What to think about The Da Vinci Code - by Fr. Evan Armatas
For a while now I have considered writing a series of articles about the issues and questions that are raised in the best selling book The Da Vinci Code. The book presents a difficult problem in that so many of the issues and questions that arise in this book are historically and theologically complicated. It would take a book of several hundred perhaps even thousand of pages to correctly discuss the number of problems contained in this work. In addition, the author has presented the material in a compelling format that is rather convincing. Many therefore have incorrectly been swayed simply by the author’s presentation. However, let me begin by saying that the book is by admission of its author fiction.
Given the number of problems contained in the work it would seem logical therefore to see if there might be a way to answer all of the questions this book raised by discussing one facet of the author’s book. Specifically, behind everything in The Da Vinci Code is the basic premise that what the Church and its leadership has proclaimed and taught about Jesus is not true or only part of the truth. The Da Vinci Code argues that the Church has deliberately or otherwise lied in its teaching about Jesus by falsifying certain documents, like the Gospels, and omitting certain pertinent material contained in other accounts about Jesus’ life. Such a statement raises the basic question of whether or not the Church has corrupted the message and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
In this first article we will examine a couple of scriptural passages that question such a claim. The first passage comes from the Epistle of Jude, in its only chapter we read in verse 3, “Beloved, being very eager to write to you of our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” In this passage we find a very specific and important point. Namely, that the faith (that is the Christian faith with all of its traditions and teachings) was once and for all delivered intact/whole to the Church. This means that what the Church teaches today about Christ is the same thing it taught 2000 years ago.
Saint Paul puts it another way in Hebrews when he writes in 13.7-8, “Remember your leaders those who spoke to you the word of God; consider the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever.“ In these two short verses the Apostle Paul asks the faithful to look to their leaders, to those who have been entrusted by the Church to teach the truth and to imitate their faith in Christ. Also embedded in these short two verses is a promise. Saint Paul appeals to those searching to know Christ to consider the lives of the leaders of the Church. That is the numerous Saints and pious men and women who perfected their faith in the Church. By searching the outcome of their lives we see how the teachings of the Church concerning Jesus Christ have changed them and better yet saved them, rich learned to serve the poor, murderers repented, drunks reformed their lives, etc. We see how the Church has brought them to the knowledge of the truth and gained them entrance into the Kingdom of God.
In the Scriptures we also learn how immediately after Jesus was resurrected he spent forty days with his disciples strengthening their faith and instructing them about the Kingdom of God, “To them [the apostles] he [Jesus] presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God (Acts 1.3).” After doing so, Jesus ascended into the heavens to be seated at the right hand of God the Father. Immediately after this the Apostles went into the streets of Jerusalem to proclaim that Jesus Christ, the man born in Bethlehem was God. It is a silly thing to ascribe, as The Da Vinci Code does, such a teaching to the 3rd century. Rather, Jesus called himself God and his Apostles likewise lost their lives defending His claim.
One last passage of scripture is important to our preliminary discussion regarding this book and it comes from the book of Acts. In the eighth chapter we read of Philip being sent by command of the Lord from Jerusalem to Gaza by foot. While on his journey he encounters an Ethiopian in a chariot reading a prophecy of Isaiah from the Old Testament. Overhearing him Philip approaches the Ethiopian and asks him if he understands the prophecy he is reading. The man replies, ‘how can I, unless someone guides me?” He then invites Philip into his chariot and Philip begins to instruct him, “Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this scripture he told him the good news of Jesus.” In this passage the Church recognizes an important principle. Instruction and guidance for the people in the faith and the proper interpretation of the Bible is the responsibility of those who have been entrusted by the Church to do so, i.e. Saints, Bishops, Priests, Monks, and Teachers. Moreover, those seeking to know Jesus Christ and what is known about Him must seek this knowledge from the Church. Thus the authority to preach and teach on Christ is not found in the individual or the odd fictional book but in the Church and again in its Saints, Bishops, Priests, Monks, Nuns, Teachers, and Evangelists. When teachings about Christ and speculation about Who He is and what He did are divorced from the authority and guidance of the Church all manner of heresies (false teachings) arise. To put it another way, separating Christ and separating teachings about Christ from the Church is impossible, to do so shows a complete lack of understanding of Who Christ is and what the Church is. The Bible tells us in 1 Colossians chapter 1 verse 18 that, “[Christ] is the head of the body, the Church.” We also learn from scripture that each of us, once baptized become, “. . .members of his body,” (Ephesians 5.30). This same point is made in 1 Corinthians 6.15, when the Apostle Paul writes, “Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?” The Church, therefore, is Christ; He is its body, and each one of us are members of that body, the one body of Jesus Christ. Again, we can look to scripture for this exact definition, which can be found in 1 Corinthians 12.27, St. Paul writes, “Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.” Thus to teach and promote teachings about Christ outside of His Body, the Church, makes no sense, for Christ can be discovered only within His Church, and to attempt to describe Jesus outside of His Church can only lead to false teachings about Him and not vice versa.
