Church Exorcist and Pro Life Priest Warns Against Harry Potter

[Portrait]

If it were indeed on any debate of modest dress I am sure we disagreed. As we do here.My comment on your post was facetious, as the rest of the post should have made clear.So why don’t we let you decide which books are appropriate (and I remember reading in this thread that you haven’t read the Harry Potter series)? Who is to decide? Is censorship appropriate? Are we to keep our children “in the box,” expose them to explicitly Catholic ideas re morality and homosexual activity exclusively? Are we not responsible to help form their minds? Doesn’t the Church welcome questioning? That’s always been my understanding.

To be honest, Portrait, and certainly with all due respect, I have absolutely no idea of what you mean by “the urgent need of the hour is surely for a discerning literacy” and I have problems with people telling me that they are “sure” I “would agree.” Please don’t be so
what they want to read (within certain parameters; for example, I would not allow my children to read The Devil’s Bible) they quite simply do not read. At all. Except perhaps the instructions for the newest computer game. Nah - they probably wouldn’t read those either. They may not read the Bible. They may not read their school books. But they most likely will learn about Harry Potter from their friends. Certainly it is more appropriate for them to read the actual books and then join in a discussion with their parents as to the messages that are put forth in the books.

Do you believe my Dad’s behavior was appropriate? I think he would have done a much better job in teaching morality to his children by actually letting us watch the episode I mentioned on TV and then turning the TV off, sitting us all down, and telling us why fornication and adultery are wrong. That would have been a much appreciated lesson and one I *never *received from him when I was growing up. All I knew was that most of what I engaged in was probably bad and the chances of my conducting myself in a moral, Christian way were extremely low. All those chances for learning were thrown out with the garbage.

-----continued in next post-----

Dear LitttleSoldier,

Cordial greetings and thankyou for your response to my post.

Of course we have a moral obligation to shield our precious children, and ourselves also, from the impurities of the world, for not to do so would clearly be a dereliction of Christian duty. This is what St. James meant when he spoke of keeping oneself “unstained from the world” (1: 27). Now given that we Christians find ourselves in the midst of all the distracting and demoralizing influences of our decadent age, then yes we need to ensure that we keep ourselves pure by continual remembrace of the demands of our all-holy-God.

In the light of this, there certainly ought to be a *self-imposed *examination of films, TV programmes, music and printed matter, even though, alas, there is no longer any official censorship within the Church. Personally speaking I think it was a sad day when our Church ceased to have an ‘index of prohibted books’, for such an index did at least do much to ensure that the faithful were protected from evil and unwholesome literature which could corrupt their faith and morals, thereby hindering their pursuit of holiness. However, that is a topic for another thread. Suffice to say that with the sheer volume of culturally unhealthy reading material, including the Potter series, that is so prevalent in our godless world today, the necessity for official Church censorship was never more urgently needed again. It is surely right to supress that which is likely to corrupt men and cause them to wander from the path of virtue into error and sin. After all, the Church exists to sanctify men and safegaurd them from anything that would be harmful or imperil their immortal souls. She has a duty towards those whom she is commissioned to guide in the way of salvation.

By a “discerning literacy” I simply mean that men must, if they are not to be deceived, be able to differentiate between wholesome and unwholesome literature which, given that we have no official index, has never been more vital. It is all very well leaving it to a man’s ‘prudential judgement’, but what if his powers of discernment have been so severely impaired or even, God forbid, utterly vitiated by a steady assimilation of the spirit of the times? If that is the case, then he will most probably make some very bad decisions and be prey to all manner of misleading argumentation which may sound superficially plausible but is, in actual fact, plainly wrong.

It is hardly my place to comment upon how your father reared you, but he sounds a good man who had your spiritual interests at heart and who sought to protect you from that which he deemed to be unsavoury and harmful. Please God, may their be many more men of his stamp today, for there is lowered public opinion both within and without the Church which desperately needs raising. The widespread acceptance and vehement defence of the Potter series by Catholics is an indication of the want of a discerning literacy amongst us and is jolly sad to behold.

Thankyou for your questions, no need to apologise, and I sincerely hope that the above will help us to “communicate in a more productive way”.

Will respond to your other post soon. God bless you.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Portrait]

-----continuation of above post-----

Then I charitably request that you read the Harry Potter series before telling parents they should not allow their children to read them. And if you are not a parent I charitably request that you read the *Harry Potter *series, anyway. As I am.

Also, I do take offense to your term “debased youth culture.” What do you mean by this? Please, simple language that I can comprehend. I want to engage in dialogue with you. Again, I apologize for this request.

