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/
I think I missed the memo about
THE MARIAN DOCTRINE OF SHOULDER CHIPS AND THIN SKINS.
Is that based on II STEPHEN 6:3
or
III MAGISTERICAL 6:6
???
I don't think it's just the memo you missed.
More bible code references?
That reminds me.
I should post a long overdue thread on the last BIBLECODEDIGEST.COM edition.
Some fascinating authentic code stuff in that issue.
Thanks for reminding me.
Justification by Faith Alone is not only theologically sound, but serves as a great tool to measure how much confidence any Christian sect has in the power of God Alone.
= = =
INDEED.
In following this discussion about the apocrypha it's stunning how historical fact is ignored. I believe St. Athansius was the first to use his office as Bishop to clearly state for churches under his direction what the books of the Canon were. He followed in the long line of theologians and the long held practices of individual churches. IOW, he just made clear what was already accepted truth. Athansius clearly stated to his churches that the apocrypha was good for devotional and historic reading, but was not as Canonical authorities.
It says God rebuked Satan. Satan went beyond what God allowed and that is sin. There is no grace for the sinning angels for there is no sacrifice for them.
My goodness, wm!
What place do you think historical fact and logic have in an FR religion thread???
Good one. Thx.
Certainly Satan could as likely be performing parlor tricks to help prop up his anti-Christian churches.
No, the criteria Christ provided for discerning such is met.
WRONG.
Try again.
wouldn't letting a single bishop's perception settle the matter be a papist idea?
Oh Holy Scripture does indeed provide a measure for this; folks who reject the teachings of St Paul for instance are called false prophets by Paul himself.
Therefore folks who do this yet proclaim to be prophets cannot be invoking the Holy Spirit.
Will try to get back to such off the wall assertions about modern miracles around the world by Holy Spirit through Protesties.
If they're standing there with uncovered women preaching and trying to claim to be invoking the Holy Spirit they're lying.
I was thinking more along the cult of Isis, but we can dial 1-800-Dr.Hinkley
1Cr 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.
1Cr 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head
1Cr 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches:
1Cr 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Great question!
I don't think so, because at this time you still did not have a consolidation of authority and the power of the state to enforce it. Christian bodies were still somewhat free and if Athansius' position on the matter was controversial local and regional churches would have fought against it. As it was his position on the issue of the Canon was accepted because it was consistent with the understanding of Christians all the way back to the Apostolic Era.
I find it interesting that this was all done independent of any Bishop in Rome, or grand council.
Is it possible Rome did not want to take a solid position so they could change their position as their "traditions and doctrines" changed with the times?
Good morning - I understand what you are saying but my concern is the same. Because Jesus says "...and have the keys of hell and of death." (Rev.1:28) Then goes to 3:7 and again mentions the "key", which is what Smyrna and Philadelphia taught which would keep us "from the hour of temptation" (3:10).
I guess I am anxious about it. I believe the message contained therein is for us to know in this perilous time.
Anyway, as you say, those are my musings and I won't say anymore about it. Thank you for taking time to share your thoughts on this subject - it is appreciated.
For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
If all Christians can argue about is the size of a Sunday hat, fortunate are they indeed.
firstly few councils were ever held in the city of Rome.
secondly canon was certainly discussed at councils though indeed no specific canon of any specific council declares what is definitlvly IN the Bible though many declared what was right out for sure.
further while athansius opinion is certainly important and relevant I don't see any reason for taking it in a vaccum; all decisions should be made as the whole church not simply as individuals; far to big of a risk there if you ask me.
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.