Harry Potter?!?

  • Thread starter Thread starter duckworth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
For me reading Harry Potter Books are more like reading some of the old Arthurian legends. I also agree that if more people would read more than the LOTR series that actually would be surprised about what Tolkien writes.

Does this mean we shouldn’t let students read Macbeth? Or any other legends, folklore etc?

I also find it scary that the Chief Exorcist is holding conversations with He Who Must Not be Named. One of our friends is a priest and he said one the things that they learned in seminary, is that you are NEVER to talk(Hold conversations) with someone who has been possessed.

This article does a superb job of explaining the religious symbolism in the Harry Potter books.

"Most striking of images in the books is the deer or stag, who represents piety, religious aspiration, solitude, and purity of life. Unbeknownst to Harry it is his father in the form of a stag who appears when he utters the Patronus spell in the third book. Recall that Harry is passing out, about to be overcome by the kiss of a dementor (themselves unsubtle tributes to J.R.R. Tolkien’s ringwraiths.) In Latin patronus means defender or advocate, and is etymologically linked with the Latin for father. Expecto means “I await,” a waiting that may be tinged with hope as in the Nicene Creed, expecto resurrectionem. So the spell expecto patronum means “I await a defender, an advocate.” It turns out that the answer to Harry’s prayer is the father whom he hopes for. The son is saved by his prayer, and then sees himself standing next to the stag on the bank across the lake. Later the wise Dumbledore explains, “your father is alive in you, Harry, and shows himself most plainly when you have need of him…”
 
What about the John Paul quote? “Rowling is Christian by conviction… Christian in her mode of living, even in her way of writing.” “They help children to tell the difference between good and evil.” And for the last time. THOSE LETTERS WERE NOT WRITTEN BY BENDIDCT HIMSELF. They were written by one of the priest working for him.
 
I have heard that Harry Potter has gotten kids interested in learning Latin again.
Wouldn’t surprise me. Furthermore, Rowling has even used Aramaic in the series…as a matter of fact, she has used it repeatedly. I have noted how much research has gone into these books (I was against them until I read them. Now, not so much), and it wouldn’t surprise me if children and adults and betweens will look up some names and places, which would get them more interested in learning about those names and places, rather than magic.

What people have not mentioned to the best of my knowledge, and I hope that this post isn’t going to be glossed over/burried with so many others among the argument going on, ignoring the topic, is that in the HP world, Witches/Wizzards are Witches and Wizzards and Non-Magic Humans are Non-Magic Humans. Never the 'tween can meet. It is stated early in the book how it would be impossible for regular people to try to do magic, they just simply cannot. It reminds me of Stan Lee’s, “The X-Men,” some people are mutants with special powers and the vast majority of people just aren’t, and never can be no matter how hard they try.

FURTHERMORE, another glanced over point is that Harry, if his parent’s were not killed, would have been a Christian (no religion is mentioned, though some places specify Harry does pray, and again, the books have witches & wizzards in our world, so, whatever non-magical people can be, riligiously, so can witches & wizzards, witch is not a religion in the books). He has a Godfather…had a Godfather if you are past Book 5…and Rowling herself has answered a question that, because of Voldemort’s activity, Harry’s Christening would have been done quickly, not a big celebration or anything, just something to make sure that the child will be brought up correctly, if not save him, should he have been killed before he reached the age of reason. (Reasonable to assume Harry would have been raised Episcopalian, though, I think I read that Rowling is a lower Christian).
 
I was once at a retreat where the priest went on for an hour about how Harry Potter was evil and taught satanic stuff. By the end of it I was convinced that Satan was at work, but not in the way this priest thought.

The devil had pulled one of his greatest tricks, convince the people that something morally neutral (or at worst just questionable) is pure evil, so we ignore the true evil around us. This priest was so caught up with Harry that he seemed to forget all the other sins, evils and struggles that are in this world. The main thing to remember was that Harry Potter was evil and we’d be fine.

I’ve read all the books and the only thing I found questionable was the rewarded disobedience that was throughout the whole series. But then again, that’s pretty standard for all young adult books, it’s rare to find anything advocating obedience outside of Catholicism nowadays.

The magic? Pshaw, there’s magic in the writings of CS Lewis; there are at least two magicians in the Narnia series that are good, and Lucy recites a spell at one point. Furthermore, in Harry Potter, if you’re a muggle there’s no point in trying to do magic, nothing will happen. At the very least you’ll need a phoenix feather or something to make a wand…and those are a bit hard to come by these days. Even if someone went around saying the Latin, nothing would happen. I think I gave up being a non-muggle about the fifth time waving my pen in the air reciting “Wingardium Leveosa.”

Honestly, while I’d be very discerning in allowing a younger child to read the books, I see no problem in having teens or young adults read them. They’re at least better than 90% of the stuff they’ll find on TV. Sex, drugs, relativism, etc - none of that is found in HP books.
 
Interesting post, Lady Cygnus…

I have found the movies to have no cursing…no swear words…truthfully, probably the cleanest movies around with no sexual undertones like many pre-teen movies have these days. I don’t see the bad in it…It’s fiction…like anything else that is fiction.
 
So, now it is okay to call a Priests a liar? See anything wrong with this picture?
He puts his pants on one leg at a time, just like everyone else. In other words, he is as human as the rest of us.
 
