![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
matrixrefugeeThis came in on the email newsletter from Karl Keating, the layman who started Catholic Answers, one of the most active Catholic apologetics organizations/ministries out there:
Novelist Umberto Eco was raised a Catholic and abandoned the faith a long time ago, but he has not abandoned common sense.
Recently he wrote that "We are supposed to live in a skeptical age. In fact, we live in an age of outrageous credulity. The 'death of God,' or at least the dying of the Christian God, has been accompanied by the birth of a plethora of new idols. They have multiplied like bacteria on the corpse of the Christian Church--from strange pagan cults and sects to the silly, sub-Christian superstitions of 'The Da Vinci Code.'"
Eco said that "It is amazing how many people take that book literally and think it is true. Admittedly, Dan Brown, its author, has created a legion of zealous followers who believe that Jesus wasn't crucified: He married Mary Magdalene, became the King of France, and started his own version of the order of Freemasons. Many of the people who now go to the Louvre are there only to look at the Mona Lisa, solely and simply because it is at the center of Dan Brown's book."
I'd also like to make what coming from me, given the fact that I outright despise Dan Brown's writings, will sound like a really shocking statement:
The Damned Book could work for me as a work of fiction *IF* it were set in an alternate universe. I was re-reading "World's End", one of the "Sandman" graphic novels the other day, and I couldn't help noticing that one of the stories, "Cluracan's Story", could almost be construed as containing several jabs at the organization of the Catholic Church, or at least the corruption that plagued it during the Renaissence. Aurelian looks an awful lot like Rome and the ruler of the city is clearly modelled after Alexander VI, who was probably the worst Pope that we ever had. But I don't read it as being that way, because Neil Gaiman set in an alternate, decidedly fantastic world. One of the reasons why I like Neil Gaiman so much is that he seems the most open-hearted towards different faiths, different religions. Some of the "Sandman" stories have involved Christian and Muslim and Pagan elements. I haven't confirmed it, but I suspect he was raised Jewish, but he appears to be an open-hearted atheist or agnostic.
If Dan Brown had used the tropes of Christianity as part of the mechanics of his universe, but had written his story so that it involved people other than Jesus and Mary Magdalen, and if it was set in a different world, I could accept it as a work of fiction. I think it would have made a great story that way, and I'd have found it very entertaining. But since he didn't and he sneered at my faith, I can't help but be as mortally offended as I am.
Novelist Umberto Eco was raised a Catholic and abandoned the faith a long time ago, but he has not abandoned common sense.
Recently he wrote that "We are supposed to live in a skeptical age. In fact, we live in an age of outrageous credulity. The 'death of God,' or at least the dying of the Christian God, has been accompanied by the birth of a plethora of new idols. They have multiplied like bacteria on the corpse of the Christian Church--from strange pagan cults and sects to the silly, sub-Christian superstitions of 'The Da Vinci Code.'"
Eco said that "It is amazing how many people take that book literally and think it is true. Admittedly, Dan Brown, its author, has created a legion of zealous followers who believe that Jesus wasn't crucified: He married Mary Magdalene, became the King of France, and started his own version of the order of Freemasons. Many of the people who now go to the Louvre are there only to look at the Mona Lisa, solely and simply because it is at the center of Dan Brown's book."
I'd also like to make what coming from me, given the fact that I outright despise Dan Brown's writings, will sound like a really shocking statement:
The Damned Book could work for me as a work of fiction *IF* it were set in an alternate universe. I was re-reading "World's End", one of the "Sandman" graphic novels the other day, and I couldn't help noticing that one of the stories, "Cluracan's Story", could almost be construed as containing several jabs at the organization of the Catholic Church, or at least the corruption that plagued it during the Renaissence. Aurelian looks an awful lot like Rome and the ruler of the city is clearly modelled after Alexander VI, who was probably the worst Pope that we ever had. But I don't read it as being that way, because Neil Gaiman set in an alternate, decidedly fantastic world. One of the reasons why I like Neil Gaiman so much is that he seems the most open-hearted towards different faiths, different religions. Some of the "Sandman" stories have involved Christian and Muslim and Pagan elements. I haven't confirmed it, but I suspect he was raised Jewish, but he appears to be an open-hearted atheist or agnostic.
If Dan Brown had used the tropes of Christianity as part of the mechanics of his universe, but had written his story so that it involved people other than Jesus and Mary Magdalen, and if it was set in a different world, I could accept it as a work of fiction. I think it would have made a great story that way, and I'd have found it very entertaining. But since he didn't and he sneered at my faith, I can't help but be as mortally offended as I am.