'Harry Potter and yoga are evil', says Catholic Church exorcist

[LiveCatholic]

That’s true… I don’t think I would list my criteria above as my ultimate reasons for considering the Harry Potter series ‘compromised’ … however, I don’t see Grimm or Aesops as being next on the chopping block is Harry goes.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

I just finished reading the first HP book this morning (not the first time I read it). I guess all the people talking about it complaining about it, made me want to read it again. It clearly states that dragons cannot be tamed. Hagrid tries to raise a dragon from the egg. But the experiment fails horribly, and it is illegal. So I guess HP doesn’t fall to that criticism. (The very fact that the evil character’s familiar is a snake, and the “bad” house at Hogwarts has a symbol of a snake as well, means that J.K.Rowling is using what O’Brien calls traditional Christian symbolism). Oh no, what was that, HP uses traditional Christian symbolism to represent good and evil. Gasp.

Yes, excellent example. Even if O’Brien were right in principle, Harry Potter would get off scot-free, as dragons in it are anything but tame - despite Hagrid’s naivete. The symbolism is always very traditional - snakes, serpents, etc. are always associated with the bad guys.

Yes… I believe sources should be honest and accurate.

Ah, right. Can’t disagree with you there!

Anything that resembles it is automatically considered evil in HP. Necromancy, seeking immortality, splitting your soul, it’s all evil in the books.

Exactly! Anything “magical” in the books falls into three categories:

(a) stuff that is structurally, aesthetically, and categorically totally made up and fictional in every way

(b) fake and foolhardy, like Trelawney’s divination nonsense

(c) portrayed as spiritually destructive or dangerous - i.e. necromancy. In Rowling’s fantasy, necromancy is frowned upon by the good guys and regarded as dangerous and foolhardy, just as much as it is in Lewis’ Prince Caspian.

Pat, I don’t think this is comparable, and the reason is the mode of expression.

Fairy tales, fables, myths, and legends all have at least one thing in common: a remove of the reader from the events of the story. ‘A Galaxy Far, Far, Away’ sort of feel.

The appeal of Harry Potter novels is the ‘Bildungsroman,’ where the reader sympathizes with and identifies with the character. You feel Potter’s achievements as your own, feel his specialness as your own, &c. This is a very compelling genre, and the fact that it deals with the occult and a weirdly twisted Christ figure narrative doesn’t help its case.

The fact that it is a bildungsroman does not mean there is no sense of separation from reality.

Harry Potter does in fact achieve that “remove of the reader from the events of the story” in two principal ways:

(a) the wizarding world is, legally and culturally, kept entirely distinct from normal human (“Muggle”) society, and the series presents this as a norm whose good remains unquestioned.

(b) No ordinary humans can do any magic whatsoever in Rowling’s books. We’re intrinsically incapable of it; “witches” and “wizards” are essentially a subspecies of the human race. There is no more possibility for the reader to want to use Harry’s powers than there would be for a reader of Lord of the Rings to want to use Gandalf’s powers, or the elves’ abilities.

As such, there’s nothing spiritually troubling there to corrupt the exquisitely crafted Paschal Mystery-based symbolism of the series, so it is indeed morally and spiritually wholesome.

 

[Elixir]

My thought is that yoga, in America, is nothing more than a form of exercise (and a very difficult one at that). I think it’s safe to say that Johnny and Sally doing yoga at the local Y or in their living room is about as far removed from the actual Hindu practice of yoga as the moon is from the earth. For pete’s sake, focus on the Cross while you’re doing it and that should wash that satanism right out.

If yoga had been invented in Missouri it’d be called “stretching” and no one would care.

 

[Irish_Eyes_826]

If yoga had been invented in Missouri it’d be called “stretching” and no one would care.

This.

And I’m still waiting for a concrete example of the “occult” in Harry Potter. Anyone? Bueller?

