Is Angels & Demons anti-Catholic?

Oy! You have got to be kidding me... It is a work of FICTION!!!!!!!!!!

I think people like Donohue are the real anti-catholics.

I AM CATHOLIC AND I LOVED THE BOOK AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE MOVIE.
IT'S FICTION AND MOVIES ARE TO AMUSE AND ENTERTAIN US. LIFE IS ABOUT CHOICES.....YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH THE MOVIE OR READ THE BOOK, IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE.

I have not read the book nor seen the film, nor will I. But i take Michael Paulson's word on it. All the media, including the globe, this book and this film, try the tried and true tactic of 'divide and conquer.' That is, they slime the Church's hierarchy, but say nice things about the laity and the content of the faith. What they fail to recognize is that the hierarchy is an essential, non-negotiable part of the Church, so if you vilify the hierarcy, you are ipso facto slandering both the laity and the content of the faith. what these critics want is a hierarchy which kowtows to them, rather than bowing to Jesus Christ, and the faith family he founded, the Church. They want a congregationalist style leadership, which often makes politically correct statements, lest its ministers be fired.

I'm Catholic but I loved this book. It's a story like thousands of others. There are good guys and bad guys on both sides and with different beliefs.
Reading a fictional piece will not change my beliefs. I enjoyed this book an I'm looking forward to the new one in the fall.

tell the Catholics to get over themselves. the truth is the truth and sometimes it hurts. i've read the book maybye four times and i haven't lost or gained any more or less respect for the church. now those priets, that's something they should worry about.

William Donahue should just go off himself already. Save some oxygen for the rest of us!

religion is out-dated. It was beneficial to people when life was horrible and it gave them something to look forward to in death. You can be a good person without believing in a fake godly being

Would an anti-gay work of fiction be OK?

"major elements of the Catholic Church's hierarchy are depicted as secretive, violent, conspiratorial, and, of course, anti-science"

Given the way in which Popes are elected, the view of the Church against contraception (and condom distribution in places like Africa), as well as their behavior during the Middle Ages, in addition to the opposition to stem cell research and other positions the Catholic Church takes, about the only word in that statement that's untrue in modern times is "violent", although the Catholic Church certainly has a history of violence (the Crusades, Inquisition, conquest of the New World), too.

are thrillers set in colleges anti-college?
Is "Friday the 13th" really an anti-camping movie?
Was "JAWS" an anti-beach community movie?

Any work of fiction is ok, Bob, That is what fiction means. The church is overly sensitive to the theology of the authors who claim no fidelity to catholic theology. Except for the less violent reaction, how much different is the church's reaction to this different from the Islamic clergy and its reaction to "Satanic Verses" by Salman Rushdie. Is every work of fiction to be vetted (before puclication) by whatever church and presumably philosophy it uses within its text? How about works that are approved by the church but are seen as attacks by others?

If you look carefully at William Donahue's stained teeth when he smiles, you can see the outline of the Last Supper. It's a MIRACLE!!

Bob - your's is the best post in weeks on these Boards... and says it all.

What I found when I spoke with many friends and relatives after reading the DaVinci Code was that they actually believed the book was fact, and that was a little overwhelming to me. Even when I argued it was just a fictional novel, they insisted it was true. So, I guess they will believe this also. But to be fair, angels and demons are part of almost all religious faiths, there is no ownership by the Roman Catholic church. So, go to the movie, enjoy watching it, and maybe a percentage will even be donated to various religions. Hope so...it would be a nice gesture.

Bob: Why should any hierarchical non-tax-paying institution get a free pass from criticism? When being gay obviates the need to pay taxes, then maybe you can equate the two.

"I have not read the book nor seen the film, nor will I. But i take Michael Paulson's word on it. "

Gaudete: I encourage you to think for yourself for a change. See the movie or read the book, then your opinion will mean something.

K,

Please be careful when discussing the Church's position. the Catholic Church and many others are against EMBRYONIC stem cell research not stem cell research.

Also please google The real history of the Crusades and The Truth about the Spanish Inquisition both articles by Thomas F. Madden. You may nor agree but I'm sure you would want to research other historical based opinions on these two subjects.

Peace and Blessings

It's a movie, if you don't like it, don't see it.

Although I didn't read or see either of the books it is my understanding that the book tries to imply Jesus is not God. I may be wrong about this. Although they say it's fiction it's clear the book is based on Jesus and to some degree the Catholic Church. The way I see it as a devout Catholic who knows Jesus is God is this. If someone wrote a fictional novel but it was obviously based on say a family member and incorrectly potrayed them as say a child molestor. If this was about your family member would you attend and say well it's only fiction. I would not and would be generally upset. If this book implies that Jesus is not God for me that is a much more serious offense then anything that could be said about any human.

Bob2,

So is what your saying is a movie can't be written against homosexuality because gay people are taxed??

Dan Brown insisted, in the front pages of "DaVinci Code," that it was based on fact.

He also claims various "facts" in "Angels and Demons" are true--he says such stupid things as, "Christians got holy communion from the Aztecs" and "Christians got the name for 'Satan' from the Islamic language, which they considered dirty."

Brown can't tell fact from fiction.

First of all, of course the movie is fiction. If they only presented the truth about the Catholic church then they wouldn't be making this movie. But just because it's fiction, does that mean it can't be offensive? If I made a movie about your life and totally fabricated stories of you doing disgusting things, would you not be offended? I just don't get people's logic... or complete lack thereof.

The book was really stupid. But, is not anti-catholic; just a silly thriller.

K,
You obviously take the leftist propaganda as infallible proof, so how are you different from a person of faith? And everyone knows that works of fiction, e.g., Uncle Tom's Cabin, are vehicles for the author to give their take on society, while hiding behind thin disguises of names, places, dates, etc.

