what should i say when some of my friends tell me that reading The Da Vinci Code is sac-religious?
547782
Because they're narrow-minded and stupid. I've read the book too (and I'm CATHOLIC for Christ's sake) and I agree that it is a lovely piece of FICTION. If they can't see that, then I feel very sorry for your friends because they are missing out on a wonderful book.
1109699
its a BOOK..a FICTIONAL BOOK! Its not meant to be taken as TRUTH! I am Catholic, I know what I believe in, and I read the book. It doesn't go against the Bible, it just suggests possibilities that maybe someone in history altered the truth. Dan Brown is an incredible writer because of the fact that he can write FICTION and make people believe that it is the honest to God truth! Its a wonderful book & he NEVER says that it is the truth...he says the CHARACTERS in the book believe it is the truth! \n\n**steps off soapbox**
325835
I don't think everything he writes about is true, of course. The author himself admitted to this. The only thing that I'm starting to be sure of is Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdalene and her being present in Da Vinci's "The Last Supper". We shouldn't believe everything the book tells us, but we might be able to read between the lines.
655327
The Passion of Christ, even Jewish scholars have references to Jesus being crucified.\n\nWhile even the author of the Da Vinci Code refers to his book as a work of fiction.
489053
Their stance is that the author has passed off some gross historical inaccuracies as fact, and that Mr. Brown has essentially incited hatred against one of the church's prelatures (Opus Dei.)\n\nThe Catholic Church would be irresponsible if it allowed some of these libels to be spoken unchallenged. History has shown - with certain religious libels like the "Protocols of Zion" - that lives are literally at stake when religious hatred is sown.\n\nAnd if the Catholic Church will not stand up to an anti-Catholic writing.... who will?\n\nAll the people jumping up and down, shouting "How dare the Catholics defend themselves!" should ask themselves this. If the "Da Vinci Code" was about a bloodthirsty albino Rabbi hiding the reality of the Protocols (Priory) of Zion from the world, would you think that anti-Semitic?\n\nWhy should it be so different for Catholics?
378024
I agree with Donna. The Da Vinci Code says alot of things about Jesus like he was married and had kids that are historically and biblicaly inaccurate. They are blaphemous and it is unfortunate that such a thing has become so popular. Also remember even though there are people who believe the false facts in the Da Vinci Code to be true they are not true and the book is listed as fiction not historic.
403228
it is a GREAT movie/book i read the book and it is so addicting!! read this interview:\n\nHOW MUCH OF THIS NOVEL IS TRUE?\nThe Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction. While the book's characters and their actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist (for example, Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings, the Gnostic Gospels, Hieros Gamos, etc.). These real elements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters. While it is my belief that some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit, each individual reader must explore these characters' viewpoints and come to his or her own interpretations. My hope in writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and a springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion, and history. \n\nBUT DOESN'T THE NOVEL'S "FACT" PAGE CLAIM THAT EVERY SINGLE WORD IN THIS NOVEL IS HISTORICAL FACT?\nIf you read the "FACT" page, you will see it clearly states that the documents, rituals, organization, artwork, and architecture in the novel all exist. The "FACT" page makes no statement whatsoever about any of the ancient theories discussed by fictional characters. Interpreting those ideas is left to the reader. \n\nIS THIS BOOK ANTI-CHRISTIAN?\nNo. This book is not anti-anything. It's a novel. I wrote this story in an effort to explore certain aspects of Christian history that interest me. The vast majority of devout Christians understand this fact and consider The Da Vinci Code an entertaining story that promotes spiritual discussion and debate. Even so, a small but vocal group of individuals has proclaimed the story dangerous, heretical, and anti-Christian. While I regret having offended those individuals, I should mention that priests, nuns, and clergy contact me all the time to thank me for writing the novel. Many church officials are celebrating The Da Vinci Code because it has sparked renewed interest in important topics of faith and Christian history. It is important to remember that a reader does not have to agree with every word in the novel to use the book as a positive catalyst for introspection and exploration of our faith. \n\nWHAT DO YOU THINK OF CLERICAL SCHOLARS ATTEMPTING TO "DISPROVE" THE DA VINCI CODE? \nThe dialogue is wonderful. These authors