After watching two thirds of The Da Vinci Code film, American philosopher Deal Hudson walked out of the theatre and commented: "I have never seen a piece of popular entertainment as blatantly anti-Catholic.

"In my opinion, Director Ron Howard and actor Tom Hanks should publicly apologise to the Church and to Opus Dei. No other religious or ethnic group would ever be treated in such a way without a mighty roar of protest from the mainstream media."


People fell for ‘The Da Vinci Code’ because anti-Catholicism is still in vogue world over

I can't quite see why so many regular people start posts with a quotation from someone else. However, this one is interesting so I suppose I ought to comment.

I have not seen the film so I can't comment directly on it, but I did read the book and found it to be a rather gripping read. In fact, Brown writes is short scenes and cuts back and forth just like a film so I suppose it was pretty similar.

now, was it anti-Catholic? I really don't see why or how. Yes it featured a bit of Catholicism and Opus Dei but in fact the story centres around a fictional idea that Jesus had offspring. Now this really is fictional for despite various odd attempts to prove it from analysis of Revelation there is not a shred of evidence and it is a plain fiction. So what is the book if it is not a work of fiction? Now that a few Catholics in the story do things that go beyond what is allowable or acceptable for Catholics is not anti-Catholic any more that discovering paedophile priests. It is fact that some members of any organistion go astray but that does not mean the whole organiation is wrong or false.

We need a sense of proportion in these matters. The compaints and objections by Catholics and some Anglicans have actually helped raise awareness of the film that would not have been there otherwise amd just ignoring it would have been a better strategy. Society in the main is very mush one that allows everyone their own beliefs and people are accepted with those beliefs. Remember non Catholics often get a hard time on this board.

You have a very interesting standard. Suppose that I wrote a novel based on 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' and it was about a university professor who discovered that the world was run by a secret Jewish cabal, which for centuries had covered up its existence by committing mass murder, would anyone deny that this novel was antisemitic? Would the defense 'hey it is only fiction after all?' satisfy the ADL?

Suppose I wrote a novel about the antebellum South, in which slavery was portrayed as a positive good, all the 'good negroes' loved being slaves, and all the black females took pleasure in being used as sex slaves by the male plantation owners and his sons. Would anyone deny that this novel was racist? Would saying 'hey, it is only fiction after all?' satisfy the NAACP?

I'm always weary of anybody who can't mention the Catholic faith without bringing up the word pedophile. It's a red flag that their only source of information is poorly researched headlines. Incidentally, on this issue, which is not what this thread is about so I shouldn't go there, but I will anyway, in a run-on sentence no less, it should be noted that the population of priests accused of any type of abuse or misconduct is lower than the percentage of non-Catholic clergy when the same charges are compared (this has been written on by non-Catholic sources, but you must actually read to find them).

Now, to be back on point: the movie is anti-Catholic not because of a slight overstepping of boundaries of some of the characters, and I sincerely doubt that you know so little of the Catholic Church or her members to think that this is what we are actually offended by.



This is maybe one of the funniest things I have ever heard. This film was a MAJOR release by Ron Howard and starring Tom Hanks...but, um, yeah, I'm sure that it was the offended Catholics and Anglicans that raised awareness. Yeah. That's it.



Remember, Catholics often get a hard time on this board and nearly everywhere we go. Don't pretend to be the voice of fairness here. Where is your acceptance of the Catholic belief that this film is offensive?

Dani

Right, the contention that the movie adaptation of a book that sold 40 million copes even NEEDS publicity is more than a little absurd. Books that sell 40 million copes don't need advertising, free or otherwise.

It's like saying 'Well, the movie critics who loathed the Star Wars prequels should have just ignored them, instead of criticizing them, if they wouldn't have complained about how much you dislike them', the movies never would have become popular', yeah right, and the 100 million+ people who have seen the original trilogy would have done what, shrugged their shoulders with indifference and said 'yeah, I loved the old Star Wars films, but if there is no one out there attacking this new movie, I am just not interested in seeing it'? Yeah, that'll work.

The film and the book are a big "what if??" - they explore a non-reality, an imaginative little conspiracy theory, and they suggest that the church is responsible for the biggest cover up in human history - just sounds like a sensationalised tale to me. The ideas in it postulate a situation where the church is secretive, but its for suspense value, its a literary device.