Bob, your problem with churches having tax exemption has been true since the time of this nation's founding. If you have a problem with that, take it up with
the Founders, i.e., go for a constitutional amendment. Plus, it is not only hierarchical churches that have tax exemption, it is also liberal, congregationalist churches.

Proud2bcatholic:
No. I'm saying that equating the two is ridiculous. Catholicism has an internationally protected status due to numbers and influence for the past 2000 years. When the Catholic church, in today's America, is forced to suppress its true identity, institutionally discriminated against, its members regularly beaten up for being what they are and prevented from marrying their chosen partner, and taxed for that privilege, then perhaps a comparison may be appropriate.

Ron Howard may not consider the film anti-catholic, but the fact that it was authored by Dan Brown is proof of the contrary. Brown in notoriously anti-Catholic. Also according to the New York Times, John Calley, co-producer with Brian Grazer of both ‘The Da Vinci Code’ and ‘Angels & Demons,’ said that the former movie was ‘conservatively anti-Catholic. He also said that Grazer wants ‘Angels & Demons’ to be ‘less reverential’ than ‘The Da Vinci Code. That is pretty convincing evidence of the anti-catholicism of these books and films.

Also, the Canadian priest mentioned in the article was Fr. Bernard O'Connor. He has been quoted as saying: “A person self-described as a ‘production official,’ said that Brown spoke for the majority of those working on the movie when he said, ‘Like most of us, he [Brown] often says that he would do anything to demolish that detestable institution, the Catholic Church. He credited the media for the ‘demise’ of the Church. This same person opined that the Catholic Church ‘is humanity’s chief enemy,’ adding that this sentiment is reflective of those in Hollywood. " Ron Howard is only fooling himself.

The movie and the books are a complete work of fiction. But the problem is that Brown continues to claim that the outlandish conspiracies in the movie are based on fact.

Also judging by the comments on this board, the only form of bigotry still tolerated by the politcally correct crowd is bigotry against the Church.

If it's such fiction, why do some people love that it discredits the Church so much? JUST BECAUSE it's fiction? Dan Brown saying it's a "fact" that the Church killed the Illumaniti, calls into serious question whether this is written AS FICTION.

On one level, I think Ron Howard could very easily be playing the part of the outwardly congenial front man for Dan Brown's relentlessly deconstructionist attitudes towards Catholicism, masquerading under the title of "fiction" (meanwhile Brown, in interviews, attests to their "accuracy" in addition to the very first page of the Code stating "Facts." All of the contents of the books can, and have been, easily debunked by serious scholarship and historical record.

If the Code is any guide as to public discussion and reaction, many thoughtful people tend instinctively to believe:

- what Brown is saying is surely true
- and what the Church or her defenders say, is surely false.

I remember people saying to me at the time of the Code, "It's fiction but some parts are true....what parts?...I don't know...but I know they're there." Therein lies the real damaging influence of these books and movies, regardless of any critical inquiry.

As for the 2 pieces by Howard and Donahue, Howard stumbles on his own denial by saying that he and his movie do not regard the Church as "anti-reason" as Donahuge charges, but then concludes that "Faith is believing without seeing" -- whoops, Ron, your true colors are shown a bit. Faith and Reason is Catholicism, Ron, not just Faith.

The difference between Gone with the Wind, Ben Hur etc that Howard references in his Huffington post is that these movies weren't trying to discredit anyone or anything. Howard admitted in the interview extras for Frost/Nixon that he wanted the film to be a subtle criticism of the previous 8 years, it seems entirely possible that he wishes this to do the same against the Church with this film.

If this was mispresenting or "fictionalizing" some other faiths, the outcry would be huge and there wouldn't this talk of "It's just fiction."

Hopefully, Angels & Demons will go down as the Da Vinci Code did: an apparently monstrously bad movie. But something tells me Howard/Hanks and Co. are going to make proper changes so this one so it comes off as a better film than the Code.

All rational thought is by definition anti-Catholic.

proud2bcatholic wrote "The way I see it as a devout Catholic who knows Jesus is God"

While I admire your blind faith and devotion, it is a bit silly to say that you 'know' this. No one knows this, and no one ever will. Faith can be described in the belief of something, without proof, and that describes your faith. I am more of a believer in science, but will never claim I 'know' that evolution is absolute truth. The main difference is that science has documentation supporting the notion of evolution, while you have no facts backing up your 'knowing' that Jesus is God.

And please stop comparing this tale to a movie badly representing a family member. Jesus neither/nor God are a member of your family, and you would not react the same as you are now. At least I hope you would have more emotion if a child of yours or spouse was portrayed in a poor manner.

Face it, all stories about Jesus are old tales, and everyone has different versions of them. That's why some parts of the bible contradict themselves. That's what happens over time when stories are told by word of mouth, they change with every person who retells them. Jesus is one of the most told stories in the history of mankind, and it's natural for people to have different beliefs based on what they read/research.

If you have proof that Jesus is indeed God, I hope you would show the world that knowledge so we can all enjoy this revelation. People have been waiting thousands of years for that information. Until then, stop confusing faith with fact.

Just because something is fiction does not mean it can't be insulting. For instance, fiction may rely on stereotype to advance character or plot. Stereotype can be offensive. I only wish that we could get over the reverence for the Catholic Church and especially its hierarchy. Sorry folks but the Vatican signed off on pedophiles and sustained a decades long scandal that exposed thousand of children to unspeakable experiences. How are these people not in jail?

well both do exist after all its Christianity the Howard view misses big time> He assumes Catholic because Catholic criticism but Catholic Vatican protects Christianity

The movie, like religion, is all fiction. Stories made up to entertain, scare, form policy. Do your homework, it's all fiction people...

