The Da Vinci Hoax: Exposing the Errors in the Da Vinci Code

by Carl E. Olson, Sandra Miesel

The Da Vinci Code , Dan Brown's best selling novel, purports to be more than it claims to be based on fact and scholarly research. Brown wants his readers to believe that he is revealing the long-concealed truth about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity, a truth that he says has been suppressed by the malevolent and conspiratorial forces of the Catholic Church. The novel alleges that there has been throughout history a secret group of true followers of a Gnostic Jesus and his wife, Mary Magdalene, the true "Holy Grail". Almost everything most Christians and non-Christians think they know about Jesus, according to Dan Brown, is completely wrong, the result of Catholic propaganda designed to hide the truth from the world.

But are  The Da Vinci Code 's claims fact or just plain fiction? Is the novel well-researched as claimed? What is the truth about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and the early Church? Has the Catholic Church distorted the real Jesus? Why is the novel so popular? What about the anti-Catholic, anti-Christian agenda behind the novel?

Best selling author Carl Olson and journalist Sandra Miesel answer these and other important questions. Their painstaking research into The Da Vinci Code  and its sources reveals some surprising truths. No one who has read or heard about  The Da Vinci Code  should miss this provocative and illuminating book.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, History, Catholic, Literary Criticism, Christianity, Christian

329 pages, Paperback

First published July 1, 2004

About the author

Carl Olson is the editor of Ignatius Insight, an online magazine that provides readers with essays, interviews, reviews and news related to the Catholic Church and the work of Ignatius Press, one of the world’s largest Catholic publishers. He is also the moderator of the Insight Scoop, the Ignatius Press weblog.

Olson grew up in a Fundamentalist Protestant home in western Montana. After two years of art school, he attended Briercrest Bible College, an Evangelical Bible college in Saskatchewan, Canada, graduating with an associate’s degree in 1991. His wife, Heather, is a graduate of Multnomah Bible College in Portland, Oregon. They married in 1994 and entered the Catholic Church together in 1997; their conversion story appears in the book, Surprised By Truth 3.

In May 2000, Olson graduated from the University of Dallas with a Masters in Theological Studies. For two years he worked as the director of catechesis and evangelization for Nativity of the Mother of God, a Byzantine Catholic parish in Springfield, Oregon. Then, from 2002 to 2004, he was the editor of the award-winning Envoy magazine.

Long interested in Evangelical and Fundamentalist beliefs about the end of the world, Olson has written over two dozen articles about Bible prophecy, the belief in the “Rapture,” and Left Behind books. His first book, Will Catholics Be “Left Behind” A Catholic Critique of the Rapture and Today’s Prophecy Preachers (Ignatius Press, 2003) was the result of years of research on the topic; it was recognized by the Associated Press as one of the best religious titles of 2003.

Carl Olson is also the co-author, with medievalist Sandra Miesel, of The Da Vinci Hoax: Exposing the Errors in The Da Vinci Code (Ignatius, 2004; see www.davincihoax.com). Francis Cardinal George, Archbishop of Chicago, wrote the foreword and described the book as “the definitive debunking” of the best-selling The Da Vinci Code. In addition, historian Dr. James Hitchcock called it “superb and meticulous,” World editor Marvin Olasky described it as a “clearly-written antidote,” and Professor Philip Jenkins of Pennsylvania State University said it “is a delight to read.”

He has also written articles for Crisis, The Catholic Faith, Catholic Parent, National Catholic Register, Envoy, This Rock, First Things, Gilbert!, Touchstone, Canticle, Saint Austin Review, New Covenant, The Catalyst, Lay Witness, National Review Online, CatholicExchange.com, and Catholic.org. He is a contributing editor to This Rock magazine and writes the weekly “Opening the Word” Scripture column for Our Sunday Visitor. Olson also wrote the introduction to [b:Pied Piper of Atheism: Philip Pullman and Children’s Fantasy|2310638|Pied Piper of Atheism Phili

Reviews

[Tiffany · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ugh. This book is not good. Olson and Miesel seem to be attempting to make valid points (times when Brown made comments that weren't correct about Constantine or the Council of Nicea, etc.), but they have a tone as if they're just trying to prove Dan Brown, himself, wrong, not so much the facts. They use words like "silly" to describe his sources, and use language that absolutely smacks of "We're trying to humiliate this man." Okay, his book wasn't 100% correct; you don't need to attack him, just argue the facts.

