 |
 |
| Reference Material |
| The Da Vinci Brouhaha and the Persistence of Belief By Ross Tipon I have read the book and have seen the movie and my faith remains, says Dong Puno (Manila Standard). This statement seems to echo what most "reasonable" Catholic believers hold. It is most apropos to recall what David Wells said in the World in a Word quoted herein: "The church needs to begin by recognizing how modernity works to rearrange the religious landscape. The old secularization thesis, that religion would retreat before the processes of secularization until it disappeared, may seem more plausible in Europe today than it is in America. The fact is that modernity does not necessarily eliminate religion, but it does work to rearrange it. Modernity is hostile to biblical faith, not necessarily to faith in general. It is quite telling, I think, that in Germany where there are 30,000 clergy of all kinds, there are 90,000 witches and fortune tellers. In France, there are 26,000 Roman Catholic priests but 40,000 astrologers. And in America today, it is clear that side by side with its growing modernity there is a gathering tide of spirituality of every kind that is seeping into society. Modernity is coexisting with these spiritualites because they are compatible with it-and in many ways biblical faith is not." The Church (at least the Roman part) has survived through more heinous crimes like the Inquisition and the Crusades and still retains a large following. Most of its believers today may not be of the same make up as those when these horrible crimes were committed but they believe (for whatever that is worth) in the Scriptures, more or less. Perhaps more important for them is the sense of belonging, of going through milestone rites like baptism, confirmation, marriage etc. in the company of their loved ones friends. It is not naughty pseudo-historical books like the Da Vinci Code that threatens the Church but Modernity as Wells has assayed. Modernity is hostile to Biblical faith, not necessarily to faith in general. This statement is very telling. This lies at the very appeal of Dan Brown. He is a very successful faith re-arranger. Ron Hubbard ("Scientology") has tried it. His money success, large indeed, does not come close to Brown's megabucks. His appeal is very much narrower. Unlike Hubbard Brown is not propagating religion per se. Hence his appeal is very eclectic thus wider. His appeal is not to modernity, on the contrary to the Will to Believe. Modernity has no popular spokesmen and doesn't have need for one. People like George Soros or scholars like Joseph Schumpeter and Max Weber of an earlier age are the types who can explain what modernity is and their message is beamed to the elite who have little need for religion. In a sense Brown is very much like H. G. Wells, exploring science fiction. Modernity: think of the cellphone. A friend can just punch in and say that today he has become an atheist. Or the condom. Whatever the strictures of the Vatican are, most believers will use it for as long as it is available within reason. There are males who refuse to use it because it goes against their notions of the macho. That has nothing to do with religion. In a sense the disbelief that books like the Da Vinci Code puts forward has been discounted like bad news about a stock. As long as there is perceived value in the security there will always be a "price support" level. Of course even an amateur investor knows that this price support moves up and down like the ebb and flow of mankind. It is understandable why many Opus Dei members are mad as a hatter. It is a direct attack on them and their practices |