Church Exorcist and Pro Life Priest Warns Against Harry Potter

[LittleSoldier]

UPDATE: Been reading more. That website I linked to above condemns not only Narnia but also Lord of the Rings as well.

There are many more like it. Please see my above reply for relevance.

Thank you for the links, Fone Bone.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Scripture.

That was also the basic moral tenet for slavery, child abuse, and the deprivation of women’s rights.

 

[Fran65]

As a psychologist I can see a number of important differences between Disney’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice and the Harry Potter franchise:

1. 
   *]The apprentice is a mouse. In HP they are children.
   *]The setting is cartoon (obviously fantasy) world. In HP a great deal occurs in a world recognised by children as the same as their own.
   *]The consequences of messing with magic are entirely negative for the mouse. In HP the children use magic that they are told not to and do their own research to save their own and other’s lives and to enhance their status and self esteem.
   
   There are many other differences. I know of children who waited for their letter for days and tried out the spells described in the books. I don’t any who thought that they could find a sorcerer to teach them or who tried to put spells on mops.
   
   Children don’t identify deeply with cartoon characters (although granted some little girls have played at being a princess or Cinderella), but they do adopt child ‘heroes’ as their role models. In addition, the consequences of identifying with a cartoon character are not the same as becoming interested in the real area of the occult through identifying with HP characters.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Children don’t identify deeply with cartoon characters (although granted some little girls have played at being a princess or Cinderella), but they do adopt child ‘heroes’ as their role models. In addition, the consequences of identifying with a cartoon character are not the same as becoming interested in the real area of the occult through identifying with HP characters.

That’s why it’s important to guide children in the lessons of telling fantasy from reality is it not?

 

[Mumbles140]

As a psychologist I can see a number of important differences between Disney’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice and the Harry Potter franchise:

1. 
   *]The apprentice is a mouse. In HP they are children.
   *]The setting is cartoon (obviously fantasy) world. In HP a great deal occurs in a world recognised by children as the same as their own.
   *]The consequences of messing with magic are entirely negative for the mouse. In HP the children use magic that they are told not to and do their own research to save their own and other’s lives and to enhance their status and self esteem.
   
   So what about the use of magic by the children in Narnia? That world is just as real as Hogwarts. Remember that in HP, they aren’t allowed to use magic outside of school until they are of legal age (17, which doesn’t happen until the very last book for Harry!). And the magical people in Hogwarts have that ability - a regular person can’t ‘acquire’ it by any way possible. In Narnia, a human child, with no innate magical abilities, reads from a spell book and creates magic. Would this then fall under your criteria used against Harry Potter?
   
   There are many other differences. I know of children who waited for their letter for days and tried out the spells described in the books. I don’t any who thought that they could find a sorcerer to teach them or who tried to put spells on mops.
   
   Tried out the spells, huh? Now, was this playing like we used to do as kids by putting our fingers in the shape of a ‘gun’ and shouting ‘bang bang! I killed you, fall over!’? Or did they grab wands and actually expect to do magic using simple Latin?
   
   Children don’t identify deeply with cartoon characters (although granted some little girls have played at being a princess or Cinderella), but they do adopt child ‘heroes’ as their role models. In addition, the consequences of identifying with a cartoon character are not the same as becoming interested in the real area of the occult through identifying with HP characters.

1. 
   I don’t know what you are basing this on - just personal opinion or if you have facts. Why do you think they make cartoon characters that are so human-like even though they are animals or other things? Look at Finding Nemo, Cars, Shrek, etc. All of them experience issues that people face in real life, and that is relatable. In fact, the majority of childhood movies are cartoons, so it makes sense that their exposure to cartoons would allow them to identify with the issues of those characters even though they know that they themselves aren’t cartoons.

 

[Mickey]

If you have such evidence, please provide it. And even though it isn’t fallible, I would very much like to see his reasoning behind his position.

I believe it has been posted early on this thread. If not, it is easy to locate. Furthermore, even if indisputable proof were provided you would say that his opinion is fallible. Pope Benedict XVI is not a Potterite.

You see Mumble, you are so entrenched in your position, that nothing would change your mind.

PS–Please attempt to avoid responding inside of the dialogue boxes. It makes it very dificult to respond in kind.

