Da Vinci Code Protests
Posted in Books, Christianity, Movies, Religion on July 9th, 2006 6 Comments »
In his cloudsoup blog, someone called David writes about yet another storm over the Da Vinci code (this time it is about the film release). Now if you have not had the misfortune of reading this book, then please - don’t bother. I had failed to bother until quite recently when someone persuaded me that it was intelligent and thought provoking, and right up my street. Thanks so much S__, but I would rather have the time back!
But we don’t need to rehash the endless arguments about how wrong a book can be. David’s beef is with Opus Dei (a group much maligned by the book) wanting a disclaimer put on the film saying that it is a work of fiction. (Well yes, we know this, but apparently not everyone does… remember the person who recommended the book to me?)
I know next to nothing about Opus Dei, (although I can translate the name 
). Still, with my lack of knowledge of their organisation, I can understand their anxiety that people who can believe the rest of Brown’s rubbish, might be taken in and think ill of their organisation. At least if they removed the frontispiece from the book that is meant to imply that there is truth in parts of the plot, that would be a start.
But David has no such sympathies. He simply writes:
Hardly believable from an organisation that deliberately promulgates what most of its priests and theologians know full well is a largely fictional account of the pre-literate religion of desert folk.
David is a frequent critic of Christianity, judging by his other blog posts, but this post is just plain loopy. He seems to be buying into the same mythical world that Dan Brown has inhabited, and has set out his stall next to Brown. David wants us to think that there is some kind of conspiracy amongst the Christian theologians and priests whereby they are concealing a truth from their congregations, and that none of them believe what they profess to believe!
No doubt we can name some notable ordained atheists, who believe the Bible is nearly entirely fictional. Donald Cupit and David Spong spring to mind. But there is no conspiracy here. Christians believe the Bible to contain just what it claims to contain. Loads of teaching, much history, some parables and allegory.
Some will disagree about certain parts of the Bible. David is fixated on the first chapter of Genesis, about which the debate over its historical literacy has been raging for about two thousand years or more. But no one seriously doubts the historicity of Jesus or the young church for instance.