William Donohue remains a pathetic extremist, living in a world that just won't obey and worship him. Poor Bill - he is, after all, one of the persecuted Catholics. I understand that, for example, Catholics can't get married in most states, and their marriages don't even have to be recognized by state authorities...wait, maybe that's not Catholics...maybe it's some other group of people...perhaps some group targeted by the so-very-persecuted Mr. Donohue. As has been stated above, if you don't want to read the book or see the movie, then don't. What the hell is the big deal, beyond a need to feel persecuted? And for those of you who are Catholic - guys like Donohue and Ray Flynn do you no favors. They tar all of you with the brush of their own hatreds and bitterness.

Was The Godfather "anti-Italian"? Perhaps some Italians think so, but most of the world just saw it as a thriller. In "True Lies", Ah-nold Schwartzegoverner shoots the main guy who is of middle eastern heritage, so is True Lies "anti-Arab" or even anti-Islam? I don't think the director of those movies "hated" any of the people they showed in a bad light to tell their story and I think that's the same case here.

Let's face it, to most people Catholism (sp?) or any "big" religion is shrouded somewhat in mystery, with interesting beliefs and traditions that come from a time most of us don't remember. There is inherent mystery and intrigue there, a perfect backdrop for a book or a movie like this. Plus it's a big, popular religion. Nobody is writing this book about Wiccan's or some other "small" religion. (plus, the catholics don't threaten to kill anyone if their religion is talked about in any slightly negative way - which is why they aren't making any movies where Islam is questioned... those guys would completely freak, even worse than this Donahue guy...)

Thinkforyourself,

Suppose i challenged you to read a conservative book which i chose, would you? I doubt it. There are only so many hours in the day, why pollute one's mind with garbahhge? Plus, we are discussing Paulson's blog comment here, not so much the book itself.

Think for yourself adds: "Gaudete: I encourage you to think for yourself for a change." There's the pot calling the kettle black. How do we know that you "think for yourself," when your comments seem like parroting left wing dogma?

Donahue: classic self-loather. Poor kid. Hope he makes peace with himself soon.

Anything that's 100 per cent not pro Catholic is considered anti Catholic by some people.

It's FICTION. Once again some Church members display the weakness of their "faith" by being so threatened by something so inconsequential.

And Bob, there is fiction where gay people are the villains. There is fiction where blacks, women, etc are the villains. Get over it.

How can a work of fiction possible smear an institution which during it's entire history has done a pretty darn competent smear job all on its own?

Dear BC, doesn't Brown have the Vatican in Rome...or should it be on Pluto...the ex Planet of which you are a member?

The church doesnt like it? That means I will - sign me up to see this movie.

Brown's "Angels and Demons" is crude and rather silly. Of course it's anti Catholic. Anti is what sells and Mr. Brown has made a lot of money. The Church will be around long after the book, the movie and Mr. Brown have turned to dust.

So what if it is? If you don't like it then don't watch it. Please. Catholic is not exactly where it's at these days people.

The Dan Brown books are good as far as thrillers go. What bothers me are all the people that actually believed that the things Dan Brown wrote were based in fact. Some people now believe that Leonardo Da Vinci was actually there at the last supper. That's what is so stupid. You have to be able to sort out the real thing. The real things are in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Bible = Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth.

How much is Donohue being paid by the Movie producers to concoct this faux outrage? Its the same tired plot every time someone makes a movie about some religion or other. Some paid shill (Donohue in this case) makes a big stink, the movie gets free press, goes on to be a huge hit and everyone goes happy and a little bit richer. It happened with DaVinci Code, Passion of the Christ and all other movies with paid talking heads telling people to boycott.

I'd be curious to see how this movie would be received:

"major elements of the gay-rights movement hierarchy are depicted as secretive, violent, conspiratorial, and, of course, anti-science"

"major elements of the Catholic Church's hierarchy are depicted as secretive, violent, conspiratorial, and, of course, anti-science". True enough. Look at the History of The Church. Look at the way they handled the molestation charges. Look at the way they embrace Mel Gibson and his extreme version of Catholicism and ignore his divorce. Maybe the truth is anti-Catholic??

The book was an entertaining and interesting work of fiction. The Vatican is a secretive and mysterious place. The Church is far from perfect and I love it.

It's one of the best books that I have read in years. It got me into reading more of Dan Brown's books. And to reiterate what many people have posted here, it is a novel. But one line at the beginning of this article, "major elements of the Catholic Church's hierarchy are depicted as secretive, violent, conspiratorial, and, of course, anti-science" speaks volumes about the church. The church is many things and this list is but a part of church history.

Although I may be christian, you have to admit some of the critisism here crossed the line. I believe that people that don't like the book or movie just ignore it and keep living life in peace, and those who wish to read or see the movie to just do it! It's FICTION! If people don't believe in christianity then don't, but please respect it. I don't mind at all about the book or the movie, I'm actually thinking of seeing the movie, but the author did make a few mistakes here and there when writting the novel...so I'm not so sure.
What ticks me off more than anything is that a friend of mine actually believes EVERYTHING the book says and then she calls me closed minded, although I listen to her, because I don't really believe all of it. I want FACTS, and the facts that support those facts, and she hasn't given me any -at least not yet- so I just don't believe everything she say. There's something called being open minded and something called just being plain GULLIBLE...
And one more thing, I know that the Church has done unacceptable things, but that doesn't mean were still the same as before. I admit that some things were really wrong, although that doesn't give any wright to ANYONE to insult what others believe in.
Please respect my believes!

You atheists just can't pass up an opportunity to bash Catholics.

Hey, why don't you take a page from your own book and leave those who do believe in a deity alone. I'm sick of your "I'm too smart for those fairy tales" lines.

I don't care what you believe but leave the other 85% of us alone. And by the way, you are not that smart. Artistotle, Locke, Jefferson, and Kierkegaard were all religious. I guess you must be smarter than them?

given all of the groups and peoples the catholic church has been anti over the years, who cares. if the novel is, in fact, anti-catholic, take a dose of your own medicine.