 

[catholicmamajoy]

My thought is that yoga, in America, is nothing more than a form of exercise (and a very difficult one at that). I think it’s safe to say that Johnny and Sally doing yoga at the local Y or in their living room is about as far removed from the actual Hindu practice of yoga as the moon is from the earth. For pete’s sake, focus on the Cross while you’re doing it and that should wash that satanism right out.

If yoga had been invented in Missouri it’d be called “stretching” and no one would care.

 

[catholicmamajoy]

On more than one occasion (and on other threads) I’ve recommended a great book for Catholic families to read about HP. The concern over then Cardinal Ratzinger’s personal reply and Michael O’Brien’s take on HP are even addressed.

It’s called "The Mystery of Harry Potter: A Catholic Family Guide " and is authored by Nancy Carpentier Brown, a Catholic homeschooling mom who also wrote the Father Brown Readers from Catholic Heritage Curricula (homeschool curriculum provider).

For any Catholic that has concerns about HP, the book gives a balanced and hysteria-free look at HP and how to discern if it’s a good choice for your family and your children. I’m sure there are people out there who have read it and still think HP’s not a good choice for their family, but it gives a Catholic view of the series ( and the movies that were out when it was published) so that parents can make an educated choice for their own families.

Here’s a link to OSV’s page (they publish it, although it’s available via many online sources):osv.com/BooksNav/OSVBookandProductsInformation/TheMysteryofHarryPotter/tabid/3880/Default.aspx

 

[LiveCatholic]

The fact that it is a bildungsroman does not mean there is no sense of separation from reality.

Harry Potter does in fact achieve that “remove of the reader from the events of the story” in two principal ways:

(a) the wizarding world is, legally and culturally, kept entirely distinct from normal human (“Muggle”) society, and the series presents this as a norm whose good remains unquestioned.

(b) No ordinary humans can do any magic whatsoever in Rowling’s books. We’re intrinsically incapable of it; “witches” and “wizards” are essentially a subspecies of the human race. There is no more possibility for the reader to want to use Harry’s powers than there would be for a reader of Lord of the Rings to want to use Gandalf’s powers, or the elves’ abilities.

As such, there’s nothing spiritually troubling there to corrupt the exquisitely crafted Paschal Mystery-based symbolism of the series, so it is indeed morally and spiritually wholesome.

Pardon me, I should have been more clear: I did not mean that simply because its a novel in the style of the bildungsroman, that there isn’t the separation one receives in a fable. I also did not mean that my issue with the Harry Potter series is its ‘realism’ or ‘feasibility.’

I meant that there is an affinity fostered by Rowlings’ style between the reader and title character that would make a myth or legend incomparable. It doesn’t matter how fabulous the events are, you’re in the passenger seat for Harry’s ride.

To put it succinctly: Labour Party multiculturalist values + Christian symbolism without Christ + Occult + Compelling Tolkien-esque fantasy world construction = Harry Potter series

Sorry if that ruffles any feathers, but its my opinion.

 

[severus68]

Pat, I don’t think this is comparable, and the reason is the mode of expression.

Fairy tales, fables, myths, and legends all have at least one thing in common: a remove of the reader from the events of the story. ‘A Galaxy Far, Far, Away’ sort of feel.

The appeal of Harry Potter novels is the ‘Bildungsroman,’ where the reader sympathizes with and identifies with the character. You feel Potter’s achievements as your own, feel his specialness as your own, &c. This is a very compelling genre, and the fact that it deals with the occult and a weirdly twisted Christ figure narrative doesn’t help its case.

Perhaps you should read about the background of Grimm’s fairy tales.

I find the HP books very moral and thus Christian in their themes. We have enough darkness in this world, we do not need to see it where it does not exist and try to take a bit of innocent pleasure away.

 

[LiveCatholic]

Perhaps you should read about the background of Grimm’s fairy tales.

