Vatican gives Da Vinci Code tons of publicity

[Ancalagon the Black]

Now even more people will be reading Dan Brown's tortured prose!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42022-2005Mar16.html

Top Italian Cardinal Is Out to Break 'Code'

By Daniel Williams

Washington Post Foreign Service

Thursday, March 17, 2005; Page C01

ROME -- As is just about everywhere else in the world, Rome is awash in editions of "The Da Vinci Code," the blockbuster whodunit with a narrative that includes a Vatican coverup of an explosive theological secret: Jesus was married! Despite the heretical plot twist, in which Jesus fathered a child with his wife, Mary Magdalene, Dan Brown's novel was on sale at the bookstore of Gemelli Polyclinic, the Rome hospital where Pope John Paul II underwent a tracheotomy last month and spent 18 days recovering before being released Sunday.

Well, enough is enough. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, once a top dogma enforcer in Vatican City and currently archbishop of Genoa, broke the Vatican's virtual silence on the book this week and told Vatican Radio that nobody should read it and certainly Catholic bookstores should stop selling it.

"Don't buy and don't read that novel," he said. And in remarks to Il Giornale, a conservative newspaper, Bertone declared: "There's a big anti-Catholic prejudice. It aims to discredit the church and its history through gross and absurd manipulations."

Bertone explained why, two years after the novel's debut, the church ought to be putting its foot down: Too many people are taking the book's mix of art, architecture, secret societies, weird symbolism and hocus-pocus as -- if you'll excuse the expression -- the Gospel truth.

"You can't be a modern youth without having read it. The book is everywhere," Bertone said. "There is a very real risk that many people who read it will believe that the fables it contains are true." Until two years ago, he belonged to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the official defender of orthodoxy in the Vatican.

Brown has disputed criticism that his novel is anti-Christian. His agent in New York said the author is writing a new book and is not expected to respond to Bertone, according to Reuters.

Stories about the life of Jesus have been popping up all over the mass media. Last year's gory mega-hit by Mel Gibson, "The Passion of the Christ," about Jesus's last hours before and during the Crucifixion, won praise at the Vatican, where it was privately screened for the pope. Vatican spokesmen said the pontiff gave it two thumbs up, but they later retracted that report and said he doesn't do movie reviews. In London, Madame Tussauds, the wax museum, mounted a Nativity scene with soccer star David Beckham and wife Victoria, aka Posh Spice, standing in for Joseph and Mary.

Leonardo da Vinci's "The Last Supper" -- used as evidence of the Jesus-Magdalene liaison in Brown's book -- also took a hit. In an irreverent ad campaign by the French fashion house Marithe and Francois Girbaud, sultry women in chic casuals were arranged at a table in postures similar to the Apostles' in the painting -- except that in John's place, a shirtless man in low-slung jeans slouches. French Catholics sued because the poster "did great injury to Catholics" by representing the Last Supper "in denigrating conditions." A judge banned the poster as "an aggressive act of intrusion of people's innermost beliefs." Lawyers for the fashion company had argued that the posters were a parody of a painting, not a religious event, and wondered aloud why the judge did not also ban "The Da Vinci Code."

In any case, the heretical horse is way out of the barn. Eighteen million copies of "The Da Vinci Code" have been sold worldwide. A movie starring Tom Hanks is in the works. Tourists pester guides at the permanent exhibit of da Vinci's "Last Supper" in Milan, asking them to point out the Mary Magdalene figure. Guides explain repeatedly that the figure is that of a youthful John.

"There are two reasons the church needs to speak out on this issue," said Massimo Introvigne, director of the Center on New Religious Studies, a Catholic research organization in Rome. "Dan Brown talks about facts, and things in his book are not facts. And second, I am astonished by the number of Italians who tell me their faith has been shaken."

Riffs on the life of Jesus outside orthodox teaching are nothing new -- in books, in Hollywood or, for that matter, in the most ancient of Christian documents. Of course, there was Martin Scorsese's film "The Last Temptation of Christ," in which Jesus on the Cross imagines an alternative life of married bliss and car pools with -- who else? -- Mary Magdalene. Before that, there was "Jesus Christ Superstar," the Andrew Lloyd Webber rock opera that also hinted at an affair between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, although not so much as to offend. Vatican officials declared it acceptable entertainment for the Vatican's millennium celebration.

