Vatician boots "Da Vinci" from shelves

[southsider2k5]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7205300/

[Wong & Owens]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7205300/

 

 

I don't believe the book contains a lick of anti-Catholic "prejudice," but if it does, well, payback's a b**** ain't it?

[Texsox]

As part of a broader question, can someone read, view, or listen to, unhealthy messages as part of research, or questioning, and not be harmed? Pete Townsend was busted for looking at child pornography, he claimed was for a project. Someone at the Vatican must have read the book to form an opinion, were they harmed? Could a loyal Sox fan spend the summer as a Cubs fan to see what it's like?

[southsider2k5]

As part of a broader question, can someone read, view, or listen to, unhealthy messages as part of research, or questioning, and not be harmed? Pete Townsend was busted for looking at child pornography, he claimed was for a project. Someone at the Vatican must have read the book to form an opinion, were they harmed? Could a loyal Sox fan spend the summer as a Cubs fan to see what it's like?

 

I believe faith has to be tested. If it isn't, how do you know that what you believe is real, or that you really believe it.

 

And it is biblically pretty clear, that if you were weak enough to let something like the "Da Vinci Code" alter your faith, you probably weren't going to get through the pearly gates in the first place.

[Texsox]

I don't believe the book contains a lick of anti-Catholic "prejudice," but if it does, well, payback's a b**** ain't it?

 

 

In Catholicism there are Capitol "T" Traditions that are bedrock matters of faith and there are small "t" traditions that are more transitory, and have changed through the years.

 

This book challenges some of the Traditions of Catholic faith. The Virgin Mary is one of them. Jesus not marrying is another. IIRC the book also questions Saints and their roll in faith. I would also assume that it challenges Peter and his roll.

On Which Rock Will Jesus Build His Church?

Was Jesus referring to Simon Peter himself, his faith, or his confession of Christ?

 

by Gary Hoge

 

Catholics look to Matthew 16:17-19 as the primary biblical basis for the Papacy. They claim that Jesus designated Peter as the earthly rock upon which He would build His Church. Let’s have a look at these verses:

 

    Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this [Christ’s identity] was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

 

When we read this in English, we must remember that this apostle’s name was Simon, not Peter, and that’s how Jesus addressed him in verse 17: “Blessed are you, Simon . . .” It’s easy to forget that “Peter” was not a name, as it is today, it was a Greek word meaning “rock.” So what Jesus said was, “Blessed are you Simon. I tell you that you are rock, and on this rock I will build my Church.” Catholics interpret this literally. They believe that Jesus Himself is the invisible, spiritual foundation of the Church, the “chief cornerstone” (Eph. 2:20), but that Peter is the visible, organizational foundation of the Church on earth.

 

Protestants have historically claimed that the “rock” in verse 18 refers, not to Peter, but to Peter’s confession of Christ, or to Christ Himself. They based this primarily on the fact that the Greek word “Peter” (Petros) is slightly different from the word “rock” (petra). Therefore, they concluded that the rock cannot refer to Peter. But the reason for the difference is simple: the Greek word “rock” (petra) is feminine, and one would not give a man a feminine nickname. The word “Peter,” Petros, is simply the masculine form of petra. link

 

 

For those wondering small t traditions would be things like the frequency of receiving communion. That has gone from at every opportunity to once or twice in a lifetime (preferably near death), to daily. Another one is Priests being allowed to marry. That was changed a few hundred years ago.

Edited March 16, 2005 by Texsox

[JUGGERNAUT]

The problem with the book is like most liberal publications it only presents a single minded viewpoint of the author's analysis. For those who want a multi-facted viewpoint I suggest you check out the National Geographic channel special on this.

 

The bottomline is that there is not one shred of proof that substantiates the claims by the author. The biggest sign of this in the special is when the so-called heirs of Christ state that unequivocally in the special.

 

I'm open-minded to some parts of the book but not the general premise.

That has nothing to do with my being religious but rather my extensive studies of Da Vinci himself. He was not a subtle person & would not have encrypted such meaning in his paintings to carry forth the author's premise. We are talking about a person who generated pages & pages of notes detailing every aspect of what he was thinking about from the helicopter to man's anatomy. Da Vinci spared nothing when it came to attention to detail in things arising from his thoughts.

