• Join The Fed
• Advertise with The Fed

• About Us
• Contact

In This Issue

• Latvia, Land of Style and Lip-Hair, Too
• Liquids Banned
• Coke: Who Snorts What
• Hate for the Hate Squad
• Tales of the Inexpressible - Part I
• Al Franken Talks, Frankly
• Eggs Run with Claims of Cracker Nazis
• A Spears-Federline Manifesto
• What Goes on in my Head While I Get Paid to Pick Pine Needles out of the Gravel at my Local Country Club
• Hairless Man
• University to Fund Loan Elimination by Selling Drugs
• Proclamations from the Desk of Most Glorious Marshal Lee Bollinger
• Poland Ruined Everything
• Prez-Bo
• Tales of the Inexpressible - Part II
• Da Vinci Code Confirms Church Can't Tell Fiction From Non-Fiction
• On My Early Fame
• Able to Fuck My Anus in a Single Pound
• THEY WATCH

Kimi Traube

"Wipe that smirk off your face, you succubus!"

"We can afford not to discuss the Gospel of Judas right now," explained Father Elliott Tappman, a priest at St. Patrick's Cathedral, "We've got bigger fish to fry."

Tappman is taking an active part in the church's current initiative to "spread the truth" about the "lies that The Da Vinci Code perpetrates," among them "the lie that Jesus was married, the lie that The Last Supper contains Mary Magdalene, and the lie that there is anything at all sacred about being feminine."

"We are truly at a crossroads here," Tappman went on. "We're at a place where an important piece of literature has come to the fore, and as children of God we have to look to Him for the answer; for Him to tell us what to believe and what not to believe.  And the answer is quite clear: this book is filled with lies."

Tappman, interestingly, is not particularly concerned with correcting all of the lies in The Da Vinci Code.  For example, the fact that Robert Langdon is not a real person is not a problem for Tappman.  "As far as that goes," Tappman said, "he can lie all he wants, I guess.  I can't figure out how so many of these so-called non-fiction books can sell when a little research will reveal that the main character isn't even real, but as long as the lies aren't undermining people's faith, it's okay with me, I guess."

Asked to explain the phrase "so-called non-fiction," Tappman replied, "Well, Brown himself says so!  He says that everything in the entire book is true."  Afraid that he might be misunderstood, and readers might think him to be referring to the book's opening claim (that "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents... and secret rituals in this novel are accurate"), Tappman clarified: "Brown is a self-professed Christian.  Obviously, no Christian would blatantly disobey the Ninth Commandment and bear false witness by making up events for the purpose of a gripping, page-turning plot.  Brown's claim to Christianity is a claim that what he writes is true."

On the subject of the Judas Gospel, Tappman said, "Nobody really knows who wrote it.  They might not be Christian.  Therefore, it is appropriate to treat it as fiction."

James Frey, author of A Million Little Pieces and expert on telling non-fiction from fiction, weighed in on the issue.  "Tappman appears to miss the point even more horribly than Oprah Winfrey," Frey quipped, adding, "That fat bitch; though I guess I do owe her for some of my book sales."

"See, the whole point of non-fiction is that it's at least based on real occurrences," explained Frey, "Even if the resemblance to reality doesn't extend beyond the superficial, it's non-fiction, in my book.  Jesus real; Judas gospel non-fiction.  Langdon fake; Code fiction.  As far as I know, no cryptically inviting crimes with cliffhanger chapter-endings have recently occurred in France."

Frey claimed that even Kaavya Viswanathan, with whom he has kept letter correspondence since they shared a writing ethics class years ago, agreed with him on this distinction.  "Funny," he added, "whenever I think of that class, I can never remember anything except how cute she was.  I think we  spent most of that class staring at each other."

Columbia theology professor Sandra Johnson was incredulous at the remarks made by both Tappman and Frey.  "To be honest, this very nearly makes me want to take the Lord's name in vain.  The point isn't to muck around about fiction.  Real issues are at stake here; this Gnostic gospel could change everything!  For Osiris' sake, The Da Vinci Code isn't even a good book!"

Prompted to explain the concept of a Gnostic gospel, Johnson would only say, "Holy Buddha, you reporters are idiots.  So are all the dumb people who read your paper."