It has been three years now since Dan Brown's novel, The
DaVinci Code,(1) was published. From the very beginning, it got
lots of attention in Christian circles because of some of the
things it said about Christ and the church. For people of faith,
there were uncomfortable statements, and they generated any
number of articles, books, study guides and seminars designed to
debunk DaVinci.
Early on, people began asking me what I thought about The
DaVinci Code and what it had to say. My response from the
beginning was READ THE TITLE PAGE. What does it say there? Its
says, "The DaVinci Code, a novel, Dan Brown." A NOVEL. Fiction.
It is a great read, a wonderful airport or beach chair page
turner, but it is a NOVEL. Fiction. It can say all the
outrageous stuff it wants. Why should we worry about that? And
so I never bothered about it from the pulpit.
But now, with the opening of the movie this weekend, one
that has BLOCKBUSTER written all over it, the anticipation of a
huge world-wide box office, even more folks will be exposed to
some of the controversial assertions. Some devout Christians are
screaming bloody murder and calling for boycotts and
demonstrations. Around the world governments are being asked to
prohibit the showing of the film. In India the government
delayed the opening of the movie for two days until Catholic
groups could be allowed a preview screening. In the Philippines
the powers-that-be slapped a "No One Under 18" designation on it
which effectively prohibited showing it in most theaters. Here
in Warren, the theater at the Mall was picketed by folks holding
signs saying that the movie blasphemed Jesus Christ. Truth is, I
am not sure how upset they were because they made their protest
in the parking lot outside the entrance while sitting in beach
chairs with placards, not held high, but rather sitting on the
ground and propped against their knees. Not exactly the stuff of
outrage.
For those few of you who have not read the book or seen the
movie, the story is a mystery, based on a conspiracy. There is a
Harvard professor of Religious Symbology, an energetic French
policeman, the Royal British Knight, an albino Monk-turned-assassin, and, of course, a beautiful heroine, "Sophie" whose
name means "wisdom," in Greek. It is one more plot among many
through the years that involve a quest for the Holy Grail, but if
you have seen "Indiana Jones and the Search for the Holy Grail,"
you learn here that Harrison Ford and Sean Connery had it wrong -
the Holy Grail is not a cup. It is a woman, one with a huge
secret that has been covered up for the last 1700 years. The
Holy Grail is Mary Magdalene, the wife of Jesus and the mother of
his child.
Now you begin to see where Christian purists have a problem
with The DaVinci Code. Jesus and Mary Magdalene were husband and
wife? Not according to scripture. The novel contends that
Leonardo DaVinci's painting of The Last Supper depicts not John,
the "beloved disciple," to Jesus' right, but a woman, if we would
just bother to look. And not just any woman, Jesus' woman - Mary
Magdalene. Well, perhaps. But art historians tell us that
Renaissance conventions called for John to be depicted with long
hair. And besides, DaVinci did not paint his famous picture from
some ancient photograph, it was his creative imagination. And
even that raises a waggish question: who has dinner with everyone
sitting on one side of the table? Duh.
Another concern: the novel asserts that the early church
never considered Jesus Christ as divine. This divinity claim
originated when the emperor Constantine, a recent convert to the
faith, decided this would be a good political move to consolidate
his power. The emperor arranged for a gathering of bishops in a
Council at Nicaea to discuss the issue, and their subsequent vote
narrowly elevated Jesus to the realm of "divine."
In fact, to buttress that position, the church selected four
gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John - from among the 80 or so
that were floating around because these four downplayed Christ's
humanity while supporting the divinity claim in ways that all the
others did not. As one of the characters in the plot says, "The
Bible did not arrive by facsimile from heaven," and he is right.
The books we have in scripture were chosen rigorously over the
course of more than 300 years with the final canon that we have
in our hands today not officially settled until 367 AD. And
actually, if you read them (and not particularly carefully even)
you will meet a Jesus who is, at times, very human indeed,
whereas many of the other non-canonical gospels (like the
recently published Gospel of Judas) assume a philosophical
position based on a Greek understanding that anything material
(including the human body) is somehow evil.
Of course, as you biblical scholars know, the emperor did
indeed call a Council of Nicaea, and there were all sorts of
theological debates, but they were never about whether Jesus was
divine or not. The issue was the nature of that divinity. The
church, from day one, responds with Peter when Jesus asked, "Who
do you say that I am?" and he responds, "You are the Christ, the
son of the living God."(2)
Speaking of scripture, one of the novel's assertions is that
the church is in possession of a secret "Q" document (which is
being guarded by a super-secret society called the Priory of
Sion) which would undermine and actually overturn the church's
account of Christian origins. Well, a little yes and a little
no. Bible scholars have speculated for years about the existence
of a now-lost document identified as "Q." The "Q" is short for
the German QUELLE which means source and scholars think existed
to compile the sayings and teachings of Jesus. If you read the
gospels carefully, you will note that you find the same stories
and teachings repeated from one to another which has convinced
those who study these things that they must have shared some
common source that is no longer available to us: "Q." Nothing
surprising in it, and certainly nothing that would undermine the
faith.
About this "Priory of Sion." The book says parchments
discovered in Paris' Bibliothèque Nationale contain information
about the ancient society that has been guarding the knowledge
that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had children and that their
descendants were later part of the Merovingian line of French
kings. Actually, there ARE documents, but they have been exposed
as a 20th century hoax - 60 Minutes did a segment on it a couple
of weeks ago.