And what of the “non-debased youth culture?” Is it OK for them to read the Harry Potter series?
Ditto.
Ditto.Ditto.

I apologize for the length of this post. I couldn’t cut out anymore and feel that I had responded adequately to your points. I don’t like writing long posts and I’ll try to not do so in the future.

Dear LittleSoldier,

Hello again.

As I have remarked previously in this thread, I do not share the erroneous opinion that one must needs read a Potter book to qualify or earn the right to give it a critical appraisal. Contrary to what has been said, this is actually a very popular modern notion and is only ever made for polemical purposes to discredit any opposition to Potter - have seen it all too many times on these boards - men are really convinced that it somehow delivers the death knell to all anti-Potter criticism forthwith. Well here I am still. Perhaps I am a stubborn die hard or just a glutton for punishment! lol. Be that as it may, it is perfectly acceptable to base one’s evaluations of the books upon trusted and learned reviews and essays. In any case, even those who have read the novels several times are still accused by the Potter polemecists of “not reading them carefully enough”; “coming to them with a biased predispostion never to accept them” and even, “they just cannot be reading the same books as I did”. So we are no further forward and all of those comments could be equally levelled against the pro-Potterites. On could say that they already come to the books with a strong pre-disposition to accept and defend them come what may; that they do not read them carefully because they choose to ignore the obvious moral ambiguities and insidious dangers when they read the novels and one could conclude that they are not reading the same books as I did.

By “debased youth cullture” I mean that the culture in which our youth live, move and have their being is generally at an all-time low in terms of morality, rank insubordination on an unprecedented scale, and tastes in the arts and literature. Of course this is owing to the interplay of many factors and not only the Potter series of books, e.g. lax discipline in the home and at school, giving the young too much freedom and pandering to their every whim and wish, exposing them to corrupt influences in society such as salacious films and TV programmes and questionable video games, engaging in too much dialouge with them as to what is acceptable and not acceptable and treating them more like friends or quasi-adults than children who must render obedience and respect. All of this has served to debase arer youth and ruin them badly. Their culture is just a very lamentable consequence of all this wishy-washy thinking so popular since the 1960’s. It will be exceedingly difficullt to reverse this unfortunate trend and I only hope and pray that the Church will play an active role in counteracting this wrongheaded philosophy in the coming years. Again that is a topic for another day. Hope that this clarifies my meaning.

Undeniably there are some very fine young men and women who have been truly brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord and who have been correctly chastised betimes. Their parents have endeavoured, sometimes without much support from family or government, to bring up their children correctly to be good citizens who are courteous to their elders and those in authority. They have also laboured to protect their offspring from inferior books such as the Potter novels, debased sensory material like rock/pop music and anything else that could present a corrupting influence upon impressionable young people yet in a state of formation. Positively, they have sought to foster in their children refined tastes in music and literature and a sweet gentleness that will have an attractive power in a very brash world.

No need to apologise for a lengthy post. Lengthy posts are also one of my shortcomings, as everbody knows only too well.

God bless and thankyou again for taking the time to respond to my posts.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Mumbles140]

Suffice to say that with the sheer volume of culturally unhealthy reading material, including the Potter series, that is so prevalent in our godless world today, the necessity for official Church censorship was never more urgently needed again. It is surely right to supress that which is likely to corrupt men and cause them to wander from the path of virtue into error and sin. After all, the Church exists to sanctify men and safegaurd them from anything that would be harmful or imperil their immortal souls. She has a duty towards those whom she is commissioned to guide in the way of salvation.

**You have yet to prove Potter is ‘culturally unwholesome’. Until you do this, your use of this phrase is another example of being a parrot. You sound like a young child who has learned a word he knows not the meaning of, but uses at every opportunity. I don’t even need specifics - just explain, without using other phrases you haven’t explained (insidious danger, immoral, etc), how the series is culturally unwholesome. Remember, we are talking about solely the series here - not the whole moral/spiritual crisis of the world.

Also, I don’t really think that is the true role of the Church. It is more a by-product, and even then, it is really rarely an actual matter of the Church, but rather non-binding, non-authoritative opinions to act as a guide for people. So when respected and important members of the clergy differ, it solely goes to show that there may be dangers out there in the eyes of some, but others realize we should focus on the legitimate, actual threats.**

By a “discerning literacy” I simply mean that men must, if they are not to be deceived, be able to differentiate between wholesome and unwholesome literature which, given that we have no official index, has never been more vital…

With no index, we must then decide for ourselves what is or isn’t acceptable. Ironically, you have yet to discern how this is unwholesome, and neither has anyone you have quoted thus far.

