« Behold the man! | Main | Foundation of dysfunction »


elena maria vidal

I totally agree with Father Angelo. Great explanation! It is a movie I will skip!


I saw the movie this weekend and I agree with Father. There were good things about the movie, but ultimately it was very watered down and disappointing.


The same things bothered me about the presentation of Mary. By the end of the movie, tho, her demeanor and attitude had turned around and seemed somewhat more in line with the traditional view of Mary. Filmakers are obsessed with showing "growth" in their characters. This is why Peter Jackson changed the character of Faramir in Lord of the Rings (according to Jackson). I think, it is also the reason the Magnificat was moved to the end of the movie instead of being included in the depiction of the Visitation. As a Catholic, there were other things I could quibble about but on the whole, it was an attractive movie and I have found that the non-Catholics and non-believers whom I took to see it, also found the movie and as a result, the real story, attractive. And isn't that what we want - to attract others to our Lord and Lady?


there were other things I could quibble about but on the whole, it was an attractive movie
I agree. I have seen it twice, and agree that this is largely a Protestant version of Mary, not sinless, rather typical until she is touched by grace later in the movie. It seems odd, that this should be true, considering that two of the director's religion advisors were Catholic clergy.
Anyway, it was inspriting, particularly the portrayal (finally) of the manly yet gentle St Joseph, and the exuberant, and motherly St. Elizabeth.I enjoyed the Christmas carols interwoven into the sweeping score, the impressive special effects (Jesus was literally born into the light of the Star of Bethlehem). And, finally, I liked the juxtaposition of the evil Herod the Great, and his son Antipas, and the innocence of Mary and Joseph as a prefigurement of the crucifixion.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Speaking Engagements

  • Contact info
    Kindly email me at gskineke [at] gmail.com for me to speak to your parish or women's group.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter


    • From Benedict XVI
      “People have realized that the complete removal of the feminine element from the Christian message is a shortcoming from an anthropological viewpoint. It is theologically and anthropologically important for woman to be at the center of Christianity."
    • Anger and Patrimony (from Donna)
      This is just another of the unintended consequences of the cultural acceptance of contraception and abortion! Men's sexuality has been robbed of its creative essence. It is now viewed as something that imposes a burden on women (when conception happens to occur), something used to control women or something that is purely recreational. Why would men bother?? In taking away their responsibility, we've also robbed them of their significance! In the big picture of humanity, men have been made into nothing more than a nuisance women have to figure out how to control in order to bring about the next generation. Men don't see it as their task to protect the vulnerable because they see themselves as the vulnerable ones. A few well preserved vials of sperm would make men entirely obsolete in the world's ethos today!!
    • Excellent, Dom! (from Teresa)
      That is astounding Robin, and good for you for standing up. At the heart of that matter, I think, is even worse than a gender mixing message. There is an increased sharper and sharper focus on the "self." Solid Catholic teaching returns our focus away from ourselves to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The original sin, Eve denied her womanhood when she desired to be like "gods." Since the only god she knew was the Father. Where was Adam? He stood impotent... in other words, they were divorced. There's a young girl at Robin's son's high school who was just told that she is the center of the universe and it's a tragic disservice to her.
    • Find the logic (from "me")
      Ditto what Mary said! A lot of high schools have very poor math and science depts, for boys and girls. I also am educated as a chemical engineer, but chose to teach the two years before we had children because its hours were more suited to spending time with children. (I was looking ahead). When it came time and I was pregnant with our first, I realized that I did not want to leave him with someone else, and was able to stay home full time. I am not sure it would have been that easy if we were used to another engineering income and not just a private school teacher income. Also some of my first job offers were out on oil rigs - I had no interest in that at all even though I enjoyed my engineering classes and did well in them. No one discouraged me from an engineering job, on the contrary I got a lot of flack for my decision not to pursue an engineering career.
    • Find the logic (from Mary)
      I've been lurking, but this is one that irritates me. Beats the heck out of me what these "barriers" are. I was educated as a chemical engineer, where 1/3 of our class was women. However, in electrical engineering, only 1 or 2 out of 30 were women. Is it possible that women are Just Not Interested in some areas? Nah, it must be The Man keeping us down so we must legislate (and, I agree -- when they say "legistlate", I hear "quota"). And actually, I have a friend that was also a chemical engineer. When she lost her job, she decided not to go back into engineering and started working from home so she could spend more time with her 3 kids. Also, if nothing else, there are all kinds of incentives for women to enter science and engineering -- scholarships not available to men, guaranteed housing on campuses that do not guarantee housing to the general population, etc. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that schools in general are not preparing students for the hard sciences. It is truly a sad state of affairs, the lack of science education these days.

    Subscribe here

    • My Catholic Homepage