CNN Portrays ‘The Da Vinci Code’ Movie as Sin ‘Too Grave to be Forgiven’

Photo of Matthew Balan.
  • Bookmark and Share

Jennifer Eccleston, CNN | Screencap from CNN on June 18, 2008 | NewsBusters.orgCNN, following in the footsteps of ABCNews.com’s overblown take on the subject, couldn’t help but to insert snotty language into its report on the Catholic Diocese of Rome’s denial to the filming of the movie adaptation of Dan Brown’s "Angels and Demons." CNN international correspondent Jennifer Eccleston, closing her report on Thursday’s "American Morning," labeled the Church’s refusal, based on "The Da Vinci Code" book and movie’s bashing of the Catholic faith, "a big problem in Rome, where some sins are just too grave to be forgiven -- even if they're for art's sake."

"Sins" that are "just too grave to be forgiven" calls to mind Matthew 12:32, where Jesus Christ refers to blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as a sin that won’t be forgiven "neither in this world, nor in the world to come." It isn’t certain that Eccleston had this scriptural quotation in mind, but she certainly gave the impression that the Church is being "un-Christian" for not letting Ron Howard and Tom Hanks film there.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Eccleston also played a clip of movie critic Tom O’Neil of "In Touch Weekly," who was more overt about the Church acting in an un-Christian manner. "The Church could have just turned the other cheek and quietly said no, you can't use our churches. Instead, they have vehemently denounced this movie publicly as an offense against God, as poison of the faith.... Wow, those don't sounds like typically Christian words."

O’Neil might not have heard that the Church had been quiet about it (not to mention Ron Howard and those involved with the filming). As the aforementioned ABCNews.com story put it, the Diocese of Rome refused permission in 2007, but the news didn’t leak until Monday, when the spokesman for the Diocese mentioned it in an interview.

Even with this, the portrayal of the Catholic Church as not "turning the other cheek" and using words that aren’t "typically Christian" leads one to conclude that CNN thinks the Church should have just taken it lying down. Would they have reacted the same way if the Martin Luther King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference denied a racist film maker access to its facilities to make a film smearing the civil rights leader?

NewsBusters.org - Media Research CenterOn the other hand, Eccleston did run extensive clips of Father John Wauck denouncing the film, so there is equal time in terms of the sound bites she ran. However, right before she ran the first clip of Fr. Wauck, Eccleston ran file footage of men burning a copy of the Italian edition of "The Da Vinci Code,"giving an even stronger impression that Catholics are reacting to Brown’s works in an un-Christian manner.

The full transcript of Jennifer Eccleston’s report, which aired 51 minutes into the 6 am Eastern hour of Thursday’s "American Morning:"

JOHN ROBERTS: Calling all the angels and maybe a few demons as well -- live pictures this morning from Rome where there's a controversy brewing between Tom Hanks and Ron Howard and the Catholic Church. The stars are filming the prequel to the blockbuster movie 'The Da Vinci Code.' It's called 'Angels and Demons.' But the Church has banned them from filming inside the Vatican and any church in Rome for that matter. We sent our Jennifer Eccleston out to capture the story for you.

JENNIFER ECCLESTON (voice-over): From the ancient to the avant-garde, from the humble to the heavenly. They're all off-limits to some of the biggest names in Hollywood, at least while Tom Hanks and Ron Howard are on the job, filming 'Angels and Demons,' the prequel to Dan Brown's novel and monster hit, 'The Da Vinci Code.'

IAN MCKELLEN (as "LEIGH TEABING") : Witness the biggest cover-up in human history.

TOM HANKS (as "ROBERT LANGDON"): Da Vinci.

ECCLESTON: The blockbuster film's premise? Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and fathered children. Many Catholics found it offensive, the Vatican called it a potpourri of lies.

FATHER JOHN WAUCK, HOLY CROSS UNIVERSITY, ROME: It's a little surprising that the same people would be coming now to Rome, looking for permission to film inside churches, and to film a movie that is, itself, also, a caricature of the Catholic Church.

ECCLESTON (on-camera): 'Angels and Demons' features similar church intrigue, evil cults, and the murder of Catholic clergy. But unlike 'The Da Vinci Code,' it is almost entirely set in Rome, and filming here was a must.

ECCLESTON (voice-over): Street scenes and ancient piazzas no problem, but the producers also wanted to shoot in the Vatican and in two historic Rome churches, where in the book, two cardinals are murdered. The Vatican said no, with one official telling an Italian paper it would be an 'offense against God.' To one movie critic, that's an overreaction.

TOM O'NEIL, IN TOUCH WEEKLY: The Church could have just turned the other cheek and quietly said no, you can't use our churches. Instead, they have vehemently denounced this movie publicly as an offense against God, as poison of the faith.... Wow, those don't sounds like typically Christian words.

ECCLESTON: Father John Wauck says artistic license is one thing, but in this case, 'punto e basta,' enough already.

