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/
"We worship our God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost; but the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal."
"We worship our God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost; but the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal."
Amen, and thanks for the ping. I actually would go so far as to say this is related to election. My understanding of Roman Catholicism is that men make the final free will decision on accepting Christ [who], whereas Calvinists believe that God has already made the final decision on His elect [Who].
Well said... God bless "US" if the same could be said about "US".. all of us not just you and myself.. and Boopie of course.. ;)~
They are the writings of men inspired by the Holy Spirit. The purpose of the writings was that God wanted to reveal something of Himself to human beings. The whole of God is incomprehensible to our meager minds; but He certainly has given us enough to keep our minds busy and to help them grow.
This I have never understood about the Apostolic faith. To continue the analogy, God as physician simply advises His patients how to eat right, live a healthy lifestyle, etc. But, when He sees evidence that a patient is not following His advice, even in matters of life and death, He just chalks it up to that person's free will. That is the extent of the power He chooses to exert in the matter.
I see this is being directly opposed to the analogy we are given over and over again in the Bible, that of parent-child. While my children live under my roof and I "own" them, in matters of life and death I have absolutely zero love and respect for their free wills. They don't know enough to do what is in their own best interests many times, so I step in to "save" them from themselves. I think this is much closer to how it works with God. Even as mature adults, the human will blow it. God must step in and save those He chooses as His children from themselves.
Theosis is not 'awarded', but attained, not though our efforts or merits, but through our cooperation with God's freely given grace.
My first use of the "awarded" idea was in response to something Kosta said. I was, in effect, asking if he was describing theosis as an award vs. being an attainment. As of your post, he has answered that it is an award, but it is possible that I misinterpreted. It is also possible there has been further discussion which I haven't caught up to yet, so ...
BTW, how does one cooperate without effort or merit?
"They are the writings of men inspired by the Holy Spirit. The purpose of the writings was that God wanted to reveal something of Himself to human beings. The whole of God is incomprehensible to our meager minds; but He certainly has given us enough to keep our minds busy and to help them grow."
Absolutely. But ponder on this, maybe everything we need to know to attain theosis is there and maybe those who have attained theosis "knew" everything that we need to know, but don't.
"God states the facts, he doesn't ask permission. He says, factually, Look I'm standing here and knocking. If you hear me and open the door to me, I will commune with you. If I said to you, If you post to me, I will post to you as well. I'm not asking permission to post to you. I'm stating what will happen in the order of events. Again, God doesn't ask permission. He states what will occur."
Do you think your comment above squares with this?:
"The Holy Spirit comes when we are receptive. He does not compel. He approaches so meekly that we may not even notice. If we would know the Holy Spirit we need to examine ourselves in the light of the Gospel teaching, to detect any other presence which may prevent the Holy Spirit from entering into our souls. We must not wait for God to force Himself on us without our consent. God respects and does not constrain man. It is amazing how God humbles Himself before us. He loves us with a tender love, not haughtily, not with condescension. And when we open our hearts to Him we are overwhelmed by the conviction that He is indeed our Father. The soul then worships in love."
No I don't.
Incidentally, I don't think that the quote is Scriptural either.
Paul was not receptive to the Holy Spirit when He came. Paul got receptive really quickly though!
If the Holy Spirit waited on our receptivity then none of us would ever be saved. "There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God."
We only become receptive after the Holy Spirit has made us alive to His truth. We do not seek God, He comes after us. He does not force as if it were against our will. Rather, He changes our will and desire so that we come because we want to come. His call is effectual.
...
It was then that I realized that becoming Catholic meant trusting that the Holy Spirit would guide the Church. It doesn't mean intentionally turning away from the Spirit and intentionally putting the Pope up in His stead. From without, that may be what it looks like. But from within it's not gee, door 1: Holy Ghost; door 2: Spirit of God.
Perhaps I was using too much short hand. :) I didn't mean to imply that I think the Holy Spirit doesn't guide the Pope. He certainly does because he is a Christian. My beef is with any idea that the Pope is the only one on the planet who gets super-duper grace, to the point of divine perfection (ex Cathedra). From without, that not only makes him appear to be a "king", but a king with a unique pipeline to God. From without, this would appear to put him on an equal footing with the Apostles and the prophets. It is a difficult concept for us to accept. :)
Amen. Exactly right, Blogger.
This was originally in response to my saying that we did not want or need a Pope. I'm still not certain of the connection. Does this mean that only the Pope may declare anything with confidence? Do you want us to preface every statement with "I think" or "I suppose" in order to be consistent with our claim of not being our own popes? :) That wouldn't make sense to me. Our authority is scripture, yours is that plus more. We both use our respective authorities to declare our views.
This I have never understood about the Apostolic faith...
Our Lord Jesus Christ makes that analogy, FK (cf. Mat 9:30-31)
A physician can heal, but his patients must cooperate.
He just chalks it up to that person's free will
No, He patiently offers again and again.
While my children live under my roof and I "own" them, in matters of life and death I have absolutely zero love and respect for their free wills
But they still have free will and, short of making them robots, that free will can produce catastrophic results no matter how much you 'own' them. They choose to obey you.
My first use of the "awarded" idea was in response to something Kosta said
Attainment first, award later.
As of your post, he has answered that it is an award, but it is possible that I misinterpreted. It is also possible there has been further discussion which I haven't caught up to yet, so ...
You that right, FK! :)
And you are correct, of course. These people cannot understand the most straightforward lessons in Scripture. There just comes that point when one realizes the time has come to shake the dust off one's sandals.
OK, I am much less familiar with the structure of an Orthodox prayer to a Saint. This sounds very different from the RC prayers I have been shown.
Bye.
"No I don't."
It is a different view from yours, isn't it. It is from the writings of a very, very holy Orthodox monastic, Archimandrite Sophrony of blessed memory, a Russian who spent the majority of his life on Mount Athos, seven of those years as a solitary, and in a monastery outside London of all places. His entire life was spent in prayer and study of the scriptures. He died in 1993.
Isn't it interesting that the indwelling of the HS lead this man to a vision of God so different from that which we hear about in the West?
"OK, I am much less familiar with the structure of an Orthodox prayer to a Saint."
I think as a general proposition on a personal basis it may be rather less formulaic while on a liturgical basis more formal. As an example of how we pray for help to a saint, here's a prayer from the vespers for today's feast, which has to do with the relics of my patron saint +John Chrysostomos:
Apolytikion in the Plagal of the Fourth Tone
The grace of your words illuminated the universe like a shining beacon. It amassed treasures of munificence in the world. It demonstrated the greatness of humility, teaching us by your own words; therefore, O Father John Chrysostom, intercede to Christ the Logos for the salvation of our souls.
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.