Cate
Pretty much invincible
I do have to back up Crystal a little - it's one thing to criticize something like a documentary without seeing it (i.e. Farenheit 9/11), but this is a work of fiction. There are lots of works of fiction out there that are based on an actual thing or event and, by playing fast and loose with the facts, present an interesting, entertaining fictional story.
A lot of the seedy underbelly of the Catholic church mentioned in the book is actually true. It's true that the Bible, though inspired by God (note to non-Christians - can't back that up, it's a crucial article of faith), was written by fallible Man, and all of those men were, well, men.
It's true that the Bible, a thousand years ago, underwent some pretty serious editing and rewrites - Dan Brown ascribes ulterior motives, but I'm willing to buy that the church was just trying to determine which of the many versions of the story that we now call "the Bible" was the most accurate.
It's true that, while the greater population of Opus Dei is just a bunch of devout Catholics wanting to do good works and live holy lives, there is a truly bizarre fundamentalist segment that engages in such acts as corporal mortification (basically, self-whipping and self-gouging and all kinds of behavior that most people go to psychiatrists to escape) to the extent that cult-buster-esque organizations exist to help families extract their children from Opus Dei for fear of physical and emotional harm.
It's true that many of the rituals that Christians in general and Catholics in particular practice today are influenced or taken in whole from pagan rituals predating Christianity. In the early days of the Chuch, they were trying to spread Christianity around to the shrinking pagan majority. One of the best ways to do this was to let them have their familiar rituals, but assign them new, Christian significance.
Dan Brown takes these truths, among others, shakes them up a bit, adds some fictional characters and fictional situations, and makes a right good novel about it. Yes, parts of it can be read as critical of the Catholic church, and if you read it as a history book rather than a novel it would definitely condemn the Church as a lying, murderous, corrupt entity. But the first thing to remember is that all - all - controlling institutions have some history of corruption, no matter how slight. The second thing to remember is that the Gospels were written, the Crusades took place, and the pagans were placated over a thousand years ago, and the Church has evolved a whole lot since then - we generally don't go around abusing people for not converting, which is more than can be said for a lot of religions out there.
And the third thing to remember is the first thing that I mentioned, which is that this is a novel, and it's a pretty good one, in my opinion. Try reading it. It's actually entertaining, and thought-provoking, which is generally recognized as a good thing.
Good God. That was almost as long as Kevin's.
A lot of the seedy underbelly of the Catholic church mentioned in the book is actually true. It's true that the Bible, though inspired by God (note to non-Christians - can't back that up, it's a crucial article of faith), was written by fallible Man, and all of those men were, well, men.
It's true that the Bible, a thousand years ago, underwent some pretty serious editing and rewrites - Dan Brown ascribes ulterior motives, but I'm willing to buy that the church was just trying to determine which of the many versions of the story that we now call "the Bible" was the most accurate.
It's true that, while the greater population of Opus Dei is just a bunch of devout Catholics wanting to do good works and live holy lives, there is a truly bizarre fundamentalist segment that engages in such acts as corporal mortification (basically, self-whipping and self-gouging and all kinds of behavior that most people go to psychiatrists to escape) to the extent that cult-buster-esque organizations exist to help families extract their children from Opus Dei for fear of physical and emotional harm.
It's true that many of the rituals that Christians in general and Catholics in particular practice today are influenced or taken in whole from pagan rituals predating Christianity. In the early days of the Chuch, they were trying to spread Christianity around to the shrinking pagan majority. One of the best ways to do this was to let them have their familiar rituals, but assign them new, Christian significance.
Dan Brown takes these truths, among others, shakes them up a bit, adds some fictional characters and fictional situations, and makes a right good novel about it. Yes, parts of it can be read as critical of the Catholic church, and if you read it as a history book rather than a novel it would definitely condemn the Church as a lying, murderous, corrupt entity. But the first thing to remember is that all - all - controlling institutions have some history of corruption, no matter how slight. The second thing to remember is that the Gospels were written, the Crusades took place, and the pagans were placated over a thousand years ago, and the Church has evolved a whole lot since then - we generally don't go around abusing people for not converting, which is more than can be said for a lot of religions out there.
And the third thing to remember is the first thing that I mentioned, which is that this is a novel, and it's a pretty good one, in my opinion. Try reading it. It's actually entertaining, and thought-provoking, which is generally recognized as a good thing.
Good God. That was almost as long as Kevin's.