Bart Ehrman's book Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code: A Historian Reveals What We Really Know about Jesus, Mary Magdalene & Constantine covers similar material, but he's much kinder in his approach. I've only read the Introduction and a little of Chapter 1, and I already feel like it's better and a more proper critical analysis of The Da Vinci Code (Olson & Miesel, notice I named the book, not the author.) than this book was.

---------------------------------------------------------------

07/07 page 17 "So far I've only read the Introduction and the Foreword, neither written by the actual authors of the book, but both seem very hateful to readers of The Da Vinci Code and to non-Catholics. hmmm...."

07/08 page 45 "[book] also against sexuality, feminism, & academic areas like postmodernism and the idea that history is "written by the winners." almost hateful & definitely condescending to people who read/enjoyed _tDVC_. readers are also "bias[ed]" and "weak." Please!"

07/08 page 47 "questioning authority is baaaaaaaad. Am I totally misreading the tone of this book, or are they really this close-minded and hateful?"

07/08 page 55 "the authors are making points that other books/authors would make, but their tone seems like they're ATTACKING Brown, not just proving points against his writing. it's not academic; it's PERSONAL"

07/09 page 84 "so it's okay to alter/interpret the text your own way, as long as you're a leader of the church? but no one else can have their own reading of it?"

07/10 page 132 "when the authors start really getting in to the Bible studies aspect and giving evidence about Bible history, they get a little less attacky. of course, as soon as i think they're done being &(&)^?^$#*ANGRY*(&(&$^$#, they get angry and attacky again. they just really hate dan brown, feminists, Po[st]Mo[dernism], and people who don't 100% believe the Bible."

07/12 page 240 "and now even less attacky (yay). however, still use some demeaning words and call other, similar books "silly.""

07/13 page 291 "it's all about tone. the authors are making some good points, but they're SO against Brown, almost sounding giddy at times to discredit him, that it just turns me off to any valid arguments they make. plus, they say that he "disparages" certain others, yet what are *they* doing? and they imply he's so dumb and off the mark for believing things that i've heard from other places, too, not just his favorite sources."

[Christine Sunderland · Rating 5 out of 5]

What is truth? The errors in Dan Brown's books are immense, but since it's fiction is that okay? I think not, and neither do the authors of this well written and well researched book. Novelists must write of truth just as nonfiction writers do, and writers should be held accountable. Unintentional errors are understandable, but blatant misrepresentation is more serious. Brown's dull conscience, poor writing, and great success are indeed troubling.

For the truth, check this book out.

[Michael Gerald · Rating 5 out of 5]

Totally debunks the myths being peddled by Brown and other neo-pagans and atheists. Only the gullible enough would even believe the fiction cum "research" of that guy Brown. Looking for the real deal, backed with research? Then read this.

[Eric · Rating 1 out of 5]

There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Dan Brown's work (putting aside that he is a great storyteller who can weave intricate puzzles into a plot). And there are plenty of good critiques out there. This book is not one of them. The author tries to hide his religious bias, although the endorsement on the cover makes it pretty obvious. On top of that, he goes a step further than do many critics by launching ad hominem attacks against not just Brown himself, but also his fans. Indeed, lumping Brown supporters with Holocaust deniers and Tim LaHaye fans (trying not to LMAO on the second one) is the kind of logical stretch of which not even Brown seems capable.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A THOROUGH CATHOLIC CRITIQUE OF DAN BROWN’S POPULAR NOVEL

