Posted on 04/30/2006 7:44:23 PM PDT by Coleus
I was recently browsing Dan Brown’s web site to gather information in preparation for the one thousand theater protests against The Da Vinci Code movie, planned by the American TFP. Since I hope to organize several protests, I felt obliged to get to know the real Dan Brown. I wanted to hear, from his own mouth, why he wrote The Da Vinci Code and whether he believes the information contained in it.
As I was clicking around, I came across a section containing TV and radio interviews that utterly shocked me. While the articles I had read, left it rather dubious whether or not Dan Brown considered his book historically correct, here he clearly claimed that the theories set forth in The Da Vinci Code are accurate. Whereas former articles suggested that he was Christian and somewhat ambivalent to the Catholic Church, here he demonstrated a clearly anti-Catholic bias.
As I listened to these interviews, I was filled with the desire to spread the information I was gathering to the hundreds of protest organizers across the country, so I transcribed the more useful quotes in this article.1 Thus, I hope it will help these organizers tackle some of the more difficult questions they may encounter.
History or Fiction?
One argument protest organizers are certain to come across states that The Da Vinci Code is fiction and therefore harmless. Common responses to this argument include showing that even a novel can be harmful or explaining that fiction does not give one the right to slander or blaspheme. However, such a line of reasoning presupposes that Dan Brown’s book was intended as fiction. This is a presupposition that he, himself, refutes.
In the book, Dan Brown leaves the historicity of The Da Vinci Code ambiguous. Although the book is termed a “novel” on the cover, the first page informs readers that: “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.”2
However, Dan Brown is not nearly so restrained in later interviews. When appearing on “The Today Show,” host Matt Lauer asked him, “How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?” Dan Brown responded: “Absolutely all of it. Obviously, there are - Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies, all of that is historical fact.”3
Similarly, in an interview with “Good Morning America” when asked: “if you were writing it as a nonfiction book, how would it have been different?” Dan Brown responded: “I don’t think it would have. I began the research for The Da Vinci Code as a skeptic. I entirely expected, as I researched the book, to disprove this theory, and after numerous trips to Europe and two years of research, I really became a believer.” In the same interview, Dan Brown strove to substantiate his theory about Our Lord and St. Mary Magdalene being married. He claimed: “The people who ask me how much is true need to realize that this theory about Mary Magdalene has been around for centuries. It’s not my theory. This has been presented, really over the last 2000 years, and it has persisted.”4
In another interview labeled “Chronicle,” Dan Brown claims that he wanted his book to be more than just entertaining, but educational as well: “I wanted to write a book that while it entertained at the same time, you close that last page and go ‘Wow, do you know how much I just learned? That’s fascinating.’ That is really what I set out to do.” In that interview he reiterates his belief in the book’s historic value: “When I started researching Da Vinci Code, I really was skeptical and I expected on some level to disprove all this history that is unearthed in the book and after three trips to Paris and a lot of interviews, I became a believer…”5
Finally, there is a Time magazine article republished on Dan Brown’s web site calling The Da Vinci Code a “historical” thriller, “purporting to expose a centuries-old Vatican conspiracy to conceal the marriage and offspring of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene.”6
It is therefore clear that Dan Brown considers the religious heresies expounded in The Da Vinci Code to be the Gospel truth and not just fiction.
Catholic Bashing
I have also heard Dan Brown described as Christian. However, the extent to which he truly believes in Christ, or any absolute truth, is called into question by a lecture he gave to the New Hampshire Writers Project. He said:
We were born into a culture. We worship the gods of our fathers. I humbly submit that if all of us in this room had been born in Tibet, probably a lot of us would be Buddhists. I think the chances are pretty good and I also think that we would hold on to all that Buddhist philosophy with all the passion that some of us might hold on to our Christian ideals.
He reaffirmed this viewpoint later in the lecture, saying: “Again, we worship the gods of our fathers. It is truly that simple.”7
Some believe that Dan Brown is ambivalent to Catholicism. However, twice in this lecture he made statements, critical of the Church. The first one lashed out against the Catholic belief in the infallibility of Church doctrine: “The world is a big place and now more than ever, there is enormous danger in believing we are infallible. That our version of the truth is absolute.”
Ironically, Dan Brown is not so relativistic in his own opinions. His opinion of Catholic doctrine on women priests is rather absolute. Later in this same lecture, he stated in a pontifical tone:
Prior to 2000 years ago, we lived in world of gods and goddesses. Today we live in a world solely of gods. Women in most cultures have been stripped of their spiritual power and our male-dominated philosophies of absolutism have a long history of violence and bloodshed, which continues to this day…the fact remains, in the major religions of the world, women remain second-class citizens. Why can’t there be women priests? Why is this even an issue?
The Real Dan Brown
After hearing the real Dan Brown in his own words, I saw clearly something that the media are not telling us. Dan Brown is not an innocent fiction writer with an overactive imagination. He is a man with an agenda. He is committed to harm the Church and promote his Gnostic and neo-pagan religious beliefs. He wants to persuade others to accept his false view of history.
That is why, as faithful Catholics, we must reject The Da Vinci Code. We must confront the growing tide of blasphemy and send a strong message that Catholics will not stand by while the Faith is dragged through the mud. We must make it clear that we will resist this attack on the Faith with the absolute certainty that the Church, our immortal Mother, will weather this storm unsullied.
