Vatican Vs. DaVinci: Round 1

Well, not necessarily because it's true. There's a lot for the Catholic church to be mad at without it being true.

When I read the book, when I was maybe 5/6ths through I was thinking HOW did he get away with this? Then he did an about-face at the end on some of the issues I was marvelling at -- the corrupt pope turns out not to be corrupt, whatever. (Cop out.)

I read this book for my book club, and the previous book was "Skipping Christmas" by John Grisham. Somehow, the discussion of that book led to the history of Christmas. I made some offhand comment about the Pagan origins, and the Christians in the club were horrified. HORRIFIED. No no it all started with Christ yadda yadda.

Then the next meeting was "DaVinci Code", and I was like "this is what I was talking about!!!" I brought a couple of textbooks. :-) But a lot of these people really had no idea of any of this.

I was raised agnostic and have long had an interest in religion as a sort of a folkway, have studied it (minored in mythology), my perspective for a long time was that Christianity marketed itself to various pagans and such by letting them keep their festivals, for example, just with a new sheen of "Christian meaning".

Also know that the bible has been translated and retranslated and retranslated and like the classic game of telephone, a lot of the original meaning is skewed. There was something about, when you go back to the original text, it being clear that one (pope? prophet? someone you wouldn't expect, I can look this up) was female.

But these ideas were new to a lot of people in my book group, and they were exposed to the ideas by "The DaVinci Code." A lot of them were seriously questioning their faith based on it. This was all a bit incomprehensible to me, but I know it is happening.

So without the whole Jesus-had-kids thing being true, there are fundamental assumptions in the book that are true and that freak out the church, sure.



If it was about Mohammed, it'd earn the author a death sentence. (Salman Rushdie...)

Of course the Vatican wants to expose the lies since so many people, even Christians, seem to believe that Dan Brown's book is anything else than fiction, despite the fact that numerous researchers have refuted just about everything in it. Since this belief could make them question their faith, and perhaps even to abandon it, this is obviously a very grave matter, that could cause immeasurable spiritual damage to countless souls, and therefore I find it kind of surprising that it took them this long to make an official statement about it. They probably didn't realise at first that so many people would take it seriously.

Bella:

Or is it that the book has people thinking and asking questions.

But that's a whole other kettle of fish!

Gee, I haven't read it since I think he is a poor writer, having read one other of his books. All a construct, I gather from at least one interview of him I read. Not that I am a vatican fan, just that I like better material.



Er, a friend said it was Adrian IV...

I'm pretty sure there is historical fiction about the holocaust, and I know there are alternative histories that deal with that period, not to mention the scifi shows that sometimes have aliens dressed as Nazis, or alien nazis (I saw it on sliders once. Hitler was really just an alien tool.) I think the aliens dressed as Nazis are always nazis. It's never just coincidence. Nope. Even if they're called Tralfamadorians (I'm not comparing the Tralfamadorians to Nazis, just like the name of their species) they're still Nazis. I'm not offended by it.

And there was that movie Birth of a Nation about how the KKK saved America from the blacks.

There have been stories that implied Hitler was involved with the Occult and actually knew black magic of some sort. It's good material!

If there was a book, widely read, about how the Nazis were really doing a favor by getting rid of the evil Jews I'd be offended, but that's not what DaVinci's is about. It's more analogous to a book about Moses' sordid love affair with Pharoa's daughter... and a sheep, each of whom yielded children whose descendants are alive today, and how Moses created Judaism by combining the Egyptian religion of his youth with the religion of his father Jethro, this all eventually being corrupted by Canaanite beliefs.

I wouldn't be offended by that. It sounds funny.

Dauer

Of course the book does have people asking all sorts of questions, which is why the Vaticam is pissed. God forbid they are challenged. Whether or not there is any truth to the book, the Catholic church does not look lightly or fondly on challenges regarding teaching and faith. I was raised Catholic.

Bella:

Am still am, for now.

But I agree on the questioning idea.

Great quote I saw somewhere, Judaism is "ask, ask, ask", Catholocism is "obey, obey, obey."

Soz,

I don't know if that's entirely accurate. there is that verse "we shall do and we shall hear" which is traditionally taken to suggest doing first and then fully understanding the reasons why. But I think there is more dogmatic flexibility due in part to the four-level approach to understanding the text and much more liberalism on account of the lack of centralization, history of persecution, emphasis on education (traditionally religious education) and some other factors. Also there's never much emphasis on divine retribution, but I think traditionally it's still "obey obey obey" as well as "ask ask ask." and the turn from orthopraxy to greater orthodoxy withing the Orthodox means there are some questions that can only be taken so far, or at least some large assumptions are made. I've been witness to this myself.

Dauer

nice post

For the benefit of everyone, if you would like a more detailed understanding of the Bloodline of the Holy Grail it has been right under your nose for centuries.

The Da Vinci Code barely scratches the surface of this most notably amazing distortion/deconstruction of history, or possibly a psuedo-history, or maybe even worse just a conspiracy theory.

Key things to go research for yourself, there isn't room enough on this thread to talk about this. But, it is all very fascinating.

Holy Grail Bloodline
The Merovingian Dynasty
King Dagobert
Rennes-le Chatea
Cross of Lorraine
Knights Templar

Maybe the true issue the Vatican is annoyed about is that of the truth is being revealed to early.

Katacq:

You forgot the Priory of Sion.

Couldn't agree more.....
From experience of course.

I think I am the only one on these boards who riffed his books off for poor language. Sadly I don't remember the title of the earlier book I dismissed so cavalierly. No, I didn't read the Da Vinci Code.

I have spent a bit of time looking into italian history, though not on this exact question. I don't claim great credentials.

I take Brown's books as constructs, presented in bestseller mode as fast as he could. He happened to hit gold re public interest.

I speak as a general italophile, someone who reads fairly esoteric writing and daily piffle, whatever is out there on the wires about italy.

You might have to wire me up to read the da Vinci code, I am not going there. I have many many many mysteries and novels set in more interesting situations, just sitting in this room. The lit world should open its eyes.

Eh, skip this post, please.

It looks like the Church is challenging the book. And it looks like you don't look lightly or fondly upon that.

Anyway, having read the book. I honestly had to do a lot of post-reading research to see what was true and what wasn't. I know most people who read the book, won't bother to do the research. Just yesterday I had a friend tell me that he thought it was based on a true story. Unlike other fictional books, your Average Joe is actually believing the Da Vinci Code! And whether it's about Christianity or the Illuminati holding Elvis at Area 51, I'm on the side of the people attacking the wacky conspiracy theories.

Good point. Sometimes we forget to read books for entertainment. I agree with osso that Brown is a poor writer. I suspended my criteria just long enough to enjoy the book

I've read this book and only this book, and then only for my book club -- people have urged me to read "Angels and Demons" and I've been resistant. "Da Vinci Code" strikes me as being the magnum opus of a middling writer -- I think he put his all into it, and wildly succeeded for what it is (fast-paced crime caper), and I doubt he has anything left. Also sounds like he had used some ideas in his previous books, and both (previous books and Da Vinci Code) are diminished for the repetition.

Did anyone read Maureen this morning? She really let the Vatican have it...good catholic girl that she is.
Commenting on the fact that the Vatican waited until half the population on earth had read the book before banning it she adds "The Vatican moved with lightning speed seeing as how it took them 300 years to reverse their ban on Galileo's sphere-earth theory. And 600 years to apologize for the Inquisition. And 1,000 years to apologize for the Crusades.
Anyway, she posits that Brown is in league with the Cardinals as he has Mary Mag's descendant aquiesce to the protagonist at the end of the book.