This is the first post in my series “The Da Vinci Code’s ignorance of…” It will include posts on art, general history, church history, and theology. I will also post on “It’s just a novel, why the big fuss.” However, the first topic I wanted to address is the way The Da Vinci Code novel, and I am presuming the movie, portrays the role of women within Christianity.
The Da Vinci Code alleges that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married and had a child together. Jesus wanted Mary and their children to be the founders of the Christian church, not Peter. The Catholic Church in a grab for power wanted Peter to be the leader of the church and to hide the sacred feminine that was rampant in Christianity and culture in general. As a result, Christianity has been one of the most patriarchal, oppressive systems with regards to women.
Through Sir Leigh Teabing, DVC character, Dan Brown says the following about women and Christianity:
The Grail is literally the ancient symbol for womanhood, and the Holy Grail represents the sacred feminine and the goddess, which of course has now been lost, virtually eliminated by the Church. The power of the female and her ability to produce life was once very sacred, but it posed a threat to the rise of the predominantly male Church, and so the sacred feminine was demonized and called unclean. . . .
Jesus gives Mary Magdalene instructions on how to carry on His Church after He is gone. As a result, Peter expresses his discontent over playing second fiddle to a woman. I daresay Peter was something of a sexist.”
Sophie was trying to keep up. “This is Saint Peter. The rock on which Jesus built His Church.”
“The same, except for one catch. According to these unaltered gospels, it was not Peter to whom Christ gave directions with which to establish the Christian Church. It was Mary Magdalene.”
Sophie looked at him. “You’re saying the Christian Church was to be carried on by a woman?”
“That was the plan. Jesus was the original feminist. He intended for the future of His Church to be in the hands of Mary Magdalene.
Mark Roberts, in his detailed 21-part series on The Da Vinci Code, points out two fantastic ironies about Dan Brown’s attempt at empowering females and Christianities role in “demonizing” women.
Irony #1 – The scene in which Sir Leigh Teabing reveals the secrets of Mary Magdalene and the sacred feminine seems on the surface to empower women. This is true if you note the content of Teabing’s revelation to Sophie Neveu. But if you note the rhetorical structure, a far different impression emerges. Sophie is the classic ingénue: uninformed, naïve, easily impressed by men who claim to have lots of knowledge. Though she’s a police cryptologist who should receive Teabing’s claims with due skepticism, she devours them hook, line, and sinker. Thus I would argue that the characterization of Sophie Neveu in The Da Vinci Code novel is rather classically sexist. …
Irony #2 – Secular feminism has fought a long, hard battle against stereotyping women according to their sex. In this fight, feminists have argued that women should not be looked upon as sex objects, and should be set free from the traditional roles of wife and mother. So along comes Mary Magdalene in The Da Vinci Code, the new poster child for feminism. But why is Mary special, according to this book? … In the story of The Da Vinci Code, Mary is special because she is a wife and mother. She is significant precisely because she has what secular feminists have been working so hard to say doesn’t really matter.
I will deal with the unsubstantiated marriage claims later, but I wanted to look at how Christianity, since it’s founding, has viewed and treated women. It has not elevated them to a special status, as Brown claims they should, but neither has it denigrated women, as Brown says it has.
While Christians, along with all other humans, have made mistakes in dealing with women and other minorities, the faith has vastly improved the standing of women through out the world, especially in those nations that were founded with Christian principles in mind.
In the New Testament
While women are not among the 12 disciples, they are clearly numerous women, including Mary Magdalene, who are disciples, or followers, of Jesus. This was a radical departure from established cultural norms in the first century, especially in Judaism.
Mary is listed specifically with two others (Joanna and Susanna) among a group of women that followed Jesus and helped during his ministry (Luke 8:1-3). She was with two other women (another Mary and Salome) at the cross after most of the disciples had fled (Mark 15:40). Those same three were the first to find the empty tomb (Mark 16:1-3). Mary was the first to see Jesus alive and he commissioned her as the first witness or evangelists (Mark 16:9-11, John 20:11-18).
Mary, the mother of Jesus, is called “favored one” by an angel (Luke 1:28) and “blessed … among women” (Luke 1:42).
