Last night we had a great talk with some friends of ours about whether or not Christians should read Harry Potter (I don’t think it was hard for them to surmise that Nance and I were more than a little excited about the latest book since we both have a copy which we’re reading). Over the course of two hours the conversation meandered from the nature of fantasy writing, to common grace, to what Scripture say about wizards, witches, and magic. In the end we had narrowed down our disagreement to one key issue: the connection between wizards in this world and those in fantasy worlds.
I’m convinced that in Harry Potter’s world there is unseen “magical” power which pervades all of the wizarding world. If you are born a wizard or a witch you de facto have access to this power which allows you to do things like apperate, fly on a broomstick, jinx your opponents, or brew a potion to defend your friends. The question, then, for Harry and his cohorts is not whether they should use their power, but how they should use it.
Our friends, however, pointed out that in our world that is not what the terms “witch” or “wizard” mean. In the “real” world a witch or wizard is someone who uses sorcery to perform supernatural acts. And while those acts may have good or bad results, sorcery, in our world, is always the use of supernatural power over others [or matter, I would add] through the assistance of spirits. And Scripture is clear on where sorcery falls on the moral spectrum:
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal. 5:19-21, emphasis added).
He [Manasseh] made his sons pass through the fire in the valley of Ben-hinnom; and he practiced witchcraft, used divination, practiced sorcery and dealt with mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking Him to anger (2 Chr. 33:6)
Our friends believe that because sorcery is always wrong in the real world, then there can be no such thing as “good” witches and wizards, even in a fantasy world (and yes, these friends were consistent and willing to say that other books by Christian authors which have good witches and wizards, such as The Chronicles of Narnia and Lord of the Rings, are also wrong).
My initial response was “what about monsters who, in our world, are always bad, but who, in other books and movies, such as Monsters Inc., are re-defined as being both good and bad?” Or, “what about superheroes, who use their powers for good, and their arch-villains, who use their power for evil?” Their response was that things like monsters and superheroes don’t actually exist (though I know many kids who would beg to differ! :)), but wizards and witches do really exist in our world.
I’m still convinced that, by its very nature, fantasy literature creates an alternate universe that doesn’t operate in the same way ours does, and so a fantasy writer has the license to redefine what the terms “witch” and “wizard” mean. I also wonder about what the alternative is? Say you want to create a world that is different than ours, one that contains “magic.” What are you going to call those who live in that world? Our friends, however, think that if witches and wizards are bad in this world they can’t just be redefined because we put them in another world. The two worlds cannot be so neatly disconnected. It was at this point that we had to agree to disagree.
Of course, I also highly doubt that many people who read Harry Potter are going to be so enamored with Harry’s wizardry that they will go off and become Wiccan. Rather, I think the vast majority of people will root for Harry and his friends because he’s an underdog who faces incredible odds as he and his friends try to defeat Lord Voldermort. And I think that’s worth rooting for.
More to come on why Harry Potter is a worthwhile read, for Christians and non-Christians alike.
19 responses so far ↓
1 isaac // Aug 1, 2005 at 2:30 pm
Let’s say for the moment that you are right about Rawlings’ creation of an alternative universe that doesn’t map neatly onto our own, so she is safe from your friends’ concers. Fine. What I wonder is why is this any good? I mean, why is it good to inhabit this textual world from someone else’s imagination?
Then, to follow up, do you think it is better or worse for fantasy literature to have more or less resemblance to our own world? At this point i am thinking about the difference between Rawlings’ fantasy series and Philip Pullman’s HIS DARK MATERIALS. Rawlings’ characters look like kids from our world. Our bodies fit pretty easily into those textual bodies. But Pullman messes with how we think about human nature as soon as we try to imagine what is going on in his alternative world. He makes us do some work in seeing how the reader can relate to his textual bodies who have an accompanying animal that personifies personality.