In the early centuries of Christianity, religious leaders grappled with various accounts of the life of Jesus, some of which were at odds with each other and with newly accepted orthodoxy. Was he man, prophet or God, or all of the above? In the 4th century, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, ordered scores of manuscripts attributed to followers of Jesus destroyed. But disobedient monks buried the versions in clay jars and some were discovered centuries later. Among them was a manuscript called the Gospel of Mary, attributed to Mary Magdalene. It suggests she was one of the chosen followers of Jesus and an equal, at least, to the (all male) others.

No mention of marriage is made in any of these, nor in the orthodox Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, and it is the titillation aspect of "The Da Vinci Code" that, in part, upsets church leaders and scholars. "Scandal is what such books are all about," said Bernardo Estrada, a teacher of the New Testament in Rome and a member of Opus Dei, a worldwide Catholic lay organization with strong Vatican connections. Opus Dei is one of the villains in "The Da Vinci Code." It is portrayed trying to suppress knowledge that Jesus left a lineage on Earth and meant for Mary Magdalene to be head of the church. "It's an attack on the church as obscurantist, and Opus Dei is just a vehicle for the attack," he said.

But Estrada doesn't think "The Da Vinci Code" ought to be banned. Rather, priests need to read it so they can talk about it. "Anyone with a historical and religious base can refute it. I rather liked it, it's a good thriller," he said.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

[codeorama]

I've never understood why they "speak out" against stuff like this. All it does is make more people go out and buy it due to curiousity.

Marilyn Manson is a great example. His music sucks, but people buy it because there is such a big deal made over it.

I did it. I wanted to see what the big fuss was over. Over nothing IMO. All they do is make the person rich.

[MakaveliRIP]

Originally posted by Ancalagon the Black

Now even more people will be reading Dan Brown's tortured prose!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42022-2005Mar16.html

Top Italian Cardinal Is Out to Break 'Code'

By Daniel Williams

Washington Post Foreign Service

Thursday, March 17, 2005; Page C01

ROME -- As is just about everywhere else in the world, Rome is awash in editions of "The Da Vinci Code," the blockbuster whodunit with a narrative that includes a Vatican coverup of an explosive theological secret: Jesus was married! Despite the heretical plot twist, in which Jesus fathered a child with his wife, Mary Magdalene, Dan Brown's novel was on sale at the bookstore of Gemelli Polyclinic, the Rome hospital where Pope John Paul II underwent a tracheotomy last month and spent 18 days recovering before being released Sunday.

Well, enough is enough. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, once a top dogma enforcer in Vatican City and currently archbishop of Genoa, broke the Vatican's virtual silence on the book this week and told Vatican Radio that nobody should read it and certainly Catholic bookstores should stop selling it.

"Don't buy and don't read that novel," he said. And in remarks to Il Giornale, a conservative newspaper, Bertone declared: "There's a big anti-Catholic prejudice. It aims to discredit the church and its history through gross and absurd manipulations."

Bertone explained why, two years after the novel's debut, the church ought to be putting its foot down: Too many people are taking the book's mix of art, architecture, secret societies, weird symbolism and hocus-pocus as -- if you'll excuse the expression -- the Gospel truth.

"You can't be a modern youth without having read it. The book is everywhere," Bertone said. "There is a very real risk that many people who read it will believe that the fables it contains are true." Until two years ago, he belonged to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the official defender of orthodoxy in the Vatican.

Brown has disputed criticism that his novel is anti-Christian. His agent in New York said the author is writing a new book and is not expected to respond to Bertone, according to Reuters.

Stories about the life of Jesus have been popping up all over the mass media. Last year's gory mega-hit by Mel Gibson, "The Passion of the Christ," about Jesus's last hours before and during the Crucifixion, won praise at the Vatican, where it was privately screened for the pope. Vatican spokesmen said the pontiff gave it two thumbs up, but they later retracted that report and said he doesn't do movie reviews. In London, Madame Tussauds, the wax museum, mounted a Nativity scene with soccer star David Beckham and wife Victoria, aka Posh Spice, standing in for Joseph and Mary.

