Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Catholic Answers--Today > Catholic Answers Magazine (formerly This Rock)
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Apr 17, '09, 3:44 pm
Sophia Sproule Sophia Sproule is offline
Catholic Answers (ret.)
 
Join Date: August 30, 2007
Posts: 42
Religion: Catholic
Post This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

A Note from This Rock’s Editors: On May 15, the cinematic adaptation of Dan Brown’s novel Angels & Demons will be released in theatres. The following article by Carl E. Olson (co-author of The Da Vinci Hoax), which appeared in the April 2009 issue of This Rock, offers a response to the book's anti-Catholic claims.

Dan Brown Rushes In
Where Angels (& Demons) Fear to Tread

By Carl E. Olson

The astounding success of The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown’s fourth novel, first published in the spring of 2003, is well known. The numbers are incredible: Over 60 million copies of the controversial novel have sold worldwide, in over 40 languages, with millions of copies of Brown’s previous three novels following fast in the wake of its success. A major motion picture was released in May 2006, starring Tom Hanks and directed by Ron Howard. It grossed over $240 million in the United States and nearly $760 million worldwide, making it the 26th most profitable movie of all time, ahead of such films as Forrest Gump, The Sixth Sense, and Pirates of the Caribbean.
Brown, Howard, and Hanks are now back, this time with the sequel (actually a prequel) to The Da Vinci Code. Angels & Demons, based on Brown’s second novel, which was published in 2000, opens in theaters on May 15 and is expected to be one of the top-grossing films of the year. It also figures to be controversial. The film features the return of Robert Langdon, the Harvard “symbologist” who revealed the alleged fact that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had descendents. It focuses on the Catholic Church and the election of a (fictional) pope, and pontificates—so to speak—on the relationship between science and religion.
Despite The Da Vinci Code movie’s worldwide commercial success, it was generally panned by critics, who complained that the movie was clumsy, plodding, and confusing. Some understood this was because the movie followed the book so faithfully. Apparently the producers came to the same realization. “I think we may have been too reverential toward it,” producer Brian Grazer told USA Today in October 2008. “We got all the facts of the book right, but the movie was a little long and stagey.” He promised that Angels & Demons will be different. “Langdon doesn’t stop and give a speech,” Grazer said, “When he speaks, he’s in motion.”

Code’s Rough Draft
If that’s the case, it’s due to the efforts of screenwriter Akiva Goldsman, especially since the main components of the two Langdon novels are almost identical. Dan Burstein, a fan of Brown’s novels and co-editor of Secrets of Angels & Demons (CDS Books 2004), wrote that Angels & Demons “struck me as a virtual rough draft for The Da Vinci Code . . . Structurally, of course, the plots and characters of the two novels are kissing cousins” (2).
He is correct. Both novels open in a major European city with the murder of a powerful, mysterious man in possession of sensitive information. The assassins in both are strange, tormented characters who belong to a secret, supposedly ancient organization. In each novel, Langdon is aided by beautiful, brainy women whose father/grandfather was the murder victim. Both books involve the Catholic Church, clandestine societies, famous art, secret documents, and hidden clues leading to earthshaking revelations. Each novel take place over the course of 24 hours.
Angels & Demons opens with Langdon being woken by an early morning phone call. Leonardo Vetra, a priest and scientist, has been murdered in Geneva. He had been researching antimatter for European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), and his boss, CERN director Maximilian Kohler, wants Langdon’s help. The murderer branded Vetra’s chest with a symbol: the word “Illuminati” written as an ambigram (a word that can be read from several different directions). Langdon meets Vetra’s adopted daughter Vittoria, who also works for CERN in the research of antimatter. They discover that this secret society, the Illuminati, stole enough antimatter to make a substantial bomb.
Langdon and Vittoria soon learn the canister of antimatter is in the Vatican. The pope has recently died and a papal conclave is in session. Cardinal Saverio Mortati, the senior cardinal in the conclave and Dean of the College of Cardinals, discovers that the four cardinals considered to be the best papal material have been kidnapped. Langdon (who is described as an art history professor who writes books on “religious symbology”) uses his knowledge of the Illuminati to uncover and follow clues located throughout Rome that might lead to the bomb and the missing cardinals. Vittoria is kidnapped, the four cardinals are eventually found dead, and Langdon must race against time—the antimatter is set to explode within hours—to apprehend the murderer and save the lady scientist.
Camerlengo Carlo Ventresca, the ultra-conservative papal chamberlain, helps Langdon discover the canister of antimatter, hidden in the catacombs beneath St. Peter’s Basilica, and detonate it safely. Ventresca subsequently attempts to kill Langdon; he, in fact, had murdered the recently deceased pope and had arranged for the kidnappings and murders of the four cardinals. The Illuminati had not been involved in any way, but were a decoy for Ventresca, who is revealed to be not only a fanatical enemy of science, but also the son of the late pope—by artificial insemination no less.

