Religion is Politics
I know I've been deviating from my normal form, although normal is relative considering the youth of this blog, but I wanted to talk about the DaVinci Code.
I saw the movie yesterday and it was enjoyable, although probably less so as I have read the book twice and am somewhat of a purist. In general though it seemed to be a good depiction of what I believe the book to be about. A couple of my gripes stem from its more controversial component, Opus Dei.
While reading the book I didn't necessarily view Opus Dei as being the vicious fringe group the movie depicted. Granted, Opus Dei is a strict Catholic sect that subscribes to indoctrinated faith rather than the relaxed liberalism brought on by John Paul II or even just the more relaxed nature of the American Church in particular. What suprised me was the changes in script that seemed to villianize Opus Dei even more. I am no expert on the teachings or practices of Opus Dei, so I will not condescend to critisize them, nor can I support them. But I found it somewhat troubling that it was so easy to make them the point of all Langdon and Sophie's trouble. Maybe that is the conservative in me.
I will give Opus Dei credit where it is due, they believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church, and they uphold them more faithfully than I, or anyone else I know for that matter, can claim to do. What they do to themselves, or ask of their members, in the name of God is truely their business. Worse atrocities have been done in the name of God.
But I am slightly ashamed of my Church at this time. I support them, believe in them, I myself would chose Catholism over other Christianities given the choice. But to renouce a movie, a work of fiction, as being blasphemous and a danger to the Church is ridiculous. Believers will believe regardless of what a book tells them about Jesus Christ. To put so much emphasis on its "evil-ness" plays right in to the hands of the books and its believers making it seem as if there really were something to hide.
The truth or fiction behind this Mary Theory is meaningless to me. Because in reality even if Jesus was a mortal man, a father and husband, it doesn't change his divinity. He died on the cross and who he left behind, blood relation or not, are the people who he died to save. Now maybe that is too much religios mumbo jumbo for some of you. But I can't help but think that perhaps Dan Brown put too much emphasis on the secret. Believers will believe and faith, the faith of the true, won't be shaken because Jesus was a man. Faith is about believing in something you can never prove, and for some that is the Grail Quest for others its Jesus' Divinity. All this controversy brings to mind a theory I've had about many things.
Its the wanting, the hope of figuring out the secret, that inspires people. To know for sure begins to take away the meaning. Human beings love a mystery and they will spend their lives trying to find answers, but once we have them we move on... find something else to search for. For a very long time people have been looking for the real answers about Jesus and God, while others have been searching for the Grail. But in the end they both believe that finding the answer will bring to revelation, that it will change humanity. Isn't that faith, that search for something greater all the same?
God is what you make him, and I suppose that is the liberal in me, but whatever it is that you seek with unbridled faith its faith nonetheless. So believe in Mary Magdeline or don't, because I believe that in the end it all might just be a wash.
I saw the movie yesterday and it was enjoyable, although probably less so as I have read the book twice and am somewhat of a purist. In general though it seemed to be a good depiction of what I believe the book to be about. A couple of my gripes stem from its more controversial component, Opus Dei.
While reading the book I didn't necessarily view Opus Dei as being the vicious fringe group the movie depicted. Granted, Opus Dei is a strict Catholic sect that subscribes to indoctrinated faith rather than the relaxed liberalism brought on by John Paul II or even just the more relaxed nature of the American Church in particular. What suprised me was the changes in script that seemed to villianize Opus Dei even more. I am no expert on the teachings or practices of Opus Dei, so I will not condescend to critisize them, nor can I support them. But I found it somewhat troubling that it was so easy to make them the point of all Langdon and Sophie's trouble. Maybe that is the conservative in me.
I will give Opus Dei credit where it is due, they believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church, and they uphold them more faithfully than I, or anyone else I know for that matter, can claim to do. What they do to themselves, or ask of their members, in the name of God is truely their business. Worse atrocities have been done in the name of God.
But I am slightly ashamed of my Church at this time. I support them, believe in them, I myself would chose Catholism over other Christianities given the choice. But to renouce a movie, a work of fiction, as being blasphemous and a danger to the Church is ridiculous. Believers will believe regardless of what a book tells them about Jesus Christ. To put so much emphasis on its "evil-ness" plays right in to the hands of the books and its believers making it seem as if there really were something to hide.
The truth or fiction behind this Mary Theory is meaningless to me. Because in reality even if Jesus was a mortal man, a father and husband, it doesn't change his divinity. He died on the cross and who he left behind, blood relation or not, are the people who he died to save. Now maybe that is too much religios mumbo jumbo for some of you. But I can't help but think that perhaps Dan Brown put too much emphasis on the secret. Believers will believe and faith, the faith of the true, won't be shaken because Jesus was a man. Faith is about believing in something you can never prove, and for some that is the Grail Quest for others its Jesus' Divinity. All this controversy brings to mind a theory I've had about many things.
Its the wanting, the hope of figuring out the secret, that inspires people. To know for sure begins to take away the meaning. Human beings love a mystery and they will spend their lives trying to find answers, but once we have them we move on... find something else to search for. For a very long time people have been looking for the real answers about Jesus and God, while others have been searching for the Grail. But in the end they both believe that finding the answer will bring to revelation, that it will change humanity. Isn't that faith, that search for something greater all the same?
God is what you make him, and I suppose that is the liberal in me, but whatever it is that you seek with unbridled faith its faith nonetheless. So believe in Mary Magdeline or don't, because I believe that in the end it all might just be a wash.
posted by KatKrusade at
10:09 AM
1 Comments:
On Opus Dei, I actually thought the film villanized the Religious sect about the same. I think what makes the film come off a bit worse is the seeing of Silas' creepiness when compared to just imagining it (which can, at times be even worse then seeing, but I do not believe this to be one of those times).
In fact, one of the largest complaints of the Catholic church about the book, if I recall, was the misrepresentation of Opus Dei as a kind of strong-arm of the church. A Christ-mafia, if you will.
Its also been argued that Brown confused Opus Dei with the Jesuits - but then again, maybe he didn't - Opus Dei has a creepier name :)
All in all, when I read the book, I did view the sect as a "viscious fringe group," as depicted in the movie.
On the subject of "the wanting." God is most certainly what you make of him as an individual. To some, He has a profound influence in their lives because they believe Him to be a profound influence in their lives. To others, not so much - He appears when its convenient for Him because they come to Him when it is convenient for them. For me, he does not exist, so in my life, he does not exist and has no influence on me at all.
Humans are always wanting to know more. We are curious animals. Thats why Eve ate that apple in that one Genesis story (since there are two conflicting ones ;)). I suppose that original sin is really nothing more than curiosity. And for me, curiosity is nothing of which to be ashamed at all.
By
Timmy, at 2:17 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home