"Also judging by the comments on this board, the only form of bigotry still tolerated by the politcally correct crowd is bigotry against the Church."
Posted by Rob A April 21, 09 04:10 PM

Whine, whine, whine. Let's see, Rob, a number of people here have mentioned things such as the church's rather bloody history and it's disgraceful aiding and abetting of pedophile priests. These are facts. So explain to the class how the recitation of historical fact constitutes bigotry. Oh, and the "politically correct crowd"? Just curious, Rob, good right winger that you are and all. How did you see those who criticized your boy Bush while he was in office? Weren't you people the politically correct crowd then, what with labeling everyone who disagreed with you as traitors, un-American, and the rest of the Limbaugh litany? And as a hardline Catholic, you seem to maintain your own version of political correctness, much in accordance with people like Donohue. But keep telling us how we're all coming after you and the rest of the so-very-persecuted.

hey P2bC ... good to see you here... I still have a post from you from a previous board, in a window to respond to...I will try to do so soon... reality has been a bit insane recently.

By the way... Jesus of Nazareth was not divine, is not god. He was a rabbi, conservative, attempting to reform Judaism and remove corruption. I believe that if he saw what has been wrought in his name he would be offended and seriously perturbed.

Anything wrong with being anti Catholic Dogma? The truth that the majority of clear-minded people know is that the Catholic Church is based on rigid dogma that simply does not hold up. Open mindedness constantly gets shut down by cries of "faith" in questioning Catholicism. To keep yelling "anti Catholic" any time someone challenges this is tiresome, to say the least.

"Faith and Reason is Catholicism, Ron, not just Faith."
Posted by Justin April 21, 09 04:14 PM

Where is Reason, Justin? This hierarchy's Catholicism is not about Reason - it's about obedience to a group of self-described "authorities". They call it "Faith", but it's really blind obedience.

I am a Catholic and I found the book so far out that I laughed out loud while reading it.

We should all be able to laugh at ourselves once in awhile.

I will add that while I don't follow Opeus Dei, I thought "DaVinci Code" gave it a bad rap.

The bottom line is that the book is fiction. Like any good novel it takes a base in fact and creates fictitious portions. For instance, it goes through the process used to select a Pope. This is fact. He then creates people, gives them thoughts, actions, motivations. Within the context of the process he creates a drama, one which could actually happen, and one which may have in some ways, at some point over the centuries. Maybe some motivation he ascribed to one person actually moved a person 1200 years ago. Again, like a good novelist, Brown created things, stories, plots, subplots and events, but with a basis in a real framework and that that are not impossible. This does not, however, make the story other than fiction. His stories are also forulaic. Either way, a good read... You should try them, gaudette.

Has there ever been a more ludicrous defense than the "it is only fiction" defense put out here? By definition, any smear is based on innuendo, half-lies and/or outright lies. That is, all smears are fiction.

The "reason over faith" and "We believe only in hard facts" posters are hilarious on this one. How can that crowd intellectually be defending Howard and Brown whose defense in this article is "its fiction, we made it up"?

Thank you to all the gay bigots who by their postings expose that anti-Catholic bigotry is a cancer sadly entrenched in that community. The gay community should acknowledge the bigotry in its midst (Act Up, etc.) and publicly disown it. What happened to Miss California recently at the hands of these intolerant leftists should also give pause to all who hold dear our freedoms. Why is there no responsible gay community leadership taking on these intolerant bigots in their midst?

Donahue heads up the beyond the pale nutter arm of the Catholic church. He has been a guest speaker at a past creationist/fundie conferences and gets on quite well with them. Every Xmas he puts on his tinfoil santa hat and imagines all sorts of 'attacks' on Xmas and Catholics.

He is merely just another cranky white curmudgeon, another legend in his own mind, who thinks his faith in JC as son of God, the Bible is inerrant word of God, etc. etc., gives him divine license to hate people, Jews in particular, like fellow anti semite Mel Gibson, who he has an especiallly soft spot for. Google this guy and see for yourself. Merely another poster boy exposing the mental ebola virus of religious fundamentalism. Thanks for sharing your Catholic religion with us, pal. Now go back under your rock marked "Do not open til Xmas" !

Dave (#29): Would you say, "Now that we know that the Earth orbits the Sun..."? Your comment about religious knowledge--supported best by certain claims of the Enlightenment, but undermined both by older and more recent philosophical thinking--is most revelatory of the current, deep prejudice against religion in favor of secularism.

Being that the Vatican and dioceses were infiltrated and taken over by the Illuminati (P2, B'nai Br'th, etc.) does not surprise that this movie depicts what has already happened. In fact, after the death (assassination) of Pope Pius XII in October 1958, the Vatican was completely subverted by this enemy in order to call a false council designed to favor the enemy of the Church. During the Conclave, there was a picture in the Houston Post which had an atomic bomb and on the otherside of the page a picture of the arrivals at the Conclave.

Atheists=Hypocrites

You want atheists to leave YOU alone. Give me a break! If you christians left everyone alone the world would be a lot better place. Nearly every weekend, some religious nut, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Catholic, Baptist, etc I've gotten them all, shows up at my door to try to spread their claptrap. They're all over the TV and radio.

Organized christian religion crying persecution is the biggest lie ever perpetrated on the human race, except for maybe the religion itself

"By definition, any smear is based on innuendo, half-lies and/or outright lies. That is, all smears are fiction."

I bet Judas would agree with you whole-heartedly.

I remember the uproar when "The DaVinci Code" was published and the movie came out. Folks screamed bloody murder over the notion that Christ could be human with human frailties. Dan Brown's books are a great read and raise some interesting questions into the blind acceptance of faith and some people are going to have issue with that. I enjoy his books and hope he continues!