and I obviously disagree, but the debate that is being generated is a positive powerful force. The more vigorously we debate these topics, the better our understanding of our own spirituality. Controversy and dialogue are healthy for religion as a whole. Religion has only one true enemy--apathy--and passionate debate is a superb antidote. \n\nPARTS OF THE DA VINCI CODE DESCRIBE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE RELIGIOUS GROUP OPUS DEI. HOW DOES OPUS DEI FEEL ABOUT YOUR NOVEL? \nI worked very hard to create a fair and balanced depiction of Opus Dei. Even so, there may be those who are offended by the portrayal. While Opus Dei is a very positive force in the lives of many people, for others, affiliation with Opus Dei has been a profoundly negative experience. Their portrayal in the novel is based on numerous books written about Opus Dei as well as on my own personal interviews with current and former members. \n\nSOME OF THE HISTORY IN THIS NOVEL CONTRADICTS WHAT I LEARNED IN SCHOOL. WHAT SHOULD I BELIEVE?\nSince the beginning of recorded time, history has been written by the "winners" (those societies and belief systems that conquered and survived). Despite an obvious bias in this accounting method, we still measure the "historical accuracy" of a given concept by examining how well it concurs with our existing historical record. Many historians now believe (as do I) that in gauging the historical accuracy of a given concept, we should first ask ourselves a far deeper question: How historically accurate is history itself?\n\nARE YOU
450518
it's a good entertainment but it is filled with falacies, lies and evil.  \n\nthe book is a fiction but the author continued to claim that it is based on historical fact.  what's so funny is that the book can't produce solid evidence of its claims.  on the contrary, there are even more evidence that would show that the book and its basis is bogus.  \n\nCatholics should be concerned about the book because it not only misrepresents their Church as a murderous institution but also implies that the Christian faith itself is utterly false.\n\nOther Christians should also be concerned.  Only some of the offensive claims of The Da Vinci Code pertain directly to the Catholic Church. The remainder strike at the Christian faith itself. If the book's claims were true, then all forms of Christianity would be false (except perhaps for Gnostic/feminist versions focusing on Mary Magdalene instead of Jesus).\n\nIt isn't a defense to say that The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction. Fiction can't change the basic facts about major historical figures without being subject to criticism. People would be outraged if Doubleday printed a novel portraying Adolph Hitler in a positive light. Christians have a right to be outraged when the basic historical facts about Christ are falsified. The criticism will be even more intense when a publisher releases a book parodying the most sacred beliefs of others in this fashion.\n\nThe author and the publisher  have gone to great lengths to mislead people into thinking that the novel has a historical basis. They deserve especially sharp criticism for this, and when criticism is made they cannot hypocritically hide behind the "It's just fiction" allegation after having made such extensive efforts to convince the reader that it is not "just fiction."
720756
I agree. The Da Vinci Code is a good source.
483746
I have not had the opportunity to read the book or see the movie. My son is reading the book and telling me about it. We are both Christians. We believe it is possible that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. The Church, in all its "wisdom," removed many books from the Bible many centuries ago. I think it's a tragedy that they felt they had to do our thinking for us. I am looking forward to reading the book. I believe we are all intelligent enough to decide for ourselves what we believe. The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction. I'll probably wait to see the movie when it comes out on DVD.
657931
Why would you take it seriously though?\n\nIt is fiction, that is like asking if Harry Potter would make Muslims give up their faith.\n\nWhile Dan Brown does site some facts, they are hard facts such as the existence of Opus Dei and facts taken out of context can make any fiction seem real.
20699
The first thing to remember about the "Da Vinci Code" is that it is a novel -- that is, fiction.  Much of the elaborate conspiracy / secret society / code apparatus of the novel comes from a book called "Holy Blood Holy Grail."  How much of all of that is true is open to argument; it is probably true that most religious / historical scholars reject it as fantasy.  A lot depends on how much secret conspiracy you are willing to believe permeates the world.\n\nThe web is full of writings on this subject, both pro and con the existence of the "code."  Poke around for a couple of hours and you can draw your own conclusion.  In sources are a few places to start.