In John 4, Jesus spoke to the women at the well. Not only did he break cultural rules by speaking to the woman, he broke the taboos by speaking to a woman of another race (John 4:9).
Luke describes a woman with a bad reputation coming to Jesus (Luke 7:37-50) and breaking a alabaster vial of perfume on him, wetting his feet with her tears and wiping them with her hair. Jesus rebuked his disciples and commended her for her faith and said that her act would forever be recorded and mentioned.
When a women caught in adultery was brought before Jesus (John 8), he rescued her from her accusers and helped her to straighten out her life.
Martha and Mary, the sisters of Lazarus, are mentioned often in the New Testament as being followers of Jesus. They often fed and helped Him and His disciples.
Women, specifically Mary, the mother of Jesus, were mentioned as being part of the prayer meeting following Jesus’ ascension to heaven in Acts 1.
Acts 9 mentions a woman named Tabitha, who was a devout disciple and “was abounding with deeds of kindness and charity which she continually did.” She made tunics and garments for people. Peter brought her back to life and many believed because of her testimony.
Acts 12 talks about the disciples meeting and praying about Peter’s arrest at the house of Mary, the mother of John Mark. It also describes a girl named Rhoda being so excited to see Peter alive that she forgot to unlock the gate for him, but instead ran in to tell everyone about Peter being outside.
Luke writes about Timothy’s mother being a believer (Acts 16:1) and Lydia, who made purple cloths, being so overwhelmed by Paul’s message, begged Paul and the others to come and stay at her house. She apparently started a church in her home as a result (v.40).
Aqula and his wife Priscilla hosted Paul for an extended period of time in Corinth. Paul stayed and worked with them. They were able to help Apollos, who taught about Jesus but hadn’t heard everything. They taught him, then he became a powerful evangelist (Acts 18).
At the close of most of Paul’s letters he includes greetings to many people who have helped him in his ministry or have been loyal believers. In Romans, the first person he mentions is Phoebe. He describes her as a servant of the church and a helper of many. He asks the church in Rome to receiver her and help her however they can. He also mentions several other women in his list of greetings. You can find listings from Paul that include women in 1 Corinthians, Philippians, Colossians, 2 Timothy. Peter also has one in 1 Peter.
Paul singled out Timothy’s mother Eunice and grandmother Lois, as faithful women who taught and trained Timothy well. (2 Timothy 1:5)
Over and over again the New Testament writings, you see women as important parts of the Christian Church. They are not hidden from view or ignored, but neither are they deified simply because of their sex. Scripture presents a balanced view of the sexes – different in terms of service, but equal in the sight of God. Galatians 3:27-28 says:
For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Compare the New Testament view with the contradicting attitudes of the Gnostic writings. In the Gospel of Mary (Magdalene), Mary is presented as the best disciple and more worthy than anyone else. Women are elevated above men. In the Gospel of Thomas, women are not allowed into the kingdom of God unless they became a man. Women are placed below men. You find several examples of mixed messages from the Gnostic writings, which is understandable since they were written centuries apart and centuries after Jesus lived and taught.
The Da Vinci Code gives a mixed message to women because the sources used portray a conflicting story. If women want to find their true worth, they’d better look somewhere else because while DVC may claim it empowers women it portrays them as easily led and worthy of praise only for their sexual and reproductive uses. I’d prefer a book that says women, along with men, were “fearfully and wonderfully made” in the very image of God Himself.
I'd prefer a book that says women, along with men, were "fearfully and wonderfully made" in the very image of God Himself.
I think your post is addressed to Christians but this little bit caught my eye. "If we are made in God's image, what would He need a body for?" I still don't know what you mean exactly when you say "image." Physical? Perhaps we made God in our image? That seems more plausible because how else would we conceive of God? That's why all major religions, even pagans, conceive of God(s) as humanlike. The exception, sun worship. Sorry for getting off topic.
Secular feminism has fought a long, hard battle against stereotyping women according to their sex.
Maybe they are happy to have any biblical woman in any good role? As a layman, I know you have the virgin Mary in the role of mother. That's it? I mean, Eve got us kicked out of paradise and Magdeline was a whore… I can't think of any other major female biblical players. So, 1 good role, 2 bad and the rest minor parts?
