Answering Angels & Demons

[cappie]

Angels & Demons is a thinly-veiled, but brutal attack on the Catholic Faith that will again shake the faith of potentially millions of people who know little about Catholic teaching and Catholic and Western history. It is full of half-truths, historical inaccuracies, and outright lies.

Answering Angels & Demons, by Mark Shea is an electronic book provided for free to help you answer the errors contained in the book and movie. Please feel free to download this resources and share it with your friends, family and neighbors.

[url="http://www.answeringangelsanddemons.com/"]http://www.answeringangelsanddemons.com/[/url]

[HisChildForever]

I went to see it today and thoroughly enjoyed it. I saw no attacks against the Church, except the literal attack of antimatter and the kidnapping of the cardinals, in which the main character was asked to come in and help the Vatican find the canister and the missing cardinals.

[manockster]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1868321' date='May 15 2009, 11:53 PM']I went to see it today and thoroughly enjoyed it. I saw no attacks against the Church, except the literal attack of antimatter and the kidnapping of the cardinals, in which the main character was asked to come in and help the Vatican find the canister and the missing cardinals.[/quote]
The whole movie is an attack against the Church, and has some messed up views about catholics...... Just saying.

Edited May 16, 2009 by manockster

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='manockster' post='1868359' date='May 15 2009, 11:22 PM']The whole movie is an attack against the Church, and has some messed up views about catholics...... Just saying.[/quote]

Oh, did you see it today too?

[Jaime]

[quote name='manockster' post='1868359' date='May 15 2009, 11:22 PM']The whole movie is an attack against the Church, and has some messed up views about catholics...... Just saying.[/quote]

Apparently the Vatican disagrees with you. (me too)

[quote]ATICAN CITY – Reviewers at the Vatican's newspaper have passed judgment on "Angels & Demons," finding the religious thriller commercial and inaccurate, but concluding it is "harmless" entertainment and not a danger to the church.

L'Osservatore Romano ran a review and an editorial in Wednesday's edition, critiquing the movie based on the Dan Brown best-selling novel of the same name.

"Angels & Demons" had its world premiere Monday in Rome, after director Ron Howard charged that the Vatican interfered with getting film permits to shoot scenes in the city — a contention the Vatican said was a publicity stunt.

The newspaper wrote that the movie was "a gigantic and smart commercial operation" filled with "stereotyped characters." The paper suggested moviegoers could make a game out of finding the many historical inaccuracies in the plot.

However, L'Osservatore praised Howard's "dynamic direction" and the "magnificent" reconstruction of locations like St. Peter's Basilica and the Sistine Chapel. Much of the film was shot on sets that painstakingly recreated church landmarks.

The film offers "more than two hours of harmless entertainment, which hardly affects the genius and mystery of Christianity," L'Osservatore's reviewer wrote. It's "a videogame that first of all sparks curiosity and is also, maybe, a bit of fun."

"Angels & Demons" features Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon of "The Da Vinci Code" fame, played by Tom Hanks. In the film, the Vatican turns to Langdon after an ancient secret brotherhood called the Illuminati kidnap four cardinals considered front-runners to be the next pope, and threaten to kill one an hour and then explode a bomb at the Vatican.

On Sunday, Howard said the Vatican had interfered with his efforts to get permits to shoot some scenes. A Vatican spokesman said the statement was designed purely to drum up publicity for the film.

Top church officials strongly objected to "The Da Vinci Code" because it was based on the idea that Jesus married and fathered children and depicted the conservative Catholic movement, Opus Dei, as a murderous cult.

"The theme is always the same in both novels: a sect versus the church, even though the parts of the good and the bad are distributed differently," L'Osservatore wrote Wednesday. "This time, with 'Angels & Demons,' the church is on the side of the good guys."

The editorial said the novels presented the church's positions in a "simplistic and partial" way. It said the success of Brown's works should push the church to rethink the way it uses the media to present i[/quote]

[Moosey]

You don't have to see it to understand the blatant ridiculous content. The premis of the movie is that the Vatican ordered a brutal massecre for the Illuminati. Rubbish.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Moosey' post='1868370' date='May 15 2009, 11:29 PM']You don't have to see it to understand the blatant ridiculous content. The premis of the movie is that the Vatican ordered a brutal massecre for the Illuminati. Rubbish.[/quote]

Oh, I take it you saw the movie too.

