Cardinal's plea: Don't read 'The Da Vinci Code'

[faerieevaH]

While the book is fiction, there are points in it which are presented as truth.

i.e.
: Jesus married Mary Magdalene. And they had a daughter.
: Jesus was a prophet who Constantine turned into deity.
: Constantine gave us the Bible, which he had put together to support his doctrines.​

Sorry, but I have to disagree. At the beginning of the book, the author clearly states there are only two facts: the headquarter of Opus Dei, and the existence of the 'secret documents'. No claim has been made about the truth for anyone but the characters further in the book. Dumas also wrote his story of 'the Man in the Iron Masque' in this vein. It's a storytelling technique that's been around for centuries.

 

[faerieevaH]

Then maybe you should reread what it says in the beginning. It claims to be based on facts. This is where the damage is done.

There are two facts that are claimed in the book, and those two facts are indeed facts. All the rest are theoretical conjunctures and an authors perspective of 'what might have been'.

 

[hannabl]

Then maybe you should reread what it says in the beginning. It claims to be based on facts. This is where the damage is done.

Yes, that is the problem!

I myself have read it, and after that some books (two to be exact) discussing it, critizising it. And of course, watched a TV-show critizising it.... It's like this huge debate, and it is very interesting.

I do understand the cardinals concern however, I know of people who after reading it asked Catholics if they're "converted now". In jest of course. But after talking to them you find out pretty fast that they do believe it, and some told that even if it wasn't true, it should be.

But to actually tell people not to read it? That seems wrong, it's better to inform I believe.

 

[KennySe]

BASED on facts! Not facts! There's a difference!

Tell us a fact that is not a fact.

 

[MichaelFJF]

Wow - see all the attention? Isn't the cardinal opening his mouth fun?

 

[Bible Addict]

Tell us a fact that is not a fact.

What?

 

[Bible Addict]

This is totally ridiculous. It's a book. It's sold in the fiction section. You shouldn't believe everything you read - especially from the fiction section - if you do, that's your own problem. The people who take this book as fact have problems to get through. Who cares if they want to believe it? Read it or don't, it's not fact and it doesn't claim to be.

 

[KennySe]

Wow - see all the attention? Isn't the cardinal opening his mouth fun?

Yep.

And as a saracastically stated in my first post on this thread, I can't wait for the movie.

 

[MichaelFJF]

This is totally ridiculous. It's a book. It's sold in the fiction section. You shouldn't believe everything you read - especially from the fiction section - if you do, that's your own problem. The people who take this book as fact have problems to get through. Who cares if they want to believe it? Read it or don't, it's not fact and it doesn't claim to be.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to ask you to leave. You're making too much sense here.

 

[LongingForLight]

Amy Welborn has a book out that debunks it...perhaps you could read her book?

Would I understand her book without first reading the original? If so, that might make more sense for my own education . . . but I'm not sure that would make sense as a move towards discussing the book with others, which is my main intent. "I haven't read it, but . . . " will automatically weaken anything I have to say and give it the appearance of blindly defending my faith and my bias without getting the facts first. Reading a response book afterwards, or maybe with, "The Da Vinci Code" would probably make sense, though, and may be a way to guard against accidentally mistaking fiction for truth myself, which I assume is the concern.

I don't really have the motivation to do this yet, but if I hear a few more people who seem confused about this book (besides the person mentioned earlier, it's also come up in RCIA! And sadly, the response given was not calm or reasonable, but reactionary) I will probably want to be able to give a reasonable complaint against the book . . . and "The Catholic Church doesn't like it" is currently all I can say, which won't mean much to others and may even encourage their current beliefs (if they draw from this that the Catholic Church must be hiding something . . . I haven't read the book, so I don't know if this makes sense).

 

[hannabl]

There are two facts that are claimed in the book, and those two facts are indeed facts. All the rest are theoretical conjunctures and an authors perspective of 'what might have been'.

Actually no, he claims that all ( don't know the quote in english) "organizations" have existed, or exist. Or something like that.
The first example that comes to mind is "Priéure de Sion", which was made up in this century. Then he made some strange symbolic interperntions, but I won't start a discussion... there are plenty of books around.

