"Vatican: Da Vinci book shows mass ignorance" The very definition of irony?

[kallend 2,150]

Is anyone else old enough to remember the fuss the church made about "The Life of Brian"?

All it did was guarantee a bigger audience.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Nightingale 0]

I think the important thing about the Da Vinci Code is not that it's factual; it isn't. It's a work of fiction based on some rather off the wall historical theories. The important thing about DVC is that it gets people to ask questions, to think, and to wonder if what they've been told all their lives is the truth. Most of the "facts" presented by the main character in DVC are made up. However, a very, very important one is true:

Constantine directed the editing of the Christian bible during the Councel of Nicea (325 CE) in order to exercise more control over the people of the Roman empire. Constantine, having become sole emperor, concerned himself with the re-establishment of religious peace as well as of civil order. One of the first things Constantine did, as Emperor, was start persecuting certain Christians, mainly the gnostic Christians and other dualist Christians, Christians who don't have the Old Testament as part of their canon, and others who didn't conform to Constantine's exact vision of Christianity. Many claim that Constantine's conversion to Christianity was sincere and legitimate, but most historians doubt this, as Constantine continued to behave as a pagan, write poetry to pagan gods, and otherwise acknowledged pagan deities after his supposed "conversion". Constantine was an incredible politician and knew he had to do what was necessary to maintain control over the empire and order within it. What Constantine did that was very important to the Christian church was legitimize it as a protected religion of the Roman empire.

Sources: Catholic Encyclopedia, BBC, PBS, Encyclopedia Britannica

[billvon 3,120]

>Is anyone else old enough to remember the fuss the church made
>about "The Life of Brian"?

Yep. We were forbidden to see it in high school. Which guaranteed that every kid at my high school went to see it.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The important thing about DVC is that it gets people to ask questions, to think, and to wonder if what they've been told all their lives is the truth.

Nuts, it was a rather entertaining piece of fiction, written at a very low complexity and intellectual level. It was fun to read, and refreshingly NOT challenging at all (and there's a real place for simple linear works like it). I'd rank it equivalent to the Swartenegger movie ("Get your ass to Mahhhs" - what was that one?)

Those that want to make something out of it more than it really is would do that with children's books.

It'll make an enjoyable movie. Kind of like those old Richard Crenna detective movies where clues just magicly appear when you need them.

I'm not sure what the fuss is. Sometimes entertainment is just that, not everything has to 'get people thinking' about (pick one - politics, social agendas, religion, man's inhumanity to man, etc etc ad nauseum). Good on those that have that compulsion though.

edit: now "Life of Brian" that had serious social and political commentary. That, and silliness.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

Is anyone else old enough to remember the fuss the church made about "The Life of Brian"?

No, but I've seen some of the TV debates they had about it.

"Of course he's supposed to be Jesus, look this Cleese bloke even has the same initials!"

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

The important thing about DVC is that it gets people to ask questions, to think, and to wonder if what they've been told all their lives is the truth.

Nuts, it was a rather entertaining piece of fiction, written at a very low complexity and intellectual level. It was fun to read, and refreshingly NOT challenging at all (and there's a real place for simple linear works like it). I'd rank it equivalent to the Swartenegger movie ("Get your ass to Mahhhs" - what was that one?)

Those that want to make something out of it more than it really is would do that with children's books.

It'll make an enjoyable movie. Kind of like those old Richard Crenna detective movies where clues just magicly appear when you need them.

I'm not sure what the fuss is. Sometimes entertainment is just that, not everything has to 'get people thinking' about (pick one - politics, social agendas, religion, man's inhumanity to man, etc etc ad nauseum). Good on those that have that compulsion though.

edit: now "Life of Brian" that had serious social and political commentary. That, and silliness.

Excellent post. Unfortunately, there are enough people in the world who will take (and have taken) the book at face value, especially it's errant and grossly misguided statements about Opus Dei, as fact which has engendered predjudice and mistrust against such religious organizations. It's quite sad, really. But as Grue said, there is a good bit of irony in all of this.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Excellent post.

Don't encourage him with compliments. That guy's mostly full of crap.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[beowulf 1]

Most Christians don't aknowledge how much influence Constantine had over Christianity and the Bible. They prefer to believe that God wrote the bible.

[brierebecca 0]

Quote

especially it's errant and grossly misguided statements about Opus Dei

out of curiosity, what misguided statements? The reason I ask is because the most chilling thing I remember about Opus Dei in the book - the mortification practices with the cilice and discipline - is actually true. It's on their website, www.opusdei.org, under FAQ.

edited to add: I realize that the monk character in the book muders people and does other crazy stuff, but I'm more interested in the daily practice of Opus Dei members

Brie

"Ive seen you hump air, hump the floor of the plane, and hump legs. You now have a new nickname: "Black Humper of Death"--yardhippie

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

especially it's errant and grossly misguided statements about Opus Dei

out of curiosity, what misguided statements? The reason I ask is because the most chilling thing I remember about Opus Dei in the book - the mortification practices with the cilice and discipline - is actually true. It's on their website, www.opusdei.org, under FAQ.