 

So even if you accept the general premise that Mary Mag is seated in the Last Supper & that the Mona Lisa represents the duality of personhood between Mary Mag & Jesus you are reaching far & wide in accepting that Da Vinci would never have created notes on the topics. If you study the man the more likely conclusion is that if he was born wealthy he likely would have done neither painting. He did them both for $ & because he was a gifted artist his expression elevated rather mundane settings to new heights. Think about it. There is nothing spectacular happening in the Last Supper or Mona Lisa. Let Da Vinci's expressionism makes both of them spectacular.

 

Da Vinci did produce writings on religion & in none of them does he ever express the premise of the author. Not only does he not even elude to such a premise but his regards for women in his own life would hardly classify him as being anything more than a chauvinist. It simply makes no sense to tie Da Vinci to that premise.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Uhm, it's a novel.

 

In response, book publisher Doubleday said: “The ideas put forth in ’The Da Vinci Code’ have been circulating for centuries; this novel explores them in an accessible work of fiction. Doubleday certainly respects Cardinal Bertone, the Vatican and their desire to clarify any factual errors they feel may have been made in ’The Da Vinci Code’.”

 

I just love the faith that the Vatican has in the strenght of the fate of their flock. "The book sows doubts and dangerous confusion among the faithful..." and reading it is going to make their faith crumble.

 

I agree with SS - spiritual faith is meant to be critically examined if it is to have any meaning.

[TheBigHurt35]

Uhm, it's a novel.

 

Agreed. I'm Presbyterian, but my wife is Catholic and we attend a Catholic church. Our priest rambled on and on about this during one of his sermons. It's a freaking nonfiction book, people. Get over it.

[Texsox]

It's just a song, it's just a radio show, it's just a movie, it's just a speech, it's just a thought, it's just a newscast, it's just a picture, it's just what we feed our brains. If it's just fiction, then how would it challenge our beliefs?

 

There are many parables in the Bible. Wouldn't it be illogical to assume a novel couldn't challenge a parable?

[FlaSoxxJim]

It's just a song, it's just a radio show, it's just a movie, it's just a speech, it's just a thought, it's just a newscast, it's just a picture, it's just what we feed our brains. If it's just fiction, then how would it challenge our beliefs?

 

There are many parables in the Bible. Wouldn't it be illogical to assume a novel couldn't challenge a parable?

The parables themselves were just stories - teaching tools Jesus used much like and Aesop's fable. What would be the big deal challenging a parable. Challenging the Gospel accounts of the life and acts of Jesus and Co. is another matter.

 

Still, DaVinci Code is a work of fiction. Still, I maintain that faith is supposed to be challenged and critically examined at the personal level - otherwise you're just practicing the regurgitated faith of your parents, their parents, etc.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Then again all the major points in the DaVinci Code are mentioned in the other book De-bunking the DaVinci Code. So as long as the Vatican offers the De-bunking book you can still get that challenge to your spiritual faith you desire

[Soxy]

It's a freaking nonfiction book, people.  Get over it.

The DaVinci Code is fiction. The "nonfiction" book is Holy Blood Holy Grail (or some other crap pretentious title).

[YASNY]

More on this:

 

Vatican appoints official Da Vinci Code debunker

 

Michelle Pauli

Tuesday March 15, 2005

 

With sales of over 18m copies in 44 languages, topping bestseller charts all over the world and earning its author more than £140m, Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code is a global phenomenon. And now it has become the first book ever to have an archbishop dedicated to debunking its contents.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Archbishop of Genoa and a possible successor to the Pope, has been appointed by the Vatican to rebut what the Catholic church calls the "shameful and unfounded errors" contained within The Da Vinci Code. He is organising a series of public debates focusing on the conspiracy theories and what the Vatican sees as the blurring of fact and fiction at the heart of the thriller, the first of which will be held in Genoa tomorrow.

 

The book follows the investigations of a Harvard code expert who is looking into the murder of the curator of the Louvre Museum in Paris. He discovers a series of clues buried in the works of Leonardo Da Vinci and, by deciphering riddles and anagrams, uncovers the secrets of the holy grail: that Jesus never claimed to be divine, that he married Mary Magdalene and had a child with her, that his bloodline survived in France and that the grail itself was not a chalice but a woman. It is this, along with the book's characterization of the international Catholic organization Opus Dei as an extremist cult, that has particularly exercised the Vatican.

