I’ve gone back and forth on this issue for a while. I’ve not read these books yet, though I intend to. Because I haven’t read them, I can’t speak competently about their content. What I can do, however, as a Catholic, is evaluate what I see surrounding them.
I cringe when I hear Catholics dismiss so quickly those who fear the influence of books glorifying – albeit through fantasy – a life of witchcraft. So many good people who have a sincere faith still seem unwilling to believe the ease with which individuals can become involved with the occult and demonic powers. In a religious vaccuum like the Western world, when something like the Potter books resonate with people in this way, it most certainly facilitates the desire of life to imitate art. And while this may not be the intent of J.K. Rowling, there are many who are more than willing to exploit this desire by assisting individuals who wish to obtainin power through the occult – even children.
I used to work with an exorcist at his parish during the summers, and I’ve had some close friends who were involved in the occult before coming to the faith. I know for a fact that not all the claims about occult powers made by the kooky “ex-witch” Mr. Shea links to are that far out there.
When you’ve heard a human being speak in an unnatural voice in an ancient and unintelligible language, even though they’re sitting in front of the Blessed Sacrament, you come to realize that it’s not just fiction, that not all of the rules of nature apply in individuals who have immersed theirselves in witchcraft of various kinds. While some might characterize these claims as nonsense, astonishing things are certainly more possible than most of us living a day-to-day existence in the normal world might believe. For a stunning look at the true power of those steeped in magic, the Catholic Encyclopedia has this to say about St. Patrick’s face-off with the druids on the Easter Vigil of 433:
The druids and magicians put forth all their strength and employed all their incantations to maintain their sway over the Irish race, but the prayer and faith of Patrick achieved a glorious triumph. The druids by their incantations overspread the hill and surrounding plain with a cloud of worse than Egyptian darkness. Patrick defied them to remove that cloud, and when all their efforts were made in vain, at his prayer the sun sent forth its rays and the brightest sunshine lit up the scene. Again by demoniac power the Arch-Druid Lochru, like Simon Magus of old, was lifted up high in the air, but when Patrick knelt in prayer the druid from his flight was dashed to pieces upon a rock.
I knew a priest in my youth, now deceased, who spent 40 years working in Bangladesh, where demonic manifestations were common. When he went with a group of the faithful to a house that was believed to be infested by evil spirits to pray the rosary, he said that great chunks of earth would be torn up from the ground and thrown down by invisible hands, very near to those who were praying. While God allowed no one present to be hit by these missiles, the scene was a terrifying one, driving home the reality of the unseen war for souls going on around us every day. (It was only after saying a Mass there that the episodes stopped. )
If it is true – as any exorcist will tell you – that a person may come under demonic obsession or even possession through the use of a Ouiga Board, sold commonly as a child’s toy by Parker Brothers (I get an advertisement for Harry Potter on that product page, by the way – I’m sure that’s targeted marketing, not a coincidence), is it any wonder that these books, potentially through no malice of the author, can be particularly dangerous to youth who find an endcap at Barnes & Noble filled with books meant to exploit the desire of these children to have power over nature, a desire stoked by the Potter books?
Books like The Book of Wizard Craft, which among other crafts teaches the reading of tea leaves and palms – both forms of divining, which is forbidden in the Catechism:
2116 All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to “unveil” the future. Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone.
2138 Superstition is a departure from the worship that we give to the true God. It is manifested in idolatry, as well as in various forms of divination and magic.
Or how about Whimsic Alley Book of Spells: Mythical Incantations for Magicians of All Ages? Barnes & Noble keeps this in the “ages 9-12″ section of their website, and the “Readers who bought this also bought” section is filled with – you guessed it – Harry Potter books.
How about another from the “9-12″ section? Beauty Trix for Cool Chix: Easy to Make Lotions, Potions and Spells to Bring Out a Beautiful You
There are, of course, many more. And for the adults who read Harry Potter, many serious spellbooks are sold, not just this introductory nonsense.
The Catechism never says that magic does not exist. Rather, it says:
2117 All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one’s service and have a supernatural power over others – even if this were for the sake of restoring their health – are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another’s credulity.
