'The Nativity Story' Movie Problematic for Catholics, "Unsuitable" for Young Children

LifeSiteNews.com ^ | 12/4/2006 | John-Henry Westen

[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/

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I would phrase it differently. I think you can find saved Christians who have been born again in almost every sect of Christianity. However, any sect that believes you need to do works in order to be saved is wrong.

Amen. Jesus came to gather the sheep from all parts and paths. But His way is clear and true and singular. God is not the author of confusion. Eventually, all the sheep will follow Him and be brought safely home, by the grace of God alone.

[Forest Keeper]

Are you now saying that the printing press made the understanding of the Councils more difficult?

The printing press obviously led to more people knowing what exactly was in the Bible. So, to any extent the Councils were inconsistent with what was in the Bible, a greater number of people had difficulty. The historical "trust us" of the Church began to weaken.

But what I was really getting at is word and phrase usage over time. Apparently, there was a time in the Church when "Mother of Christ" only referred to Nestorianism and heresy. Given the normal use of those words today, that conclusion is counter intuitive. It wouldn't occur to anyone outside the Apostolic Church to take offense at that title today, as no one would use it in the Nestorian sense. At least I think that's safe to say in America.

FK: "... the distribution of the Bible has far surpassed the Apostolic Church's ability to personally explain it."

One evident result was growth in Protestant denominations. As you yourself admit, there has been no corresponding growth in understanding.

Actually, I would say there has been a huge growth in understanding. I don't think it's any accident that the Reformation happened soon after the advent of the printing press. Whenever the Bible is allowed to speak for itself, there is greater understanding. I thank God for the gift of the invention.

[D-fendr]

Whenever the Bible is allowed to speak for itself, there is greater understanding.

You got audio books? :)

If this book only method causes "greater understanding" why didn't our Lord send forth scribes instead of teachers?

[wmfights]

Eventually, all the sheep will follow Him and be brought safely home, by the grace of God alone.

My wife is reading the Bible now looking at predestination and irresistible grace. She keeps jumping up to tell me she never realized how much is written. My 13 year old son recently asked me how do I know I became a Christian because I wanted to, or because you wanted me to? I see God working his miracles in both of them.

It is God

It is Christ

It is Faith

It is Grace

It is Scripture

[Kolokotronis]

"The printing press obviously led to more people knowing what exactly was in the Bible. So, to any extent the Councils were inconsistent with what was in the Bible, a greater number of people had difficulty. The historical "trust us" of the Church began to weaken."

and

"I don't think it's any accident that the Reformation happened soon after the advent of the printing press. Whenever the Bible is allowed to speak for itself, there is greater understanding. I thank God for the gift of the invention."

Maybe in the West, but in the East even common people could read and collections of scripture were widely available in public libraries, churches, even private homes and, believe it or not, the caves of monastic ascetics. In your COE course you've been reading many of the sermons of the Fathers. You will note how they harp on having their listeners read the scriptures ( I suspect in great measure because people didn't generally.). They weren't asking them to do something which was impossible because there were now scriptures available or the people couldn't read. I know it was different in the West, but you also know that there was nothing even approaching the Reformation in the East. Apparently reading the scriptures there didn't have the effect on the laity and lower clergy that it did in the West. Perhaps that's because in the East the practices of The Church, Holy Tradition and the scriptures are seen as a seamless garment.

[klossg]

However, any sect that believes you need to do works in order to be saved is wrong.

Which sect says works above Christ's grace or faith? It is not Catholicism because we know that without Christ's death and resurrection we cannot be saved. Pelagians, thought their own works could save them. Pelagians were condemned by the early Catholic Church.

It might help if you listed the works the people in the sect need to do in order to be saved. I think there might be a misunderstanding that can be unraveled.

[wmfights]

It might help if you listed the works the people in the sect need to do in order to be saved. I think there might be a misunderstanding that can be unraveled.

Not likely. :-0

Are you exclusively justified by Faith, or is there something else you need to do? If not what was the Reformation about?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

My wife is reading the Bible now looking at predestination and irresistible grace. She keeps jumping up to tell me she never realized how much is written.

Amen! Isn't it just a splendid awareness?

My 13 year old son recently asked me how do I know I became a Christian because I wanted to, or because you wanted me to?

I remember arguing with my father when I was in college and I snarled that I had become an agnostic (having just learned the word and was very impressed with myself for understanding it.)

I expected an argument (for my dad loved nothing better than a loud and raucous debate.) But instead he just smiled and said, "One day you'll need your faith, and it will be there for you."

I sputtered some gibberish, deflated by his arrogant calm. How dare he not fight back on this egregious error of his.

And then, of course, I grew up and gradually realized the faith God had blessed me with was there all along, waiting for my life to catch up to it.

And now when my son says to me, "prove it," I just smile and give him my father's answer.

It drives him nuts. But he's been reading the Bible again lately, so I think he's going to catch on much faster than I did. 8~)

[klossg]

Are you exclusively justified by Faith

I am not sola anything, except maybe Christ. :) Nor is any Catholic. But I know from the Bible and my Catholic Catechism that Faith is a huge part of being saved. I know that I need faith to be saved and cannot be saved without it. As I am sure you will agree to as well. Faith is just not exclusive in redemption. Unless you are talking about being converted on one's death bed. Then the only thing one needs is Baptism and faith in Christ as his Saviour to be saved. Most of us though are not reborn / accept our Lord on their death bed.