2 blip » Harry Potter (and Fantasy): Worth our Time? // Aug 7, 2005 at 3:23 pm
[...] In my previous post I defended Harry Potter as a book Christians can read despite the plethora of witches, wizards, and other magical creatures it contains. In this post I want to put forth some of the benefits of reading fantasy books, specifically Harry Potter. In other words, I want to suggest why Harry Potter is worth our time. Before going further I do want to make a couple of disclaimers. First, I don’t think Harry Potter is appropriate for everyone. There are difficult, sad, scary, and strange things in Harry Potter, especially as the books progress. I wouldn’t read them to my eight year old (assuming I had one of course ) than I would Lord of the Rings . And, of course, if my kid was reading it I would read it with them and discuss it as we went along. Second, I make no claim that Harry Potter is in some way subtly Christian. There are those who would say Harry Potter is a Christ figure, that the books are chalk full of Christian themes, etc. I don’t think J.K. Rowling is trying to write a book with a Christian subtext (a.k.a. The Chronicles of Narnia) and it would do an injustice to her books to twist them into a Christian worldview. However, I do think they are good books with interesting themes and some attractive heroes. Moreover, they are part of the fantasy genre which I think offers some good correctives to our highly scientific, modern world. [...]
3 hbz // Oct 14, 2005 at 5:48 am
I believe that there is no reason to hate the Harry Potter books. im jewish and i have had 3 different rabbis all of whom find nothing wrong with JK Rowlings books. i am doing some reasearch on this controversy,so please post some links to ather articles
4 hbz // Oct 14, 2005 at 5:49 am
soon please
!
5 Jason // Oct 14, 2005 at 10:53 am
hbz, look at the follow up to this post here. It has some good links in the comments.
6 Bob Purinton // Mar 12, 2006 at 9:30 pm
Hello,
I, for one, enjoy Harry Potter and his adventures. I like fantasy as a chance to get away from reality. Harry and friends let me do that.
As for “Sorcery,” What do you think someone from a hundred years ago would call going 60 mph in an automobile with no horses in front of it. Or, that same person standing at street level in front of a modern day skyscraper. How much different is sorcery from technology?
As for the religious aspects, I’ll admit I’ve never really thought about it much. I do believe, though, that Harry Potter can’t be too much different from a little fat man in a red and white suit that uses eight reindeer to cover the world in one night carrying a bag of gifts for all those people(and it all fits in the sleigh?). Nevermind a Bunny that can do the same thing on foot with candy and colored eggs. I know, at least one or both of these holidays are adapted from pagan customs. I don’t see how Harry Potter can be any worse than that. And “No!” I am not forgetting the REAL reasons for those two seasons.
I’ve just re-read this prior to posting it and probably should go ahead and delete it but I think I’ll leave it as-is and just apologize for rambling. You’ve given me something to think about.
7 Marie // Mar 14, 2006 at 9:17 pm
Hello,
I like the response from Bob Puriton about “Harry Potter not being too far different from the little fat man in the red and white suite.” (I got a chuckle from that comment).
Without a doubt one could say that computer’s are evil and I do not know too many people of religious beleif that do not use a PC. or watch television for entertainment purposes.
My son views Harry Potter the same way I imagined the movie “The Wizard Of Oz.” I find Rawlings writing’s and the movies to be packed with imagination and adventure.
After reading the Potter book series my son’s reading level has surpassed my expectations. My son not only read’s well but has maintained Honor Role statis for two years. I see no harm in a great imagination. If I could write fictional stories I would love to create children’s stories as imaginative and original as Rawlings.
And in the defense of all the make beleive character’s in “Harry Potter’s” World I will not apologize for my opionion’s or rambling.
8 Bob Purinton // Mar 15, 2006 at 5:52 am
I know this site is about Harry Potter and I haven’t forgotten that.I just want to throw out a couple of points to ponder (with apologies to Marie in the previous post).