Part II
(This is the second part of a three part series examining the best-selling novel, The Da Vinci Code. In the first article we looked at some of the scriptural claims of the Church and in this article we will examine a portion of Church history).
In looking at the number of questions raised in this book, we must admit that it does not help when churches and church leaders (here I mean the leaders of various Christian denominations) across the globe have been discredited by public scandals of child molestation and financial misappropriations. All of this, along with the steady march of secularism and the results of the Enlightenment have placed the authority of the Church into serious question. In addition, the Orthodox Church in particular is further hampered by the historical realities of time. Having rejected much of the theological direction Western Christianity has taken in the past 1000 years, and having been absent from much of the historical developments the West faced, we view the discussion of certain issues from an almost fundamentally different location. That is to say, that many of the questions raised in this book and many of the theological definitions that are questioned are foreign to us.
Moreover, often the West is asking the wrong questions and therefore no matter how well thought out the answer is, the premise is flawed from the beginning and so the answer cannot shed any light or speak the truth of revelation. For example, in The Da Vinci Code the main focus is on whether or not a cover up has occurred with regards to Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene. In the West such a discussion has captivated many for a long period of time. This book is only a recent manifestation of a long-held opinion. What this belief and the discussion surrounding it displays, is a deep and rather troublesome fact: people are no longer acquainted with the teachings of the Church, its message concerning Jesus Christ, and how this message came to be.
To begin to answer this question and others let us set aside the witness of the Church and of her millions of Saints, and pious believers through the centuries, and focus just on the scholastic world and the work of historians. When we do so we see that the majority of modern scholarship holds such a view of Christ, that he was married to Mary Magdalene, and other non-traditional teachings about Jesus, in a very low opinion. These are ideas that exist on the fringe of scholarship and they are ideas that are very hard to prove. Scholars admit that the best evidence we have concerning Jesus Christ comes to us from the canonical Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Alternative views on the person of Christ such as those contained in this book, or in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, come later in the historical record, after the Canonical Gospels were written, and were not held by a majority of the faithful.
Further, the claim that the Church suppressed and destroyed “secret” and various other documents in the first centuries as the book argues is difficult to prove. Yet, such a claim looks at the question from the wrong perspective. The Church was not and is not interested in promoting anything false, even if doing so, as is argued in this book, would present a more unified set of theological ideas. Such a claim is preposterous the belief in the Trinity (one God in essence but three in Persons), promoted by the Church, is and was a cross for human thought. Rather, Her mission has been to proclaim the truth about Jesus Christ as it received it, regardless of how difficult or confusing the facts are. If documents and teachings existed that were “more correct” than the Gospels why were they not preserved or promoted? Men and women, however, died by the thousands and some say the millions in the first few centuries promoting a faith that was considered dangerous and criminal. Such people were only willing to die for a faith they thought was the truth. More to the point, if they were willing to die for what they believed, if they were willing to forsake everything for their faith, would they not also have been willing to die for the “so-called” secret and missing scriptures that contained their faith’s complete teachings?
When the most powerful institution on earth the Roman Empire could not destroy the faith of these poor and politically weak believers how or why would their successors, now free to worship without persecution, change their beliefs? Why would Christians of later centuries destroy the earlier testimony of Christ’s teachings? Why would Christians who had learned to honor the martyrs of the first centuries through elaborate feast-days and commemorations, desecrate their memory by throwing out their witness to Christ? Especially when Christianity had become legal and the previously persecuted Christians were now in places of power? Rather, it seems that a rather old myth has gained a new voice. Namely, that the Emperor Constantine and his court and his “institutionalizing” of the Christian faith corrupted the true faith and destroyed its purity.
In addition, the debate surrounding the suppression and destruction of earlier documents and teachings about Jesus Christ returns us to a question we considered earlier in this series: the place and role of Holy Scripture and the Church. This issue can be framed by the time old question, what came first the Chicken or the Egg? Today many Christians argue that Scripture came first. This stance, however, is impossible to defend. The clearest historical documents tell us that the Bible as we know it and specifically the New Testament did not reach its current form until the 4th century. This means that for over 200 years believers did without what we would call the Bible. In fact the Apostle Paul when writing to his disciple Timothy in 2 Timothy 3.15-17, refers to the Holy Scriptures and in doing so is referencing only the Old Testament. Thus in matters of faith and in teaching the people of God had to look to the Church, and the Church alone for direction. The Church was entrusted with preserving the authentic witness to Jesus Christ. Christ himself did not write a book but rather he established a community that bore His name.