Why do so many faithful Catholics insist on portraying those who believe in the powers of the occult as delusional? If you’ve ever known a person who has been down that road, who has used so called “white magic” and wound up having to stare down real demons at their conversion, or have to constantly seek the intercession of a priest to be rid of demonic harassment, nightmares, violent temptations, etc. – you know how real it is. Of course, most of these people don’t talk about this stuff, because they know that even their fellow parishioners would think they are crazy.
The odds are good that the Potter books are harmless fantasy, but they strike me as an irresponsible fantasy at a time when everyone is into “spirituality” without discering which spirits, exactly, they are praying to. The fact that the world has never before seen a book light up the fervent interest of so many readers at the same time in all age groups should, I think, concern us. Why is it so addictive? Why does it seem that the only other book in recent times to have anything like the level of popularity of the Potter books was the equally questionable The DaVinci Code? Why have Catholic exorcists spoken out against the Potter books?
I don’t have the answers, but the principle of non-contradiction dictates that either the books are harmless or they are not. They can’t be both. If they are harmless, there are a bunch of well-formed Catholics acting like fools, including Catholic priests whose very apostolate is working with those under the influence of the Devil. If they are not harmless, then too many Catholics have their guard down, and think that just because their children are well formed enough not to be led astray by fiction, that no danger exists there.
Either way, as Catholics, we have to lead by example in the culture, and that means making a sincere attempt to discern in these matters. Rather than dismissing those who have such fervent concerns about these books, maybe the Potter apologists should look at the correlative (if not causitive) evidence that Potter feeds the growing interest in the occult.
Today, Wicca is booming. The Harry Potter genre is a mutimillion dollar cinematic and publishing phenomenon. Shortly after the first Potter film was released, Jess Wynn, spokesman for the pagan Federation of England offered thanks to the Harry Potter books because in its wake, his organization recieved thousands of inquiries from teenagers seeking information about “The Craft,” A popular code word for witchcraft.
And witches are gaining political power while simultaneoulsy being in the news for committing crimes.
Call it what you want, but don’t call it nonsense, ignorance, or stupid rubbish. Not everyone who is suspicious of Harry Potter is on the verge of madness. It seems to me that it’s a bit arrogant to think them so.

Cars are harmless, or they’re not.
Food is harmless, or it is not.
What do these have in common with your proposition? The conditions surrounding their use. While noncontradiction applies to mutually exclusive conditions, the effects of a thing are tied to how it is used. “Harm” is in the use or misuse of something. In order for the principle of noncontradiction to apply, you have to posit that the books are either always harmful or never harmful. I wouldn’t be willing to commit to either one of those propositions.
By: Theocoid on July 26, 2007
at 1:51 pm
I don’t see your analogy. Neither cars nor food are pure intellectual property in the way that a work of fiction is. And as intellectual property is made up of ideas, those ideas are what must be analyzed.
It isn’t a question of “are the books always harmful or never harmful”, but rather, “are elements of fiction that promote the use of witchcraft always harmful or never harmful”. And even this is a far-from-perfect analysis.
I’m not looking for laser-guided precision here, though perhaps that’s what I imply. What I am looking for is a general theory of “are these books producing a positive or negative influence on the culture as a general rule.” I am willing to read them, and I’m quite certain that I will not feel compelled to begin spellcasting. Because I am an exception to this rule, it shows that something like this is subjective, rather than objective, and if that means I don’t get to invoke non-contradiction, that’s fine.
I never said I was a philosopher, so I’m willing to stand corrected.
That said, I don’t believe it’s an acceptable proposition for both sides of this argument – those who think Potter is great and those who think it’s a danger – can just agree to disagree. Either this type of fiction, taken into the context of our culture, objectively creates a danger for many or it objectively does not.
To make a crack of my own at your food analogy in a way I think it would work: if 100 people eat the same food and only two of them get sick from it, it would be fair to say that their immune system is probably weak. If 100 people eat the same food and 100 of them get sick, it would be fair to say that the food is bad.
But what if only 43 of them get sick? 67? 29? When does a number become sufficiently grave that you say, “Well, many people are getting sick and many aren’t. I don’t think I want to try the food, just to be safe”? When does it become sufficiently small that you say, “I’ll take my chances”?
I think that this is more like what we are faced with. It’s not an easy answer, but it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to come up with one that works, rather than sitting on opposite poles saying that the other side is dead wrong.