The premise of the movie is that the Vatican is under attack by the Illuminati. The Illuminati have stolen and planted a canister of antimatter somewhere in Vatican City, which will explode once the battery (which keeps the antimatter suspended) runs out. Four cardinals - the ones most likely to be elected Pope (for the former Pope passed away just as the movie is starting) - have been kidnapped by the Illuminati. Robert Langdon, a symbologist and professor at Harvard, is called to help the Vatican. The Illuminati are seeking revenge against the Church because they were persecuted centuries ago for telling the Church that She was in error regarding Her scientific understandings of the universe. I believe that Galileo was persecuted to an extent - labeled a heretic and arrested (someone please correct me if I am wrong). Of course the film hypes this up, making the gross exaggeration that the Church had killed some of the scientists.

(I should say "The Illuminati" in quotations. Those who have read the book and/or have watched the film know what I mean.)

Edited May 16, 2009 by HisChildForever

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1868368' date='May 15 2009, 11:27 PM']Apparently the Vatican disagrees with you. (me too)[/quote]

Thanks for posting this article, you beat me to it!

[Hassan]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1868384' date='May 15 2009, 11:38 PM']Oh, I take it you saw the movie too.

The premise of the movie is that the Vatican is under attack by the Illuminati. The Illuminati have stolen and planted a canister of antimatter somewhere in Vatican City, which will explode once the battery (which keeps the antimatter suspended) runs out. Four cardinals - the ones most likely to be elected Pope (for the former Pope passed away just as the movie is starting) - have been kidnapped by the Illuminati. Robert Langdon, a symbologist and professor at Harvard, is called to help the Vatican. The Illuminati are seeking revenge against the Church because they were persecuted centuries ago for telling the Church that She was in error regarding Her scientific understandings of the universe. I believe that Galileo was persecuted to an extent - labeled a heretic and arrested (someone please correct me if I am wrong). Of course the film hypes this up, making the gross exaggeration that the Church had killed some of the scientists.

(I should say "The Illuminati" in quotations. Those who have read the book and/or have watched the film know what I mean.)[/quote]

I don't understand the hostility considering you confirmed her criticism of the movie

And you don't need to see a movie to know what it's about. I've never seen An Officer and a Gentleman, but still know it's about a naval officer who carries some woman around constantly

[Brother Adam]

[quote]May 15, 2009


“ANGELS & DEMONS”:
SPECTACULARLY STUPID



Bill Donohue saw “Angels & Demons” today. Here is his take:

The movie is so spectacularly stupid that it blunts its anti-Catholic elements. But there are problems, nonetheless.



In the movie, the Catholic Church is said to have murdered members of the Illuminati, of which Galileo was a member. In real life, the Catholic Church never laid a hand on any member of the secret society and Galileo died almost a century and a half before the Illuminati were founded. In the movie, even Church officials admit that the Illuminati have reason for revenge, when, of course, this is pure nonsense. In the movie, we learn how the Church has worked against the march of progress, when, in fact, the historical record shows the opposite: the scientific achievements and contributions to higher education made by priests are incredible. In the movie,

Catholics are portrayed as believing “Stem Cell Research Is Murder,” when, in fact, the Church is pro-stem cell research, save for procedures which destroy embryos. In the movie, Pope Pius IX is said to have bludgeoned the genitalia of male statues (so anti-sex was he), when, of course, this never happened. Indeed, Pius IX lavishly funded the arts. And so on. There are a few bones thrown our way, but they hardly make up for the lies.



In the end, however, director Ron Howard turned out to be a blessing: his melodramatic characterization, and positively James Bondish type absurdities, have the effect of undercutting Dan Brown’s malicious portrayal of Catholicism.[/quote]

[quote]Apparently the Vatican disagrees with you. (me too)[/quote]

You cannot quote a newspaper that is run by a layman and is not an official organ of the Vatican and say that the Vatican has said anything.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1868400' date='May 15 2009, 11:45 PM']I don't understand the hostility considering you confirmed her criticism of the movie [/quote]

The main focus of the movie is to protect the Vatican and save the cardinals.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1868417' date='May 15 2009, 10:51 PM']The main focus of the movie is to protect the Vatican and save the cardinals.[/quote]
Dan Brown has proven his biases though. There's far more to it than saving the cardinals, I'm sure.

(I haven't read the books or seen the movies.)

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1868432' date='May 15 2009, 11:57 PM']Dan Brown has proven his biases though. There's far more to it than saving the cardinals, I'm sure.