BTW – I would love to discuss why I think it's wonderful that Eve got us booted if you want.
Great stuff … I’ll be coming back to read about the Da Vinci Code’s ignorance of .. whatever you can come u up with!
Christianity oppressive toward women? Who comes up with this crap.
Obviously it was Christians who insisted that women be treated as equals in allowing them the vote during the authoring of the Constitution. Obviously, it is Christians who insist that they should be able to set legal policy for all women regarding abortion. And come on, Christians obviously love women when they're advocating women as being subservient to men. That's Love. That's Support. There's nothing there that looks at all like a patriarchy.
I mean Aaron, come on. I haven't read that dumb book, and I couldn't care less about it, but get serious. Christianity in its organized forms HATES women (or at least, women who believe that they're capable of being anything more than stay-at-home-Moms. And no, the issue isn't the women who stay at home. It's the Christians like Rick Santorum who advocate that ALL women stay at home, regardless of what they want to do.)
I'm not sure that that most major religions conceive of God in man's image. For example Hinduism, the religion of about a seventh of all humanity, has relatively few gods who look human. Most of them have multiple appendages, the bodies of animals, or even when in human form, blue skin.
Also, I think it’s important to seperate Christianity (the faith – which has historically been used to oppress the weak and powerless, including women and native peoples the world over) from the teachings of Christ (which, given the age in which Jesus lived, were remarkably liberal).
I once read a statement by Gandhi I think appropriate to quote here: “The message of Jesus as I understand it,” said Gandhi, “is contained in the Sermon on the Mount unadulterated and taken as a whole… If then I had to face only the Sermon on the Mount and my own interpretation of it, I should not hesitate to say, ‘Oh, yes, I am a Christian.’ But negatively I can tell you that in my humble opinion, what passes as Christianity is a negation of the Sermon on the Mount… I am speaking of the Christian belief, of Christianity as it is understood in the west.”
I propose we start using the word Christianism when referring to the stuff preached by Jerry Falwell, Focus on the Family etc, to distinguish it from the teachings of Christ. Same principle is Islam and Islamism.
Hinduism, the religion of about a seventh of all humanity, has relatively few gods who look human. Most of them have multiple appendages, the bodies of animals, or even when in human form, blue skin.
You are correct. I did a search because I got curious :) Here are the images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses.
click here
What do you think? Ganesha is elephantine but many of the others are recognizably human in their features.
Cineaste, my bad, that statement should have read “who look completely human”.
They always have something ‘extra’ or ‘altered’ like a third eye, blue skin or multiple arms to signify their divinity. This is analagous to Christian representational art which puts halos around saints but much stronger.
Gotcha :) I liked your quote from Ghandi but I admit I am ignorant of the Sermon on the Mount. All I know is I find sentiments like "love thy neighbor" the ultimate truth which the bible holds. I believe if the bible is viewed as a metaphor and not taken literally, Christianity becomes a better religion for it.
Sorry, I am always away from the computer on the weekend. To all the points:
Cineaste, I was quoting from Genesis where God says, "Let Us make man in Our own image." It was not saying the physical part of our existence, but the spiritual. We are the only creation that has a soul – that makes us like God, in His image.
Mary Magdalene was not a "whore." Jesus cast seven demons out of her. The Bible never says anything about her being a prostitute. I listed many women mentioned in the NT above. It is not a minor thing that the first witness of Jesus was a woman, which in the first century would have been meaningless in court.
Eve, didn't get us kicked out. Sin got us kicked out, both Eve's and Adam's. I place no more blame on Eve than on Adam both disobeyed God. The Bible even says that sin entered the world through one man, Adam and that salvation has entered through one man, Jesus.
Sam, I thought this nation wasn't founded by Christians? We can't say that Christians did all the negative stuff in our nations founding and then say all the good stuff was done by others. Christians were involved in the good and bad. They are human and make mistakes, just like the atheists, agnostics, deists and everyone else back them made mistakes. It is worth noting that Christians were involved in the correction of those mistakes.
