Flattery =/= lying.
I’m talking post-modern literary analysis, not the whole bloody philosophy.
Thank you for sharing Msgr. Fleetwood’s comments. They are very interesting. Rather than simply dismissing them or pretending he didn’t say what he said, I will comment on what he did say.
This is very interesting. Does he think watering down teaching about the devil and evil is a good thing? Does think it hasn’t happened, and complaints it has are groundless? I would classify myself as somoene who complains about the lack of preaching on both the devil and evil. Prior to the last two years of my life, I’ve heard precisely zero sermons given at Mass about either topic. I don’t believe that experience is atypical, at least in the United States. I also don’t believe that experience isn’t a very serious problem for the Church.
Does Msgr. Fleetwood, think books are incapable of positive or negative spiritual influences? Is any book willingly read a good book to read? I would strongly disagree.
Not all flattery is lying, but one can certainly lie while flattering someone.
That sounds completely absurd to me. How else did the text get on the page other than by the author’s intent? Why do readers who like one book an author wrote, often find they enjoy additional books by the same author? Because the author is connected to the book, that is why. Their style and ideas come through in the writing.
Nice. Character assassination. Rather than actually face the fact that then Cardinal Ratzinger redirected Kuby to this man, you decide to go ad hom.
Yet he actually told the woman to redirect her concerns to him.
The thing about flattery is that it’s not always true enough to be considered honest but not false enough to be downright lying. Read the letter with that in mind and you’ll see that even Cardinals aren’t spared from practicing such things to uphold face. It’s not a bad thing actually. They are public figures after all. It’s the same in business as with everything else that involves public relations.
I’ve yet to see if putting a bit of my saliva on my keyboard causes it to automatically write out my thoughts in the same way Rita Skeeter does with her quill.Can we even consider Harry Potter witch craft? They seem like a story about kids with magical wands shooting each other, not of crooked pagan witches who chant eveil spells to conjure the Devil
Again, let me break it down so that simpler minds may understand.
Please show me where I went “ad hom”? Actually, I simply responded to the points that he made. I disagree with them and explained why.
That’s the ad hom. Whether or not you disagree with him and start whining about sermons is irrelevant to the point that Cardinal Ratzinger redirected Kuby to this man on the subject of Harry Potter.
You want me to disagree with a generic PR response? Who’s pretending? I’m not. I see generic thank you letter. It might as well have been written by someone in my company.
Exactly but since when did fiction care about accuracy? The accounts on a letter are true. A fantasy tale however is not. It’s FICTION! It was never meant to be true. It’s a tall tale. Hence, emphasizing on author intent is moot. Freedom of interpretation is not only a given, the fabricated nature of fiction makes it inevitable. It’s not like a science textbook or the Bible where facts are written out. However, with fiction, any interpretation is possible. And as such, interpretation now becomes the responsibility of the reader and NOT the writer or the material being read.
Cardinal Ratzinger’s private letter, a 'thank you for the information" letter is not Christian thought, nor does it rise to theological analysis, literary analysis, or magisterial teaching authority. It seems all the more likely that he received the book in the mail, read neither it, nor the Harry Potter books, an aid read the back cover of the back and wrote the note, and the Card. signed it. (You know when you write thank yous that you place a little something about how you would use the item or how much you appreciate it, I bet that phrase about the subtle seductions comes almost straight off of the promotional material on the book).
I agree with this but for those who wish to discredit the series they will never admit it to be true. The Cardinal did not read it and it wasn’t a completed series when he wrote that note. When it was completed this was released by CNSVatican newspaper says Harry Potter film champions values
This is an interesting theory that comes up often. The problem is that it is based entirely on speculation. It also charges Cardinal Ratzinger with either lying (saying he had concerns about the books when he didn’t) or incompetence (signing whatever his aides put in front of him without paying attention to what it says). Either charge is made without any evidence.
Sigh, the phrase in the note, is about the book that she sent. Ms. Kuby’s book is presumably about how Harry Potter leads people to the occult (or other such nonsense), in his note, Ratzinger thanked her for bring to peoples attention (was that the phrase), referencing the topic of her book, not making a judgment call on either the book… You need to read the whole note in context. Not to mention it is also presumably a translation into English from German (as Ms. Kuby and the book are written in German).
I sometimes get scented soaps or candles or bubble bath stuff as teacher gifts. I always write thank you notes to the students, thanking them for their gifts. I never use scented soaps (it aggravates my skin), I never burn candles (I am afraid I would forget they are burning and go to bed with them still going), and I always shower rather than take a bath. So when the students later ask if I liked them, I tell them that the soaps/candles/bath stuff smelled very good. That is not a lie. I am just not using them. They’ve been donated, and I assume someone who likes those sorts of things use them.
One of my biggest pet peeves is when people (especially other Catholics) attribute sentiments to the Holy Father that he did not articulate. We get enough of that sort of thing from the secular press (“Pope lifts ban on condoms”, etc.). That’s why I get upset when people trot out this insignificant thank you letter as though it is the smoking gun that “proves” even the Pope thinks Harry Potter is evil.
The pope has never written anything on the subject matter that I’m aware of. You are mistaken. Dan is talking about a letter from Cardinal Ratzinger.One of my biggest pet peeves is when people (especially other Catholics) attribute sentiments to the Holy Father that he did not articulate. We get enough of that sort of thing from the secular press (“Pope lifts ban on condoms”, etc.). That’s why I get upset when people trot out this insignificant thank you letter as though it is the smoking gun that “proves” even the Pope thinks Harry Potter is evil.
Personally, it doesn’t bother me at all if someone thinks Harry Potter is evil and they want to keep their kids from reading them. I may disagree, but I can respect where they’re coming from and that they have the spiritual welfare of others at heart. But when people try twisting the Pope’s words to suit their own argument, then I get miffed.
I do believe you brought up the letter first.
So now please tell me who is attached. “Pro Potterites” (What a derogatory term) which I am not, do not bring up the letter because it is irrelevant to the topic at hand. It neither provides support for or against reading the HP books. But we will point out when others put up strawmen, or use other logical fallacies when they argue, especially when they drag Card. Ratzinger into it.