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/
There ARE protestant churches that do NOT feel this way. Quit painting us with such a big, broad brush.
Oh please. There are a host of websites dedicated to these things. There is no rejection. They simply ignore the problem.
You all should hear Scott Carroll some time. He's a teacher in Boston, I think, and he has and continues to study all the ancient manuscripts. He believes they are pretty true to what we have now. Sometimes we misinterpret the original words, though. He's been to our church several times and he's amazing to listen to. He pokes holes in our doctrine and theology with his knowledge of what the Bible says.
I can tell you ONE reason why protestant churches have women preachers. Because the MEN aren't stepping up to the plate!
In your excellent studies of words, what have you found on apostello and apostolos?
I ask because I think it is in the concepts around those words that we on the RC/EO sides find a tertium quid between usurping God's authority and saying the Church has no authority.
I will look for his works.
Wonderful responses, AG. Just wonderful. We ARE only pilgrims here on this earth. Our home is with God and most of us long in our spirits to be there, but we have a purpose in lingering here.
I know I have changed over the years because of the indwelling Holy Spirit. I see things differently, I view people and circumstances in a new light. I am less judgemental and critical of people I love and am letting the Holy Spirit work whatever He needs to work in them instead of offering my own views (unless God prompts me). I was a very angry person throughout much of my life and God has tempered that (oh, I still get ticked off now and then, but it's nothing like it used to be). I know God's restoring power. Amen!
They may not today but they may tommorow. All the original protestant churches now have at a minimum schismatic branches which do this. Many have only a handful of schismatics who do not do this. Protestantism is rebellion against God's will.
I can't remember which school he's in in Boston, but he does teach there. He's very good.
Harley: Despite what folks say about them, they don't have a secret police and a SWAT team on-call. And I know over some groups whose necks I would cheerfully wring, they display decades of forbearance and patience before lowering the boom.
Yeah, they may not move as quickly as I'd like, but sometimes it's easier to rip up the tares if you let them grow a little (worst approach) or patient discussion and imploring may save a few before the rest have to be given the boot.
If you view the behavior with the supposition that it is uncaring, it'll look uncaring. But I think the data, viewed without supposition can be explained as much by patience and forbearance as by insouciance.
I haven't checked the original post in eons.
REACTIVE ATTACHMENT DISORDER is only partially in jest.
It's been a challenge to overcome such things most of my life and still not completed.
And, the evidence of such amongst a number os posters hereon is considerable. All of us with such a background have an intense compulsion to invest in all kinds of things--to invest our emotions, passions, chips on our shoulders, contrariness, contentiousness, constructions on reality, brittleness, pickiness, prissyness, fierceness, . . . the list goes on--to invest such things and in such things out of our never adequately Daddy filled love buckets from the first 8 years of our lives.
We become addicted to work, ideas, organizations, churches, religions, habits, anything but God because Daddy never cemented foundational security and peace and love in our bone marrows in a Godly way those first 8 years.
And there's literally hell to pay for decades thereafter EVEN AFTER WE REALIZE THE PROBLEM AND EVEN WITH TONS OF PROFESSIONAL HELP, PRAYER AND COUNSEL.
Unless, of course, Holy Spirit does it all in an instant--but I've rarely seen that.
Sorry, kosta,
I don't have time to reply much. But it sounds like Alice's rabbit hole has slapped us upside the face again.
I hope such was hyperbole or a word processing malfunction or a finger malfunction or something. Those sentences are incredibly implausible to outrageously off the wall in their logic and construction, to me.
As I'm catching up, initially I couldn't believe what I was reading about Scripture being made up doctrines to save Christianity. However, It makes sense if you want to place your faith in men. The only thing standing between the tyranny of despotic men acting "in the name of GOD" are the SCRIPTURES. The SCRIPTURES contain the truth that refutes tyrants.
= = =
INDEED, INDEED, INDEED! AMEN.
God sure seems to use your fingers and mind so incredibly well at this. I was going to say so much better than mine but I'm not a good judge of that and that's not the point.
So I'll just note His wonderful way with yours.
Thanks tons.
Protestantism is rebellion against God's will.
= = = =
Wrong.
Absolutely wrong.
Where remotely right--on average--a lot LESS so than Romanism is rebellion against God's will.
Were the assertion accurate, God would not have blessed Protestantism as He has.
Holy Spirit would not be routinely doing miracles through a myriad Protestant servants of the Most High God as in China and a host of other areas--including, amazingly, still in the US of A.
With all due respect, this is all gooblygook nonsense. You first complain about people not following scripture and then turn right around and say the Church is allowed to change things. If you want to say Protestants don't follow scripture after preaching "sola scriptura", well guess what, very few Orthodox or Catholics do either, even the parts they haven't changed. We all fall short.
While, regretably Protestants try to explain away things, Catholic and Orthodox simply say that parts of the scriptures are obsolete. I don't see much difference. This is evidence of our sinful nature, another thing Orthodoxy tends to explain away.
It still boggles my mind . . .
HOW ON EARTH IN ANYTHING REMOTELY CLOSE TO LOGIC . . .
IS IT CONCEIVABLE
THAT an edifice piled high with fossilized traditions of men
would be a MORE Godly sanctioner of God, Godly Righteousness and spiritual life
THAN HOLY SPIRIT HIMSELF????
Y'all, on the Romanist side of things, have utterly wholesale failed to remotely come close to answering that resounding issue/question.
Oh, sure they are. Just because we aren't EO doesn't mean we're rebels. Cheez.
Well, how 'bout because that's not how we look at it at all>
Of course we would dispute the TOM allegation. And then we would dispute that we ever claimed to be holier than the Holy Spirit.
And always we would say that we are earthen vessels, and that's on a good day, and anything good that comes from us, through us, or whatever the preposition du jour is us does so because of God's grace and faithfulness to His promise, and most certainly not because of any merit of our own.
And always we would say that we are earthen vessels, and that's on a good day, and anything good that comes from us, through us, or whatever the preposition du jour is us does so because of God's grace and faithfulness to His promise, and most certainly not because of any merit of our own.
= = =
On that we'd likely be in very close unity.
Thanks thanks.
Yes, I understood the rest would be the likely perspective! LOL. Perhaps it can be seen why we might have ours, however.
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.