I find the HP books very moral and thus Christian in their themes. We have enough darkness in this world, we do not need to see it where it does not exist and try to take a bit of innocent pleasure away.

I don’t see your point.

In fact, I think that perhaps you should re-read what I’ve written. Sorry you seem insulted that I’m not in favor of your favorite book.

P.S. Snape had it coming.

 

[severus68]

I don’t see your point.

In fact, I think that perhaps you should re-read what I’ve written. Sorry you seem insulted that I’m not in favor of your favorite book.

P.S. Snape had it coming.

Perhaps you should re-read what I posted. I love books. The HP books are a series, so they can’t be my favourite ‘book’ and I do not have a favourite book anyway. Not telling you what to like, not interested in your reasons for not liking the HP books, they appear to be just a prejudice. Why should I be insulted as I do not know you and many here post anyway they like in the safety of anonymity and without consequences.

Yes, Severus Snape started out a nice, misunderstood guy and gave in to the dark side. BTW, Severus was also the name of a Roman king.

 

[LiveCatholic]

Perhaps you should re-read what I posted. I love books. The HP books are a series, so they can’t be my favourite ‘book’ and I do not have a favourite book anyway. Not telling you what to like, not interested in your reasons for not liking the HP books, they appear to be just a prejudice. Why should I be insulted as I do not know you and many here post anyway they like in the safety of anonymity and without consequences.

Yes, Severus Snape started out a nice, misunderstood guy and gave in to the dark side. BTW, Severus was also the name of a Roman king.

Gotcha, but my point you originally responded to is not affected by the background of Grimm’s tales. At all. You don’t seem to follow them.

I’ve read your point, and I think you underestimate the extent to which something can be good or noble, but at the same time wrong.

Anywho, I think you knew well what I meant, regarding the series being your fav… its OK, no need to be defensive, I’d be upset when people attack LOTR or the Bible or Ernst Juenger’s books. Nothing to be ashamed of.

 

[Sonic]

Ah, right. Can’t disagree with you there!

Alright, I checked out A Landscape With Dragons this morning at the library. I’ve got till January 12th to read it. It’s the newest edition of the book. The book is only six chapters long, which is good because I’ll have it read in a couple of days.

I’ll let you know whether DGDDavidson’s analysis is reliable.

 

[curlycool89]

To put it succinctly: Labour Party multiculturalist values + Christian symbolism without Christ + Occult + Compelling Tolkien-esque fantasy world construction = Harry Potter series

Sorry if that ruffles any feathers, but its my opinion.

Well, as long as your willing to just say that’s your opinion (even though you haven’t proved there’s anything occultish about Harry Potter).

 

[LiveCatholic]

Well, as long as your willing to just say that’s your opinion (even though you haven’t proved there’s anything occultish about Harry Potter).

I actually think the fact that narrative is framed as a Paschal drama w/ Christian symbolism, but with a Labour Party multiculturalist message is a dozen times more scandalous than its occult features.*

 

[Irish_Eyes_826]

Please, please, please, can somebody name a real occult feature of Harry Potter? I haven’t seen one for this entire thread.

 

[LiveCatholic]

Please, please, please, can somebody name a real occult feature of Harry Potter? I haven’t seen one for this entire thread.

Pretty sure that’s simply because its assumed. The whole witch/wizard thing is very much in the European folk tradition, and historically it is assumed that all ‘supernatural’ power that isn’t derived from God, is derived from the Evil One.

The roots of this ‘magic’ aren’t addressed in the series, but its pretty clear what the deal is.

 

[jilly4ski]

Pretty sure that’s simply because its assumed. The whole witch/wizard thing is very much in the European folk tradition, and historically it is assumed that all ‘supernatural’ power that isn’t derived from God, is derived from the Evil One.

The roots of this ‘magic’ aren’t addressed in the series, but its pretty clear what the deal is.

