Setting DaVinci Wright …

Johnny and I shared a conversation this morning as we were preparing for The Lord’s Supper, Communion. He expressed one of my sentiments regarding the variety of opinions about the Da Vinci Code. He remarked, “If the movie gets people to consider who Jesus really is, we should not fear the movie.” Certainly Johnny is suggesting the movie as a basis for conversation about who Jesus is. I agree, if it gets us talking about Jesus, good.

I know the concern some will miscontrue fiction as fact. Stephen Shields has done a good job of compiling internest resources to refute the fiction purported to be fact. One may easily uncover the fact the premise of the book is not only disputed but some consider Brown to have coopted someone elses intellectual property.

Some find it hard that a Southern Baptist abides N.T. Wright. He is maligned by many in the Truly Reformed camps ( Baptist and otherwise). I agree with Alastair Roberts that the stream coming out of the Reformation cuts a wider swath than most acknowledge (I cannot get to the link for his article, “N.T. Wright and Reformation Readings of Romans”)

I happened onto an article by N.T. Wright, Decoding the Da Vinci Code, in the Seattle Pacific Universtiy Magazine, Response. I found the following humorous if not helpful,

It is a well-known feature of todayâ??Ã?ôs culture that some people canâ??Ã?ôt tell fact from fiction. Stories abound of people who believe the characters in soap operas to be real, including tales of thousands of baby clothes being sent to radio stations after one of the fictitious characters has given birth, and of actors being attacked in the street by people angry about the bad behavior of their screen character. Within a would-be Christian subculture the same thing becomes sinister, as when millions who read the Left Behind series really do believe not only in the â??Ã?úraptureâ??Ã?ù as a central element of their theology but in the sociopolitical ideologies powerfully reinforced by that series. In a sense, Dan Brown represents the mirror image of LaHaye and Jenkins, reproducing in fictionalized form some of the myths of the postmodern world as LaHaye and Jenkins reproduce in fictionalized form some of the myths of the fundamentalist right.

And for those who wonder about Wright’s commitment to the gospel he notes,

In particular, the resurrection of Jesus was central to early Christianity, though youâ??Ã?ôd never know that, either, from Dan Brown or from the many other writers who perpetrate the modern myth in its various forms. And Jesusâ??Ã?ô death was consequently interpreted, from extremely early in the Christian movement, as (a) the fulfillment of the Jewish scriptures, (b) the defeat of all rival spiritual powers, and (c) the means of forgiveness of sins. Early Christianity was not primarily a movement which showed, or taught, how one might live a better life; that came as the corollary of the main emphasis, which was that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had fulfilled his age-old purposes, had dealt with the powers of evil, and had launched his project of new creation upon the world. The early Christian gospel, which was then written up in the four canonical Gospels, was the good news, not that a new teaching about hidden wisdom had appeared, enabling those who tapped into it to improve the quality of their lives here or even hereafter, but that something had happened through which the evil which had infected the world had been overthrown and a new creation launched, and that all human beings were invited to become part of that project by becoming renewed themselves.

The article is worth the read on a number of levels.

About the Author
Husband to Patty. Daddy to Kimberly and Tommie. Grandpa Doc to Cohen, Max, Fox, and Marlee. Pastor to Snow Hill Baptist Church. Graduate of Oklahoma Baptist University and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Reading. Photography. Golf. Colorado. Jeeping. Friend. The views and opinions expressed here are my own and should not be construed as representing the corporate views of the church I pastor.

2 comments on “Setting DaVinci Wright …

  1. says:

    Todd-

    Great post! It is amazing indeed how everyone seems to forget about the resurrection, the truly defining moment in our faith tradition. And, what you offer is a good litmus test for anyone who tells us something new about our faith and what it means.

    And, I loved the movie, The DaVinci Code. I guess it sounds funny that I both love the movie and agree with everyone’s assessment of Brown’s fictionalized Christianity. Still, the movie really explained the book (sometimes I went, “Huh?! What was that again?”). I guess one of the reasons I loved the movie and the book is my love of the Gnostic scriptures (little ‘s’). And, how men and women have been interpreting the Christian experience outside of the authority of the Christian church (who often were violently opposed to different opinions and ideas).

    You know, I guess I am just not afraid of whether believers and non-believers will get confused over Brown’s version or the versions expressed by our ancestors of the faith. God is a big God and the Spirit of God (yay Pentecost!) is what inspires and teaches the heart the truths of God. And God will continue to do so.

    I also liked the movie because, like you said in your post, the movie gives us a great opportunity to share our faith. I like it too because it’ll give us an opportunity to explore why we believe what we believe, and perhaps even ferret out the complicated theologies from the essential ones (assuming that we must even comprehend and affirm our constructed and often complicated ‘theologies’ of God).

    I must admit though, I have been a bit disappointed about the movie. I have yet to find a single person who believe’s Brown’s version over the biblical one. And I live in and around New York City, the bastian of liberalism (of which I am an honorary member, thank you very much.) The hoopla from the Catholic church and many other Christian establishments have argued that this movie may cause many people great angst and, as of yet, I have not met a single person who is confused or even thinks Brown’s version is ‘spot on’.

    It makes me think of the threat of WMDs that didn’t materialize, but was only used to scare people (they tried to scare New Yorkers but we’re a tough people). And it makes me think of the scare tactics of the religious right that all things gay will destroy the traditional moral fabric of American Christianity. (Knowing that ‘the moral fabric’ is not actually a real noun and doesn’t even exist is beside the point.)

    Maybe its all really about getting good press, stiring folks up, and making insane amounts of money. I am thinking this is what the hoopla is really about. What do you think?

    Sorry for the long post. 😉

  2. Anonymous says:

    Bo – Glad you stopped by and commented.

    I do think much of the stir over the Da Vinci Code is about not missing out on a potential piece of the pie. While I may not find the Gnostic “s”critpures of much value, there is enough in the breadth of Christian orthodoxy through Church history to suggest we can abide a variant with firm but calm conversations about the person and work of Jesus, the Christ.

    I have not yet decided on seeing the movie or waiting on the DVD. Patty has convinced me, and maybe correctly, the movie never lives up to the book. Another blogger I read evaluated Brown’s work from a literary perspective and considers it a mediocre novel at best. I found it a bit entartaining, in the vein of a “whodunnit.” I was not thrown by the revisionist history and the senstational conspiracy theories.

    I agree the history of Christianity comes with ample illustrations of an abuse of power; this is still true today. I do not believe it necessitates the creation of a conspiracy cobbled together from those poor illustrations of Christ following in order to undermine the authority of the “Church.” As you well know, the hands of any “extreme” group often create a view of the Scriptures more palatable to their preference and then pound the table “agaisnt” all comers. Change the “dominant” voice and the habit yet remains.

    We must rise above that by approaching issues of life with a “confident humility” about which we have exchanged e-mails before.

    I am not sure if I reached your length in my reply, but I tried. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.