| |
January 3, 2004
THE DaVINCI CODE by Dan
Brown: The Issue of Authority
Controversy about this novel pendulates
between “it’s lies, bogus history and half-truths” and “why take
good fiction seriously?” Scores of issues and secrets are debated
in hundreds of chat-rooms. This multitude of topics gravitate to a
single issue, the authority of the Bible and the church. In other
words, what do Christians believe (content) and why do they believe
it (basis). This issue is evident in the text of the book and the
responses of its readers.
Linda Kulman and Jay Tolson’s “Jesus in
America” (US News and World Report, 12/22/03, 48) paves the
way for any belief about Jesus when they say, “Of course, there is
no way to return to the original Jesus, any more than there is a way
to go back to the original church, however much Christians have
tried to do both.” The church has always accepted biblical
authority for truth about its Messiah. The book is consistent and
trustworthy about what we need, a Savior from sin who is necessarily
both God and man as his biblical opponents clearly understood in the
Passion narratives. Brown’s Jesus is only human and very compatible
with today’s canons of pleasure and profit. The Bible does not
offer us everything that we want, so people have tried to spin its
challenges into acceptable alternatives. However, without the
Bible, Brown’s story is as possible as any other.
The church’s imperfections are well-known and
lend themselves to sizeable audiences. They include injustices
against minorities and veneration of leaders and relics rather than
its Lord. An internet reviewer “authoritatively” endorses the
Code by saying, “The many cover ups made by the Catholic Church
and other religions are blatantly exposed and only back up my long
term opinion that the current Bible is a skewed version of Jesus
written by sexist men of high power.” In an era of “watergates,”
the DaVinci Code narrates a “churchgate” of titanic
proportions. However, the church has celebrated it’s Savior (our
Christmas season in spite of its cultural trappings) and His
salvation (our Easter season in spite social accretions). Anselm of
Canterbury (ca. 1100) got it right in his Why God Became Man,
and amazingly he was unconcerned about the identity of the Grail
when he should have been.
Kulman and Tolson were correct in saying, “The
contrast [in Jesuses of popular literature] only hints at the
creativity Americans continue to show in projecting their wishes
upon the image of Jesus.” (49) There is controversy because
authoritative sources declare that he is to be worshipped and not
reassembled. We, in turn, must be careful that we do not entertain
ourselves to death.
|
|