WAUCK: Sometimes when you're interested in making money, it's necessary to do things that are somewhat sleazy, like caricature another person's religious faith, and apparently, from Hollywood's perspective, that's not a big problem.

ECCLESTON: But it is a big problem in Rome, where some sins are just too grave to be forgiven -- even if they're for art's sake. Jennifer Eccleston, CNN, Rome.

—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"Wow, those don't sounds

"Wow, those don't sounds like typically Christian words."

What would you know? It's probably that you just don't like to hear them. Obscenities and threats of violence would be un-Christian - firmly denouncing what amounts to insults and libel against the Catholic Church is correct, necessary, and justified. I read Angels and Demons. It was very violent and graphic. What ever it's flaws, I get sick and tired of my church being portrayed as some satanic type of organization for the purpose of entertainment.

Chris - Who said anything about not forgiving either?

This is so outrageous. Like they shouldn't be able to denounce the misrepresentation of their religion. Who said anything about forgiveness? It has nothing to do with forgiveness.

It's the same stance liberals make all the time about all Christians. They try to equate speaking out out against a practice (abortion, drug use, pre-marital sex etc....) to wishing eternal damnation against people who slip. They know nothing about forgiveness and what it means. Liberals can't forgive people. Look how they treated Rush Limbaugh for drug use or anyone else who they don't like. We condemn the acts, they condemn the people.

It's so completely ludicrous. You speak out against bad behavior to discourage the behavior and you make laws to provide consequences against bad behavior. It doesn't mean you don't forgive. This makes me sooooo mad!

DB, Liberal political

DB,
Liberal political correctness has distorted words and meanings to such an extent that liberals can use the same words and descriptions for opposite meanings and back again. It's Orwellian.

Hold up. . .

QUOTE:  It isn’t certain that Eccleston had this scriptural quotation in mind. . .

If it isn't certain, then it's obviously not a valid reference as stated to begin with.

QUOTE:  "Sins" that are "just too grave to be forgiven" is a reference to Matthew 12:32, where Jesus Christ refers to blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as a sin that won’t be forgiven. . .

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

It could be a reference to

It could be a reference to Mark or Luke where Jesus said the same thing. Nit-picky?

Look again Matt.

MB:  It could be a reference to Mark or Luke where Jesus said the same thing. Nit-picky?

Very.  Especially when the "nit" in question relates to Holy Writ. 

But that's not my problem.  You're saying it's a Biblical reference when you turn right around and then add the disclaimer.  Look again at your own statements in context.  Here, I'll even highlight them for you:

"Sins" that are "just too grave to be forgiven" is a reference to Matthew 12:32, where Jesus Christ refers to blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as a sin that won’t be forgiven "neither in this world, nor in the world to come." It isn’t certain that Eccleston had this scriptural quotation in mind, but it certainly gave the impression that the Church is being "un-Christian" for not letting Ron Howard and Tom Hanks film there.

Therefore, either the reporter is making a reference, as you assert, or she isn't. 

Just take pick one and be consistent.  That's all I'm saying.

-PJ 

There are plenty of terms

There are plenty of terms that have entered the common lexicon that are from Scripture, but people don't realize it. I can't be certain Eccleston knows Scripture or not, so that's why I put that qualifier.

Then don't say she's

Then don't say she's referencing it.  I'm sure there are a few terms that originated from the [insert any written reference here], but I don't go so far as to accuse you of referencing them.

There's no such thing as "unknowingly" referencing a book anyway.  Either you're making a a valid reference, or you're using your own hackneyed cliches. 

Reference or not.  That's all I'm concerned about.  If NB's job is combating MSM bias, they have to remain at a standard higher than the MSM.  

Matt, I cannot take any of your words out of context and claim that you're quoting from the Reagan Diaries, or Audacity of Hope or whatever book fits the subject at hand.  Fair is fair. 

-PJ

"She's is referencing the

"She's is referencing the Bible here, but we're not sure of that." <---???

So then why not simply delete the initial insertion, or else phrase it as a question?

Is it because your readers like to skim and you hope they don't read the fine print?

-PJ

Another example of what you did. . .

Let's say I was an NB blogger and wrote the following on my blog criticizing the same report you cite here. . .


Eccleston's ". . .even if they're for art's sake" is a reference to a French slogan that states the intrinsic value of art, and the only "true" art, is divorced from any didactic, moral, or utilitarian function." It isn’t certain that Eccleston had this French slogan in mind, but it certainly gave the impression that blah-blah-blah.

Am I crystal clear now, Matt? 

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

I reworded it. You certainly

I reworded it. You certainly have a tenacity that is hard to ignore. Just please don't lord it over me in the future. Thanks in advance, and God bless.

Thumbs up.

MB:  I reworded it.

No problem.  I don't want to give any liberals ammo.  That's was all. 