Leonardo da Vinci's "The Last Supper" -- used as evidence of the Jesus-Magdalene liaison in Brown's book -- also took a hit. In an irreverent ad campaign by the French fashion house Marithe and Francois Girbaud, sultry women in chic casuals were arranged at a table in postures similar to the Apostles' in the painting -- except that in John's place, a shirtless man in low-slung jeans slouches. French Catholics sued because the poster "did great injury to Catholics" by representing the Last Supper "in denigrating conditions." A judge banned the poster as "an aggressive act of intrusion of people's innermost beliefs." Lawyers for the fashion company had argued that the posters were a parody of a painting, not a religious event, and wondered aloud why the judge did not also ban "The Da Vinci Code."

In any case, the heretical horse is way out of the barn. Eighteen million copies of "The Da Vinci Code" have been sold worldwide. A movie starring Tom Hanks is in the works. Tourists pester guides at the permanent exhibit of da Vinci's "Last Supper" in Milan, asking them to point out the Mary Magdalene figure. Guides explain repeatedly that the figure is that of a youthful John.

"There are two reasons the church needs to speak out on this issue," said Massimo Introvigne, director of the Center on New Religious Studies, a Catholic research organization in Rome. "Dan Brown talks about facts, and things in his book are not facts. And second, I am astonished by the number of Italians who tell me their faith has been shaken."

Riffs on the life of Jesus outside orthodox teaching are nothing new -- in books, in Hollywood or, for that matter, in the most ancient of Christian documents. Of course, there was Martin Scorsese's film "The Last Temptation of Christ," in which Jesus on the Cross imagines an alternative life of married bliss and car pools with -- who else? -- Mary Magdalene. Before that, there was "Jesus Christ Superstar," the Andrew Lloyd Webber rock opera that also hinted at an affair between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, although not so much as to offend. Vatican officials declared it acceptable entertainment for the Vatican's millennium celebration.

In the early centuries of Christianity, religious leaders grappled with various accounts of the life of Jesus, some of which were at odds with each other and with newly accepted orthodoxy. Was he man, prophet or God, or all of the above? In the 4th century, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, ordered scores of manuscripts attributed to followers of Jesus destroyed. But disobedient monks buried the versions in clay jars and some were discovered centuries later. Among them was a manuscript called the Gospel of Mary, attributed to Mary Magdalene. It suggests she was one of the chosen followers of Jesus and an equal, at least, to the (all male) others.

No mention of marriage is made in any of these, nor in the orthodox Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, and it is the titillation aspect of "The Da Vinci Code" that, in part, upsets church leaders and scholars. "Scandal is what such books are all about," said Bernardo Estrada, a teacher of the New Testament in Rome and a member of Opus Dei, a worldwide Catholic lay organization with strong Vatican connections. Opus Dei is one of the villains in "The Da Vinci Code." It is portrayed trying to suppress knowledge that Jesus left a lineage on Earth and meant for Mary Magdalene to be head of the church. "It's an attack on the church as obscurantist, and Opus Dei is just a vehicle for the attack," he said.

But Estrada doesn't think "The Da Vinci Code" ought to be banned. Rather, priests need to read it so they can talk about it. "Anyone with a historical and religious base can refute it. I rather liked it, it's a good thriller," he said.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

why the hell do u people write so much?

whos gonna even read it?

[MrWill]

'Fables'......LOL. Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

[@DCGoldPants]

I enjoyed the book......like a year ago....haven't thought about it in awhile....... seems like they shouldn't of said anything. But if they were, its alittle late.

[Destino]

This just in: Tons of publicity works both ways.

It's not exactly easy for the church to find a pop culture issue on which anyone cares for its opinion. We know they don't like the music, the clothes, and the attitude. So the western non-catholic world ignores them for the most part. But a book that everyone's read, that people have enjoyed, has provided the church with a small window through which they can throw in a few pamphlets.

[E-Dog Night]

Vatican spokesmen said the pontiff gave [The Passion of the Christ] two thumbs up, but they later retracted that report and said he doesn't do movie reviews.

