Author Topic: Question about Harry Potter? (Read 13451 times)

Rosarium · « **Reply #5 on:** June 15, 2013, 11:46:47 PM »

Quote from: gobosox91

I'm just curious to see what the general Catholic opinion on J. K. Rowling's popular saga. I understand that very fanatic people will call it satanic and evil, as they say it promotes witchcraft.
First off, I only liked Harry Potter from 1999-2003 and just gave up on it, because they were making the movies while the books were still being written and it took forever for book 5 to come out, and in that time I came to love J. R. R. Tolkien's Middle Earth. I love The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit.

I wrote this blog post on the subject in general:
http://blog.nonpeccabis.com/2010/09/witchcraft-and-fantasy.html

Quote

But why do Christians endorse J. R. R. Tolkien's works, which he wrote as Christian (particularly Catholic) allegories, as well as C. S. Lewis' Narnia series, but believe Harry Potter comes from the depths of hell? I was always aware that true witchcraft was bad and that the only true faith was Christianity, particularly Catholicism.

Christianity does not endorse any particular works of fiction.

Rather than defend one work of fiction, I would say that any source of entertainment and material pleasure which is a stumblingblock to virtue or the faith should be avoided completely. If it is a scandal in itself, or because of the individual, it should be avoided regardless.

Quote

I never met anybody who was inspired to dabble in satanism and the occult because they read Harry Potter? This magic they speak of is fiction, and real magic is to be condemned. As long as they know the difference...? How can we endorse certain fantasy stories by people like Tolkien and Lewis, but we condemn J. K. Rowling as being inspired by the devil?

Discernment is more than a clumsy consistency and simple categorization.

Moral issues in this sort of decision are:

* What are the effects of reading/enjoying the particular work?
* What kind of principles does the work advance sympathetically?
* What are the intentions of the author?

And probably others, but those stand out.

And for fantasy, remember, not everyone is in agreement. Tolkien was not happy with Lewis, because Tolkien thought that if one is going to create a fictional universal, it should not be connected to reality for theological reasons.

And of course, hypocrites exist, so you should not always look to others for general trends. The issue is not that one or the other sort of work is good or bad, or that both must be judged the same, but that one should not make excuses for sin, and completely avoid reading (or watching, listening to, etc) anything which can dangerous to the Faith.

Rosarium · « **Reply #6 on:** June 15, 2013, 11:58:01 PM »

Quote from: gobosox91

I understand that very fanatic people will call it satanic and evil, as they say it promotes witchcraft.

Be careful about calling other fanatics. It often reveals a continuum of views and a tendency to moral relativity.

If what is appropriate is merely the most comfortable level for oneself, and anything less or more is wrong, we will be led astray.

Some people do condemn things with an in-depth examination, and that is not entirely reasonable, however, it is not a bad way to judge unnecessary things in this world. The risk of error in judgement is not equal.

If one condemns a work for being spiritually dangerous, and avoids it, because one suspects it is dangerous, and it was not in fact dangerous, one has lost nothing.

However, if one endorses a work, and it turns out to be spiritually dangerous, one is exposed to real danger.

There is no reason to support J. K. Rowling and her works, and there may be reason to avoid them merely because of her personal views and morality (which will be reflected in her writings), and her works have caused alarm for some people and are avoided.

That is not "fanatical". That is faithful and prudent. Avoiding works which are dangerous to the faith is an obligation we have and failing to meet that obligation is a sin.

Rosarium · « **Reply #7 on:** June 16, 2013, 12:06:22 AM »

Quote from: Rosarium

Some people do condemn things with an in-depth examination, and that is not entirely reasonable, however, it is not a bad way to judge unnecessary things in this world. The risk of error in judgement is not equal.

I meant:

Quote from: Rosarium

Some people do condemn things without an in-depth examination, and that is not entirely reasonable, however, it is not a bad way to judge unnecessary things in this world. The risk of error in judgement is not equal.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #8 on:** June 16, 2013, 01:10:32 AM »

The author is typical of anti-family UK women, and her goal is to corrupt the minds of the young:

Quote

Rowling attacked the Blair government's policy on single parent families. She said that Labour could do "a good deal more" and then donated £500,000 to the One Parent Families charity to set an example.[68] Rowling said that Brown's measures for children 'would have made a real difference to my family's life' when she was poor.[69] Blair stepped down shortly before the release of Rowling's seventh book, and Brown was appointed Prime Minister. Rowling subsequently donated £1 million to the Labour party during the 2010 general election which Labour lost.[70]

PatrickG · « **Reply #9 on:** June 16, 2013, 03:44:42 AM »

I am a fanatic on those grounds; and it is simply wrong to compare JRR and JK R.

i) As Pheo said, the 'witches' and 'wizards' in Tolkien's works are powers - actually called the Ainur, Valar and Maiar (Gandalf, Saruman the traitor and Radagast are three lesser Maiar). They're rather like the angels - Powers, Thrones, Dominions, Archangels, Angels and so on - being created by Eru (God). His villains are really the fallen angels - Melkor or Morgoth (the greatest of the Ainur and so analogous to the Devil) refused to be subject to Eru and corrupted many of the Powers to his cause - Sauron is a corrupted power, the Balrogs are corrupted lesser powers and so on. It really is a thoroughly Catholic fiction in its morals, about the weakness and treason of Man in serving evil powers and the desire for power corrupting.

ii) A proper definition of 'magic' is using the power of a demon - a fallen angel - to perform something that could normally only be performed by God. It's an alliance between men and devils to wreak something that God would not permit to be wrought - it's always blasphemous, always evil and invariably ends in damnation. Harry Potter is true magic - men uttering incantations and doing all manner of things with demonic help. Her curses have a ring of reality about them, too much for me. Religion is an exercise of the 'muggles', the ignorant mass who have not the power to grasp this occult knowledge. The whole thing stinks like a week-old fish.

Very simply, Gandalf is an analogy to an angel. The 'power' in Middle Earth comes from God. Harry Potter's characters, 'good' (their isn't a good character among them) and ill, are summoning demons. There is no God in Harry Potter, only exercises of demonic power. He would be in any Christian book a dangerous villain bound for Hell, not a Hero.

Tolkien was a devout Catholic before the Council, Rowling's a rank atheist. Steer well clear of Potter.
The Remnant.
http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2011-0725-harry-potter-girard.htm