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/
Please do not address any further posts to me. I talk with humans not goads.
when we light candles near icons and light incense near them (just as was done in the temple with the bulls and the angels) you say we worship icons...
guess YOU'RE understanding is absurd.
The 12 oxen offend me? Why because I know their purpose and you don't? lol, lol
Good god, will this thread please die?
their purpose was to be present in God's house.
No you are the one who thinks Jews worshipped oxen. I wonder what they think of yourposts, lol
the difference is between a statue and a graven image
= = =
Ahhhh, . . . and now . . . pretend . . .
we are standing before THE FATHER . . . who happens to have the reconstituted original 10 Commandment tablets on His desk rather prominently displayed . . . .
and
HE says,
NOW, TELL ME KAWAII, JUST WHAT WERE EACH OF THOSE ITEMS ON THAT LIST OF DIFFERENCES between a statue and a graven image?
and kawaii begins to shuffle a bit . . .
and
THE FATHER SAYS
SPEAK UP, KAWAII, I want all in the universe to hear your rationalization loudly and clearly . . .
and kawaii shuffles some more . . .
lol
says much of how you hate the word of scipture...
= = =
Ladies and gentlemen . . .
we have graduated from merely offensive to . . . ta da! . . . drum roll . . .
not just mind reading, but heart reading as well.
Perhaps next, coming to a confessional near you, we'll have a bluelight daily special on
TEA LEAF READING! Get your tickets now.
Without a quick infusion of courtesy, it surely will.
If any one would like to know the meaning of the oxen in solomon's temple I will tell them privately, just so you will look even more foolish than you do now
hey 1000 mentioned explicitly that cultural habits were all that was the issue (if that aint forsaking scripture for the culture of the moment i dunno what is)
laughes all the way to the lake of fire...
= = =
It just may be that some of the laughs and Holy Spirit's use thereof . . . will prevent some unnecessary trips to the lake of fire . . .
BTW I know for a fact that THE FATHER has a different understanding, knowledge of my eternal destiny.
Something to do with what St Paul called faith . . . . justification by faith, I think, is the Biblical phrase.
[Kosta quoting:] "In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel." (Rom 2:16) [see also Rom. 16:25] Not only does he speak of his gospel, but his statements sound very Gnostic here.
Well, does it seem more reasonable to reconcile these verses by concluding that Paul made up his own gospel, apart from Christ, or that Paul is saying that his Gospel is identical to Christ's Gospel? If we choose the former, Paul would also be denying his own humanity. It seems pretty clear to me that Paul is saying that the Gospel he is preaching, "his Gospel", is the same Gospel that was given to him personally by Christ. Another way to look at it would be that if Paul did go out and preach his own made-up gospel, then it would mean that God made a colossal mistake in choosing Paul. :)
ah the hidden gnostism of protestantism (secret personal interpretations so valuable folks would pay cash and line up to hear your televangelistas)
It is not "hidden", lol. Maybe if you study you too will learn something
is father not a term for parent? is it not a term Christ uesed for Joeseph even knowing Joeseph was not his biological father?
= = = =
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh
The rubber Bible strikes again.
"head covered" has to mean precisely what the magesterical says it means in absolutely every respect and all cases for all eras and contexts period.
But "father" . . . ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh, tradition and powermongering trumps plain Scriptural meaning in that case.
Thank, Heaven . . . . for little girls . . .
and hell for rubber Bibles.
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
thx.
ahh now we see protestants doing what they do best TWISTING things that are written plainly so that they don't mean anything at all.
Interesting that the inspired word of God would have meaningless passages...
There is no indication that indwelling of the Holy Spirit can lead in contradiction to the teaching of the Apostolic Church which offers the sacrament inviting the indwelling. Most definitely the saints of the Church by whose work the Great Commission was carried out had the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in them. To deny that would be not merely dangerous, but blasphemous. To call the same saints "stone cold compost" (8207) is not merely a blasphemy but an ugly and angry one: a dog biting the hand that fed her.
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.