You view abortion as a women's rights issue. Pro-life people do not. We view it as a life issue. It wouldn't matter to me if it was men, women or robots who carried the baby. It is a life that should be protected. You cannot pin on me that I am trying to hold women down because I think unborn babies deserve life. You should read the polls and look at the leadership of most pro-life organizations. Women are the most vocal opponents of abortion, many who have had abortions themselves, include Roe from Roe v. Wade.
I am not going to rehash the "subservient" issue again here. That is clearly a misunerstanding of Christian teaching. If you can't comprehend that the Biblical command for husbands to love their wife as Christ loved the church, being a servant, giving everything He had, laying down His life, is anything but loving and treats women as special, then I can't help you.
Where do you come up with your stuff? Who said that women weren't capable of anything but being a stay-at-home mom and why do you denegrate that role in society by saying "they're capable of being anything more than stay-at-home-Moms"? Do you think it is easy to be a stay-at-home mom? Let me tell you, I was a stay-at-home dad for eight months, it's not easy.
Women are just as intelligent and capable as men to do most jobs. But when women have children many want to stay home for the good of their child. There is no Christian policy demanding that all women stay home with their children. Many wonderful Christian women work outside the home. No one is saying they can't, but they should be allowed to choose (pro-choice?) to stay at home without someone insulting them or downplaying their contribution to society.
My wife chose to stay at home with our two boys. I didn't tell her to do it. She left work because she wanted to be with our first son. I would love to have more money from a second income, but we feel it is in the best interests of our children for her to be at home with them until they go to school. It is a sacrifice for both of us and one that I respect and honor her for.
RationalSean, I do think the Sermon on the Mount is a wonderful illustration of how we should live. It can be applicable to all people, not just Christians. But here is the distinction that must be made, Ghandi (you and Cineate) may like what it says and even follow what it says, but that is not all Jesus said.
He also said "Take up your cross and follow me." He told Nicodemus that to see the Kingdom of God "one must be born again." He told the disciples that He is "the Way, the Truth and the Life" and that "no one comes to the Father (God) except through" Him.
As to the Christianism, as in Islamism, remark, when Falwell and Dobson start calling for the heads of Ron Howard (Da Vinci Code director) and their gay neighbor, then you can call them Christianism.
Aaron,
You know that the issue here isn't the good that Christians have done. You know that it is regular refusal to accept responsibility for some of the horrors of this country's history. It's fantastic that there were Christians who opposed slavery, bans on interracial marriage, etc, but the fact of the matter is that many more Christians believed in those evils. Christianity HAS to take responsibility for that.
Now, as for this nonsense about stay-at-home mothers. Of course I have no objection to women who want to raise their children. Nor have I ever argued that I have any problem with that. What (Some) Christians argue is that all women should stay at home, is that our society is in rough shape specifically because women DON'T stay home. There is no reason my daughter should be raised to believe that the only thing she is capable of accomplishing is churning out babies.
It's great that that you argue that women don't HAVE to stay home anymore, but it wasn't your people, on your side of the argument, who got women to the point where they were free to go to college, to become scientists, to become welders, whatever. It was women fighting against a patriarchy that dominates this nation. (Or, to put this another way, it was women fighting for the right to vote. It wasn't kind Christians turning the right to vote over to women.)
And where does all of this patriarchy come from? Well, if we're going to believe that we live in a Christian nation, and if we're going to believe that Christianity is the dominant American religion, then I'm going to have to argue that our nation's terrible attitude toward women (an attitude which is slowly changing) comes from that same Christianity, a religion that argues for subservience. You can say "Oh, no no no, Christians love women!" but it falls a little short when anybody takes even a casual glimpse at the entire history of Christianity.
Finally, I'd be willing to bet my bottom dollar that you'd think differently about numerous issues if it was you carrying the baby. You can say that it's all about being pro-life, but it isn't. If (Some) Christians were genuinely pro-life, they wouldn't take the same stands. Being pro-life is about far more than the birth of a damned baby.
Supporting Sams's point…
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."
"The religious persecution of the ages has been done under what was claimed to be the command of God."
Susan B. Anthony
“The Bible and Church have been the greatest stumbling block in the way of women’s emancipation.”
– Elizabeth Cady Stanton
We can use the early feminists including Anthony to defend the pro-life position as well.
