Comment: Solid critiques expose sloppy, ludicrous Da Vinci Code
By W. Ward Gasque
THE DA VINCI CODE has been the best selling hardback in recent years. It has been at or near the top of nearly all bestseller lists since its appearance a year and half ago. It has been translated into more than 35 languages. To date more than 10 million copies have been distributed.
Reviews of the book during most of the first year of its life were positive, even enthusiastic. "An exhilaratingly brainy thriller," wrote the reviewer in the New York Times. "This is pure genius," commented Nelson DeMille, adding: "Dan Brown has to be one of the best, smartest, and most accomplished writers in the country." The Library Journal called the book "a compelling blend of history and page-turning suspense."
Finally, eleven months after its release, Laura Miller wrote an article for the New York Times Book Review entitled 'The Da Vinci Con,' in which she pointed out that most of the 'research' that went into Dan Brown's book was dependent on the discredited pseudo-history embedded in the 1982 bestseller, Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln and that the so-called Priory of Sion, which features so prominently in the book, was a hoax invented by a man who had pretensions to the French throne.
Since Laura Miller's essay there has been a spate of new books that critique The Da Vinci Code. Secrets of the Code (CDS Books), edited by Dan Burstein, is an eclectic collection of essays and excerpts by both recognized scholars, informed and insightful amateurs, and the conspiracy pseudo-scholars upon whom Brown has drawn (Baigent, Leigh, Lincoln, Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince, Timothy Freke, Peter Gandy, Margaret Starbird et al.). Read critically, it contains much fascinating if mutually contradictory information.
The best Christian response is The Da Vinci Hoax (Ignatius Press) by Carl E. Olson and Sandra Miesel, who astutely expose the extremely sloppy historical research that is reflected in Dan Brown's thriller. The implied claim that the historical references in his book are all 'FACT' (he capitalizes the word in his note at the beginning of the book) and claim that "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate" could not be further from the truth. He rarely gets anything right! What makes Brown's claims so appealing to many readers is that they simply do not have a clue about history. Olson and Miesel have little difficulty exposing the ludicrous insinuations that he puts into the mouth of Harvard guru Robert Langdon and fictional historian Sir Leigh Teabing. One satisfying feature of Olson and Miesel is that they cover the whole gamut of historical allusions rather than just the earliest centuries.
An extremely well written but briefer response is Amy Welborn's De-Coding Da Vinci (Our Sunday Visitor), sub-titled 'The facts behind the fiction of The Da Vinci Code.' The author is a Catholic and occasionally, it seems to me, a bit too sensitive about the outlandish claims of the book, though the same could be said for some of the evangelical Protestant critiques. Still, this is probably the best, brief but comprehensive treatment.
Two excellent critiques by Protestant writers who focus primarily on refuting Dan Brown's historical reconstruction of the first four Christian centuries are Breaking the Da Vinci Code (Thomas Nelson) by Darrell L. Bock; and The Gospel Code (InterVarsity) by Ben Witherington, III. Witherington, who has published several scholarly books on women in the early church, offers an authoritative counterbalance to the muddled-headed neo-pagan feminism reflected in DVC.
Both offer superb introductions to the New Testament data, the Gnostic and other post-biblical literature, and history up through the fourth century. What is offered is both 'NT 101' and 'Early Church History 101.' In reading these works, I kept asking myself: Why is it that most adult Christians do not know this material? I suppose the answer is that the church has been influenced by the anti-historical age in which we live as much as any other institution has been. This is something that really must change!
Cracking Da Vinci's Code (Victor) by James L. Garlow and Peter Jones offers a comprehensive response to both Dan Brown's implied historical reconstructions and new-age-ish theology and also attempt to link it to the current religious and ideological scene. Three smaller books offer interesting reading on the subject: The Da Vinci Deception (Tyndale) by Erwin W. Lutzer, a popular preacher's response; The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code (Harvest House) by Richard Abanes, which reads like a commentary on key claims by Langdon and Teabing; and The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction? (Tyndale) by popular apologist Hank Hanegraaff and history professor Paul L. Maier.
Why should Christians be concerned with a book like The Da Vinci Code?
(1) The book has been read by more than 10 million individuals, many of whom have been duped by the fraudulent historical pretensions. But just wait until the movie comes out in 2005, produced and directed by Ron Howard and the team that made A Beautiful Mind: this will likely create a media opportunity for the church, comparable to The Passion of the Christ. I hope that we will be ready.
(2) DVC reflects the 'Zeitgeist' of the time in which we live. The Pacific Northwest is the part of North America where people are least likely to be regular churchgoers. It is also the region where neo-paganism and new age spiritualities are flourishing. That's why your unchurched friends are enthusiastic about DVC: it rings true to what they already believe. If we are to be effective in sharing the Good News with our neighbors, we need to know the culture in which they live and breathe.
What can we learn from The Da Vinci Code?
(1) The power of literature and art to communicate.
(2) The presence of images and symbols in our culture.
(3) The need to teach our children and adult Christians to read and think critically.
(4) The importance of historical research and understanding for Christian apologetics.
(5) The difference between Christianity and Gnostic Religion.
W. Ward Gasque is President of Pacific Association for Theological Studies, Seattle.