Fatuous Fiction or Food for Thought?
As in The Da Vinci Code, Brown uses implausible narrative and thin characters to tackle complex, controversial topics. These include the relationship between faith and reason, religion and science, introduced early in the novel. As with The Da Vinci Code, which clumsily attempted to tell the “real story” of Jesus, the early Church, and the Bible, it’s hard to take this novel seriously. Brown makes a lot of mistakes and his characters say many silly things with a pomposity that makes you wonder: Is this just a spoof?
Yet both Brown and many of his readers take his research and theories seriously. Angels & Demons carries an Author’s Note that states: “References to all works of art, tombs, tunnels, and architecture are entirely factual (as are their exact location). They can still be seen today. The brotherhood of the Illuminati is also factual.” In an interview posted on his Web site, Brown states, “My goal is always to make the character’s [sic] and plot be so engaging that readers don’t realize how much they are learning along the way.”
Burstein believes that offended theologians and annoyed academics need to look at “the Dan Brown phenomenon” differently. Brown’s novel, he argues, offers ordinary people a chance to engage in a vital discussion about various issues. He writes,
We are torn between the impulses toward faith and spirituality on the one hand and science and technology on the other. The more logical and technological our society becomes, the more some of us crave spirituality and a return to past values. . . . And the more globalized and materialistic our cultures become, the more small groups seem attracted to the most illogical, untenable, extremist, and dangerous religious dogmas. (Secrets, 3)
There’s little doubt that Burstein, like Brown, thinks traditional, orthodox Christianity—especially Catholicism—is illogical and dangerous. He suggests that an emphasis on facts and objective truth can obscure what Brown’s work is all about:

But like much else, the point in Dan Brown’s work is not the facts (no matter how many times he asserts that everything is factual). The point is to understand his use of myth and metaphor, his uncanny ability to suggest intriguing alternative explanations for historical events, and his talent for mining ideas and symbols that have been hiding in plain sight for years—and infuse them with new thought-provoking interpretations. (Secrets, 5)

The problem is that Burstein, like Brown, wants to have it both ways: Readers are encouraged to accept Brown as a serious (but accessible) guide to historical events and belief systems, but are also told anyone upset with Brown’s claims is too literal-minded, uptight, and resistant to new ways of thinking. Yet, in the end, Brown puts forth claims and insinuates notions that are often historical and factual in nature. Setting aside myth and metaphor for a moment, how good is his research?

