Articles criticizing Harry Potter novels

[Tim_Kirchoff]

For (hopefully) the last time, wizards in Rowling’s world are not the same as sorcerers from the middle ages. What will it take to convince you of that?

 

[estesbob]

Has the OP answered this, yet?

Does anybody else here think that, though he believes he is serving his master (whomever that may be), SILVERHAND here will, sooner or later, choke himself?

Now that was cute! Oblique but cute nonetheless. And since I suspect since he hasnt read the books he will never get it!

 

[SILVERNAME]

As many more have said, big difference between magic and witchcraft

No, there is no difference, unless you are talking about harry blackstone or david copperfield style magic, which isn’t really magic or socery, but is rather deception( which isn’t a good thing either, some people like to pay money and waste time to let other people decieve them, i do not fancy such things)

Harry potter magic is sorcery not parlor tricks, and socery is forbidden by Scripture.

There is no difference between the witchcraft of harry potter and real life witchcraft, except that the witchcraft of harry potter isn’t exactly doable in real life.

Your conclusion is based on the fallacy of presumption. There is not, as has been demonstrated in the past and clearly apparent to those who have actually bothered to read the books, no relationship between the magical world of the Harry Potter novels and the real-world witchcraft/sorcery. Therefore, Scriptural prohibitions against real-world witchcraft/sorcery are utterly irrelevant to the arguments about whether or not Harry Potter novels ought to be read.

I honestly do not know what you people mean by “relationship”.

But this i do know.

Harry potter teaches that magic sorcery and witchcraft are ok, as long as you are a “good witch”.

But there is no such thing as a good witch, all witchcraft magic/magick/sorcery is immoral so all witches are immoral.

This novel consider harry potter and his friends has “good wizards”

But Scripture teaches that there is no such thing as a good wizard.

So this silly novel made by an immoral phoney Christian teaches something which is against Scripture and traditional Catholic teaching.

That makes this novel series immoral.

Its that simple. There is no need to presume anything.

Like one of the article i quoted said, '"would you allow your children to read a novel about a battle between “good postitutes and good pimps versus bad prostitutes and bad pimps”

Of course not, for prostitution and pimping is inherently immoral, just like the practice of witchcraft magic and sorcery.

As for wizard of oz, that’s another silly worthless story, if you want a good story there are plenty in Scripture and Catholic history.

 

[SILVERNAME]

The Harry Potter novels do not, in fact, teach witchcraft. This false assertion has been repeated many times by critics of the novels, but repetition of a false statement does not render that statement true. Lying is also sinful, I might add–and an act that takes place in the real world (unlike the magic of the novels of Harry Potter which do not take place in the real world at all).

I am not arguing that you or any other particular person ought to read these particular works of fiction. However, I must ask you and those critics of these novels who rely on second- and third-hand sources if they have ever considered the possibility that those sources are in error?

The novels promote witchcraft by teaching that there is such as thing as good wizards and by teaching that its ok to practice sorcery as long as you are a good wizard.

These are of course contrary to Catholic teaching and Holy Scripture.

My sources from Lifesite.net and World net daily are not in error about this, Lifesite.net and WND.com are proven to be
pro-Christianity websites and organizations.

Lifesite.net is even very pro-Catholicism. Wnd is more baptist or evangelical in inclination.

But in the culture war, in the War between Christianity/Catholicism and the forces of islam and secularism.

These two websites are great truthful and dependable allies.

 

[rocklobster]

Sometimes I wonder if these people even read the books. They make up false claims about them too. They really read too much into Harry’s innocent romance with Hermione.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Sometimes I wonder if these people even read the books. They make up false claims about them too. They really read too much into Harry’s innocent romance with Hermione.

Harry never had a romance with Hermione—they were always just pals.

But Ron had a VERY age-appropriate and realistic romance with her. It was nice to see teenage love portrayed like that.

 

[Contarini]

Harry potter magic is sorcery

Define sorcery

But Scripture teaches that there is no such thing as a good wizard.

Define “wizard.” If a “wizard” by your definition is someone who practices “sorcery,” then I refer you back to the previous challenge–define sorcery. Until you have done that your remarks have no real meaning–you are using language equivocally.