 

[Mickey]

But then even Satan can quote scripture to his own ends.

Exactly! And he can also appear as an angel of light.

Rowlings sets this in the fantasy genre,

Yes–using witchcraft.

She uses magic as the device,

Yes—under the guise of witchcraft.

She then sets it in a school,

Yes—a witch school.

Now, if your contention is that any christian message is tainted or invalidated by the use of magic as a device, due to the possibility of interesting children in the occult, although I don’t agree I can understand that.

Thank you for understanding.

 

[Mickey]

Hogwarts may be called “Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry,” but the similarities stop there.

You’re kidding, right?

there are no occult powers in Harry Potter.

You’re kidding, right?

The “magical” powers of the wizards in the series are not supernatural at all; they are purely a natural ability of this fictional type of human being, and their powers are totally non-transferable to regular humans like you and I.

Oh, I see now. These particular witches and wizards are acceptable because they were born that way. I’m sure the children will undersatnd this important distinction.

 

[Mickey]

I know of children who waited for their letter for days and tried out the spells described in the books.

How very sad.

 

[gatewood1988]

spotlightministries.org.uk/harrypotterarticle.htm

I found this article very interesting and it uses examples from the books as well that could lead one into occult practices.

 

[mdrummer5]

I know of children who waited for their letter for days and tried out the spells described in the books.

This is not the result of some hidden occult message in the HP books. It’s the result of poor parenting as any child waving a stick and saying “wingardium leviosa” or some other word that’s been obviously made up to those who know better simply does not know the difference between fantasy and reality. Frankly and with all due respect, given your profession I’d expect you to realize this.

I understand what you’re saying about the difference between Fantasia and HP. One is obviously pure fantasy. The other is also fantasy with splashes of reality, so for a young child it can be harder to differentiate the fantasy in HP with reality whereas in Fantasia it’s “in your face”. A witch in HP is not the same thing as someone who labels themself a witch in real life, there are no real witches in some dark basement concocting love potions or liquid luck, there’s not a real witch who would ever make claims to be able to create fire out of nothing or to make something magically float and there is not a real witch who carries a magic stick that is the source of their power. Again, it’s a matter of being able to differentiate fantasy and reality. Some children do not comprehend that… either because they aren’t mature enough to or they simply haven’t been taught properly… either way their parents are to blame for either allowing them to read them too early or for not educating them properly. Blaming a series of books for for the actions of an underdeveloped mind is not just ridiculous it’s a skirting of responsibility to educate children properly.

That’s the issue I have here. I don’t care if someone doesn’t care for the books. There’s plenty of books that a lot of people enjoy that I didn’t find all that entertaining. But the claims being made against the books and trying to hold them somehow liable for the actions of children is irresponsible but it’s a lot easier for those that want to make this claim to stand up together and point their finger at one person (Rowling) than to point the finger at themselves. It’s easier to do that than to properly educate a child. It’s a lazy coward’s way of thinking.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Exactly! And he can also appear as an angel of light.

Thank you for understanding.

Mickey, you’re welcome. To ensure I thoroughly understand your position, could you please respond to the following, I don’t want to put words in your mouth.

Even if we are concede the point that the magic in HP has no relation to the occult, i.e. there is no invocation of spirits or outside forces, it is irrelevant. This is because the child’s interest in the ‘non-occult’ magic of HP may spark an interest leading them to investigate ‘real world’ magic which as the exorcists have stated is always related to the occult. This also nullifies any christian message in the literature that the author is attempting to convey because of the possibility of real world consequences.

The logical application of that position than, is that children should never be exposed to literature or art portraying the use of magic due to the risk. Whether it’s Narnia, LOTR, Fantasia or any other work which may provide that spark in the child leading to the eternal buring of their soul.

Now, again, I don’t agree however, if that correctly sums up your argument than I do appreciate and thank you for your consistency in applying a principle.

 

[Mickey]

Even if we are concede the point that the magic in HP has no relation to the occult, i.e. there is no invocation of spirits or outside forces, it is irrelevant.

It is not irrelevant. I believe that occultic themes are prevalent throughout the Potter series. This is dangerous.

The logical application of that position than, is that children should never be exposed to literature or art portraying the use of magic due to the risk.