"Why is there no responsible gay community leadership taking on these intolerant bigots in their midst?"
Posted by kevin831 April 22, 09 07:03 AM

I'll preface this with full disclosure - I'm a happily married heterosexual. Having said that - are you kidding? Let's have a look at facts, shall we? Your church has been attacking members of the gay community pretty much forever. Your church has been going after their basic human rights. Your church has been insisting that they be denied that which we in the straight community take as a birth right. Your church is the one spewing bigotry and you want to claim that it's gay men and women who are bigots here? Here's a suggestion - if the church doesn't want to be called out on their bigotries, they should stop being bigots.

**William Donohue, the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights**

"The Catholic League"? i.e..One guy and a computer!

Posted by OnTheLeft April 21, 09 11:25 PM

Ontheleft, get over yourself. I am not going to defend Bush or Limbaugh. I am not even a registered Republican. He is not my boy Bush as I have been highly critical of him in the past. Judging by your two posts on this board, you are just trying to coax people into arguments that have been rehashed on this blog too many times - politics and gay marriage. I believe that classifies as whining. I am not getting into either since that is off the topic of this post.

If you hadn't been so busy looking for an opportunity to sound self righteous again, you would have seen that my whole point was that when movies such as the Passion of Christ came out, the were many protests calling it anti-semetic. Since 9/11, Hollywood has been very careful with any portrayal of anything Islam. If anyone dares say anything critical of anything associated with the gay community such as Brokeback Mountain or Milk , there are protests and people are called bigots. But when it comes to Christianity and especially the Catholic Church, the general consensus from that same PC crowd is that it is no big deal. This is hypocritical. If you are going to treat one religion or community with respect when it comes to movies then you should treat others the same. It makes no sense why people like you go nuts when it comes to being anti-semetic, anti-muslim, or anti-gay, but you turn a blind eye when it comes to being anti-Christian or anti-Catholic.

You are quick to mention the bloody-history of the Church. Have you ever done any research to see whether or not those claims are true or just part of revisionist history. Have you ever done any research to see the bloody-history of other religions and cultures? Probably not. So before you criticize Donahue for trying to set the facts straight about the Church, do your own homework before you start trying to pick a fight.

I am Catholic and I can't wait for the movie. I read this Dan Brown book a few years ago and loved it. It was even better than " The DaVinci Code" to me .

Gaudette (#2), way to go. You critique something you have not read based on someone else's say so. In other words, never mind the facts. Typical narrow mind-set.

Wow, some very solid dialogue here. Being a PR practitioner by trade I look at this nothing more than a chance for Hollywood to try to grab a peice of the market. Any time a book coincides with a movie it is not by accident. If there is controversy, they love it and it sells. Hollywood sees and knows markets and has hit the nail on the head.

There is a consistent theme to many posts where religioous topics are concerned: that Catholicism is under attack. Of what I've learned of the Catholic institution, both in its past and present forms, is that the greatest enemies of Catholicism are Catholics themselves. No Protestant, Jew, agnostic or atheist can damage the institution as deeply and effectively as its adherents (and especially employees) have in the past and present.

But if it's necessary to ban fiction that, God forbid, should offer a less than sugar coated namby pamby butt-kissing praise of Catholicism, or any other religious institution, then we should ban studying Dante's Divine Comedy in college, or ban studying Martin Luther. For that matter we should ban any Protestant denomination rooted in protest of Catholic abuses of the past. Perhaps that is the goal of everyone whose bloomers get blown out when they read something offending their religious sympathy: to actually have only one religion to which everyone is obligated to submit?

#56 by Katherine:
"I am a Catholic and I found the book so far out that I laughed out loud while reading it."

Funny, I feel the same way about the bible. Some old man makes the Red Sea part? I bet you think Noah's Ark was real too. Just as believable. Who needs logic when you have blind faith? What I find odd about these stories is that people believe these tales of super-human powers and supernatural happenings, but laugh at them when not in the context of religion and faith. Why should I believe that an old man can part a sea because an old book that's been rewritten thousands of times said so, but if any other person claims it's been done or has done it, they are crazy?

I'm not even saying it didn't happen, although the chances are quite slim. What I am asking is how can you believe the supernatural, super-powered tales of the good book and shrug off other tales of just as logical?

Let's leave off the shrillness, people. It's possible to talk with hatespeech and condescension, no? I hope so.

Sounds to me like both sides here have valid points: A. whether or not they have any claim to timelessness, the movies and books are entertaining; but B. let's not pretend that fiction has no effect in the world--most of us are just unreflective enough that what we read affects our real-life views of the world in ways of which we're unaware.

Would love to see Ron Howard make a movie depicting islam in a negative way, he would never do it, you see it's ok to insult Catholics, good thing we are level headed and very tolerable, if this was about islam they would be calling for a beheading.

"it's ok to insult Catholics, good thing we are levelheaded and very tolerable",
Posted by gop April 22, 09 11:25 AM

Yes gop, you Catholics are very tolerable. So tolerable, you let "Men" of the cloth rape and abuse children, then reward the man who knew about it and covered it up, with a job at the Vatican. That oughta show 'em! Why not 'punish' them some more and give them a daycare to run? It's like giving a recovering alcoholic a bottle of champagne for reaching 3 months of sobriety. Cardinal Law was REWARDED for ruining the lives of thousands of people, and trying to keep the image of the Church squeaky clean.

I don't think tolerable is a good adjective for a religion with the bloodiest history on record. Feeding people to the lions? Not an act of tolerance in my opinion.

I just wish people could learn to be descent people without doing it for any religious reasons. If we can out our egos aside and realize that in the grand scheme of things, our lives don't serve much of a purpose, and that our beliefs aren't always right, our short time on this planet could be so much better.

Dave,

I respectfully disagree that a person can't KNOW Jesus is God. If you believe historically as I believe almost all do that Jesus walked the earth there are only three possibilities, Lord, Liar, or Lunatic. Either He was who he said He was, God or He was crazy or lying. I believe the former.

