Harry Potter books

[Portrait]

First off, my apologies for missing your signature. You’re right, I generally don’t read them. I guess sometimes there is useful stuff in there.

I did read through some of the threads you linked to. I didn’t read every post in the history of CAF about Harry Potter. I believe I read enough to evaluate your charge that OBrien’s use of the Kuby-Ratzinger letters was discredited. I found the charge unfounded. Nothing I read in anything you linked to or anything you said even alleged that the letters are fakes. In fact, almost everyone readily concedes that they are authentic.

What results is 3 contradictory but simultatenous arguments being put forth:

1. The Pope has never in his lifetime been critical of the Harry Potter books.

This charge is easily dismissed by simply reading the letters, which as I said no one has produced any evidence or even claimed they are fake.

1. The Pope said stuff that looked critical but that’s not what he really meant.

This charge requires the accuser to jump into Cardinal Ratzinger’s head and gain special knowledge of his intentions which seem to be clearly contradicted by his choice of words.

1. The Pope was critical of the books, but he was a Cardinal not a professional literary critic so who cares what he thinks.

This charge probably has the most going for it and is the most honest. However there are a few problems. First, one doesn’t have to be a “professional” to have an opinion worth considering on a topic. Secondly, Cardinal Ratzinger wasn’t commenting on the quality of the writing in the books, he was commenting on the moral implications and influence on the faith…exactly his area of professional expertise.

The opinions expressed in the letters are just that, opinions, expressed by a Cardinal. A Catholic is not bound by them. If someone wants to disagree, they may do so, and I welcome substantive debate on why they would or would not disagree.

However, claiming someone didn’t say what they clearly did say, is not honest debate. Claiming OBrien is “debunked” or “discredited” without evidence to back the charges is unfair. I don’t know Mr. OBrien personally, but like all of us, he deserves honest critiques, not false allegations against his integrity.

Pax Christi and God bless

Dear Dan Daly,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Hear, hear, jolly well said and bang on target. An excellent post with which many Catholics would heartily concur. The assertions frequently made on these boards that the letters are not genuine or are mere ‘thankyou letters’ are nothing more than pro-Potterite propaganda.

Thankyou for your contribution.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Joe_5859]

As much as I agree with you all the time Joe, I really can’t say it’s wise to suggest this person to go to the likes of O’Brien. I heard the man speak himself. He is not a credible authority on fantasy. :dts:

Fair enough. O’Brien certainly would not convince the OP to change her opinion of Harry Potter.

I recommend that book of his because it has a huge list of books for suggested reading (100+ pages). If I were composing such a list, there might be books I would put on there that O’Brien would not approve of, but I figure that anything he would recommend, I probably would not have a problem with.

I barely remember the essay portion of the book as I read it when it first came out (over ten years ago) and Harry Potter wasn’t even on my radar screen. Heck, I hadn’t even read Lord of the Rings or Narnia yet back then. My exposure to fantasy literature was pretty much non-existent. I’m sure if I read that part today with O’Brien’s subsequent articles and my own experience in mind, I would probably find much to critique. Back then, I more or less took his word for things.

I do like his novels, though. His paintings seemed odd to me at first, but his style has kind of grown on me.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

I also think The Boxcar Children is great and highly recommend it for children!

Again, I have no idea where you got the idea that I was exiting the thread… I only stated I was done with the HARRY POTTER discussion.

Ah, I stand corrected. My apologies.

This thread wasn’t even supposed to be about HP. The OP asked for suggestions for other books.

It’s really depressing that CAF posters still just can’t resist chiming in and ‘taking to task’ each person who disagrees with them, and the worst part is this breakdown in civility.

Would you talk to people this way if they were standing in front of you? I sure hope not.

Well, the title is “Harry Potter books” …

And plenty of posters have recommended other books. The related matters this broad topic brings with it are all relevant…

I tired out one of the spells in a Harry Potter book.

It worked.

Also, Harry Potter is actually a real Demon.

He showed up in my bedroom at 3am and just stared at me.

I prayed a Hail Mary and he disappeared.

LOL, I stand corrected, then!

The only thing I said about the series is that it has some secular humanist themes which are contrary to Catholic doctrine.

