violachic

If you haven't yet jumped on the bandwagon known as The Da Vinci Code, I highly recommend you do so now.

No, really, now.

Just kidding. Later is okay too.

It is a novel by a gentleman named Dan Brown, and it is easily the best book I've read in quite some time. I just finished my third reading of it.

If you haven't noticed, it has caused quite a flap.

It is a masterfully done mystery, incredibly well-written with beautifully developed characters, and quite a lot of stuff you've probably never thought about before (jeeez, I sound like a bad book jacket blurb). It is also very controversial, mostly because it delves into a lot of gray areas concerning the life and humanity of Jesus, and connections between modern Christianity and early pagan religions. It also is accused of being highly critical of the Catholic church. The latter I have no opinion on at the moment, except to say that I can see why some people feel that way.

But the book really got me to thinking. Which, if you know me at all, you realize can be detrimental to my health and well-being. At the very least, it means I talk non-stop about said subject until I get it out of my system.

But the topic at hand tonight (and who knows where the hell it will go after this??) is the idea of something being sacred.

Excuse me, I need a space heater. Its ass cold down here.

Ooh, warmth!

Anyway...

One of the main threads of the novel revolves around an alternative... interpretation, perhaps?... of Jesus' life as we know it. It suggests that he and Mary Magdalene were married, and had a child together. This is not a new theory, I have heard it postulated several times in the past. The legend holds that Mary and the child fled to Gaul, or what is now France, after Jesus' crucifixion in order to save themselves, and that there was a line of ancestry created by the child (a girl child, I believe, in every version of this I have heard) that still exists today. If you are a Kevin Smith fan, you will remember that the movie Dogma presents a similar theory, only instead of Jesus being married, it was that he actually had brothers and sisters. But this lineage created in the south of France is supposedly still alive today in those descended from the Merovingian line- and for Matrix fans, you'll remember that the jerky French guy in the second two movies was called "The Merovingian", whose presence in the movies I believe is open to a plethora of interpretation.

But I digress.

That theory really threatens a lot of people. That, and the existence of what's known as the Gnostic Gospels, and the use of a great deal of pagan imagery in Christianity today, all of which are addressed a great deal in this novel. Now, the author does not presume to present this novel as fact, or history, or even a theory- I believe he presents this novel as simply that: a novel, based on a great deal of legend, supposition, and even documented history. But that is not my point.

Let us take a quick side trip, shall we?

I took this really great World Religions class two years ago. In the very first class, the prof posed a question to us: For years, Mount Sinai (the mountain where Moses purportedly received the Ten Commandments from G-d) was thought to be in one particular spot. It was revered and worshiped, and lots and lots of people made pilgrimages to the site. But then, an archaeologist decided the true Mount Sinai was in a different place. And it threw people. They didn't know which was true, and which was the place to worship, or even if they should worship it anymore. The question she posed was asking about the sacredness (is that a word?) of the site- was it sacred to begin with? Did the idea that maybe you had been pilgrimaging to the wrong site all of a sudden make the first one not sacred? Was nothing sacred?

Is nothing sacred??

Oh, sorry.......

I'm hugely curious about religion and theology. Its one of my top pet interests, especially when it has to do with those of one faith trying to understand or make a bridge with those of another faith. I'm personally really fascinated by many of the theories presented in The Da Vinci Code. But it really makes me think, if any of it is true at all, or if maybe there is a whole other truth out there, does it really diminish what we have now?

I've been doing a lot of mulling over about the humanity of Jesus versus the Divinity of Jesus. I love the movie Jesus Christ Superstar, and this summer I read a really great book recommended to me by

dustytm called Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal (not the same Biff I'm friends with, as far as I know), which is both hilariously funny and very profound at the same time. Both of those also offer different perspectives on the life and humanity of Jesus, both of them, I will note for you, offered as simple interpretations, or "what-could-have-happened" kind of things.

'Kay, coming back around the bend...

Question:

If it were somehow historically proven that Jesus had fathered a child, who then produced a lineage that is still alive today, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

If you found out that Mary wasn't actually a virgin when Jesus was conceived, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

Would the knowledge of him having brothers and sisters? Would it change anything if we could prove through DNA that Joseph actually was his biological father? Or that he studied abroad for those eighteen years that are missing in the Bible, and truly was inspired by other ancient religions (many scholars propose that Jesus' family came from the Essene branch of the Hebrews, who are noted for their amazing scholarship) or philosophies?

Would any of that change how you viewed what we are taught in Sunday School today? Or would you say yes, I can still accept the basic principle of what I was taught?

At this point, I'm not sure if I'm articulating what I want to say correctly. Its late, and this stupid space heater isn't doing a whole lot of good.

But I also take issue (yes, this is related, at least in my brain) with people who feel their faith is somehow compromised or threatened by the presence of other religions or philosophies. I've heard people say that trying to prove the humanity of Jesus takes away from the power they feel from his message, or somehow diminishes his divinity. But I guess to me, if the message is strong enough to you, it should withstand and even be strengthened by the questioning. This applies to any faith, not just Christianity. Think about it- if you hold in your hand the most beautiful object you've ever seen, yet the objects you are comparing it to are dull and tarnished so their true identity is veiled, is it really such a stunning thing? But if you polish up the rest of what's in the room, and scrutinize them, and really look closely at their own individual beauty and still find that what you hold in your hand is the most beautiful object you've ever seen, then you really have something special.

Okay, I may either edit this tomorrow, or add to it if I can regroup my bearings. But at least its out there now. Whew!

I'm going to bed. Are you coming?