Cardinal urges [hypocritical] legal action against Da Vinci Code

Rooters.com ^ | Sun May 7, 2006 10:13am ET | Philip Pullella

[Lunatic Fringe]

OK, quiet everyone... "The Sopranos" is on.

[trashcanbred]

As I understand it the Archives are open to very few scholars. I would imagine that there must be something in there to disprove Dan Brown's book and what he states about the church in the 3rd century.

[trashcanbred]

I agree... which is why I still am scratching my head over why the Church is making such a big deal over this.

[Constantine XIII]

A debunking by Skeptic.com:

"The DaVinci Code Cult"

http://www.skeptic.com/the_magazine/featured_articles/v11n4_da_vinci_code.php

[TAdams8591]

It would be "hypocrisy" if the church made fun of the Muslim cartoons.

BTW, I argued the editors should have censored themselves and NEVER printed those cartoons. And I was excoriated for that opinion.

I don't want people mocking my religious beliefs, and the religious beliefs of others shouldn't be mocked.

[Kellis91789]

I'm focused on my fantasy; don't confuse me with facts !

Now ... where's my koolaid ?

[Kellis91789]

Let's see if I have this right.

A religious creed that maintains it CANNOT be known definitively, but requires an act of FAITH (def. without factual knowledge) now suggests bringing lawsuits to force somebody else to DISPROVE their tenets ??

[DustyMoment]

You answered your own response:

For cryin' out loud, Brown has done nothing but claim otherwise. 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."

Nowhere in there does he say that the plot is factual, just the parts of the story that make the plot come to life.

[DustyMoment]

Can you point me to where he said it is fiction?

If you read irishjuggler's post #102, you have the answers to your own question.

[DustyMoment]

I don't believe in censorship or legal action, but I certainly think the church has a duty to respond to an attack.

I have rarely seen so much hysteria over a work of fiction. If the Catholic Church considers this to be an attack, what is it when the press brings up all the pedophiles in the church that, to this day, they have refused to really address?

This is the biggest much ado about nothing I have seen in years and the Catholic Church is giving it credibility by even mentioning the book. If there were no truth to the story, there would be much less uproar. IOW, to quote Mr. Shakespeare again, methinks they doth protesteth too much.

Brown knows full well that his novel would not have sold as well if he had marketed it as non-fiction.

He has clearly intimated that the basic premises within the novel are true.

And they are. The art, architecture, secret socities and secret rituals, and locations are all true. Those are part and parcel of the basic premise of the novel. When you read too much into something, you see things that aren't there and, thus, the current firestorm of hysteria surrounding this novel. Trust me when I tell you that Dan Brown is laughing all the way to the bank.

[DustyMoment]

I would also add that prior to the release of the Passion of the Christ, the hysteria over that movie reached near panic crescendo. Jews, in particular, claimed that the movie would incite a whole new round of anti-semitism. Other than that stemming from the Religion of Peace, there has been none.

And, if you hadn't noticed, the movie went on to become a worlwide blockbuster. So much for hysteria.

[Miss Marple]

Here's the point: the basic premises in the article are NOT true. Why are you convinced that they are? Is it because you believe the novel?

My priests are not hysterical. They have suggested reading which explains the errors in the novel (and I presume the movie). Attending the movie is left up to us. Since I attend about 2 movies a year, this will not be one of them.

As far as the pedophile priests, that is a shame that the Church is dealing with. Some cardinals and bishops(Mahoney in particular) should and probably will be removed. The Vatican is examining and inspecting all seminaries. Admission to seminaries now requires psychological screening and background checks.

From time to time throughout history, the Church has suffered through periods of corruption and scandal. She has always righted herself, and is still here, after 2000 years.

The concern of the Church is for the souls of gullible people and for those who know nothing of Christianity to begin with. Unlike some who post here, the Church values all souls, even those of the stupid, gullible, and uneducated.

[Lunatic Fringe]

I once read a book that referred to real places called New York & Chicago, and real people like Albert Einstein & Carl Sagan. I think someone should sue.

[Lunatic Fringe]

The concern of the Church is for the souls of gullible people

LOL! Truer words were never spoken!!!!

[capitalist229]

This is one of the fundamental human rights: that we should be respected, our religious beliefs respected

Our right to practice religion is protected by the US Constitution.

But that is as far as it goes. There is no right to turn religious sacrilege into legal slander.

All ideas must survive on their own merit.

BUMP

[DustyMoment]

Here's the point: the basic premises in the article are NOT true.

What's not true about it? DaVinci's artwork? The places? The secret societies like the Illuminati, Knights Templar, or Opus Dei? The secret rituals? Those are all real, and they constitute the premises on which the story is predicated. That's the nature of good fiction - take known real elements and weave a story around them.

Is it because you believe the novel?

Who said I did? What I have said is that it is a good read, and it is. It's also FICTION!!!! You seem to believe that there is only black and white. There are also shades of gray.

My priests are not hysterical.

Again, who said they were? Your priests don't have to be hysterical, they have all of the heirarchy in the Catholic Church to be hysterical FOR them. That's the entire substance of this whole debate. It is the Catholic Church that is giving this fictional story credibility by its aggressive denials. Where there's smoke, there's fire, and the Catholic Church is on fire.

As for whether you attend this movie or not, that is strictly your choice. Ain't freedom wunnerful??

[DustyMoment]

I think someone should sue.

LOL!!! I concur!!

[uglybiker]

was surprised by National Treasure, since they did not put Freemasonry in a poor light as typical in films. It was a fun film to boot.

As a Freemason I found it a most refreshing bit of free advertizing. ;-)

[steve-b]

You're right, that is the important point. The Church never bothered to oppose things like "The Story of Maria Monk," a bit of Protestant anti-Catholic trash that circulated in the US in the 19th century and featured secret passageways between monasteries and convents, etc., because it wasn't worth bothering with.
This is being presented to the world as the truth, and Christians have the right to remind the world that it is NOT the truth.

Actually, "The Story of Maria Monk" was presented as a supposedly true story (a la "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"). It wasn't fiction, it was simply a pack of lies.

[Sun]

"..and entertaining book..."

It is immoral to be entertained with blasphemy.