By: Steve on July 26, 2007
at 2:06 pm
If you can understand what I’m saying and actually respond to it, you get an extra 50 points. I just re-read it and it’s a lot less clear than I wanted it to be.
Hopefully you can work through my muddled thoughts and find what I’m trying to say.
By: Steve on July 26, 2007
at 2:11 pm
Steve,
I agree with you. For children in particular, art serves a very influential role in forming the moral imagination. Why turn traditional fairy tale imagery on its head by making witchery and wizardry morally neutral activities? Also, the heroes of the Potter stories (my experience is mostly with the movies) sometimes act as though the end justifies the means. Basically, these are not the most wholesome stories for children, their primary intended audience.
By: Lorraine on July 26, 2007
at 2:44 pm
[...] Jul 26th, 2007 by Steve Nah, you won’t get any milk from a cute aquatic mammal, but I just posted a lil’ somethin-somethin’ at CR about the boy from Hogwart’s. [...]
By: Rhymes With “Dairy Otter” « Uncovering Orthodoxy on July 26, 2007
at 2:47 pm
I don’t think you can invoke the principle of non-contradiction here, because “harm” is not a true/false distinction, but is a matter of use and degree.
More food example: Doritos™ are harmful. Botulism-contaminated meat is harmful. One of these is more harmful than the other …
I don’t think the nature of “Harry Potter” as story/’intellectual property’ changes that.
My evaluation (which I only have time to assert, not defend at the moment) is that HP is the spiritual equivalent of junk food, not botulism. If you’re already healthy, a bit won’t hurt much, but a steady diet will make you a miserable wretch.
peace,
By: Zach Frey on July 26, 2007
at 3:53 pm
Since you’re referencing Mark’s piece … I want to highlight this comment from Sandra Miesel:
But it fascinates me that all the ire falls on Rowling and not on actual Neo-Pagan or pro-Pagan or general writers of magical fantasy, muchless on militant atheist Philip Pullman.
There’s a weird disproportionality here. I mean, I know HP is a craze, and umpty-million copies sold, but why focus on HP as somehow uniquely evil? There’s a lot worse out there that gets scant attention. (Michael D. O’Brien is at least consistant in his criticism of the genre, but he’s rare in that.)
peace,
Zach
By: Zach Frey on July 26, 2007
at 4:06 pm
Harry potter is a stepping stone, a mild peak into darkness, its the wet finger sugar bowl, bet ya just cant stop at one little taste of sweet magik. Wiccan was created by Aleister Crowley and Gerald Gardner, both were pediphiles, Crowley was suspected of over 150 blood sacrifices, He once forced his lady friend to have sex with a Ram upon orgasm he cut the Rams throat. The day Virginia Tech suffered the shootings was the begining of a Satanic three week holiday, Also the July 21 is the beginng of a 10 day Satanic holiday till the 31st. Stop guessing people and Study Satanism, then you understand Wicca, then you understand the mild influence of Harry Potter on young growing minds. No not all will fall into this trap, but what percentage will ??? one kid out of 1000 is 1 to many for me. study your enemys then you understand your enemy, believe me people your enemy has studied you.
By: Greg on July 26, 2007
at 11:06 pm
I remember growing up they used to sell candy in the shape of cigarettes. They even came in cigarette style boxes complete with different “brands”. Now, I am not saying that JKR is even nearly as conscience about what effect HP may have as those candy makers were (wouldn’t surprise me if they were a subsidiary of Phillip Morris) but the danger to this type of exposure is the same. And that, I think, is where some of HP’s defenders (and JKR’s detractors) miss the point. It is not JKR’s intent that is at issue, her intentions could be as pure as the driven snow. It is the effect the books may have, wittingly or not. And that effect, seems to me, is to make the occult more familiar, less frightening, and unfortunately encurage some to look into it that may not have otherwise.
I do have one question – what makes the magic in HP different from that in LOTR, if there is a difference?
By: c matt on July 27, 2007
at 8:54 am
Coincidentally, Colleen Hammond, author of Dressing With Dignity, has a post today about the star of Harry Potter on her blog, http://colleenhammond.blogspot.com/
and she links to some relevant articles.
By: Roseanne on July 27, 2007
at 10:10 am
C Matt,
You bring up a good point. I don’t cast aspersions on Rowling for being malicious – I think she probably doubts the seriousness of the association between real witchcraft and the kind in her stories because she thinks that the former isn’t real and the latter most certainly isn’t.