Just one other issue, the abuse of power by the church and
the murderous religious "underground" represented by the society
Opus Dei. There is no question that, at times in history, the
church has done some horrible things, especially when it becomes
allied with political power (which is why some of us are
concerned about the religious right's involvement with partisan
politics right now, but that is another story). So saying, the
church has never tried to cover up the existence of physical
descendants of Jesus (I suspect they would have been objects of
worship rather than a cover-up). And, yes, there is a
conservative Roman Catholic organization called Opus Dei, but
these are simply folk like you and me who are trying to live out
their faith in a disciplined manner, not some collection of
murderous freaks.
Enough about the problems with The DaVinci Code. I, for
one, am glad that it is out there. I am glad for anything that
gets people talking about Jesus. Tom Hanks, who stars in the
movie, got it right when he said, "I think the movie may end up
helping churches do their job. If they put up a sign saying,
'This Wednesday we're discussing the gospel,' 12 people show up.
But if the sign says, 'This Wednesday we're discussing The
DaVinci Code, 800 people show up.'"(3) About right.
So saying, I am sorry that some well-meaning Christians have
raised such a fuss. As a church, we look like petulant, selfish,
angry children who throw hissy-fits anytime we don't get our own
way. It smacks of the reaction that Islamic extremists had to
the Danish newspaper cartoons that were not entirely reverential
toward the prophet Mohammed.
Note the different attitudes toward the book by two
different churches. One, historic Westminster Abbey in London,
which is where one of the climactic scenes takes place. Director
Ron Howard asked permission to film the movie inside the Abbey,
but the officials there turned him down cold. They said the
novel is filled with "factual errors" and is "theologically
unsound" and therefore they were not going to open their doors
for the film.
The second church was Lincoln Cathedral, which is a two-hour
train ride north of London. After being turned away from
Westminster Abbey, Ron Howard went there in the hopes he could
transform the interior of this ancient church into a replica of
Westminster for his movie. Cathedral officials were just as
critical of Brown's book as the Abbey officials had been. They
called it "speculative and far-fetched" and even heretical in
places. But then they said something else: "The book claims that
the church has suppressed important facts about Jesus. The way
to counter this accusation is to be open about the facts and
welcome vigorous debate." They decided to let Howard inside to
film.(4) Good for them. Dialogue and engagement are much more
productive than protesting and picketing.
Remember our lesson in Acts 17 when the Apostle Paul
traveled to Athens. The city was the center of classical
antiquity and home to such famous philosophers as Socrates,
Plato, and Aristotle. By this point, Athens was resting on its
laurels a bit (the Romans were in charge, not the Greeks), but it
was still an intellectual capital, like a major university town
today.
It was a religious city. In fact, Athens had more statues
of gods and goddesses than all the other cities of the day
combined. So here comes Paul. Not happy at what he saw - as the
lesson has it, "he was greatly distressed to see that the city
was full of idols." Perhaps he could have organized a protest in
the parking lot. He had a better idea: "So he reasoned in the
synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in
the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there."
He could attack or attract...but not both. I think he chose
well.
As he continued in conversation with these Athenians, he was
complimentary: "Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are
very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at
your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this
inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as
something unknown I am going to proclaim to you." And he
proceeded to share the good news of Jesus Christ.
And how did people react? "When they heard about the
resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said,
'We want to hear you again on this subject.'" The lesson ends
with, "A few men became followers of Paul and believed." How
about that?
The current issue of The Christian Century includes an
interview with Robin Griffith-Jones, Master of the Temple Church
in London, the site of some of the story's excitement. Lots more
tourists have come since the publication of the book, and many
have questions. Griffith-Jones has a good attitude:
So many people--inside and outside the churches--have
wanted to ask so many questions for so long about
Christianity, but have felt they might seem insulting
or stupid. The novel has brought a lot of these
questions out into the open. If the churches raise the
drawbridge, hide in their ancient pageantry and make
some angry or dismissive response, it will simply
confirm in people's minds that we have something to
hide or simply don't know the answers to their
questions. What if we take this opportunity to present
our story? It is far more exciting, humane and deep
than Dan Brown's; let's help people to hear it.(5)
Amen. Decoding DaVinci. Sixty million books in print, a
blockbuster movie. And we have the same choice Paul faced in the
first century: we can lash out or we can reach out - and based on
Paul's approach, I think the way is clear. If the questions
raised are openly examined and discussed, the truth ought to
prevail without the help of protests, boycotts, or political
intervention. As Paul advised the early church, "Test
everything. Hold on to the good."(6) Christianity has survived
one test after another through the centuries, and it is hard to
believe that a novel, no matter how many copies it sells, or a
movie, no matter how many eyeballs see it, pose any threat to the
survival of the faith. If anything, it is the embarrassing
response of some Christian groups to anything that looks like a
challenge that makes the church lose credibility in the eyes of
the world.
"Be Prepared" is not only a good motto for the Boy Scouts,
it can be good for you and me as well. "Always be prepared to
give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for
the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and
respect..."(7) So says the scripture. Good advice anytime, but
especially now that folks want to talk about The DaVinci Code.
Familiarize yourself, first, with the story itself and, second,
with the reasons why its claims do not withstand scrutiny. And
do not forget the title page - It says, "The DaVinci Code, a
novel, Dan Brown." A NOVEL. Enjoy.
Amen.
1. New York : Doubleday, 2003
2. Matthew 16:16
3. Quoted by Lee Strobel, "Leveraging The DaVinci Code," www.sermoncentral.com
4. ibid.
5. "Temple Church and The Da Vinci Code," The Christian Century, 5/16/06, pp. 20-21
6. I Thessalonians 5:21
7. I Peter 3:15
click and send us mail