It is hardly my place to comment upon how your father reared you, but he sounds a good man who had your spiritual interests at heart and who sought to protect you from that which he deemed to be unsavoury and harmful. Please God, may their be many more men of his stamp today, for there is lowered public opinion both within and without the Church which desperately needs raising. The widespread acceptance and vehement defence of the Potter series by Catholics is an indication of the want of a discerning literacy amongst us and is jolly sad to behold.

But sometimes we need to see examples of the fall so we can see the need for redemption. Would you agree? If every single piece of literature we read had those who were sinless, we wouldn’t see the desperation when people realize they have lost that grace. If the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was taken away from us when Edmund betrays his family, we wouldn’t see the need for his penance, and we wouldn’t learn of the sacrifice and resurrection of Aslan. I fear you do not see the forest for the trees.

Also, I know you may be busy, but as a reminder, I will request, in every future post, that you address the issue of Lucy Pevensie I mentioned in a previous post. If you can answer that without using the author’s POV as a defense, then we can have something real to discuss. If not, it would then appear that using a combination of Fr. Amorth and other sources has lead you into a contradiction of views, which ultimately means hypocrisy.

 

[mdrummer5]

Personally speaking I think it was a sad day when our Church ceased to have an ‘index of prohibted books’, for such an index did at least do much to ensure that the faithful were protected from evil and unwholesome literature which could corrupt their faith and morals, thereby hindering their pursuit of holiness.

It’s this kind of thinking that makes people think that some Catholics (or Christians in general) are mindless drones and in your case it appears to be true.

Do you honestly believe that’s what God wants? That he wants us to ignore his greatest gift to us, to have some other human being make our decisions for us? Do you not realize what a slap in the face of God that is?

All you’ve done is repeat the same thing over and over as Mumbles pointed out. “Harry Potter is full of dangers.” The only variance has been which adjective you use to try to make your point more profound since you lack any supporting argument which again can only lead one to believe that you are in fact a mindless drone, repeating information and ignoring your God given intelligence out of pure, unfounded fear. It’s quite pathetic really.

 

[Mumbles140]

As I have remarked previously in this thread, I do not share the erroneous opinion that one must needs read a Potter book to qualify or earn the right to give it a critical appraisal. Contrary to what has been said, this is actually a very popular modern notion and is only ever made for polemical purposes to discredit any opposition to Potter - have seen it all too many times on these boards - men are really convinced that it somehow delivers the death knell to all anti-Potter criticism forthwith. Well here I am still. Perhaps I am a stubborn die hard or just a glutton for punishment! lol. Be that as it may, it is perfectly acceptable to base one’s evaluations of the books upon trusted and learned reviews and essays. In any case, even those who have read the novels several times are still accused by the Potter polemecists of “not reading them carefully enough”…

First, the fact that you use the phrase ‘only ever made…to discredit any opposition to Potter’ is truly ridiculous. If you honestly believe that is the only time someone wants a critic to have first-hand knowledge of the source material, you might be too rabid with anti-Potter emotions. I, for one, have never pressed you on this. What I said was that someone you are following should have read the entire series, and they should give several examples for such serious claims as ‘insidious danger’ and ‘culturally unwholesome’ (a personal favorite of yours). I then requested that you provide us with the examples we used.

The objections we had were that, first and foremost, there were no citations. Okay, maybe they didn’t have the books in front of them, but they can talk about specific events. Well, they don’t actually mention specific examples, they take general events, place them out of context, and present minor incidents as stark examples. I understand we must be aware of subtle dangers as much (if not more) than grave danger, but saying ‘Harry lies and is rewarded for it’ without explaining a single lie, or how he gets away with it isn’t arguing - it is making claims.

I can’t speak for all, but I believe the point of ‘reading more carefully’ is keeping events in context. What if I told you that St. Peter cut off a man’s ear in rage? He even denied knowing Our Lord because he was frightened. Later in life, he tried fleeing Rome because he was scared. Would not the logical conclusion, based on the facts presented, be that he is an angry coward? But we know this isn’t true. We know his use of the sword was for his love of Christ, and Christ rebuked him for this. When the cock crowed thrice, Peter knew what he had done and vowed to never deny Christ again. And when he was acting human, Christ appeared to him and filled him with courage, to the point where he requested to be crucified upside down on an X. But without the context of the events, the Rock upon which Our Holy Mother Church was built is not cast in a pleasant light.