Edwin

 

[Melissa]

No, there is no difference, unless you are talking about harry blackstone or david copperfield style magic, which isn’t really magic or socery, but is rather deception( which isn’t a good thing either, some people like to pay money and waste time to let other people decieve them, i do not fancy such things)

Harry potter magic is sorcery not parlor tricks, and socery is forbidden by Scripture.

There is no difference between the witchcraft of harry potter and real life witchcraft, except that the witchcraft of harry potter isn’t exactly doable in real life.

I honestly do not know what you people mean by “relationship”.

Relationship: re·la·tion·ship /rɪˈleɪʃənˌʃɪp/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-ley-shuhn-ship] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun

1. a connection, association, or involvement.

There most absolutely is a difference between the magic in the Harry Potter novels (a mechanical ability which one either has or does not have FROM BIRTH, though there are differences in degree of ability–the more marked distinction is between those who do and those who do not have this ability) and the magic/witchcraft in the real world (either a sleight-of-hand deception or the matter condemned in Scripture). Therefore, I shall say it again: There is no connection, association, or involvement between the magic of the fictional world of Harry Potter and the witchcraft of the real world.

But this i do know.

Harry potter teaches that magic sorcery and witchcraft are ok, as long as you are a “good witch”.

But there is no such thing as a good witch, all witchcraft magic/magick/sorcery is immoral so all witches are immoral.

This novel consider harry potter and his friends has “good wizards”

But Scripture teaches that there is no such thing as a good wizard.

So this silly novel made by an immoral phoney Christian teaches something which is against Scripture and traditional Catholic teaching.

That makes this novel series immoral.

Its that simple. There is no need to presume anything.

Again, you misunderstand. The fallacy of presumption which you (and the authors on whom you rely for knowledge) commit is presuming the connection between fact and fiction. You (nor they) have not proven that there is any relationship (connection, association, involvement) between the fictional and the factual. In other words, the argument is based on a statement which may or may not be true, yet proceeds as though that statement had already been proven. (In fact, however, the veracity of this presupposition has already been disproven, but that particular detail does not factor into the fault of the logic.)

In fact, as I said before, the Harry Potter novels do not teach witchcraft, nor do they teach that it is ‘ok to be a good witch’. They are an entertaining read for many people, but the discussions with most people upon reading the novels is not centered on witchcraft (which would be expected if the novels did, in fact, ‘teach witchcraft’ or ‘teach that it’s ok to be a good witch’), but rather on some rather significant moral questions: was Snape’s killing of Dumbledore euthanasia (and the associated discussion about why euthanasia is wrong)? how it is not our mere abilities that determine our life, but rather how we choose to use those abilities, that there are times when we must choose between right and easy paths, that remorse (contrition?) is necessary for the wounded soul, the importance of love–particularly self-sacrificial love, and so on.

In all honesty, do you truly believe that you have the right to sit in judgment on JK Rowling personally, as you have in your personal attack against her? Matthew 7:1-2.

Like one of the article i quoted said, '"would you allow your children to read a novel about a battle between “good postitutes and good pimps versus bad prostitutes and bad pimps”

Of course not, for prostitution and pimping is inherently immoral, just like the practice of witchcraft magic and sorcery.

I read that article also, and it also is based on that logical fallacy of presumption, as explained above, in addition to creating a straw man.

As for wizard of oz, that’s another silly worthless story, if you want a good story there are plenty in Scripture and Catholic history.

So, does this mean that one should eschew the entire fiction section of a library or book store?

My sources from Lifesite.net and World net daily are not in error about this, Lifesite.net and WND.com are proven to be
pro-Christianity websites and organizations.

Lifesite.net is even very pro-Catholicism. Wnd is more baptist or evangelical in inclination.

But in the culture war, in the War between Christianity/Catholicism and the forces of islam and secularism.

These two websites are great truthful and dependable allies.

In other words, the answer to my question–“I must ask you and those critics of these novels who rely on second- and third-hand sources if they have ever considered the possibility that those sources are in error?”–is: No.