Everyone can know Jesus personally. It's done through persistant and patient prayer with an open heart and mind. I didn't know Jesus for most of my adult life and now I do. I'm not insane I just asked in prayer. Mt personal relationship and clarity of God existing grows stronger every day through daily prayer, regular Mass attendance and reception of the Sacraments, making a continued effort to avoid seperating myself from God through sin and spending most of my free time in youth ministry.

The way I look at it is the only way someone can say there may not be a God is if they with an open heart and mind ask Him to show himself. Anyone whom truly does and is persitent will be shown the Truth from God. I am living proof of this.

The Catholic Church does not teach against evolution just differs on details of evolution.

I stick by my analogy of this story compared to a story of a family member or loved one. Jesus is by far first in my Life. I feel it is much more offensive for someone to say Jesus is not God then for someone to slander my family. Love is not an emotion but a decision and I have chosen Jesus as the One I love the most.

Probably your and I major disagreement is whether someone can know God personally. I do!

ontheleft - Is Miss California being treated fairly by the gay blogger (and judge of the Miss USA contest) that asked her what her opinion was about gay marriage? Will you condemn his hate speech here publically when he called her a "dumb b***ch" on his video blog, because she believes that a marriage is between a man and a woman, because of her faith?

Can you respond to the question without mentioning Bush or Cheney?

Kai,

Nice to here from you as well (see OnTheLeft people can disagree and still be social)

Obviously I disagree about your take on who Jesus was. As far as Jesus being perturbed and offended about what's being done in His name, I can only speak for my Community and thise whom follow the Truth of the Church. Although I am a pitiful sinner whom regularly offends God, He knows my heart is in the right place and that I Love Him more then every human combined. Like 17 year old Katie once told me, "You can't brown nose Jesus."

Peace and Blessings

I hope so as no person or institution is beyond reproach!!

Ahhh...nothing like a religious discussion to fire up the passions!

Maybe the Romans will accept a financial contribution to assuage their perceived slights?

And dear old Mr. Dohonue, perhaps could join a new religious order, the Roman Society of the Habitually Offended.

Enjoy the movie everyone!

Proud,

This book has nothing to do with the sanctity of Jesus. It has to do with a fanatical young Vatican priest who becomes enraged by the increasingly lax laity and community who takes it upon himself to create an image of fear and terror in order to bring back the people and their faith.

In fact, where in "The DaVinci Code" had obvious undertones of the possibility that Jesus lacked divinity, Angels/Demons was more on how anyone can use the work of fear and the generation of a fake "miracle" to wow a population into following a cause.

The book does not say that miracle’s do not exist. In fact the main storyline is based upon a theoretical physicist’s work to PROVE God exists.

Just because the book’s plot has a terrorist in the ranks of the church does not mean that the church itself is evil, it is saying that anyone that is human has the possibility of being corrupted by some power that he or she wishes to attain. In this case, the priest wanted to become a living miracle to show everyone that God is still watching.

Sure it's anti-Catholic. So what?

Reporting the name of the organization, "Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights," without contextualizing it accurately is very misleading. Donohue's little organization is a racist, heterosexist, misogyinistic, and Catholic supremacist hate group. It is the polar opposite of a civil rights group.

If you haven't read the book, any opinions on it are worthless. As for those who have read it and feel it's anti-Catholic, that is your opinion and you have a right to have it. Instead of arguing over who is right and who is wrong everyone should just take it for what it is: a story.

Well, I am not religious, but Angels and Demons book and movie are anti-Catholic. And it doesn't matter if is work of fiction. Work of fiction can be anti-something,as for example ethnic jokes are bad, and anti-some group. "Oh, it was only a joke!" lame excuse is similar to "it is only fiction!". I am simply tired of all this Catholic baiting which is going on because of Dan Brown and the DVC and A&D. As fro me watching this movie: why should I pay money for this and support an enterprise which is based on religious intolerance? For me enough is enough. Catholic baiting is in bad taste as any other expression of religious intolerance.

Let's try the substitution game:

[The Protocols of the Elders of Zion] is also obviously a work of fiction ... So is it anti-[Jewish]?

Of course it is. Fiction creates and sustains powerful prejudices, sometimes more effectively than nonfiction.

I, also, am a Catholic. And I enjoyed reading the novel. I am also looking forward to seeing the movie. I think my Catholic and Christian faith is strong enough to withstand "attacks" by authors of fiction such as Dan Brown. But I am also concerned about the negative image of the Church that this movie and book is portraying. I dont think it's helping the Church in any way...I mean, how can the Church (Catholic and other Christian denominations) invite non-believers into their flock if this negative image of the Church is what is imprinted in the minds of prospective converts?

All you have to do is read some of these comments and see that there is plenty of anti-Catholicism out there. Dan Brown excites these people. I had many conversations with people during The DaVinci Code fascination that while acknowledging its fiction, revelled in the "truths" contained therein. It was based on The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail which is pure bigotry, not much different from The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion. I don't really know much about A&D, but I'm sure it follows the same pattern.

Wow, just reading some of the comments here show that in fact there is a very strong Anti-Catholic movement out there...

As far as the Priest problems with children, we have been trying to get the Homosexual Rapist priests defrocked for 40 years now, but they entrenched themselves and protected themselves and some even became Bishops. They are known to Catholics as the Lavendar Mafia, and thank goodness they are now being defrocked finally. The Homesexual Rapist Priests are now being removed...

How did Donahue feel about Jurrasic Park flicks?
Did that film bad mouth dinosaurs ......like Donahue.

Bill....babycakes, evolve or die

It's a MOVIE! A work of fiction that is meant to be enjoyed; not be obsessed over. I am Catholic and I have read both books and am excited about the movie. It's not slander and it's not making fun of anyone or trying to taint the church in any way. Those who have a problem with a work of FICTION, must be pretty insecure in both their faith and their day to day lives. Grow up!

