Journey to Bethlehem worth a look for the story, if not the history

There is no more widely beloved Christmas tradition than that of creating the nativity scene, with its assemblage of figures and animals, including the baby Jesus, Mary, Joseph, the shepherds, the magi, donkey, cow, sheep, and lambs. 

Since St. Francis first assembled such a creche in 1223, it has retained its popularity in churches and homes throughout the world, bringing as it does a gentle and lovely reminder of the infancy narratives as recorded in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew.

So beloved is the imagery that it is not at all surprising that a number of film versions of the nativity story have been created, including the most recent, Journey to Bethlehem, screening locally and available on Amazon Video.

In the tradition of such productions as Webber’s Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat and Jesus Christ Superstar, this latest attempt at retelling the events surrounding the birth of Jesus not only includes a number of (largely forgettable) song and dance routines but also takes considerable liberties with the events recorded in the Infancy Narratives – presumably in an attempt to put a contemporary spin on the storyline.

Thus it is that, at the outset, Mary is shown to be a woman yearning for independence from the Jewish traditions she is expected to follow and rejecting the idea of an arranged marriage, but rather asking her parents to allow her to fulfill her ambition to be a teacher.

As unlikely as this is historically, the film further plunges along with a storyline that not only depicts Herod accompanied by a guard that is not above engaging in some unintentionally comical militaristic choreography but also creates an entirely new storyline around a person purported to be Herod’s son. 

Perhaps even more egregious is that the magi (here also mistakenly depicted as kings, in accordance with another myth attached to the Gospel story) are  depicted as a comedy trio owing more to the Three Stooges than to St. Matthew.

Of course, purists will object to this “interpretation” of the story of the Nativity, though I have always found it equally odd that no one seems to object to the fact that the magi  have been depicted as definitely three in number; Matthew’s Gospel only states that there were three gifts.

Even more telling, however, is that in most depictions of the Nativity, the magi are shown as present in the stable (often along with their camels, the shepherds, and a veritable farmload of sundry animals), when the Gospel account clearly indicates that they visited the baby Jesus in “the house.”

This leaves us free to conjecture that once the “census” (if indeed it was a census that brought the Holy family to Bethlehem) was complete and people started to return home, Joseph was able to find more suitable accommodation for his family – and certainly justifies Epiphany being celebrated sometime after Christmas Day. In any case, it seems to be an altogether unnecessary invention to have, as in the film, the expectant parents entering Bethlehem by a secret tunnel to avoid being caught by Herod’s forces.

This leads one to question whether all of this invention, altering of the Gospel narratives, and historical inaccuracy means that Journey to Bethlehem should meet with disapproval. For those who want tradition to go unchanged, the answer is probably in the affirmative. However, there is really no harm if a reimagining of the story is going to cause viewers to revisit it in a new light and be challenged to think further about it and its implications. 

They might even be tempted to reopen their Bibles and thoughtfully reread the Gospel narratives with a new approach. It is true that in some regards, the film does push the limits. Do we really need, presumably in a desperate attempt to inject a comic note into the proceedings, to have the angel Gabriel depicted as a bumbling messenger new to the job? In the light of inclusiveness, it is perhaps good that Gabriel is black. More justifiably, it is decidedly clever to have a donkey playing a minor but noteworthy role throughout the story, serving as a subtle reminder of Christ’s entry into Jerusalem. In other words, a tolerant acceptance of good intentions is perhaps a requirement when watching a clearly well-meaning film, a film which, all things considered, is not without merit.

As we try to rise above the commercialism and the arrant materialism of the Christmas season, one might well turn to Journey to Bethlehem as an entertaining challenge to reconsider the underlying reason that we celebrate Christmas. And surely that is a good thing.

Share your thoughts and contribute to the ongoing conversation by sending us a Letter to the Editor.