Most high school history students in australia at some point do a case study of the JFK assassination. most people don't believe it was lee harvey oswald, and many suggest a huge US government coverup. Does that make these ordinary australians who eat their mcdonalds and watch american sitcoms anti-american?

I still maintain that the davinci code has provoked one of the biggest mass-overreactions i've ever witnessed.

What you're failing to recognize is the fact that the protestant agenda has always attempted to make the Church seem secretive and manipulative. And, the film and book are not a "big 'what if'" nor is that how Dan Brown attempts to present them. By listing his page of "facts," wherein he cites faulty sources, and then further by blatantly misrepresenting actual religions and groups, Dan Brown is clearly attempting to manipulate his audience. Remember, the website for the film was SODARKTHECONOFMAN...Not WHATIFTHECONOFMAN?.



While I'm not sure that paranoia is necessarily the best mentality to encourage in the public school setting, it does not make them anti-American. There are two reasons why this analogy doesn't hold water. One is that you are comparing ONE SMALL EVENT potentially perpetrated by the American government to the FOUNDATION of a religion (and many other religions that sprang forth from it). If they were saying that the US Government's consititution was based on a lie, and presented a list of "facts" in an effort to manipulate the general international population into believing that, then I would say that, yes, they were anti-American.

Secondly, a government is a government. Religion is a different matter. Religion is sacred and should be treated as such.



And yet, the numbers speak differently, don't they? It's been proven that this type of film shakes the faith of the weak. We are indeed the keepers of our brethren, and when something like this shows up, it is not overreaction to say, wait a minute folks, and expose all the holes. It's okay to say, "You know what? This is an attack on our religion and that's not cool." Nobody would stand for a film that so blatantly attacked any other religion, would they? Why should we say that it's ok when the target is God's Church?

Dani

I personally know people who have left the Church because reading the Davinci Code convinced them that Christianity is false. So, if you think that people being led into eternal damnation is 'no big deal'....

I've heard of many more who were provoked to set aside their complacency and find out more about what really happened. Many people have come to the Church through their investigation of DVC.

The ends don't justify the means Nero.


SV

You could argue that if a person's faith crumbles so quickly, because of reading ONE book, there was not a solid faith to start with...As my late-godmother used to say 'A faith not tested, is not a faith at all' and I still think there is some truth in that...

Anna x

Agreed. I would never be a proponent for such an idea.

I think the point I was trying to make is that the story is a story. It is neutral in and of itself, it is neither good nor evil.

The motive of the man who created it is actually irrelevant to the manner in which it is received, in my opinion.

The neutral object can be a force for good or for evil.

I think that to say that the Holy Spirit can't work through DVC is to put God in a box, which is never a good idea. God works ALL things together for the good.

And isn't there something in one of St Paul's letters about taking ALL things and rendering them unto Christ?

Just a few thoughts.

Nero how you can say the motive of the man is irrevelant??

A movie attacking Christ can hardly be considered a neutral object!

Render unto Christ indeed.....and we do so by openly speaking against a movie that attacks Him.


SV

That's the fault of many people, and especially of priests who won't preach doctrine from the pulpit. It's no wonder so many Catholics have shaky faith when their priests give them "feel-good" sermons rather than theological truths. I know that priests today have many pressures put on them, but that's no excuse to neglect the spiritual health of their congregation.

In light of that, it makes sense that some people's faith is shaken by a pop culture book/film such as "The DaVinci Code." Pop culture has worked hard to shape our public morality on other issues, such as "normalizing" homosexuality, so why should it not use its power to mock and trivialize Catholicism? After all, the Church stands for everything our "post-Christian" society hates--self-control, chastity, temperance...you know...the virtues.

On the other hand, each of us is responsible for forming our consciences and finding theological truths. I got nothing from my 16 years of Catholic school, and had to find the truth about the Faith for myself. Everyone must take responsibility for that, so that a stupid, 3rd rate book and film don't drive them away from Peter and from Christ.

(sorry about the sermon...I'm new here... )

Mandingo.

You may be interested in the "Chalice of Strength" booklet of prayers for priests.

It is good and necessary to both pray for and support our parish priests as much as we can...any desired improvement is more likely to follow when a priest is supported and prayed for.

Dani