Nobody is arguing (that I know of) that we should teach our daughters that "all they are capable of doing is churning out babies." But they should be taught that they can't have everything – no one can. Sacrifices have to be made. If you want to pursue a career as a young woman you have to put having children on hold. The longer you do that, the higher the risk of pregnancy problems. But you will not go as far in the corporate world if you wait until after you have children. Men have to make similar sacrifices, though not as much.
Yes, many Christians have made mistakes in their understanding of the Bible and in their application of those principles to society. Would you like to be held responsible, or "those on your side" for the millions killed in communist nations because you don't believe in a god either? Every way of thinking has people who corrupt it for whatever reason (personal gain, power, money, control, etc.).
What I'm telling you is to look at the founding of the Christian faith to see the proper understanding of women's role within Christianity. Jesus used a woman to testify (witness) to Him being alive, something that was worthless in court. Look at all the examples I listed of women's interaction with Jesus and their roles in the spread of Christianity.
As far as what I would think differently about, you need to talk to my wife, who is more staunchly pro-life than I am. She has carried and delivered two children and is passionately pro-life. As I said, so many of the pro-life leaders are women, including the former Roe. You can talk to them about it being different when you are caring the baby. They would know better than either you or I.
I'm not sure what stances you think we should take being pro-life. Possibly the death penalty or government aid to the poor? Those are issues to be debated, but none of that determines whether it is right or not to have an abortion.
I have a question that I have always wondered about abortion supporters. Why do so many say that we should work to reduce the number of abortions? The whole safe, legal and rare stance. While that sounds good, it makes no sense.
If an abortion is nothing. If the unborn baby is just tissue or whatever the correct term is today, why is it something we want to reduce? Does anyone say they want to reduce the number of tonsils being removed? If the unborn baby is not a person, why is it any different than any other operation that removes unwanted tissue from the body – tonsils, appendages, even tumors?
We can use the early feminists including Anthony to defend the pro-life position as well.
Sam's point was…
It was women fighting against a patriarchy that dominates this nation. (Or, to put this another way, it was women fighting for the right to vote. It wasn't kind Christians turning the right to vote over to women.) [ed. italics tag fixed]
This quote supports Sam's point…
"The Bible and Church have been the greatest stumbling block in the way of women's emancipation."
– Elizabeth Cady Stanton
I didn't realize we had already moved on to the abortion debate. This post is jumping all over the place :)
I know the quote supports Sam's argument. I was just stating that if we can use their quotes for one issue (Christianity's supposed oppression of women), we can use their quotes for another issue (the pro-life argument).
From the Feminists for Life website:
Susan B. Anthony refered to abortion as "child murder."
"When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." – Elizabeth Stanton.
"The rights of children as individuals begin while yet they remain the foetus." – Victoria Woodhull, the first female presidential candidate.
So when do we listen to them and when do we ignore them? I propose to listen to them speak about something they knew about personally – pregnancy and child birth as opposed to them speaking about a faith, which apparently they didn't subscribe to and that was being practiced poorly in regards to them when they were alive.
Great quotes, though they are off topic to what I was referring to. How do you reconcile the anti-church beliefs of Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Stanton with their beliefs in the abortion debate, if at all? To get back to the point of the post, I can guess what they thought of women's role in Christianity. Poor.
In order to make an intelligent contribution, you have to read the book. In fact, also it will help to read what iniciated all: "Holy Blood, Holy Grail". It is very easy to criticize being in just one side. Please make intelligent suggestions. Some of your stuff is what it is critized by Brown, a old thinking church.
Remember the old priest in "The name of the Rose". No position to dialogue just prejudice and imposition. If we are to become modern we must not only respect others' thinking but also have an inquisitive mind to open up and evaluate every point.
Great movie reference Hans and you make an excellent point!
Hello!
Eve got us kicked out? hummm….read Pauls letters recently? I believe he feels that Sin entered the world through ADAM who was more at fault that Eve because Eve was tempted by Satan.
And I believe you will find that Morna D Moody and C.K Barret agree with me, as do COUNTLESS other Pauline Theologians.
Extract codeine from fioricet.
Buy codeine. Cocaine with codeine. Codeine cough syrup. Tylenol with codeine. Codeine acetametaphen. Codeine.