"Boycott Da Vinci Code film": top Vatican official

Link

The Vatican stepped up its offensive against "The Da Vinci Code" on Friday when a top official close to Pope Benedict blasted the book as full of anti-Christian lies and urged Catholics to boycott the film.

The latest broadside came from Archbishop Angelo Amato, the number two official in the Vatican doctrinal office which was headed by Pope Benedict until his election last year.

Amato, addressing a Catholic conference in Rome, called the book "stridently anti-Christian .. full of calumnies, offences and historical and theological errors regarding Jesus, the Gospels and the Church."

I guess I could have started this in P&C, but I thought we would get more discussion here first.

I guess its just odd because it is a 'fiction' book, although some groups have used it for a bit more PR for their ideas or beliefs.

I can only express it in one way...

IMAGE(http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/7707/11459339647936uf.gif)

[edit] Thx to Edwin for the image.

I'm sure the film's makers and Dan Brown are jumping for joy, the boycott will probably add 5 million to its take.

If I boycott it just because it will suck big time, does that mean I'm letting the forces of censorship win?

So if I refuse to see this piece of crap, does that make me a Catholic?

Is is being suggested that there should be no fictional books that take liberties with the stories in the Bible or with Christianity in general?

Wow, this smells alot like the Satanic Verses debate all over again, save the "boycott" in place of the "fatwa".

LobsterMobster wrote:

So if I refuse to see this piece of crap, does that make me a Catholic?

Only if you also refuse to have sex except for the purpose of procreation.

Funkenpants wrote:

If I boycott it just because it will suck big time, does that mean I'm letting the forces of censorship win?

No. You're letting the terrorists win.

I'd like to say that the Vatican is over-reacting about a fictional book based on a fictional premise wrapped in fictional occurences. But I've heard a lot of idiots using "The Da Vinci Code" as evidence for some great and evil Catholic conspiracy (supported by how vocal Dan Brown is about his extensive research). So I guess it's no wonder the Vatican's going into over-time damage control mode.

TuYungTuDy wrote:

Is is being suggested that there should be no fictional books that take liberties with the stories in the Bible or with Christianity in general?

Wow, this smells alot like the Satanic Verses debate all over again, save the "boycott" in place of the "fatwa".

Ok, please don't exaggerate. No one in the Vatican is calling for Dan Brown's head.

Anyway, I just don't care. I'm not Catholic, but I just can't get interested in the novel or movie. In fact, once someone spoiled the book for me, I couldn't figure out what the big deal was.

I think the image above pretty well covered my attitude.

KaterinLHC wrote:

But I've heard a lot of idiots using "The Da Vinci Code" as evidence for some great and evil Catholic conspiracy (supported by how vocal Dan Brown is about his extensive research).

Oh, I assume there's an evil Catholic conspiracy. But it involves the gold standard and freemasons, not the bloodline of Jesus.

I thought free masons were mostly Methodist. You're losing me man!

Of all the questionable things in religion that can be historically traced (indulgences, power grabs, bribery, censorship, etc.), THIS is the one thing that's the problem? Some moron making up The Adventures of Jesus?

Maybe they should start by boycotting the King James Bible.

Botswana wrote:

I thought free masons were mostly Methodist. You're losing me man!

That's exactly what they want you to think. It's all part of the plan....

TheTrantor Tribune wrote:

Dan Brown could not be reached for comment as journalists have yet to successfully climb his mountain of money to speak with him.

Paleocon wrote:

Maybe they should start by boycotting the Rick James Bible.

Fixed. (Bitch)

The Catholic church went crazy when the DVC got super-popular. It was crazy, there are probably a dozen books "refuting" stuff mentioned in the DVC. On the other hand, those two authors who sued Dan Brown for plagiarism published their own books as nonfiction, and Brown did indicate he used them as sources.

LobsterMobster wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

Maybe they should start by boycotting the Rick James Bible.

Fixed. (Bitch)

Don't make me start on yo mamma.

Botswana wrote:

I think the image above pretty well covered my attitude.

Ditto.

There's a church in this area (though, for the life of me, I can't remember the name), that do these radio sermon's during the commercials that really piss me off most of the time. The dude always ends with "Not a sermon, just a thought."

He did one of his little sermon's telling people not to believe in The DVC, and that it's a fictional book. My opinion? If you need to tell your followers that it's a piece of fiction, maybe it's not your biggest problem. Maybe you should teach them to use the matter that resides between their ears, then let them figure out that it's not real.

This is the same bullsh*t like "Harry Potter teaches kids witchcraft!". These people need to learn some freakin tolerance.

[/rant]

PurEvil wrote:
Botswana wrote:

I think the image above pretty well covered my attitude.

Ditto.