 

[BjBarnett]

This is totally ridiculous. It's a book. It's sold in the fiction section. You shouldn't believe everything you read - especially from the fiction section - if you do, that's your own problem. The people who take this book as fact have problems to get through. Who cares if they want to believe it? Read it or don't, it's not fact and it doesn't claim to be.

well when people start believing it and accepting it as truth thats when the problem steps in. the book store near my house sells it in the Christian books. There are a lot of people out there that totally believe the Da Vinci Codes. Im with the Cardinal on this one people should read such a heretic writing without knowing its a heretical writing. kinda like the book of mormon. yeah its fiction and shouldnt be taken as truth but there are tons of mormons out there that take it as truth.

 

[MichaelFJF]

My mother-in-law is going through RCIA and she read it. When she's asked about it she usually says soemthing like: "It's a great read.....but......" So even someone new to catholicism can figure it out. It's not that big a deal, until some high ranking official spouts off to the press.

 

[faerieevaH]

Read the book, enjoy the book. My other thread about 'the proof that the Da Vinci code is right', gives a good example of the storytelling technique used there. If you want to convince people who may be confused about it, without a debunking book, let them read Angels and Demons from the same author. It makes use of the same techniques, but is less persuasive making it clearer to see that it's just fiction. Especially the last part with the attempt to blow up the Vatican, the IV baby, the fight in the helicopter, the assassin, etc. might make it more easy to debunk.

 

[hannabl]

My mother-in-law is going through RCIA and she read it. When she's asked about it she usually says soemthing like: "It's a great read.....but......" So even someone new to catholicism can figure it out. It's not that big a deal, until some high ranking official spouts off to the press.

Naturally a lot of people realises that it's only fiction, but not all.

But then the fact that someone might be foold shouldn't make us ban books, which s why I think it would have been better to just inform.

 

[faerieevaH]

Actually no, he claims that all ( don't know the quote in english) "organizations" have existed, or exist. Or something like that.
The first example that comes to mind is "Priéure de Sion", which was made up in this century. Then he made some strange symbolic interperntions, but I won't start a discussion... there are plenty of books around.

He claims the priory of Sion has existed, which is true. He doesn't claim the truth of the documents of the priory which state them as an organisation that's been running under cover for centuries. The existence he claims is the one of this century, plus the existence of the documents. The truth of these documents which detail the history of the organisation is never claimed.

 

[BjBarnett]

Naturally a lot of people realises that it's only fiction, but not all.

But then the fact that someone might be foold shouldn't make us ban books, which s why I think it would have been better to just inform.

i agree. maybe it should of been just an informing statement and to advice people not to read it but i think he was just trying to get the point across that its totally a heretical book. like I said before I think its about on the same level as the book of mormon

 

[hannabl]

He claims the priory of Sion has existed, which is true. He doesn't claim the truth of the documents of the priory which state them as an organisation that's been running under cover for centuries. The existence he claims is the one of this century, plus the existence of the documents. The truth of these documents which detail the history of the organisation is never claimed.

He claims that the Prior the Sion exists, whisch isn't true. Nor has Da Vinci ever been a member in it, or any other of the names he listed. This guy made it up in like the 70's or 80's (can't remember), he the forged the papers and got a museum to accept them. He also later confessed that it was all a fake!

Whether or not the organization actually existed can be discussed, since it only existed a sa figment in his, and his friens, mind.

But as I said before, read some books on the subject. It's interesting and informative.

 

[Metanoia02]

It's a storytelling technique that's been around for centuries.

I agree anti-Catholic literature has been around for centuries. Previous renditions have used the Jesuits that were the secret society doing the will of the Vatican. The only thing different is that Dan Brown has replaced the Jesuits with Opus Dei. Yes this is a story telling tradition, just not a very good one.

 

[hannabl]

From http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/faqs.html
PARTS OF THE DA VINCI CODE DESCRIBE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE RELIGIOUS GROUP OPUS DEI. HOW DOES OPUS DEI FEEL ABOUT YOUR NOVEL?
I worked very hard to create a fair and balanced depiction of Opus Dei. Even so, there may be those who are offended by the portrayal. While Opus Dei is a very positive force in the lives of many people, for others, affiliation with Opus Dei has been a profoundly negative experience. Their portrayal in the novel is based on more than a dozen books written about Opus Dei as well as on my own personal interviews with current and former members.

Yeah, right
I actually like Opus Dei, or what I know about it...