[QUOTE][DIM]7pt[=DIM]Scritto da: TERESA BENEDETTA 13/05/2006 16.56
From www.chiesa.espressonline.it/dettaglio.jsp?id=55661&eng=y -

[G]In a Very Secular France,
Nicolas Sarkozy Is Breaking a Taboo[/G]
In a book, the candidate for the presidency of the French Republic
acknowledges the public role of religion.
And the Church is paying attention, in Italy and Rome, too.

[C]by Sandro Magister[/C]

[IMG]http://www.chiesa.espressonline.it/rendercmsfield.jsp?field_name=image&id=54981[/IMG]er

[G]Even the République Needs Religion [/G]
[C]by Carlo Cardia [/C]

---------------------------------------------------------

<p><font class='xsmall'>[<i>Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 13/05/2006 17.13</i>]</font></p>[/DIM][/QUOTE]
To read and comment on Sarkozy's book from only a Catholic point of view is very misleading. In fact, what Sarkozy was proposing was not just for the financing of the Church but also for the construction of mosques, temples, synagogues,etc. His view is more of an integration of ALL religions (not just catholicism) with the state, and in which currently Islam is a major problem in France. He views integration as a solution to extremism.

His book was published in 2004 and there was a great deal of debate about his 'daring' proposals because this implies that catholics may have to indirectly finance the construction of mosques, synagogues,temples, etc. As well as pushing the social woes of the marginalized to the believers of religions instead of being taken care of by the state.

However, some of his views were also interesting :
a. State cannot solve all the problems of its people, but religions could help because religions provide hope. He sees religions (Islam, Catholicism,etc) as a complement to the state.
b. Religions properly taught and well-integrated in society, can help stabilise society and avoid extremism.
c. State laws are to be obeyed over and above religious laws/beliefs. For example, females are subordinates of males in Islam. State law says that all females and males are equal.

His book is interesting but needs to be read with ALL religions in mind.

DEAR SIMPLYME - Since I have not read the book and don't have immediate prospects of doing so, I strongly urge you to e-mail your comment right away to Sandro Magister (through his blog or his e-mail service in www.chiesa), because it is very disturbing, to say the least, that a journalist like him, whom I have held in high regard for the past year since I started reading him, could choose to ignore such an obvious fact as you observe in reporting on Sarkozy's book!

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 13/05/2006 22.01]

Here is a translation based on a story from ZENIT's Italian service today.

CANBERRA, May 12, 2006 - The Federal Government of Austrailia has decided to finance scientific research into the use of adult stem cells for possible treatment purposes. This would avoid the ethical problems raised by using embryonic stem-cells, which entails destroying human embryos for research purposes.

The Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, through its news agency Fides, expressed its satisfaction over this development.

Initial implementation of the federal decision comes in theform of a grant of 22 million Australian dollars to Griffith University.

“It is a wonderful moment, a great stimulus for science but one that also has an ethical basis,” said Mons. Eugene Hurley, Bishop of Port Pirie, Australia, and chairman of the Family and Life committee of the Australian bishops conference.

Griffith University’s Eskitis Institute of Cellular and Molecular Therapy presented promising results of its initial work in adult stem-cell research last year. The federal funds will help establish a Research Center on Adult Stem Cells under Prof. Alan McKay-Sim, vice director of the Eskitis Institute.

The professor and his team have shown that they can culture adult stem cells in a controlled manner so they can develop into many types of body cells, such as cardiac tissue, muscle, kidneys, even blood cells. Stem-cell therapy offers the possiblity of treating diseases like Parkinson’s, motor disabilities and cerebral disorders.

Mons. Hurley said that the Australian government’s example may help scientists worldwide to focus their stem-cell research on adult rather than embryonic cells.

“We congratulate the government for its decision, because it helps stimulate scientific research while being respectful of the ethic of life,” he said.

Bravo for the Indians! They have succeeded where everybody else failed. So any offensive parts of the "Tickle Me" film will be cut out? Will they do that with "The Da Vinci Code" as well? That would probably result in all but 5 minutes of the film on the cutting room floor. Maybe the remaining 5 minute version could be promoted as a cartoon since Tom Hanks says it's such a lot of fun.

From www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=ZXBLUI3OO15NXQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2006/05/12/ndav...
on 5/12/06, an interesting idea.

Scratch the Da Vinci Code
and reveal the truth
By Jonathan Petre
Religion Correspondent


Your view: do you believe The Da Vinci Code?

Scratchcards, usually associated with National Lottery games offering "instant cash prizes", are to be put to a more elevated use - debunking The Da Vinci Code.

The Christian Enquiry Centre is distributing 270,000 specially designed cards today to every cinema screening the Hollywood version of the Dan Brown bestseller when it is released next week.

The cards feature 10 claims made in the book. Cinema goers are asked to judge whether they are fact or fiction by scratching the appropriate box.

For example, the cards state that "the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is a matter of historical record". If the box marked "fact" is scratched off, it will reveal a cross, while the box for "fiction" will show a tick.

The cards, which will be placed in racks in cinema foyers, will also encourage film goers to apply for a free booklet called Cracking the Da Vinci Code by Mark Stibbe, which examines the claims in more detail.

The £20,000 "scratch-for-truth" scheme is part of a campaign by the churches to capitalise in the interest in the book, which has already sold more than 40 million copies since its publication in 2003.

"In The Da Vinci Code story, several of the lead characters make highly contentious claims about secret gospels, the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, and whether the Church has been engaged in a cover-up for the past 2,000 years," said Jeff Bonsor, the director of the centre.

"We want to set the record straight and introduce people to the real story of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and the events surrounding the life of arguably the most influential figure in history."

Following an attack on the book on Easter Sunday by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, the Church of England has launched a website challenging people to make up their own minds.

The website quotes the Rev Richard Burridge, the Dean of King's College, London, which appears in the book, saying: "The Da Vinci Code is a cracking read, a real page-turner of a novel. One of its appeals is that we all like secrets.

"But its claims about Jesus are cracked. In fact, sometimes the real truth is stranger than fiction. Get exploring!"

A more confrontational approach has been taken by the Vatican, with senior bishops calling for the film to be boycotted. Archbishop Angelo Amato, of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said: "If such lies and errors had been directed at the Koran and Holocaust they would have justly provoked a world uprising."

Cardinal Francis Arinze, who was tipped to become Pope last year, said: "Christians must not just sit back and say it is enough for us to forgive and forget. Sometimes it is our duty to do something practical."

Here's the first of three stories ZENIT ran this weekend about DVC in its Italian service (although the third story was based on a Spanish text which the Spanish service does not carry!) Here is a translation from the Italian -

'The Da Vinci Code' is like
'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion'!