Unfortunately, whether or not one accepts the claim that Lifesite and WND are, in general, truthful and dependable (again, another presumption), it can be demonstrated that they are neither truthful nor dependable when it comes to the Harry Potter novels. Lifesite, in particular, can be demonstrated to have rather deliberately misconstrued and misrepresented letters written by then-Cardinal Ratzinger. I cannot say that they deliberately mis-translated the first letter, but I have subsequently asked someone w/ fluency in German who pointed out that a word was missing in the English translation–the missing word would resolve the grammatical issue noted by Jimmy Akin in his analysis of Lifesite’s misrepresentation; however, it remains true that they presented a mis-translation in their article with an extremely misleading headline (and I quite frankly doubt that the mis-translation was accidental, but I am not going to state such as fact).

I might as well quote Welch: “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?” [NB: “sir” could easily be struck from the sentences of the quote to make it more applicable to the present situation. However, in the interest of accuracy, the quote is presented as it was.]

 

[estesbob]

The novels promote witchcraft by teaching that there is such as thing as good wizards and by teaching that its ok to practice sorcery as long as you are a good wizard.

Can you give me some examples.? It would be helpful if you would give us a page number and which book it is in that teaches this

These are of course contrary to Catholic teaching and Holy Scripture.

Can you give me some examples.? It would be helpful if you would give us a page number and which book it is in that teaches this

My sources from Lifesite.net and World net daily are not in error about this, Lifesite.net and WND.com are proven to be
pro-Christianity websites and organizations.

LIFE.net is even very pro-Catholicism. Wnd is more baptist or evangelical in inclination.

Did they give page numbers the book it was from that backs up your assertions

But in the culture war, in the War between Christianity/Catholicism and the forces of islam and secularism

.

And THIS HAS what to do with Harry Potter

 

[Chronister4673]

The problem with most of the criticism coming from the Anti-Harry’s is that they are reading this as if it was something that’s really going on. If you’re going to read fantasy of any sort, you have to allow your mind to work around the framework that the author creates. In the world that JK Rowling has created, God has allowed human beings to be born with innate magical talent. In Anne McCaffrey’s writing, there are dragons and intergalactic space travel. In other authors’ worlds, there are sentient and talking animals, human colonization of other planets, etc… ad nauseum…

The point I’m trying to make here is that within the framework of these novels, moral choices are still moral choices. In HP, the framework is doing everything within your given talents to fight evil, and doing it within the most moral manner possible. Repeatedly, Harry is given the choice to use things that are considered reprehensible to meet his desired end. He repeatedly does not do this. In the last book, he does use the Unforgivable Curses, but it’s a case of self defense. Killing someone innocent is always a gravely immoral act, but killing someone to defend yourself or your family or someone else is allowable. Harry has mercy on those who have wronged them, up to and including Voldemort. Harry sacrifices himself for the sake of the whole wizarding world. Death is overcome by love. All of this is done in an imaginary framework where magic of this type exists.

In our world, God has not given us this ability. The sorcery and witchcraft spoken of in the bible is divination using spirits. The wizarding world of Rowling’s books is entered dependant on your DNA. Reading a book or watching a movie requires you to suspend the real world for a bit. The message of HP is that Love will win over Evil. (What was B-16’s first encyclical titled? Oh yeah, GOD IS LOVE) Rowling is using her secret wizarding world to drive home messages of Love, Mercy, Forgiveness. At the end of book 7, Harry urges Voldemort to repent. The one who took everything from him, the one who hounded him from his infancy, the one who wanted to kill him. Harry grew up enough to not want him to suffer (“Try a little remorse. I’ve seen what you become.”). Love your enemies? Sound familiar?