:laugh: :rotflmao: :laugh: :rotflmao: :laugh: :rotflmao:

[galentjm]

The thing that I find most amusing about all this is that the Vatican is getting their panties in a bunch over a book that within its contents openly states that the characters and events are ficticious.

There are references to actual individuals and organizations (i.e. The Priory of the Sun, Opus Dei, Da Vinci, etc.) and the author deliberately attacks the common belief systems of Catholicism and Christianity, but the underlying truth is that the book is not factual.

The Vatican should have ignored this situation altogether and if anything Bertone's statements could lead one to believe that the Vatican has something to hide.

[ntotoro]

Originally posted by Destino

This just in: Tons of publicity works both ways.

Agreed. There is truly no such thing as bad publicity.

Roman Cathololics are still a religious minority in the US. Not necessarily the Western World, but at least in the US. I suspect that is the reason why the book has been popular in the US. If you live in highly Italian or Irish communities, you think everyone is Catholic. When you go to other places, you realize WASPs are still the prevalent "lifestyle" in the US and they may find the book more interesting as a work of fiction rather than dismissal of the Roman Catholic Church and its dogma & creed.

Hell, I think there are more Mormons in NoVa than Catholics. They're just quiet about it...

I don't think people reading it as fiction truly interpret it as the be-all end-all of the Church, they just find it entertaining.

Nick

[ntotoro]

Originally posted by galentjm

The Vatican should have ignored this situation altogether and if anything Bertone's statements could lead one to believe that the Vatican has something to hide.

I don't think it's that so much as it is he's Italian...

If you're not Italian, it's hard to understand. Italians are passionate about every single facet of their lives. Everything. The farther south you go, they become even more encompassed with relgious fervor. Italy as a Government is actually very secular, even given the prescence of Vatian City, but the Italian people are very passionate about their lives and their religion, particularly from the areas surrounding Rome and south all the way to Sicily.

Nick

[galentjm]

Originally posted by ntotoro

I don't think it's that so much as it is he's Italian...

If you're not Italian, it's hard to understand. Italians are passionate about every single facet of their lives. Everything. The farther south you go, they become even more encompassed with relgious fervor. Italy as a Government is actually very secular, even given the prescence of Vatian City, but the Italian people are very passionate about their lives and their religion, particularly from the areas surrounding Rome and south all the way to Sicily.

Nick

There is definitely some truth to what you're saying, however being passionate about something is one thing, and being unable to separate reality from "make believe" is something else altogther. In my opinion those two things shouldn't be mutually exclusive.

[jenmdixon]

originally posted by Ancalagon the Black

Now even more people will be reading Dan Brown's tortured prose!

Amen, brother. I read this book, and listened to it on CD. I could not get past the fact that it seemed to plod along and was too easy to predict.

originally posted by MakaveliRIP

why the hell do u people write so much?

whos gonna even read it?

MakaveliRIP, many people - including me. We tend to read it if it's a news report, or has nearly no spelling or grammatical errors, even if we do not agree with the content.

originally posted by ntotoro

Roman Cathololics are still a religious minority in the US. Not necessarily the Western World, but at least in the US. I suspect that is the reason why the book has been popular in the US. If you live in highly Italian or Irish communities, you think everyone is Catholic. When you go to other places, you realize WASPs are still the prevalent "lifestyle" in the US and they may find the book more interesting as a work of fiction rather than dismissal of the Roman Catholic Church and its dogma & creed.

...and in another post...

If you're not Italian, it's hard to understand. Italians are passionate about every single facet of their lives.

LOL I totally agree re: thinking everyone is Catholic. I grew up in a high-density Catholic area (on Long Island) in an Irish/Italian Roman Catholic family. I knew only one Christian-non-Cathlolic family growing up - and one Jewish family. EVERYONE else was Catholic. It was a rude awakening moving down to NoVA and seeing how things are here - VERY different.

And WORD to the Italian observation. Ain't it da truth!

[ntotoro]

Originally posted by galentjm

There is definitely some truth to what you're saying, however being passionate about something is one thing, and being unable to separate reality from "make believe" is something else altogther. In my opinion those two things shouldn't be mutually exclusive.

