Here at Idol Chatter we often have to dig around through the pop culture items we cover to come up with a relevant religious, spiritual or ethical angle for our readers. It’s often a challenge!
Case in point, I watched a movie that opened last Friday in Los Angeles (and opened a couple of weeks ago in New York) called “Bloodline” which follows a team of documentary filmmakers as they investigate whether Jesus of Nazareth married Mary of Magdala and had children, thus creating a royal bloodline, and whether that lineage made its way to Rennes-le-Château in Southern France from the Middle East almost two millennia ago. With a synopsis like that, I’m taking the rest of the day off!
If this reminds you of Dan Brown’s phenomenally successful “The Da Vinci Code” you’re right on track. Both Brown and Bruce Burgess, the director of this compelling film, were struck by the ideas put forth in the 1982 bestseller “Holy Blood, Holy Grail,” which claimed that a secret society called the Priory of Sion was created to protect the assets, foremost the secret of such a royal lineage courtesy of Jesus and Mary, from the Catholic Church and, by default, the masses at large.
Have these leave-no-(literal)-stone-unturned filmmakers found undeniable proof of the greatest cover-up of all time? Is that mummified female corpse “of unique Middle Eastern heritage” that they discovered in a tomb in France actually Mary Magdalene or one of her children?
The answers to these questions, if found to be true, could rewrite history and crack the very foundation of one of the world’s great monotheistic traditions. Of course, this latest addition to the Indiana Jones-esque saga, three years in the making, is only but a very small piece of the overall puzzle. As a thought-provoking documentary and a great example of cinéma vérité, “Bloodline” is a fascinating film that dares to ask the questions whose answers unsettle so many.
The movie itself gets a little bogged down in the details (names, dates, innuendo, etc.) of the “bloodline conspiracy” (as it’s been called), but I found the press notes of great benefit when trying to piece it all together for a review. Readers can check out the film’s extensive website for similar, helpful information. For all of the film’s painstaking effort for authenticity, however, I admit that I was enraptured when it turned into a mystery/thriller as the filmmakers started uncovering ancient clues left in bottles in the hills of Rennes-le-Château.
When a camera is passed down into an unreachable burial chamber (by Ben Hammott) and, after a little rooting around, a mummified face appears on the screen which has the potential of being that of Mary Magdalene, my brain flooded with electricity, feeling like I might be witnessing history. It reminded me of how Howard Carter must have felt when his team stumbled upon the tomb of Tutankhamun in the Valley of the Kings in 1922, the only difference being that these images may be pieces of a puzzle that could shatter Christian theology and Christianity itself as we’ve come to know it!
Admittedly, I am very skeptical when it comes to Biblical archaeology, as anyone should be, so there was always the question in the back of my mind of whether this could be a hoax on the filmmakers’ part à la “The Blair Witch Project” or one orchestrated by the Priory of Sion to send the documentarians on a wild goose chase. In any event, it’s extremely compelling cinema for where it takes the human imagination.
Personally, my own spiritual life will not teeter if it’s ever proven that Jesus married and/or fathered children with Mary Magdalene (endlessly proven by scholars now not to have been a prostitute) or with anyone else, for that matter. I’m fascinated by the historical aspect of it and simply hope that the truth of the “bloodline conspiracy” will one day be revealed, be it a red herring or one that may well alter the world psyche.
The movie’s tag line reads:
What if the greatest story ever told was a lie?
I don’t think much would change if the scientific community signed off on new evidence supporting the idea of a Christian bloodline. Religious belief by its definition has little to do with scientific, rational reasoning so it’s hard for me to picture a post-discovery world where everyone falls in line with such conclusions. At the end of the day, I think we’d just have more Christian denominations for sociologists to count in their surveys.
I hope the French government is sincere in its talks of a full-scale excavation of this burial tomb in Rennes-le-Château. After all, if Bruce Burgess and company have, indeed, stumbled upon the mummified remains of Miss or Mrs. Mary of Magdala, don’t we honor her best by revealing the historical truth of her life?
posted May 19, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Star Trek dealt with the concept – not the artifacts but the implications – a Next Generation episode entitled “Righteous heir”. It focused on Klingon faith and Worf. The result of it all was this, that the will for faith is greater than any reliance on “fact” or documentation. So people (Klingons?) will choose faith over fact almost every time.