Francesco Alberoni, auhtor and editorial writer for Corriere della Sera, says the DVC is a book of lies written deliberately to attack the Church, just as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were invented by anti-Semites to attack the Jews.

ZENIT asked him in an interview for his sociological interpretation of the DVC phenomenon.

You have maintained that DVC is like "The Protocols..." Could you explain this to us?
This book has been presented to the public as being based on historical reality. This premise is still found in the English edition, whereas it has been taken out in the Italian edition because we protested.

Now, Dan Brown, no matter how ignorant he might be, could not possibly not have known that Christ’s divinity was explicitly affirmed in the letters of St. Paul written around AD 60 and in the Gospel of John, in short, during the first century. Whereas he says it was affirmed in the Council of Nicaea in the 4th century.

It is not possible to claim that Jesus Christ was married, much less to Mary Magdalene. It is all an unsustainable invention – this story of the descendance to the Merovingians, the massacres committed by the Church and later by the Opus Dei to keep this secret hidden, etc…

But all these deliberate lies have resulted in discrediting the Church because the book is written in a way that gullible people believe it. That’s exactly what is accomplished by The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a document invented by anti-Semites in which a plan to dominate the world is attributed to the heads of the Jewish community and became one of the reasons used by Hitler to persecute the Jews.

As a sociologist, writer and intellectual, how do you explain the book’s success?
Because there is a great need for the sacred, for the religious, for the mysterious, as we have seen in the success of the books of Carlos Castaneda, in thew New Age texts, in the books of Paulo Coelho. Tolkien’s saga, Harry Potter, but no one till now has fantasized over Jesus Christ. And Dan Brown did that, using the elements of an erotic relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, as well as the supposed criminality of the Church. It is an appetizing cocktail especially for the younger generation, who know very little of history, whether sacred or profane. [I think the ignorance cuts across all ages!]

Is there a demand for religiosity that the Catholic church has not sufficiently noticed? Or did Dan Brown simply think he could profit from the widespread ignorance of history and the bases of Christianity?
Yes, this demand for religiosity has been taken advantage of, and it is true that the intellectuals, the Christian writers, have not known how to give an exhaustive reply to this need for spirituality, or when they have done so, they have either been ignored or fought by the laicists, or not fully undestood by the official organs of the Church.

There’s a little example in the book my wife Rosa wrote, “The mountain of Light”, a novel with a strong mystical inspiration but ignored by all the Catholic organs. However, John Paul II did a lot to bring together the youth, give them a sense of belonging, to make them live the Christian life, using a modern language, including music.

What do you consider to be the profound truths of Christianity, and in what way do the Incarnation and Resurrection of Christ impact on the lives of men?
Those which any Christian who is minimally attentive would know – the sublime morality of the Gospel which constitutes a break with the past and opens a new era the Incarnation and death of Christ out of love for us; and the Resurrection as a promise of eternal life. Charity is hope. Without Christ there would be no Europe, no Renaissance, no Immanuel Kant or Jeremy Bentham, not even Marx – everyone drew from Him except that in turn, some ended up dispensing poisoned wine.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/05/2006 16.53]

It really hurts that, notwithstanding all the valid objections that have been written and said about this man's fiction and criticisms about his 'ignorance' and disingenuous claim to presenting 'only historical fact' in his fiction, he must think himself completely armored and impervious to all of it by the megabucks he has already earned and will go on earning for as long as there are people willing to be gulled, and must spend his days chortling his heart out about all his critics on the way to the bank!

Here is the second ZENIT piece on DVC, trnaslated from the Italian -
----------------------------------------------------------------
Decoding the secret of
Dan Brown's abysmal ignorance

”The attack against the truths of Christian faith wrought by Dan Brown in his book may yet boomerang,” according to the Jesuit priest Gerald O’Collins.

Emritus professor at the Pontifical Gregorian University, where he taught fundamental theology for 32 years, this Australian Jesuit is one of the best authorites on Brown’s fiction.

Zenit interviewed him in Rome on May 10, shortly before he spoke on “The DVC Phenomenon” at the day of reflection on “Catholicism and 20th Century Literature” organized by the Pontifical Council on Culture in cooperation with the Institute of the Italian Encyclopedia.

”I was recently in Washington,” O’Collins said, “where 400 persons came to listen while I pointed out the thousands of errors in Brown’s text. I have never before had to explain the differences between the Gospels and the gnostic gospels to so many people all at once.”

“It is true that the public success of this book was favored by a widespread religious ignorance,” he continued. “But perhaps now it is possible to explain so many things about Cristianity that people have forgotten or simply did not know.”

Dan Brown and so many editorial writers have claimed that the Gospels were imposed by a minority group of Christians and that the truth can be found instead in the gnostic Gospels…
According to Brown, it was Constantine who imposed the four Gospels and decreed they should be left alone, but in reality, there were at least 80 competing Gospels in the 4th century, all of them more or less at the same level….But this argument just shows an abysmal ignorance.

The true history tells us that in the second century, two centuries before Constantine, Saint Irianeus and others had demonstrated clearly that four Gospels existed. The actual Gospels preceded the gnostic Gospels. The Gospel of John, which is the last of the four, was written in AD 90-95, several decades before any other authors started writing the gnostic gospels.

In the letters of St. Paul and in the Acts of the Apostles, there is no reference whatsoever to the gnostic gospels. Even St. John who lived between the synagogue and the Church and had to confroint whoever denied the divinity of Christ, never once spoke of the gnostic Gospels.

Those that are called gnostic Gospels are not even Gospels, because they do not recount the entire story of Jesus and do not speak at all about His death and resurrection. Whereas the Gospel reports the story in full.

If one reads the Gospel of Mark, we see the Baptism, the life of Christ, his minsitry, his Passion, death and resurrection. That is a Gospel.

The so-called Gospel of Thomas is nothing but a list of sayings. This is an abuse of the term Gospel. It is an abuse that has become common in our day as exemplified by that so-called Gospel of Judas.

Those who love the gnostics choose some sayings and ignore embarrassing passages, such as, for example, the gnostics’ hatred for the Old Testament and their anti-Semitic attitude. The gnostics were against the body and most of all, against women. [Irony of ironies, that Brown's subtext in DVC appears to be an exaltation of the divine cult of women!]

For example, at the end of the so-called Gospel of Thomas, Simon Peter objects and says, “Mary should leave us! Because women are not worthy of Life,” to which Jesus reponds: “Look here, I will guide her to make her masculine, so that she may become a living spirit eequal to you males. Because every female who makes herself masculine will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”

But why has Dan Brown had such enormous success with the public?
Well, he has had little competition. Several years ago, there was (the) Lord of the Rings (revival) and the nascent phenomenon of Harry Potter. We also do not have great writers like J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis.