Authors Carl E. Olson and Sandra Miesel wrote in the Introduction to this 2004 book, “If you have read that novel, you probably have some questions about it: is it as factual and well researched as the author claims? Is it telling the real story about the history of Christianity? What should readers think about its statements about Jesus, the Catholic Church, and Mary Magdalene?... This book has been written to answer the seemingly endless questions raised by ‘The Da Vinci Code.’ …. The issues and questions raised by [the book]… have to do with what people believe, how they live their lives… the chart-topping novel was purposefully written to challenge what people believe about God, Jesus, the Bible, Mary Magdalene, religion, history, and the nature of truth itself. The author readily admits this is so… Both of us are Christians who take our faith seriously … We believe the evidence shows that many of Brown’s statements about the Catholic Church are false; as Catholics we also find those statements offensive and upsetting… we want to examine ‘The Da Vinci Code’ carefully and with fairness, relying upon available scholarship---Christian and non-Christian.” (Pg. 17-19)

They note, ‘Brown apparently hopes ‘The Da Vinci Code’ will… radically … change perceptions of history, religion, and Western civilization… Brown … asserts his desire to promote the ‘sacred feminine’ and to challenge commonly accepted understandings of Western culture and Christianity.” (Pg. 28)

They outline, “Here is a list of what we believe are the major problems with ‘The Da Vinci Code: 1. It claims to be historically accurate and based on fact, but often it is not… Brown’s novel …. is unique because its historical claims ARE the central focus… the characters are simply devices meant to help promote Brown’s central concerns, which are ideological… 2. It repeatedly misunderstands or misrepresents people, places and events… Brown confuses the Vatican and the Catholic Church and writes as though they are synonymous… Similar confusion exists about the status of Opus Dei… A key character is Silas, a ‘hulking albino’ monk. Never mind that Opus Dei is not a religious order… it consists of mostly lay people, with fewer than 2 percent of its members being priests… In [Brown’s] previous novel ‘Angels and Demons,’ a main character states that Copernicus … was ‘murdered’ by the Catholic Church. (Actually, Copernicus, a devout Catholic, was bed-ridden for several days and then died of a cerebral hemorrhage at the age of seventy…

“3. It promotes a radical feminist, neo-gnostic agenda… [The book] draws much of its inspiration from goddess spirituality… the goddess movement involves a mixture of neo-paganism, neo-gnosticism, wicca, occultism, and radical feminism, all of which are mentioned, at least in passing, within Brown’s novel…. 4. It incorrectly and unfairly misrepresents Christianity and traditional Christian beliefs about God, Jesus, and the Bible… A sampling includes: Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. Prior to A.D. 325 no one believed Jesus was divine. Emperor Constantine declared Jesus to be divine… The Catholic Church burned over five million witches… 5. It propagates a relativistic, indifferent attitude toward truth and religion… [The book] reinforces the relativistic attitudes that are already prevalent in Western culture … the character Robert Langdon… talks about ‘faith’ as being built upon ‘fabrication’ and beliefs that cannot be proven in any way… such notions … frees people from any sense of obligation or discipline…” (Pg. 33-37)

They summarize, “Brown has written a novel that takes a potent mixture of divergent elements and shapes them into a popular, postmodern myth… he insists history cannot be known, but he still offers a history based on ‘fact’ and ‘research.’ He claims that religion is a crutch, but he has written a book permeated with an esoteric, syncretistic religiosity. He implies there is no truth, but he offers up secret ‘gnosis’ about reality…” (Pg. 43)

They state, “The interconnection between these ancient gnostic notions and feminist attacks on core Christian beliefs, especially upon the male priesthood, should be apparent. If the male and female genders are not unique in vital, but equal, ways… but are the results of an incomplete anthropology, then there is no reason to keep women is simply a matter of misogyny, not of theological, doctrinal truth. This connection is readily apparent in the activities of religious feminist groups, such as ‘Women-Church,’ that are intent on getting women ordained as Catholic priests (or priestesses)…” (Pg. 54) They add, “The feminist belief that the early Church was an egalitarian body led by both female and male bishops and priests is based on flimsy premises and lacks historical evidence. This has been partially admitted by [Elaine] Pagels, who stated … [to PBS] ‘I don’t see a picture of a golden age of egalitarianism back then… I see a … threatened movement which allowed a lot more flui9dity for women in certain roles for a while…’” (Pg. 57)

They note, “The Jesus of the gnostic writings is rarely recognizable as a Jewish carpenter, teacher, and prophet dwelling in first-century Palestine; instead, he is often described as a phantom-like creature… [in] terms that only the gnostic elite would comprehend---hence their secretive, gnostic character… One strain of gnosticism, known as Docetism, held that Jesus only … appeared, to be a man.” (Pg. 67)