First, Nothing is evil, People are evil. To expand on that; Nothing inanimate has ever done anything to anybody without human intervention. A computer has never wrecked anyones life. The person at the keyboard has. A gun never has killed anyone, the person pulling the trigger has. In varying degrees all of us are evil. Yes, I’m in there too. That’s what the 10 commandants are for. to show us how evil we are. Nobody can adhere strictly to all of the commandmants all of the time. We are not perfect. We are all evil and we can find evil in anything if we look hard enough and want to find evil.
I know, when someone reads this, they are going to say that they are not evil. Ever stepped on an insect? (Thou shalt not kill) Ever envied the boss his new Corvette? (Thou shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbors)
With all that being said; onto Mr. Potter.
There are a lot of good points to Harry Potter that we can use to teach our children. I don’t have to worry about naked people running around and I don’t have to worry about graphic violence (You know,Blood and gore, flying body parts)(OK, there were flying body parts, but they were all connected and they got up after they landed)
Harry Potter is a refreshing change from reality as I said in my previous post. I believe people need this after being assaulted, by the media, with war, crime, and other evils that men perpetuate on each other.
I don’t remember people back in the 1960’s having anything to say about the Sinbad and the Greek Mythology movies that were popular then.(During the Vietnam War)As I said, A safe escape from reality.
I think people need the basic tenant that good will eventually triumph over evil bolstered every once in a while. John Wayne did it, William Shatner (Captain Kirk) did it, Even Bugs Bunny did it. Now just seems to be little Harry’s turn. Same theme just done a different way.
Thanks for letting me ramble again.
9 Jason // Mar 15, 2006 at 8:30 pm
Bob and Marie, thanks both of you for jumping in. I think, Bob, that your point about technology is an insightful one. Especially since, in many ways, the “magic” in Harry Potter is technological in the sense that it does stuff we wish we could do. Portkeys, flying cars, and brooms for transportation. Being able to be invisible. All stuff that we hope to do one day “for real.” Of course, there are also jinxes, curses, and defensive blasts of the wand which are more magical, but even these seem “technological” because they aren’t called up by spirits, but by formulas.
On a side note, one thing I’ve been thinking about lately, but likely won’t do a whole post on is how completely Rowling is able to “secularize” magic. In the first century magic was the accusation laid against people who were socially deviant, but were doing miraculous deeds. If someone was your hero and they did these great healings, exorcisms, etc. then they were a miracle worker with special connections to the divine, but if they were your enemy they were a magician manipulating spiritual forces for their own agenda (c.f. Mark 3 where Jesus is accused of being a magician). So, magic was a way to manipulate the divine, the supernatural, in order to attain something for yourself—healing, a child, love, a prophecy, whatever.
However, here’s what is so interesting. Rowling has magic, but no power underneath that magic. What do Harry and his fellow magicians manipulate that gives them the ability to do such fantastic things? It doesn’t seem to be anything supernatural; the closest thing we see that is “supernatural” are the Centaurs, but even they are “scientific” in the sense that they just read the stars. I suppose we’re left to assume that the magic in Harry Potter is a matter of manipulating “energy” at a molecular level or something. It just seems wierd that Rowlings never delves into where this “energy” or power comes from—it’s just assumed.
10 Anonymous // Apr 7, 2006 at 2:31 am
brilliant
11 Bob Purinton // May 16, 2006 at 10:24 am
However, here’s what is so interesting. Rowling has magic, but no power underneath that magic. What do Harry and his fellow magicians manipulate that gives them the ability to do such fantastic things? It doesn’t seem to be anything supernatural; the closest thing we see that is “supernatural” are the Centaurs, but even they are “scientific” in the sense that they just read the stars. I suppose we’re left to assume that the magic in Harry Potter is a matter of manipulating “energy” at a molecular level or something. It just seems wierd that Rowlings never delves into where this “energy” or power comes from—it’s just assumed.
Hey Jason, Read that last sentence using the word “Faith” instead of “energy.”