By “debased youth cullture”…

Thank you for admitting that this has been a trend really since World War II - it was obviously most prevalent during the 60s and 70s, and has continued to happen over time. However, you have yet to show how Potter is a by-product of this. Just because it comes from this time period doesn’t make it bad. And if you are claiming it isn’t acceptable because it doesn’t come from a Christian viewpoint, we’ve shown that to be a false truth. It comes from a Christian author, but wait, her church is liberal, so we should just ignore it. In fact, other than the Protestant churches who have turned back to the Church, they are all pretty liberal, so we should only stick to Catholic literature and high Anglicans set to return. Sorry, C.S. Lewis, but just like the Old Testament kings, you appeared worthy (although none can know but the Lord), but you were a bit too early…

Undeniably there are some very fine young men and women who have been truly brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord and who have been correctly chastised betimes. Their parents have endeavoured, sometimes without much support from family or government, to bring up their children correctly to be good citizens who are courteous to their elders and those in authority. They have also laboured to protect their offspring from inferior books such as the Potter novels, debased sensory material like rock/pop music…

There are those same times described above who have read, enjoyed, and seen the true virtue in ther series. You continue to group Potter in with rock music. I ask you, is it all rock music in general? What about Christian rock bands like POD and DC Talk?

Also, please address the issue with Lucy Pevensie in the Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

 

[mdrummer5]

I can’t speak for all, but I believe the point of ‘reading more carefully’ is keeping events in context. What if I told you that St. Peter cut off a man’s ear in rage? He even denied knowing Our Lord because he was frightened. Later in life, he tried fleeing Rome because he was scared. Would not the logical conclusion, based on the facts presented, be that he is an angry coward? But we know this isn’t true. We know his use of the sword was for his love of Christ, and Christ rebuked him for this. When the cock crowed thrice, Peter knew what he had done and vowed to never deny Christ again. And when he was acting human, Christ appeared to him and filled him with courage, to the point where he requested to be crucified upside down on an X. But without the context of the events, the Rock upon which Our Holy Mother Church was built is not cast in a pleasant light.

Valid point that will undoubtedly be ignored or receive a long winded response explaining how somehow this comparison is invalid.

debased sensory material like rock/pop music…

This just shows the kind of foolish closed mindedness we are dealing with. Your assumption here is that all rock/pop music is somehow bad. This is not just a foolish assumption, it’s ignorant. There are plenty of Christian rock, metal, pop, rap acts out there. Your implication that that all music that isn’t sung at mass is bad is just ridiculous.

Portrait it’s your ridiculous thinking on pop culture that has me terrified of telling people that I’m becoming a Catholic. Your views may be the minority but sadly most of the world thinks that we are all as ignorant and arrogant as you in our thinking.

 

[Portrait]

It’s this kind of thinking that makes people think that some Catholics (or Christians in general) are mindless drones and in your case it appears to be true.

Do you honestly believe that’s what God wants? That he wants us to ignore his greatest gift to us, to have some other human being make our decisions for us? Do you not realize what a slap in the face of God that is?

All you’ve done is repeat the same thing over and over as Mumbles pointed out. “Harry Potter is full of dangers.” The only variance has been which adjective you use to try to make your point more profound since you lack any supporting argument which again can only lead one to believe that you are in fact a mindless drone, repeating information and ignoring your God given intelligence out of pure, unfounded fear. It’s quite pathetic really.

Dear mdrummer,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Yes I firmly believe and truly that the Catholic Church exists to sanctify and safeguard men from anything that would harm and imperil their immortal souls. She has a duty towards those whom she is commissioned to guide into the way of salvation.

What you assert above could be equally applied to the Catholic Church itself, for she does ask that men entrust themselves to her as regards faith and morals and relinquish their own autonmous thinking. Of course they are at perfect liberty to discuss doctrines and moral issues as much as they wish, but not the rightness or wrongness of them as that has already been settled authoritatively by the Magisterium.

Is having His Church decide these issues an affront to God and ignoring the faculty of reasoning with which he has endowed us? Are all the Catholic faithful “mindless drones” because they submit themselves unreservedly to the teachings of the one true Church of Christ? No, if you believe in the infallibility of the Catholic Church and that it was established by Christ upon St. Peter.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Mumbles140]

What you assert above could be equally applied to the Catholic Church itself, for she does ask that men entrust themselves to her as regards faith and morals and relinquish their own autonmous thinking. Of course they are at perfect liberty to discuss doctrines and moral issues as much as they wish, but not the rightness or wrongness of them as that has already been settled authoritatively by the Magisterium.

Is having His Church decide these issues an affront to God and ignoring the faculty of reasoning with which he has endowed us? Are all the Catholic faithful “mindless drones” because they submit themselves unreservedly to the teachings of the one true Church of Christ? No, if you believe in the infallibility of the Catholic Church and that it was established by Christ upon St. Peter.