Did you identify them? If so, I admit I missed that part. I’ve seen that charge before, and I admit I’ve never really seen details to back it up… I thought this reply to have answered this charge quite solidly. Did I miss where you responded to it, or particularized the objection further?

engaging in the silliest forms of argument available to man (aka, taking a Catholic definition which has clear meaning to anyone educated and twisting it around to something that was clearly not said).

I did, however, feel that it was germain to come back and offer an authoritative source to correct a poster whose tag says “Roman Catholic” who is mocking the church defined definition of “occult practices”.

That’s not how I remember it.

You were deploying an academically imprecise and therefore theologically inadequate definition of “occult practices” - one far too broad - and those who pointed this out and clarified the matter further did not seem to me to be mocking you…

For the non-internet saavy, Danth’s law states: “If you have to insist that you’ve won an internet argument, you’ve probably lost badly"

Clever, especially since to cite Danth’s law is itself to violate it.

Anyway, I don’t think I’ve “won.” It’s not a victory when one’s interlocutor storms off in a huff. It’s a shame.

The assertions frequently made on these boards that the letters are not genuine or are mere ‘thankyou letters’ are nothing more than pro-Potterite propaganda.

C’mon, Portrait, you know that’s not true.

I will repost my links for those unaware of the controversy so they can decide for themselves. I’m confident of the impression the facts give:

jimmyakin.org/2005/07/pre16_on_harry_.html

jimmyakin.org/2005/07/lifesitenews_ca.html

hogwartsprofessor.com/rita-skeeter-covers-the-vatican/

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I tired out one of the spells in a Harry Potter book.

It worked.

Also, Harry Potter is actually a real Demon.

He showed up in my bedroom at 3am and just stared at me.

I prayed a Hail Mary and he disappeared.

This is just as valid as that “letter to Harry Potter fans” (saying it named real demons and that the spells were real) that was linked in some thread. It rings just as true except that it isn’t.

Don’t write stuff like that! Michael O’Brian will use it to write another book and cite it as a case study.

That was what I thought!

 

[Allegra]

Thus, for example, your so called ‘good’ characters habitually steal, lie, cheat, use unseemly language, break laws, deceive each other, behave hypocritically and have no ethical problem with pursuing revenge - all of which is done with an apparently clear conscience. Pax

Total BS. (and somewhat ironic as well.)

 

[Catholic90]

Total BS. (and somewhat ironic as well.)

Yeah, exactly. Very ironic!

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

That’s right, it could very well have been a boggart taking the form of Harry Potter, knowing how terrified I am of the occult wizard with the wand.

Of course, boggarts are pawns of the devil as well. But then again, every character in the Harry Potter book is a pawn of the devil. As is the author, JK Rowling.

I’m sure she is secretly a satanist who uses her children as sacrifices for the Evil One, making them do some terrible deeds.

Is that so? If you ask me, boggart is just a label. The ‘boggarts’ in Mr. Potter’s world seem more like shapeshifters. I know another world though where the things are in fact goblins who enjoy mindless thievery.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to a world called Mundus Magicus. I can’t say I should keep my maid-I mean housekeepers waiting hehe…^^;;; cat ear band accidentally drops from bulging backpack

Er… snatches Ehehehehehe… >_>;; Laterz! warps away

Yeah, exactly. Very ironic!

Count me in on that. I had long reached the conclusion to never expect intellectual integrity from the Anti-Fantasy League.

 

[Portrait]

C’mon, Portrait, you know that’s not true.

I will repost my links for those unaware of the controversy so they can decide for themselves. I’m confident of the impression the facts give:

jimmyakin.org/2005/07/pre16_on_harry_.html

jimmyakin.org/2005/07/lifesitenews_ca.html

hogwartsprofessor.com/rita-skeeter-covers-the-vatican/

Dear Fone Bone,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Hope all is well and a belated happy New Year to you. Thankyou for your above response, deja vu!

Thankyou for the the links above, but it is manifestly obvious that they are just too favourably disposed to the Potter series of books to be able to be considered impartial or objective. For example, it is really special pleading to contend that Mr. O’ Brien and LifeSite news have “exploited the Pope” or made him “into something of a hand puppet to say those things they want him to say”. To be perfectly frank, this is jolly risible stuff, old chap, and a desperate last ditch attempt to explain away the clear and unambiguous words of Pope Benedict on Harry Potter. However, as you say, let men make up their own mind as to whether they are deserving of trust or not.

