Well – that was an almost perfectly good waste of a few hours.
During the last few days I had the misfortune of (struggling to) read{ing} The Templar Legacy: A Novel
Ugh. About half way through this turgid and bewildering novel – see critiques of the novel as a work of literature(?) at Amazon.com – I realized Berry had a colossal axe to grind. He hates… he loathes… he despises Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church in particular. The book is largely a knock-off of The DaVinci Code by Dan Brown. Its central “crux” is hard evidence that Jesus of Nazareth never rose from the dead. Evidence that the Knights Templar possessed. And used to blackmail the Roman Catholic Church. Which is to say the Roman Catholic Church knew all along that one of the central events of the Christian story is a lie. Brown quotes Pope Leo X: “It has served us well, this myth of Christ”. Yup. Those Medici popes. Very representative.
Issues of religion and theology and history aside – it is not a very good book. Problems with plot and writing and characterization are pointed out well in the smattering of reviews one can find on the Internet. I will focus – briefly I hope – on Berry’s axe and why it is so dull.
Key elements of Berry’s assault on Christian (especially Roman Catholic) faith are (pp. 282-283, 323-329, 336-340, 404-405, 453-465, 473 et passim):
- differences (“contradictions”) between the four Gospel accounts***
- that several scenes in the Gospels could not possibly have been witnessed by anyone (so they must have been invented)
- that only a single skeleton of a crucifixion victim has ever been found
- that Jesus lasted only three hours on the cross
- that Jesus – a victim of crucifixion – was even given a decent burial
- the way the church chose a small set of writings as “Scripture” and imposed them on the world to the exclusion of other writings
- that Jesus is not mentioned in a single (secular and historical) writing outside the New Testament
Berry is certainly entitled to his views. And to criticize – even reject – Christianity. Fair enough. But could he at least offer an informed and intelligent critique? That is my criticism of Berry and his novel. Not that he rejects the Christian faith. I can hack that. Dude – I went to Cornell. Been there and faced that. My complaint is that Berry’s attacks are uninformed and downright stupid.
Some of the “arguments” against “orthodox Christianity” are not bad points. I think #2 and #4 merit discussion. And yes rather a lot of genuine evil has been done in the name of the Christian religion.
What is troubling is that intelligent and informed Christians have good answers to most (if not all) of the above. Many Christians respond to such challenges with more than just “it’s a matter of faith” (p. 327 – Stephanie serving as Berry’s straw-woman). And as a matter of fact the choices are not only “inerrancy… literal meaning” on the one hand, “contradictions… myth” on the other. That is typical Western, dichotomistic, binary, rationalist thinking – which ironically is characteristic of (Christian) fundamentalism. Fundamentalism and extreme religious liberalism (along with secularism) are kissing cousins. “Either it’s all a lie or you must be a fundamentalist”. Oh please.
It is entirely possible to view the Bible as the “Word of God” and to believe what it teaches (however one determines that) – including such central events as the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus – without resorting to “inerrancy” or “it’s just a matter of faith”. But if Berry had done any decent amount of research into biblical scholarship on these issues – besides reading Resurrection, Myth or Reality by the lamentable John Spong of all people – he would know there are well researched, scholarly, reasonable approaches to these questions. Not to mention that Berry parrots the usual “conspiracy” theories about orthodox theology and the biblical canon – theories which are not supported by responsible scholarship. In other words it’s not just a matter of whether one agrees with Berry’s arguments and opinions. Sometimes he is just wrong.
Read the Gospel of Thomas and tell me if it is really superior to the canonical Gospels. I dare you.
Dude – Berry invites and writes a fictional Gospel of Simon which is placed along the alleged bones of Jesus. Modern secularist pablum projected into the past. Wow. That’s profound. But it is painfully clear Berry thinks Christians (of even a slightly traditional flavor let alone who are “orthodox”) are dumb. Breathtakingly dense. That we cannot see these problems and arrive at what Berry thinks are the obvious conclusions that it is all a myth invented to manipulate and control people (see p. 473). You would think someone at some point would have cleaned up the biblical (anti-)evidence were it so danged obvious.
One wonders if Berry plans similar attacks on Muhammad and the origins of Islam.
Berry on the one hand correctly understands the distinctiveness of resurrection as opposed to mere immortality (see p. 282). Even Christians often fail to recognize this. But Berry fails to recognize that if you want to motivate people with the promise of an afterlife you do not need resurrection. Just hit them with “immortality of the soul” and “eternal bliss”. But resurrection?!?
In a way the novel explores a single question. “What if the resurrection had never happened?” (p. 283).
Fair enough.
But what if it had?
