Whose God may we mock?

[Kulapavana]

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>Source: Pittsberg tribune review</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD><TD vAlign=top>Published: May 18, 2006 Author: Pat Buchanan</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD><TD vAlign=top>For Education and Discussion Only. Not for Commercial Use.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

<!-- Brilliant Pat Buchanan Ed piece -->By Pat Buchanan

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

 

 

WASHINGTON

If "such lies and errors had been directed at the Quran or the Holocaust," said Archbishop Angelo Amato, the Vatican's secretary for the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, "they would have justly provoked a world uprising." The archbishop was speaking of "The Da Vinci Code," the Ron Howard film that opens worldwide this week and is expected to gross $500 million by summer's end.

 

The archbishop's point is undeniable. Blasphemous cartoons of the Prophet with a bomb in his turban, published a few months ago in a Danish newspaper and reprinted on the front pages of Europe's major papers, ignited demonstrations in Muslim communities across Europe and violent riots across the Islamic world.

 

Leaders friendly to the West, from Egypt to Afghanistan, felt compelled to denounce the cartoons, as did many in the West, as a provocation and insult to the faith of a billion people.

 

In the 1990s, British novelist Salman Rushdie spent years in hiding after Ayatollah Khomeini issued a "fatwa" calling for his killing for publishing the blasphemous "Satanic Verses." In the 1970s, the film "Muhammad," starring Anthony Quinn, was pulled from many U.S. theaters after bomb threats. The film had offended Muslim faithful by showing the face of Muhammad.

 

Last February, British historian David Irving, whose books on World War II have sold in the millions, was convicted in an Austrian court of Holocaust denial and sentenced to three years in prison. His crime: In two speeches in Austria in 1989, Irving asserted there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz. Though he recanted in court, it did not save him.

 

In nine countries of Europe, Holocaust denial is a crime. In the U.S., to deny the Holocaust happened or suggest that it has been exaggerated is not a crime, but marks one as a social leper.

 

Ask yourself: Whom is it impermissible to offend? The hoopla attending the release of "The Da Vinci Code," based on the Dan Brown novel that has sold 7 million copies in the U.S., tells us something about whose God it is permissible to mock and whose faith one is allowed to assault.

 

For what "The Da Vinci Code" says is that Roman Catholicism is a gigantic fraud, that the church has for centuries been perpetrating a monstrous hoax, duping hundreds of millions into believing something it knows is a bald-faced lie. At the novel's heart lies the contention that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married, that they had a daughter, that the Vatican has known this and been hiding the descendants of Jesus, that Opus Dei is a secret order whose agents will engage in murder to protect the secret.

 

If "The Da Vinci Code" is based upon facts, no other conclusion follows than that to be a Catholic is either to be in on this fraud or to be the dupe of those perpetuating it. But if it is fiction, why would Hollywood put out so viciously anti-Catholic a film that can only have the effect of undermining the faith of millions of Christians?

 

Putting "The Da Vinci Code" on film, with what it alleges about the Catholic Church, is the moral equivalent of making a movie based on the "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and implying this is the truth about the Jewish plot to control the world. One imagines Ron Howard and Tom Hanks would take a pass on that script.

 

Like the "Hitler's pope" smear of Pius XII, a man who did more than any other to save the Jews in World War II, "The Da Vinci Code" is a Big Lie that, though readily refuted by facts, will be believed.

 

But that it will be a box-office smash, that it is the subject of lavish praise in the press, that it is the best-selling novel of the 21st century, tells us we live not just in a post-Christian era, but in an anti-Catholic culture not worth defending or saving, for it is truly satanic.

 

Pat Buchanan edits The American Conservative magazine.

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

"The Da Vinci Code"

 

Wandering lost souls with no shelter will believe just about anyone and anything. This book/film is just a case in point.

 

Here is a thought - maybe these people should understand just 'who' and 'what' Jesus was/is - then - one might see this sort of non-sense for what it is.

 

For example - Jesus was not the messiah - yet how many people believe he is? Why do they believe that? Why are 99.99% duped by 'that'?

 

Then the issues are really even more compounded for them when we explain that while Jesus was not God - he is an impowered incarnation of God!

 

What is so amazing is just how 'popular' this whole "The Da Vinci Code" delusion is - at least with harry potter it's known and accepted as fiction and fantasy - yet the same populations scarf down this other trash as though it were true.

 

One day there is going to be an even more intense attack on ALL BELIEVERS - in this manner.

 

We have to see that there is only one way to stop this and - that is the truth speading - one must learn the truth and then find a way to give it out to those they encounter in life.

 

Don't waste your time going to see any movie that disparages Lord Jesus!

[gHari]

I liked the film, and found it spiritually inspirational. But then, I'm so far gone I tend to see everything as spiritually inspirational.

 

The positives I saw were:

 

1) The increasing of awareness about the <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea target=new>Council of Nicaea in 325AD</a> where many potential Biblical sources were rejected forever. What other ideas besides reincarnation and vegetarianism were lobbied out of dharma? Surely only Mahaksadasa knows.

 

2) I saw so many young girls flocking into the theatre - perhaps secretly wishing to be married to God - what a novel concept - and the Gopi-bhava Club membership swells!

 

3) While the Church complains, the fact remains that it is common knowledge about dark days of Crusades, Inquisitions, and witch burnings among a host of other racketeering-type crimes from the past revisited in the film. Given the track record, one still feels cautious about rejecting the potential for such modern action thrillers surrounding or infesting any spiritual organization.

 

4) Everybody is talking about Christ. I've spoken to people about the Kingdom of God who I thought would never give me an opening. And they listened! Most people it seems find it difficult to see Jesus, a man, with "a man's needs", never having some kind of romantic encounter with a woman.

 

5) Postulating that his marriage to Mary somehow made Jesus an ordinary man was quite offensive I must admit. However, jumping to such a conclusion was so stupid I hardly expect anyone to buy into it for any serious length of time.

 

6) Even bad news is good news in the press game. It is generating such volumes of Christ-katha throughout the world.

[Guest guest]

Indeed, Christ's possible marriage doesn't make him ordinary. Doesn't even disqualify him as a son of God. All it does is mean that Christ was married, and possibly imply that priesthood isn't necessarily a cause for celibacy.

[Guest guest]

Whose God may we mock?

 

all of em. None know god as he is, they have gods that are of their tribe only, therefore, these gods deserve to be mocked, always.

 

Now, the real God? He likes to rassle. Hes got the greatest sense of humor. aND HE RECOGNIZES THAT SOME PRAY FOR FORGETFULNESS, SOME PRAY FOR REMEMBERANCE, AND HE GIVES BOTH WHAT THEY PRAY FOR.

MAD MAHAX