We are not mindless drones, because, God-willing, every Catholic has examined the teachings of the Church, whether from reading the CCC (or Compendium to…) or hearing from Church authority, and determined that Catholicism is the OTF. However, if someone were to hear from poor/misguided authority, or authority that tried to make a mountain of a mole hill, you would not be getting the best information. That is what we are trying to show here. We aren’t trying to force you to read HP, but we think you should know it isn’t right to call for its ban, either.

We have been trying to discuss with you in the absence of Church authority. I fear you are making authority out of fallible opinion, and we have even attempted to show the fallacies in the arguments, but you refuse to even acknowledge that Fr. Amorth’s statements, as they stand, are in contradiction to your belief about Narnia and Middle Earth, and that is ignorance.

Also, please respond to the issue of Lucy Pevensie

 

[Portrait]

Valid point that will undoubtedly be ignored or receive a long winded response explaining how somehow this comparison is invalid.

This just shows the kind of foolish closed mindedness we are dealing with. Your assumption here is that all rock/pop music is somehow bad. This is not just a foolish assumption, it’s ignorant. There are plenty of Christian rock, metal, pop, rap acts out there. Your implication that that all music that isn’t sung at mass is bad is just ridiculous.

Portrait it’s your ridiculous thinking on pop culture that has me terrified of telling people that I’m becoming a Catholic. Your views may be the minority but sadly most of the world thinks that we are all as ignorant and arrogant as you in our thinking.

Dear mdrummer,

Hello again.

Without wishing to deviate too much from the subject under review, I would indeed contend that rock/pop music is unwholesome sensory material and an art form that is beyond artistic redemption. No matter what words are appended to the music, that music per se conveys a distinctive message, namely the message of moral permissiveness and anti-authoritarianism. It is so wedded to this music that one could say that the music itself is the message, irrespective of what words are attached to it, even if its The Magnificat or Lord’s Prayer. Rock music emantes from an Augean stable of unimaginable filth and depravity and as such is mind polluting material that is likely, with continued exposure, to corrupt good morals or at least coarsen a man’s life.

Sorry If this sounds harsh but that is only because we have all come to accept, to a lesser or greater degree, a much lower standard of holiness and separation from the godless world than our forefathers in the Faith or the holy saints of old.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[mdrummer5]

Dear mdrummer,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Yes I firmly believe and truly that the Catholic Church exists to sanctify and safeguard men from anything that would harm and imperil their immortal souls. She has a duty towards those whom she is commissioned to guide into the way of salvation.

What you assert above could be equally applied to the Catholic Church itself, for she does ask that men entrust themselves to her as regards faith and morals and relinquish their own autonmous thinking. Of course they are at perfect liberty to discuss doctrines and moral issues as much as they wish, but not the rightness or wrongness of them as that has already been settled authoritatively by the Magisterium.

Wow… I wish you could see how ridiculous this sounds. God gave us intelligence and free will and you want us to get rid of it? Furthermore even if we were to adhere to sucha ridiculous notion, the Catholic Church does NOT have an official ruling on the HP books or any specific form of literature so your point is moot and you still have provided ZERO evidence.

Is having His Church decide these issues an affront to God and ignoring the faculty of reasoning with which he has endowed us? Are all the Catholic faithful “mindless drones” because they submit themselves unreservedly to the teachings of the one true Church of Christ?

**Actually in this case, yes. Considering that there is no official ruling but you’re spouting off about it as though there is and essentially begging for one just so you don’t have to think and provide your own reasoning. So I say again, yes you are a mindless drone.

And again, you suggest that by using our free will and our intelligence that those of us that disagree with you are NOT faithful. **

Once you learn to speak for yourself you may actually be able to form a valid point… unfortunately you seem perfectly happy to remain ignorant… I guess it truly is bliss.

 

[mdrummer5]

Dear mdrummer,

Hello again.

Without wishing to deviate too much from the subject under review, I would indeed contend that rock/pop music is unwholesome sensory material and an art form that is beyond artistic redemption. No matter what words are appended to the music, that music per se conveys a distinctive message, namely the message of moral permissiveness and anti-authoritarianism. It is so wedded to this music that one could say that the music itself is the message, irrespective of what words are attached to it, even if its The Magnificat or Lord’s Prayer. Rock music emantes from an Augean stable of unimaginable filth and depravity and as such is mind polluting material that is likely, with continued exposure, to corrupt good morals or at least coarsen a man’s life.

Sorry If this sounds harsh but that is only because we have all come to accept, to a lesser or greater degree, a much lower standard of holiness and separation from the godless world than our forefathers in the Faith or the holy saints of old.