Since when is it accepted that just cause one is a priest they are always telling the entire truth and not EMBELLISHING? 😉

I dont believe the man when he goes to the extremes about daily battles with the devil. In THAT particular area I think he isnt being honest. If someone disagreeing with or not fully believing a priest upsets you, then maybe you are too easily scandalized or putting wayy too much faith in every single word one of them utters.
Once again CathCentrist…a voice of reason. Something which is little used here. Dare to think for yourself. 👍
 
Priests are humans. They make mistakes. To think otherwise, makes them dieties unto themselves…🤷
 
But, what if you are wrong? What if Father Amorth, Cardinal Ratzinger, and thousands of others (including me) are correct when they say HP can be dangerous to some children? You firmly believe the books are not harmful, fine. But again, what if you are wrong? Are the souls of children worth the risk?

IMO, if there is even the slightest risk, even if that risk is less then one-percent, then that is too much when it comes to using entertainment, which is all HP is anyway.

Let me close my responses on this thread with this final analogy (not a perfect analogy, but I think you’ll understand):

I am married and have kids. I really like motorcycles and often have wanted to purchase one. I have a family member who likes to skydive and has invited me to go with him. As a Catholic father and husband I accept that my “wants” are completely unimportant because my real job is to care for my family. As a responsible parent and husband I must make every effort to be there for my family, so even though the risk of using motorcycles and skydiving is quite low, there is still a risk and if I did those things I would be risking my life for the sake of personal pleasure. IMO, that is just plain wrong because once I chose to have a family, I no longer live just for myself. So, I do not buy a motorcycle, I do not go skydiving, I do not do a bunch of things that might put me in harms way, and I also will not take even the slightest risk with my childrens souls for the sake of personal pleasure (reading a novel). And, I feel that no child should be placed at risk, even if that risk is very small. That is why I speaks so often about this subject. In essence, if I am right, then children are a risk; if I am wrong, then it is not going to hurt a child if he/she does not read HP.

Thanks for the chat, we have talked this into the ground.

God Bless
If that’s the case, do you forbid them from watching any television? Even the most wonderful children’s programming can have a questionable moral message and/or situation. Do you forbid them from talking to other people, who, simply due to the nature of human beings themselves, may scandalize your children merely by saying something morally objectionable?

Your principle is admirable, but in all honesty, carrying it out requires that an individual can essentially do nothing at all - because the risk of harming your children, be it from robbing them of innocence, scandalizing them, pressuring them to sin via parental disobiendence, etc. is present in just about anything we do.

For the record, I plan on purchasing the final HP book when it finally goes on sale later this summer 👍
 
I’ve been wondering this for a while, how many of you who think Harry Potter is bad actually read the book instead of hearing what others say about it.

Harry Potter is just a story, it is not real or going to make anyone want to become a witch or anything like that.
 
I’ve been wondering this for a while, how many of you who think Harry Potter is bad actually read the book instead of hearing what others say about it.

Harry Potter is just a story, it is not real or going to make anyone want to become a witch or anything like that.
exactly…they really are just stories…edgar allen poe’s poetry is more disturbing.🤷
 
After suffering through the first several chapters of the first Harry Potter novel, I decided my time and my children’s time would be better spent reading good books. Thus, my son is currently reading Kidnapped and my daughter is reading The Princess and the Goblin.

Phew! I guess I dodged that particular satanic bullet!

– Mark L. Chance.
 
When I was a kid, I wanted to be an evil witch when I grow up. I only read Hansel and Gretel, Sleeping Beauty and Snowwhite. So you never know, and just to be safe, it’s best to ban all books and Disney cartoons. :rolleyes:
 
If that’s the case, do you forbid them from watching any television? Even the most wonderful children’s programming can have a questionable moral message and/or situation. Do you forbid them from talking to other people, who, simply due to the nature of human beings themselves, may scandalize your children merely by saying something morally objectionable?

Your principle is admirable, but in all honesty, carrying it out requires that an individual can essentially do nothing at all - because the risk of harming your children, be it from robbing them of innocence, scandalizing them, pressuring them to sin via parental disobiendence, etc. is present in just about anything we do.

For the record, I plan on purchasing the final HP book when it finally goes on sale later this summer 👍
Carrying it out is very easy: I simply don’t let my kids read HP. Quite simple really.
 
After suffering through the first several chapters of the first Harry Potter novel, I decided my time and my children’s time would be better spent reading good books. Thus, my son is currently reading Kidnapped and my daughter is reading The Princess and the Goblin.

Phew! I guess I dodged that particular satanic bullet!

– Mark L. Chance.
At least you read part of one. The most vocal critics of HP are those who have never read the books or seen the movies.
 
Carrying it out is very easy: I simply don’t let my kids read HP. Quite simple really.
As I mentioned, if you’re going to ban HP, you’re going to have to ban a great deal more. HP certainly presents some undesirable circumstances, the most prevalent of which is the idea of disobedience to elders and parents, but these idea are prevalent not only in most other forms of media but in our communication and relationships with other human beings.

To be extremely blunt and frank (hopefully while still remaining within reasonable bounds of charity), banning HP isn’t going to cut it. You’re going to have to go much furthur if you are truly going to adhere to that principle.
 
How many porn movies have you watched?
Although I realize that this wasn’t directed at me, this comparison utterly fails because it is comparing something is inherently evil with something that is not.

Exposing children to porn isn’t at all a necessity because it meant solely for lust and this is all it accomplishes.

HP and other books that merely depict morally questionable situations are not inherently wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top