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/
being born again is a work too.
Except for Vatican-purchased and approved annulments. Even a marriage that has produced legitimate children and been sanctioned in a RC church in a ceremony conducted by a RC priest can be "annulled" for spurious reasons.
"He could have" in the sense that He had the power. He also could have redeemed all sin at any point in time, without any progressive revelation to the Jews, incarnation or resurrection, or the institution of the Church, or the inspiration of the Scripture. He is sovereign God, remember?
But God did not do any of that. He chose to adopt a lengthy plan of salvation that grew His own nation of Israel under the law, and that nation produced a woman who would be the pure vessel to willingly carry the Word to the world. This woman is Mary the God Giver, the Theotokos.
What interpretation? "I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven".
What you think and what St. Augistine thinks, and what the Protestant or the Orthodox think is interpretation. some is better than others. This is plain text, the keys to the kingdom given to Peter.
In the 1571 and 1662 texts of the 39 Articles of the Church of England was article XXI:
.... . When [general councils] be gathered together (forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all not not governed with the Spirit and Word of God,) they may err, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining to God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of holy Scripture.This is an approach which seems to me to deny any reliable authority of any kind, since, as we see "proving things from Scripture" is a horse race.
I don't say this disparagingly. I just think it represents a very different approach to ecclesiology, apostolicity, and the promise of God's Spirit leading the Church.
It should not be:
brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election.(2 Peter 1:10)
4 ... the benignity of God leadeth thee to penance? 5 But according to thy hardness and impenitent heart, thou treasurest up to thyself wrath, against the day of wrath, and revelation of the just judgment of God. 6 Who will render to every man according to his works. 7 To them indeed, who according to patience in good work, seek glory and honour and incorruption, eternal life: 8 But to them that are contentious, and who obey not the truth, but give credit to iniquity, wrath and indignation
(Romans 2)
The election before the foundation of the world is foreknown by God who foreknows your works. As you are breathing and working it is not secure at all. Your faith should give you hope, not presumption. The particular judgement is necessary. It is also scriptural: "it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment" (Heb 9:27), "I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43).
The individual soul receives one judgement upon death. The universal judgement at the End Times is when the world as a whole is judged, boith living and the dead, and the elect receive their glorified bodies (Matthew 25).
both "doctrine" and "dogma".
Doctrine is any teaching at all, dogma is reserved to infallible doctrines that are essentials to the faith.
Peter is saying that as we do good works in love for Christ, that we may be sure of our salvation. Doing the good works is a confirmation, for our benefit, that we were previously called to do them, and previously elected.
You can read it that way as long as we recognize that these works will not come automatically, but must be chosen by our free will, and should we not chose them, he would be "unfruitful, blind, and groping", and his "old sins" although forgotten, will be replaced by new sins.
to say that the issue of remarriage is not a matter of tradition really did have me laughing out loud
You can laugh all you want about how annulment is practiced, but prohibition of remarriage is an issue of plain scripture and not tradition: "Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery against her." (Mark 10:11). One can, perhaps, make exception for fornication based on the similar passage in Matthew, but the principle is clear.
the other scripture telling us what Christians are supposed to do.
Works salvation! See that thunderbolt coming from heaven? Aha!
Even a marriage that has produced legitimate children and been sanctioned in a RC church in a ceremony conducted by a RC priest can be "annulled" for spurious reasons.
Marriage exists if a freely undertaken informed consent to marry exists for both sides. The ceremony, Catholic or otherwise, is merely an ourtward expression of such consent. If, for example, a marriage involved a prior bond (such as a previous marriage or holy orders), or was not open to procreation, or was not intended for life, or fidelity was not intended, then such marriage is likely invalid, no matter what ceremony.
Which, by the way, explains why the annulments are so common: because the modern culture of marriage produces marriages that are largely invalid.
For completeness, in addition to consent, there needs to be another factor for an annulment: the marriage no matter how implausibly conceived must be challenged by one or both putative spouses. An unchallenged marriage is presumed valid.
Amen, absolutely right. Quix, I'm sorry if your experience with Calvinists has been to the contrary. I have never known or heard of any true Calvinist who held the views you describe. Since that attitude is 100% against Calvinism, perhaps the people you are thinking of aren't really Calvinists at all.
I was unaware of that. Is there an easy way to say how?
I'm not quite sure where you are in this discussion. I think POTS and OSAS are the same. As I see it the fundamental difference is "will" are we drawn to saving faith or do we choose saving faith. Either way we should be jumping up and down with joy. Saving Faith means your blessed with God's free gift of GRACE!
BTW: FK; I can't believe how diligent you are in responding to all posts. Feel free to skip mine if the discussion has moved on. :-)
So? He views wrong.