Slander and Stereotyping
Angels & Demons contains numerous errors relating to art, landmarks, maps, names, dates, and technology (see “Brown Fumbles Facts,” below). Some of these reveal an obvious dislike, even mocking animosity, toward the Catholic Church.
The author spends two pages (ch. 84), for example, on false statements and salacious intimations about The Ecstasy of St. Teresa, a famous sculpture by Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini (1598-1680) located in the Cornaro Chapel of Santa Maria della Vittoria in Rome. The sculpture, readers are told, “had been moved from its original location inside the Vatican” not long after its unveiling, “banished” to “some obscure chapel.” That is false. The sculpture was commissioned by Venetian Cardinal Federico Cornaro for the Cornaro Chapel.
“Pope Urban VIII had rejected The Ecstasy of St. Teresa as too sexually explicit for the Vatican.” That is also false. Bernini didn’t begin working on it until three years after Urban died in 1644; he completed it in 1652. Further, Langdon deems the sculpture—which depicts St. Teresa of Avila in spiritual ecstasy, based on a description in her autobiography—as pornographic, as it supposedly depicts the saint “on her back in the throes of a toe-curling orgasm.” Going from bad to worse, Langdon interprets St. Teresa’s description of her mystical experience as “a metaphor for some serious sex.”
This crude dialogue is easily matched by the audacious dismissal of historical fact in the service of Catholic-bashing. Kohler and Langdon agree, in an early conversation, that “[o]utspoken scientists like Copernicus . . . [were] murdered by the Church for revealing scientific truths. Religion has always persecuted science” (ch. 9). This is not just false; it is libelous. Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) was a canon at the Cathedral in Cracow, a loyal son of the Church who died after a stroke at the age of 70.
“Unfortunately, Brown is reinforcing a stereotype,” stated Owen Gingerich, Senior Astronomer Emeritus at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and an expert on Copernicus, in an interview with the editors of Secrets of Angels & Demons. “Copernicus was a servant of the Catholic Church. He dedicated his book to the pope, and never suffered any personal reproach or persecution.” Gingerich added: “In truth, it is extremely difficult to document anyone put to death as a heretic for introducing scientific ideas” (81).

Galileo, Again
Brown takes the prevailing mythology of Galileo as martyr for science and fictionalizes it even further. Langdon describes a dramatic clash between “the world’s first scientific think tank, calling themselves the enlightened ones” and the ruthless, tyrannical, and violent Catholic Church. Galileo is said to have been a key player in the “think tank”—that is, the Illuminati—and is described as “a pacifist” who was “almost executed by the church for proclaiming that the sun, and not the earth, was the center of the solar system” (ch. 9).
This is utter rot. The Illuminati had no interest in scientific research. And Galileo had no interest in the Illuminati, since they didn’t exist until well over a century after his death. Yes, both Galileo and many of his critics among Church leadership made mistakes, acted unbecomingly, and did themselves no favors. But Galileo was never in danger of being executed; in fact, he was allowed to continue to adhere to Copernican theory as a hypothesis.
Sadly, Galileo continues to be represented in popular culture as the poster boy for reason and science against superstition and religion—that is, Christianity. Brown’s novel and the impending movie promote the misrepresentations. “Since the beginning of history,” Langdon states nonsensically, “a deep rift has existed between science and religion” (ch. 9). The fictional historian is apparently unaware that modern science would not have come into being if it weren’t for Christian theology and philosophy, along with the support of the Catholic Church. Nor did science, as we think of it in modern world, even exist prior to the late Middle Ages; the term “scientific method” was rarely used before the mid-19th century.

Demons in the Details
Yet the best-selling novelist seems confused about the topic. Both science and religion, Brown stated in an interview posted on his Web site, “are manifestations of man’s quest to understand the divine. Religion savors the questions while science savors the quest for answers.” Whatever does that mean? Are there actually any scientists who would say that science is a quest “to understand the divine”? Most would likely go with the standard definition of science as the systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
“Science and religion seem to be two different languages attempting to tell the same story,” Brown adds, “and yet the battle between them has been raging for centuries and continues today.” Why, then, does Brown have such an irrational dislike for Catholicism? Why does he put all of the blame for this “battle” on the Catholic Church? Does he not know the integral role played by the Catholic Church and scientists who were devout Catholics in every field of scientific study? Does he agree with Langdon, the hero of Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code, that “it seemed there was always a close correlation between true believers and high body counts” (ch. 11)? Does he agree with the vague pantheism of the heroine Vittoria, who states, “We all seek God in different ways. . . . Religions evolve . . . God is the energy that flows through the synapses of our nervous system and the chambers of our hearts! God is in all things!” (ch. 131)?
Dan Brown’s exact religious beliefs and spiritual inclinations remain obscure. What is clear is that he has a tenuous, even contrary, relationship with truth in general and the Catholic Church specifically. And while he has sometimes talked as though he wants to appeal to the better angels of his readers, the careful reader should know there are demons in the details.