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

OK, so last time wasn’t the last time…

Harry Potter magic is not the same as witchcraft and sorcery in the real world-- In the HP universe, people are born with their powers, they perform no satanic ritual to gain them. They do not call upon demons to perform magic, but recite latin-sounding words. Witches in the middle ages called upon deities and demons, Harry and friends do not.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

The problem with most of the criticism coming from the Anti-Harry’s is that they are reading this as if it was something that’s really going on. If you’re going to read fantasy of any sort, you have to allow your mind to work around the framework that the author creates. In the world that JK Rowling has created, God has allowed human beings to be born with innate magical talent. In Anne McCaffrey’s writing, there are dragons and intergalactic space travel. In other authors’ worlds, there are sentient and talking animals, human colonization of other planets, etc… ad nauseum…

The point I’m trying to make here is that within the framework of these novels, moral choices are still moral choices. In HP, the framework is doing everything within your given talents to fight evil, and doing it within the most moral manner possible. Repeatedly, Harry is given the choice to use things that are considered reprehensible to meet his desired end. He repeatedly does not do this. In the last book, he does use the Unforgivable Curses, but it’s a case of self defense. Killing someone innocent is always a gravely immoral act, but killing someone to defend yourself or your family or someone else is allowable. Harry has mercy on those who have wronged them, up to and including Voldemort. Harry sacrifices himself for the sake of the whole wizarding world. Death is overcome by love. All of this is done in an imaginary framework where magic of this type exists.

In our world, God has not given us this ability. The sorcery and witchcraft spoken of in the bible is divination using spirits. The wizarding world of Rowling’s books is entered dependant on your DNA. Reading a book or watching a movie requires you to suspend the real world for a bit. The message of HP is that Love will win over Evil. (What was B-16’s first encyclical titled? Oh yeah, GOD IS LOVE) Rowling is using her secret wizarding world to drive home messages of Love, Mercy, Forgiveness. At the end of book 7, Harry urges Voldemort to repent. The one who took everything from him, the one who hounded him from his infancy, the one who wanted to kill him. Harry grew up enough to not want him to suffer (“Try a little remorse. I’ve seen what you become.”). Love your enemies? Sound familiar?

A really top-notch analysis, Chronister.

In the final book, Hermione reads about the Dark Arts and is clearly appalled.

 

[beckers]

He repeatedly does not do this. In the last book, he does use the Unforgivable Curses, but it’s a case of self defense. Killing someone innocent is always a gravely immoral act, but killing someone to defend yourself or your family or someone else is allowable. Harry has mercy on those who have wronged them, up to and including Voldemort. Harry sacrifices himself for the sake of the whole wizarding world. Death is overcome by love. All of this is done in an imaginary framework where magic of this type exists.

I don’t remember Harry using a unforgivable Curse. He doesn’t kill anyone. Remember he didn’t want to stun Stan because he was afraid that falling of a broom stick would kill Stan. He doesn’t even “kill” voldemort.

But i agree with pretty much everything else you said. I don’t know why we get into these arguments with people. They want to believe what they want to believe without acknowledging the truth. Heck she could have had Harry become a priest and people would be saying the book is anti-christian.

 

[beckers]

A really top-notch analysis, Chronister.

In the final book, Hermione reads about the Dark Arts and is clearly appalled.

Yep. None of the main characters could understand how voldemort could do that to himself. I remember Harry being sickened that he had caused that amount of pain to malfory in the HP (6th book) with a random curse.

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

I don’t remember Harry using a unforgivable Curse. He doesn’t kill anyone. Remember he didn’t want to stun Stan because he was afraid that falling of a broom stick would kill Stan. He doesn’t even “kill” voldemort.

But i agree with pretty much everything else you said. I don’t know why we get into these arguments with people. They want to believe what they want to believe without acknowledging the truth. Heck she could have had Harry become a priest and people would be saying the book is anti-christian.

Remember in the bank, when he uses the Imperius curse? Also, in the 5th book, he uses Crucio on Bellatrix, but the latter was done when Sirius had just died and the former was done only out of necessity.

 

[wisdom_3_5]

Remember in the bank, when he uses the Imperius curse? Also, in the 5th book, he uses Crucio on Bellatrix, but the latter was done when Sirius had just died and the former was done only out of necessity.

He also uses crucio, to great effect, in Ravenclaw tower on Amyctus in DH.

 

[Tim_Kirchoff]

He also uses crucio, to great effect, in Ravenclaw tower on Amyctus in DH.

I forgot about that part