edited to add: I realize that the monk character in the book muders people and does other crazy stuff, but I'm more interested in the daily practice of Opus Dei members

Brie

well, if you are familiar w/ the faq on the opus dei website, it does a fairly good job of answering your question. however, since you specifically address the question of mortification, i'll respond to that as well as give some cursory remarks about opus dei in general, since i've had numerous dealings w/ this organization over the years.

engaging in physical discipline, more traditionally called mortification, such as by using tools such as the cilice doesn't bother me one bit. as the opus dei website says, such behaviors are centuries old and, if I might add, aren't indiginous to catholicism. in fact, we find (what I would call) perversions of these practices in modern secular culture all the time... look at those who worship the "gods" of their own image and of physical beauty, look at the suffering and morification, if you will, they will go throughthrough surgery, starvation diets, exercise, etc.

but i digress. in the book, if I remember correctly (it's been a while since I've read it), opus dei is painted as a corrupt organization whose holds the financial purse strings of the vatican. not true. in fact, of the 80,000 members of opus dei, the vast majority of them are not in wealthy countries. it is only from it's members that opus dei has any funds at all. it is a self-sustaining entity.

the book is right in that opus dei has a sort of "headquarters" in new york city, but that is not the "hq" of hte organization. as a catholic ministry, the main location is naturally centered in Rome off of a road call Buono Buozzi (I have no idea if I spelled it right). That is where the founder, St. JoseMaria Escriva is buried. I've been there.

some people are scandalized that they have a building in NYC as well as a house for women and for men in NYC (i've been to the men's house, it's nice). why are they scandalized? is it b/c it's expensive to live there? I can tell you, the house and the building are nice but not at all extravegant. the houses and building, again, are supported by the members of the organization. nothing wrong there.

Cultic tactics, brainwashing, etc: there are some things about Opus Dei I find to be a bit heavy handed. I would not call them brainwashing however. Their idea of living a Catholic/Christian lifestyle is more strict and disciplined and serious than what a lot of people would consider. They are pretty rigid. Frankly, it was a bit of a turn off for me. that is why i'm not a formal member. However, all of the people i've met seem to be well rounded, professional, reasonable, happy people. I was not pressured in anyway to do anything or join anything or whatever.

Anyway, enough of my prattling... I hope this answers some questions... pose some more if you want...

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Is anyone else old enough to remember the fuss the church made about "The Life of Brian"?

What a funny movie.

"I want to have a child"
"Where is it going to gestate? In a box?"

We are all engines of karma

[Nightingale 0]

It is a work of fiction, and it is an easy and interesting read, which are the main reason why it's reached so many people that "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" didn't. Many of the historical theories (Jesus married to Mary Magdalene, for example) have been proposed by historians, especially after reading the gospel of Peter, which was eliminated from the bible during the council of Nicea. What Dan Brown did in DVC is mix historical theories with fictional ideas in a way that people have trouble telling which is which, because he does it quite convincingly. Also, the historical information in DVC doesn't always show christianity in a positive light, which is one of the reasons many christian groups try to discredit the entire book, forgetting that it's a work of fiction, and as fiction, there is nothing to discredit, so it pretty much just makes them look silly, just as silly as the people who take everything in DVC as fact. If anything, those groups should be working to discredit Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which is where a lot of the historical theories and ideas for the fictional DVC came from. Dan Brown took some off the wall historical theories and some little known historical facts and mixed them up with fictional ideas, characters, and a pretty good plot.

What many churches don't like is that because people know some of what's in DVC is true, those people have been asking questions and researching to find out what is true, what is fiction, and what's just weird theory. The information those people are finding out and making available to people not inclined to do the research is information such as the fact that Constantine had a hand in choosing what's in the bible, and this information is making people question whether or not the bible we have today is truly divinely inspired (regardless of whether the original works were divinely inspired), or whether it was edited the way it was as a means of controlling the roman population. It's making people ask if they're reading parts of the bible out of context and if some big ideas are missing.

So, it isn't the book itself that is making people ask questions, it's the information that's come to light to the general public because of the book.

[avenfoto 0]

Quote

It doesn't make your children get SuperAIDS,

good stuff....
shitpisscuntfuckcoksukermotherfukertitsfartturdsantwat.

[micro 0]

well articulated.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

So, it isn't the book itself that is making people ask questions, it's the information that's come to light to the general public because of the book.

If that's what turns some people's cranks, more power to them. IMHO I think reading extra stuff into it is just a pile of self congratulatory crap. It didn't really have that much depth of content or plot. I just thought it was nice simple entertainment and didn't "choose" read into it.

Reading a big conspiracy plot and non-compimentary stuff into it by anti-religious types seems a waste of energy. But then again, if probing and researching is interesting and fun for some, great for them. Ditto for the religious types that find it threatening.

I'm just saying that I personally don't see the big deal either way. I saw National Treasure and haven't had the urge to go dig holes in Arlington and D.C. either. Those urges were before I saw that movie and had to do with how painful it is to drive in that area.......

The most threatening thing in that book is if you tied a hardback version of it to a stick and swung it at people.

That and the very real threat of paper cuts.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants