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/
Actually the standard has been set forth that no protestants manage to actually follow Holy scripture.
Whether it be as simple and strait forward as allowing women preachers, and urging women to cover their heads while praying, or major deviations from scripture such as blessing homosexual marriages, or homosexual clergy; Protestants claims of sola-scriptura are a canard, and don't stack up simply because no protestants actually practice what Holy Scripture teaches.
Further it is a result of protestant dislike for what Holy Scripture mandates and the fact that anti-Christian forces urge them to splinter the faith, and revel in their perverting of it, that protestant churches spliting into more and more groups which are more and more at odds with Scipture.
Luk 12:33 "Sell your possessions and give to charity; make yourselves money belts which do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near nor moth destroys.
Let me know when you follow the Holy Scripture and what our Lord's command.
Interesting side point. There are those in RC and EO who follow this. It is in fact a fairly large group.
Is there a corollary in Protestantism?
Are you suggesting that we don't give to charity in my church?
Also:
Luk 12:32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.
Luk 12:33 Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth.
Luk 12:34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Protestants claims of sola-scriptura are a canard, and don't stack up simply because no protestants actually practice what Holy Scripture teaches.
= = =
God's opinion is clearly exceedingly different . . . as witnessed by
HOLY SPIRIT'S CONFIRMATION around the world through miracles and signs following JUST AS SCRIPTURE SAYS.
Collectively the Protestants are not, I agree. But arrogating a right of individual interpretation of the scripture is beyond even the papal prerogative.
Further it is a result of protestant dislike for what Holy Scripture mandates and the fact that anti-Christian forces urge them to splinter the faith, and revel in their perverting of it, that protestant churches spliting into more and more groups which are more and more at odds with Scipture.
= = =
OH?
Oh, perhaps similar to the
multiplicity of schisms which have blown through the various factions in the Roman edifice century after calcified century.
Do you believe all Scripture is inspired "directly" by God?
INDEED.
Though I wonder if per capita, they are ahead of most Protestant groups on that score given the various orders which have poverty as their requirement . . . though the picture is muddy for several reasons.
Are you suggesting that we don't give to charity in my church?
I've tended to find that remembering one's own pontifications from post to post helpful in the dialogue.
The contentious contention was . . . that Protestants don't follow Scripture because some arbitrarily siezed upon debatable cultural features of a minor Pauline note resulted in differing opinons.
So, given some difference on that issue between RC vs Protestants, it was a convenient minor detail to seize on and pontificate about with great . . . loftiness . . .
Whereupon a dear Protestant bro returned the volley with a somewhat arbitrarily chosen Scriptural command--this time from Christ Himself--calculated, probably to be one which most RC's would not have done . . . therefore illustrating that RC's are not the least bit more likely to obey 100% of all Scriptural commands than most Protestants--regardless of the cultural or other debatable aspects of each command.
Silly arguments kind of result in silly replies a lot of the time.
So, is that match, set and serve, or what? I haven't played tennis in decades.
Please remember our agreement.
But arrogating a right of individual interpretation of the scripture is beyond even the papal prerogative.
= == = ==
Clearly a denial of the historical record is included in the above perspective.
I didn't realize that RC folks were that . . . absent awareness of their own edifice's thick history. Amazing.
Popes have thought and taught and demanded all manner of idiotic things over the centuries . . . no surprise given their humanness . . . Goodness, they've even lopped of lots of heads because all and sundry didn't agree with them on all their little idiocies.
Perhaps I should frequent the threads and dialogues more.
But I have engaged intensely in such many times in my life. And they were of value to do so.
I don't know that anything mentioned has resulted in anything near what I desire regarding loving God more; trusting God more;
It seems to me, it is clearly something His Spirit has to work in me since I've done all I know to consciously and behaviorally do many times over as well as I know how . . . including asking him for such gifts etc. in quadruplicate many thousands of times over.
Mercifully, He does declare that those who hunger and thirst after such shall be filled.
At 60, I'm wondering when that's scheduled.
AMEN!
"“Two years ago, John Knox in a private conversation, asked my opinion respecting female government. I frankly answered that because it was a deviation from the primitive and established order of nature, it ought to be held as a judgment on man for his dereliction of his rights just like slavery — that nevertheless certain women had sometimes been so gifted that the singular blessing of God was conspicuous in them, and made it manifest that they had been raised up by the providence of God, either because he willed by such examples to condemn the supineness of men, or thus show more distinctly his own glory. I here instanced Huldah and Deborah.” (John Calvin in a letter to William Cecil, 1559)"
You and I had no agreement. Perhaps you were dreaming...
That hardly supports anything about protestant doctrine. Heck most protestant 'miracles' are in the form of some rich evangelist tossing some guy off stage and proclaiming he's healed.
In fact the rate at which protestant churches split up shows a definitly lack of being supported by the Holy Spirit in terms of doctrine.
He responded with a straw man, our church does follow the cited scripture.
We also follow all of 1st Corinthians, even when you protestants are busy making up excuses to be fashionable.
Read Hebrews.
Heck most protestant 'miracles' are in the form of some rich evangelist tossing some guy off stage and proclaiming he's healed.
= = =
Depends on one's sample, I suppose. I'm not talking about TV minister examples.
I'm talking about millions of Chinese in village after village; Brazilians; . . . countless others in South and Central America and all around the world. A study of such would be inspiring in affirming God's blessing on such folks mercifully freed from the doctrines and traditions of men constricting folks from the RC edifice.
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.