Doing Pennance.
Gal 1:6-7.
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/
Discuss the issues all you want, but do NOT make it personal!
INDEED.
And it has been a chief goal, strategy, tactic of satan's to detract from that role, priority, focus
every way he can.
Of course, he is persistently most successful in the guise of religion . . . especially pontifically, organizationally, traditionally glorified and elaborated religion of every stripe and flavor.
In the pattern Paul gave for the operation of local congregations in I Cor 12-14 . . .
he indicates that the local congregation is to come together and discern whether a prophetic message is of God, or not.
THE CONGREGATION--not the hierarchy. Not the bureaucracy. Not per se even the gifted ones . . .
BUT THE CONGREGATION.
In another place, he exhorts local congregations to search out a humble wise old codger to decide matters of dispute and not take them to the secular courts.
Again--NOT the bureaucracy. Not the hierarchy. Not the paid staff . . .
Christ's atonement did all of those things. But the primary purpose of the atonement was to reconcile man to God. The only way that could be done was that the penalty for breaking God's laws had to be paid. Since we were so full of sin ourselves, we could never do it on our own. Jesus paid our penalty. Jesus became sin for us. Jesus took the penalty of death in His atonement and through His blood and His blood alone we have remission of sins. This was accomplished once and for all on the cross and then Christ cried "It is finished" for it was. Now, when God looks at His children, He sees the blood of Christ which has washed us as white as snow. He does not see our sin. We are reconciled. Mission accomplished.
Though we do sin in life, our sin does not positionally separate us from God but does separate us in terms of fellowship with God. We grieve the Holy Spirit and grow far from him. Yet, we do not utterly fall for the Lord chastens who he loves (sometimes by taking them home).
Still the fundamental truth of Christianity is that Christ paid my debt. Christ paid the penalty for my sin. He was My substitute. His atonement removed all of my sin debt - past, present, and future. Positionally, I have been reconciled to God and thanks to Christ Jesus alone will be physically reunited with Him in Heaven where any glory I have gained on earth will be given back to Him - for He alone is worthy.
Have to run to a memorial service for a dear saint who has gone to meet the Lord; then have another church function later in the day. Won't be back on until this evening some time.
Jesus started mine.
= = =
Jesus started mine.
God also started the church of the Pharisees. Jesus made very clear what He thought of that and what it had become.
I'm reasonably happy for whatever exhortation . . . that has a shred of truth in it . . . even if it's sharp and hurts.
I'm not well pleased by off the wall inaccurate stuff. But it's no big deal. I can handle it easily enough. Goes with the territory.
Being a dyed-in-the-wool pervasive literalist . . .
I'm SOMEWHAT comfortable with a literalist interpretation.
However, to be harshly pontifical and insistent that one of 2-3 possible interpretations of those verses is arbitrarily determined to be the "ONLY POSSIBLE" interpretation . . . is not fitting, to me.
Thought so. Too late to shed the 'old foggy' label, toots.
Yo in it as deep as I am! 25 Feb . . . big old 60 racing up! Hard to believe.
Doing Pennance.
Gal 1:6-7.
you cannot count on Hollywood to be accurate with religious beliefs.
AMEN!
God is looking for Biblical "excuses" to save people, not Biblical excuses to damn them.
That's HIS NATURE.
Once knew a prophet type who insisted on the Salvation aspect of Baptism. Wouldn't talk much with folks who believed otherwise as he felt they were not worth his time. That God insisted he use his time better than that. Considered himself God's #1 general for the end times.
I once asked him what he thought of someone dying in a car accident on the way to baptism. He was insistent that God would NOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN. But I knew of a case that happened exactly like that.
We can sure get narrow and rigid on petty things, imho. And forget all about God's Nature and majoring in major things.
I don't doubt that something spiritual and important happens in Baptism. It is certainly important from an obedience standpoint as well. But God's NATURE is to find a Biblical reason to grab folks from satan's clutches . . . not an excuse to shove them into hell.
INDEED. AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
Important points, imho.
Mind you I LIKE Biblical, and I sure wouldn't advance anything unhealthy. But if I have to set the Bible down to free both arms to embrace Jesus, my choise is clear. Heck, I'll drop my Rosary too!
= = = =
No trouble with that.
However, God uses ANYTHING and EVERYTHING in His ways and timing to bring folks to Him.
And as long as He is using say an axe murderer to scare someone into Salvation--fine with me.
But I want nothing to do with the axe murderer. I certainly won't plan to try and manipulate the axe murderer to scare anyone into Salvation.
I think you get my qualification.
Truly, God is like a master artist to me, permitting our differences and working it all together for the good!
Some truly are like sapphires and some rubies and so on – and as you say the important part is that each of us follow the Spirit. (Romans 8)
And I assure you, dear brother in Christ, striving to be a diamond despite the overwhelming likelihood of failure, is precisely what the Spirit leads me to do.
But we are each different, like different colors in a master work of art. That, I assert, is the language of art.
My gift of the Spirit (I Cor 12) is encouragement, a Barnabas rather than a Paul – and the apostle I most closely identify with is John, and the church, Philadelphia. That is probably why I have this particular leading in the Spirit.
But it is altogether beautiful that we are different.
Praise God!
Maranatha, Jesus!
"Mother of God" ignores the Trinity.
That's why using it in conversations with non-Christians would add an additional layer of communication problems that it would be best to avoid. Best to say that Mary is mother Jesus the Christ.
FK is exactly correct, because he has carefully pointed out that his concern is communication with a person not steeped in subtle Christian distinctions.
= = =
IMPORTANT POINTS.
However, still, the most destructive aspect of MOTHER OF GOD usage, to me,
is the subtle to not so subtle demonic press that results in a kind of strong hint, aire, assertion, . . .
that therefore MARY is above God or at least co-redemtrix equal to God.
That is from the pit of hell and it is INHERENT with virtually every MOTHER OF GOD utterance.
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
Not really, think in terms of those that are raised inside an institution where the authorities inside the institution tell them all power and understanding is only invested in them and if you leave, or disobey, you will die. In that environment it truly is surprising any open their eyes and see the error.
= = =
INDEED.
Yeah, what the Dawg said.
I'm gonna stay with the Old Church on this one in particular.
It is too big a point to get so wrong, so early and for so long.
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.