We're talking about Italians in Italy here, though. You can't expect them to be that reasonable...

There are some villages in Sicily that if you suggest their ancestors are Jews, which is possible, they'll slit your throat. Seriously.

Nick

[Mr. S]

in my experience, Catholics as a whole generally seem more progressive and open minded than various Protestant groups. I seem to know just as many Catholics in both high school and now in college than I do protestants. A lot of my catholic friends may be religious, but they are not as likely to judge as many non-catholic people I know of.

Seems to me that a lot of people who would be against the book are non-catholics, especially born-again types. They to me are very passionate, as passionate as the very devout catholics. Seems like they would be against the book in that it still questions origins of Christianity.

Dan Brown did say the characters and events are fictitious, galentjm , but in the sense that Sophie and Langdon, and the whole chase through countries were fictitious, it is just a story, an action adventure. However, there are enough respected sources who do not doubt the claims made about the writing of The Bible, and of the Knights Templar and mainly the bloodline. Watching the History Channel special about it, the things they doubted were the messages and all the stuff about paintings, and the existence of the Priory of Sion being more than 150 years old. They did not doubt any of the other stuff, the stuff that the Vatican's article is against.

And I agree, this will only make more people go and read it now, people who were not initially into it.

[hokie4redskins]

I think that when thousands are losing, or at least questioning their faith due to Brown's book, something needs to be said. I was one of them who had serious questions about the history of my church after reading this hogwash, until I dug a little deeper.

I don't remember Brown coming out and saying "The characters and story are fictitious", but what I DO remember is the blurb at the beginning where it says, "All paintings, buildings, architecture, and descriptions in this book are fact" or something along those lines. And if you've seen any DB interview, he believes very much of what he writes, and so do many who read his work. He is subtle in his methods but the premise of the Da Vinci Code is not fiction to him and you can see him portray this in his work.

I recently read "The Da Vinci Hoax" which reads like a dissertation but refutes EVERYTHING in DB's book from the utterly absurd to the mildly inaccurate and unlike the Code, it is very well researched. Within the first 10 pages, they render Brown a weak writer with one source. It's not a personal attack on Brown at all, just proof what he writes is nothing short of absurd.

[codeorama]

No wonder Brown's book has sold so many copies. When a Fiction book has books written to dispute it, no wonder so many people want to read the original book.

BTW, Brown didn't make up the theories that are present in his book, they already existed, he just tweaked them to make a book.

There are people that believe that Mary Magdalene is the figure beside Jesus in Davinci's Last Supper, Brown didn't make that up.

There are people that believe it makes more sense for Jesus to have been married, he didn't make that up.

That doesn't mean it's true, but those theories as well as others were out there before Dan Brown. He's just benefiting from being smart enough to piece them together into a story.

[Mr. S]

what i heard is that the figure besides Jesus in "the last supper" is always painted feminine like for some reason, though im not sure. Also, the old male and female symbols that Brown talks about hidden in the paintings are artistic things (cant think of the word) that are put in to shift the focus of a painting.

However, many do believe in what Brown has said otherwise. I havent heard of that other book though, 'da vinci hoax'. I can see Brown being a very weak writer though, his writing style was pretty simple and the language was not that high in 'da vinci code'. I wonder how it refutes his claims though, as they are claims shared by many.

[galentjm]

Originally posted by Mr. S

However, many do believe in what Brown has said otherwise. I havent heard of that other book though, 'da vinci hoax'. I can see Brown being a very weak writer though, his writing style was pretty simple and the language was not that high in 'da vinci code'. I wonder how it refutes his claims though, as they are claims shared by many.

A lot of people believe Elvis is still alive.....doesn't make it true.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Originally posted by galentjm

A lot of people believe Elvis is still alive.....doesn't make it true.

Doesn't make something false if a lot of people believe it either...

[codeorama]

Originally posted by Mr. S

what i heard is that the figure besides Jesus in "the last supper" is always painted feminine like for some reason, though im not sure. Also, the old male and female symbols that Brown talks about hidden in the paintings are artistic things (cant think of the word) that are put in to shift the focus of a painting.