They report, “the novel asserts the following: 1. Mary Magdalene, not an inanimate chalice, is the Holy Grail… and Leonardo da Vinci depicter her as such in ‘The Last Supper.’ The Quest for the Holy Grail is the search … for the resting place of Mary Magdalene. 2. The Catholic Church launched a ‘smear campaign’ against Mary Magdalene…and labeled her as a prostitute … ‘on order to erase evidence of her powerful family ties’… 3. Jesus and Mary were married… [and] had children; after Jesus’ death, Mary fled to France, persecuted by the Catholic Church. 4. Mary Magdalene was the first and greatest apostle… She was of royal blood… By marrying, Jesus and Maray established themselves as heirs to Solomon’s kingship.” (Pg. 75)

They point out, “the Church left open the question of whether or not Mary Magdalene and the woman who was a sinner are the same person… [this] teaching … was not infallible, nor was it issued in an encyclical or a papal bull. It was never defined as Catholic dogma… But ‘The Da Vinci Code’ and many of its sources react as though the sole purpose for the existence of the Church was to destroy Mary Magdalene.” (Pg. 84-85) They summarize, “There is no credible evidence that Jesus was married, that Mary Magdalene was of royal blood, or that the two created a dynastic alliance together. But there is plenty of evidence that those promoting these beliefs are willing to do so without any proof or logical explanation.” (Pg. 106)

They assert, “There is clear and copious evidence that Christians, dating back to Jesus’ time on earth, believed that Jesus of Nazareth was divine… Explicit and implicit evidence that Jesus and his followers knew he was more than a mere mortal is found throughout the New Testament… John’s gospel contains some of the strongest statements about the divinity of Jesus.” (Pg. 112-113)

They recount, “Brown is especially adamant that Constantine was at the heart of the move from ‘matriarchal paganism to patriarchal Christianity’ by ‘waging a campaign of propaganda that demonized the sacred feminine, obliterating the goddess from modern religion forever.’ This is puzzling, since his novel also states that all eth pagans of the time were sun-worshippers, or worshippers of a male deity.’” (Pg. 141)

They state, “books such as ‘The Da Vinci Code’ take the approach of throwing together a convenient mixture of religions (that is, sun-worshipping paganism; Mithraism; the cults of Isis, Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysius; and Hinduism’s Krishna) that contain some parallels and similarities and then declare: ‘See the similarities? Obviously Christianity is derived directly from paganism.’ Usually ignored is that for every general similarity (for instance, Mithra born of a virgin) there are serious differences (the virgin became pregnant by swimming in water containing four-hundred-year-old sperm)… the mystery religions that supposedly influenced Christianity often do not have physical evidence for existing prior to the second century.” (Pg. 165)

They argue, “The claim that ‘thousands of documents’ that chronicles Jesus’ life were in existence is spurious and is far off the mark… the actual number [of documents] was probably several dozen… The reference to a ‘new Bible’ is misleading, implying that Constantine created a canon that not existed before… Constantine had nothing to do with the selection of books��� He relied on the Church, which had firmly established the four Gospels and the majority of the New Testament long before the fourth century.” (Pg. 174-176)

They report, “Dan Brown… claims that the Holy Grail was really the body of Mary Magdalene. She was the figurative vessel that carried the holy blood of Christ in her womb while bearing his offspring… Brown also [is]… making her a manifestation of the ‘divine feminine.’” (Pg. 178) They say, ‘What Dan Brown and his sources, influences, and fellow travelers display is a radical refusal to engage the Catholic Church and her cultural artifacts on their own terms. The occultists, feminists, and gnostics who inspired Brown wish only to redefine and mutilate Catholicism unto its destruction.” (Pg. 193)

They explain, “‘The Da Vinci Code’ and its sources … trade heavily on this supposed continuity between paganism, gnosticism, and the Templars, as well as on the supposed gnostic connections of the Holy Grail… The Romantic era’s taste for the perverse and conspiratorial led some people to regard the Templar as enlightened heroes, allies of the Cathars and opponents of the clerical order. All the heretics of the Middle Ages…. Were imagined to have actively collaborated against the monstrous impositions of Rome.” (Pg. 217)

