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/
Thanks. I indexed that on my profile.
Yup, I'd say we think pretty much alike. I think I would take Matthew and John, along with Psalms and Romans. I don't think it would be safe to leave me alone with Revelation for any extended period of time. :)
You are passing up gems like "the lost are judged for their works salvifically", Joe.
And the only audience which counts is the one that the Father draws:
I apply all of those tests to my own words - so if anything I say fails on any of those points in the eyes of another person, that person should not listen to me either.
After all, one of my earnest continual prayers is that His Light will shine unobstructed by me.
Faith, yes. Alone? No. The word "just" itself implies obedience to law.
I think we have a very different construction on reality.
Not that
that is a ragingly new or novel idea.
Theotokos,
Holy Mother of God,
Holy Virgin of virgins,
Mother of Christ,
Mother of the Church,
Mother of divine grace,
Mother most pure,
Mother most chaste,
Mother inviolate,
Mother undefiled,
Mother most amiable,
Mother most admirable,
Mother of good counsel,
Mother of our Creator,
Mother of our Savior,
Virgin most prudent,
Virgin most venerable,
Virgin most renowned,
Virgin most powerful,
Virgin most merciful,
Virgin most faithful,
Mirror of justice,
Seat of wisdom,
Cause of our joy,
Spiritual vessel,
Vessel of honor,
Singular vessel of devotion,
Mystical rose,
Tower of David,
Tower of ivory,
House of gold,
Ark of the covenant,
Gate of heaven,
Morning star,
Health of the sick,
Refuge of sinners,
Comforter of the afflicted,
Help of Christians,
Queen of angels,
Queen of patriarchs,
Queen of prophets,
Queen of apostles,
Queen of martyrs,
Queen of confessors,
Queen of virgins,
Queen of all saints,
Queen conceived without original sin,
Queen assumed into heaven,
Queen of the most holy Rosary,
Queen of families
Queen of peace.
BTW,
THIS:
"as these are your defining heresies. The additional heresy of Predestination of the Reprobate is indeed found in a subgroup only."
is offensive language.
So what. It's also just annalex being annalex . . . doing what annalex thinks/feels is the most righteous thing for annalex to do. So what.
Yeah, I could rant and rave and feel all affronted about it--my choice.
I'd rather give annalex the freedom to be annalex and take for myself the freedom to respond as me . . . hopefully with some caring as well as some points and wording triggering thought and coming out of a caring as well as an affinity for vigorous fun exchanges without any chips on my shoulder.
(noting that some of these are questionable however I would like to see quix froathaly refute each... ;p )
we all beholding the glory of the Lord with open face, are transformed into the same image (eikona) from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Cor 3:18)let us bear also the image (eikona) of the heavenly. (1 Cor 15:49)
You forgot Co-redemptrix
Was that why Christ used offensive language? Was that His goal?
Not mine.
The desire is to be thought provoking, not offense provoking. I realize both tend to occur in many people together. Not exactly my problem.
I suspect Christ's desire was to be thought provoking.
In some persons and constructions on reality . . . being thought provoking is a major challenge. Perhaps offense has to come first, for many. Their psychology. Can't change their psychology. Perhaps their psychology can be a lever, though.
No guarantees, certainly. Many religious rulers walked away more outraged at Jesus than ever. Some few evidently woke up and were saved. Maybe He did something right--even in offending them.
co-redeemer would be questionable too.
we orthodox refer to the original sin as the sin of adam. (not the sin of adam and co-sinner eve).
thus it'd be odd to call the second eve a co-redeemer.
Concerning Spiritual credentials, we should all remember Gamaliel's testimony:
For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, [even] as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.
And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God. - Acts 5:33-39
Well eve sinned first
protestants choose the term protestant themselves whether your particular schismatic sect still uses it or not; either way you protest against God's will so it's a fitting term...
Perhaps I should enquire of the motive.
Am I supposed to be
--tweaked,
--disgusted,
--outraged,
--incensed . . .
What was the hope, expectation?
= = =
BTW, mostly I'm a bit amused . . . then a bit saddened.
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.