And then there is an ongoing campaign to say that people are disappointed with the official Church and that priests in the United States are pedophiles. This has encouraged suspicion and morbid interest in what Brown has called “the secret hidden for centuries – Jesus married to Mary Magdalene.” I would say instead, “Discover the secret of Dan Brown's abysmal ignorance.”

Can you give us some examples?
There is nothing new in the book except his very eccentric explanation of the Last Supper by Leonardo. But it is evident in some parts of the book that Brown confuses Leonardo with Michaelangelo. The other stories like Jesus wed to Mary Magdalene have been told by an infinity of earlier authors. I remember a book by the Australian journalist Donovan Joyce, who wrote a book called “The Jesus Scroll” in the 60s. So it is not surprising that there was a court action regarding plagiarism. Who knows how many have written the same thing?

Many prelates have publicly expressed their concerns against this book and the film inspired by it. What would you do?
I find very interesting what the Catholic Church in Great Britain has done, which was to prepare pamphlets which expose the great deception and recount instead what is known as fact. Even in Australia, some dioceses are preparing their faithful to counteract Brown’s falsehoods in study encounters. I would avail of the situation to open the debate in a way that would unmask Brown’s lies.
----------------------------------------------------------------

The third ZENIT story was filed much later and I still have to translate it - it is Opus Dei's reply to the film director Ron Howard's statement dismissing the need for a disclaimer

Also, the momentum of anti-DVC reaction may well build up till the film opens, so if I am taking the time and effort to post such material here, it is because it is my poor personal effort to help 'circle the wagons' against this near-unprecedented atgtack by popular culture against Christianity and the Church.
.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 14/05/2006 18.34]

ZENIT's third DVC-related story this weekend, tranlsated from Italian-

Opus Dei responds to film director,
calls on Sony to respect Catholics


A few days before the film opens in theaters, the Prelature of Opus Dei has reaffirmed that “Christians do not react with hate or violence, but with respect and charity, without insults or threats.”

In a communique sent to ZENIT Friday by the Information Office of Opus Dei in Rome, in response to some declarations made by the film director Ron Howard, Opus Dei says: “In the sentences attributed to him, Howard maintains that ‘to deny anyone the right to see the film is a fascist act’ and that “even telling others not to go see the film is a militant act, and militancy generates hate and violence.’”

The communique in Spanish is signed by Manuel Sanchez Hurtado, who is in charge of relations with the international press, calls on Howard to “keep cool and express yourself respectfully.”

“It is not good to lose sight of the reality of the situation: that this film is offensive to Christians. Howard represents the aggressor, and Catholics are the victims of an offense.”

“You cannot deny the aggrieved party his ultimate right – to express his point of view,” the note says. “It is not the declarations of any churchman or the respectful request made by Opus Dei to place a disclaimer at the start of the film that it is a work of fantasy, that generate violence: rather it is odious, false and incorrect claims that inflame hate.”

In his declarations, the note goes on, “Howard says that it is only a film, an invented story that should not be taken seriously, but one cannot deny the significant effect of film and books (on popular culture).”

Indeed, “fiction affects our way of looking at the world, especially among the young. It is frivolous not to take this matter seriously.”

While Opus Dei recognizes that ”artistic creativity certainly needs a climate of freedom,” it also wishes to underscore that “freedom cannot be separated from responsibility.”

“Imagine a film which would allege that Sony was behind the attacks on the Twin Towers, an act it promoted because it wanted to destabilize the United States. Or a novel that says Sony paid those who shot at the Pope in 1981 because it wished to oppose the moral leadership of the Holy Father,” Hurtado’s statement says.

“I would think that Sony, being a respectable and serious institution, would not be happy to see itself portrayed that way on screens worldwide and would nto be satisfied with an answer like, “Don’t worry, it is only a fantasy, you shouldn’t take it seriously, freedom of expression is sacred.’”

He continues that those who took part in the film could “continue to calculate calmly the profits that the film will make…because the freedom of economic gain appears to be the only sacred freedom that is exempt from any responsibility whatsoever.”

“Very likely Sony will make a lot of money but they are paying a price by degrading their prestige and reputation.”

He concludes by expressing the hope that “the polemics of these last few months have not been sterile, that they will serve to reflect on the relative character of economic gain when higher values are in play, on the role played by fiction (in cultural life) and on the responsibility that must accompany and protect every freedom.”

The head of Opus Dei himself was less concerned about the attack on Opus Dei but about the falsehoods propagated by the book about Jesus and the Church.

Interviewed by Vittorio Messori for Corriera della Sera (5/12/06), Mons., Javier Echevarria, the head of Opus Dei, said” “That imaginative person (the author) has won for the time being – and not only in dollars – along with others who attack us. But according to the teachings of our Lord, we pray with the same fervor for those who praise us as well as for those who defame us.”

Echevarria, who for 30 years was personal secretary to Opus Dei founder St. Jose Maria Escriva de Balaguer and his second successor as Opus Dei head, disclosed that he had only leafed through the book.

“I obviously don’t have time to waste with dime novels. However, it is not mainly a question of what it says of us (Opus Dei) - these are the usual things that make us smile. But what pains me is the grotesque deliriums about Our Lord and about Holy Mother Church. They can say what they want to about us but they should not blaspheme the faith.

Asked about what could motivate hostility to Opus Dei, he replied without mincing words: “Because our loyalty to the Pope is well-known, our loyalty to the Church, our rigor in the orthodoxy of the faith.”

“They attack us in order to demonstrate that we are the hypocritical creation of of a Catholic Church that can only give poisoned fruit. Also because when no one believes in the devil anymore, the true devil, they look for substitutes. Loss of faith always leads to supersitition,” he observed.

Jordanian churches seek ban on 'Da Vinci Code' film


May 8, 2006
The Middle East Times

AMMAN -- The head of the Jordanian Council of Churches called on Saturday for the controversial film The Da Vinci Code to be banned from cinemas in Jordan, state news agency Petra reported.

The council's secretary-general, Archbishop Hanna Nour, was quoted as saying that the film "harms the image of Christ", pointing out that the book of the same title, written by American author Dan Brown, is already banned in Jordan.

It "harms Christian and Muslim religious symbols by calling into question what is written in the Gospels and the Koran on the personality of Christ", Nour said.

The film, scheduled for global release on May 19, explores the idea that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene, had children, and that their descendants have survived up to the present day.

It depicts a conservative Roman Catholic order, the Opus Dei, as involved in a dark plot to avoid discovery of Jesus' descendants.

The director of Jordan's audiovisual authority, Mohammed Shawabkeh, said that there is a "good chance the film will be banned because of the negative reactions it is likely to provoke among Christians in Jordan".