1147963
The "Da Vinci Code" is basically a mixture of distorted facts and fiction. I think the book is composed of about 90% fiction.\n\nThe author, Dan Brown, claims in his fact page that all his depictions of artworks, secret societies, and rituals are true. However, his main sources for the his 'facts'--"Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and "Templar Revelation"--are only pseudo-histories. Even the authors of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" accept that Jesus MIGHT have been married, but it is UNLIKELY.\n\nThe Da Vinci Code supports the claim that Jesus might have been married by mentioning the Gnostic gospels. In reality, the Gnostic gospels don't mention much about Jesus's life. The only Gnostic gospel that suggests that Jesus was married was the Dead Sea Scrolls--but it is impossible to know whether the word "companion" meant "wife," because the words are in Coptic and they can't be translated the way Dan Brown says.\n\nOne more thing Brown claims to be true is that a secret organization, the Priory of Sion, exists to protect the "secrets" of Jesus's real life. The Priory of Sion was NOT created by Godfrey of Bouillon in the 11th century, it was only actually created in the 70s by an anti-semitic supporter of the Vichy government, Pierre Plantard, fir personal gain. He wrote a family tree of the Merovingian royal family and included himself on the list. He also made a list of the "Grand Masters" of the Priory of Sion. A great Renaissance painter, Leonardo Da Vinci, was included in the list. After writing all those documents, Pierre Plantard deposited them in the Bibliotheque Nationale and claimed to have "found" them years later. So the Priory of Sion was actually only a fake organization created by Plantard.\n\nBrown also says that the Church "demonized" Mary Magdalene. But she is actually a saint in both the Catholic and Orthodox churches. The only thing close to "demonizing" Magdalene that the Church did was sometime during the 6th century when Pope Gregory merged three women named "Mary" in the Bible into one person.\n\nOne more thing, Brown says that Jesus's divinity was created by the Council of Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325 was actually a response to the threat of the Arian heresy, which claimed that Jesus was a semi-divine creature, not of the same being as God. This was quickly becoming a popular belief and threatening the unity of Christianity. \n\nThere are more facts that I can write, but I hope what I did write is enough. Read the books below in the sources.
614798
Most of the book is a fabrication.  The National Geographic channel and 60 min. recently had specials on this topic, exposing the completely fraudulent claims made in the book. \n\nThe thing I find the most humorous is that numerous non-Christians have exposed many of the false claims.  Any knowledgeable historian who has looked into the matter will tell you the same thing.\n\nA plethora of books have been published exposing the bogus claims of the book, including the "FACT PAGE".  \n\nThe title itself is repugnant to art historians.  da Vinci means "from Vinci", it is not a last name. Any art buff will tell you they refer to him as "Leonardo". Furthermore, Leonardo experts will tell you that he did not put hidden meanings into his paintings.  In his painting of the Last Supper, there is a picture of John to Jesus' left. The book claims that this is actually Mary Magdalene. John has a somewhat feminine appearance, but John was young. Leonardo and others painted what we know was John many other times with feminine looking features, we still have these paintings.\n\nThe book claims that there was a secret organization called the Priory of Scion created to protect documents that proved Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. THERE IS NO FACTUAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM.) On a logical level, if this secert were so terrible, then why wouldn't they just destroy the documents? It doesn't make sense. \n\netc.etc.etc.
682711
I think it is because not everyone is as smart as you and some that have read the book think that the book is 100% factual.  I am not catholic but I think that they are not being scared by what is said about them, as much as they are afraid of people believing every word of the book.
488168
The Da Vinci Code is a mystery/detective novel by American author Dan Brown, published in 2003 by Doubleday Fiction. It is a worldwide bestseller with more than 60.5 million copies in print (as of May 2006) and has been translated into 44 languages. Combining the detective, thriller and conspiracy theory genres, the book is part two of a trilogy that started with Brown's 2000 novel Angels and Demons, which introduced the character Robert Langdon. In November 2004, Random House published a "Special Illustrated Edition", with 160 illustrations interspersed with the text.\n\nThe plot of the novel involves a conspiracy by the Catholic Church to cover up the "true" story of Jesus. The Vatican knows it is living a lie but does so to keep itself in power. The novel has helped generate popular interest in speculation concerning the Holy Grail legend and the role of Mary Magdalene in the history of Christianity. Fans have lauded the book as creative, action-packed and thought-provoking. Critics have attacked it as inaccurate, sacrilegious and decry the many negative implications about the Catholic Church and Opus Dei.\n\nDan Brown's novel was a smash hit in 2003, even rivaling the sales of the highly popular Harry Potter series. It spawned a number of offspring books and drew glowing reviews from the New York Times, the People Magazine and Washington Post . The novel has also inspired several tour groups like Da Vinci Code tours, and companies like Ravenchase Adventures to create Da Vinci code like races and adventures using codes, ciphers, actors and gadgets. It also re-ignited interest in the history of the Catholic Church. As well as re-invigorating interest in the church, The Da Vinci Code has also spawned numerous "knockoffs" (as they are referred to by Publishers Weekly) , or novels that have a striking resemblance to The Da Vinci Code, including Raymond Khoury's The Last Templar, and The Templar Legacy by Steve Berry.