Nothing in what you posted contains any informed criticism of the annulment process. Someone wrote a critical book about the Church. Dime a dosen. And yes, everyone admits that some annulments look strange.
My husband said he left the RC church while a student at a Catholic university when a priest admitted that the clergy wasn't really necessary for a man's sins to be forgiven, leaving my husband to wonder, "then what's all this stuff about?"
Thankfully, he returned to Scripture and found out what it's all about -- Christ risen.
Thanks for your reply.
The difference between the way we speak of "the Spirit" is something I've been more aware of reading this thread. I'm not sure how to express it.
One way would be the prayer to the Holy Spirit O Heavenly King:
"O Heavenly King, Comforter, Spirit of Truth, Who art everywhere present and fillest all things, Treasury of good things and Giver of life: Come and dwell in us, and cleanse us of all impurity, and save, our souls, O Good One."
So we can speak of "Spirit" in two ways: As God and as in relationship to us now. "Everywhere present", yet "come and dwell in us"..
I think when Contemplatives and Orthodox speak of "the Spirit" quite often we mean more accurately our 'conscious contact with the divine' or our current state of grace, lack thereof, or our current spiritual condition.
This can be a state of being or consciousness that we are aware of, and it may also include an almost bookkeeping accounting of our unrepented sins and the purity of our heart.
Spiritual growth then is a more, I believe, tangible or intuitively known state of being or intention. It is, in large measure the condition of our heart - which is the perceptual organ, eye, that is used to know God. And through askesis and God's grace this develops over time into more constant conscious contact with God.
This is different I believe than how I see others talk of the Holy Spirit.
Your husband can come back, with a sacramental confession, any time.
I don't know what thet priest really said. He might have been misinformed, misunderstood, or he might have referred to some unusual circumstances under Canon Law, when a sacramental confession is impossible and death is imminent.
"As I see it the fundamental difference is "will" are we drawn to saving faith or do we choose saving faith. Either way we should be jumping up and down with joy. Saving Faith means your blessed with God's free gift of GRACE!"
Perhaps it effects us in different ways at different times or according to the "step" we are on on the Ladder of Divine Ascent.
"At the start of the spiritual way, the soul usually has the conscious experience of being illumined with its own light through the action of grace. But, as it advances further in its struggle to attain theology, grace works its mysteries within the soul for the most part without its knowledge. Grace acts in these two ways so that it may first set us rejoicing on the path of contemplation, calling us from ignorance to spiritual knowledge, and so that in the midst of our struggle it may then keep this knowledge free from arrogance." +Diadochos of Photiki
2. It should be known, then, that God nurtures and caresses the soul, after it has been resolutely converted to his service, like a loving mother who warms her child with the heat of her bosom, nurses it with good milk and tender food, and carries and caresses it in her arms. But as the child grows older, the mother withholds her caresses and hides her tender love; she rubs bitter aloes on her sweet breast and sets the child down from her arms, letting it walk on its own feet so that it may put aside the habits of childhood and grow accustomed to greater and more important things. The grace of God acts just as a loving mother by re-engendering in the soul new enthusiasm and fervor in the service of God. With no effort on the soul's part, this grace causes it to taste sweet and delectable milk and to experience intense satisfaction in the performance of spiritual exercises, because God is handing the breast of his tender love to the soul, just as if it were a delicate child [1 Pt. 2:2-3].1
Here is the entire book: The Dark Night By St. John of the Cross.
I think that's the point. Forgiveness through Christ's atonement isn't confusing, oblique, uncertain, ill-defined, or circumstantial. It is black and white. Either Christ died so that you and I and all God's children would stand before God acquitted of our sins, or He didn't.
I believe He did, as Christ has assured us in Scripture.
I know your offer is sincere, but a day does not dawn that my husband does not thank God for his faith and for the assurance he and his family have received by the certain knowledge of Christ's redemption of us.
It's a gift.
"Anecdotally, I go to the Catholic Store online and click on Statues. There are 8 Jesus statues. There are 20 Mary Statues. There are 12 books on the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There are 44 on Mary/Rosary. There are 13 Catholic pictures. 7 of them have Mary in them or are all about Mary. It goes on and on. Mary IS worshipped in Catholicism. And the worship of Mary takes the focus off of her Son. Irreconcilable. Short of the Holy Spirit, I agree."
Take a look at these:
http://store.holycrossbookstore.com/
http://www.svspress.com/
You won't find any statues at all, but that's not really our thing. I'd be interested on your take on the offerings of the seminary bookstores. As a pratical matter, aside from a few other presses and monasteries, these are where our books, sacramentals etc come from.
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.