Da Vinci Code: assault,deterrent, blasphemy, etc...

At the height of the controversy hounding the 'The Da Vinci Code' world premier yesterday, mixed reactions were heard. In the Philippines, the MTRCB gave the fiction-film a Restricted rating, the only country to gave such among the 36 countries which underwent a review. I could only speculate to what end the move may serve (nagpapalakas cguro sa CBCP, regarding Cha-Cha! or somethin else).

As with its early stand, the CBCP maintained a fair disposition as it did not prohibited Filipino Catholics to see the film, but did not also encouraged them to watch. Pretty safe for the Church, since our Bishops were also careful of what the intellectuals, the democrats, and the liberals may say, withstanding the fact that this does not cater to the poor Catholic majority, isn't it. Hence, views on the film, as to whether it will be ban or not, boils down to personal point of views.

As a practicing (not for a year now) Catholic, I do agree that the film is a work of art and it's fiction as Dan Brown claims, and disclaims in the book, but accounts on the book are based on real people,events, dates, etc. How could one claims that it is pure fiction (imaginary, or coincidence, or meant!)?..better, half-truth, but I say it's ,misleading, notwithstanding the intellect of Christian faithfuls. Brown even dragged the name of Opus Dei, and it seemed to me, upon hearing some members of the prelate, has been maligned or negatively portrayed.
Second, I find it blasphemous, basing on the second commandment which is "thou shall not take the name of the Lord, thy God in vain"...Do I need to elaborate?..unless you haven't read the book or watch the film!

Thirdly, I'm afraid that this would serve as a deterrent for other film-makers, who has personal interest in whatsoever in the future, whether to attack something or someone, and who would makes use of films to reach such ends, hiding behind the genre of fiction, art, and self-expression (try to have a review of Brown's profile).

Finally, under the Revised Penal Code, it provides that it is 'a crime to offend a religion', the basis of Manila's banning resolution. Moreover, try to consider this, what if I make a film, a play, a book whatsover depicting GMA (to have an affair), or Rizal (a gay), or Martin Luther (a thief), or a relative of yours (a prostitute), and I would disclaim that it's only a product of my imagination, would that concern you? If not, then I bet, that this will really be a deterrent for future films, and I could foretell the birth of the 'masquerade genre' in film making, as it does in politics.

This is pure attack on our faith as Christians, even for Moslems, and every believer of Christ. We do not deserve this challenge, as Christ do not deserve the blasphemy Brown commited. Just as we pray to defy evil, we should also fight the mundane evils with equal earthly actions and moves.

Da Vinci Code: assault,deterrent, blasphemy, etc...
At the height of the controversy hounding the 'The Da Vinci Code' world premier yesterday, mixed reactions were heard. In the Philippines, the MTRCB gave the fiction-film a Restricted rating, the only country to gave such among the 36 countries which underwent a review. I could only speculate to what end the move may serve (nagpapalakas cguro sa CBCP, regarding Cha-Cha! or somethin else).

As with its early stand, the CBCP maintained a fair disposition as it did not prohibited Filipino Catholics to see the film, but did not also encouraged them to watch. Pretty safe for the Church, since our Bishops were also careful of what the intellectuals, the democrats, and the liberals may say, withstanding the fact that this does not cater to the poor Catholic majority, isn't it. Hence, views on the film, as to whether it will be ban or not, boils down to personal point of views.

As a practicing (not for a year now) Catholic, I do agree that the film is a work of art and it's fiction as Dan Brown claims, and disclaims in the book, but accounts on the book are based on real people,events, dates, etc. How could one claims that it is pure fiction (imaginary, or coincidence, or meant!)?..better, half-truth, but I say it's ,misleading, notwithstanding the intellect of Christian faithfuls. Brown even dragged the name of Opus Dei, and it seemed to me, upon hearing some members of the prelate, has been maligned or negatively portrayed.
Second, I find it blasphemous, basing on the second commandment which is "thou shall not take the name of the Lord, thy God in vain"...Do I need to elaborate?..unless you haven't read the book or watch the film!

Thirdly, I'm afraid that this would serve as a deterrent for other film-makers, who has personal interest in whatsoever in the future, whether to attack something or someone, and who would makes use of films to reach such ends, hiding behind the genre of fiction, art, and self-expression (try to have a review of Brown's profile).

Finally, under the Revised Penal Code, it provides that it is 'a crime to offend a religion', the basis of Manila's banning resolution. Moreover, try to consider this, what if I make a film, a play, a book whatsover depicting GMA (to have an affair), or Rizal (a gay), or Martin Luther (a thief), or a relative of yours (a prostitute), and I would disclaim that it's only a product of my imagination, would that concern you? If not, then I bet, that this will really be a deterrent for future films, and I could foretell the birth of the 'masquerade genre' in film making, as it does in politics.

This is pure attack on our faith as Christians, even for Moslems, and every believer of Christ. We do not deserve this challenge, as Christ do not deserve the blasphemy Brown commited. Just as we pray to defy evil, we should also fight the mundane evils with equal earthly actions and moves.

*views expressed may have change through time; this posting is for recording purposes only
*reposted