May 21, 2006
Herald Columnist: Church's "DaVinci Code" Counter-Offensive Hypocritical

Everett Herald columnist Julie Muhlstein today writes that the fuss over the new movie "The DaVinci Code" - which includes a rebuttal Web site recently promoted by the Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle and developed for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops - is a convenient foil for the church, which has allowed sexual exploitation of children and other parishoners by priests to fester for years.

Muhlstein writes:

The real Catholic Church, my church, is using lots of energy defending itself against fictional secrets, as if a page-turning novel could actually shatter heartfelt beliefs of the faithful. Please, don't insult us. I'm mystified by all the controversy about a fictional plot, when there are real secrets - horrible nonfiction - that have deeply wounded the Catholic Church, damaged its people, and caused financial catastrophe across the country.

Read on.

Muhlstein continues:

Secrets? From Boston to Everett, Catholics have heard denials and later learned terrible truths in scandals in which priests have sexually abused children. Friday's Herald contained a review of the "The Da Vinci Code," saying the movie's more lackluster than blockbuster. The same newspaper also contained an Associated Press article about a federal judge rejecting a $45.7 million settlement for 75 people who've filed sex-abuse claims against the Catholic Diocese of Spokane, which is bankrupt. The judge decided the settlement didn't make accommodations for all possible victims.

Nan Waldie, a former Catholic chaplain with the Archdiocese of Seattle, has seen the human toll of the scandals. Now in divinity training to become an Episcopal priest, Waldie, of Mercer Island, worked as a counselor through her involvement with Voice of the Faithful, a Catholic lay group, and the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests. "I worked for a short time as a liaison between the Seattle Archdiocese, where I was a chaplain, and SNAP. I was invited to some of their meetings, and those personal stories were horrific," Waldie said.

..."I was working with a man in his 90s who was dying slowly at a nursing home run by the Sisters of Providence, a good nursing home, in Issaquah. This poor man was so angry, and the root of that anger was that his church had betrayed him," Waldie said. Disillusioned by revelations of abuse, and having financially supported the church and attended Mass all his life, "he didn't know if he could even believe in God," Waldie said. "It was heart-breaking....Always, the church does a tremendous amount of good. Its job is to be a light to the world."

Any thoughts?

Posted by Matt Rosenberg at May 21, 2006 11:20 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Yeah, here's a thought: Dumb article. I suppose there would be SOME similarilty between the silly Da Vinci Code plot and the not-so-silly sexual abuse scandal if the Church spent two millenia trying to suppress information about intentional, systematic sexual abuse among priests. And sent out clerical hit men to help do it. And if the reason for the cover-up was to protect some Early Church secret about Saint Paul preaching the virtues of child buggery. Or of Jesus Himself taking liberties with young boys in the Galilee public pool.

But because the Church's sex controversy actually has almost nothing in common with Dan Brown's fantasy, the best thing that can be said about the article is that it's a sloppy and contrived effort to use a pop-culture phenomenon as a platform to criticize the Church (again) for trying to protect its dirty priests from going to jail.

But the article (unwittingly, I'm sure) raises one interesting point: There's a very real and very interesting story to tell about the Church's decades-long cover-up of pedophile priests. Given that, why is Hollywood spending its time making dumb movies about the bride of Jesus, the Holy Grail, and murderous monks--instead of telling real stories of real conspiracies? I mean, it seems that the studios are more interested in selling fictional tales that paint a far-worse picture of the Church than simply telling the truth. Right?

Posted by: DJ on May 21, 2006 12:46 PM
2. No brainer.
The reason "look back" legislation in Colorado and Ohio was soundly trounced was because of insurance company lobbies. You see, to be constitutional it would have had to not singled out one instition.

In ONE year, reports of sexual abuse were nearly doubled for than by public school personnel than those reported for the Catholic Church over 20 years.

Few know that even other religions have many more reports than the Church. What we have here is 2 things working, blatent anti-Cathoicism and "deep pocket" lawyers.

