‘The
Da Vinci Code’ - merely writings of fiction not
history
by Rev. Ron Rolheiser, OMI,
Most of us, I suspect, are
familiar with Dan Brown’s runaway bestseller, “The Da
Vinci Code.” Here’s the storyline: Looking at Leonardo da
Vinci’s painting of the Last Supper, Brown proposes that the figure on Jesus’
right, the “beloved disciple,” is Mary Magdala,
who married Jesus, bore him a child, and was Jesus’ real choice to succeed him
as leader. Moreover, what she represents (the goddess, the eternal feminine,
sexuality) is the “Holy Grail,” the real quest of every heart.
But the official church, from
its beginning to this very day, has suppressed this, often violently, burning
to death more than five million women in the process. Indeed, it’s almost as if
the real reason the institutional church exists at all is to suppress this
truth. Fortunately, a few great men (Da Vinci,
Galileo, curators at the Louvre, Walt Disney, and a
Harvard professor) have, through secret codes, preserved the real truth. The
Last Supper painting by Da Vinci is such a code, as
is Disney’s Daffy Duck (a symbol of Mary Magdala).
All of this, of course, would
just make for a good story if the book hadn’t caught such a fertile, if not
exactly deep, vein within the popular imagination. Millions of people are
taking its storyline as a truth claim, and numerous groups and societies are
springing up around it, presumably to continue to crack and preserve “the
code.”
What’s to be said about this?
On the positive side, I give
Dan Brown full marks for telling a good story and for being clever — clever
enough to know what sells today.
What does? The elements of
this book: Gnosticism (There are hidden secrets you need to know);
anti-Catholicism (Rome is founded on a lie and protects itself by a lie); the
importance of a return to the sacred feminine (Patriarchy has thoroughly
distorted both history and consciousness); sex (It’s the ultimate liberating
force, if the church would but step aside); and fiction as history (Truth is
less important than perception). Brown reads the market well.
Less to his credit, his book
is full of historical misinformation and flat-out error. Just a couple of
examples: Brown claims that the church has always belittled Mary Magdala as a prostitute to hide her true relationship with
Jesus. So much for the tributes of countless church writers, including popes,
who spoke of her as “the apostle of apostles” and “the new Eve announcing not
death but life,” and so much for the fact that she’s celebrated as a saint by
the official church.
As well, the claim that
Constantine shifted the Christian day of worship to Sunday is simply false, as
are his claims that virtually all the elements for Christian worship were taken
directly from pagan mystery religions (bypassing their Jewish origins), as is
his claim that the sacred name, YHWH, was drawn from the idea of an androgynous
physical union between the masculine JAB and the pre-Hebraic name for Eve,
HAVAH.
Of course, Brown can claim
that he is, after all, writing fiction, not history. True enough, except that
millions of people are taking it as history. Is this Brown’s fault? Not
entirely, but largely. His historical disclaimer at the beginning of the book
is far from honest. Had he said what every fiction writer should say, that this
is simply a work of his imagination, nothing more, a lot of the nonsense around
the book would not exist. But that’s not what he did and his disclaimer is, to
my mind, deliberately ambiguous and self-serving for his thesis (that we’ve all
been naively swallowing a Vatican-enforced conspiracy for centuries).
Brown plays to the gnostic in us (“You’ve been had, but I can tell you the
real secret!”). But which is the greater naivete, believing in the truth claims
of Christianity, or believing that a few intellectuals have access to spiritual
secrets denied to the rest of us because they who know the truth have been too
intimidated for 2000 years (by the Vatican!) to ever reveal it? Who exactly is
being taken for a ride here?
In his
memoirs, Nikos Kazantzakis
shares why he wrote, “Zorba the Greek.” He believed that Christianity was ultimately founded
on a lie, a loving lie, but a lie nonetheless. When Jesus died, Kazantzakis suggests, Mary Magdala
loved him so much that she simply couldn’t accept his death and so she
resurrected him in her heart and began to spread the news that he had risen.
Her story took hold and a great religion was born. Kazantzakis
had similar feelings about Zorba and tried to do for
him what Mary Magdala did for Jesus. Well, that made
for a good book and an excellent movie, but hardly for a great religion.
Christianity is a great
religion with a billion adherents and the world measures time by its inception,
and that’s hardly because a few self-serving church officials have been able to
hide the real truth from everyone (except “the wise and the clever”) for a
couple of thousand years.
Oblate Father Ron Rolheiser is a theologian, teacher, and award-winning author.