Church Exorcist and Pro Life Priest Warns Against Harry Potter

[Lost_Wanderer]

Meh, I’m just the guy who dug this up from an old thread. You should thank the guy who originally posted that critique on this forum. It’s a shame I haven’t seen him around much.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

In that the good Father, is a practicing exorcist, who is speaking from experience, you might reread what he is relating…“Demons do not discriminate between intentions – no matter how innocent – and children lose the clear distinction between good and evil.”

"Father Euteneuer told me possession is almost always a result of someone getting involved in some sort of occult practices, such as witchcraft, Wicca, tarot cards, and Ouiji boards.

“Harry Potter and these Twilight vampires glamorize the power of evil,” Father Eutenener explained, “and this has lead to many, many cases of possession among young people.” It may begin with a child or teenager simply “playing around” with the occult, but that seemingly harmless act is “opening a window” to possession.

Father Euteneuer emphasized this point, “Demons do not discriminate between intentions – no matter how innocent – and children lose the clear distinction between good and evil.”

The HP series does not glamourize evil. In reading it, I see the author’s Christian intent, and find Christ everywhere in it, down to the end where Harry and his friends turn against Dumbledore because they do not ‘understand’ his plan.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I wouldn’t know; never tried a spell. But I’ve heard if one says,“Accio!” while pointing at an object and someone is there with you they will bring the object to you. You may have to say it a couple of times.

Oooor they could just think you’ve got allergies, depending on how you actually pronounce that bloody word. XD

I hasten to add that being Catholic totally makes up for not getting into Hogwarts. Or not being Buffy.

Meh, I just have an axe to grind with reality in general. I may have to acknowledge it and put it first place in my priorities but if the good Lord in Heaven would only allow it, I’d have this world turned into a medieval fantasy realm and change my job to a mage in an instant.

Besides, I’m probably too old for Hogwarts and I don’t even care about Buffy (I’m not into vampire stuff XD).

Right now, I fantasize more of becoming high-ranking mage from Fairy Tail.

Spells yes. The wand? More for casting a circle ie the sacred space we work in. Actually my one wand mostly sits in my closet. I usually use a stang for the circle casting these days, or a sword, which is more traditional. And strictly speaking, no instruments of any kind are needed for spells or anything else we do. And for the record, no, I don’t cast spells with latin(ish) incantations like Harry Potter. One of my wife’s friends looks like Harry Potter, and I know another guy into ceremonial magick who looks (and has the temperament) of Malfoy, but that’s as Rowling-esque as it gets with me.

Think you can cast Magic Missile?

 

[kenofken]

I DO cast magic missle, but only when I’m in character with my RPG buddies!

 

[graceandglory]

atheism.about.com/od/harrypotter/i/witchcraft_2.htm

"The Pagan Federation in Britain has reportedly appointed a special youth officer to deal with the flood of inquiries from children who love the Harry Potter books.

Children have more trouble distinguishing reality from fantasy than adults; **because the Harry Potter books appear so rooted in real life, many may believe that the magic in the books is real and will therefore explore witchcraft, Wicca, and paganism. **

Even if J.K. Rowling didn’t set out to deliberately promote witchcraft, she certainly sympathizes with it and those sympathies have led to her create a dangerous series of books that imperil the youth of today, threatening to lead them into satanic, evil practices."

Richard Abanes writes in his book Harry Potter and the Bible:

“The whole attraction of the occult is power, excitement and entertainment, each of which is represented in the Potter series.

Rowling’s books, at the very least, will desensitize children to the dangers of occultism, which in turn may create in them a general sympathy toward a spiritually detrimental set of beliefs.

For some children, the Potter series may even spark a desire for genuine occult materials and paraphernalia.”

You might be interested to know that Richard Abanes has been on this forum, I think in preparation for his anti-Catholic book…which he never did write.

forums.catholic-questions.org/search.php?searchid=7541356

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Ok, time for all you Harry Potter fans to come at me with your worst, because I know you will. But I saw this article, written about a very holy priest on the front line in our spiritual battle against Satan, and I have to put it out here, even though I know it will meet with ridicule and even hate coming from Harry Potter fans. But here goes.

Hopefully this will be of help to someone who is not so sure about Harry Potter. For all you die-hard fans, I know it’s hopeless. It’s scary how much of a hold these stories have over some people so that they won’t even consider that there might be something wrong with them. If only people would hold to the dogma of the Church as rigidly.

The exact opposite is the truth. What’s scary is how hell-bent the anti-Harry Potter crowd is on villifying the series, despite overwhelming evidence of its blatant Christian elements and moral/spiritual wisdom.

