What do you say to a Da Vinci Code Believer? Continued
In answering the questions of those first two groups, “evidence” is the word to keep in mind at every point, and to stay focused on the basics.
The Da Vinci Code is a mess, a riot of laughable errors and serious misstatements. Almost every page has at least one of each. It would be easy to get swamped up in the small stuff, to spend hours debating the relationship of Marian imagery to Isis or who’s who in Leonardo’s Virgin of the Rocks The good news is, however, that’s not necessary. When discussing the factuality of The Da Vinci Code, all you really need to do is stick to a few fundamental points – and stick to them!
They say….. “But there’s a page in the front of the novel that says “Fact.” There’s a bibliography in the novel and on the website – those are real books – I’ve seen them in the library. His characters say that historians believe that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married, for example.”
You say…There is enough truth in The Da Vinci Code to be seriously misleading. Yes, the sources – like Holy Blood, Holy Grail and The Templar Revelation exist. But they don’t reflect serious historical scholarship. You’re not going to find a university history department on the planet that uses the works that provide the meat of The Da Vinci Code theories as part of the syllabus.
What’s also important is what Brown doesn’t use. There are scores and scores of texts that have survived from the mid-1st century through, say, the era of Constantine in the 4th, that tell us very clearly what early Christians believed. Brown uses none of these.
It might be interesting to ask - and discuss – why. What do these reliable sources say that Brown would prefer to ignore?
previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 next page
view all pages |
Copyright © 2006, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Washington, DC. All rights reserved.