Carl E. Olson is the editor of IgnatiusInsight.com; the co-author, with Sandra Miesel, of The Da Vinci Hoax (Ignatius, 2004); and the author of Will Catholics Be “Left Behind”? (Ignatius, 2003). He has written for numerous Catholic periodicals. He and his wife, Heather, have two children. Their conversion story appears in Surprised by Truth 3.

Brown Fumbles Facts
Following are just a few of the many mistakes a conscientious author with access to a library or the Internet (not to mention an editor!) should not make—especially if he wishes to be known as a good researcher. (Because there are several editions of Angels & Demons, these errors are identified by chapter, not page number.)
  • On the “Fact” page, Brown states that CERN “recently succeeded in producing the first particle of antimatter.” But the positron (or antielectron), the first known antimatter particle, was identified by physicist Carl Anderson in 1932. In 1955 the antiproton was produced at the Berkeley Bevatron, a fact that is, oddly enough, acknowledged on Brown’s Web site.
  • The character Maximilian Kohler, the director of CERN, says that GUT refers to “General Unified Theory . . . The theory of everything” (ch. 8). It actually is an abbreviation for “Grand Unified Theory.”
  • Langdon states that the Illuminati fled Rome after Galileo was arrested in the 1630s and “were taken in by another secret society . . . a brotherhood of wealthy Bavarian stone craftsmen called the Freemasons” (ch. 11). But there were no Freemasons in Bavaria prior to the mid-18th century. The Bavarian Illuminati was founded on May 1, 1776, by Adam Weishaupt, the first lay professor of canon law at the University of Ingolstadt. Galileo died in 1642.
  • Vittoria Vetra, Kohler informs Langdon, “is a strict vegetarian and CERN’s resident guru of Hatha yoga.” Langdon wonders to himself: “Hatha yoga? . . . The ancient Buddhist art of meditative stretching seemed an odd proficiency for the physicist daughter of a Catholic priest” (ch. 14). Although yoga is practiced by some Buddhists, all forms of yoga, including Hatha yoga, have their origin in Hinduism.
  • Langdon refers to Edwin Hubble as a “Harvard astronomer” (ch. 19). Hubble had no association with Harvard University, either as a student or professor.
  • Kohler’s secretary hears the director of CERN in his office “on his modem, his phone, faxing, talking” (ch. 28). Since the World Wide Web was invented at CERN (in 1990, by Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Cailliau), it’s hard to understand why Kohler would be relegated to using a modem.
  • Several characters are depicted trying to hear a “dial tone” on their cell phones (ch. 25, 32, 106). Cell phones do not have dial tones.
  • Langdon marvels at “Michaelangelo’s famed spiral staircase leading to the Muséo Vaticano . . .” (ch. 31). The Vatican Museums are correctly known in Italian as Musei Vaticani, and the staircase was designed in 1932 by Giuseppe Momo, personal architect of Pope Pius XI.
  • Passing some Swiss Guards, Langdon notices that they carry “the traditional ‘Vatican long sword’—an eight-foot spear with a razor-sharp scythe—rumored to have decapitated countless Muslims while defending the Christian crusaders in the fifteenth century” (ch 35). The ninth and last Crusade ended in 1272; the Papal Swiss Guard was established in 1506.
  • Readers are informed that popes “died of exhaustion in an average of 6.3 years” (ch. 42). But when Brown was writing his novel (c. 2000), the papacy had been in existence for about 1970 years; divided by 264 popes, that is an average of 7.46 years per pope. Working the other direction using Brown’s average (subtracting 1663.2 [6.3 x 264] from 2000), we arrive at c. 337, the year of Emperor Constantine’s death. If we start with the pontificate of Leo XII (1878-1903), the nine popes prior to Benedict XVI averaged over 13.5 years per pontificate.
  • The camerlengo, asked if he recalls the prayer of St. Francis, prays, “God, grant me strength to accept those things I cannot change” (ch. 43). But that is from the Serenity Prayer, usually attributed to Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971).
  • The character Gunther Glick, a BBC correspondent, tells his photographer that “Rhodes Scholarships were funds set up centuries ago to recruit the world’s brightest young minds into the Illuminati” (ch. 63). But according to www.rhodessscholar.org, Rhodes Scholarships “were initiated after the death of Cecil Rhodes in 1902.”