Last week, an aide to Pope Benedict XVI called on the public to shun the movie, describing the novel as perversely anti-Christian.

Isn't it ironic that the little signs of 'success' in the anti-DVC campaign are coming from non-Christian nations like Jordan and India (well, they've succeeded with a local film; I hope they can get at least a disclaimer for DVC!)...

Anyway just when I thought I could go to lunch and had done with all the translating I needed to do this morningg, Sylvie posts something DVC in the French section, and as it comes from the French yahoo.com, I thought I might find it on the Yahoo's English site...Maybe I don't know how to look but among the first 50 entries I checked, not one of them was the one I wanted, so it was easier to just go ahead and translate...
----------------------------------------------------------------

DVC conquers its readers
thanks to religious polemic

Sunday, May 14 - DVC has become an international social phenomenon by provoking an explosive religious dispute over the origins of Christianity, which has contributed to the sales of the book and will most likely contribute to the success of the Ron Howard film based on it.

While the film starring Tom Hanks will open the Cannes Festival on Wednesday, the book, which as been described as “blasphemous” and “satanic” by some of its critics, continues to gaing round three years after it first came out.

“Religion has always been one of the primary fields of human interest and research,” says Robert Thompson, professor of media at the University of Syracuse in New York state.

“Popular culture does not consider the subject (Christianity) taboo and it is one that is likely to attract enormous pbulic interest,” he said, even as Sony had launched a monstrously huge promotional campaign worldwide for its film.

The Roman Cathloic Church itself rarely makes direct comments over works that it may disagree with but it has declared war againt DVC because of fear that its claims are damaging to the Church.

The book, whose worldwide sales are now estimated at close to 50 million copies, affirms that since its early days, the Church has sought by every means to hide the fact that Jesus was a mere mortal who married Mary Magdalene.

Dan Brown also portrays Opus Dei as a secret society that will not hesitate to murder in order to protect this “secret.”

Fiction or fact? The controversy rages, from the United States to India, from Spain to the Philippines, recalling that which surrounded Mel Gibson’s film “The Passion of Christ” in 2004.

“Gibson made a film which galvanised Christian traditionalists and Catholics, whereas DVC excites those who oppose the authority of the Church,” says Stephen O’Leary, professor of religious communications at the University of Southern California.

Gibson’s “Passion,” a ‘violent’ film, earned him accusations of anti-Semitism as well as worldwide success.

DVC could result in an inverse phenomenon, O’Leary says. “Mel Gibson found a Christian public ready to pay to see a Christian film, while the promoters of the DVC film want to attract a public that is hostile to the Church who would love to see something which portrays it in a bad light.”

It is a role which the church is obviously not willing to take on, especially after recent scandals about misbehaving priests have already given it a very bad press.

Brown’s book “liberates the opinions of those who consider Church institutions hypocritical,” says Thompson to explain the unprecedented debate sparked by a book that many consider to be a dime novel.

For his part, film director Ron Howard has refused to place a disclaimer at the start of his $125-million film that would state it is only a work of fiction, as Opus Dei has requested.

“When one places a disclaimer to a work of fiction, it is a bit like being a killjoy. One has tried to make a film so that the public can forget its doubts and immerse itself in the story,” he told journalists, adding that he thinks the opponents of DVC simply want to have themselves talked about.

"But even if it attracts millions of viewers to the cinema, the film will not change the public image of the Catholic Church,” Thompson assures. “It would take more than a film of fiction like DVC to change religious beliefs.” [If the beliefs are well-founded in the individual, yes. But what about ‘ye of little faith’ who must comprise most of those who have gone overboard for the book? They don’t know any better, and they choose to believe a best-selling dime novel is giving them the ‘truth’! ]

A follow-up to the post by Benefan on Colombia's legalization of abortion...
---------------------------------------------------------------

Colombian bishops threaten civil disobedience,
excommunication for creators of new abortion law

Bogotá, May. 12, 2006 (CNA) - In response to a ruling by Colombia’s Constitutional Court making the country the first in Latin America to legalize abortion, the country’s bishops said Thursday that civil disobedience may be necessary to resist the new immoral law.

Likewise, Bogotá’s Archbishop, Cardinal Pedro Rubiano Saenz is threatening excommunication against the responsible lawmakers.

The president of the Bishops’ Conference of Colombia, Archbishop Luis Augusto Castro, rejected the Court’s decision to legalize abortion in certain cases and said it was a crime against human life.

“A door is being opened toward the elimination of the innocent lives of so many children who will not be allowed to live, we have always said this is wrong,” the archbishop said.

“We continue to say that this is an act against the life of the unborn and it is immoral.”

Likewise, Cardinal Rubiano told Colombia’s El Tiempo newspaper that “all those who commit the crime, the sin of abortion, will be excommunicated immediately."

“This applies as well to those who foster or assist abortion,” he added, insinuating that the justices who passed the ruling to allow abortion in some cases, might be included in this excommunication, without mentioning them explicitly.

Cardinal Rubiano lamented that the justices did “open the door” for a broader legalization of abortion. “Draw your own conclusions,” he added, stressing that abortion is “a deliberate murder in the womb of the mother.”

For his part, Archbishop Castro said that “We must have a two-fold perspective, that is, to see the situation of the mother and help her in every way, but also look after the child, because nobody does it… Nobody looks after the baby, there is no consideration for a child that has been conceived, who tries to move forward in this world but has his possibilities cut off.”

The archbishop noted that in the conception through rape, “the child is innocent… the criminal should be punished and put in jail for a longtime, but the child should not have to pay for the sins of another. He is an innocent baby. In this sense we defend the life of the baby as well.”

While Archbishop Castro underscored that a child conceived through rape is “the result of a deplorable action,” he emphasized that what exists in the mother’s womb is a child who committed no crime. Many women who have conceived through rape, he noted, “accept their babies because they understand that the child is one thing, and the person responsible for the rape is another.”

The bishops of Tunja and Engativa decried the Justices for taking the easy way out and they noted that “not everything that is legal is moral.” They said Colombians should question the legitimacy of the ruling.

“It is sad that the Justices have chosen the easy way, which is the path to crime,” said Bishop Hector Gutierrez Pabon of Engativa. “In the Catholic Church, there is no such thing as a first, second or third class citizen and it should be this way also in society.”

“Many people will think that because it is legal it is okay. No! What is legal is not always morally licit,” he added.

'Da Vinci Code'
Misses the Mark for Critics
By DAVID GERMAIN, AP Movie Writer
Tue May 16, 6:52 PM ET

CANNES, France - "The Da Vinci Code" drew lukewarm praise, shrugs of indifference, some jeering laughter and a few derisive jabs Tuesday from arguably the world's toughest movie crowd: critics at the Cannes Film Festival.