I see where you are going with this and I understand. You see, I am a realist. I am not so naive to think that I am going to protect my children from everything “in the world”. It was not until I had a child that I noticed that virtually every children’s program and/or cartoon is saturated with images of magic, spell casting, fairies, witches, etc, etc, etc. It was mind boggling for me to see. Unless I would keep my childen in a bubble, it would be impossible for me to shelter them from these worldly new age themes. Does it surprise me? No. Have you ever seen the number of Catholic retreat centers which teach such things as reiki, enneagram, labyrinth walking, mandalas, eco-spirituality, nature worship, etc? And many of these places are run by nuns!!! So when my children are exposed to these things, I see it as a teaching moment and read them something from the Scriptures or Holy Fathers to help with the explanation. But my wife and I will limit the more blatant and occultic material (of which Potter falls into). We watch very little television. We attempt to play only Christian themed DVD’s. We read mostly from Scripture, Lives of Saints, and patristic literature. And we do not celebrate halloween. We are advocates of home schooling. We are very close to the monastic community in our area and we try to stay obedient to our spirtual father. We try to center our lives around Jesus Christ and his holy Church.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Mickey,

I was asking you to concede the point, because it is irrelevant to the argument. As well as, since you aren’t familiar with the material or that of LOTR or Narnia we really can’t get into the details. I won’t concede it’s occultic as defined by the church because I’ve read it and know it isn’t.

But really, the point is whether something risks sparking a child’s interest in the occult. And I am willing to concede to you that is in fact a judgment call. All children being different, I also agree with the exorcists that the spark can come from portrayal of magic by either good or bad characters for evil or good.

I believe the vast majority of adults can read HP with absolutely no risk of that. You seem intelligent and well-grounded in the faith and could easily pick out the christian themes without being influenced to pursue magic. I think you would see it for what it is. I would never urge someone who doesn’t like the fantasy genre to begin with to read it. Or even just disinclined to read them. Really, burn up the time reading (is it 7?) lengthy books in a genre you’re not fond of to begin with? Life is too short.

I’m not trying to trap you into the box of saying “I’ll never let my kid be exposed to anything dealing with magic.” I know that’s unrealistic, what I’m hoping we both can agree on, is that if we take the exorcists concerns seriously than we do need to consider that warning with any work encompassing magic. And if I as a parent feel strongly enough about it, I should deal consistently with the issue for each work.

If you’ve read the entire thread, (I just reviewed it this weekend), I hope you will note that I have advocated that children should be educated on the issue of the occult, regardless. Which I think is similar, although not identical, to your position.

One caveat, if one teaches CCD to children of the appropriate age, it may be worth the time to read the books to reinforce the christian points, warn of the occult, and avoid kids confusing a rejection of HP including rejection of the christian elements and points. I used it recently in response to a kid bringing up the new atheist claim that religion has been the source of most violent conflicts and deaths. I pointed out that like HP, humanist/socialist governments invoking ‘For the greater good’ as in the Ministry of Magic in HP have killed far more of their own people (Russia/China/Cambodia etc.) than religion in recent history. Unfortunate as it may be, it is a work many of them are familiar with and can relate to.

I will not defend the movies as they drop some things for brevity and I fear will not embody the most important points that the book does in the conclusion.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Thank you for the links, Fone Bone.

No problem. There are many others like it. In fact, I was looking for another one I had found when I discovered that one.

There are many other differences. I know of children who waited for their letter for days and tried out the spells described in the books.

Absurd. I think you need to learn to tell the difference between children’s make-believe games and children being utterly delusional.

When I was little, it was fun to pretend to be a Jedi and have lightsaber fights and use Force powers. Did I think Jedi powers were real? Did I think I was a Jedi? No.

I’m sure loads of children have picked sticks up off the ground, pretended that they contained phoenix tail feathers, and pretended to disarm, stun, or otherwise duel each other, Harry Potter-style.

Now, if a child actually does somehow think that such obviously fantastical fantasy magic is real, then that child has serious issues separating fantasy from reality in even the most elementary sense. That would be a psychological problem, not Rowling’s problem.

Furthermore, since Harry Potter “magic” is purely fictional, incantational, non-supernatural and non-occultic, it’s totally harmless anyway. It’s like believing in Santa Claus, Fran.

