DaVinci Code: Intellectual dissent and the church: Why do hierarchs want you not to see this movie? (You might start asking questions . . .)
This story was taken from www.inq7.net
http://news.inq7.net/lifestyle/index.php?index=2&story_id=75877
Intellectual dissent and the Church
First posted 11:22pm (Mla time) May 16, 2006
By Jaime Licauco
Inquirer
WHY is the Catholic Church in the Philippines panicking over a work of fiction? In the last three weeks, sermons of parish priests during Mass attacked Dan Brown’s best-selling novel, “The Da Vinci Code,” as well as National Geographic’s newly released translation of the Gospel of Judas.
Even Opus Dei, which earlier took a “no-comment” stance on the novel, reportedly was preparing an official answer to Brown’s fictitious portrayal of that organization as a murderous, shadowy and sinister Catholic sect. The movie version of the book will have a premiere on May 18.
Frankly, I couldn’t see what the fuss is all about. For me the “Da Vinci Code” is a cleverly written and exciting thriller with a religious theme. Some of the topics the author raised are admittedly based on speculation and fantasy. But a number of them are historically true.
The novel has been attacked vehemently by the religious community for a number of supposed theological and historical errors. But every fiction writer is entitled to a certain degree of poetic license. Brown is no exception.
Insulting
It is part of a healthy democratic society to have differences of opinion. The problem with some apologists of the Church is that, in their attempt to discredit the novel, they tend to insult the author rather than stick to the issues.
One Catholic critic, for example, questioned Brown’s motives, saying he was only after the money, that’s why he chose a controversial subject. Another said the author “is obviously anti-Christian.”
Gee, all that Brown probably wanted to do was entertain his fellow Christians while provoking serious thought and stimulating discussion about the bases of their religious beliefs. Why should this produce so much anger and hostility from the religious hierarchy?
The problem, as I see it, is that the Catholic Church throughout its 2000-year history has never encouraged independent thinking and intellectual dissent among members. The faithful have always been treated like small children who cannot think for themselves. The Church cannot stand being questioned about its doctrines.
It is a matter of historical record that since the early formation and consolidation of the Christian Church in the fourth century, those who disagreed with official teachings were persecuted and banished by ecclesiastical authorities. Opposing beliefs were considered heretical, meaning, “not in conformity with the official teaching.” Worse, they were regarded as “false” or “erroneous” teachings.
Inquisition
The Church even established the dreaded Inquisition to run after heretics and burn them at the stake. Hundreds of thousands were put to death on mere suspicion of being either a heretic or in league with the devil, including the innocent and great warrior Joan of Arc.
At that time, the Church could easily impose its beliefs on the mostly ignorant people and prevent them from knowing other opinions because it had control over all means of communication. This is no longer possible today because of so many alternative sources of information available to the average Christian.
Although the office of the Holy Inquisition has long been dissolved, a good number of priests and the Church’s followers still have not gotten rid of the inquisitorial mentality. They still maintain a quaintly medieval way of thinking.
One local dentist, for example, who proudly calls himself a “defender of the faith,” recently lambasted Elaine Pagels, who has a doctorate degree in Religion from Harvard University, for her views on the Gnostic Gospels and the Gospel of Judas.
Elementary
When I heard him speak during a symposium on the “Da Vinci Code” sponsored by a publishing house, I asked myself, “Between a doctor of dentistry and a doctor of religion, who should we believe when it comes to religious questions?” Elementary logic provides the obvious answer.
The Church has really nothing to worry about. Filipino Christians will not lose their faith because of a novel, or because of a newly found gospel, which deviates from the official teachings.
But Christian priests and ministers should be prepared to answer the many questions that the thinking population is bound to ask.
For example, why were Mary Magdalene, John the Baptist and Judas Iscariot marginalized by the Church when they all played very important roles in the life and mission of Jesus? Why was Peter chosen to head the apostles when it was to Mary Magdalene that Jesus gave that assignment after his resurrection? Why do women play a very minor role in the Church, when Jesus obviously accorded them a special place when he was alive? What was the real relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus?
Jesus never once declared himself God. Who then declared him so? Is it not true that the books constituting the present Bible were decided by several councils beginning with the Council of Nicea in the year 325 AD? Weren’t there so many gospels existing at the time? Why were only four chosen? What was the basis for the choice?
Several hundred bishops attending the Council of Nicea disagreed with the official choice of what should constitute the Bible. They were promptly banished by Emperor Constantine with the obvious consent of the Pope. Is this a correct course of action sanctioned by God?
Many more questions will be asked by the faithful which should be addressed by the Church.