There's a church in this area (though, for the life of me, I can't remember the name), that do these radio sermon's during the commercials that really piss me off most of the time. The dude always ends with "Not a sermon, just a thought."

He did one of his little sermon's telling people not to believe in The DVC, and that it's a fictional book. My opinion? If you need to tell your followers that it's a piece of fiction, maybe it's not your biggest problem. Maybe you should teach them to use the matter that resides between their ears, then let them figure out that it's not real.

This is the same bullsh*t like "Harry Potter teaches kids witchcraft!". These people need to learn some freakin tolerance.

[/rant]

Well.... in fairness... when you tell a group of folks to take a literal interpretation of stuff like "Jonah being swallowed by a whale" or "two of all the animals", you can't expect them NOT to believe all manner of nonsense.

I guess I could have started this in P&C, but I thought we would get more discussion here first. :)

I'm not your damned personal thread Shepard, if you feel a topic belongs somewhere else, put it there.

Paleocon wrote:

Well.... in fairness... when you tell a group of folks to take a literal interpretation of stuff like "Jonah being swallowed by a whale" or "two of all the animals", you can't expect them NOT to believe all manner of nonsense.

I agree, but I was trying to make the point without going against my point at the same time. I can't exactly call the Pope intollerant, then turn around and say the Bible is stupid, now can I?

But this is what we're seeing more and more of nowadays. Religious intollerance. The pope has officially taken on the image of the mom in "The Waterboy" to me.

Don't watch that, it's the DEVIL!"

What's the problem here? Popey McPoperton says the book is offensive to the Catholic faith and asks that Catholics boycott it. Call me crazy, but isn't that what rational people are supposed to do as opposed to: calling for it to be banned, suing, burning Dan Brown at the stake? Telling people to vote with their dollars is not exactly a fatwa.

PurEvil wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

Well.... in fairness... when you tell a group of folks to take a literal interpretation of stuff like "Jonah being swallowed by a whale" or "two of all the animals", you can't expect them NOT to believe all manner of nonsense.

I agree, but I was trying to make the point without going against my point at the same time. I can't exactly call the Pope intollerant, then turn around and say the Bible is stupid, now can I?

But this is what we're seeing more and more of nowadays. Religious intollerance. The pope has officially taken on the image of the mom in "The Waterboy" to me.

Don't watch that, it's the DEVIL!"

I don't know. It's a pretty sad intellectual state of affairs when calling bs on folks whose purpose is to affirm ignorance is considered "intolerance".

I'll follow the Catholic boycott as soon as they start boycotting molesting little boys.

As to the rest, I know some of you hate Dan Brown's book, and I'm not going to get into an argument about the quality of his writing, but I will say that the reason the book is so popular is because it it addresses the concept of the Female Divine. A chord that is resonating strongly with bunches of people who feel that perhaps the Catholic/Christian Hairy Thundering Sky God may not actually cover all the bases.

Everyone who has ever studied the history of religion knows that female deities have always played a role in theology, until the Christians, who proceeded to demonize them, or saint them, or steal their holidays. (Easter, anyone?) The book is so popular because it wraps around a hole in cosmology that many people have unconsciously felt...like a missing tooth.

The market for the storyline: female goddess being repressed by a patriarchal religious system is huge. I've been approached by a couple of package houses who want those books written. And while I don't mind ghostwriting, say celebrity memoirs and whatnot, I care about *this* topic too much for me to touch it as a ghost. (Ghosts have no real control, ask the guys who write Le Carres stuff.)

Chumpy_McChump wrote:
LobsterMobster wrote:

So if I refuse to see this piece of crap, does that make me a Catholic?

Only if you also refuse to have sex except for the purpose of procreation.

Every sperm is sacred
Every sperm is great!
If a sperm is wasted,
God get quite irate!

Didn't we already beat this horse to death the last time some Vatican official denounced the Da Vinci Code?

Quote:
I guess I could have started this in P&C, but I thought we would get more discussion here first.
I'm not your damned personal thread Shepard, if you feel a topic belongs somewhere else, put it there.

Well, no, but I thought we could get some constructive talk about it before paleocon pushed it to P&C. Besides, only about 7 people visit P&C anymore so that is where topics go to die.

(Note the at the end.)

Podunk wrote:

Didn't we already beat this horse to death the last time some Vatican official denounced the Da Vinci Code?

It's been awhile. Maybe the horse got zombified and needs more kicking.

KaterinLHC wrote:

Maybe the horse got zombified ...

Just like Jesus!!! Unless you believe this book!

How's that for P&C?

KaterinLHC wrote:
Podunk wrote:

Didn't we already beat this horse to death the last time some Vatican official denounced the Da Vinci Code?

It's been awhile. Maybe the horse got zombified and needs more kicking.

He looks fine to me...