Dan Brown's view on the Roman Catholic Church

[benjamin1973]

I’d take it all with a grain of salt. Christianity is an old faith, and there ARE a lot of interesting mysteries and secret orders which might make good fodder for a pop-fiction book.

 

[Thorolfr]

when you say they are only good for entertainment, they are actually not good entertainment. He is a poor writer. And a horrible researcher, which a good fiction writer needs to be.

I haven’t read The Da Vinci Code, but I did read Inferno and rather enjoyed it. It isn’t a literary masterpiece, but was an easy and relatively quick read and I don’t think it was badly written.

 

[tafan2]

Ok, that’s fine, I enjoy a good pop nivel every now and then myself. But if I read a novel, the background info needs to be half way accurate. A monk in Opus Dei? It would take all of 5 minutes of researching Oous Dei to learn they do not have any monks, they are not even a religious order. Good writers don’t get such a key part of their story so spectacular ly wrong.

 

[angel12]

I haven’t read The Da Vinci Code , but I did read Inferno and rather enjoyed it. It isn’t a literary masterpiece, but was an easy and relatively quick read and I don’t think it was badly written.

I’ve read, I believe, most of his books. They are light, fun, reads. I read them for entertainment. Not for an education in theology, Church history, or the organization of religious orders.

 

[michaelhager]

A lot of Dan Brown’s fiction is based on fact. There are still those who believe that Jesus married St. Mary Magdalene and that she bore HIs Children who’s descendants walk the earth today. He based the over-all premise of his book on that. Some other items have some historical basis. There is academic speculation that the person to the right of Jesus in the last supper is Mary Magdalene. Unproved. His history is very interesting and mostly verifiable although some of his conclusions based on History are a little wobbly. His descriptions of ancient architecture and monuments is spot on. He weaves a great mystery tale and his work is easy to read and exciting. But his theology is slanted, exaggerated and there is a good reason his books reside in the fiction section of the library.

I have immense enjoyed reading most of them, and I have even enjoyed reading his warped theology. As apologists we are bound to prepare counter arguments for these kinds of things.

As to whether or not he hates Christians, Catholics or religion in general, I suppose you could infer that fro his writing, but as said elsewhere here, having not heard him state any of this directly, I could be mistaken.

The important thing is to remember that he is writing fiction. Fiction is to be enjoyed (if it’s well written) but not believed. So if you choose to read these books, do so with a copy of the Bible and the Catechism at your elbow jsut to check up on the truth of those things you might find dubious.

 

[MT1926]

They tried to explain a woman the fact that Constantine could have rewritten the Bible and “divinate” Christ, together with his attempts to completely eliminate Mary Magdalene (who was supposed to have royal blood) from the Scripture.

We still have something like 150 manuscripts of the Bible dating before the time of Constantine. Not to mention the writings of the Church Fathers who predate Constantine. None of which even allude to Mary Magdalene, not St. Peter being the Rock.

I couldn’t even imagine how impossible it would have been for Constantine to round up every writing in existence then undergo the task of having scribes make new ones with his changes in them, by hand. With as long as it took to hand write a Bible I’m sure Constantine would have been six feet under before that task was completed.

Never read the Da Vinci Code, but that is one highly illogical explaination on Dan Browns part.

God Bless

 

[Dovekin]

his theology is slanted, exaggerated and there is a good reason his books reside in the fiction section of the library.

The theology is NOT Dan Brown’s. There are real people who hold positions on Mary Magdalene similar to those he describes. He is describing their theology as part of a fictional account, just like Star Trek discusses the Prime Directive. Gene Roddenberry may or may not believe in the Prime Directive, but he created a fictiinal account of people who do believe in it.

Otherwise, I agree with everything you said.

 

[Dovekin]

None of which even allude to Mary Magdalene, not St. Peter being the Rock.

Mary Magdalene. […] loved her more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples […]. They said to him “Why do you love her more than all of us?” The Savior answered and said to them,“Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.”

This is a quote from the Gospel of Philip, one of those many manuscripts from before the time of Constantine. While it does not use “rock” to describe Mary Magdalene, it certainly seems to be making her into a higher authority than Peter.

There are other examples hat people use to show that the subject was discussed in the early Church. There are even passages from the canonical scripture that suggests some controversy, as in

He appeared first to Peter. I Cor 15
He appeared first to Mary Magdalene. Mark 16

The Church accepted the differences in meaning of those reo statements, and St Peter became known as the leader of the disciples. Quite rightly imo. But there was evidence for a different opinion that should not be denied.

 

[YoungCatholicGuy]

Dan Browne stated in an interview that his book the Da Vinci Code is fiction, NOT real or historical.

 

[somecanadian]

I think it’s all nonsense and pretty much every historian of every kind knows it (art historians, biblical historians, etc).

Christians were hugely persecuted before Constantine. He ended the persecution of Christians after he perceived the Christian God to save his neck, so to speak. BUT he would have gained NOTHING from controlling or changing Catholic beliefs as at the time Christians had absolutely no power. It was the Emperor after Constantine who made Christianity the religion of the state but this was some time after Constantine said: Hey, let’s maybe not throw Christians into lion dens eh?

Constantine was pantheistic for almost all of his life and I’d wager he had more important things to worry about than messing with the persecuted Christians beliefs.

 

[MT1926]

While it does not use “rock” to describe Mary Magdalene, it certainly seems to be making her into a higher authority than Peter.

Haven’t really read the gospel of Phillip, not enough time in this life for the books I already want to read.

Anyway, not really seeing anything about authority here. Quite often the one that is loved the most is not the best candidate to be left in charge. That’s probably why he chose Peter over John.

But there was evidence for a different opinion that should not be denied.

It all depends on context. We can isolate any one verse and read the rest of the Bible within that context and form whatever opinions we want. To me that really is just evidence for our need for a guide.

God Bless

 

[Peebo]

I haven’t read The Da Vinci Code…I have read other books that follow along similar lines…I think they pander to the conspiracy theories that many Protestants…atheists…and probably even some Catholic…have about the Catholic church…obviously there’s money to be made in knocking the Catholic church

 

[somecanadian]

It’s a Protestant country. The anti-Catholicism runs fairly deep (in my experience).

 

[scope]

It’s not just about Anti-Catholicism. He is claiming that the whole Bible was rewritten.

 

[somecanadian]

It’s a book of fiction. People who think it’s real are, in my opinion, just looking for excuses to hate. So I do believe those who believe this nonsense believe it because of inherent anti-Catholicism.

 

[anon90438963]

It is fiction. Fiction by definition is something “not true.” In my way of thinking anyone can write any fiction they want. It is wrong for people to assume fiction is “true.”
As I mentioned in a previous recent thread about Dan Brown, my problem with him is he is a lousy writer.

 

[CelticWarlord]

Great writing, good entertainment, I’ve enjoyed all his books. But there’s a reason they are found in the fiction section.

And Da Vinci’s painting of the last supper… I don’t think Leonardo was present for that.

 

[YoungCatholicGuy]

As he said in an interview :
The whole book is Fiction, Not historical/ fact.