I don’t any who thought that they could find a sorcerer to teach them or who tried to put spells on mops.

You’re absolutely right, but this very sentence about putting spells on mops is the reason your fearmongering is so absurd, because the magic in Harry Potter is just as obviously fantastical and unreal as the broom enchantment in Fantasia.

Do you understand that? Are you capable of understanding that? It’s a fact, not an opinion. The magic in Harry Potter is far more unrealistic than enchanting brooms: Harry Potter “wizards” fly on brooms, teleport themselves, turn furniture into pigs, and similarly ridiculous and totally, unmistakably non-realistic things.

Anyone who wants to argue that Harry Potter can tempt children to the occult desperately needs to keep their facts straight and their arguments consistent. If you don’t think a child could realistically think that they could enchant brooms to clean magically, then you cannot seriously fear Harry Potter, whose magic is even more unrealistic.

You’re kidding, right?
You’re kidding, right?
Oh, I see now. These particular witches and wizards are acceptable because they were born that way. I’m sure the children will undersatnd this important distinction.

Actually, the distinction is very clear and impossible to miss in the books. All seven begin in Muggle (non-magical) society, where the reader is constantly exposed to the household of Harry’s Muggle relatives and is constantly reminded that no Muggle can do any kind of magic under any circumstances, ever.

Heck, even underage wizards like Harry are not allowed to do any magic outside of school. No reader of Harry Potter can miss that in Rowling’s fantasy world, regular humans cannot under any circumstances perform any magic whatsoever.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

spotlightministries.org.uk/harrypotterarticle.htm

I found this article very interesting and it uses examples from the books as well that could lead one into occult practices.

Thank you for actually engaging in specificity, Gatewood. I appreciate it.

The article is well-written, but its claims are misguided and mistaken. For instance:

(a) The supposed increase in interest in witchcraft

This was disproved earlier on the thread. I forget who did it - mdrummer or Mumbles, I think - but they laid bare the math for everyone to see.

Furthermore, even here on these HP threads on CAF, I’ve seen at least two pagan participants explain to us that Harry Potter “magic” in no way resembles what they do.

Finally, I realize that some occult websites have tried to use the success of Harry Potter to enhance their own publicity. But so what? As many of the links in this thread - including the one I provided on the previous page - have established, many occult websites promote and utilize The Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia as well.

(b) The lightning/thunderbolt imagery in Harry Potter

The article correctly indicates that a thunderbolt is sometimes a symbol of evil, but Harry Potter itself uses the symbol in precisely this way: Harry’s lightning-shaped scar is a result of the evil villain Voldemort’s attempt to murder him, and it symbolizes the piece of Voldemort’s soul that - until the climax of book seven - remains inside Harry, tempting this otherwise good boy toward evil.

This actually potently symbolizes the spiritual stain of original sin: we’re created good, but due to some primordial evil, we inherit a flawed nature that tends to the bad. Harry consistently struggles to achieve virtue throughout the series, and he ultimately succeeds.

(c) The Mirror of Erised

I basically agree with the article, and so does the narrator of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. Albus Dumbledore has the Mirror of Erised removed and instructs Harry not to search for it again, precisely because it is spiritually dangerous.

(d) Alchemy in Harry Potter

Alchemy actually does play a strong symbolic role throughout the entire series, but in a good way. Christian critic John Granger in his book How Harry Cast His Spell opened my eyes to how many Christian spiritual writers in the Middle Ages utilized alchemy symbolically to illustrate the spiritual journey toward holiness and God.

Basically, the analogy is simple: we start as sinners, as “base metal,” but through fire, trial, and purification, we can become “gold” in the hands of our Creator, Who also bestows on us, through faith, submission, and obedience to His will and goodness, immortal life (the other goal of alchemy).

But Harry Potter constantly cautions against seeking immortality on our own terms, on selfish terms. That is why Dumbledore and Flamel have the Philosopher’s Stone destroyed at the end of the first novel.

Voldemort, who seeks to conquer death throughout the series, ultimately loses both his life and his soul. Harry’s self-sacrifice - his surrender to death for the sake of goodness - actually preserves his life and purifies his soul in the last book. “Whoever seeks his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it” is the clear subtext throughout.

(By the way, the whole “literary alchemy” thing is very specific throughout the series. I highly recommend Granger’s book.)