The year's most anticipated movie, "The Da Vinci Code" was a generally faithful adaptation of Dan Brown's monster best seller, spinning a murder thriller that stems from a cover-up of secrets about Christianity's roots.

While readers worldwide devoured the novel, reaction from Cannes critics ranged from mild endorsement of its potboiler suspense to groans of ridicule over its heavy melodrama.

"It's a movie about whether the greatest story ever told is true or not, and it's not the greatest movie ever screened, is it?" said Baz Bamigboye, a film columnist for London's Daily Mail. "As a thriller, well," he continued, shrugging.

"Maybe the next day I'll forget about it," said Igor Soukmanov of Unistar Radio in Belarus. "But today for two hours it was good entertainment. ... As a Hollywood movie, it's a very nice picture."

Critics got their first look at "The Da Vinci Code" a day before its world premiere at Cannes on Wednesday, when it also debuts at theaters in France and some other countries. The film opens worldwide over the following two days, including the United States on Friday.

Directed by Ron Howard, the movie stars Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou as strangers hurled together on a frantic quest for the Holy Grail after a series of murders is committed.

The filmmakers add some twists and variations here and there, but the general thrust of the novel remains intact, including its theory that Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene were married and had a child, which has prompted denouncements from many Christians.

The Cannes audience clearly grew restless as the movie dragged on to two and a half hours and spun a long sequence of anticlimactic revelations.

"I kept thinking of the Energizer Bunny, because it kept going and going and going, and not in a good way," said James Rocchi, a film critic for CBS 5 television in San Francisco and the online outlet Cinematical. "Ron Howard makes handsome films. He doesn't make bad ones, but he doesn't make great ones."

One especially melodramatic line uttered by Hanks drew prolonged laughter and some catcalls, and the audience continued to titter for much of the film's remainder.

Some people walked out during the movie's closing minutes, though there were fewer departures than many Cannes movies provoke among harsh critics. When the credits rolled, there were a few whistles and hisses, and there was none of the scattered applause even bad movies sometimes receive at Cannes.

Critics singled out co-star Ian McKellen, playing a wry Grail enthusiast who joins the search, as the movie's highlight, injecting hearty humor and delivering the most nuanced performance. Paul Bettany added a seething mix of tragic pathos and destructive zealousness as a monk assassin who carries out the slayings.

Bamigboye said all the actors were solid, but enthusiastically added, "I've got to tell you, Ian McKellen steals it. He slices all the crap away."

[Unfortunately, Mr. McKellen (Sir Ian?) was also reported elsewhere to have derided the Vatican for reacting against the movie, but then he has criticized the Church before for its stand on homosexuals, especially as he is one.]

The Duh Vinci Code

"AND THE WORD IS OUT ...IT'S A DUD!"


Is anybody surprised?

The Duh Vinci Code
"AND THE WORD IS OUT ...IT'S A DUD!"

Is anybody surprised?
______________________________________________________

Nope. Not surprised at all. From the first awful trailer (which I only saw because I couldn't get to the remote quickly enough)it looked like a third-rate horror film with ridiculous dialogue. It seems now that they have been getting so defensive of it for more reasons than the disgusting subject matter, but because they know it's a dud.

The lead movie reviewer of the New York Post has just given a 4-star review to DVC, saying everything the opposite of what most of the reviews out of Cannes said yesterday - he thinks it's a 'superb thriller' that is that 'rare summer blockbuster that has brains" (???), that it's the best work of Howard and Hanks since Apollo 12, that it's a movie the cinemagoer won't get out of his mind easily, that it is a great adaptation of an already cinematic book, that even people who have not rad the book will love it - did he see the same film the others have seen?

Let's not count on box-office eggs yet! (This reviewer is American....) SHEESH!

The Duh Vinci Code Review

Let's wait till some of the more respected movie critics review the film before we give up hope of imminent disaster for it. I can't imagine the European reviewers could all be wrong about it.

Here's another review of the DVC from Catholic News Service which provides more specifics.


'Da Vinci Code' draws laughs from journalists at press screening

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

CANNES, France (CNS) -- Toward the end of the movie "The Da Vinci Code," the main character, Robert Langdon, tells his sleuthing partner, Sophie Neveu: "You are the last living descendent of Jesus Christ."

That line, meant to be the dramatic apex of the film, drew laughs from many of the approximately 900 journalists who viewed the film's first press screening May 16 at the Cannes Film Festival.

The derisive laughter, along with widely critical comments from reporters afterward, summed up the Cannes press reaction to the much-heralded launch of the movie. When the credits ran, silence and a few whistles drove home the response.

The movie sticks to most of the book's controversial religious elements, while softening some of the edges.

Directed by Ron Howard and starring Tom Hanks, it faithfully depicts the novel's story of intrepid American "symbologist" Langdon, who follows a coded trail leading to a supposedly age-old secret: that Christ was not necessarily divine, that he was married to Mary Magdalene and that their descendents survive today.

The church is the bad guy in this conspiracy-theory version of Christianity, and is depicted as suppressing all evidence of Jesus' alleged marriage.

But one striking difference about the movie is that it lacks anything resembling the famous "fact" page that prefaced the novel, in which author Dan Brown claimed that "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."

The film doesn't make any claim to accuracy of any kind -- artistic, historical, religious or biblical.

Brown's preface also made a point of saying the Priory of Sion, the novel's organizational keeper of the secret, was real -- even though it was unmasked as a fraud years ago.

The film keeps the Priory of Sion as the protagonist of the mystery, but -- unlike the book -- has Langdon protest at one point that the priory was a known hoax.

Colombia Pictures, in the booklet distributed to journalists at Cannes, noted that while Brown "contends" the Priory of Sion was real, the documents he cited were proven to be forgeries.

All this tends to underline that the movie is a work of fiction, and to deflate some of the historical assertions that irritated critics of the book.

While the movie's portrayal of the Catholic Church is distinctly unflattering, its treatment of the Catholic organization Opus Dei is particularly negative.

The novel placed Opus Dei in the middle of the church's nefarious efforts to keep secret the "truth" about Christ, and had a cruel Opus Dei member commit several murders in the process.

In the book, Opus Dei's fictional leader, Bishop Manuel Aringarosa, is a somewhat unwitting figure in the machinations. In the film, however, the bishop operates with Machiavellian ruthlessness.

The sicko murderer, Silas, is a caricature not only of Opus Dei but of religious sentiment in general. A typical sequence: he crosses himself and says, "God, give me strength"; he pitilessly murders a nun; he prays over her body; he crosses himself; he whips himself bloody as he stands naked in his room; he crosses himself; he phones his superior for further instructions.

