Opus Dei received a bad press from Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code, but in all fairness it is probably deserved. Especially so if what these film makers have to say is true. Perhaps Opus Dei does 'protest too much'?
On a more positive note the article suggests that the Spanish government, long a bastion of pro-Catholicism, may be succombing to secular ideals.
Showing posts with label Dan Brown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dan Brown. Show all posts
06/10/2008
21/03/2007
Some Comments on The Da Vinci Code
Well, first of all this blog is about reasoned arguments, and this book is a novel. The overlap of the two comes not from the novel itself, but from the discussion it has created.
I wont go into the plot, you've probably read it already, but one of the themes is that of a different description of the history of the church and mainstream Christianity. This seemed to awaken a number of sleeping giants in our society. Of course some people came out and denied it was true, and others said it was true without doubt. I expect most people who believe in the power of reason sit somewhere in the middle.
This book (and to a lesser extent several others previously and after) seemed to be a catalyst that encouraged an open debate about the origin of a major religion. All of a sudden millions of people were challenging the official history, in the process uncovering for themselves much of the contradiction, misogyny and violence committed by the church.
Is this a good thing? Of course. It has long been argued by people of reason that religion should be placed under the same scrutiny that we heap on the other disciplines; science, history, economics...
By being a catalyst for open debate, and showing that it is acceptable to challenge the doctrines of Christianity this book has made a not-insignificant stride in the name of reason. All we need now is for everybody to take this willingness to challenge an idea to heart.
I wont go into the plot, you've probably read it already, but one of the themes is that of a different description of the history of the church and mainstream Christianity. This seemed to awaken a number of sleeping giants in our society. Of course some people came out and denied it was true, and others said it was true without doubt. I expect most people who believe in the power of reason sit somewhere in the middle.
This book (and to a lesser extent several others previously and after) seemed to be a catalyst that encouraged an open debate about the origin of a major religion. All of a sudden millions of people were challenging the official history, in the process uncovering for themselves much of the contradiction, misogyny and violence committed by the church.
Is this a good thing? Of course. It has long been argued by people of reason that religion should be placed under the same scrutiny that we heap on the other disciplines; science, history, economics...
By being a catalyst for open debate, and showing that it is acceptable to challenge the doctrines of Christianity this book has made a not-insignificant stride in the name of reason. All we need now is for everybody to take this willingness to challenge an idea to heart.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
