Debate DaVinci Code

Ok, I'll lay the ground work and we'll see how this goes. This isn't about how great/bad the movie or the book was so much as it is about the controversy stirred up when the Catholic community went ballistic over it, as well as the controversy around the basic premise of the novel. Being a Catholic myself I find it ironic that the apparent hypocrisy of my own religion is simply hanging there in front of me, grinning into my face.

If you haven't read the book or seen the movie and you don't want to endure any spoilers then you probably wont want to participate in this because I know I'm not going to use many spoiler tags, if any.

To keep it simple I'm simply aghast that all these Christian and Catholic conservatives are coming out of the woodwork, denouncing the movie and book (works of fiction, mind you) while villain-izing Dan Brown, author of said book. They appear to claim that it's a pack of lies designed to weaken the church and shake people's faith and drive them away from the word of God. That people might actually believe what is written. -Sunday Herald

Despite Dan Brown's personal views The DaVinci Code is still a work of fiction at heart. Is the belief system, or the faith in God, within the Catholic Church so bankrupt that they're afraid a single novel purporting a new idea with a clever execution will drive individuals away from 2000 years of Catholic doctrine?

My biggest beef with the whole thing (and my concern for the apparent hypocrisy) is that the Catholic Church wasn't making much of a stink when Mel Gibson came out with "The Passion of the Christ". In fact, many were using it as a tool to help instill faith in non-believers and re-enforce those who were already members.

Well what about all the non-Catholics? Most didn't rise up and say anything about it, save a few who were concerned with the excessive violence and blood. The Church seemed to simply shrug them off. Because it's Christ it's Ok to be violent and bloody? That line of thought puts the Crusades into perspective.

Now they're sitting at the opposite end of the spectrum and the non-Catholics have released a film shedding a completely different light upon the same figure. All of a sudden they're up in arms, banning the film and preaching hell & damnation to those who watch it. Where it was Ok for The Passion of the Christ to dramatize and shake the ideals of non-Catholics, it's not ok for them to do the exact same thing to us?

'Doesn't seem right to me.

Dan Brown's works are all really interesting reads and he always seems hook a fascinating plot around real life things. Angels and Demons (the precursor to The DaVinci Code) was an amazing work of fiction, and I would recommend it to almost anybody.

...But that's just it. It's just fiction. Is the Catholic Church worried that what he proposes might NOT be fiction? That it might actually be true? There is interesting evidence, in real life, that begins to grey what was once considered to be unquestionably black and white. Holy Blood, Holy Grail was a real book with real points to prove. Hmmm...

Well, from the stand point of a completely neutral person (someone with no affiliation to any church what so ever, or to Dan Brown's interpretation on the theory that Christ had a wife and child) Dan Brown's theory seems to hold a lot more water than the theory that there's an invisible man living in the sky who sent his son off to die at our hands.

I'll finish my opener with that thought and leave the forum open to anyone who has any further thoughts on the matter. Is the Catholic Church really being hypocritical or are their claims legitimate? Is it possible that Christ really did father a child through Mary Magdalene and that the Holy Grail is her body, not the chalice Christ drank out of at the last supper?

If anyone has any more points or debatable topic on this I would love to hear and discuss them, both the Pro-Catholic arguments and Pro-Magdalene arguments.

~W

 

I've been waiting for someone to start a discussion on this. Okay, straight to the point. Remember, all following points are based on pure opinion, save when strict evidence is applied. The Catholic Church wasn't too upset with The Passion because the movie depicts Christ as a divine figure. The DaVinci Code, however, shows that Christ was merely a normal human, who was in fact the son of GOD, but had no divine prowess. It shows Christ having relations with a normal woman, and supposedly having a daugther.(I would like to apologize from here on out. If I somehow fall out of the theory-evidence routine, I'm sorry, just trying to get them all out.) Now I read or watched somewhere that Mary Magdalene WAS a regular woman who married Jesus and that(no bashing) the Catholic Church turned her into, for better or worse terms, a ***** for some reason I can't remember. This would make some sense, seeing how many conspiracies are connected with the Catholic Church. They would prefer to make Christ more divine than he actually is.

Now, for some proofs of evidence that support the DaVinci Code's propositions. If you take a look at The Last Supper, you will in fact notice that there is not one single cup upon the table. If the Holy Grail was in fact a cup as many believed, would it not be painted upon the table. DaVince painted the piece going off most Biblical aspects so, in retrospect, if there's no cup painted, how could the Holy Grail be a cup? Also, if you look to the left of Christ you wil notice a person, who seems quite feminine. Most scholars would tell you that this is actually John the Baptist, but if you look, this figure is, as mentioned previously, more feminine than everyone else. Many believe that this was Mary herself, and the shape between them somewhat proves this. It's the shape of a "V", an ancient symbol for women. Can anyone find a logical reason why DaVince would paint the picture this way, if not to give us this clue? He could have very well painted this person in the center and none would be the wiser, but he didn't.

Now for my closing. I'm a Christian. I believe in Jesus, GOD, etc. However, I would be a fool not to take in accordance both these simple proofs, and the idea submitted. I'm not saying its true, but neither am I dismissing it. This is a work of fiction, but every tale has a bit of truth in it, does it not? My explanation for the Church's defiance is both simple, and quite obvious. They are indeed scared. Lets supposed that everything Dan Brown subjected in his book is in fact true. The Church would have to scramble to cover this up. If this turned out to be true, entire ways of life would be destroyed. Everything we've all heard about would have been a lie. History itself would be false, the one thing that SHOULD be true. Like I stated previously, the Catholic Church is the main idea in most conspiracies, most know this as common sense. It is foolish to think that there are not people in the backgroud tweaking the wheels of history or general life. It would seem that this may be one conspiracy, the Church doesnt walk away from totally unscathed.

 

Are you serious? Oh yes they were. Infact, they made more of fuss over Passion then they ever could make over Da vinci Code. I mean, they were boycotting and holding public protests and people were telling Mel Gibson he'd be going to hell, etc. Yeah, Da vinci Code's got nada on Passion of the Christ.