Your question about LOTR is a good one, and would probably require a bigger Tolkien fan than I to answer, but my understanding about Tolkien’s world is that characters like Gandalf aren’t actually human. They are something other – creatures who appear human but to whom things like magic, such as it is, is proper to their being. The exercise of whatever power they have is, in the sense of the fantasy world, natural. They also are not participating in something that one would confuse with a real world practice, like witchcraft.
In Lewis, at least, what I’ve re-read recently, the characters in Narnia who use magic, and particularly those who are witches or wizards, are almost always portraid as evil, from the “magician” in The Magician’s Nephew to the White Witch in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. Now, I’ve only just gotten into The Horse and His Boy with the kids, so I may be proven wrong further down the road, but I see a certain type here.
In Potter, the whole thing centers around witchcraft and incantations and uses the familiar imagery of black robes and pointy hats and broomsticks and wands and incantations that is associated with – although probably not accurate about – real world witchcraft or wicca or druidism. Most of this symbolism, I would imagine, does derive, however, from actual practices.
Perhaps one of the greatest distinguishing factors about Tolkien or Lews though, from Rowling, would be the context of the culture in which they were writing. At the time they created their stories, the West was still by and large a Christian culture. It was decaying, but much of the framework was still standing. A Christian could explore mythology with a thorough understanding of what the truth really was. In this post-Christian culture, however, all bets are off, and a literary framework that apes real occult practices in a more direct way than Tolkien or Lewis ever did seems more a cause of concern to me.
By: Steve on July 27, 2007
at 10:40 am
I’ve been battling family, friends and neighbors (mostly Catholic) over the HP issue since it first hit the streets….not so much lately because banging your head against a brick wall becomes painful after a while.
I can recommend a series of tapes/CDs compiled by Matthew Arnold of St. Joseph Communication which I tried to circulate to friends, to AT LEAST get parents to LISTEN to the concerns already expressed eloquently in these postings.
Arnold, as an ex occult member, addresses many questions very well; for example, the difference between HP fantasy and the LOR.
I have a couple of sets of tapes I will gladly share with anyone..we could circulate them if you like. The CD set, however, does have an additional section which was added later regarding, I believe, Pope Benedict’s postion. I can’t let this one go yet, as my daughter is doing er college thesis on the assault on children’s literature and she’s using it for one of her resources.
By: Jo Shrader on July 27, 2007
at 11:08 am
P.S. sorry! Forgot the title tape/CD set!
It’s :”THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY”
By: Jo Shrader on July 27, 2007
at 11:10 am
Steve, just to clarify, I do think you’re correct that we shouldn’t be dismissive of such concerns. I do think the case can be made too exclusively on either side. Zach reiterated well what I was attempting to say. The problem is in how something is used rather than the thing itself, even in works of intellectual property (which is a false distinction, given that many manufactured items such as cars fall into this category).
By: Theocoid on July 27, 2007
at 11:13 am
I believe J.K. Rowling majored in Greek Mythology from the University of Exeter in the U.K. While Arnold acknowledges that she is a skillfully entertaining author, and that the books are well written, he also explains that a closer look at the development of the stories reveals that not all her ‘creativity’ is random.
I am less worried about her motives than the fruits of her efforts.
By: Jo Shrader on July 27, 2007
at 11:24 am
I don’t think Steve is making an irrelevant distinction. The use of objects made by art, particularly in the case of fine art, bears a more direct relation to moral activity because objects of art are made by humans for the use of humans. Here are a few relevant quotes from Jacques Maritain’s “The Responsibility of the Artist”:
In other words it is true that Art and Morality are two autonomous worlds, each sovereign in its own sphere, but they cannot ignore or disregard one another, for man belongs in these two worlds, both as intellectual maker and as moral agent, doer of actions which engage his own destiny. And because an artist is a man before being an artist, the autonomous world of morality is simply superior to (and more inclusive than) the autonomous world of art. There is no law against the law of which the destiny of man depends. In other words Art is indirectly and extrinsically subordinate to morality.