However, many do believe in what Brown has said otherwise. I havent heard of that other book though, 'da vinci hoax'. I can see Brown being a very weak writer though, his writing style was pretty simple and the language was not that high in 'da vinci code'. I wonder how it refutes his claims though, as they are claims shared by many.

My point was that Brown didn't start this belief. People already believed the points that he made in the book.

He stole the ideas from non fiction books and created a story around them. He didn't think these ideas up.

And I agree, he is a weak writer IMO. I like the subject matter he choose to write about in Anglels and Demons and DaVinci Code, but they were like cookie cutter novels.

[chomerics]

I grew up in the RCC and I have come to loath it. I was always the kid getting in trouble for asking the "wrong" questions. I was in second grade when I had the "gaul" to ask the teacher why we have to confess our sins. She then went on a thological rant about how Jesus died for us and how we need to confess our sins to god. She also talked about how purgatory was the place where people go who don't profess their sins before you die. I argued with her about the Christian who is killed (I had a friend was murdered a few months before) if they would still go to purgatory because they didn't profess their sins. She said they would and I told her what I thought about that rule. Needless to say at a young age I had a bad taste of catholocism in my mouth (no pun intended).

As I grew older and began to read and understand the religion, I disagreed with it even more. I was taught the fire and brimstone approach some places, and I thought it was wrong. I was also taught the loving caring approach, which I think was right, but I never completely bought into the whole Jesus is god bit. I was confirmed when I was 18 years old and I have not been to mass since. As I grew older, I started reading different ideas about the foundation of the church, what it meant, how they ruled, and how it was used as a political tool to control a population.

I then came across the Templar Revelations and I was intrigued about the whole Jesus/Mary marriage deal. I did a bit of investegating and studying and I do think it has some merit. In my view of history, I think Jesus WAS a man, not a carpenter, but a philosopher (there is an Aramaic use of naggar as both carpenter and scholar or learned man) who wanted to change the world. I think he was persecuted and was killed as is in the bible. I think he did NOT rise from the dead, but his story lived on. As people started to believe that Jesus was the son of god (remember at the turn of the century people believed if you lived life as a great person you BECAME a god) Christianity began to take hold.

Enter Constantine, who was a bright and wise man. He noticed the uprising of Catholocism and and used it to his benifit. He used the councel of Nicea to promote the diety version of Christ. He made the RCC to control the population and to give him power over not only the peoples' government, but also their religious beliefs. The very first melding of church and state.

That is my abbreviated version of what I believe Jesus to be, and yes I do believe he was married to Magdelene.

I also think the RCC is going down in flames in a few years (one can hope can't he ) The pedophile scandals are ripping the church apart, and they are being sued left and right. They are trying to save face, but they are scared to death of this movie.

Not because it is fiction, but because there is a lot of truth in the movie, it is just as fictional as the New Testament IMO, and they see this. They are already playing dammage control, and without a leader, they are like a lost soul. I say we just divy up their loot, take control of the Vatican, persecute the cardinals for their role in the sexual abuse scandal and say good riddance.

Now, I hope this doesn't offend anyone, or change anyones beliefs, it is just simply my opinion of the RCC and what I think we should do with them.

[Ancalagon the Black]

Originally posted by Destino

This just in: Tons of publicity works both ways.

It's not exactly easy for the church to find a pop culture issue on which anyone cares for its opinion. We know they don't like the music, the clothes, and the attitude. So the western non-catholic world ignores them for the most part. But a book that everyone's read, that people have enjoyed, has provided the church with a small window through which they can throw in a few pamphlets.

Good point, Destino – I hadn’t thought that the Church might be leveraging the Code for its own publicity purposes. Heck, it got quotes from a cardinal on the front page of the Post!

[zoony]

Originally posted by Mr. S

in my experience, Catholics as a whole generally seem more progressive and open minded than various Protestant groups. I seem to know just as many Catholics in both high school and now in college than I do protestants. A lot of my catholic friends may be religious, but they are not as likely to judge as many non-catholic people I know of.

As a rule I try not to generalize and stereotype... but the one you've pointed out is one that I hang my hat on.