You are an ignorant human being. The lyrics below are from a band called Skillet. I’m sure you wouldn’t care for the music which is one thing but I urge you to explain to me how this fits in your description of moral permissiveness and anti-authoritarianism.

Lifting up my voice
To the God who really sees
The God who is consumed
With loving thoughts of me
The screaming winds
And the crashing of the oceans
Shifting sands and the changing of the seasons
As I stand in awe and wonder
Nothing in the world has prepared me for you!

Jesus, Jesus, I’m safe with you

 

[Mumbles140]

Without wishing to deviate too much from the subject under review, I would indeed contend that rock/pop music is unwholesome sensory material and an art form that is beyond artistic redemption. No matter what words are appended to the music, that music per se conveys a distinctive message, namely the message of moral permissiveness and anti-authoritarianism. It is so wedded to this music that one could say that the music itself is the message, irrespective of what words are attached to it, even if its The Magnificat or Lord’s Prayer. Rock music emantes from an Augean stable of unimaginable filth and depravity and as such is mind polluting material that is likely, with continued exposure, to corrupt good morals or at least coarsen a man’s life.

Sorry If this sounds harsh but that is only because we have all come to accept, to a lesser or greater degree, a much lower standard of holiness and separation from the godless world than our forefathers in the Faith or the holy saints of old.

So you are throwing out an entire style, even though the music is relatable and portrays a good message? That is a bit ludicrious. That is like saying most television is awful stuff, and watching it forces us to sit around, which leads to sloth. Therefore, we shouldn’t care if they are showing Pope Benedict XVI’s Midnight Mass on Christmas because all TV should be avoided.

The problem here is that you are taking a personal distaste for something and applying that as a universal proof against it. You have no reasons to claim where rock and roll came from. If you look at the evolution, there was a lot of early jazz and blues influences - look at Elvis. Music, like art, is constantly evolving. If you choose to condemn an entire genre (ironic because it is probably the most diverse genre so maybe you are only replying to metal, etc) without factual evidence, it does lean towards you basing decisions on emotion, which is rejecting the intellect God gave you.

Just because you think the world we live in is garbage doesn’t mean everything coming from that world is also garbage. Your personal tastes do not create dogma, and I fear your comments concerning censorship, the arts, and music make you out to be a fundamental extremist. I do not mean to offend, but you really have abandoned logic for your personal opinion and emotion at this point.

Also, please address my question about Lucy Pevensie.

 

[mdrummer5]

Just because you think the world we live in is garbage doesn’t mean everything coming from that world is also garbage. Your personal tastes do not create dogma, and I fear your comments concerning censorship, the arts, and music make you out to be a fundamental extremist. I do not mean to offend, but you really have abandoned logic for your personal opinion and emotion at this point.

Very well said.

Also, please address my question about Lucy Pevensie.

I admire your persistence

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Portrait, I was wondering if you’d be willing to respond to my reply #780:

Here is a link to it if you are willing to.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Dear mdrummer,

Hello again.

Without wishing to deviate too much from the subject under review, I would indeed contend that rock/pop music is unwholesome sensory material and an art form that is beyond artistic redemption. No matter what words are appended to the music, that music per se conveys a distinctive message, namely the message of moral permissiveness and anti-authoritarianism. It is so wedded to this music that one could say that the music itself is the message, irrespective of what words are attached to it, even if its The Magnificat or Lord’s Prayer. Rock music emantes from an Augean stable of unimaginable filth and depravity and as such is mind polluting material that is likely, with continued exposure, to corrupt good morals or at least coarsen a man’s life.

Sorry If this sounds harsh but that is only because we have all come to accept, to a lesser or greater degree, a much lower standard of holiness and separation from the godless world than our forefathers in the Faith or the holy saints of old.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

Portrait - it doesn’t sound harsh. It sounds bizarre.

And so you are willing to damn an entire form of communication and artistry. Have you ever heard the following words (they are from a song I love very much):

I don’t how I’ve survived
in this cold and empty world for all this time.
All I know is I’m alive
because You love me.

When I recall what I’ve been through,
there’s some things that I wish I didn’t do.
Now I do the things I do
because You love me.

And now that You’re in my life -
Oh, I’m so glad I’m alive!!
'Cause you showed me the way
and I know now how good it can be…
because You love me.

I believe in things unseen,
I believe in the message of a dream,
and I believe in who You are…
because You love me.

