alone is sufficient for all essentials of the faith, and that works are a mere product of faith, which alone saves. On the first falsehood, logic requires that you find a verse that teaches Sola Scriptura; such verse is not in evidence. On the second we have virtually every page of the New Testament exhorting good works, we have clear explanation that we are judged by them, and we have the explicit statement contrary to the Protestant belief of Sola Fide in St. James. If you have more spin in addition to the stuff you had offered on these, or if more books of the Bible have been redacted by the Protestants since last we spoke, be my guest.
I am aware of these, but nowhere does Christ say that the gift of the Holy Ghost will bypass His Church, and when He actually sends Him, the recipients are the apostles (John 20:22) and then, at Pentecost, the disciples in the Upper Room, who comprised the First Church. Acts 2:38 explains that the gift is received by the believer at baptism, that is, again from the Church.
Amen!
See my previous post; it equally applies to these verses you additionally cite.
The Church also teaches us to rely on the superabundant mercy of Christ; however, in this setting I try to argue the scripture and what is the position of the Church, not necessarily my own personal interpretation which sometimes occupied a more narrow area than the entire range of thought allowed by the Church.
Surely you would agree that the crime of abortion is so much greater because it deprives these children of the joy of ordinary baptism Christ prepared for them; even though His mercy extends to them in full in an extraordinary way.
The parable of the publican and a pharisee at prayer comes to mind.
The people you trust are also the ones who wrote the history books. At some point in time, you are trusting that what the priests and historians are telling you is true. That is faith.
If this is how you view the search for truth, it's an example of poor methodology. If it's how you approached your search, I'm dissappointed. If it's how you think I search, it's insulting.
A doctor exhorts us to "breath deeply," but does that mean we breath because we choose to breath or that we could hold our breath and still live?
Or is breathing a reflexive action endemic to our humanity?
If we are reprobate, even any semblance of good works will be for naught and remain "as filthy rags."
If we have been acquitted and redeemed by Christ, we will perform good works because they result from the sanctifying efforts of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
Good works are evidence of our salvation; not a requirement for it.
We can argue if baptism itself or the intention of the Church to baptize is efficacious, but my point is not that the faithful never receive the Holy Ghost, but rather that when they do, it comes from the Apostles, St. Peter is this instance, and therefore from the Church.
Again, I am not trying to tell you that you are deprived of the Holy Ghost because you are not Catohlic, -- far from it. I am telling you though that when one speaks against the Apostolic Church in the spirit of rebellion, that this is the time when the Holy Ghost is silent in him, even if some other ghosts might be speaking.
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.