 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
JillD
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Visalia, California USA |
| Posts: | 963 |
| First Name: | Jill | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | heathen, EvFree, Messianic, LC-MS, Catholic 2007 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 16th, 2006 01:31 pm |
|
Spirit & Life
“The words I spoke to you are spirit and life.” (Jn 6:63)
Human Life International e-Newsletter
Volume 01, Number 46 | Friday, Dec. 15, 2006
...................................................................................
http://www.hli.org
Setting the Record Straight on Mary
The new movie that debuted on December 1st, The Nativity Story, has received many positive reviews around the country already and also a fair amount of attacks by the standard group of village atheists.
Criticisms notwithstanding, the movie certainly has many redeeming qualities to it including its portrayal of Joseph and the touching scene of Mary's visit to Elizabeth, but at the same time I feel it necessary to correct the record about its presentation of Mary. More to the point, twenty centuries of theological reflection on the Virgin Mary have been effectively glossed over in the movie, and we have been given someone's private interpretation of Mary's role in salvation history which does not match the public record of historical Christianity. The Catholic Church has made it clear from the beginning that we do not understand Jesus as a historical and theological figure without Mary, and so a Nativity story that gets Mary wrong also skews our understanding of Jesus.
First and foremost, any portrayal of Mary as giving birth in pain is simply contrary to the Christian Church's long tradition of Mary as virginal before, during and after birth. In this view, Her intact physical integrity during birth was accompanied by a psychic integrity that admitted of no pains during childbirth in any form. That may be a surprise to some, but it is nonetheless the historical Christian view of this event. The movie's portrayal of Her childbirth is thus not the Church's mainstream understanding and qualifies as a strictly private interpretation of the event. In fact, the movie had a chance to contrast the painful childbirth of John the Baptist to Elizabeth with the miraculous birth of Jesus to Mary, and it missed the perfect opportunity to provoke a good theological debate!
Biblical Christians should know that there is a Scriptural reason for this doctrine. The virtually unanimous opinion of the Fathers of the Church in the first six centuries was that Mary is the "New Eve," the necessary counterpart to Christ, the New Adam (cf. Rom 5:12-14). Just as the old Eve collaborated in the sin of Adam, so the New Eve, with the New Adam, reverses the original disobedience and undoes the curse brought upon the human race by the first sinners. That same curse also brought about the grim consequence of labor pains for all of Eve's daughters (cf. Gen 3:16), but the New Eve who broke the curse was not subject to its dictates.
Secondly, Mary was not an immature adolescent as she is portrayed in the movie. The director of the movie, Catherine Hardwicke, intended to portray Her as such in order to make her more "real" to teens. That is fine as an evangelistic motive, but depicting Her in a quasi-feminist tizzy against her father's authority when he addresses the delicate subject of pre-marital relations is simply inaccurate to the historical record and doesn't help kids to take Her as a role model.
The immaculate Mary's passions were first and foremost totally consecrated to the Lord and without the slightest disorder in any sense; she is not your typical teen in western society. She is the teen Mother of the Messiah, the perfect role model for all kids and adults alike. Not only would it not have entered the mind of the All Pure Mary to have pre-marital relations, She could not have had a fit of rebellion against Her father's legitimate authority that concretized God's Will for Her. This presentation of Mary is quintessentially Hollywood and reflects neither historical Christianity nor even the Biblical evidence. It is also a reflection of the Protestant view that Mary is just another person who happened to follow Jesus.
No, Mary is the Mother of God, perfectly pure in every respect and, even as a teenager dedicated heart, mind, soul and strength to God's Plan of salvation. "Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it done unto me as you say." (Lk 1:38) Let the historical record speak for itself.
Sincerely Yours in Christ,
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer
President, Human Life International
http://www.hli.org/sl_2006-12-15.html
____________________
"I praise you, for I am wondrously made. Wonderful are our works! My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret." Ps 139
"Guard me, O Lord, from the hands of the wicked; preserve me from violent men." Ps 140
|
|
|
lia
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 11th, 2006 |
| Location: | Quezon City, Philippines |
| Posts: | 98 |
| First Name: | lia | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 19th, 2006 10:20 pm |
|
I did think that Mary was potrayed as a western girl of our times instead of who she really is.
Being a cradle Catholic I've accepted all teaching about Mary, like Immaculate Concepcion, Mary's Perpetual Virginity, etc. But I never thought that when Mary gave birth, she didn't feel any birth pains. A good thing it was correlated with Eve's curse and Mary being the new Eve, so now I understand. It is wise to know why we believe what we believe. Thanks!
This is what I find so great in being a Catholic...I never stop learning and growing in my faith! There's that 2006 years of learning and counting! 
____________________
Man can't b forced 2 accept the truth.He can b drawn toward the truth only by his own nature, that is, by his own freedom w/c commits him 2 search sincerely 4 truth & when he finds it, 2 adhere 2 it both in his conviction & his behavior.-- JP2
|
|
|
brian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Chicago South Burbs, Illinois USA |
| Posts: | 893 |
| First Name: | brian | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | methodist, evangelical, anglican, catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 20th, 2006 02:26 am |
|
| I thought it was up for debate or not a mater of strict doctrine if the birth had birthpain or not or what physically happened to her?
|
|
|
CajunRick
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 20th, 2006 02:40 am |
|
brian wrote: I thought it was up for debate or not a mater of strict doctrine if the birth had birthpain or not or what physically happened to her?
To the best of my knowledge it has never been defined doctrinally whether Mary lad labor pains, but many of the Fathers wrote of how Jesus passed through the birth canal leaving her hymen intact.
Some of the Fathers went so far as to speculate that Jesus was born walking and talking with adult intellect. I find this hard to accept because he then would not be "a man like us" needing to "grow in wisdom and strength". But the fact is that we simply don't know. However, it is doctrinally declared that Mary remained a virgin, physically as well as morally, throughout her life.
Catholics United for the Faith have a Faith Fact on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary that examines this issue.
|
|
|
Current time is 10:16 pm | |
|
|
|
|
|