With all my heart
and ALL my soul
I’m LOVING You and
I NEVER will let go.
And everyday I’ll let it show,
because You love me…

Because You love me…
because You love me…
Oooh, because You love me…

[Lyrics are by Jo Dee Messina]

The words at the beginning of my signature are part of the lyrics of another song that I love. Can you actually read those words and deny that they are holy? What is it about the music they are put to that suddenly makes them evil?

Have you ever heard of “make a joyful noise unto the Lord?”

I find your dismissal of rock/pop to be indicative of ignorance and oversimplification to the extreme. Rock/pop has brought many to the fold and at a time in my life when I so despaired that I considered suicide seriously, three pop/rock songs provided me with an epiphany and have held me strong in my love for God ever since. The song whose lyrics I presented above is one of those songs. God bless ALL who present His message of Faith, Hope, and Charity to those of us who are willing to listen. And I find your remarks about “The Magnificat” and “The Lord’s Prayer” to be extremely offensive. There is an arras in my parish church which states “Those who Sing Pray Twice.” I agree.

I wish you would.

Your concluding paragraph is absolutely bizarre. I’m amazed at your thinking. A pop/rock hater. Are there any other art forms you simply dismiss with the arguments you use? Is Gregorian Chant acceptable to you? I love Gregorian Chant but I don’t have enough imagination to ever conceive of it being “a joyful noise unto the Lord!”

Also, how in the world can pop/rock music convey “a distinctive message, namely the message of moral permissiveness and anti-authoritarianism”? Where do you get this stuff? Is this Church dogma? Is this any sort of Church teaching? You’re taking a morally neutral object (music) and imparting an evil intent to it. That’s anthropomorphic and not logical. At all.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I am also anxiously awaiting a response to my questions to you re Fantasia, censorship, and burning books.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Dear LitttleSoldier,

Cordial greetings and thankyou for your response to my post.

Of course we have a moral obligation to shield our precious children, and ourselves also, from the impurities of the world, for not to do so would clearly be a dereliction of Christian duty. This is what St. James meant when he spoke of keeping oneself “unstained from the world” (1: 27). Now given that we Christians find ourselves in the midst of all the distracting and demoralizing influences of our decadent age, then yes we need to ensure that we keep ourselves pure by continual remembrace of the demands of our all-holy-God.

Portrait. all ages are decadent!! Even when Jesus Himself walked the earth as God-incarnate. If that age was not decadent, why was He put to death? Do you honestly think that past ages have been peachy keen and hunky dory?

In the light of this, there certainly ought to be a *self-imposed *examination of films, TV programmes, music and printed matter, even though, alas, there is no longer any official censorship within the Church. Personally speaking I think it was a sad day when our Church ceased to have an ‘index of prohibted books’, for such an index did at least do much to ensure that the faithful were protected from evil and unwholesome literature which could corrupt their faith and morals, thereby hindering their pursuit of holiness.

No, it didn’t. I know about that index. I also knew about everything that was going on. I learned it in the streets - from other children.

However, that is a topic for another thread. Suffice to say that with the sheer volume of culturally unhealthy reading material, including the Potter series, that is so prevalent in our godless world today, the necessity for official Church censorship was never more urgently needed again. It is surely right to supress that which is likely to corrupt men and cause them to wander from the path of virtue into error and sin. After all, the Church exists to sanctify men and safegaurd them from anything that would be harmful or imperil their immortal souls. She has a duty towards those whom she is commissioned to guide in the way of salvation.

“Godless world?” What can you mean? God is here, right now. This world has *always *been watched over by a loving God!! How do you know this about the Harry Potter series? All I’ve seen is you taking the fallible word of one priest. And above you used the phrase “*self-imposed *examination of films, TV…” How can you conduct a self-imposed examination of the Harry Potter books without even reading them?!?

Surely you know that what you state as the Church’s reason for existence is not her only reason for existence!! Or do you?

And Portrait, I do hate to bring this up, but your language is uh, really sexist. I’ve noticed that for several posts you refer only to “men.” It might surprise you to know that approximately half the world’s adult population is not composed of “men” but women. Again, I mean no offense to you or to anybody. But your continued use of “men” offends me and I don’t think you mean to do that.

By a “discerning literacy” I simply mean that men must, if they are not to be deceived, be able to differentiate between wholesome and unwholesome literature which, given that we have no official index, has never been more vital. It is all very well leaving it to a man’s ‘prudential judgement’, but what if his powers of discernment have been so severely impaired or even, God forbid, utterly vitiated by a steady assimilation of the spirit of the times? If that is the case, then he will most probably make some very bad decisions and be prey to all manner of misleading argumentation which may sound superficially plausible but is, in actual fact, plainly wrong.

I apologize, but instead of making your statement simpler you actually made it more abstruse.