Further Reading
  • Science And Belief in the Nuclear Age (Sapientia Press), by Peter E. Hodgson
  • The Evidential Power of Beauty: Science and Theology Meet (Ignatius Press), by Fr. Thomas Dubay, S.M.
  • Light and Shadows: Defending Church History amid Faith, Facts and Legends (Ignatius Press), by Walter Brandmueller
  • The Savior of Science (Regnery Gateway) and Questions on Science and Religion (Real View Books), by Fr. Stanley L. Jaki
  • “The Plot Holes and Intriguing Details of Angels & Demons,” by David A. Shugarts, in Secrets of Angels & Demons: the Unauthorized Guide to the Bestselling Novel (CDS Books, 2004), pp. 336-361
  • “Dan Brown is a fraud: A list of errors in Angels and Demons,” on the “No Loss For Words” blog (http://www.dannyscl.net/2005/01/dan-...errors-in.html; January 3, 2005)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Apr 27, '09, 4:35 am
uther uther is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2005
Posts: 260
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Some understood this was because the movie followed the book so faithfully. Apparently the producers came to the same realization. “I think we may have been too reverential toward it,” producer Brian Grazer told USA Today in October 2008.

Interesting choice of words that speaks volumes.
__________________
If "ifs" and "buts" were candies and nuts we would all have a very merry Christmas.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Apr 27, '09, 5:09 am
gwl gwl is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: March 5, 2009
Posts: 41
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Thanks for this review. I'm among the people who read The Da Vinci Code as a purely fictional adventure and found it a poorly written, plodding, fictional adventure.

I can appreciate that one runs certain risks in writing books involving the clash of science and religion. The author is bound to get some subtle point of theology or modern physics incorrect, but Brown's "fumbled facts" are just embarrassing. I really feel bad for him and everyone involved. After all, the guy is on to something. It should be possible to write an interesting, exciting work along these lines. Think "The Name of the Rose".

I tried to find the review on Google and couldn't, but, regarding The Da Vinci Code I seem to remember a reviewer saying "his descriptions of Paris read like a free tourist brochure but without the accuracy". Sounds like "Angels and Demons" is more of the same.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Apr 29, '09, 8:17 am
caoimhin's Avatar
caoimhin caoimhin is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: April 29, 2009
Posts: 70
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

A while back, the History International channel did an hour long show on The Da Vinci Code. They spent an hour interviewing Dan Brown and dramatizing some of the historical details he mentions, giving a "documentary" feel to Brown's fevered imaginings. Then at the end, the interviewer, Tony Robinson, pulled the rug out. He asked Brown what evidence he had for his claims. Brown responded that he isn't saying his depictions are necessarily the way things happened, only that they might have been. Classic
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old May 4, '09, 7:03 pm
srlucado srlucado is offline
Regular Member
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2009
Posts: 1,647
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwl View Post
Thanks for this review. I'm among the people who read The Da Vinci Code as a purely fictional adventure and found it a poorly written, plodding, fictional adventure.
I couldn't get past about page 40 in that wretched book--and for some reason I saw the movie, which wasn't any better. Really awful.

Far better is the book I just finished reading, Chesterton's book on St. Thomas Aquinas, The Dumb Ox. Chesterton points out "St. Thomas was willing to allow the one truth to be approached by two paths [faith and science], precisely because he was sure there was only one truth."

That reminded me of a book I'd read years ago, Friedrich Heer's The Medieval World (luckily buried not too deep in my library), in which he states: "...there was a corresponding internal flexibility [in Europe in the 12th Century], learning was liberal, popular piety took many forms, the Church itself stood open..." Heer goes on to make the point that rather than stifling knowledge, the Church was the source of much of it.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of a Hollywood smear job?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old May 5, '09, 2:49 am
mary1173's Avatar
mary1173 mary1173 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 2009
Posts: 1,997
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Didn't bother with the De Vinci Code..not going to bother with this one either.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old May 5, '09, 7:04 am
MarcoPolo's Avatar
MarcoPolo MarcoPolo is offline
Forum Master
Radio Club Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2005
Posts: 13,467
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophia Sproule View Post
The problem is that Burstein, like Brown, wants to have it both ways: Readers are encouraged to accept Brown as a serious (but accessible) guide to historical events and belief systems, but are also told anyone upset with Brown’s claims is too literal-minded, uptight, and resistant to new ways of thinking.
Screwtape could not do better himself.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Jun 3, '09, 3:21 pm
ntenaglia ntenaglia is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: March 25, 2009
Posts: 86
Religion: Catholic
Red face Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwl View Post
Thanks for this review. I'm among the people who read The Da Vinci Code as a purely fictional adventure and found it a poorly written, plodding, fictional adventure.