Snip
Every work of art reaches man in his inner powers. It reaches him more profoundly and insidiously than any rational proposition, either cogent demonstration or sophistry. For it strikes him with two terrible weapons, Intuition and Beauty, and at the single root in him of all his energies, Intellect and Will, Imagination, Emotion, Passions, Instincts and obscure Tendencies. The question is, as Léon Bloy put it, not to hit below the heart. Art and Poetry awaken the dreams of man, and his longings, and reveal to him some of the abysses he has in himself. The artist is not ignorant of that. How will he deal with this problem?
JP II’s “Letter to Artists” also has some relevant passages:
In a certain sense, beauty is the visible form of the good, just as the good is the metaphysical condition of beauty. This was well understood by the Greeks who, by fusing the two concepts, coined a term which embraces both: kalokagathía, or beauty-goodness. On this point Plato writes: “The power of the Good has taken refuge in the nature of the Beautiful”.
Snip
Every genuine artistic intuition goes beyond what the senses perceive and, reaching beneath reality’s surface, strives to interpret its hidden mystery. The intuition itself springs from the depths of the human soul, where the desire to give meaning to one’s own life is joined by the fleeting vision of beauty and of the mysterious unity of things.
By: Lorraine on July 27, 2007
at 11:39 am
Lorraine,
But Steve didn’t say “work of art”, he said “intellectual property”. These are distinct (although overlapping) categories.
And “intellectual property” isn’t. But that’s a whole ‘nother rant.
Steve,
If what you really meant was that H.P. is a work of art in the sense that Lorraine means, I’d agree — although then I’ll have to re-read with that understanding and think again about whether that’s a distinction with a difference.
peace,
By: Zach Frey on July 30, 2007
at 5:53 am
Zach,
Some days, I’m not entirely sure what I mean until long after the fact. I haven’t been clicking on all cylinders lately.
I did, however, mean it in the sense that Lorraine summed up, though I was grasping for the right way to express it.
Reading any work, fiction or nonfiction, results in a direct consumption of the ideas therein. Non-critical readers aren’t able to distinguish the good ideas from the bad. I meant that this distinguishes the reading of a book from driving a car or eating food. Those things do not have the same effect on the mind, do not convey the same depth of meaning, are not purely for the consumption of ideas.
By: Steve on July 30, 2007
at 7:51 am
Thanks for the clarification, Steve.
Having reread … even so, I’m not sure the distinction is as sharp as you make it. Cars, for instance, are certainly works of “art” in the sense of being works of artifice (and even, in a sense, of “works of art” in terms of styling, etc.)
And one of the myths poisoning our society is the notion that “technologies” (in other words, practical “arts”) should be immune to being judged harmful.
So, H.P.’s status as a “work of art” just affects how one evaluates its healthfulness/harmfulness.
And being in a fallen, muddled world, any work of art will have both virtues and faults.
It seems to me that H.P. has both virtues and faults. The problem with it is then that its faults are potentially so dangerous, and its virtues so weak, that one can reasonably evaluate the whole thing as harmful overall.
Hopefully, this is making some sort of sense.
peace,
By: Zach Frey on July 31, 2007
at 7:44 am
Zach,
As I’ve said, I’m not a philosopher, so I have a hard time articulating these distinctions.
But I’m certain of the fact that a car and a book have different effects on the mind – particularly on the formative mind of a child. I will never tell my child, “Don’t look at that car” because I’m concerned that it’s design will lead him to sin, but I will most certainly tell him “Don’t read that book” because the ideas contained in it very well may.
I’m well aware of the level of IP that goes into cars – I am a consultant for a major automotive manufacturer and I have been within the secret bowels of their design studios. And as much as the design of a car can be construed as a work of art, it is not an art that conveys ideas about morality, portrays heroes or antiheroes that readers will identify with and desire to emulate, or introduce moral or philosophical concepts into its fabric that can lead one to virtue or lead them astray.
The power of ideas contained in the written or spoken word are probably the most influential sorts of ideas we can consume. The Visual Arts have a tremendous power through our apprehension of beauty, but it is a more limited power and is tied to our ability to apprehend and sustain an image. An erotic work of art may lead one to lust, but the image fades more easily than a work of fiction or philosophy that weaves ideas into the framework of our thought. One feels the effects of such a work of art most strongly when one is confronted directly with it, when one is staring at it. The ideas I’ve learned from books, however, I can much more easily reproduce. They change the way I think, perceive, and argue. They are concepts in the most raw and digestible form.