We must also point out that the New Testament was not written in its entirety and its compilation would take a couple hundred years. Rather the faith was kept and taught as we have stated earlier by a community, the Church. The Church was responsible for teaching people about Jesus Christ, about Who He was and what He did. In fact, the reason an approved list of what could be classified as scripture was finally made had to do with the fact that so many dubious and questionable writings had begun to circulate. Writings and teachings that did not match up with the original witness of the Church, writings that this book and others claim provide a more complete and authoritative view than the canonical Gospels. Therefore, in order to protect the truth the Church classified certain books, of which she was certain of their authorship and correctness of teaching, as canonical. The others she called proto-canonical and deutero-canonical. What is interesting to note is that these other books, such as the Gospel of Thomas were not classified outright as heresy but rather they were excluded from the approved list of canonical sources. This meant that in matters of faith they were of second importance. The Saints of the Church decided that they were pious writings that believers could read but they could not supplant or contradict those writings that had been given primary importance, specifically, what we call the current canon of the New Testament. It is interesting that the ancient Church faced the same question that this book brings to the forefront: should the Canonical Scriptures hold first place or should other writings be of more importance? More so, they also answer the question of whether one could place writings, the canonical and the non-canonical, side-by-side. The Church answered these questions in the negative, only the canonical Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John could be viewed as primary and the others could not.
When we consider the above what emerges is not a picture of a Church bent on destroying and wiping out the “real” story of Jesus in favor of a more politically powerful and unifying one, another argument found in The Da Vinci Code, but rather a community of faithful who carefully guarded and protected the truth. Think of the realities of history if this faith was to be such a powerful tool for uniting the Roman Empire why did the hierarchy and religious leadership of the Church find itself at odds with the Imperial Court time and time again, after the legalization of Christianity. The history of the Church is full of examples of Church opposition to Imperial decree. It is true that the Imperial throne did at times act to preserve the unity of the Church but the teachings of the Church were never subject to imperial decree. Rather, the faith was defended by the faithful against the incorrect teachings of heretics.
Part III
(This is the last article of a three part series on The Da Vinci Code).
Probably the most interesting question raised in The Da Vinci Code is whether or not Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene. This question has certainly captivated many of us and influenced the way we now view Jesus’ life and ministry. However, when we look at this question of Jesus marrying from a purely theological point of view a rather persuasive response presents itself. The short argument against such a notion goes something like this, the Church has taught and affirmed through the centuries that Jesus Christ was fully human and fully divine. This led to the Church’s dogmatic formulation, “Jesus Christ is perfect man and perfect God.” As perfect God and perfect man, Jesus Christ lived in a perfect communion of love and union with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. To a theologian then to discuss the marriage of Jesus is almost preposterous or at the very least irrelevant. Yet, to explain what we mean to the average layperson we will have to develop further what the Church’s teaching is about the person of Jesus Christ.
First as we mentioned above Jesus was both God and the complete and perfect human being. This teaching implies that Jesus existed in complete communion with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. Unlike Jesus Christ we are only human, however, we each bear the image and to some degree the likeness of God. Our faith goes on to teach us that this image of God can never be taken away no matter how we live or what we do in life. On the other hand, the likeness we have to God is to some degree attained only through the way we live our lives. A primary aspect of the likeness is the perfect communion and union of love that Christ experienced. For us this means that as we become more human, more Christ like, we naturally enter into and create relationships of love and communion that mirror Christ’s communion of love and union with His Father and the Holy Spirit. For Christ this reality, this striving to live in the likeness of God, was accomplished. He knew love perfectly and lived this love in His life. For us it is a daily process of growth and work to perfect the likeness of God in us.
Now, in marriage we attempt to imitate God’s perfect love of communion by yoking ourselves to a spouse. We attempt, through marriage to begin to understand God’s unselfish (agapitic) love. We experience how real love is self-emptying and never self-serving, and this experience brings us into a closer proximity of the likeness of God. Once again for Christ this was an already accomplished reality. He therefore did not need to seek out human companionship to complete Himself or to better understand the fact that God is love. Being God He had already experienced that truth and the image and more importantly the likeness of His humanity were already perfected.
Christ’s earthly mission was the natural outpouring of the love He had as God for His creation and of His desire that His creation understand and share this love. We must ask then why would Christ marry? What purpose would Christ’s earthly marriage serve? We see how a misunderstanding or an ignorance of the teachings of the Church can lead to the wrong question and a search for the wrong answer.
In closing, what is sad about the whole phenomenon surrounding this novel is how readily people have read this book but how hard it is to get them to apply themselves to the reading of Scripture. One person was so bold as to say to me that they were not much inclined to read Scripture and so they turned to The Da Vinci Code for a more simpler and truer rendering of the life of Christ! In opposition to such a sentiment I encourage each of you to take a more considered approach to your spiritual formation. Set aside time to read Scripture and to learn the teachings of our Faith. Take the time to clarify what it is that our Holy Tradition teaches and investigate the teachings our Faith professes. To do so is to find one’s salvation.