The bottome line: IF IT BOTHERS YOU, DON'T READ THE BOOK and DON'T WATCH THE MOVIE.

It's neither anti or pro anything.

Oh, for those that have not read the book (s) and continue to complain and accuse, read it!

For those, and that includes me, have not even seen the movie since it hasn't been released yet, perhaps it's best to reserve such harsh judgements until after the fact.

I'll reserve judgment until I see the film. However, the media is notoriously anti Catholic and engages in constant mockery of the religion and its beliefs. Will we ever see a work of "fiction" depicting the Jewish faith in a highly non flattering manner turned into a major film? No one from Hollywood would dare and you all know it. So if Catholics get a bit tired of being targeted by the Hollywood non believers and Jesus mockerers, don't be so offended. You don't mess with other people's religions - including Catholics.

Notice all the hate from the anti-theist atheists and agnostics?

So pretty much after Mr. Donohue came to the Catholic Church's defense, the main response from the movie's director and mostly everyone else was, ITS JUST FICTION! GET OVER IT!...yeah well thats just the point! And thats what makes me so angry! Its amazing how something thats just fiction, can present such falsities against a religious institution, in particular the Catholic Church, without having anyone blink an eyelash, and yet if any other "work of fiction" were to calumniate lets say the Jewish religion, or Islam, there would be a public outcry! Thats exactly what frustrates me so much, no other religion can be touched, but when it comes to the Catholic Church the gloves come off and its an all out free for all.

As Bill Donohue pointed out, if a movie were to be made about The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a tract alleging a Jewish and Masonic plot to achieve world domination, it would probably make quite the conspiracy thriller,and of course it would be entirely fictional, since the book of Zion is not in any way accurate. However the content is entirely antisemitic, so does it make it right to provide entertainment at the cost of exploiting someones religion or race? And do you honestly think everyone would be ok with such an antisemitic movie? and silence offended Jews with the line "Its just fiction! Get over it!" Of course not! Its never ok to slander ANYONE'S religion and paint it in a negative light. I am so positive that if this movie were fictionalizing or misrepresenting another religion, the outcry would be huge. Or in another example, re-runs of the old TV show Amos 'n Andy were banned on American television due to its stereotypical and racist portrayals of African Americans. And guess what, that show was about fictional characters in fictional scenarios, but it didn't make it any less offensive.

#81, "This book has nothing to do with the sanctity of Jesus. It has to do with a fanatical young Vatican priest who becomes enraged by the increasingly lax laity and community who takes it upon himself to create an image of fear and terror in order to bring back the people and their faith."

MC, you have a good argument. I do not Believe "angels and demons" is anti-catholic. having rEad the noveL and re-reading it agaIn, i thought the noVel doEs promote catholic belief in GOD by proving in the plot that god does exist. if anything i thought the book might be trying to convince people of god existence through a scientific approach , something the readers, non catholic believers or atheist, might take into consideration after reading the book, and something that will enforce a believers' believes. (if people took this seriously,i think the fictional physicist's approach has a more believable explanation than the mythical like stories of the bible). the oNly thing that might seem anti-cathOlic would be the depicTion of its followers, their history and actions (but seriously, how far away are we from the truth in reality?). but then again, tis just fiction rIght.

for some reason DONOHUE kinda reminds me of "JANUS" lol

Liberals are nothing but narrow-minded hypocrites. The hate-filled, bigoted gay community just can't stand the fact that they are not God and people can and do disagree with their agenda. You know how to drive these leftist nuts crazy? Just dare to exercise your first amendment right to free speech and they get apoplectic. The only group on earth more hypocritical and intolerant than liberals are Muslims. How about a film exposing the fact that Islam is a lie and a phony religion? All rational thought is anti-liberal and anti-atheistic. Liberals tolerate anti-Catholic bigotry because they are hypocrites. Ron Howard is clearly an anti-Catholic bigot ,as are many of the posters here. Liberalism is hypocrisy.

One only needs to substitute Catholic with Jewish or Muslim imagery to KNOW that this film is hateful to the Caholic faith. American popular media is almost always very insenstive to Catholics. As a Catholic, I'm tired of seeing ruler-slapping nuns, abusive priests, power hungry clergy, and mindless followers of the faith on television and in movies. I have the greatest honor and respect for the hundreds of thousands of Catholic religious and lay persons living their faith in a hostile world. Over the years, I've also leaned a new respect for German Jews in the 1920s and early 30s, before Jewish hatred became government policy. I suppose it is now time for Catholics to suffer for thier beliefs.

Just as in the “The DaVinci Code”, in the new movie “Angels and Demons” untruth is used as a basic premise, that no one is supposes to question, to form the backdrop of the story.

In “The DaVinci Code” "Opus Dei" a reverent apostolate that formed in the early 20th century to raise up the virtue of ordinary daily labor as an offering to God, was portrayed as a secretive, conspiratorial and sinister organization formed in the middle ages to hide a phony “secret”. It is supposed to be a “secret” that actually strikes at the very foundation of Christian Catholic belief. Its simple message… if the morality surrounding Christ’s life, death and resurrection is a lie, Christianity is lie! And the Church will do anything to protect that lie!

Now, in “Angels and Demons” we have the same formula, directed this time, at the truth about the aspirations of the Catholic Church that Jesus founded. This time the basic premise is that the Catholic Church is anti-science and, therefore, anti-rational and anti-truth.

The “illuminati” are represented as a organization of scientific elites who the church persecuted in the 1700s because the Church is afraid that science will decrease her influence and power. Both Ron Howard and Tom Hanks state that they believe this is an historical reality in the “Making of…” extra feature that that previewed on cable and that will probably accompany the DVD.