12 Chris Klopp // May 21, 2006 at 5:19 am
The previous comments regarding Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny provide an interesting point of entry into what I see as the larger problem with the Christian rejection of books like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. Simply put, this seems to be an issue of “purity,” of avoiding the taint of “pagan” influence. The real reason people don’t like magic whether in fantasy or in the “real world” seems to be its connection to evil spirits and false gods. Thus, even the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, having been drawn from pagan mythology are considered sub-Christian. In fact, I have friends for whom the fear of the evil/pagan roots of Christmas actually prohibits them from celebrating the birth of our Savior.
This is indeed a sad state of affairs, not only because such an attitude cuts people off from much literature and art that is “pagan,” but also because it is impossible to “purify” Christianity of all its non-Christian influences. Such an attempt at “purity” is also mostly unnecessary.
The patristic doctrine of the logos spermatikos, holds that God’s Word has been spread through all cultures like seed scattered by a farmer. It bears fruit in all of these cultures and the astute Christian can detect reflections of Jesus, the supreme Logos, in them all. The fact that the church took “pagan” symbols and customs and adjusted them to serve the purposes of the gospel is not to be lamented as “selling out.” Rather, this is a creative, redemptive act of the Holy Spirit, by which we are able to see that God’s truth indeed permeates the entire cosmos.
So, to return to Harry and Gandalf, the real issue should not be the “paganism” of these figures, but the way in which Rowling and Tolkien reconfigure these “wizards” as servants of Christ’s gospel. I am convinced that this is precisely what Tolkien accomplishes, but I am not sure about Rowling. There is nothing inherently evil in her portrait of Harry Potter, but does she lead the reader to the truth, or does she simply entertain and provide moral “lessons”?
13 Jason // May 22, 2006 at 9:06 am
Chris, thanks for the insightful comment. I’m especially intrigued by the patristic doctrine of logos spermatikos which you mentioned. I’ve not heard of it, but it sounds like something worth investigating.
14 isaac // May 22, 2006 at 11:50 am
The logos spermatikos stuff comes from Origen who talked about the ‘transmigration of the soul’—we are all little logikoi trying to return to the enernal contemplation of the Father. And Jesus is the trail-blazing logos who shows us the way. What Chris seems to be picking up on is the way each of us has a piece of the Son’s same spiritual material (logikoi is the plural form of the greek word for logos) at the core of our being, at the core of every human being. So, to reiterate Chris’ point, we can see reflections or refractions of the Logos everywhere. Part of the problem with all is that Origen’s idea about the logikoi is part of his thought about the ultimate return of all humans to a state of contemplation of the Father, and that was condemned by one of the church councils (the Council of Orange, I believe)—this part of Origen’s teaching is called Apokatastasis, which means something like “the end will be like the beginning.”
So, all that to say, logos spermatikos may invoke unnecessary ecclesiatical condemnations. Instead of getting into all that, I would go with what Augustine taught about the proliferation of God’s Wisdom, God’s providence. In On Christian Teaching he draws on the story of Israel taking the gold and silver from Egypt as they leave for the Promised Land: “Just as the Egyptians had not only idols and grave burdens which the people of Israel detested and avoided, so also they had vases and ornaments of gold and silver and clothing which the Israelites took with them secretly when they fled, as if to put them to a better use.” But, then he adds that these wonderful treasures of the Egyptians are actually from God too: “These are, as it were, their gold and silver, which they did not institute themselves but dug up from certain mines of divine Providence, which is everywhere infused, and perversely and injuriously abused in the worship of demons” (De doctrina christiana 2.40.60). Augustine provides the same sort of logic for supporting Chris’ point about the way God’s truth permeates the entire cosmos without getting into ancient controversies.
By the way, Chris, thanks for checking out the site. I hope you continue to converse with us.
And to other folks out there: please check out Chris’ site. It’s only a week old and he already has plenty of interesting posts to chew on.