I can appreciate that one runs certain risks in writing books involving the clash of science and religion. The author is bound to get some subtle point of theology or modern physics incorrect, but Brown's "fumbled facts" are just embarrassing. I really feel bad for him and everyone involved. After all, the guy is on to something. It should be possible to write an interesting, exciting work along these lines. Think "The Name of the Rose".

I tried to find the review on Google and couldn't, but, regarding The Da Vinci Code I seem to remember a reviewer saying "his descriptions of Paris read like a free tourist brochure but without the accuracy". Sounds like "Angels and Demons" is more of the same.
I read Da Vinci Code before seeing that movie and thought the book was a good piece of fiction. Let's all remember that these books are fiction. The movie based on Da Vinci Code was not very good compared to the book.

This time I saw Angels & Demons without reading the book first. The movie was pretty good as a suspense fiction. Being somewhat familiar with Rome, there were some things that just were too hard to believe, but this is a movie. To be watched for entertainment purposes only. I think that sometimes people seem to forget that fiction will mix some fact with some fantasy and not everything should be taken seriously. Remember that every article published about a movie, tv show, book, etc. is free advertising. Da Vinci Code probably sold twice as many tickets, twice as many books because of all the free advertising. So the producers who bankrolled Angels & Demons are probably cheering every post on this site. You go guys!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Jun 3, '09, 3:47 pm
estesbob's Avatar
estesbob estesbob is offline
Forum Elder
Prayer Warrior
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 8, 2005
Posts: 38,295
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Most of the compalints about the book did not make it into the movie-the ecatsy of St Theresa being one of them. i enjoyed the movie, didnt see much of anything anti-catholic about it and in fact at the very end there seems toi be a hint langdon may be "getting it" about the faith of the church.
__________________
We ought to speak, shout out against injustices, with confidence and without fear. We proclaim the principles of the Church, the reign of love, without forgetting that it is also a reign of justice.

Miguel Agustin Pro
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Jun 3, '09, 3:49 pm
estesbob's Avatar
estesbob estesbob is offline
Forum Elder
Prayer Warrior
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 8, 2005
Posts: 38,295
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Quote:
Originally Posted by srlucado View Post
I couldn't get past about page 40 in that wretched book--and for some reason I saw the movie, which wasn't any better. Really awful.

Far better is the book I just finished reading, Chesterton's book on St. Thomas Aquinas, The Dumb Ox. Chesterton points out "St. Thomas was willing to allow the one truth to be approached by two paths [faith and science], precisely because he was sure there was only one truth."

That reminded me of a book I'd read years ago, Friedrich Heer's The Medieval World (luckily buried not too deep in my library), in which he states: "...there was a corresponding internal flexibility [in Europe in the 12th Century], learning was liberal, popular piety took many forms, the Church itself stood open..." Heer goes on to make the point that rather than stifling knowledge, the Church was the source of much of it.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of a Hollywood smear job?
I though the DaVinic code was a god book and a terrbile movie. Angels & Demons was a so so book but a very good movie IMO
__________________
We ought to speak, shout out against injustices, with confidence and without fear. We proclaim the principles of the Church, the reign of love, without forgetting that it is also a reign of justice.

Miguel Agustin Pro
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Feb 25, '10, 11:41 pm
Leonard12 Leonard12 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: June 18, 2009
Posts: 1
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Is there anyway to make this work with hellsatan's Avatars Per Forum Plugin?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Jun 2, '10, 1:27 am
Major Minor Major Minor is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2010
Posts: 145
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Dan Brown is writing those books from Gnostic sources. I was involved with Gnostic studies for some years, though have since rejected everything about it. I converted to Catholicism 6-7 years ago and am convinced of the Church's truth.