MB:  You certainly have a tenacity that is hard to ignore

Attention to detail is incredibly important when we're analyzing liberal bias.  

MB:  Just please don't lord it over me in the future.

Not at all.  I'd do the same with just about anyone.  Nothing personal.

-PJ 

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

Not at all. I'd do the same

Not at all. I'd do the same with just about anyone. Nothing personal.

Now that I read your profile, I know you meant nothing personal. You're admirable. It's just a little wounded pride on my part. ;-)

"But if anyone causes one

"But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."

-- Matt. 18:6

"Wow, those don't sounds like typically Christian words" [sic]

Wow, this doesn't sound like typically lucid words.

I fear many "little ones" may have been led astray by Dan Brown's Da Vinci Propaganda, although I pray I'm wrong.

What do they know?

What do these people know about Christianity?  Nothing.  They like to portray Jesus as a liberal peace loving hippie.  They won't acknowledge that Jesus had a white hot anger when he went into the Temple and cleansed it of buyers and sellers whose minds were more centered on profit than on ministry.

A typical comment that an atheist would make

knowing nothing of the theology they make it up as they go.

People can't forgive sins, only GOD can do that.

 

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.

Expel the money grubbing merchants of distortion ...

I guess it is OK for Muslims to issue Fatwas against novelists and cartoonists - without criticism from the media.  Yet, the Church is supposed to assist those who would distort her message and history with their propaganda....

I seem to remember a Gospel story about some "money changers" being expelled from the Temple.  Ring a bell with anyone?

 

I guess you'd have to see

I guess you'd have to see the video to get the "snotty" part.

http://www.thefreedi... 2.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/snotty

2. Slang Impertinent; arrogant.

2. having a proud and superior attitude 3. Slang contemptible; nasty O'Neil wasn't snotty?

 

Balboa likes to focus on

Balboa likes to focus on minutiae. He picks nits and splits hairs in attempts to obfuscate and discredit the main point - don't you, Bal? :)

kinda snotty of bal isn't it?

; )

I prefer the phrase

I prefer the phrase "striving for accuracy."

Uh-huh. Accuracy as you

Uh-huh. "Accuracy" as you define it...

No, as The Universe defines

No, as The Universe defines it. :-)

Perhaps in the the Balboa

Perhaps in the the Balboa Galaxy.

No audio required to see Snot factor

 

Bal, you must have a pretty high snot-tolerance

 

"...some sins are just too grave to be forgiven -- even if they're for art's sake."

So art trumps religion. Snotty. 

"Calling all the angels and maybe a few demons as well."

Howard/Hanks = Angels, Church = Demon. Very snotty.

 

There She Is!

I remember Jennifer Eccleston from when she worked at FoxNews.  She was a field reporter in Iraq at the very start of the war.  One or two reports and she was gone!

I wondered at the time if she was hooked up with that reporter/journalist that was so pro-Saddam that was excoriated by damn near everyone and basically banished to extreme nothingness (sorry, can't remember his name; British, though, I think).

Anyway, this is simply another twist of the MSM to bash Catholics and Christianity in general.  They simply don't "get it" as the MSM and it's devotees are people of very little faith in anything.

"But we're from Hollywood"

"an offense against God, as poison of the faith.... Wow, those don't sound like typically Christian words."

He's right; they sound like some other religion. Reactions applied to the most miniscule outrage-enducing slight, which you never hear about in the MSM. But the Catholic church is supposed to 'be quiet about it', even though they were asking to film this heresy inside the Vatican. They should have just whispered softly, "No, thank you, maybe next time, Ron."

The Catholic Church is not

The Catholic Church is not alone when it comes to having a hard forgiving the makers of the "Da Vinci Code" movie...

Rog

Absolutely -- the Da Vinci Hoax is slander against all Christianity.  All Christians would do well to actively oppose (and boycott, i.e., do not patronize in any way shape or form) this modernist, neopagan propaganda.  While it may implicate the Catholic Church specifically, the implication is in her role as defender of the Biblical Canon and Deposit of Faith (aka, orthodox Christianity), which the storyline rejects.

Well, I wasn't going that

Well, I wasn't going that deep, I was just commenting on how lousy the movie was... But your point is well-taken.

ECCLESTON: But it is a big

ECCLESTON: But it is a big problem in Rome, where some sins are just too grave to be forgiven -- even if they're for art's sake. Jennifer Eccleston, CNN, Rome.

....Even if it's for art's sake....

Cute Jennifer...real cute.

This whole thing is infuriating...leave it to CNN...it is almost non-stop with them.

Let's see of Jack Kennedy were running for President again...I just wonder how they would report their constant bashing of the Catholic Church....they make me sick.

"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson

 So keeping hollywierd

 So keeping hollywierd cameras out of the Vatican is big news, but when Obama doesn't want them around it's a no story?

Wonder what the headline would be if they were refuse entry in a Mosque while telling stories of the prophet?

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.