Posted on 05/15/2006 4:08:09 PM PDT by NYer
"Catholics Are Victims of an Offense"
ROME, MAY 15, 2006 (Zenit.org).- The press office of the Opus Dei Prelature sent this statement to ZENIT on Friday in response to comments by the director of the soon-to-be-released film "The Da Vinci Code."
* * *
On Thursday the Italian press published interviews with Ron Howard, director of "The Da Vinci Code" film. In statements attributed to him, Howard said that "to deny the right to see the film is a fascist act," and also "to tell someone not to go see the film is an act of militancy and militancy generates hatred and violence." The Opus Dei is mentioned several times in these interviews. The phrases seem to refer to recent statements by Church authorities.
I would ask Ron Howard to keep calm and express himself with respect.
It is not wise to lose sight of the reality of the situation: This film is offensive to Christians. Howard represents the aggressor, and Catholics are victims of an offense. The one offended cannot have his last right taken away, which is to express his point of view. It is not the statements of ecclesiastics or the respectful request of Opus Dei -- to include a notice at the beginning of the film that it is a work of fiction -- which generates violence. It is rather the odious, false and unjust portrayals that fuel hatred.
In his statements, Howard also repeats that it is simply a film, an invented story, and that it must not be taken too seriously. But it is not possible to deny the importance of the movies and literature. Fiction influences our way of seeing the world, especially among young people. It is not right not to take it seriously. Artistic creativity certainly needs a climate of freedom, but freedom cannot be separated from responsibility.
Imagine a film that says that Sony was behind the attacks on the Twin Towers, which it promoted because it wanted to destabilize the United States. Or a novel that reveals that Sony paid the gunman who shot the Pope in St. Peter's Square in 1981, because it was opposed to the Holy Father's moral leadership. They are only invented stories. I imagine that Sony, a respectable and serious company, would not be happy to see itself portrayed in this way on the screens, and that it would not be satisfied with an answer such as "Don't worry, it's only fiction, it mustn't be taken too seriously, freedom of expression is sacred."
In any case, those who have taken part in the film's project have no reason to be concerned. Christians will not react with hatred and violence, but with respect and charity, without insults or threats. They can continue to calculate tranquilly the money they will make on the film, because the freedom of financial profit seems to be in fact the only sacred freedom, the only one exempt from all responsibility. They will probably make a lot of money, but they are paying a high price by deteriorating their prestige and reputation.
I hope the controversy of these months will not be sterile but serve to reflect on the relative character of financial profit when high values are involved; on the importance of fiction; on responsibility, which always supports and protects freedom.
[The statement added:]
The plan of Opus Dei's Communication Office in regard to this case may be found on the Web page www.opusdei.org, which explains in detail its position over these months.
[From] Manuel Sánchez Hurtado, in charge of relations with the international press, at the Opus Dei's press office in Rome
So, because some Catholics in the history of the Church have committed egregious sins (and all humans other than Our Lord and Lady have committed sins by the way), it is perfectly acceptable to make up lies and attribute absolutely any horrible thing you want to the Catholic Church or a Catholic organization like Opus Dei? If you are a Protestant or an Atheist, can I make up anything I want about you and turn it into a fictional movie using your name just because some Protestants or some Atheists have committed horrific crimes?
I'm glad they're speaking out, too. High time and then some.
Umberto Eco made an effort to try to stick relatively closely to historical reality in his context. In fact, I seem to remember that he criticized Da Vinci Code for taking so many liberties in this regard.
If this film were about any other religion, there'd be screams of horror. Let's say, Islam...can you imagine what would happen? But Catholicism is fair game. Over and over and over. And yet, as one monk said last Sunday, When someone is dying, nine times out of ten, they call us for the last rites. At the end, millions return to the faith.
The Inquisition was to stop the advancement of "heresies" such as the Cathars and other gnostic sects, along with anyone else whose beliefs ran counter to that of the Church. By today's standards, it's the worst kind of wrong. By the standards then, it still wasn't all that much fun.
My own objection to DVC is that it uses a good ol' conspiracy theory to sneak in a poorly written, poorly executed diatribe on goddess-worship. I was actually amused and fascinated by "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", and would have gone to see a movie that incorporated its elements intact. Brown is pushing some new-age concept of goddess-worship as being the true root of Christianity, and he does it with the vehemence of someone who believes it himself.
Yes, the story is fiction, but the agenda is fact.
"...just because some Protestants or some Atheists have committed horrific crimes?"
Stalin, perhaps? Those 340 to 60 millions who died in his reign of terror are forgotten.
In fact, Stalin has had a resurgence of popularity with the left.
Whoops, that was 30 to 60 millions....
Note 340...
Wikipedia is not a recognized, authoritive source. Try this: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm
Go here for visiual evidence of this "mystery":
http://www.fisheaters.com/xdavincilastsupperphotos.html
The restoration of the painting is the cause of the idiotic controversy.
A historical novel has two elements: background and foreground.
In the foreground, the author is free to invent characters and have them do and say anything he wants. It is understood that this is fiction, the author's invention, but even here it is sometimes understood that the author is telling truths about real people for which he would be sued if he used real names.
The background, though, is expected to be historical. In a novel about the Civil War, the North still wins, Lincoln is still president, etc. etc.
The reason you can't say of DVC that "it's just fiction" is that he lies about the background, the things that people assume to be factual in a historical novel.
Imagine an historical novel about WWII that presented Hitler as a misunderstood saint. How far would that "it's just fiction" argument go?
I know that too, but I just want to take a little peek. ;-)
Why do you hate Catholics so much?
Marking.
"If people are really interested in knowing Our Blessed Lord, then sacred scripture is all you need to read."
I don't know of anybody who read DaVinci Code to get to know Jesus better. It's F-I-C-T-I-O-N. And the vast majority of us do read material other than the Bible and religious works. Heck, we even read FR.
"Yes, this film may be so-called "fiction," but it is not inspirational and will only accomplish confusion and untruth."
It's not "so-called" fiction. It IS fiction. There's nothing confusing about it. It's a made-up story. That's what fiction is.
"Please people, don't waste your money on such garbage. Hollywood as well as Ron Howard are only interested in your money, not your soul."
Of course Ron Howard isn't interested in my soul. In fact, I can't remember the last time I went to a movie thinking the director was interested in my soul. Not even Mel Gibson.
I don't hate Catholics and you are being deliberately misleading when you phrase the question that way. Typical way to divert attention from the real issues - i.e. "When are you going to stop beating your wife" kind of question. The RCC has lost all pretensions to spiritual leadership based on it's misdeeds. That's what I have issues with, and not with my many Catholic friends as individuals. I have a degree in History, know the details and am not going to spend hours/days cataloging them for you in some misguided hope that you actually intend to learn something. There is plenty of published material out there - read it for yourself.
You obviously filter out of your "history" what is inconvenient to you for your worldview and your predjudice against the Catholic church. I read your posts. You are obviously intelligent, and great, I salute you and your history degree. But I also read here people presenting you with other facts and you ignore them because they don't suit you. Fine, its your perogative. I get the feeling that you are hold grudges not yours to hold
The facts have been evaluated already. Further discusion is pointless.
We can agree on that
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.