Contrary to what is cliamed by some, the letters, which have not been demonstrably proven to have beenforgeries, cannot be dismissed as mere courteous “thankyou letters” to Gebreile Kuby. Moreover, neither is there any conclusive proof that they were written by some aide at the Vatican. All of this amounts to unfair argumentation on the part of the pro-Potterites, who just wish that Pope Benedict had not made these “embarrassingly reactionary” remarks when he was Cardinal Ratzinger.

As far as Monsignor Fleetwood is concerned, it would not be the first time that his comments were the occasion of disinformation. When he responded to a reporters question about the Potter novels at a press conference, he replied, “If I have understood well the intentions of Harry Potters author, they help children to see the difference between good and evil”. Unfortunately, it was this superficial personal opinion that was the source of the erroneous world media headlines that the Vatican and Pope John Paul II had approved of the Potter series of books.

Much of the fanatical, though well-intentioned, pro-Potterite support is more, I think, to do with making the Catholic Church look cool and trendy to modern youth. There is this feeling among many contemporary Catholics, especially the young, that oppostiton to the Potter books, which enjoy world-wide popularity, will only serve as a hindrance to evangelism. They argue that it is difficult enough making the Church seem credible without making it more difficult by a negative appraisal of a popular fantasy fiction series. This may sound plausible, at least superficially, but the young cannot be shielded from some unpalatable truths about their favourite work of fiction because this may just deter them from embracing our most holy religion. True, we may initially offend them, but we will be more respected in the long term if we proclaim what we believe to be truth regarding in these inferior books. If we believe, along with Father Amorth, that these popular books could be potentially injurious to their immortal souls, then necessity is laid upon us to speak out and denounce them. The Devil and his forces have deeply invaded man’s social and cultural structures - and children’s fantasy literature has not been omitted.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[jilly4ski]

Dear Fone Bone,

Thankyou for the the links above, but it is manifestly obvious that they are just too favourably disposed to the Potter series of books to be able to be considered impartial or objective.

Pax

Portrait, I am confused. So you will dismiss anything that is favorable to Harry Potter? Anything that is favorable is biased? There is then nothing that we could present that would be acceptable to you, because everything in support of our position would be overly favorable and thus biased? Jimmy Atkin is a well respected apologist, not a Potter fan, you won’t take his word, but you will take O’Brien’s, who is an author? I could use the same argument about taking O’Brien seriously. It is manifestly obvious that O’Brien is just too negatively disposed to the Potter series to be able to be considered impartial or objective. (Not to mention he actually has a personal interest in selling and having people read his own books, can we say conflict of interest).

I don’t even know what kind of logical fallacy this is, but it seems to be a rather large one. An ad hominem against Akin’s impartiality mixed in with a mind so closed you will not even consider the opposite opinion.

This seems incredibly uncharitable and a very poor way to argue.

 

[Havard]

Well, the title is “Harry Potter books” …

And plenty of posters have recommended other books. The related matters this broad topic brings with it are all relevant…

With respect to the original post, the title is actually clearly inapt, as I pointed out very early on in post #7 that it would be wise to modify it in hopes to avoid yet another one of these disasters.

Come on, the HP thread phenom on CAF is like a merry-go-round of incivility. Anti-HP people routinely get ridiculed for being superstitious fools. And like clockwork, this thread is already just another example which proves my point. I love a good debate, but it’s been made clear time and time again by certain posters that anti-HP opinions are not welcome, and that posters holding those opinions will be personally attacked.

Edit: To be fair, ad hominem attacks are not limited to one side. However, the usual suspects that I keep seeing in these threads are on the pro-HP side. And I say this being a fan of HP.

 

[Baelor]

Havard, most of the anti-HP comments are directed at those who do irrationally consider the series the spawn of Satan, etc. It is factual to say that HP is not occult, Satanic, anti-Catholic, etc. Those anti-HP comments should be corrected because they are wrong at an empirical level. Some posters may take it too far, but the fact that some do does not mean that all do.

