Harry Potter?.......( Is it bad?)

[adgloriam]

I won’t take JKR word on anything more than I’d take Kim Kardashian’s word on anything.

They have millions, billions at stake.

I’ll read their PR the same way I read political propaganda or multinational ads.

‘Bona fide’ does not go without prudence nor wisdom - nor does it put away with critical thinking.

 

[Roguish]

I honestly don’t follow you. You acknowledge the CCC’s point, which outlaws magic. Then you seem to argue that it doesn’t apply to the magic used by HP’s protagonists because they don’t “seek after it” but have “innate magic abilites” that the Hogwarts education teaches them to have “self-mastery” over. How is that different from the “taming of occult powers” that the Catechism condemns? I don’t see how the CCC makes a distinction between “innate” and “non-innate” magic abilities. You’re trying to get out from under the CCC’s blanket injunction against all magic by inventing a distinction.

Like all sins, the root is pride.

That’s true.

We are not to aim at controlling God,

A pointless point, this, because noone, not even a sorcerer, aims at controlling God anyway. The very notion of “controlling God”, even if considered just hypothetically, is absurd. Perhaps you mean “controlling nature” or something like that. That would make sense.

Occultish practices take our religious inclinations and mix them in with pride.

You seem to think that the occult is a somewhat derailed or twisted version of religion. But actually occultish practices don’t have anything to do with religion whatsoever, though I can understand that some get that impression from Wicca etc.

 

[adgloriam]

@Roguish the subtle difference is actually dissected at length in the utube video by the young dominican that was linked upthread. [Although I think that’s just one step of a necessarily broader analyses that one is wise not to employ his time on.]

 

[adgloriam]

Lee1:

We’re not talking about the crusades. Jesus told us to love our enemies.

We are still to oppose any evil they may do

That is captious in a way. Your first responsibility is to resist sin - which you humanly can’t without Christ.

Then you are to give witness of your faith in Christ crucified and resurrected in the flesh as God.

And then you’ll see hardly even the bishops openly oppose political evil discourse. That resisting and opposition transforms into meekness, abandonment, turning the other check and carrying your cross. Therein lies the madness, to defeat evil is to bear your cross.

 

[adgloriam]

Hey @Lee1 I’ll give a personal commentary dedicated to your efforts on this thread.

To start: If you open a HP book the first page will say: ‘Warner Brothers copyright’. Meaning: a 13billion yearly revenue giant. That’s the only reason we are talking about JKR/HP !!! Otherwise, we would never have heard of them…

Then: Their last 25 highest grossing movies were fantasy genre, except American Sniper.

Lastly: Do these giants capitalize on polemics, shock value, desensitizing, and do they part-wise push agendas for synergistic gains with the powers that be? CERTANLY !!

 

[Roguish]

I’ll skip the vid. In any case, the original poster wrote that the argument (in the video) is…

based on the notion that Harry Potter’s world is NOT our world

Which IMO is entirely irrelevant. It’s still a world with humans, so human morality still applies.

 

[adgloriam]

@Catholicwife32 out of respect for your writing I’ll give a commentary that attempts to inflect the direction of the reflection.

I think whoever promoted and bought HP knew exactly what they were doing and their bet was commercially successful [although I think number of sales was artificially inflated with entire editions collecting dust on reseller shelves waiting to be recalled by the editor per contract agreement - a common commercial strategy to claim best seller statues.] The success can be attributed more to marketing and sheer publisher power than to the quality of the books in themselves. It’s been known that popular culture isn’t refined, and a worldwide (globalized) children’s book franchise spinoff was a phenomenon that needed to be created - returns justifying a heavy investment.

In many cases, you’ll see anti-catholic themes and immoral themes, polemic and controversial themes, selling in themselves.

And, indeed, we should start by reexamining our own positions and statements to avoid getting pulled into misleading analyses. Caught up in the hype.

 

[phil19034]

I remember that frenzy here in the US for the last books.

For which book release did the craziness start in the UK?

 

[twf]

The books are so British that I feel they would lose a lot of their charm in translation. While I am a fan, I admit they are not always stellar examples of literature… but there is a very English charm to them.