Any objective Christian reader discovers this. For instance:

Actually what prompted me to pick up the Harry Potter books was to see if there was any creditability to the claims that the books are dangerous. I read the first book with a very critical eye. I had every intention of putting the book down if it appeared to be truly dangerous and it simply was not. The book was simply innocent fantasy written by an author with a sense of humor I could appreciate.

I then heard that the other books are far worse, so I kept picking them up. What I can say is that I do think that as Harry Potter gets older, the books move from intermiedate reading to young adult reading. As such, some of the books I do think are more suitable for teenagers rather than 9 and 10 year olds. But that said, the more books I read, the more I began to realize that however much of a “progressive” Christian Rowling is, the books have great Christian themes and have no relationship with the occult at all. The criticism of Rowlings books are along the lines of the criticisms CS Lewis and Tolken got from some Christians who felt that the Narnia books and the Lord of the Rings were dangerous.

I’ve become a fan of the series because they’re enjoyable books, have well developed characters, good themes and that they succeed in having all these elements while preserving a lot of innocense that most books on the market lack. Definitely there are books that parents need to cautious their children away from reading, but it takes more than listening to frantic ignorant people attacking just the top best selling books to do it. It takes making sure you know what you’re kids are reading and what really is out there.

Well said!

Lastly, one need only reference the Chronicles of Narnia to see similar types of magic, dueling, etc. I have even heard some argue that the Harry Potter series ‘borrowed’ or ‘followed’ (depending on your view) several themes and similar plot lines as Lewis’ Chronicles. But you don’t hear people up in arms because the Chronicles are filled with strong Christian allegory.

Precisely. I recently reread Prince Caspian, in which good/white magic is distinguished from evil magic - which is one of the criticisms leveled at the HP series. Also, Glenstorm the Centaur uses astrology to predict regime change in Narnia, and it’s not presented as a bad thing. But no one complains about Narnia. Nor should they - the “magic” is highly fictionalized and the context is so clearly Christian. Kind of like Harry Potter, actually…

So, I’d want to reject paranoia, but after reading more about Harry Potter’s author & her statement that one of the main characters was a homosexual,& seeing the increasingly dark nature of the films, I’m back to being wary.

Dumbledore’s homosexuality is not revealed anywhere in the books, nor is it even hinted at. In all actuality, Dumbledore - who is celibate - actually constitutes a great role model. I don’t think it would be wise to avoid HP just because Dumbledore is gay, when (a) it’s not in the books, and (b) he chooses to live celibately.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

And you think teens will want to (or) be able to discern that.

Have you ever spoken with a Wiccan?

This argument fully encapsulates with remarkable succinctness the absolute absurdity of the position that Harry Potter promotes the occult and witchcraft:

Yes, I have, Barbkw. Ask any Wiccan or witch if there’s a similarity between what he or she does and Harry Potter. They openly scoff at the mere suggestion that there’s any relation. Heck, there was even one on the other HP thread (“Warnings about Harry Potter,” I think). Check it out if you don’t believe us.

 

[Reservoir_Dog]

This argument fully encapsulates with remarkable succinctness the absolute absurdity of the position that Harry Potter promotes the occult and witchcraft:

Yes, I have, Barbkw. Ask any Wiccan or witch if there’s a similarity between what he or she does and Harry Potter. They openly scoff at the mere suggestion that there’s any relation. Heck, there was even one on the other HP thread (“Warnings about Harry Potter,” I think). Check it out if you don’t believe us.

That wiccan guy had one of the few sane things to say on that thread.

 

[57classic]

I have (finally) read through the entire thread, whew! Yes I have read all the HP books, started in the airport in Brazilia, only thing I could find in English I hadn’t read then eagerly read everything that was out and awaited all forthcoming books. I was 40 at the time and encouraged my 20 something daughters to read them then as my younger daughter and grandchildren got older they also read the books. Not a one of them has left the church.

What I have observed of life in general is that since we are all different, it takes different interests to trip us up or different temptations by Satan to cause us to sin.

As a teen, I was very interested in witchcraft, read lots of fiction books and one massive book in our junior high library call the Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology. I did not take the plunge into practicing witchcraft. I have read a few Adept novels that kinda give me the heebee jeebees. Sorcery is not my downfall.

Some people, even whole races of people have trouble with alcohol. While in my ancestry are 2 of those races, and I have consumed a great deal of alcohol, that is not my downfall.

Gambling is not my downfall.

Impurity has been and could still be my downfall if I let it but because I recognize it as a near occasion of sin, I pray and I avoid it and anything that I perceive in time that could be a temptation in that direction.