Much of the fanatical, though well-intentioned, pro-Potterite support is more, I think, to do with making the Catholic Church look cool and trendy to modern youth

Proof please? My experience has not suggested that this is the case in any way at all. In fact, I have not heard this mentioned implicitly or explicitly ever. This is certainly not my own position or that of anyone I know. Furthermore, why would you ascribe motives? How does that affect the correctness or validity of an point of view?

 

[Havard]

Havard, most of the anti-HP comments are directed at those who do irrationally consider the series the spawn of Satan, etc. It is factual to say that HP is not occult, Satanic, anti-Catholic, etc. Those anti-HP comments should be corrected because they are wrong at an empirical level.

As previously stated, I have no problems facts or reason.

Some posters may take it too far, but the fact that some do does not mean that all do.

Oh you’re quite right, however imagine yourself being on the anti-HP side for a second. If people are gleefully making fun of your seriously held beliefs (see above, for example) you’d have to be a real champ to keep shrugging off such a hostile atmosphere all for the sake of engaging the few respectful ones.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

Dear Fone Bone,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Hope all is well and a belated happy New Year to you. Thank you for your above response, deja vu!

Haha, thanks! A belated happy New Year to you as well, Portrait, and a happy Feast of the Presentation of the Lord!

Thank you for the the links above, but it is manifestly obvious that they are just too favourably disposed to the Potter series of books to be able to be considered impartial or objective.

I don’t think so: two out of the above three links are blog entries written by Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin, who is not a fan of the series.

Much of the fanatical, though well-intentioned, pro-Potterite support is more, I think, to do with making the Catholic Church look cool and trendy to modern youth. There is this feeling among many contemporary Catholics, especially the young, that oppostiton to the Potter books, which enjoy world-wide popularity, will only serve as a hindrance to evangelism. They argue that it is difficult enough making the Church seem credible without making it more difficult by a negative appraisal of a popular fantasy fiction series. This may sound plausible, at least superficially, but the young cannot be shielded from some unpalatable truths about their favourite work of fiction because this may just deter them from embracing our most holy religion. True, we may initially offend them, but we will be more respected in the long term if we proclaim what we believe to be truth regarding in these inferior books.

While some fall into that trap, I don’t think I or most “pro-Potterites” I know do. Most Catholics I know are aware that trying to make the Catholic Church “look cool and trendy” will inevitably come across as condescending or patronizing to teenagers. Catholic Tradition is beautiful and profound enough as it is that its refreshing distinctness from the world will draw more young souls to Christ than attempting to reflect popular youth culture will.

You know that my position is that the Harry Potter series locates itself firmly within some very old and well-established genres in English literature: it’s a bildungsroman and a series in the style of the British boarding school genre, as well as Christian fantasy. In fact, Rowling’s artistry is perhaps sometimes *too *transparent; she certainly structures her series “by the book,” as it were.

Because of the specifically Christian merits of the series, I think it would be a shame for young people to think that Harry Potter is antithetical to truth and goodness. That’s why I defend it as I do - not to make the Church look “cool.” You certainly won’t see me defending “cool” popular works that are garbage, like Twilight.

Come on, the HP thread phenom on CAF is like a merry-go-round of incivility. Anti-HP people routinely get ridiculed for being superstitious fools. And like clockwork, this thread is already just another example which proves my point. I love a good debate, but it’s been made clear time and time again by certain posters that anti-HP opinions are not welcome, and that posters holding those opinions will be personally attacked.

Yes, I acknowledge that, and I think it’s a shame. If I stoop to incivility and uncharitable comments, I hope someone calls me out on it so that I can correct my own bad behavior.

I still think this is an important topic, because it’s symptomatic of a broader clash in how to apply and spread our faith: fearless, Gaudium et Spes-style engagement with the modern world, emboldened by the inherent positivity of the gospel, mixed with a healthy dose of literary symbolism, vs. a fundamentalist-style spirit of suspicion and withdrawal.

I don’t mean to mock anyone or belittle anyone’s opinion by saying that; in this case I do not hesitate to assert what I do because of the way the critical world - as well as most Christians, whether Catholic, Protestant, or (like John Granger, who first opened my eyes to the Christian elements in Potter) Eastern Orthodox - has gradually come closer and closer to unanimity concerning an acknowledgement of Harry Potter’s status as young adult Christian fantasy. It is simply a fact that since the publication of Deathly Hallows in 2007, fears that Potter encourages or desensitizes the young to sorcery have continually fallen further and further outside the mainstream.