Sure, ANY abuse is a terrible sin. I am a school psychologist and was Chief Psychologist in a major city of over 10 years. I KNOW the pain and damage it can cause. My staff was outraged when a teacher having sex in a cloak room with a retarded child was simply made to sign a paper he would never teach in Ohio again. Six monthes later, the Northern Kentucky papers reported his arrest on child molestation charges while working as a teacher over there. Don't talk to me about 'hypocrasy'. The media and lawyers are FULL of it.
If they were serious we would be looking at public schools.

Posted by: Dr Bill on May 21, 2006 01:07 PM
3. The reason that many are upset with this book/movie is that it is a Catholic version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. While Protocols was written as a pretext to slander Judaism (and marketed as fact, not fiction), too many people who aren't really paying enough attention will think that the movie is true. Consequently, some of its more offensive slaps against Christianity (in general) and Catholicism (in particular) will take on a life of their own. They will become "received wisdom" that everybody knows are true, despite their decidedly fictional origins.

Of course, as others elsewhere have pointed out, what the Da Vinci Code postulates as happening with Catholicism is somewhat similar to what is really happening with Islam. In the real world, it is Islamists who are killing people who disagree with their worldview, whereas Christians are simply making a lot of noise and withholding their entertainment dollars. Can you imagine if a movie version of The Satanic Verses were to be produced? FWIW, I don't recall any Christian leaders declaring a fatwa upon Dan Brown for writing The Da Vinci Code, whereas Salman Rushdie is still marked for death by the Iranians. (Khamanei reaffirmed Khomeini's edict last year.)

Posted by: timekeeper on May 21, 2006 02:06 PM
4. Much ado about nothing. The church should not have even responded to the Davinci Code. It's just a quick read, fast action, mystery that uses the church history plus a lot of fiction to tell a Hollywood story. The book was written like a screenplay to begin with. Ripe for harvest by Hollywood.

Bottom line, anyone who's dumb enough to view this as anything other than Hollywood is probably not going to have the intellect to hold any real values, religious or otherwise. The Catholic Church should focus on real problems and just ignore Hollywood.

I could care less either way.

Posted by: Jeff B. on May 21, 2006 02:25 PM
5. The DaVinci Code is fiction, and therefore harmless, right? "Fight Club" is fiction, too. But that didn't stop teenage boys from putting each other in the hospital. Fiction or not, movies influence people, and someone should be prepared to offer a counter-influence to keep the public within view of the truth. If parents won't, then who?

Posted by: jdpesz on May 21, 2006 02:39 PM
6. I'm not catholic and I think this article is just an example of what is left on the field after the herd has roamed. Just more victim babble.

There are plenty of things to criticize about the Catholic Church. Trying to make sure the public knows what the facts are is not one of them. And, it has nothing to do with some isolated cases of sex abuse. That's a different topic, only the numb of mind (e.g., well over half of Seattle) would fall for that sort of emotional bait.

Posted by: BananaLand on May 21, 2006 03:08 PM
7. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075005/

1 The difficulty w/ The DaVinci Code is that it is presented as truth versus fiction.
2 Thirty (30) years ago when The Omen w/ Gregory Peck and Lee Remick came out most people thought it was based on Biblical teaching and true Bible verses
2 Wrong. The NY Times had a follow up review which basically said the "scripture quotes" were essentially made up and had limited, if no, relationship to the Book of Revelation
3 As JD Pesz said above the difficulty is most people in the NW are not current on The Bible and will use the movie as an execuse for Catholic Bashing
4 I agree w/ the statements that The DaVinci Code has limited if any relationship to the Catholic sex abuse scandal, and that Julie Muhlstein is just using the release of the movie as an excuse for Catholic Bashing

Posted by: Green Lake Mark on May 21, 2006 03:19 PM
8. I heard the non-sense over Grail knights protecting the bloodline of Jesus of Nazareth on Art Bell over a decade ago.
Personally, it wasn't as good of an episode as those about the Grays, Mel's Hole, Lizardmen, Sasquatch and the Pyramids of Mars which were built at a 19.5 degree angle.