(d) Astrology and all that

All forms of divination are presented in the series as foolish and a waste of time at best, and outright dangerous at worst. (Reliance on fortune telling ultimately causes Voldemort to seal his own fate)

(e) No good and evil in magic?

I’m not sure what the point of this section of the article is. Yes, the bad guys don’t believe that good and evil matter - only magic and power. But they are the bad guys. They always lose in every novel’s climax precisely because their magic - though it is more powerful than the good guys’ magic - is less powerful than the good side’s goodness, love, and courage. My favorite illustrations of this aspect of the series are the climaxes of Goblet of Fire (book four) and Deathly Hallows (book seven).

(f) Possession

Yes, Voldemort possesses people (Quirrell in book one, Ginny in book two, Harry in book five), and it’s presented as evil and creepy. Again, not sure what the point is. Chamber of Secrets (book two) actually presents very positive lessons about being wary of unknown sources of power and knowledge, since the only reason Voldemort is able to possess Ginny is because she lets herself become vulnerable to his enchanted diary. The books present this as a bad thing, a foolish choice.

(g) The Hand of Glory

Sold in a creepy, morally nasty shop, and presented as evil and best to be avoided. No kid who reads Harry Potter and who remembers the Hand of Glory from it will want to have anything to do with one.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

(h) The Serpent

Yes, serpents play a big role in Harry Potter, but so what? In the series, they do symbolize evil. Voldemort even has a vicious pet snake, Nagini. And Harry can only talk to snakes because he has a horcrux - spiritual “piece” of Voldemort - inside of him, as noted above. It’s all part of the whole symbolism of original sin.

Once Voldemort is vanquished, Harry no longer can speak to snakes.

(i) Other Concerns

Harry Potter in no way trivializes death. The series is all about death. There’s nothing trivial about the deaths of Harry’s parents, Cedric Diggory, Sirius Black, Albus Dumbledore, Fred Weasley, Remus Lupin, or of the numerous others who perish throughout the course of the books. Dumbledore isn’t flippant about death; he simply doesn’t fear it.

Ever read the brilliant and wonderfully orthodox theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar? In his book Love Alone Is Credible, he criticizes secular modernity for its “necrophobia” which so contrasts with Christ’s loving, courageous, and efficacious surrender to death for our sake. It is this approach to death - the courageous, self-sacrificial one - that Harry Potter celebrates.

And Harry Potter does not make “controlling others” and magical power look cool or efficacious. The people who use magic that way in the books are the bad guys, and even their power proves itself utterly weak when confronted by the power of things like Lily Potter’s love for her infant son, Harry’s faith in Dumbledore (which calls Fawkes the Phoenix to him and enables him to slay Voldemort’s pet basilisk), or Harry’s surrender to death at the climax of Deathly Hallows (which ultimately gives him power over Voldemort in every way).

I do appreciate the specificity of the article, but I really hope everyone reading this thread can see how misguided and incorrect it is on the points it raises. I hope I’ve also shed a bit of light on the positive moral and spiritual themes in Harry Potter.

 

[Mickey]

Heck, even underage wizards like Harry are not allowed to do any magic outside of school.

LOL! That’s reassuring.

 

[Mickey]

I hope I’ve also shed a bit of light on the positive moral and spiritual themes in Harry Potter.

I hope that anyone who may be lurking on this thread can see the blatant occult themes in the Potter series–and the extant to which the Potterites will go to be apologists for it.

 

[Mumbles140]

I believe it has been posted early on this thread. If not, it is easy to locate. Furthermore, even if indisputable proof were provided you would say that his opinion is fallible. Pope Benedict XVI is not a Potterite.

You see Mumble, you are so entrenched in your position, that nothing would change your mind.

PS–Please attempt to avoid responding inside of the dialogue boxes. It makes it very dificult to respond in kind.

I have yet to see it posted. And unlike others who refuse to accept logical arguments, I would definitely weigh the arguments carefully. You assume my close-mindedness, but I am simply looking for a logical reason using my God-given intellect. Now, I am trying to work with you on this matter, and rather than respond back, you focus on the Holy Father and how I would never ever change my mind.

And I never claimed Pope Benedict XVI would be in support of the books, but that is a long way from condemning them also.