[RexBeach]

Does the book not say on its dust jacket somewhere that it's a "historical novel" or a "novel"? What's wrong with that?

I add, though, that many of my non-Catholic friends urged me to read "The DaVinci Code" because it would help me to "question my faith." Now why would I want to do that if I adore my faith? I, in turn, posed this question: "If I urged you to read a book because it would help you question the love you have for your children, would you read it?" Honestly.

Vatican's a mite late on this, however. I'd say that horse left the barn a long time ago, and it's kinda late to try and shut the barn door.

[the OlLine Rebel]

I think the problem is not so much whether it says it's true or not, but the impression it gives.

This is true of basically every piece of "fiction" put out in the public. Happens in movies all the time. It helps to give certain impressions, even if it's nothing but a "fanciful" made-up story.

There are enough dumb people in the world who would believe stuff like it, or allow it to sow the seeds of such belief as more discussion of Christ maybe having children crops up.

Impressions are important, whether the author intended to change all church history or not.

[A.A. Cunningham]

The book also says: "All description of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate." Browns' own words; it's fiction but it's accurate fiction.

Lots of gullible folks in this world, many whom, unfortunately, are Catholics that are only too willing to line hack writer Browns' pockets. Plenty of people in the Vatican and within the Catholic Church; Opus Dei, Carl Olson, etc. have spoken out and written about this waste of pulp since it was published. This is only news because an official appointment has been made to educate the gullible movie goers in the world before they make the mistake of lining the pockets of Brown, et al.