They recount, “Brown… kept the Priory’s pretensions as the ultimate secret society, more powerful than the Jesuits, the Holy Office, Opus Dei… He does simplify the Priory’s list of rivals, making its great enemy Opus Dei instead of the Knights of Malta… Brown does cling to the … historically ludicrous claims … [that] Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and intended his church to be led by her, not St. Peter. They were the parents of at least one child. After the crucifixion---which is not followed by a resurrection---the Magdalene fled to southern Gaul with Joseph of Arimathea… Some descendant injected the Holy Blood into the Merovingian dynasty that took power in … France after Rome’s fall… the lineage persisted in secret and linked up with various noble families…” (Pg. 225) They summarize, “the Merovingians was not as described in ‘Holy Blood, Holy Grail.’ … there was no holy blood to be transmitted because Jesus was not married to Magdalene, there was no place for it to enter the Merovingian lineage or be continued after that dynasty’s fall in 751.” (Pg. 231-232)

They conclude, “Our hope is that readers will not only consider the truth about specific replies and issues but will agree that Truth does exist and needs to be respected.” (Pg. 298)

This book will be of great interest to those seeking critiques of Dan Brown’s novel.

[Michael Toleno · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is a persistent tendency among reviewers (both on Goodreads and elsewhere) to dismiss out of hand any book or article that seeks to analyze the claims of The Da Vinci Code, often saying, “It’s just a novel; you’re not supposed to take it so seriously” as if Brown’s presentation were simply light entertainment. It’s ironic—and deeply lamentable, considering the eternal consequences of rejecting the gospel, especially for willfully stopping one’s ears to it in favor of a hoax—that the same reviewers and readers take Brown’s claims very seriously without cross-checking even the most obvious and easily refuted errors. In reality, The Da Vinci Code—both in the text itself and in Dan Brown’s numerous interviews during his promotional book tour—was presented as being based firmly on historical fact. Brown consistently claimed to have researched his material thoroughly, even going so far as to assure viewers on nationally broadcast programs that every detail surrounding art, architecture, secret societies, and religious history was absolutely true. Many people took him at his word and then went on to defend the book and shout down any criticism, no matter how warranted, and no matter how obviously incorrect Brown’s “facts” were.

That context is exactly why The Da Vinci Hoax and other such books (e.g., Breaking the Da Vinci Code by Darrell Bock, which I’ve just started) are crucial to an honest understanding of this bizarre cultural phenomenon. Olson and Miesel do an excellent job both outlining why such a response is necessary and then backing it up with carefully researched, point-by-point analysis of Brown’s numerous errors and outright fabrications. Their documentation is solid, and they clearly explain the real history—topics like the canon of Scripture, the Council of Nicaea, Leonardo da Vinci’s life and work, the secret societies, the early church, the “Holy Grail” legend, Mary Magdalene, and much more. I particularly appreciated their explanation of gnosticism and how Brown’s claims lean heavily on gnostic ideas that have long been discredited.

Though I certainly disagree with the authors’ Catholicism and inevitable Mariology, their defense of early Christian history was commendable. Their work is clear, fair, and on target—much needed given how easily the popular culture swallowed Brown’s misinformation and wild conspiracy claims.

I have a couple of minor criticisms: (1) A few of the logical refutations and historical explanations run long, causing the reader to lose track of which claims of The Da Vinci Code are being refuted and what specific point is being addressed or why. The sheer volume of material wasn’t the issue; this could easily be fixed by restating the main arguments or recapitulating the relevant parts of the argument to that point so that the reader can stay oriented. (2) There are a few editing oversights. The most noticeable occurred several times. Here is an example sentence: “Constantine . . . knew that his place was, not to be a theologian or scholar, but to help facilitate . . . .” The comma before not is incorrect, causing the reader an unnecessary bit of parsing difficulty.

All things considered, authors Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel succeeded in what they set out to do: They provided a readable, thoroughly documented corrective that should give any open-minded reader the full picture. For those interested in truth over popular myth and hype, The Da Vinci Hoax is well worth reading.