Oddly, we have seen this in our own political campaigns. The “Swift Boat” incidents of the 2004 campaign were proof that people will choose a false story over actual events.
posted May 19, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Mary Magdelene may well have relocated to South France by boat. This account is old and well established. Old news! Why are some trying to treat this as if it were something new that was covered up? Other accounts say she went to Ephesis in Asia Minor. These two accounts compete with each other. And if she went to South France, she may well have brought a daugher named Sarah.
But this does not bear any credibility to the notion that Jesus and Mary Magdelen were married or “had a thing going on”.
Mary Magdelene was not a street walker. Seems to me she was a high class, attractive, established gal with only a few restriced “clientele”, possibly making her more of a serial mistress. Such women do become pregnant and have children. Seems likely St. Mary Magdalene would also have some offspring.
posted May 20, 2008 at 9:57 am
Oh Lordy, “poor” Mary Magdalene. From common prostitute to high class call girl! It seems hard to believe that there are other ways a first century woman could be financially independent.
As for the secret of Rennes-le-Château and the Priory of Zion…am I the only one bored with the whole thing? Whether or not Jesus was married (to Mary Magdalene or Mary of Bethany or someone else) isn’t going to change his message. I do find it disturbing that the very idea of Jesus being married, especially if he had sex, upsets so many people. As the Book of Common Prayer says “marriage is an honorable state…”. I figure that if God created sex it must be okay in spite of what St. Augustine may have written.
posted May 20, 2008 at 12:01 pm
A first century woman could be financially independent in other ways if she either inherited a bunch or it was given to her by family.
If Jesus was married, we would have some account of that. I doubt if Mary Magdelene was married. I suspect there is a 50% chance she did go to South France. And if so, there is an outside chance she went with a daughter named Sarah.
posted May 21, 2008 at 7:59 am
Great post. I loved The Da Vinci code (that doesn’t mean I agreed with it or accepted its hypotheses) and the questions it raised. I have been surprised that so much Christian reaction is negative – ‘disproving’ historical details which were fictional anyway. I think that the book raised interesting issues like truth in religion, relationships between women and men in religion etc etc.
Re Mary – your post is quite correct that there is no evidence she was a prostitute (or a call girl or serial mistress). Apparrently a pope started this rumour – conflating two different biblical characters – and unfortunately it has stayed with her in every retelling of her life.
I will check out this movie – it looks interesting. I really enjoyed Mary a movie about an actor playing the role of Mary Magdalene who then forsook her comfortable North American lifestyle to live in palestine
posted May 25, 2008 at 5:16 am
There is a book called The Magdalene Scrolls by Bettye Johnson. Buy it on Amazon, supposed fiction but has won awards and now there is a follow up! This story of the great Love affair of the god/goddess within would NEVER be ALLOWED to present as TRUTH for the Catholic Church had no reason to FREE WOMEN from the bondage that we have been in for the past 2000 years. This is real, and it aint going away!
LOL
I Say BRING IT ON! Mary had one in belly and one with her. The Bloodline lives on in bastards of the royal houses, ALL ACCROSS THE WORLD! Merovingian bloodlines. Read the Books, See this Movie, I give thanks it is already a Global Success!!!!!!!!!!!!
posted May 27, 2008 at 7:27 am
So no one has any problems with the idea that Christ didnt really die on the cross and rose on the 3rd day, appeared to over 500 after his resurection and then ascends to the Father? Just how will they trace her(unknown woman in crypt) DNA back to Magdelene? Those of you who say it would change nothing have nothing to loose, because you already believe Jesus was “just a good man” not what and who he said he was, the son of God the Christ. And if he was just a “good” man that is in itself a lie because it would make him a liar, which makes him not so good.
posted May 28, 2008 at 2:13 am
I read “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” many years ago, and noticed that its argument consisted primarily of the allegation that if there’s no evidence for a hypothesis, that proves the hypothesis because it shows that someone took the trouble to conceal the evidence. With logic like this no-one should have any trouble believing seven impossible things before breakfast. But conspiracy theories are way too much fun to be given up because of a little thing like logic.
I sincerely believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Incarnate Word of God–not “just a good man” but the Savior and Redeemer of the world. That being said, I do not see that finding that he had had a sexual relationship with Mary of Magdala or anyone else would change either the fact or my belief about who and what He was. Is there any logical necessity for the Savior to be celibate? In the unlikely event that the “Bloodline” theory were proved, my spiritual life would not teeter, either; but I see no way of “proving” it that does not involve first assuming that at least part of it is true.