And that's saying something." I'll only add one thing to his list: it's also blasphemous. He writes, "This is without doubt, the silliest, most inaccurate, ill-informed, stereotype-driven, cloth-eared, cardboard-cutout-populated piece of pulp fiction that I have read. Peter Millar, writing in the London Times, seems to have liked this book a tad better than I did. *Andrew Greeley, the liberal Catholic priest who never goes out of his way to defend the Church's teaching or history, nevertheless writes in the National Catholic Reporter, "Brown knows little about Leonardo, little about the Catholic church, and little about history." That's too bad because this book is about Leonardo, the Catholic Church and history. *The aforementioned Miesel, a medieval historian, concludes her review by writing that, "in the end, Dan Brown has penned a poorly written, atrociously researched mess." She goes on to note that, unfortunately, the damage is done because "after all, how many lay readers will see the blazing inaccuracies put forward as buried truths?"
#Is there any truth to the da vinci code code#
A very consise yet also quite comprehensive book, is Fact and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code by Steve Kellmeyer, which has the interesting format of going page by page through the novel and countering its assertions. For those who are willing to take the time to get to the bottom of the issues raised in The Da Vinci Code, I also recommend reading The Da Vinci Hoax by Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel or Amy Welborn's book, De- Coding Da Vinci.
First is the review by Sandra Miesel in the Septemissue of Crisis magazine entitled "Dismantling The Da Vinci Code." She takes up many of the preposterous claims and provides far more thorough evidence and research than I would have time to muster.
Writers much more qualified than myself in areas such as art, esoteric religions, and medieval history have already discounted the bizarre notions included in this work of fiction masquerading as fact, and you can look at their reviews on my website.īefore we start I want to refer you to some bibliography. Readers who do further research and exercise critical judgment will discover that assertions made in The Da Vinci Code about Jesus Christ, Mary Magdalen, and Church history lack support among reputable scholars. The central plot of this mystery novel is whether these secrets will either be lost forever or revealed for all to know. Therefore a secret society, the Priory of Sion, is the keeper of this truth and the true religion, both of which, of course, have been covered up by the Vatican for all these years. What does the novel say? The book claims that Mary Magdalene was actually the Holy Grail, that it is she, rather than Saint John, who is pictured next to Christ in Leonardo DaVinci's painting "The Last Supper" and she, not Peter, was to be leader of his new church. How many of you here have read the The DaVinci Code? Whether or not you've read it, you must have heard of it. Yet it contradicts holy Scripture and the doctrines of Christianity by re-explaining Jesus by playing on ever-popular biases against the Catholic Church.
This is now a best-selling novel which, because it is engagingly written, is being treated as plausible. There is a certain gullibility for conspiracy theories, and currently exploiting that is "The DaVinci Code" by Dan Brown. Althout unrelated to the Da Vinci Code, it shows how easy it is to manipulate the facts and write a book just like it. Go to my pages on Da Vinci Code Resources and Who is Mary Magdalene? Coulter's Homepage Good Counsel Retreat House The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction By Fr.
0 kommentar(er)
