Anthroposophy versus Dan Brown

This is a translation of a Dutch book criticizing Dan Brown's bestseller "The Da Vinci Code". The book contain a number of grammatical errors, and no translator is given, so I suspect the translation was actually made by the Dutch author himself, John van Schaik.

Since Schaik is an Anthroposophist, this is actually something as unusual as an esotericist criticism of "The Da Vinci Code". However, the author says little of interest we haven't already heard elsewhere.

Thus, Schaik points out that the Gnostic gospels in which Jesus supposedly kisses Mary Magdalene are fragmentary, and that kissing was common in many ancient cultures even between people who weren't lovers. This is trivial, but in our over-sexed culture, words such as "Jesus loved her" or "Jesus kissed her" is immediately taken as evidence of an erotic relationship. Schaik also points out that kisses were used in initiation rituals, so the fact that Jesus kissed the Magdalene might simply mean that she was more initiated in the mysteries than the other disciples. Indeed, this seems to be the real point of the Gnostics, many of whom were ascetic and viewed Jesus as a purely spiritual being! No sex there. The author also points out that not all Jewish holy men were married, so Jesus might very well have been celibate.

The Grail legends are also dissected by Scheik, who regard them as unmistakably Christian, not Cathar. As for the Knights Templar, the Inquisition accused the Templars of sodomy, not ritual sex magic with women. Besides, the "confessions" of the Templars were extorted under torture. Indeed, it was standard fare during antiquity and the Middle Ages to accuse "heretics" and other deviants of sexual orgies. In some cases the accusations might have been true, but in most cases we are dealing with typical slanders. According to Scheik, Dan Brown probably took his descriptions of "hieros gamos" sexual rituals from a modern religious cult, the OTO.

Somewhat surprisingly, Scheik claims that the medieval Catholic Church didn't denigrate women, pointing to the cult of both the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene. Indeed, he doesn't even believe that the Church slandered Mary Magdalene. Rather than being misogynist, the Church was anti-sex. This was necessary, according to the author, due to the sexual excesses of the pagan world. I get the impression that Scheik has an orientation to traditional Christians, hence his positive appraisal of the Catholic Church. He even claims that the Anthroposophists can solve the enigma of Jesus' dual nature as both human and divine. Here, the author is being somewhat disingenuous, since the Anthroposophical "solution" is that the Christ was a solar spirit incarnating in the human Jesus - a weird mutant version of the Nestorian position, not the Chalcedonian. Besides, Scheik implies at one point that Mary got pregnant in the usual manner, although not by Joseph!

I can't say "Why Jesus didn't marry Mary Magdalene" thrilled me, but it might have a certain interest for those who still give a damn about Dan Brown. I certainly don't!

Three stars.