That, in my opinion is the answer to this hysteria. Satan uses whatever tool is necessary to get a sinner’s attention. It is up to parents to educate their children, know their children and guide their children’s choices in literature, TV, movies, clothes, games, whatever until that child is mature enough to select their own. After that, while every person experiences setbacks on the road to heaven, with a well formed concience and maturity the holes in the road become easier to crawl out of or even avoid altogether.

 

[Netty313]

Odd. The first time I fully encountered the man’s name was in a poster’s critique of his books.

Given the critique above and my integrity as a student of literary criticism, forgive me if I have ceased taking anything by O’Brien as credible.

Sometimes he sounds more like a Lutheran or Calvinist than a Catholic.

I can’t take a critique seriously from someone who says the above. O’Brien’s Catholicism has never been questioned. He is allowing families to discern the books with his words. He didn’t want to write the book, but did so out of obedience to Christ. One can dismiss him all they want, and dismiss Fr. Euteneuer’s warnings and Fr. Amorth’s warnings as well as Fr. Corapi’s. Three top-notch priests and two exorcists.

When I finally look Christ in the eye (provided I get that far!), I want to be able to at least say I listened to the people that He sent to me.

 

[curlycool89]

I can’t take a critique seriously from someone who says the above. O’Brien’s Catholicism has never been questioned. He is allowing families to discern the books with his words. He didn’t want to write the book, but did so out of obedience to Christ.

I wouldn’t question his Catholicism (nb. Nobody shouldn’t be questioning anyone’s Catholicism), but the review that LW posted suggests he has a very heavy bias and inconsistency in his reviews. He rails against books he doesn’t like and then make excuses for the same elements found in “better” books. He’s a “party apologist”, where “his side” can do no wrong and the “other side” can do no right. That’s not being objective, and what we’re looking for is objectivity.

When I finally look Christ in the eye (provided I get that far!), I want to be able to at least say I listened to the people that He sent to me.

Coles notes version: “I’m right, you’re all wrong and going to hell”.

 

[Netty313]

I wouldn’t question his Catholicism (nb. Nobody shouldn’t be questioning anyone’s Catholicism), but the review that LW posted suggests he has a very heavy bias and inconsistency in his reviews. He rails against books he doesn’t like and then make excuses for the same elements found in “better” books. He’s a “party apologist”, where “his side” can do no wrong and the “other side” can do no right. That’s not being objective, and what we’re looking for is objectivity.

Coles notes version: “I’m right, you’re all wrong and going to hell”.

I never implied you were going to hell. In fact, I implied I might. Christ sends messengers, however, and IMO we’re supposed to listen to them.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

This weird thing about dragons is the pet idea of Michael O’Brien, and it always amazes me that so many Catholics have paid attention to it. He contradicts himself in his book, misunderstands some of the fantasy works he attempts to analyze, and even abuses Christian theology. His overview of dragon imagery in world mythology is selective, inadequate, and inaccurate. The book is simply terrible, and yet I keep finding people who take it seriously.

O’Brien’s favorite trick is tossing around certain inexplicable words to lead you by the nose. He compares fantasy works with “traditional” fairy tales, but never explains what he means by “traditional.” Dungeons and Dragons is a “cult,” but he never explains why he calls it that. Dragons are positive symbols in China because of “dualistic eastern religions,” but he doesn’t explain why dualism would lead to positive dragon symbols. Nor does he explain why serpents are consistently negative in Zoroastrianism, which is unquestionably dualistic. He mentions Tiamat from the Enuma Elish as a sort of dragon and seems to think that helps his case, but he’s apparently unaware that Tiamat’s vanquisher, Marduk, has serpents and dragons among his sacred symbols. He claims J. R. R. Tolkien is on his side in all this, but he is apparently unaware of Tolkien’s Farmer Giles of Ham, which contains a tamed dragon, the very thing O’Brien claims will drag children into neo-paganism.

When attacking the work of Madeline L’Engle, he criticizes her for describing cherubim as dragon-like, apparently unaware that in ancient iconography, cherubim are winged sphinxes. He is also apparently unaware that seraphim are winged serpents with legs–that’s a positive use of snake imagery right out of the Bible. He also gives no account, that I remember, of John 3.14 or of the good dragon, representing Mordecai, who battles the evil dragon in the additions to Esther. Scripture does not contain a univocal use of serpent imagery, so there can be no basis for a Christian argument that snakes in fiction must always represent only one thing, all the time, unless we’re prepared to condemn the Bible as a confused neo-pagan work.