 

[Catholicwife32]

I honestly don’t follow you. You acknowledge the CCC’s point, which outlaws magic. Then you seem to argue that it doesn’t apply to the magic used by HP’s protagonists because they don’t “seek after it” but have “innate magic abilites” that the Hogwarts education teaches them to have “self-mastery” over. How is that different from the “taming of occult powers” that the Catechism condemns?

This is why I gave you the etymological definition of the word occult. It’s not a synonym with the word “magic.” When a child says God has magical powers, that child is both right and wrong. Magic has a very broad meaning. On the one hand, it refers to supernatural powers. And indeed, God has supernatural powers. On the other hand, it refers to supernatural powers one does not innately have through means of the occult. Because God innately has supernatural powers, His powers aren’t magical.

But likewise, demons do not possess magic either because their powers are innate to their nature as well.

You seem to think that the occult is a somewhat derailed or twisted version of religion.

That is EXACTLY what it is. It is a distorted perversion of religiosity. When pagans engaged in magic, they were calling on the powers of their gods. The word daimon (which evolved into the word demon) meant “guiding spirit” and “lesser god.”) It was used to refer to the pagan gods because they were inferior to God.

This does not mean that they were actually gods. They were creatures, Spirits, what we would call fallen angels. And most certainly, false worship doesn’t actually mean a demon is involved at all. But magic was seen as evidence of the god’s powers. And prayers and devotions offered to the pagan gods were used to gain their favor.

Our God revealed Himself at first as being the most powerful. But by the time we get to Christ, He warns us not to worship as the pagans do.

In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words.* Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

He then teaches us the Our Father. “Thy will be done.” Moreover, Christ is critical of those who pursue Him solely for His miracles. It isn’t that He never performed them, but they were often more interested in His powers than in His message. Likewise, we can fall into this same trap.

A preoccupation with the supernaturally sensational is open ground for the occult, whether it is dressed as non-Christian or not.

 

[Jimbo]

I’ve read them all. I think it’s only an issue if you are very susceptible to being lead astray. If you find yourself reading up on Wiccan spells because of them, maybe they aren’t for you, otherwise…

I think people get all bugged about this. When I was younger I read about some Christians getting scandalized by the Lord of the Rings.

To borrow a phrase from Bishop Barron, we can have a both/and. We can both be against sorcery, divination, etc. and still like stories that have such things in them. Fiction exists, is a fine literary style, and can make ones life more rewarding.

 

[Catholicwife32]

Ugh! I saw these books at Christian before a lot of people were speaking out about it. I found John Granger’s website originally because I wanted to see if anyone else thought the same things I did. My degree is in English. These books are filled with Christian themes. We can argue it to our deaths, you won’t change my mind.

 

[Roguish]

This is why I gave you the etymological definition of the word occult. It’s not a synonym with the word “magic.”

First you distinguish between innate and non-innate magic. Now you quibble over the distinction between the occult and magic, apparently arguing that the CCC outlaws the occult but not magic. But the fact remains that the text of CCC 2117 contains both these terms (and the term sorcery as well) and condemns them all:

All practices of magic or sorcery , by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one’s service and have a supernatural power over others - even if this were for the sake of restoring their health - are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion.

Note also the expression “supernatural power over others”. When Hermione casts “obliviate” on some person, how is that not a supernatural power over another?

A preoccupation with the supernaturally sensational is open ground for the occult, whether it is dressed as non-Christian or not.

I agree. And HP is preoccupied with the supernaturally sensational.

Good luck making further attempts at getting from under this. I might read your equivocations, or I might not – as the mood strikes me later.

 

[Roguish]

We can both be against sorcery, divination, etc. and still like stories that have such things in them.

Certainly. But the question is not whether it is okay to like stories that have magic in them. The question is whether it is okay to like stories that portray magic as fun or interesting or excusable or good.

By comparison, it is similar with violence. Sure, violence can be a useful element in a story that is good and healthy overall. But what about a story that portrays violence as fun? That wouldn’t be very healthy, now would it?

