Read Along with Pastor Amanda

For the new "read along," I'm going controversial. Back when Dan Brown published The DaVinci Code, thousands of people were convinced that "the Church" was a part of a major conspiracy to oppress women and keep God male. Friends who read it questioned why I've continued to be a part of such an oppressive institution. I loved The DaVinci Code and loved Angels and Demons even more. It's light, fun, distracting, and a decent way to spend an afternoon. It wasn't life changing, and it's not written to win literature awards. It's sensationalist writing, and it got people talking. Like any book, fiction or nonfiction, it needs to be read with a degree of skepticism. I'm taking that approach to The Lost Symbol.

When I first started The Lost Symbol and I realized it was in part about Masons, I looked online to see if there's a standard response from the Masons on the book. It looks like they are enthusiastic about the opportunity for more people to learn about Masonry. Some are anxious about their presentation. There is not the same level of condemnation The DaVinci Code experienced. We'll see. I know a Mason or two who will probably be willing to help me check the accuracy of information.

Dan Brown takes a direct approach to controversy in the early chapters. He has someone run into the main character at the airport and say aren't you the one who wrote that books and infuriated the church? That he wrote a book with the intent to cause a scandal? The "character" says that wasn't the intent. Surely Brown would say his intent is to foster conversation and education.

I struggle because he presents everything as "this is all being kept secret from you." One example is that slaves built the capitol. That atmosphere, to me, creates a sense of anger that disrupts conversation. But maybe that's just me.

My favorite part of the first six chapters is where the main character is describing a comparative religion class and creates an ABC model of describing religion. Assure, believe, convert. A is to assure people of salvation, B is to have a specific set of beliefs and C is to convert others to that way of thinking. Am I comfortable with the United Methodist Church being described as a religion in such terms? Are you? "Salvation" and "Conversion" aren't at the top of my list when talking about Christianity, but I strongly believe they are one important part of it. (Especially if we take a Wesleyan approach to salvation, but I digress. . . ) I think I'm ok with it- though, like much of Brown's work, it feels simplified and reductionistic.