True... oh so very true.

[zoony]

Originally posted by chomerics

I grew up in the RCC and I have come to loath it. I was always the kid getting in trouble for asking the "wrong" questions. I was in second grade when I had the "gaul" to ask the teacher why we have to confess our sins. She then went on a thological rant about how Jesus died for us and how we need to confess our sins to god. She also talked about how purgatory was the place where people go who don't profess their sins before you die. I argued with her about the Christian who is killed (I had a friend was murdered a few months before) if they would still go to purgatory because they didn't profess their sins. She said they would and I told her what I thought about that rule. Needless to say at a young age I had a bad taste of catholocism in my mouth (no pun intended).

As I grew older and began to read and understand the religion, I disagreed with it even more. I was taught the fire and brimstone approach some places, and I thought it was wrong. I was also taught the loving caring approach, which I think was right, but I never completely bought into the whole Jesus is god bit. I was confirmed when I was 18 years old and I have not been to mass since. As I grew older, I started reading different ideas about the foundation of the church, what it meant, how they ruled, and how it was used as a political tool to control a population.

I then came across the Templar Revelations and I was intrigued about the whole Jesus/Mary marriage deal. I did a bit of investegating and studying and I do think it has some merit. In my view of history, I think Jesus WAS a man, not a carpenter, but a philosopher (there is an Aramaic use of naggar as both carpenter and scholar or learned man) who wanted to change the world. I think he was persecuted and was killed as is in the bible. I think he did NOT rise from the dead, but his story lived on. As people started to believe that Jesus was the son of god (remember at the turn of the century people believed if you lived life as a great person you BECAME a god) Christianity began to take hold.

Enter Constantine, who was a bright and wise man. He noticed the uprising of Catholocism and and used it to his benifit. He used the councel of Nicea to promote the diety version of Christ. He made the RCC to control the population and to give him power over not only the peoples' government, but also their religious beliefs. The very first melding of church and state.

That is my abbreviated version of what I believe Jesus to be, and yes I do believe he was married to Magdelene.

I also think the RCC is going down in flames in a few years (one can hope can't he ) The pedophile scandals are ripping the church apart, and they are being sued left and right. They are trying to save face, but they are scared to death of this movie.

Not because it is fiction, but because there is a lot of truth in the movie, it is just as fictional as the New Testament IMO, and they see this. They are already playing dammage control, and without a leader, they are like a lost soul. I say we just divy up their loot, take control of the Vatican, persecute the cardinals for their role in the sexual abuse scandal and say good riddance.

Now, I hope this doesn't offend anyone, or change anyones beliefs, it is just simply my opinion of the RCC and what I think we should do with them.

Everything we experience in life is a function of perspective.

I could write just as long a post about the Catholic Church being the largest charitable organization in the world... but I don't think it will do any good. You've chosen the eyeglasses that you'll wear to see the world around you.

The only thing that I will say is that you should seriously re-check the foundations of your philosophy...especially the Constantine/council of Nicea conclusion as well as what you were taught when you were young by your "teacher". That sounded like an awful experience and I'm sorry you had to go thru it.

I will not argue whether your conclusions are correct Chomerics... but I think it is important the way in which those conclusions are reached.

Is the conclusion based on the narrow window of perspective, or the broadness of reality?...

[chomerics]

Originally posted by zoony

Is the conclusion based on the narrow window of perspective, or the broadness of reality?...

I have a scientific mind and I need to see things to understand them. I have done a lot of research about the Council of Nicea and the meetings of the bishops. I am under the opinion that Constatine used the power of religion to meld the church with the state. This gave him more power and controll over the population. I also think is should be noted that technology pretty much ceased to develop for the next 1000 or so years, mainly because of the RCC.

Like I said, I have read a lot of information on the meeting, the formation of the church and how it was set up. I disagree with the entire RCC philosophy, and I think my version of history actually makes sense. It puts everything into place for me, where when I was younger I felt something was not right.

I look at history through the eyes of evolution, and science, not religion and faith. If people want to believe in their god, that's great, just don't tell me or my kids we are going to hell because we don't believe in your immaginary man.