Unlike the book, the movie keeps its distance from the Vatican. Instead, unidentified prelates in a sinister "Council of Shadows" pull strings in order to cover up the secret life of Jesus. Their secret meeting room is outfitted with a billiard table.

The film retains several of the claims considered outrageous by many Catholic critics: that the Bible as we know it was collated by the "pagan" emperor Constantine; that alternative gospels recounting the real life of Jesus were suppressed; and that church ritual borrows heavily from pagan mystery religions.

But the film puts these and other claims into the mouth of Leigh Teabing, the story's true villain, and at several points has the hero, Langdon, skeptically questioning these assertions. That too is a change from the book, and adds a veneer of even-handedness to the story.

The movie's historical flashbacks illustrating these supposedly dark chapters of church history were so overdone that they provoked catcalls during the first Cannes screening. The pandemonium-in-vestments version of the Council of Nicea may especially amuse church historians.

Early reviews from the Cannes screening gave the movie decidedly low marks. Its biggest sin, according to many critics, was that it was dull.

The movie was to be formally presented at the festival May 17 and was to open in theaters worldwide two days later.

[I promise after this article I will stop posting DVC items. I couldn't pass this one up.]


'Da Vinci Code' meets with catcalls
Film inspires protest -- and negative reviews

Wednesday, May 17, 2006; Posted: 10:45 a.m. EDT (14:45 GMT)

(CNN) -- The long-awaited movie version of Dan Brown's best-seller "The Da Vinci Code" is entering the world to disapproval.

The opening salvos have come from journalists and movie critics, who screened the film Tuesday night, where it opened the 59th Cannes Film Festival. More trouble is coming from Christian groups in several countries, who are angry with the film's mix of fact and fiction involving Jesus Christ and Roman Catholicism.

At Cannes, one scene during the film, meant to be serious, elicited prolonged laughter from the audience, and when the credits rolled, there was no applause, only a few catcalls and hisses. Things were no better Stateside, where the film screened for critics in New York.

The Hollywood Reporter headlined its review, " 'Da Vinci Code' an unwieldy, bloated puzzle."

"No chemistry exists between the hero and heroine, and motivation remains a troubling sore point," wrote reviewer Kirk Honeycutt, panning Tom Hanks' "remote, even wooden performance." Only co-star Ian McKellen managed to avoid criticism.

Time magazine's Richard Corliss also takes digs at Hanks and director Ron Howard. The latter "seems propelled more out of duty than love for the project," Corliss wrote, while Hanks "seems to sleepwalk through the part."

Corliss, however, admires the film for not shying away from the book's more controversial assertions: "Beneath the chases and crashes, the chalices and cilices [hair shirts], it denies Jesus' divinity. ... And further still: the film challenges the belligerence that too often adheres to religious believers, the wars and atrocities perpetrated in His name."

For those who haven't read the book, "The Da Vinci Code" storyline proposes Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married, had a child, and that a powerful organization linked to the Church conspired to commit murder to keep it secret.

Criticism by Opus Dei
Those assertions are exactly the fuel that is igniting protests by Christian groups, some of which have already criticized the book.

Opus Dei, an influential Catholic organization that is one of "The Da Vinci Code's" villains, asked for a disclaimer to be added to the film. None was forthcoming.

On the Opus Dei Web site, the organization addresses the claims in the novel and movie, stating " 'The Da Vinci Code's' depiction of Opus Dei is inaccurate, both in the overall impression and in many details, and it would be irresponsible to form any opinion of Opus Dei based on 'The Da Vinci Code.'

"Those who do further research and exercise critical judgment will discover that assertions made in 'The Da Vinci Code' about Jesus Christ, Mary Magdalene, and Church history lack support among reputable scholars," the Web site statement said.

Although the leader of the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI, has not voiced an opinion either way on the novel or the film, many Catholic Church officials have.

"I'm mystified by the popularity of it," said Father Joseph DiNoia, a Vatican official during an interview with CNN's Alessio Vinci.

"It has to do with the harm it does to people's faith, not the harm that it does to the [Catholic Church's] public image. It's something a lot more important."

Monsignor Robert Sarno, also a Vatican official, told Vinci he did not see the storyline as an attack on the Church.

"I just think it has been given a lot more truth value and faith value than it has," he said. "I just read it as an entertaining novel."

Author Brown himself does not purport that the novel or movie are historical or theological fact on "The Da Vinci Code's" Web site.

"This book is not anti-anything," he writes on the site. "It's a novel. I wrote this story in an effort to explore certain aspects of Christian history that interest me.

"The vast majority of devout Christians understand this fact and consider 'The Da Vinci Code' an entertaining story that promotes spiritual discussion and debate."

"If we have offended any Christians I would ask them to forgive us, which seems to be one of the main tenements in the New Testament," actor Paul Bettany, who plays Silas in the film, said with a smile during an interview with CNN's Brooke Anderson at Cannes Tuesday.

Bans, protests, boycotts
Protests were brewing in several countries.

In India, the government Tuesday put a temporary hold on the movie's release because of complaints, The Associated Press reported.

In South Korea, which has 13 million Protestants and 4.6 million Roman Catholics, a court ruled Tuesday that a Christian group's request for an injunction to block screenings lacked merit. The Christian Council of Korea, an umbrella group of 63 South Korean Protestant denominations, said it respected the ruling but would lead a boycott of the movie, which it said defiles the sanctity of Jesus Christ and distorts facts, AP reported.

In mostly Hindu India, which is also home to 18 million Roman Catholics, Joseph Dias, head of the Catholic Secular Forum, began a hunger strike in downtown Mumbai and said other people were joining him.

"We want the movie to be banned," he said.

The film had been set for release in India on Friday and had already been cleared by the national censor board. But Information and Broadcasting Minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi said he put a temporary hold on the movie after receiving more than 200 complaints.

In Thailand, Columbia Pictures has appealed a ruling by government censors to cut the final 10 minutes of "The Da Vinci Code," police said, after Thai church leaders complained the film's content was insulting.

Philippine censors approved an adult rating for the movie but stopped short of rating it "X" because "it does not constitute a clear, express or direct attack on the Catholic church or religion" and does not libel or defame any person.

The movie-review panel's chairwoman, Marissa Laguardia, told The Associated Press that the movie would be a "test of faith" for many people in the predominantly Roman Catholic Philippines.

The National Council of Churches in Singapore, which also had requested a ban, planned lectures to refute aspects of the film and the book on which it is based. The censorship board gave the movie an NC16 rating, barring viewers under 16, arguing that "only a mature audience will be able to discern and differentiate between fact and fiction."