Perhaps Dan Brown knows this as well. During of his lecture to the New Hampshire Writer’s Project, he finished by cynically quoting a British priest who said: “Christian theology has survived the writings of Galileo and the writings of Darwin, surely it will survive the writings of some novelist from New Hampshire.”
At least I can say that on this matter, Dan Brown and I see eye to eye.
___________________
1. The interviews themselves can be viewed at http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/breakingnews.html.
2. Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code, Doubleday, New York, 2003.
3. http://www.danbrown.com/media/multimedia/final/larger/today_show2.mov
4. http://www.danbrown.com/media/multimedia/final/larger/gma_cbds.mov
5. http://www.danbrown.com/media/multimedia/chronicle/large/chronicle_edited.mov
6. http://www.danbrown.com/media/morenews/time041505.htm
7. http://www.danbrown.com/media/audio/DVC_NH_talk.mov
I responded to Knarf last night. I am an evangelical Protestant and we consider this book blasphemous. Knarf seems to be confusing the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdelene (sp.?)
I thought the mating call of the sorority girl was "I'm soooo wasted! Somebody get me another margarita!"
You should read this from the Onion: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46936
Girls Gone Wild Released Back Into Civilization
I agree.
Who CARES what Dan Brown thinks! The books is listed in FICTION ... right on the cover and on the shelves.
Christians are beginning to sound like Muslims after the "Satanic Verses" were published.
ooooh, good one. Seperated at birth, or the same person? "If you pick them up by their ears, it doesn't hurt them..."
I love that scene in Wedding Crashers when he spots the woman with the tattoo on her lower back and says "It's like a bullseye!"
I agree with you. I thought both of the books were amateur at best. It's all the protests and free publicity that has made this hack millions from these 2 books. If everyone had kept silent instead of waging this protest war against the books, they and their author would have faded into obscurity by now.
Not quite. Have any fatwas been issued?
I think this went to #1 on the charts long before the first protests. I don't remember any significant outcry until the book had been on the charts for at least a year, maybe longer.
Umm, yeah. I read the entire Left Behind series, including the part at the end about Jesus returning to Earth. I have a copy of Anne Rice's new book, "Christ the Lord:Out of Egypt", and plan to start reading it as soon as I finish the book I'm currently reading. By the way, Anne Rice's book was named the Best Spiritual Book of the Year by BeliefNet.com, and it's a work of historical fiction, telling the story of Jesus at age 7, leaving Egypt with His family to return to Nazareth. Real people, real events, details fictional, since no historical records exist concerning this time in His life. But that's ok with me, because I suppose I know what He looks like also, even though I've never seen a photograph of Him, just artwork that portrays Him, which was made hundreds of years after His death.
another example of someone injecting their unfounded beliefs into Christology
Hmmm, unfounded, where to start. How about determination. Events far in the future, God determines, or predestines beforehand.
"...for that that is determined shall be done," Dan. 11:36b.
The 70 week prophecy of Daniel: "Seventy weeks are DETERMINED upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sin, and to make reconcilliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy," Dan. 9:24.
The Messiah appears and is "cut off, but not for himself," in v. 26. This happens 483 years from the beginning point of this prophecy (v. 25).
Now, without getting too technical for you, here's my point. God determines beforehand, and what God determines will be done. Write it down, take it to the bank.
It was determined beforehand that Jesus Messiah (Messiah means Christ) would die (be cut off), and not for himself, for the sins and transgressions of the Jews - the prophecy was given in response to Daniel's concern, the transgressions of his people, the Jews.
God had forewarned through his prophets that Jerusalem would be destroyed because of their transgressions. Jerusalem was destroyed. Daniel, some 70 years later thought that the transgression issue was now resolved and his prayer was to that end (see Dan. 9).
However, he finds out the transgression issue is not resolved at all, God determines a 483 year period and then their long awaited Messiah would appear and be cut off. The events predetermined would "finish the transgression, make an end of sin, and make reconcilliation for iniquity" that Daniel was so concerned about. And not only so, but would bring in everlasting righteousness.
Thus, God predetermined that Jesus would die for Israel's sins - and beyond Daniel's concern, we know from the New Testament, he would die for the sins of the whole world - and in doing so would make an end of sin, make reconcilliation for iniquity, and bring in everlasting righteousness.
This happened as God said it would happen...done in accordance with the determination of God.
There is no such thing as a fake death, burial, and resurrection, and then a marraige to Mary Magdalene predetermined by God...as promoted by Dan Brown's book.
No, a thousand times no. Messiah's crucifixion, burial, and resurrection were genuine. The salvation he wrought is genuine. What's more, it was the basis of salvation behind every word written in the New Testament.
Every New Testament writer understood the predetermination of God. They wrote often of predestination. They understood that Messiah's being "cut off" was predestined in the great plan of God before the foundation of the world.
"...whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," Rev. 13:8b.
It's your call if you want to have your name written in the Lamb's book of life. Belief in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection as predestined by God before the creation of the world is how you get your name written there.
If you choose to believe what this blasphemous book promotes, a blasphemous determination, then your name most assuredly will not be written in that book of life. It's your call.
No, but read this thread. A lot of senseless thrashing about a work of fiction.
Don't buy the book or see the movie. It's as simple as 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.