Posted by: Reporterward on May 21, 2006 04:17 PM
9. What amazes me is the antique media tells Christians, it only fiction, get over it.

But then they bend over and drop trou for Islamofasict outrage over "CARTOONS."

If your faith can't withstand hollywoods inane attacks, how is it going to survive a real test?

Posted by: JCM on May 21, 2006 05:16 PM
10. I had to go see the movie just to tweak the Catholic church. If you have no faith in your faith, where are you?

Anyway, it was not good. Overblown music, terrible dialog (think Star Wars), poor casting (it's funny to watch Tom Hanks be serious for 2+ hours)and Ron Howard is using a lot of technology he used in A Beautiful Mind and it got annoying.

Posted by: westello on May 22, 2006 08:45 AM
11. So now we're back to banning books and movies in the Catholic Church. Ho hum. As a "retired" Catholic this whole mess makes me sick to my stomach. This joins the ridiculous from the pulpit screaming about Harry Potter.

I think a bigger blockbuster might be an historically true story of how women were viewed in the Middle Ages by the church, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the treatment by the church of great men like Galileo.

Factual and far more appalling, Hollywood wouldn't tackle these examples for the world--rather they blockbuster the Passion of Christ (totally bloody and unappealing and fine to attend) or a whitewashed version of Moses, etc.

Religion is for the uneducated masses.

Posted by: jkm on May 22, 2006 01:38 PM
12. So now we're back to banning books and movies in the Catholic Church. Ho hum. As a "retired" Catholic this whole mess makes me sick to my stomach. This joins the ridiculous from the pulpit screaming about Harry Potter.

I think a bigger blockbuster might be an historically true story of how women were viewed in the Middle Ages by the church, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the treatment by the church of great men like Galileo.

Factual and far more appalling, Hollywood wouldn't tackle these examples for the world--rather they blockbuster the Passion of Christ (totally bloody and unappealing and fine to attend) or a whitewashed version of Moses, etc.

Religion is for the uneducated masses.

Posted by: jkm on May 22, 2006 01:39 PM
13. jkm,
Oh yes, give me Atheist like Stalin, Lenin and Mao Tse-tung who slaughter millions of people in their attempts to create the Atheist utopia of elitist intellectuals like Karl Marx. Nothing says death like the modern Atheist governments, me hardies.

I'm tired of hearing the "oh, if it wasn't for religion we would all get along dandy"

The truth is, in the modern age, more torture, death and misery has been caused at the hands of unreligious people over political power then at the hands of over zealous religious folk.

It seems to bother you when a religious group asks people not to support a book or a movie. Does it bother you when China, Cuba, and other "progressive" socialist states, suppress the press, the internet, locking up reporters and it's citizens as spy for speaking their minds and the truth? In those countries they don’t have to burn the books, they just don’t print the ones they don’t want you to read.

"In the real world, it is Islamists who are killing people who disagree with their worldview, whereas Christians are simply making a lot of noise and withholding their entertainment dollars. Can you imagine if a movie version of The Satanic Verses were to be produced? FWIW, I don't recall any Christian leaders declaring a fatwa upon Dan Brown for writing The Da Vinci Code, whereas Salman Rushdie is still marked for death by the Iranians. (Khamanei reaffirmed Khomeini's edict last year.)"

Important point Timekeeper!

"ACLU, we don't hate religion, just Christianity"

Posted by: akosted on May 22, 2006 05:20 PM
14. JCM--I'm right with you on the cartoons; selective tolerance in the media; i'll agree with the mainstream only when i see other religions bashed (represented or questioned) in the same manner and have it called "art" or "1st Amendment;" until then, it's lopsided to anti-Christian; any fool can see that pattern--IF they want to---one thing's for certain--at least the insulted Islamic people mean business and follow through on their cause--not that I agree with their methods; this point is lost on most Christians--too much pacifism in this area; as on a playground with a bully, not fighting back ALSO sends a message;

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on May 25, 2006 10:28 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?