Also, while not planning a protest or boycott, members of the National Organization for Albinism and Hypopigmentation expressed unhappiness with the film's heavy, a monk-assassin, being an albino, as described in the book.

Michael McGowan, an albino who heads the organization, said "The Da Vinci Code" will be the 68th movie since 1960 to feature an evil albino. He said the group aims to use the movie's popularity to raise awareness about the realities of albinism. People with albinism have little or no pigmentation in their skin, eyes and hair.

After making its print debut in 2003, "The DaVinci Code" has since sold more than 60.5 million copies and has been translated into 44 languages.

IT'S NOT THE MOVIE CRITICS AND REVIEWERS I WORRY ABOUT - AFTER ALL, THEY'RE A MINUTE DROP IN THE DVC OCEAN. IT'S THE MOVIEGOERS...

McKellen today on the Morning Show said that the Bible, not DVC, should have a 'fiction' disclaimer.

Now he has insulted his Jewish and Christian audience, is he going to start on the Muslims, then the Buddhists, etc? He must think that only atheists put all those dollars in his pocket. Or maybe he just doesn't care.

(There isn't a smiley to convey what I am feeling right now).

www.americanpapist.com/blog.html

Music: "(There isn't a smiley to convey what I am feeling right now)."




I don't think smileys are genetically capable of conveying anger. Frownies are. Likewise, McKellen, in his current lifestyle, isn't capable of appreciating anything at all about religion.

Thanks, Benefan. I don't know if I needed a frownie, a growlie or just an eye-rollie ? We must forgive.
He's one more to add to the prayer list. It's getting quite long.

Here's a translation from an item in ZENIT's Italian service
(still don't understand why with the news protagonist being an English-speaking priest, the story does not appear in the English service). A new angle altogether from the other film reviews...
----------------------------------------------------------------

ROME, 17 May 2006 (ZENIT.org). For Fr Peter Malone, MSC, president of the Catholic world organization for communications, SIGNIS, the film taken from the Dan Brown novel is a sort of ”Gnostic pulp fiction."

“The first thing to say about the film is that it is definitely superior to be book,” Malone said in a statement sent to ZENIT, referring to how the film is toned down compared to the novel.

“One must say that the scriptwriter Akiva Goldsman and the producers were far more careful to minimize controversies compared to Brown,” he adds. In the course of the film, he points out, “there are statements that opinions remain opinions only and that there are always other possibilities to consider.”

As to the Opus Dei,which is specially targeted by the novel, the scenario shows that its Bishop “is part of a hidden secret group within the Church which wishes to renew the faith and promote its rigid practice to take the place of cafeteria Catholicism.”

According to Malone, “if there is any group that should feel itself targeted by the movie, they would be represented by the Lefebvrists.”

The SIGNIS president maintains that “it is impossible to review the film simply as a film, because the book (more than 40 million copies sold) and the reactions pro and con have become a worldwide phenomenon.”

“It’s a story about ‘what would have happened if…’ rather than ‘what did happen,” he observed.

Even if “directors and writers do it all the time – think of films on Joan of Arc and Francis of Assisi – interpreting the lives of the saints through contemporary eyes and therefore rewriting history to suit that view, they do not play loose with documents like the cited Gospel of Phillip which was written at least 200 years after Christ.”

As to the reaction of the filmgoers, Fr. Malone, thinking above all of those who have read and appreciated the book, thinks that the film “will do well” with them because "it follows the plot faithfully even if it modifies some claims.”

“But for those who read the book and thought it badly written, the film will reinforce their view,” he added.

“Tom Hanks is a good Robert Langdon (and does not have to do as much gymnastics as he does in the book), but it is one of his most boring performances, and makes a lot of solemn speeches with a decidedly air.”

Ian McKellen, on the other hand, appears to be very amused to play Sir Leigh Teabing. “It is he who makes most of the mistaken statements about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, the Church, on the role of the Priory of Sion. It is hoped the public will think all these statements cannot be true because they are made on the screen by a villainous character whom you would not trust.”

In conclusion, Fr. Malone points out that “right at the start, Robert Langdon reminds us that when we look at a painting, we see what we want to see and do not see what we don’t want to see. Exactly.”

SIGNIS is a non-governmental organization with members in 140 nations and as a “world Catholic association for communications,” these members are professionals in radio, television, film, video, Internet and new information technologies.

SIGNIS is a consulting member in UNESCO, the Economic and Social Council of the UN, and the Council of Europe. It is recognized by the Vatican as a Catholic organization, with its headquarters in Brussels.

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 18/05/2006 2.00]

I loved him as Gandalf, I don't like him as Ian McKellen... sorry!

[Modificato da .Imladris. 18/05/2006 2.03]

Avvenire, the daily newspaper of the Italian bishops' conference, came out today with the following editorial on DVC, here int ranslation.
--------------------------------------------------------------

THE CODE OF NONSENSE:
ACTIVATING CRITICAL AWARENESS

By Giuseppe Savagnone

Can a bad book produce unexpectedly positive results? It is a question asked today amid a renewal of interest – on the wave of the singular success of DVC – in problems that have long been consigned to oblivion such as the authenticity and historicity of the Gospels.

Critics and commentators of proven ‘laicity' agree that Dan Brown’s book is terrible from the literary point of view, even setting aside any concern on religious grounds. The situation is worsened by the fact that the work mixes reality and fantasy in a very confused manner – that’s a euphemism for truth and lies – which lends a veneer of verisimilitude to every sort of historical nonsense that is served up. And so, many readers have remained impressed by the peremptory pseudo-scientific statements placed in the mouths of this or that character.

For the benefit of such readers, let us recall some facts.

In the first place, it is not true that in 325, with the Council of Nicaea, “Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible,” while “the old gospels were banned, commandeered and burned.”

All serious historians – many of whom are non-believers and even extreme critics of Christianity – acknowledge that the gospels which we have were written a few decades after the death of Jesus, at least 250 years before Constantine.

Besides, it is not true that the apocryphal gospels, in particular the Gnostic texts, are more reliable than the canonical gospels. E. P. Sanders, an absolutely “laicist” historian, writes that in many points the apocrypha strongly contradict the earlier Christian readings.

“I share the view prevalent among scholars that few, very few, of the apocryphal gospels could date back to the time of Jesus. They are all legendary and mythological.” He concludes: “It is to the four canonical gospels that we must turn to in order to find the traces of the historical Jesus.”

And in these Gospels there is not a trace of the supposed primacy given to the Magdalene by Christ, nor that she was “of royal descent”, much less of a supposed marriage between them which, according to Brown, was intended to forge an alliance between two princely houses and take over power in Israel!