I think that culturally, we’ve got a lot to lose if any of us is seen giving the impression that These Books Are Bad. Thus I find this discussion important enough to engage in whenever it arises, as it does disquietingly often on this forum.

 

[Baelor]

Oh you’re quite right, however imagine yourself being on the anti-HP side for a second. If people are gleefully making fun of your seriously held beliefs (see above, for example) you’d have to be a real champ to keep shrugging off such a hostile atmosphere all for the sake of engaging the few respectful ones.

You are correct, you would have to not engage with disrespectful posters. But I also expect critical thought and application of reason in a discussion. “Seriously-held beliefs” that are demonstrably absurd (e.g., Benedict XVI has commissioned a Vatican assassination squad and has twenty wives) should be noted as such. Refusal to change these same beliefs is extremely problematic on the part of the holder, and although everyone should be granted respect, the tone changes when one remains stubborn in the face of truth and reality.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Edit: To be fair, ad hominem attacks are not limited to one side. However, the usual suspects that I keep seeing in these threads are on the pro-HP side. And I say this being a fan of HP.

You have a problem with us getting personal yet you don’t acknowledge how insulting it is for these people to imply that we:

a.) Encourage occultism
b.) Promote witchcraft
c.) Delude children to switch to paganism
d.) Worship the devil
e.) Ish not good Catholics

Compare that to us simply calling these people insane, irrational, and stubborn. Those are some serious charges up there when you see them in the context of our religion. I’d wager saints would prefer being called idiots than heretics.

 

[EasterJoy]

With respect to the original post, the title is actually clearly inapt, as I pointed out very early on in post #7 that it would be wise to modify it in hopes to avoid yet another one of these disasters.

Come on, the HP thread phenom on CAF is like a merry-go-round of incivility. Anti-HP people routinely get ridiculed for being superstitious fools. And like clockwork, this thread is already just another example which proves my point. I love a good debate, but it’s been made clear time and time again by certain posters that anti-HP opinions are not welcome, and that posters holding those opinions will be personally attacked.

Edit: To be fair, ad hominem attacks are not limited to one side. However, the usual suspects that I keep seeing in these threads are on the pro-HP side. And I say this being a fan of HP.

Yes, I agree, but this is what I mean:

If I were to post that I need some books for my child because we’re “just not into” Harry Potter or fantasy stories with magic, implying only that it was my personal take on that kind of children’s literature, I’d expect people to chime in with books having more realistic story lines, perhaps with a few inquiries into what books my kids have liked in the past, in order to have a positive match to make instead of a negative one.

If I were to post that I don’t want my kids reading J K Rowlings because I think that she is a bad writer whose horrible prose is going to ruin my child’s eye and ear for the “real literature” with the kind of prose in which the good Lord meant English to be written, that the inventor of Harry Potter turns out nothing but the literary version of cotton candy and Cheetos, I would expect to hear a great deal from the fans of Harry Potter, not to mention lovers of cotton candy and Cheetos.

Attack someone’s position, and they will defend it. When the weapon of choice is a keyboard, things get violent rather faster than not. Is this some surprise?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

If I were to post that I don’t want my kids reading J K Rowlings because I think that she is a bad writer whose horrible prose is going to ruin my child’s eye and ear for the “real literature” with the kind of prose in which the good Lord meant English to be written, that the inventor of Harry Potter turns out nothing but the literary version of cotton candy and Cheetos, I would expect to hear a great deal from the fans of Harry Potter, not to mention lovers of cotton candy and Cheetos.

Attack someone’s position, and they will defend it. When the weapon of choice is a keyboard, things get violent rather faster than not. Is this some surprise?

Actually you’re free to make that criticism as everyone is entitled to a literary opinion. Heck, hearing something like that on these boards is hardly going to turn my head.

On the other hand, if you’re going to fire off with a statement that declares this work as ‘occult’ and that we’re all luring children to worship Satan, guess what? You’ll find that statement turning into a self-righteous, holy boom spell which hits more than just your intended target of Harry Potter fans. You’ll be knocking down wizards like myself, who have gone beyond Rowling’s word. And as far as I’m personally concerned, expect me to get back up with fiery vengeance.

