The DaVinci Code, Mary Magdalene, and the Last Supper

And yet we are also dealing with a religious doctrine taught through a novel. I like to think of Dan Brown in a personal way as "Pastor Dan;" so let me be quirky and call him that as I speak of him. He is preaching, after all, in his own way, through Langdon.

Brown's claim is the "mystery" of Jesus' marriage to Mary Magdelene. Well, now that he has announced it, it is mysterious no longer, and we do not have to go on a quest to find it, as Langdon and Sophie do. Or do we? The Quest for the Holy Grail is over. Centuries of seeking, and mystery, and ritual, and here it is. Or is it?

What are we to do? Are we to start allowing priests to marry? The Bible itself doesn't even prohibit it! Brown is right that the Catholic doctrine represses male sexuality; that's probably partially responsible for the cases of child molestation. But there are also a lot of sincere and good priests. Some apostles, like Peter, were married. (Matthew 8:14-15)

Or is God really a woman? Or androgynous, mixed-gender, or a balance of man and woman? We shouldn't shy away from asking these questions, and I'm grateful that Brown raises them.

Langdon suggests we can experience God in female sexual intercourse. He teaches this to college students and prison inmates, who laugh at him. Langdon himself is single and shows only passing interest in Sophie, having ended his relationship with the Italian heroine Vittoria of Angels and Demons. What he teaches must be at best some form of abstraction, although he does apparently sleep with Vittoria.

As for "The Last Supper," Langdon implies that the person seated to the left of Jesus at the table is not the disciple John, but Mary Magdelene. He reasons that the character is "effeminate" in appearance, and wears a robe that is color-coordinated with that of Jesus. There are two problems created here. First, where is John? Hiding under the table? By removing John, Brown has created a bigger problem. Using Occam's Razor, we seek the simplest possible explanation. John was "beloved" of Jesus, and the youngest; these are good reasons for Da Vinci to make him "effeminate."

The second issue concerns the disciple Peter, seated next to the dark figure of Judas, counting two to the left of Jesus. Langdon suggests that Peter is holding a knife in a menacing threat toward Mary Magdelene, and that Peter holds his other hand menacingly at her throat. However, when Jesus is betrayed, Peter does draw a sword to strike the soldier Malchus (John 18:10). Peter would do this kind of thing. That's his style. Also, "Mary," if she is being threatened, doesn't look concerned.

In the story, it is Jesus who announces the coming betrayal, and Jesus again who foreknows the betrayer, Judas (Luke 22:15-22). Jesus announces what is to happen, and gives his body and blood (bread and wine) to the disciples to take from Him; from him the entire scene radiates outward. He is the center of the painting. If he is just a married man, what is he doing giving his "body" and "blood" to a bunch of other men too?

The left half of the painting is dark, while the right half is lighter, or white. The legs underneath the table are dark on the left side and white on the right. For an artist portraying a God, light and dark would surely represent good and evil. Isn't that reasonable? If so, it would be consistent for Jesus' betrayer to be sitting on the dark side. It would not be consistent for Jesus' wife to be there. Judas, incidentally, is darker in his clothing, hair, and skin tone than any of the eleven other disciples.

If the Chalice and the true Bride are Mary Magdalene, what does that mean for today? Should we seek out the seed of Jesus and Magdelene and make him/her King of the Earth? If DaVinci was convinced of these things, and was the seed, why did he keep this secret? Isn't it also odd that intellectual genius, and female sexuality, of all things, are the features attributed to Nazarene-Magdalene descendants? Why that? And that they remain in hiding in France, in the 21st century?

I feel what we have is an interesting novel, the best in a series of conspiracy novels, that promotes an academic theory whose merits have yet to be proven. There is much talk of "suppression," and therefore incomplete understanding of theory. But we have really quite seriously lived outside the political control of the Roman Catholic Church since the Reformation - four centuries. That complaint really rings hollow.

I agree Magdalene is nearest of all to Jesus, closer even than the twelve disciples. She stands outside the empty tomb awaiting his return in tears (20:15). Peter and John come running, upon her word, and are satisfied to see the discarded clothes in the empty tomb. Then, like busy men, they run away. But Mary keeps waiting. Then Jesus, masking himself as the gardener, appears to her in person (20:18). This is precious. You sense he would all but embrace her, if he were not still stained with death (20:17). And if He did kiss her on the lips, would it matter? We know what it means...

Or do we? Langdon may be questioning the divinity of Christ. If Christ married and had a child, that child is divine, and there is no faith. On the alternative view, if Christ died and rose for sins, then He is divine, and there is faith. I will personally choose the latter, trusting my life to Christ over Pastor Dan.

Jesus once asked Peter, if a man with a small debt were pardoned, and a man with a great debt were pardoned, which would feel it more? Peter answers, the one with the greater debt. I believe it is the most dignifying statement of all in the gospel of John that the person who feels greatest pardon is Mary Magdelene. She is the first to preach the gospel (20:18). She is perhaps the most grateful for her life, for her good news. She is indeed Jesus' bride! But is she the only one?

That is the crux of the matter: if Pastor Dan is right, Jesus was only human, and cannot forgive sin. Mary was his ONLY bride. If Christ himself is right, He gave His body and blood so that ALL who believe in Him can be forgiven of sins and ALSO be his bride. Which kind of man would you prefer to believe?