It is hardly my place to comment upon how your father reared you, but he sounds a good man who had your spiritual interests at heart and who sought to protect you from that which he deemed to be unsavoury and harmful. Please God, may their be many more men of his stamp today, for there is lowered public opinion both within and without the Church which desperately needs raising. The widespread acceptance and vehement defence of the Potter series by Catholics is an indication of the want of a discerning literacy amongst us and is jolly sad to behold.

It is your place if I ask you. As I did. He had my spiritual interests at heart and so he threw away every possibility to educate me with the goal of forming my conscience? Oy vey!!!

Thankyou for your questions, no need to apologise, and I sincerely hope that the above will help us to “communicate in a more productive way”.

I don’t think it’s working.

Will respond to your other post soon.

Thank you.

God bless you.

Ditto.

Warmest good wishes,

Ditto.

Pax

Ditto.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I apologize but what I have read today has been bothering me. A lot. And so I would like to present the following:

IMO the most popular and perhaps most loved Christmas song is Silent Night. I don’t believe that any person, Christian or not, can say with any honesty that this song does not represent Christian ideals. Yet it was written so that the music could be played by a person using a guitar.

A guitar. One of the most essential instruments in pop/rock/country/Christian pop/rock/country.

"The carol was first performed in the Nikolaus-Kirche (Church of St. Nich, 1818. Mohr had composed the words two years earlier, in 1816, but on Christmas Eve brought them to Gruber and asked him to compose a melody and guitar accompaniment for the church service.

“In his written account regarding the composition of the carols, Gruber gives no mention of the specific inspiration for creating the song. According to the song’s history provided by Austria’s Silent Night Society, one supposition is that the church organ was no longer working so that Mohr and Gruber therefore created a song for accompaniment by guitar. Silent Night historian Renate Ebeling-Winkler Berenguer says that the first mention of a broken organ was in a book published in the U.S.Template:The Story of Silent Night By John Travers Moore.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Night

My Mom told me the story of the church organ being broken and so the song was sung with a guitar providing the melody.

For anyone who does not know the entire version of the song, here it is:

Silent night holy night
All is calm, all is bright
Round yon virgin mother and child.
Holy infant so tender and mild,
Sleep in heavenly peace.
Sleep in heavenly peace.

Silent night holy night
Shepherds quake at the sight,
Glories stream from heaven afar,
Heavenly hosts sing alleluia;
Christ the Savior, is born
Christ the Savior, is born.

Silent night holy night
Son of God, love’s pure light
Radiant beams from thy holy face,
With the dawn of redeeming grace,
Jesus, Lord, at thy birth.
Jesus, Lord, at thy birth.

christmassongswords.com/silent-night-songs.htm

Today this would be classified under the genre of “pop” music. Yet there is nothing evil about it!! The words and lyrics combine to form a prayer; an actual gestalt that is greater than the sum of the music and the words taken separately. This is what music is!!

I could say the same for a large number of songs. The sort of reasoning that has appeared in this thread just doesn’t hold up. Pop/rock music can be used to express hatred and/or frustration. It can be used to express comedy/satire. It can also be used to express hope, faith, and love.To deny this is to not understand music - a gift from God.

Every song, no matter its style, should be evaluated on its own and not illogically dumped into a category encompassing literally thousands of songs and then called evil.

 

[mdrummer5]

I apologize but what I have read today has been bothering me. A lot.

As a musician let me tell you I’m right there with ya. Bottom line though, Portrait is ignorant beyond anyone I’ve ever known. This is not an insult, it is fact. It’s been pointed out to him by myself and several others yet in his own admitted stubbornness he refuses to see it.

The HP books are one thing. If someone wants to stupidly label something that they have no true knowledge of, it is ignorant but whatever. But to label and entire genre of music. That’s not just ignorant, it’s absolutely stupid. It shows a complete lack of thought and it makes me wonder if he’s ever considered the phrase that an idle mind is the devil’s playground.

Don’t worry though, I’m sure he’ll give you some extremely wordy but irrelevant explanation as to how the example you give to negate his point is somehow “different”.

 

[Joe_5859]

The HP books are one thing. If someone wants to stupidly label something that they have no true knowledge of, it is ignorant but whatever. But to label and entire genre of music. That’s not just ignorant, it’s absolutely stupid. It shows a complete lack of thought and it makes me wonder if he’s ever considered the phrase that an idle mind is the devil’s playground.

That’s right, you missed the lengthy Don’t Support Devilish Music(Rock Music)!!! thread that was mercifully closed last August (after 15 months and 723 posts). If you want to read Portrait’s articulation of his views on rock music, you’ll find much to read there.