 

[EasterJoy]

Actually you’re free to make that criticism as everyone is entitled to a literary opinion. Heck, hearing something like that on these boards is hardly going to turn my head.

On the other hand, if you’re going to fire off with a statement that declares this work as ‘occult’ and that we’re all luring children to worship Satan, guess what? You’ll find that statement turning into a self-righteous, holy boom spell which hits more than just your intended target of Harry Potter fans. You’ll be knocking down wizards like myself, who have gone beyond Rowling’s word. And as far as I’m personally concerned, expect me to get back up with fiery vengeance.

Consider the level of the criticism. It is one thing to say someone has no taste. It is quite another to say they are, witting or unwitting, in league with the devil.

OTOH, I had a friend in college whose boyfriend became a Wiccan. He asked if she minded that he practiced witchcraft. Her response: “It’s none of my business what you do. I think you’re going to Hell, but it’s none of my business.” Let’s say she was unusually tolerant, considering her position.

Oh, if you know the Rule of Three, you won’t be so free with the threats, Mr. Wizard!

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Consider the level of the criticism. It is one thing to say someone has no taste. It is quite another to say they are, witting or unwitting, in league with the devil.

That’s kinda my point. Unfortunately, the latter is often (if not always) the angle approached by the Harry Potter ‘critics’ on these threads (OP included).

Oh, if you know the Rule of Three, you won’t be so free with the threats, Mr. Wizard!

Hard to say as I’m familiar with two versions of that Rule. One is the Wiccan version of Karma which I don’t care for since Wiccans fall under the technical definition of druids. I am not a druid. I am simply a sophisticated-]insane/-] and brilliant,-]out-of-his-mind/-] dragon mage who is skilled in the art of the retributive replication of spells-]sending three flame javelins your way if you tick him off/-].

(BTW, I hope I just adequately demonstrated the second version of the Rule up there, the writing one )

 

[styrgwillidar]

Name calling? On the internet? Never bothered me. Heck. you can call me whatever you want, it doesn’t make it true. You can call me a lamp-post but I still won’t shine any light on the street if you stand me on the sidewalk. Gonna need that flashlight to find your keys whatever label you stick on me.

I don’t see an ‘anit-HP’ or ‘anti-fantasy league’ per se. Sorry, Lost Wanderer but I can’t label Portrait, for example, as part of a league when he advocates for Narnia. I think for most, it’s a question of what age is appropriate to read and understand them and see the christian elements. I don’t think anyone is going to (or has been saying) that a 45 yr old catholic with a fully formed conscience is going to turn to the occult from reading HP.

I respect the other posters as having a valid concern from their perspective. Magic in HP may lead children towards the occult in real life. Ok, I can understand that. Certainly I take the concerns of an experienced exorcist seriously- that depiction of magic in children’s literature may lead to an interest in the occult. Now, I don’t necessarily agree- I certainly don’t see it as high risk. But, if consistent I can understand, comprehend and discuss the opinion.

However, where people lose me is when they deviate from that principled position and say, well, it’s ok in some works but not others. ??? By what standard? Folks cite O’brien but he’s incredibly inconsistent. And I do mean incredibly as in lacks credibility since he changes, modifies, morphs the standard applying it differently to different works.

And the issue is the child who’s reaction is beyond the control of any author. The depiction in LOTRs or Narnio could spark that interest as easily as HP (or Bewitched, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, Frosty the Snoman… whatever). In fact, if you think Narnia is more engaging and better written and children hear how it’s ‘christian’ than it’s higher risk than HP. Doesn’t matter on what the author’s intent or skill was it’s the reaction of the child.

I’ll agree that a parent needs to understand what their child is reading, help them understand and interpret it, gauge their reaction and dispel misconceptions that arise. So back to the OP, if your child is reading anything with depictions of magic (and as they get older I would extend that to ESP, parapsychology and other things attributing extra-normal powers to naturally occurring conditions) then you should be concerned with Father Amorths warning about the unintentional attraction to the occult due to innocuous seeming portrayals in literature.

Because to be consistent, if that’s the concern it doesn’t matter what christian elements I can point to in any work, it’s not my/adult’s view it still comes down to each individual child. I think it’s putting too much responsibility on any author to hold them accountable for the reaction of each and every individual who reads their work.