I finally gave in...

...and read the "Da Vinci Code".

Warning ... this is a potentially meaningless and confusing post to wade through. It helped me gel some trains of thought and see where I am more clearly. It's not necessarily useful to others. Enter at your own risk.

After countless months of being met with people's blank stares when I share that I have not read DVC; being the Tom Hanks fan that I am and considering the imminent release of the film, I caved.

I read it yesterday. Yes, you heard me right. I. Read. It. Yesterday.

Not being interested in devoting many useful days to it, I decided to do the thing I don't do very often and dedicated a single day to it.

It's not that I have been opposed to the book on any spiritual or theological level, just that I'm not a follower of the majority on most things artistic. Call me a rebel, but I make no apologies. It's not that I don't usually enjoy the entertainment preferred by the masses, or that I fear some kind of "lemming syndrome", just that I often rather spend my time in the unusual and "off the beaten path".

Case in point: my favorite movie in recent times? "The Weeping Camel" or "Danny Deckchair". Favorite musical interest of late? Flyleaf ... Book choice? "The Silmarillion" ... Did I EVER once crack the pages of, let alone read, "PDL"? Of course not.

Get my drift?

So moving right along...what did I think of DVC? Hm. Pondering.

It's full of thoroughly interesting concepts, imagery, and mystery. It's a creative masterpiece, and frankly Dan Brown is a genius for looking to this subject matter as not only the groundwork for a bestselling novel, but the foundation for the creation of an entire cult. Not that he antcipated that to occur. But not that he didn't. WINK.

Does the book worry me? Of course not. I am smart enough to know that most Christians, regardless of what the "truth" might actually be, are not looking to be spiritually led by a work of fiction. Nor do I think that Christians should be concerned about NON-Christians being spiritually influenced by this book. Will people be influenced? Yes. But not in bad ways. It will cause a few people to seek, and they will naturally go to the Church for answers. This book certainly has the ability to stir in people an interest in history as a whole, as seen by the masses flocking to the historic sites featured in DVC, only because of the book. And it opens the door of dialogue about the alleged atrocities committed and secrets held by the "church" throughout history.

I am not concerned with the theories the book tosses about. These ideas are nothing new. I am not concerned about whether or not these ideas are truth, lies, or something in-between. If a day were to come when there was indisputable evidence that there exists an earthly lineage of Jesus, I would cross that bridge when I came to it.

In the meantime, I have got to thinking. I just wonder if the real draw of this book is much more simple than many would want to believe.

I wonder if what it's really about is the (and you can call me biased on this) enormous disillusionment people have with the church ... both christians and non-christians alike. I wonder if we are so hungry for some new sense of truth ... some excitement ... some new ideas about this faith and it's evolution over the last 2000 years ... and even the last 10,000 years if we peer back far enough?

All I know is this "christianity" does not work. I'm not sure it ever worked ... ever. We've been taking the bull by the horns - so to speak - for so long ... trying to wrestle the great and powerful unknowns of God into something tame and knowable, manageable even, that maybe much has been lost over the millenia. I wonder if we really have missed some essential elements of our faith ... not saying that we must canonize the gnostics or accept the idea that Christ had children ... but that maybe we really do need to look beyond what is/has been manistream christianity for thousands of years and seek that which is missing ... mystery ... intrigue ... whatever else you might want to call it.

I have always wondered why we keep feeling the need to revise this faith system ... I mean the disciples certainly had a pretty clear idea of what Christ was about ... why don't we have great general agreement among ourselves? I realize the whole story has been manipulated by men ... if not in any literal sense, at least in an interpretive sense, so that what we know today is a far cry from what we read about in the NT. Each generation believes the lens through which christianity was interpreted by the generation immediately preceeding us was dirty or out-of-focus. I wonder if it's not the lens that's the problem but the fact that we are using a lens at all ... wondering if it's so much more simple than it's always been made to be. Maybe it's about opening our eyes, trusting our own vision instead of the glasses we are given.

And I realize I am ranting and may be losing you in my train of thought ... it's midnight so bear with me as I get it all out ...

People are obviously drawn to the ideas that are put forth in this book, so I wonder if we really need to give it a serious shake at helping us see what out freeze-dried faith needs to get a grip on in order to become what it was meant to be.

Not saying that ANY of the concepts in DVC are what our faith is lacking... but that they are ALL what it is lacking... collectively, as a whole ... meaning, what do these ideas in DVC, as a unit, offer people that modern christianity doesn't? Why are there seemingly more DVC converts in the last 2 years than there have been real disciples created in the last 20?

Aside from the notion that Jesus was much more "human" than we ever imagined (I doubt it) and aside from the notion that there is some enormous conspiracy to conceal that fact (I double doubt it) and aside from the notion that anyone would ever be able to prove such things were true...

... maybe we have missed some great point ... some key element ... that could make this faith the powerful agent of love and change and justice that it was meant to be?

Maybe in all our attempts to explain and understand and grasp what Christ would really have us be, and then document and dissect and argue why we have these particular explanations and understandings so that others will know that WE have the REAL TRUTH ... maybe we have lost the point entirely.

It was never meant to be known or understood or unravelled into some kind of college text book. It was meant to be powerful and secretive and awesome and mysterious. God is only knowable in that we can know that He exisits and that He is who He says He is ... God is not knowable in that He will never be predictable or formulaic or measurable.

The Gospel was never meant to have all the answers. The Gospel is about pointing the way to the ONE who does. That way is twisting and turning and sometimes dark and sometimes treacherous. It is a wagon on a rutted road and a bicyclist on cobblestone. It is switchbacks and downhills. It is forested and desert. It is seaside and rainsoaked. It is foggy and starlit...

So does the "DaVinci Code" really provide more answers than it does questions? I think so, if we know where to look. It provides the answer to the question of "what do people really seek"? That answer is this: "What we seek is NOT answers to questions of doctrine and theology and history. What we seek is THE answer. The answer to life and meaning."

Everything we seek beyond the One Whom we Seek just leads to more questions we cannot answer.

Confusing?

But maybe that's the point. Maybe we need to rethink whether we actually NEED any other answers?

Just wondering.

OK, my mind is now officially mush. Going to bed.