Do you bother with the Bible or is faith enough for you? ;) How about Baptism? Were you Baptized? 8)

By the way, just so we are on the same page. Baptism isn't a work that I do. Baptism is a gift from God. Baptism is a grace.

[D-fendr]

How would you define "works" and differentiate it from what is not?

[Forest Keeper]

A "normal" reaction? The simple fact is that every last Orthodox person on earth, every last Roman Catholic person on earth, every last Oriental Orthodox, likely every Lutheran and Anglican, on earth knows exactly what "Mother of God" means when applied to +Mary. That's, oh, 1,600,000,000+/- people, FK.

That's all fine. I've never said anything against how the term is used among adherents to it in your respective churches. My perspective has always only been in terms of how it sounds to those outside your churches.

The misunderstanding, if indeed there is such, arises exclusively from the abysmal, simplistic "common sense" teaching which, it seems, goes on in sola scriptura assemblies.

Blast that common sense! :)

[HarleyD]

I would phrase it differently. I think you can find saved Christians who have been born again in almost every sect of Christianity. However, any sect that believes you need to do works in order to be saved is wrong.

I would agree with you to a point. I feel doctrine does matter. I have never placed such an emphasis on it as I have in the last three years. However, I feel there is so much error out there that it does become important to emphasize right teaching.

I suppose you could take just about any heretical group in the past and ask yourself if there were saved Christians in those groups? The answer may be "Yes, but not many."

[Forest Keeper]

I started praying the Rosary off and on, in 1967.

Since I'm 40, back in 1967 I'd say that my prayer life was still guided by formula. :)

[spunkets]

"other's spiritual leanings and musings concerning the revelation that the heavens will be rolled back like a scroll."

I think the sky rolling up like a scroll contained in Rev 6:9-15 refers to a man made event. It's not so much the sky rolling up, but retreating at the advance of the debris kicked up by war. It's the debris that blotted out the sun and caused the moon to appear red. Matt 25, Daniel 9, 11, and 12 give the clues, along with the full context of the opening of the 2 seals. The last to be saved was born, as per opening of the 5th seal. The desolation is the abscence of of those who would be God's people, and was caused by man. The 6th seal containing the rolling up of the sky in retreat of the destruction, is the end.

"Light, no time passing, but time passing for other observers"

The electromagnetic field still exists in time. Any photon flying through the vacuum still interacts with the virtual photons, and other particles in the vacuum. As it flies along, it interacts with all possible particles contained as pairs within the vacuum. In classical EM, it is considered polarization of the vacuum and results in the permittivity and permeability of free space. Field theory just elaborates on the details. The interactions are the clock which ticks, and cause the speed of light to be limited.

The photons, particles of light, are movement of energy through the vacuum. The field is the polarization of the vacuum. If it's simply a static field, the photons pop in and out of existance and dance in the sea of virtual particles. If the field is not constant, they move in some net direction at the speed of light, dancing as they move along the way in the sea of particles.

The speed of light shouldn't be taken as a boundary. It is just the result of interaction. The boundary is a limitation that limits life in this world to this world. Life here must rest on the dust, which is the underlying physics, that supports the function of sentient, rational beings.

[FormerLib]

I requested not to be pinged to this thread again. Please honor that request.

[Kolokotronis]

"However, I feel there is so much error out there that it does become important to emphasize right teaching."

Soooooooooo...some of that study of Orthodoxy paid off after all, eh! :)

[Quix]

I would phrase it differently. I think you can find saved Christians who have been born again in almost every sect of Christianity. However, any sect that believes you need to do works in order to be saved is wrong.
= = = =

Well put.

[Kolokotronis]

"That's all fine. I've never said anything against how the term is used among adherents to it in your respective churches. My perspective has always only been in terms of how it sounds to those outside your churches."

Ah, pay no attention to old Greeks when they are in pissy moods! :)

Thereafter, as you may remember, I mentioned that Marian veneration really isn't for people outside The Church. Funny thing that. One of our dearest friends at the parish is a woman who came into Orthodoxy several years ago with her husband from the Episcopal Church. She had been brought up sort of a generic Protestant and at about 40 they joined the Episcopalians. After a few years they say the apostasy of TEC and started coming to our study classes (COE). They were catechumens for over a year, mostly because she had such a problem with Marian veneration. Well, she decided to put that aside and "take the plunge" and get baptized and chrismated on Lazarus Saturday in Great Lent. She spent the next week, Great Week, in church for all the devotions. During the chanting of the Lamentation on Good Friday, she suddenly understood and since then has had, over many years, a profound devotion to the Theotokos.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: "The nature of the Canon was that it was divinely inspired in its main assembly."

Huh? With or without the Deuterocanon? "All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable..."

Without, naturally. "Your guys" had their chance, but didn't formalize the second canon until more than a thousand years later. Too late. The Holy Spirit doesn't need any mulligans. :)

[Blogger]

Mine also :) We're around the same age.