I think the distinction is really quite sharp. Our ability to communicate through words is perhaps our most powerful tool.
By: Steve on July 31, 2007
at 8:35 am
On the topic of Wiccan/neo-Pagan crime: Years ago, one of the most beautiful and irreplaceable landmarks in our city, the ancient Treaty Oak, was almost entirely destroyed by a young man who poured bags of herbicide all around it. He was quickly the most hated person in Austin, and there was much discussion about his motives; but when it came out that he was a neo-pagan who had tried to sacrifice the tree as part of a spell to win back his girlfriend, the (substantial) neo-pagan community here immediately claimed he wasn’t *really* one of them, and discussions of motive for the crime almost immediately vanished from all media reporting on the event. To this day, even though the crime is still discussed (when people ask why there’s a city block dedicated to housing the nearly dead remains of an oak tree), the motive is never, ever mentioned.
Meanwhile Wiccans/neo-pagans constantly tell me that adherents of their religion do no wrong in its name, unlike us genocidal Catholics.
By: o.h. on August 5, 2007
at 10:38 am
Could you be complicating things, Steve?
Isn’t it enough to say that a person with only the usual modern sense of good and evil has no ability to write useably – especially for children – on these themes?
Like a manual for a rocket-launcher written by a cheesemaker, a thing has not got to be intentionally misleading or intrinsically evil to be a really bad idea to read.
By: John on August 7, 2007
at 11:43 pm
There is only one series of books that I personally have found to influence people toward an intense interest in old pagan things, celtic “magic” and the rest of it: J.R.R. Tolkien’s works.
Like I said, it has only been personal observation, but it is still pretty wide, as far and away the majority of people I associate with are not Christian in any true sense.
Also, I’m rather impressed with some of the christological aspects of Rowling’s plot development as to the rise and ultimate defeat of her main antagonist, Voldemort – how the means by which he attempted to destroy Harry will ultimately be the means which harry will employ to defeat him (O felix culpa?).
Now, I’m not reading anything into Rowling’s beliefs, nor am I trying to make her work something it is NOT. But after all, it is a Western opus, and not derived from an utterly alien system.
It wasn’t written in India, I mean.
Like it or not, or even if she is even aware of it, her thought processes, although not inspired directly by Christian philosophy, has at least recognizable contours.
And so when are you going to write about the dangers of Lord of the Rings?
By: Edward on August 9, 2007
at 3:02 pm
The fact that the world has never before seen a book light up the fervent interest of so many readers at the same time in all age groups should, I think, concern us. Why is it so addictive? Why does it seem that the only other book in recent times to have anything like the level of popularity of the Potter books was the equally questionable The DaVinci Code?
Maybe because they’re exciting and interesting books, and J. K. Rowling is a talented storyteller? And because once a book becomes popular, the craze often feeds on itself and draws in yet more people who read it just to find out what all the fuss is about?
Are you seriously suggesting that a book can only become popular if the devil is promoting it? I admit to a pretty low opinion of the literacy level of the American public, but that’s a bit much even for me.
Two more points:
1) None of the anti-Harry Potter crowd, so far as I know, has ever explained why Harry’s use of magic is eeeevil but it’s perfectly okay for Aragorn to raise an army of ghosts in RotK. I mean, hello, necromancy.
2) If your kids read Harry Potter and decide to become Wiccans? They have got way more serious issues going on than their latest bedtime stories.
By: rose on August 21, 2007
at 11:13 am
Salient points, to be sure, Rose.
I concur wholeheartedly.
Harry Potter has become too big of a target. There’s nothing truly evil going on here.
And I do think the – well, I’ll say it – ‘overreaction’ to the whole phenomenon reeks of a kind of Puritanism. It’s not a Catholic or even Orthodox reaction, at least culturally.
I would ask if any of our Rowling naysayers are familiar, for example, with the fantastic tales of Gogol. Now THERE’S some scarry goings-on.
But has all this old Ukrainian folklore turned the Holy land of Russia and its environs into the seat of the Anti-Christ? (And no, I do not accept the Bolshevik Revolution as a resulting judgment: a system imposed upon that empire and its peoples thoroughly steeped in the Christian faith.)
By: Edward on August 21, 2007
at 3:01 pm
Hi, I was going to leave a long comment here, but I wrote an entry on my blog instead, linking to here.
