Outrage?

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

And there are many groups, Christians included, that have misconception about others' beliefs, whether they are of other denominations with a religion or other world religions/belief systems, such as 'witchcraft' or Wicca.

Cheers, alatar.

Now I'm going to paraphrase an author that I really liked but whose name has escaped me. He wrote "Lamb: the Gospel According to Biff" which is a terribly funny and extremely irreverant portrayal of the Christ's teenage years. What he says in the end is that if reading a book makes you question your faith, than your faith wasn't strong enough to begin with. That's my words for adults, now here's children.

I know kids are impressionable, but if, as a parent, you take part in what your kids are reading/experiencing, and guide them a bit with discussions on why witchcraft should not be tried in our world, but that in a book, it's part of the story, and that sort of thing, it should not be a problem.

To use an example, I'm nearly 18. I still discuss a lot of what I'm reading with my parents, especially if it's odd or in some way disconcerting. Reading Huxley's Brave New World, I talked to my parents and brothers about how eugenics and the way people are created for a purpose can tie in to God creating individuals for a purpose (my brothers are not remotely religous, but my dad's Catholic and my mom Methodist). Good and evil are discussed using Harry Potter (I was upset at the end of Six, but I'll save it for when more people have actually read Half-Blood Prince and I'm not spoiling it) and the LotR.

Even though I'm not a kid any more, my parents still play an active role in my life. Duh, I wouldn't want it any other way. But my point is, parental involvement really keeps kids, not to sound all cold and cynical but, molded to the way you want them.

And here's another paraphrasing (this one from Tamora Pierce): Only those who want to be corrupted will become so. If your kids are going to be swayed into doing some weird "stuff", than there must have been something up to begin with. It's just like the prejudice against certain video games. Inanimate objects do not force kids to do things. They are simply there.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

It's easier to see that people walking between Mordor and Gondor are either soldiers of the Black Tower or of the White.

It's easier to attire yourself in the livery of the White Tower and say, "Destroy the soldiers of the Black Tower!"

However, we Christians--yes, I'm referring to all of you there, even the one who wrote that article--are called to love first and foremost. However unpalatable the concept, we're supposed to love Saddam Hussein. We're supposed to love that kid hooked on drugs, even his dealer. We're supposed to love the one who just got an abortion, even the doctor who did it. We're supposed to love those who dabble in (detestable, yes) witchcraft, and even those who are remotely interested in it. Why? Read your Romans 5:8. That's why.

Instead of doing that, we are content to stay in our Minas Tirith, and say to other people, "If you do not fall under the rule of Denethor, you are not with us."

Post-traumatic possum. I think I just confused people with my switches between LR quasi-quotes and real-world stuff. Sorry.

[Encaitare]

This whole thing has gotten really off topic, and the idea of the condemnation of entire groups of so-called "unrighteous" people makes me feel very uncomfortable.

[littlemanpoet]

Perhaps the whole issue is not one of Christians versus witchcraft. Alatar makes a good point about "in but not of the world". You see, it seems to me that there is a psychological piece to this issue as well as the religious/faith issue: there are people who are given to fear, and there are people who have wrestled with their fear and have become courageous. I'm trying to make the transition myself. Anyway, there are a lot of Christians who are given to fear, and they need - yes, need - objects for their ready fear. Harry Potter is simply one of the chosen objects. There are also a lot of Muslims who are given to fear, and they cry out against the Great Satan in the West, by which they usually mean the USA. But there are also courageous Christians and Muslims - and wiccans, no doubt - who have moved past fear to understanding; these people do see themselves as part of a community and try to build others up. When there is real Evil afoot, aka actual bombings and murders, etc., the fearful and the courageous tend to forget their differences and band together to deal with the real threat in their midst.

All of which is to say, I really think this is not a Christians versus witchcraft issue.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

If people who denounce LR (and Harry Potter) stand back for a while and see if what they're doing is helping them or not, I think the outrage would stop.

C'mon, people! We're supposed to be letting morality flow from within, instead of attempting to enforce morality at large! It never works, anyway--see the Inquisition and Calvin's Geneva. And Communist Russia, for that matter.

And as for the Professor being a "hellbound Roman Catholic"--ha! Double ha! This guy understands my faith better than I do (but I'm trying to change this now, of course). If people took the time to know their "enemy"--instead of attacking it outright (and foolishly, I might add)--they might realise they're not really up against an enemy. Then, the outrage might stop.

But this wouldn't happen. As I have said, people will find it easier to hate than to love.

[davem]

Just found a discussion on the Pope's comments re HP on the Second Spring website. This is from Professor Ted Sherman's post:

Rowling is a more sophisticated and complex author than many literary folks give her credit for. She does write "addictive" page-turners, as Francesca called them, but they are more than that, especially with each successive novel. She is creating a universe that is internally consistent (as Tolkien did), but that is also closely related to our own world. She's doing this for at least a couple reasons: she's writing a fairy-tale (or a series of fairy-tales if you want to look at each story independently) and all fairy-tales are ultimately about our world, the world we inhabit with all its problems. Remember, it was Tolkien who said (and I quoted this in my talk last summer--which was about Tolkien's "On Fairy-Stories" essay and Harry Potter) that "creative fantasy is founded upon the hard recognition that things are so in the world as they appear under the sun; upon a recognition of fact, but not slavery to it" ("On Fairy-Stories"). I don't know whether Rowling is familiar with the essay; but her fairy-tale is just as founded upon the hard recognition of fact as any modern, realistic novel. She is first and foremost telling a story, but her story does have a point, and part (at least) of that point is how does one behave and engage in the ongoing battle between good and evil? And the answer she continually shows Harry coming to is that one engages evil on a very personal level, and that the only way to combat evil is to do it oneself. One cannot wait for others to solve the problem, to defeat Voldemort, to report the suspicious package at the tube/train station, etc. As is attested to Burke (which I also quoted last summer), evil thrives when good men do nothing. Lord Voldemort returns in Book 4 and thrives in Books 5 and 6 precisely because the wizarding community turned its back on Harry and Dumbledore who were telling them the truth about Voldemort's return. And as Harry sees, and others in the larger tale only gradually learn and accept, it is up to each of them to decide whether or not to stand in the way of evil. We saw at the conclusion of Bk 4 what happens when an innocent got in Voldemort's way--he was killed.

Rowling's larger story is a parable or fairy-tale of spiritual warfare. As a parable or fairy-tale it can be read on at least two levels, the superficial (literal) level of rollicking good story, and the deeper (analogical) level of spiritual enlightenment. At this deeper level, we see a boy with no spiritual understanding or development when we first meet him develop (by the end of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix) into someone who now ponders the mysteries of life--and death. Indeed, it is the death of his godfather that awakens in him the desire to know what happens to people when they die. And it is through the "loony" Luna Lovegood (notice that surname!) that Harry is reminded about the voices he heard "beyond the veil" (a _very_ biblical metaphor and image there) and taught that he will see Sirius, and indeed his entire family, once again. The name Rowling gives to Luna suggests, I believe, the foolishness of God--she is taken for a fool by most of the students, but only because she is different, she believes things they don't, and she sees and understands things they don't. She is akin to the medieval fool who was commonly thought "touched by God." She is an analogue to many "holy fools" or "fools for Christ."