\n\nSony's Columbia Pictures has adapted the novel to film, with a screenplay written by Akiva Goldsman, and Academy Award winner Ron Howard directing. The film is set for release on May 19, 2006, and will star Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon, Audrey Tautou as Sophie Neveu, and Sir Ian McKellen as Leigh Teabing.\n\nPlot summary\nSpoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.\n\nThe book concerns the attempts of Robert Langdon, Professor of Religious Symbology at Harvard University, to solve the murder of renowned curator Jacques Saunière (see Bérenger Saunière) of the Louvre Museum in Paris. The title of the novel refers, among other things, to the fact that Saunière's body is found in the Denon Wing of the Louvre naked and posed like Leonardo da Vinci's famous drawing, the Vitruvian Man, with a cryptic message written beside his body and a Pentagram drawn on his stomach in his own blood. The interpretation of hidden messages inside Leonardo's famous works, including the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper, figure prominently in the solution to the mystery.\n\nThe main conflict in the novel revolves around the solution to two mysteries:\n\n•What secret was Saunière protecting that led to his murder? \n\n•Who is the mastermind behind his murder? \n\nThe novel has several concurrent storylines that follow different characters. Eventually all the storylines are brought together and resolved with the denouement.\n\nThe unraveling of the mystery requires the solution to a series of brain-teasers, including anagrams and number puzzles. The solution itself is found to be intimately connected with the possible location of the Holy Grail and to a mysterious society called the Priory of Sion, as well as to the Knights Templar. The Catholic organization "Opus Dei" (a caricature of the real Opus Dei) also figures prominently in the plot.\n\nThe novel is the second book of a trilogy by Brown in which Robert Langdon is the main character. The previous book, A
563850
Well I´ve read the book and enjoyed it throughly! But sad to say there is a lot of thingd in the book that is false, \nbut it does makes you wonder. \n\nWhat I can´t understand is that a few years ago there were some old scripures found, but wouldn´d be accepted by the church. These scriptures underwent all the neccassary test to prove its validity(and it was found to be written the time Jesus was alive and 100 after he died).But it was a little bit contridicting to what is in the bible.\n\nAnyway what the da vinci code does is start to put doubt in the minds of people, and why did  the church reacted so strange to this book which is a novel! \n\nAnd okay the thought that Jesus actually has a living heir is strange, but Dan Brown was not the first to write about this there are many other listed books. And ´if´ that were true then the church would clear not want that knowledge to be known because it would loss a lot of credibility.\nSome modern writers,including Dan Brown, have come forward with claims that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus. These writers cite Gnostic writings to support their argument. Sources like the ´Gospel of Philip´ do depict Mary Magdalene as being closer to Jesus than any other disciple. \nHowever, there is no known ancient document that claims she was his wife and Gnosticism was generally non-supportive of sexuality. The closeness described in these writings depicts Mary Magdalene, representing the Gnostics, as understanding Jesus and his teaching while the other disciples, representing the Church, did not.\nMary Magdalene appears with more frequency than other women in the canonical Gospels and is shown as being a close follower of Jesus. Mary's presence at the Crucifixion and Jesus's tomb, while hardly conclusive, is at least consonant with the role of grieving wife and widow, although if that were the case Jesus might have been expected to make provision for her care as well as for his mother Mary. Given the lack of contemporary documentation, this scenario cannot be proven, and although some consider the idea desirable to believe, most scholars do not take it seriously.\n\nAn argument for support of the married status of Jesus is that bachelorhood was very rare for Jewish males of Jesus' time, being generally regarded as a transgression of the first mitzvah (divine commandment) — "Be fruitful and multiply". According to this reasoning, it would have been unthinkable for an adult, unmarried Jew to travel about teaching as a rabbi.\nA counter-argument to this is that the Judaism of Jesus' time was very diverse and the role of the rabbi was not yet well defined. It was really not until after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 that Rabbinic Judaism became dominant and the role of the rabbi made uniform in Jewish communities.\nPaul of Tarsus was an example of an unmarried itinerant teacher among Christians. Jesus himself approved of voluntary celibacy for religious reasons and explicitly rejected a duty to marry: "There are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it." (Matthew 19,12)\n\nThe idea that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus was popularized by books like the pseudo-historical Holy Blood, Holy Grail (1982) and The Da Vinci Code (2003), a novel heavily influenced by the former book. These assertions have found no acceptance from scholarly circles.\n\nAnd secret societcy are meant to be kept secret so I don´t expect the historians to find a lot of concrete information about the Priory of Sion. \n\nAnd maybe Leonardo did discover something and instead of just saying or exposing it out right he decided to be clever and hide it within his works of art. After all he was known as a genuis.\n\nSo I(am born and raised catholic, but was taught to have an open mind about things.) personally an very intrigued by this idea of Dan Browns, but I am neither for it nor against it. I