I do agree that there is risk to be wary of, but I also think that there are graces afforded through the sacrament of marriage which allow parents to guide their children through this maze of life, including the cultural influences such as the Potter books.
I do not think that the people who believe in the supernatural are nut cases, I believe there are many evil forces we battle everyday. I see it so often when I work in the community with the teen catholics, teaching them their faith. But, my position is with parental guidance, teens can navigate through Potter and come out the other side with a better understanding of the world they live in.
By: Lily A. Thorns on September 29, 2007
at 11:09 am
Hi, I’m an ex-witch and I just wanted to give an “amen” to this:
Why do so many faithful Catholics insist on portraying those who believe in the powers of the occult as delusional? If you’ve ever known a person who has been down that road, who has used so called “white magic” and wound up having to stare down real demons at their conversion, or have to constantly seek the intercession of a priest to be rid of demonic harassment, nightmares, violent temptations, etc. – you know how real it is. Of course, most of these people don’t talk about this stuff, because they know that even their fellow parishioners would think they are crazy.
The odds are good that the Potter books are harmless fantasy, but they strike me as an irresponsible fantasy at a time when everyone is into “spirituality” without discering which spirits, exactly, they are praying to. The fact that the world has never before seen a book light up the fervent interest of so many readers at the same time in all age groups should, I think, concern us. Why is it so addictive? Why does it seem that the only other book in recent times to have anything like the level of popularity of the Potter books was the equally questionable The DaVinci Code? Why have Catholic exorcists spoken out against the Potter books?
6 years later, I struggle with the faith like no other convert I know. 6 years later, I am still hit with violent desires to go back to the faith I left. 6 years later, I still feel punched in the stomach with an almost tangible longing when I walk by a Harry Potter display, or Halloween costumes, or anything related to the occult. It is NOT something I get out of LOTR, or Narnia, or anything like that.
Being in the occult leaves a sensitivity to these things. Show me one ex-witch, or someone who works with the occult, who supports the HP books?
Don’t be fooled. Many neo-pagans got their intro to the faith by watching and reading sci-fi or fantasy. This is commonly known. It puts the longing in them for what they’re reading about, for mysticism other then the faith.
By: Sara on October 2, 2007
at 7:49 am
“Why do so many faithful Catholics insist on portraying those who believe in the powers of the occult as delusional? If you’ve ever known a person who has been down that road, who has used so called “white magic” and wound up having to stare down real demons at their conversion, or have to constantly seek the intercession of a priest to be rid of demonic harassment, nightmares, violent temptations, etc. – you know how real it is. Of course, most of these people don’t talk about this stuff, because they know that even their fellow parishioners would think they are crazy.”
Just had to give a “amen” to this.
When I explain it to people, I try to compare it to quitting alcohol. It’s been 6 1/2 years since I have been a Wiccan, and I couldn’t explain how strong the temptations still are. It’s- amazing?- how I can still feel a yearning when I walk by a HP display, or a Halloween costume display (something I don’t get, btw, with LOTR or the Narnia books- there is a difference). I’ve spent a lot of the last 6 1/2 years longing to go back to the faith I’ve left. I even have to be careful what evangelism I take on.
There is no one I can share this struggle with, except my priest, and I think even he is a little lost before this.
Most Wiccans felt like there was a different religion for them out there as a child, reading sci-fi, mythology, or fantasy. Be careful, and don’t fool yourself. Find me even one ex-witch who supports Harry Potter.
By: Sara on October 2, 2007
at 11:27 am
I’m an ex-witch and I don’t have a problem with Harry Potter. I have seen the movies but have not read the books. My kids are too young for the books and we’re busy concentrating on literature with more staying-power (Narnia, Beatrix Potter, Winnie-the-Pooh, etc.).
We need to be aware of our children’s (and our own) sensitivities, but I don’t think we can give a blanket condemnation of Harry Potter for all Catholics.
Rowling is a self-proclaimed Christian and member of the Church of Scotland. While the Potter books might not be the greatest example of English literature, they’re certainly not penned by the devil himself, either.
By: Jessica on October 5, 2007
at 10:47 am
wat’s that !
ppl we need ur help
wat’s the positive and the negative things in Harry Potter films ?
and thax alot
By: Miss Green on November 10, 2007
at 10:34 am