 

"The book is everywhere," Cardinal Bertone told Il Giornale newspaper, according to a report in The Times today. "There is a very real risk that many people who read it will believe that the fables it contains are true. [Dan Brown] even perverts the story of the holy grail, which most certainly does not refer to the descendants of Mary Magadalene. It astonishes and worries me that so many people believe these lies."

 

The 70-year-old cardinal, a former football commentator, has acted as deputy to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The appointment of such a high-profile defender of the church to take up battle against a work of fiction is an indication of how upset the Vatican is about the success of the book, which has spawned a small publishing industry of its own and is currently being made into a film, starring Tom Hanks, to be released next year.

 

According to David Barrett, a writer on religion and expert on The Da Vinci Code, "Members of the Catholic church are particularly upset by what they see as the blasphemous suggestion that Jesus may have had sex - but there is absolutely no reason theologically why Jesus could not have been married and had a family. They are also upset at the way the Catholic church and the Vatican are characterised as having plotted to cover up the 'truth' about Christianity, and they are understandably upset at the characterisation of Opus Dei.

 

"Many people think there are genuine concerns about Opus Dei but the actions ascribed to them in the novel are completely ridiculous. Apart from anything else, they don't have monks."

 

As a result of the book's hold over the public's imagination, Opus Dei has produced its own response: a 127-page statement which sets out the "errors" in the book, and states that "many readers are intrigued by the claims about Christian history and theology presented in The Da Vinci Code. We would like to remind them it is a work of fiction and not a reliable source of information."

 

Barrett is dismissive of the bestseller. "It's basically a hack thriller, a typical airport book," he says. "The Catholic church are overreacting: ultimately, it's only a novel and the controversy will eventually die down. On the other hand, the book raises some serious questions about the origins of Christianity. Even though it makes many glaring historical errors, the fact remains that early Christianity did take many variant forms, including Gnostic Christianity, and there are genuine issues to be examined. But such examinations should be undertaken by competent theologians and historians, not hack thriller writers who are very poor at their research."

 

Greg Watts, a Catholic author, has similar concerns about Brown's credentials. "Dan Brown's concern is to make money rather than teach theology. He has found a gullible audience and has played on their ignorance," he says. "He gives the readers the impression that they understand Christianity when in fact they've been hoodwinked and manipulated."

 

However, Watts also feels that the fact that The Da Vinci Code has appealed to such a broad audience presents a challenge to the church: "There is a lesson for the church in the success of The Da Vinci Code and the lesson is that the church needs to use modern media much more effectively to present the Christian message to the new generation."

 

A spokesperson for the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, said that they had no plans for any similar 'debunking' initiatives.

 

Dan Brown's publishers were unavailable to comment on the appointment of Cardinal Bertone.

[TheBigHurt35]

The DaVinci Code is fiction. The "nonfiction" book is Holy Blood Holy Grail (or some other crap pretentious title).

 

Doh! That's what I meant. :banghead

[Rex Kickass]

Vatican City is really small. I didn't even know there was a fiction bookstore in the Holy See.

[sec159row2]

what's the cardinal gonna say about brown's other book "Angels and Demons" ?

 

angels and demons in my opinion is much more damaging to the vatican.. the pope fathers a child thru artificial insemination(sp?) .. the pope is murdered by his closest aid and then four cardinals are murdered in the same plot... to protect the vatican...

 

sorry to those who are gonna read it....

 

and what's so wrong with thinking jesus was married and did the nasty with mary mag? it doesn't effect my faith.. i like to think jesus was a normal guy...

 

the cardinals response only strengthens brown's premise that the church does bad things to protect itself... not to mention, sell more books for mr. brown....

[Wong & Owens]

Vatican City is really small. I didn't even know there was a fiction bookstore in the Holy See.

 

 

Oh yah, you can get papal keychains, pencils with pope hat-shaped erasers, and beach towels with the Sistine Chapel scene on them.

[sec159row2]

Oh yah, you can get papal keychains, pencils with pope hat-shaped erasers, and beach towels with the Sistine Chapel scene on them. 

 

 

I've got a popener from the vatican... a bottle opener with a picture of the pope on one side and some design on the other...

[JUGGERNAUT]

This 1 non-fiction book as spawned a library

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/listm...6082266-7334316