(I haven't read the books or seen the movies.)[/quote]

The bias does show through Robert Langdon, who is not a religious man. However, the final scene of the film is very beautiful. The newly elected Pope is about to appear in public for the first time (on the balcony). His new carmelengo (who was the overseer of the conclave) passes some words of wisdom to Robert, explaining that human beings are the ones who are flawed. He then tells Robert that God sent him to save them. When Robert gently doubts this, the carmelengo lightly places his hand on Robert's shoulder, looks him in the eye, and says quite firmly "He did." Those who are fans of traditional Catholicism will also notice something about the main female character (a physicist) who is present with Robert just outside the Pope's room. She is wearing a veil.

[Nihil Obstat]

That's interesting...
...What I'm getting at though, is this:

Dan Brown is against Catholicism. That's a given. Therefore I think it's safe to assume that there are anti Catholic biases in his work. With that assumption, I'd prefer to dig deeper than the more obvious themes and try to find what's actually being communicated. Know what I mean?

[CatherineM]

I'm just glad the Vatican didn't ban it. That would just put money in their pockets. Calling it mindless entertainment is the best way to go.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1868453' date='May 15 2009, 11:06 PM']That's interesting...
...What I'm getting at though, is this:

Dan Brown is against Catholicism. That's a given. Therefore I think it's safe to assume that there are anti Catholic biases in his work. With that assumption, I'd prefer to dig deeper than the more obvious themes and try to find what's actually being communicated. Know what I mean?[/quote]
You mean digging around in the movie to see what you can possibly take as "anti Catholic"?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1868457' date='May 15 2009, 11:10 PM']You mean digging around in the movie to see what you can possibly take as "anti Catholic"?[/quote]
Did I say that? I don't recall it.

If you're talking to a person that you know for a fact hates you, and you happen to come across them while they're talking in a group of people who also don't like you, and that person turns around and says something outwardly rather pleasant, are you going to assume right away that there's nothing you might be missing?

Sorry, that's an awkward analogy. I'm pulled in a bunch of directions at once right now.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1868453' date='May 16 2009, 12:06 AM']That's interesting...
...What I'm getting at though, is this:

Dan Brown is against Catholicism. That's a given. Therefore I think it's safe to assume that there are anti Catholic biases in his work. With that assumption, I'd prefer to dig deeper than the more obvious themes and try to find what's actually being communicated. Know what I mean?[/quote]

As explained, the only blatant bias I could find against the Church was through Robert's character. The [i]purpose[/i] of the story focuses on the stereotypical "religion versus science" debate. The [i]point[/i] of the story stresses the importance of religion and science working together, that they do not HAVE to be mutually exclusive.

There was one discrepancy I found, however, that CAN be directly attributed to Dan Brown. While trying to save the third cardinal, Robert and the authorities are ambushed (for lack of a better word). Robert ducks for cover and hides under the elevated glass coffin of an incorruptible saint. He kicks through grating and slips beneath the Church into a crypt. The camera pans the Church and focuses on how it has become ruined by a fire which was set by the bad guy. Something happened with the saint's coffin, I think the glass was shattered by bullets. In any event, she is briefly on camera and the fire is melting the hot wax which has been put over her preserved body. Now my understanding is that SOME of the incorruptible saints ARE coated with a thin layer of wax. The movie, however, shows a fairly decayed face behind the wax - as if she is really corruptible after all, and that man - not God - has preserved her.

Is that the sort of thing you were looking for? In all honesty I was scrutinizing the film to pick up on things like this, and this was the only blatant discrepancy I could find.

[BG45]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1868457' date='May 16 2009, 01:10 AM']You mean digging around in the movie to see what you can possibly take as "anti Catholic"?[/quote]

I don't think he does dig around given his earlier comment.

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1868432' date='May 16 2009, 12:57 AM'](I haven't read the books or seen the movies.)[/quote]

Edited May 16, 2009 by BG45

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1868462' date='May 15 2009, 11:15 PM']Is that the sort of thing you were looking for? In all honesty I was scrutinizing the film to pick up on things like this, and this was the only blatant discrepancy I could find.[/quote]
Like I said, I wouldn't know exactly what I'm looking for... but a person who's hardline anti-Catholic is going to tend not to write things particularly friendly towards the Church.
I hear that was toned down for the movie though, so people more qualified than me have to analyze it.