The fact that a little simple, real historical research reveals that this never happened seems irrelevant to the movie’s creator and its star. They have their basic premise (their own leftist dogma, if you will) and their obvious agenda. Facts and truth won’t be allowed to get in their way. Anything that hurts the Church’s reputation in the minds of the public is justified, even if it’s based on a lie.

The makers of this movie are skilled at their craft. They are very good at wrapping poison in the pleasing package of an exciting and entertaining story, complete with all the stunning visuals, compelling sound and star power of a first-class cast. But at its heart, “Angels and Demons” is still poison to truth. The weak excuse that it is “only a work of fiction” does not deflect the fact that it is a blatant slander on the Catholic Church and a propaganda attack on all the values and scientific/historical contributions that the Church has offered to the world down through the centuries.

I have not read the book, and have not seen the movie yet. from the reviews so far, I think that "Angels & Demons" is not that anti-catholic (as the previous film "The Da Vinci Code" was, though it did reveal much needed truth about The Vatican - that the world was not aware of - because they have surpressed way more than will ever be exposed... also see the movie "Stigmata"). Because of the reaction they got from catholics and The Vatican on the first film, I believe (even though the story originally may have not been that critical) the second film was "toned down" even more to ensure there would be less criticism toward it.

To: proud2bcatholic

Pope John Paul II, a few years before his death, apologized for "the atrocities and wrongful deaths brought upon innocent people, by The Church/The Vatican, during The Spanish Inquisition and The Salem Witch Trials and The Crusades" (in which The Church influenced the government/King to attack The Muslims for the reasons of religion and greed - the same thing that is still going on today, with Christianity's help, which was never what Jesus would have done!)

To Larry S.

The Church is "based on a lie". Why else would it try for centuries to prevent the religious followers from knowing what The Bible said, by not allowing it to be printed in any language other than Latin.

Myles Coverdale finished translating the Old Testament, and in 1535 he printed the first complete Bible in the English language, making use of Luther's German text and the Latin as sources. Thus, the first complete English Bible was printed on October 4, 1535, and is known as the Coverdale Bible.

The Church also forbade anyone to go back and re-translate from the original Hebrew & Greek Texts, and put people to death during the Spanish Inquisition for such “heresy”. John Rogers went on to print the second complete English Bible in 1537. It was, however, the first English Bible translated from the original Biblical languages of Hebrew & Greek. It remains known most commonly as the Matthew-Tyndale Bible.
600 AD: LATIN was the Only Language Allowed for Scripture.
The New Testament was completed in 1557, and the complete Bible was first published in 1560. It became known as the Geneva Bible. Due to a passage in Genesis describing the clothing that God fashioned for Adam and Eve upon expulsion from the Garden of Eden as "Breeches" (an antiquated form of "Britches"), some people referred to the Geneva Bible as the Breeches Bible.
Starting just one year after the huge 1611 pulpit-size King James Bibles were printed and chained to every church pulpit in England; printing then began on the earliest normal-sized printings of the King James Bible. These were produced so individuals could have their own personal copy of the Bible.
William Tyndale had been forced to flee England, because of the wide-spread rumor that his English New Testament project was underway, causing inquisitors and bounty hunters to be constantly on Tyndale's trail to arrest him and prevent his project. God foiled their plans, and in 1525-1526 the Tyndale New Testament became the first printed edition of the scripture in the English language. Subsequent printings of the Tyndale New Testament in the 1530's were often elaborately illustrated.
They were burned as soon as the Bishop could confiscate them, but copies trickled through and actually ended up in the bedroom of King Henry VIII. The more the King and Bishop resisted its distribution, the more fascinated the public at large became. The church declared it contained thousands of errors as they torched hundreds of New Testaments confiscated by the clergy, while in fact, they burned them because they could find no errors at all. One risked death by burning if caught in mere possession of Tyndale's forbidden books.
Having God's Word available to the public in the language of the common man, English, would have meant disaster to the church. No longer would they control access to the scriptures. If people were able to read the Bible in their own tongue, the church's income and power would crumble. They could not possibly continue to get away with selling indulgences (the forgiveness of sins) or selling the release of loved ones from a church-manufactured "Purgatory". People would begin to challenge the church's authority if the church were exposed as frauds and thieves. The contradictions between what God's Word said, and what the priests taught, would open the public's eyes and the truth would set them free from the grip of fear that the institutional church held. Salvation through faith, not works or donations, would be understood. The need for priests would vanish through the priesthood of all believers. The veneration of church-canonized Saints and Mary would be called into question. The availability of the scriptures in English was the biggest threat imaginable to the wicked church. Neither side would give up without a fight.
Today, there are only two known copies left of Tyndale’s 1525-26 First Edition. Any copies printed prior to 1570 are extremely valuable. Tyndale's flight was an inspiration to freedom-loving Englishmen who drew courage from the 11 years that he was hunted. Books and Bibles flowed into England in bales of cotton and sacks of flour. Ironically, Tyndale’s biggest customer was the King’s men, who would buy up every copy available to burn them… and Tyndale used their money to print even more! In the end, Tyndale was caught: betrayed by an Englishman that he had befriended. Tyndale was incarcerated for 500 days before he was strangled and burned at the stake in 1536. Tyndale’s last words were, "Oh Lord, open the King of England’s eyes". This prayer would be answered just three years later in 1539, when King Henry VIII finally allowed, and even funded, the printing of an English Bible known as the “Great Bible”.
In the film “Angels & Demons”, The Vatican’s underground “sacred archives” contain all of the confiscated/stolen religious scriptures and icons from other religions. When creating The Bible, scriptures were taken from Gnostic religious texts (one set of these texts were found in Egypt, like the Dead Sea Scrolls, and The Vatican is still trying to get their hands on them – but the museum will not allow it).

Please, no more attacks on priests. I am a priest. The vast majority of priests have never been accused of any wrong doing. Awful things happen among every group of people. Most sexual abuse happens in families!