Redimete Diem!Look
carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, |
|
Home |
The Pilgrim's
Progress |
Worship |
Sermons |
Courses |
|
Confronting The Da Vinci Code Appendix: Concerning Christian Symbols
“’Transmogrification,’ Langdon said,
‘The vestiges of pagan religion in Christian symbology are undeniable.
Egyptian sun disks became the halos of Catholic saints. Pictograms of
Isis nursing her miraculously
conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the
Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus. And virtually all the elements of the
Catholic ritual – the miter, the altar, the doxology, the communion, the
act of ‘God-eating’ – were taken directly from earlier pagan mystery
religions.’ “Transmogrification” comes from the root word “transmogrify” which means “to change or alter greatly and often with grotesque or humorous effect”. Dr. Jekyll changing into Mr. Hyde would be an example of transmogrification. The latter half of this definition is what separates “transmogrification” from “transformation” which simply means “to change”, and in this case, “to change in character or condition”. The etymology of “transmogrify”, according to Merriam-Webster, is unknown. It would seem, therefore, that Mr. Brown’s great symbologist has, himself, borrowed a very unoriginal term which comes from where he knows not and has applied it imprecisely and even inappropriately in the attempt to mislead others for his own purposes. And “symbologist”? There is no such term according to Merriam-Webster and if you search for such a field or specialty online, the only symbologist you immediately find is Robert Langdon! Mr. Brown’s “symbologist”, you see, is itself just a symbol, another word for a mask behind which one intentionally seeks to teach or communicate phony information and myth. One main reason why a “science” such as this “symbology” would be phony is because icons themselves tend to be phony. Pictures, images, etc., always and primarily reflect the one who creates them or the person or persons who employ them at the moment. The meaning and interpretation is his own. Halos are the emphasis given by an artist, not handed down from authority. Icons can and do easily mean different things to different people, different cultures and different times. And trying to track down a “true” derivation of any given symbol – let alone try to convince us that its use and meaning has been scrupulously and conspiratorially maintained and communicated – is vain and naïve at best. The symbols of Christianity are all borrowed and meaningless, we’re told, but the symbols of hidden and suppressed secrets are original, profound and historically meaningful. This is imagination and fiction at best. At worst, as here, it is deliberate deception. There can be no doubt that various “symbols” that Mr. Brown refers to in his book are really just things, traditions and mannerisms that the Christian faith has picked up along the way. But they are far from being clues as to how the Christian faith as we know it today was somehow made the end product of taking an early, “simpler” message and combining with the mysticism and myth of pagan religions. They are really signposts showing the path by which the true faith, often in very specific times and events of history, overcame the attacks and attempts to change and compromise it along the way. Every culture and every generation that has ever embraced the Gospel has contributed to such symbolism. How Christmas is celebrated, for instance, is widely different from one culture and one nation to the next and even from one age to the next. (The present generation in America, for instance, is the first one to add the tradition of manic and unbridled materialism to the celebration of Christmas.) To turn and track back the origins of such symbols, just to prove they were “man-made” or that some resemble the traditions and practices of other pagan religions, does no more toward proving or arguing that the Christian gospel itself is just as fake. Such “mystery” is an absolute waste of time. There is no real point in arguing about the various symbols and their origins. No one would deny that in the midst of the transition from pagan religions and superstitions to Christianity, as was done in the 4th century, much ignorance, tradition and misconception were also transferred over. But other things were done deliberately and with great debate and discussion. The dates for Christmas and Easter were not quietly borrowed and adopted to somehow “make” Jesus a god by giving him the miraculous birth and resurrection which were first taught elsewhere and making them church dogma. These realities were the testimony of Christians from that very first Christmas morning and that first Lord’s Day and they were willing to stand true to the testimony of historic Christian faith even in the face of death – precisely refusing to worship idols and man-made deities, not wishing whatsoever to compromise in any way. But still, those decisions concerning such dates were just man-made. Nothing was given us by God regarding the annual celebrations of Jesus’ birth and resurrection – they were simply times chosen – whether wisely or poorly – to commemorate the truth of those events. For what it is worth, this has also worked the other way around from time to time: Christian symbols are taken and incorporated into other religions or practices. The Red Crescent is the Islamic version of the Red Cross. (Even more than the symbol, the concept of needing to organize in order to be compassionate and merciful toward others in need has been borrowed from the Christian message and now finds its way even into Islam.) From time to time, the covenant sign of the rainbow from Gen. 9 is taken and used by groups advocating anything from diversity of the races to homosexuality – neither of which has anything to do with the Biblical message. The dove, taken from the story of Noah and the Ark, complete with the olive branch in its mouth has, somehow, been “transmogrified” (to use Mr. Brown’s term) into the quintessential symbol of peace – peace not defined in any historical, objective or theological standard, mind you, but rather to mean whatever anyone wants it to mean at the time. But nobody would ever think of scoffing at the sincerity of such things as these merely because their symbols were not original. But all of this is not to say that Christianity has always necessarily endorsed, claimed or has truly benefited from all these so-called symbols either. Catholics and Protestants (to draw with a broad brush) take drastically different views regarding the use of icons and images. But we can agree that wisely chosen and applied symbolism can be rich in meaning and point to truth with just as much profundity as Mr. Brown wants to use symbolism to point to distortion and lies. Elsewhere, there are questions and challenges among Christians regarding some symbols that are already in place. As widely accepted as the holidays of Christmas and Easter are as cultural celebrations, not all Christians are persuaded that they really should be celebrated, per se, because they are not given as such by God in His Word. But even these disagreements do not force us to conclude that the basic Gospel should be dismissed as fiction. Meanwhile, other symbols, such as we find in the rich Christian tradition of the arts – music, architecture, sculpture and painting – have all seen truly glorious contributions to the representation of the Gospel in the culture of man, Da Vinci included. But, you see, the real sadness of this little bit of Mr. Brown’s propaganda is that he plants the seeds of doubt in some Christians’ minds about the use of “symbols” that are really quite irrelevant. The real symbols of the Christian faith are not pictures or robes or days or colors. The real symbols are words – words well studied, thought out and formulated and then put down on paper from age to age as confessions and creeds of the Church’s faith and testimony. The real symbols of Christianity include the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Canons of Dordt, the Westminster Confession of Faith. These are the real symbols behind which the Church stands – they are real, historical, meaningful, profound, and, I assure you, quite, quite, original. Rather than blending in with other religions for political and pragmatic reasons, the Christian faith, by the tools of her real symbols, has always called for the radical embracing of its radical message, calling for radical change, for repentance, faith, commitment and evangelism. Mr. Brown would have his readers focus on the things that are incidental and, essentially meaningless, and draw our attention away from the sure testimony of the Gospel and its history. If Christianity is, indeed, true, Mr. Brown is to be condemned for his deception. He has become the symbol of Satan, the Father of lies, and he is to be regarded as such.
Pastor David G. Barker, 2005 |
| David G. Barker david.barker@ncpres.org |