[Marie-Chantale Sundberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Recently, someone was sharing that it was interesting to watch the Da Vinci Code. I didn’t share my opinion on the subject because it was not requested. But I went and dug out this book that I had looked for after reading 4 of Dan Brown’s best sellers. The American writer combines historical fiction and Christian concepts and claims that he is not anti-Christian but rather promotes spiritual discussions and debates “for introspection and exploration of our faith”.

Although this review is about the debunking book published a while after the Da Vinci Code hit the market, I will cast a few words about Angels & Demons, The Da Vinci Code, The Lost Symbol and Inferno. I read all online and I haven’t watched the movie adaptations that were made of Angels & Demons, The Da Vinci Code and Inferno. It would have been a sheer waste of time in my opinion. The reads are pretty easy and showcase “treasure hunts”, focusing on cryptography and conspiracy theories. The storyline is entertaining as a thriller and you can actually read one book of the trilogy and have enough of that narrative since a lot will be recurring and at times boring you from repetition. Additionally, if you have religious knowledge, the so called “facts” are laughably idiotic. Some people might be offended from them. I just see these novels as fictional tales that can be provocative to some and are amusing to me. Don’t get me wrong. The riddles are intriguing and the suspense is real. Definitely not if you have read all the aforementioned books: if you have gone through one, you can easily predict the others.

Getting back to our book of today and its review, it is undeniably a compelling disproof of all the false facts and ideas presented as historical such as the medieval chronicles allegedly promoted by the Priory of Sion and the Templar Knights. Again, the events are presented as truths that sounded a bit fishy to me and got me to do in depth research on the practices of the Templars and their doctrines and practices. The idea of Mary Magdalene being romantically involved with Jesus and shoring in the south of France, and that the Holy Grail is in fact the bloodline of the Messiah, are not new theories. These are elements found in multiple esoteric documents. It is actually up to you to decide whether you consider this kind of information as historical or a hoax. I know that for myself, I did enjoy reading what I consider a mystery writing, before getting bored with the second and third and fourth stories. I certainly would not consider these tales as a truthful account of historical facts, that are simply erroneous. Our book, exposes the errors, and provides with sources if you wish to dig deeper. Happy reading!

[Anne · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having just read The Da Vinci Code and rather disliked it, I was excited to see its claims debunked. And for the most part, I enjoyed this book. It pulled on primary sources and well as scholarly opinions to debunk many of the claims Brown writes about in his book. However, it is told from a very Catholic stance, and I would have preferred if the book took a more scholarly view of the evidence instead of focusing on defending Christianity specifically. It also went so far as to make attacks on Brown as a person. And I'm saying this being a Catholic myself. However, when the book gets down to the meat of the arguments, it does a good job backing its claims with thoroughly researched evidence. If you did read The Da Vinci Code and want to know of the truth of the history it claims, this is a good book to read.

[Margaret Hovestadt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good! Extremely informative. I recomend that anyone who read The Da Vinci Code read this book as well!

[Leyla · Rating 1 out of 5]

I truly believe that you have to read The Da Vinci Code on the side to understand this book, or before it. Or simply don't read it or them at all. As they say: Don't mess with fire.

If you are into History this book is for you.

I finished it for the sake of accomplishment and thank God it's over - I can move on to new things now!

Thanks for the experience though :)

[Em7ar7 · Rating 4 out of 5]

huge hole in the whole plot at the end

[Marcia · Rating 3 out of 5]

...a must read to understand the truth....

[David · Rating 1 out of 5]

A reallly bad book published in house by the same religious group who wrote the book.Views persued by closed mided people living in medevil times.read at your own risk.

[Dale · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the real EYE OPENER of the truth book based on research and not just fictional story like Da Vinci Code.

[Natalia · Rating 1 out of 5]

It looks like this book was written by a couple of religious fanatics. This was not a mere critique but a personal attack on Brown. I would not recommend this to anybody.

[Roseann · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a great history book. Learn the facts here.

[B O G E L]

semakin yakin,,,akan keyakinan,

[Kerry · Rating 4 out of 5]

[Copied across from Library Thing; 17 October 2012]