©2006 www.inq7.net all rights reserved
http://news.inq7.net/lifestyle/index.php?index=2&story_id=75877
Intellectual dissent and the Church
First posted 11:22pm (Mla time) May 16, 2006
By Jaime Licauco
Inquirer
WHY is the Catholic Church in the Philippines panicking over a work of fiction? In the last three weeks, sermons of parish priests during Mass attacked Dan Brown’s best-selling novel, “The Da Vinci Code,” as well as National Geographic’s newly released translation of the Gospel of Judas.
Even Opus Dei, which earlier took a “no-comment” stance on the novel, reportedly was preparing an official answer to Brown’s fictitious portrayal of that organization as a murderous, shadowy and sinister Catholic sect. The movie version of the book will have a premiere on May 18.
Frankly, I couldn’t see what the fuss is all about. For me the “Da Vinci Code” is a cleverly written and exciting thriller with a religious theme. Some of the topics the author raised are admittedly based on speculation and fantasy. But a number of them are historically true.
The novel has been attacked vehemently by the religious community for a number of supposed theological and historical errors. But every fiction writer is entitled to a certain degree of poetic license. Brown is no exception.
Insulting
It is part of a healthy democratic society to have differences of opinion. The problem with some apologists of the Church is that, in their attempt to discredit the novel, they tend to insult the author rather than stick to the issues.
One Catholic critic, for example, questioned Brown’s motives, saying he was only after the money, that’s why he chose a controversial subject. Another said the author “is obviously anti-Christian.”
Gee, all that Brown probably wanted to do was entertain his fellow Christians while provoking serious thought and stimulating discussion about the bases of their religious beliefs. Why should this produce so much anger and hostility from the religious hierarchy?
The problem, as I see it, is that the Catholic Church throughout its 2000-year history has never encouraged independent thinking and intellectual dissent among members. The faithful have always been treated like small children who cannot think for themselves. The Church cannot stand being questioned about its doctrines.
It is a matter of historical record that since the early formation and consolidation of the Christian Church in the fourth century, those who disagreed with official teachings were persecuted and banished by ecclesiastical authorities. Opposing beliefs were considered heretical, meaning, “not in conformity with the official teaching.” Worse, they were regarded as “false” or “erroneous” teachings.
Inquisition
The Church even established the dreaded Inquisition to run after heretics and burn them at the stake. Hundreds of thousands were put to death on mere suspicion of being either a heretic or in league with the devil, including the innocent and great warrior Joan of Arc.
At that time, the Church could easily impose its beliefs on the mostly ignorant people and prevent them from knowing other opinions because it had control over all means of communication. This is no longer possible today because of so many alternative sources of information available to the average Christian.
Although the office of the Holy Inquisition has long been dissolved, a good number of priests and the Church’s followers still have not gotten rid of the inquisitorial mentality. They still maintain a quaintly medieval way of thinking.
One local dentist, for example, who proudly calls himself a “defender of the faith,” recently lambasted Elaine Pagels, who has a doctorate degree in Religion from Harvard University, for her views on the Gnostic Gospels and the Gospel of Judas.
Elementary
When I heard him speak during a symposium on the “Da Vinci Code” sponsored by a publishing house, I asked myself, “Between a doctor of dentistry and a doctor of religion, who should we believe when it comes to religious questions?” Elementary logic provides the obvious answer.
The Church has really nothing to worry about. Filipino Christians will not lose their faith because of a novel, or because of a newly found gospel, which deviates from the official teachings.
But Christian priests and ministers should be prepared to answer the many questions that the thinking population is bound to ask.
For example, why were Mary Magdalene, John the Baptist and Judas Iscariot marginalized by the Church when they all played very important roles in the life and mission of Jesus? Why was Peter chosen to head the apostles when it was to Mary Magdalene that Jesus gave that assignment after his resurrection? Why do women play a very minor role in the Church, when Jesus obviously accorded them a special place when he was alive? What was the real relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus?
Jesus never once declared himself God. Who then declared him so? Is it not true that the books constituting the present Bible were decided by several councils beginning with the Council of Nicea in the year 325 AD? Weren’t there so many gospels existing at the time? Why were only four chosen? What was the basis for the choice?
Several hundred bishops attending the Council of Nicea disagreed with the official choice of what should constitute the Bible. They were promptly banished by Emperor Constantine with the obvious consent of the Pope. Is this a correct course of action sanctioned by God?
Many more questions will be asked by the faithful which should be addressed by the Church.
©2006 www.inq7.net all rights reserved
posted by Paschal Baute at 9:33 PM
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home