:banghead:

Actually yes, the roots (or at least how one acquires magic powers) are discussed in the series. It is clearly stated that one is born with an innate ability. Those without the power are muggles and can never learn to do magic, and the people with the power are wizards and witches and can learn to (or control) their magic.

As opposed to occult powers, which are gained by demons and the devil, by anyone who wants to acquire such powers. Not to mention the “magic” of Harry Potter has nothing to do with European folk tradition, except in the loosest sense. As we have been trying to explain. Just because it shares a name, does not mean that it is the same thing.

 

[Irish_Eyes_826]

Actually yes, the roots (or at least how one acquires magic powers) are discussed in the series. It is clearly stated that one is born with an innate ability. Those without the power are muggles and can never learn to do magic, and the people with the power are wizards and witches and can learn to (or control) their magic.

As opposed to occult powers, which are gained by demons and the devil, by anyone who wants to acquire such powers. Not to mention the “magic” of Harry Potter has nothing to do with European folk tradition, except in the loosest sense. As we have been trying to explain. Just because it shares a name, does not mean that it is the same thing.

What she said.
HP naysayers are trying to make something real out of something that’s imaginary.

 

[LiveCatholic]

:banghead:

Actually yes, the roots (or at least how one acquires magic powers) are discussed in the series. It is clearly stated that one is born with an innate ability. Those without the power are muggles and can never learn to do magic, and the people with the power are wizards and witches and can learn to (or control) their magic.

As opposed to occult powers, which are gained by demons and the devil, by anyone who wants to acquire such powers. Not to mention the “magic” of Harry Potter has nothing to do with European folk tradition, except in the loosest sense. As we have been trying to explain. Just because it shares a name, does not mean that it is the same thing.

Bash your head against a brick wall in frustration all you want, but I read the entire series from cover to cover. Nowhere is the ACTUAL REASON WHY this magic exists discussed.

Yes, people in the books are born with an innate ability to do this stuff–but why? From whence did this power come? Are these people just mutants? What makes Harry Potter wizards different than X-Men? Why haven’t these changes in human nature been addressed by muggle science?

Rowlings makes use of a long tradition of European folk witchcraft, where the ‘supernatural power’ of individuals are assumed to be derived from the Evil One. She does nothing to clarify how the series’ parallel society of wizards and magic-users is different from this tradition. She just rolls with it. So can we be blamed for feeling a little uneasy, when we are following the career of the magic savior of this parallel society?

 

[jilly4ski]

Bash your head against a brick wall in frustration all you want, but I read the entire series from cover to cover. Nowhere is the ACTUAL REASON WHY this magic exists discussed.

Yes, people in the books are born with an innate ability to do this stuff–but why? From whence did this power come? Are these people just mutants? What makes Harry Potter wizards different than X-Men? Why haven’t these changes in human nature been addressed by muggle science?

Rowlings makes use of a long tradition of European folk witchcraft, where the ‘supernatural power’ of individuals are assumed to be derived from the Evil One. She does nothing to clarify how the series’ parallel society of wizards and magic-users is different from this tradition. She just rolls with it. So can we be blamed for feeling a little uneasy, when we are following the career of the magic savior of this parallel society?

So wait, you are saying that an innate ability is from the devil? (As indeed, Harry makes things happen when he doesn’t even know it is happening or how to do it as a child). There is no difference between the X-men’s abilities and those of the characters from Harry Potter, except that the X-men uses an evolutionary theme to explain their special powers. As to why the powers haven’t been explained by modern science, it seems that is also explained in the books, the wizards take a great deal of care to avoid the notice of the muggle world, even resorting to memory charms and such (think Men in Black and their mind wipers).

Wait, so wand waving, and point and shoot magic is a parallel to European folk magic? I don’t think I have ever seen that in etching.

I still don’t see how their powers are derived from the devil or demons. Or how that is even assumed? Are Gandalf and Saruman’s powers derived from the devil, or the elves’ in LOTRs? Or how such powers are even in the same theme of European folk magic?