He trips over his theology on a few occasions. In an attempt to discuss beauty as a property of being and the symbolic use of beauty in fairy stories, he gets confused and ends up–I hope by accident–saying pretty people are inherently better than ugly people. Even though he praises fairy tales for showing evildoers as ugly and do-gooders as beautiful, he turns around in one of his essays on Harry Potter and attacks J. K. Rowling for doing the very same thing.

During that aforementioned criticism of L’Engle, he criticizes her for (correctly) depicting evil as non-being, even though he admits she’s basically right on that point. But though O’Brien himself (correctly) understands demons as beings as wholly dedicated to evil as beings can be, and (correctly) criticizes L’Engle for a universalist bent, he (incorrectly, very incorrectly!) says some living human beings are the same way, “completely ruled by evil.” Sometimes he sounds more like a Lutheran or Calvinist than a Catholic.

He also excuses George MacDonald for his universalism. In Lilith, MacDonald depicts even Satan being saved, and O’Brien gives this a pass, but for some reason, that sort of thing is absolutely condemnable when Madeline L’Engle does it. He also praises MacDonald for depicting Lilith being converted back to good, even though she’s a demonic figure, though he condemns the depiction of the conversion of other demonic figures. The heroic characters in Lilith also use magic, just as Lilith does–yet when discussing Harry Potter and other fantasy works, he condemns books where both heroes and villains employ magic. For some reason, the use of magic by both good and evil is something O’Brien is willing to excuse in works by the authors he favors. O’Brien simply can’t be consistent in his criticism, so how can anyone seriously expect fantasists to use ideas like O’Brien’s as a moral guide for writing their work?

O’Brien may be a fine novelist. I know from experience he’s a competent painter. But in the realms of folklore or literary criticism the man is a sophomore, the Richard Dawkins of Catholic literary moral criticism, making facile arguments based on some master key to interpreting stories that he claims to have discovered, and huffily dismissing anyone who disagrees with him as “illiterate.” I do not understand why anyone treats A Landscape with Dragons or O’Brien’s essays on this subject as anything other than an embarrassment.

That makes a lot of sense. I read an essay/selection from Harry Potter and the Paganization of Culture and was taken aback by how his objections fail utterly to fit Harry Potter. For instance, his objection to the reversal/inversion of traditional magical imagery for good and evil… Harry Potter fits even his wacky criteria perfectly, as lions, stags, etc. become symbols for good, whereas serpents and the like (the basilisk? Nagini? the Hungarian horntail?) are either overtly evil or (in the case of my last example, for instance) at least require opposition in Harry Potter.

 

[curlycool89]

I never implied you were going to hell. In fact, I implied I might. Christ sends messengers, however, and IMO we’re supposed to listen to them.

Yes, it’s your opinion, not fact. Just because a few other people say it also does not make it a fact (and I’m completely ignoring those you brought up because both of them have an obvious bias and can’t possibly be taken as objective sources).

What about the Bishop someone brought up that thought HP was a good read? Why are you discrediting his opinion? He after all would rank above priests and exorcists as a successor to the Apostles themselves.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I actually find it laughable yet disturbing at the same time that just because someone’s an exorcist or that he/she has ‘battled demons’, these people treat them like they’re an authority on everything from literary theory to even science!

God, it’s like I’m laughing on one side and wanting to ram my head through a wall on the other.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I can’t take a critique seriously from someone who says the above. O’Brien’s Catholicism has never been questioned.

Your nit-picking neither justifies or defends O’Brien’s inconsistency in his criticism technique. Comparing a style of literary criticism to the views of one particular religion is hardly putting to question a person’s faith.

For instance, when arguing about significance of names, I adopt a view that someone described as materialistic. Does that make me a materialist? Hardly.

He is allowing families to discern the books with his words. He didn’t want to write the book, but did so out of obedience to Christ.

Allowing or confusing? Granted the critique I presented (of which the actual, major points you have deliberately ignored to address), he is not a credible authority.

One can dismiss him all they want, and dismiss Fr. Euteneuer’s warnings and Fr. Amorth’s warnings as well as Fr. Corapi’s. Three top-notch priests and two exorcists.

When I finally look Christ in the eye (provided I get that far!), I want to be able to at least say I listened to the people that He sent to me.

Even priest’s can be instruments of the devil. They’re only human after all.
However, to throw Fr. Corapi in is a bit of a joke don’t you think? Last time I heard him speak on the demonic, he talked more about drugs and the sex/porn industry and never mentioned fantasy fiction at all.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Why do I torture myself by coming back to these threads? I’m like the fool in Proverbs 26:11 for doing so: “As the dog returns to his vomit, so the fool repeats his folly.”

Well, here I go, back to the vomit…

Exactly! I’ve placed articles from Euteneuer regarding Potter on another forum site, and whenever I do, within seconds (literally), the rabid pro-Potters attack.