 

[Seagull]

And many that believed came,
and confessed,and shewed their deeds.
Many of them also - which used curious arts -
brought their books together, and burned them -
before all men: and they counted the price of them,
and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver.
So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.

Harry Potter has sold over 500 million books !

I say, let’s start a bonfire !

 

[Crusader30]

Yes. Exorcists, as well as other priests (including Fr. Don Calloway) warn against it. Catholics ought to avoid it.

 

[adgloriam]

My degree is in English.

Excellent.

First chapter, of the HP book I’m reading starts with an entire family being murdered - without leaving descendants. Before that the narrator portrays that entire family in a negative light - following suite with no one in the village actually caring for them or their fate. The villagers gossip and slander everyone - narrator doesn’t morally comment. The families gardener is also portrayed entirely in the negative. Finally every single human/moral factor gets reduced to a magic plot. [A lengthy chapter without a single moral comment or a drop of charity.]

Second chapter, HP is as estranged as possible from his foster family - everyone gets portrayed in a negative light. Exception being his friends and his magic world. [Here it gets dangerous, the adolescent following suite is alienated from family in favor of friends - we know from church doctrine you’re to be loving and especially so with family.]

-The main psychological factors thus far:

1. Estrangement from family (justification/naturalization of)
2. Uncharitable comments (demeaning/mockery) towards everyone except self and adolescence friends
3. Alienation from everything and exaggerated self-centered personal drama
4. Identification with hero in the above points is only viable avenue the books leaves open by the 2nd chapter

These books are filled with Christian themes.

Yes I know, and that is precisely what should be avoided and overlooked !! Because the underlying psychological sub-text is what will work on the adolescent. Everyone knows the Christian themes intuitively from childhood which does not avoid sin or falling from the faith latter. It is moral relativism by way of nihilism that constitutes the main message, magic being only the polemic accessory serving to distract from the core issue - however masked, euphemistic, or oblique it may be presented.

 

[Ioannes_L]

These books are filled with Christian themes.

Pretty much like A song of ice and fire with his Messianic views and so on, but this doesn’t make the books more readable.

 

[Catholicwife32]

First you distinguish between innate and non-innate magic. Now you quibble over the distinction between the occult and magic, apparently arguing that the CCC outlaws the occult but not magic. But the fact remains that the text of CCC 2117 contains both these terms (and the term sorcery as well) and condemns them all :

Oh give me a break. I simply said that in some sense of the word, God’s powers can be referred to as magic. The word has a broad meaning. Like most theological terms, you have to look at how the Church is using the word.

 

[Catholicwife32]

First chapter, of the HP book I’m reading starts with an entire family being murdered - without leaving descendants.

Without leaving descendants? Harry is Lily and James Potter’s son. We are introduced to the Dursleys, a couple who is preoccupied with their reputation and fitting in. They absolutely want to be perceived as normal. They are a great character study on the sin of vanity. While I think this goes beyond the first chapter, the Dursley’s vanity leads them to abuse both Harry AND their son, Dudley.

Harry, they abuse more overtly. Every action of caregiving is done begrudgingly to an absolute minimum. They pride themselves, though, of having not turned him away, and feel all these burdensome actions are acts of sincere charity. Whereas, with Dudley, their drive for constant selfish approval leads them to not actually do what is good for Dudley, but to give into his every whim so that he will stop expressing his disapproval of them.

This character study reminds me very much of the character study CS Lewis did of those in “the Grey Town” in CS Lewis’ “The Great Divorce.” Rowling even listed Lewis as one of the authors who’s inspired her work.

Before that the narrator portrays that entire family in a negative light - following suite with no one in the village actually caring for them or their fate. The villagers gossip and slander everyone - narrator doesn’t morally comment.

While the entire book is written in third person past tense, the first chapter is written from the perspective of Mr. Dursley. The “Thank you very much” at the end of the opening line is Mr. Dursley’s personality being personified in the prose.

Making moral commentaries throughout a piece of fiction or having perfect character who never sin is actually what makes for bad writing. Moral messages in stories exist in the content of the story, things that are shown and not told. And as I said already, the character of the Dusleys is an examination of the vice of pride, making the story begin on a profoundly Christian them.

I’ll continue in another post.