What is surprising about that whole Da Vinci code phenomena is that even major Gnostic thinkers reject that particular stream of thought for being weak and easily disproved.

It employs the classic smoke and mirrors technique most occultists use of "Some of this is true... can you guess which? Even if it isn't it sure is fun to wonder, isn't it"? sort of rationalization... and people fall for it basically swallowing it whole....

The source stream for most of these misleading hermetic goose chases is... Freemasonry.
Which is also behind the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witness, the Rosicrucians, and most new age groups for that matter. Be certain of one thing: You CANNOT be a Christian and a Freemason of that I can assure you.

They are absolutely incompatible.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Jun 2, '10, 8:01 am
Spencerian's Avatar
Spencerian Spencerian is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 27, 2009
Posts: 1,475
Religion: Catholic (Joined 2005)
Unhappy Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

I'm actually ashamed for liking Code as much as I did.

But that was before I became Catholic. And before I turned my grammar cells back on.

Dan Brown is such as horrifically bad writer, the Internet has dedicated whole entries to the writer's extremely terrible to non-existent grasp of fact, sentence structure and other gaffes.

TV Tropes, a wiki dedicated to identifying common themes in all kinds of storytelling, tells that, when you take a story and try to spin it as historical fiction with disasterous results, you have a Dan Browned tale. Related to this is "Critical Research Failure" (where Dan scores majestically high, per the fact-checking of the original post).

But nothing makes my morning coffee spurt through my nose more than the entries of "Language Log", a blog that documents questionable and downright awful writing. Brown seems to like murdering a character at the start of his books, and Language Log, in turn, documents how Brown also murders the English language in so many, many ways.

Just start with this entry about Brown's overly-formulaic and badly phrased opening sentences in Code, Angels, and another book, Deception Point. (Note: Some appropriately used profanities may be used in these entries--and wouldn't you sputter a few choice words of disgust if you were an editor that had to read this stuff? )
__________________


"If I am not (in a state of grace), may God put me there; and if I am, may God so keep me." --St. Jeanne d'Arc



Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Oct 18, '10, 11:13 pm
Indica Indica is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: October 14, 2010
Posts: 4
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Sounds it's good.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Feb 3, '11, 9:19 am
rosh rosh is offline
Trial Membership
 
Join Date: February 3, 2011
Posts: 1
Default Re: This Rock Answers Angels & Demons' False Charges

Perhaps the gravest of all the problems which were to occupy the coming generation was the problem of pauperism. The view taken by the Utilitarians was highly characteristic and important. I will try to indicate the general position of intelligent observers at the end of the century by referring to the remarkable book of Sir Frederick Morton Eden. Its purport is explained by the title: ‘The State of the Poor; or, an History of the Labouring Classes of England from the Norman Conquest to the present period; in which are particularly considered their domestic economy, with respect to diet, dress, fuel, and habitation; and the various plans which have from time to time been proposed and adopted for the relief of the poor’. Eden was a man of good family and nephew of the first Lord Auckland, who negotiated Pitt’s commercial treaty. He graduated as B.A. from Christ Church, Oxford, in 1787; married in 1792, and at his death (November 14, 1809) was chairman of the Globe Insurance Company. He wrote various pamphlets upon economical topics; contributed letters signed ‘Philanglus’ to Cobbett’s Porcupine, the anti-jacobin paper of the day; and is described by Bentham as a “declared disciple” and a “highly valued friend”. He may be reckoned, therefore, as a Utilitarian, though politically he was a Conservative. He seems to have been a man of literary tastes as well as a man of business, and his book is a clear and able statement of the points at issue.

Posted By tv shopping Author
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Catholic Answers--Today > Catholic Answers Magazine (formerly This Rock)

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8243Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: GLam8833
5007CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: Vim71
4342Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: James_OPL
4029OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: B79
3830SOLITUDE
Last by: beth40n2
3556Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
3221Poems and Reflections
Last by: tonyg
3203Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: memphian
3108Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: Amiciel
3045For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: flower lady



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 9:22 pm.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.