The anti-Harry Potter arguments have no credibility. You need to read How Harry Cast His Spell by John Granger. You’ll be surprised to learn that the Harry Potter series is Christian fantasy like Narnia (though not for children as young as Lewis’ target audience).

In any case, you need to take a good, long, hard look at your position. Please read carefully what kenofken, a real Wiccan, had to say on this very thread:

If we’re growing, it’s not because of Harry Potter. It’s because of churches that have grown so dogmatic that they seek to strangle creativity and fantasy and the celebration of magic that is life itself. People who come to Wicca hoping to live a Hogwarts fantasy life are very quickly disappointed. HP is about as realistic an avenue for recruiting for Wicca as crusader movies would be for Catholicism.

And you know what? He’s got a point, Netty. Those who don’t have Christ will never experience the transcendence, the wonder, the paradox, the joy, that life in Christ offers if they see our faith as lifeless and anti-imaginative. By desecrating the inspiring and beautiful modern tradition of Christian fantasy, the paranoid Potter-phobes are partially responsible for the lack of faith of anyone in our culture who thinks Christianity is opposed to life, creativity, and celebration. Based on what kenofken said above, all the Harry-hating fanatics really need to wake up their souls, or just go find a millstone and an ocean.

This is what Fr. Euteneuer had to say about The Alien movies.

Again, a criticism that makes absolutely no sense. Have you seen the second one in the series, Aliens? Ellen Ripley explicitly contrasts the frightening alien reproduction with the beauty of true motherhood, and this antithesis drives forward motherhood as the film’s central theme.

Again, this anti-imaginative hysteria only makes things harder for Christ to reach souls. C.S. Lewis wasn’t afraid to include among the good guys in Prince Caspian Bacchus, Silenus, and a river god, not to mention an astrology-practicing centaur. And today his Chronicles of Narnia - written for young children! - is rightfully celebrated as great Christian fantasy.

By contrast, today we’ve got paranoid accusations that the Alien films promote abortion when the second one celebrates true motherhood and contrasts it with the horrific alien reproduction. This cultural state of affairs is worse than tragic - it’s an abomination.

O’Brien’s book, though, is an eye-opener to those who have done little research into the potential harm that the HP series might encourage; he is a well-known highly-regarded Catholic writer. Do you know of him?

O’Brien is a quack. In post #257 I quoted DGDDavidson, who explains why, then I went on to give one example of how even by O’Brien’s ludicrous standards, Harry Potter is very spiritually appropriate.

No symbolic Christ, and that’s covered in O’Brien’s writings, which I was attempting to lead you to.

False. Leaving aside the absurdity of the demand for a symbolic Christ in fantasy literature, Harry Potter actually does have a symbolic Christ figure at the climax of every book. The phoenix Fawkes helps Harry slay the evil basilisk in the climax of Chamber of Secrets, for example; Harry’s Patronus charm, which saves his life from soul-sucking dementors, is a white stag at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban; etc. Harry himself becomes the Christ figure of the last book when he surrenders himself up to death - literally - in order to save his friends. Every Harry Potter book includes a symbolic journey from death to spiritual life and resurrection.

Here as elsewhere, O’Brien doesn’t know what he’s talking about on Harry Potter.

I like to go to the experts. Just my style …

John Granger’s books on the Harry Potter series are far better.

 

[GuitarPlayer]

Who better knows Satan than an exorcist? ]

Exactly!!! Listen to the exorcists people

I’m currently reading Exorcism and the Church Militant (I found a few copies), and have read Michael D. O’Brien’s Harry Potter and the Paganization of Culture. Both are extraordinary reads.

I wish some of the pro-Potters would read these books.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I wonder if some of these Potter fans defend the church with the same enthusiasm.

Quotes from three official Church exorcists:

You’re appeal to authority is a logical fallacy in the face of our arguments.

I wish some of the pro-Potters would read these books.

I guess you didn’t read the critique of your champion O’Brien that is just so conveniently posted up above now did you?

Good Lord do I have to lecture you about literary theory as well?

 

[Netty313]

Exactly!!! Listen to the exorcists people

I wish some of the pro-Potters would read these books.

I do too, but they really love/enjoy the Potter movies, and don’t want to waste there time, I guess. The exorcists that have come out regarding Potter are extraordinary Catholics, and need our prayers a great deal; they are constantly battling Satan. Michael D. O’Brien is a strong practicing Catholic as well, who did his own battle with Satan when he decided to write his book. I don’t think pro-Potters, in general, understand the strength the devil has, and that just a tiny little opening (such as is available through the magic of Potter) is enough for him to slip in.