As for the allegation that the Magdalene had a daughter with Jesus whom she brought to France, where this daughter gave rise to the Merovingian dynasty, we are faced with one of those fantasies about which one can only laugh it out of consideration.

In the same way one is forced to laugh out loud, as have all the historians of the Middle Ages, at the thesis that the Crusades were carried out to destroy all evidence of Jesus’s descendants.

So what good can come out of a text with such nonsense? Here comes the surprise. For some, reading the book provided the first opportunity to examine traditional statements that had been taken for granted because of habit. Perrsons who were heretofore never interested in the least about religious facts, particularly the Gospels, have started to ask questions and to look for answers by reading and boning up on information.

We might as well say it: instead of the secrets of the Holy Grail, this book has brought to light the abysmal ignorance of the public. A great deficit of information, but even of intellectual formation, has become obvious and calls for urgent intervention to be filled up at least in part.

As believers we are finally forced to take note that a faith without critical awareness risks being betrayed into becoming a somnolent practice, easly vulnerable to provocations, even the most superficial ones, like DVC. But precisely because of this, new perspectives also open up for a more critical approach to Christian tradition, overcoming the easy temptation to take everything for granted.

Then let a villainous challenge like Dan Brown’s come forth! Even if it would be intelligent not to augment the business towards which the author and the film producers inexorably aim for.

As for the Catholic world, it is important that it does not pretend this is nothing serious nor should it retreat behind its own offended reaction, but it should know how to interpret the sense of defending the faith as a stimulus to intelligent and effective dissension, to recover its own creativity and rediscover, as Cardinal Ruini expressed it, “the attraction of truth.”

God, according to an old saying, can write straight even on crooked lines.

Iran president to send letter to Pope - paper

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is writing a letter to Pope Benedict, following an unprecedented letter to U.S. President George W. Bush earlier this month, a newspaper said on Thursday.

"President Ahmadinjad's second letter is for Pope Benedict and will be sent in the next days," Jomhuri-ye Eslami newspaper, which is close to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, quoted unnamed sources as saying.

The newspaper gave no details of the letter's content. Iranian officials were not available to comment.

In the first direct communication between the two countries' presidents for more than two decades, Ahmadinejad wrote a long missive to Bush this month in which he questioned his commitment to Christian values and criticised U.S. foreign policy.

Some Iranian analysts and Western diplomats interpreted the letter as a veiled offer to open talks with Washington on the dispute over Iran's nuclear programme.

But Washington has said it has no intention of holding direct talks with Iran on the issue.

Britain, France and Germany, the European Union's three biggest powers, plan to offer Iran a package of incentives to try to induce Tehran to freeze a uranium enrichment programme which the West suspects could be used to make atomic bombs.

Ahamdinejad has ruled out halting nuclear fuel work in return for incentives, saying the Europeans were offering "candy for gold".

Here's an amusing little piece for those who are still in DVC mode:

www.godspy.com/reviews/My-Lunch-with-an-Old-Friend-of-Dan-Brown-by-John-Zm...

This man has been laughing his way to the bank for three year now and will be doing so for a long time to come!

05.19.06 catholicidigress says:
You know i was just looking at the picture of Dan Brown (in this article) and i really think he looks a bit like a lizard.. yes it's uncanny i know! I heard from a few people talking about this movie ..implying my beliefs are on questionable ground and after reading this cute article i came up with a good response when asked if i'm going to see it: 'I never really got into those planet of the apes movies'

Eeheheheheh! Very good, Teresa. I'm going to remember the Planet of the Apes line next time I get asked if I am seeing the movie.

I like the lizard analogy. St Teresa of Avila talks about lizards in the early 'mansions' of the spiritual life. These refer to the stuff which keeps us back from progressing in prayer. So lizard is apt, because thinking about what Dan Brown has said in his 'novel' makes me angry, and one step away from losing charity.

I watched a tape on DVC last night. Our parish priest lent it to my daughter. It's a series of four programmes, made in the USA by a Christian group. I learned rather more about what that book is saying as I haven't read it. I find it hard to understand how people can swallow such piffle. It goes to show that to fool the masses, the bigger the lie, the more it seems to be believed. In this case, it helps enormously to have no knowledge of early history.

Ian McKellen will probably never say a word against Muslims - even though Islamic countries are far more severe with practising homosexuals than Christian ones. I think we can guess at the real reason why he doesn't care for the Bible though!!

[How is this different from becoming a nun?]


New role for Catholic women...with a catch

By Sarah Price
The Sydney Morning Herald
May 21, 2006

THE Catholic Church will give greater leadership and ministry roles to women on the proviso they take a vow of celibacy.

Bishop David Walker, from the Diocese of Broken Bay, has created the scheme, which stops short of ordaining women.

When it is launched next year, it will create a new vocation in which women will take a vow of celibacy and be consecrated ministers to help in the pastoral care mission within the diocese.

While the scheme will also be open to men, the emphasis will be on formally recognising women in greater ministry roles within the diocese.

Bishop Walker emphasised that the move was not a precursor to the ordination of women as deacons or priests. "This is a legitimate way of women entering in a full-time way into the Church," Bishop Walker said.

But Catholic author and historian Paul Collins said it could develop into an ordained deaconate of women.

"I see this as a very good first step, but it shouldn't be seen as anything other than a first step," Mr Collins said.

Bernice Moore, NSW convenor of Women and the Australian Catholic Church, an organisation that agitates for greater inclusiveness in the Church, said she welcomed the scheme.

"I see this whole proposal as positive action to include women in the life and leadership of the Catholic community," she said. "The path is made by walking and this is definitely a step on the path of being a more inclusive church and to using the gifts of all of us."

Maree Kennedy, a member of WATAC, said she saw this as a step in the right direction. "But I think it's a very slow step in something that needs to be moving a bit faster," the mother-of-two said.

Bishop Walker said the consecrated ministers would be a group of lay people in ministry but would not be ordained. They would also receive an agreed stipend.

"They'd be able to do anything that is available to the lay faithful," Bishop Walker said. "The difference is it would be a full-time commitment and the whole way of life would be geared to service."

Those who take up the vocation would be required to take a vow of celibacy, but not poverty.

"Celibacy is really a single way of life that's directed towards living the gospel and living a way of life," Bishop Walker said.

"People can only get so much done because of family or other commitments."

Those wanting to take part would make a commitment for a year, which would then be renewed for three years, during which they would undertake spiritual and theological study at the diocese's college, the Broken Bay Institute

Then they could make a five-year commitment, and another five-year commitment or a permanent commitment.

Bishop Walker said the consecrated ministers would ultimately be sharing in the "pastoral care mission of the bishop".

"Their focus would be essentially spiritual," he said.

[Modificato da benefan 20/05/2006 16.49]