15 Chris Klopp // May 23, 2006 at 9:33 am
Actually, I was referring to Justin Martyr’s use of the term logos spermatikos in his Second Apology, ch.13. Speaking of the “Word” that had been sown among philosophers before the advent of Christ, he writes:
Two important considerations in regard to “pagan” celebrations, literature and art follow from this:
1) Whatever is “rightly said” is the “property” of Christians, since whatever reality the “pagans” are able to see comes from the “sowing of the implanted word.”
2) Secondly, since the suffering Jesus is the full expression of the Logos, all other expressions of logos are necessarily limited and need to be weighed against Christ’s example.
The Augustine quote is also a favorite of mine, and I use it often when talking to people who can’t accept the Christianization of “pagan” culture. The main point in all of this is that Christians are free to make use of whatever is true in this world, provided we do so with discernment.
Thanks for advertising my blog, Isaac.
16 Fritz // Aug 31, 2006 at 12:32 am
hmm…me thinks that Rowlings approach of making sorcery a thing that people can get exited about, is definetly wrong. Your friends are right: Sorcery is always the use of force over other things and that includes living things, too!
If a boy can inflict damages on others (there these spells in the book, like the “Death Spell”), what example does it set for the world? And what should kids (apparently main-target group for book) think the next time they get into an argument with their parents or friends? “I wish I could use the invisible/twitch/DEATH spell on them?”
Is this something a true Christian would think about???
Sorry to say this: Anyone calling themselves a true Christian and Potter fan at the same time is “biast” in my opinion…
17 Danny // Dec 29, 2006 at 11:13 pm
OK. Lets not forget that we are talking about a book not inspired by God and not to be used as a “guide” but an instrument of entertainment. Why do people always take things so litterly. Why do Christians think that every thing printed or depicted or whatever is always an attack if it doesn’t quite jive with their particular view of the world. You all need to remember that the only… I repeat ONLY God inspired “Book”, and the only source that we have to take seriously for our salvation is the BIBLE everything else is entertainment
18 Vince Klortho // Apr 3, 2007 at 11:13 am
Fritz, if you’re wishing death on your parents, it’s not the book’s fault. Would it be more morally acceptable for them to wish they had a gun?
This whole dilemma, it seems, stems from the friends’ inability to imagine a world different from our own. I play roleplaying games, and I recently came across a player who was a Mormon. In the midst of a conversation someone mentioned the fact that characters in a game weren’t neccessarily Christian, as the worlds they tend to inhabit have their own religious structures that are distinct from our own, to which this particular player responded, “All of MY characters are Christian.”
This strikes me as part of the same phenomena – a refusal to accept the rules of the game, as it were. There is a distinction between those who recognize fantasy as distinct from our own world and those who either cannot or refuse to because of their theological beliefs.
As far as whether a “real” Christian can read Harry Potter or not, I’m afraid I’m not much of an authority, since I’m not a Christian. I would point out, though, that those who make that claim would also be claiming that a “real” Christian couldn’t watch Disney movies, or the Wizard of Oz, or any animated movie at all, for that matter (since they portray real-world things behaving in a way that neccessitates a re-definition of their natures – fish can’t talk, but they do in cartoons). They can’t watch Shakespeare or read Dickens – and forget about anything on television. Basically, you have to read and enjoy only things that present the world as it is, and agree with the Judeo-Christian worldview.
I didn’t realize that imagination was a sin.
19 Cori Warner // Jun 18, 2007 at 8:09 pm
I’m with Vince on this one. Let me add that those who oppose the Potter books can also eliminate basically every children’s book ever written from their family’s library. Fairy tales, which abound with “supernatural” creatures, talking animals, and fairies are obviously taboo. Tommy De Paola’s book “Strega Nona”, and “Country Christmas Angel”, both which are wonderful and teach lessons about kindness, humilty, and accepting people as they are can’t possibly be read in a Christian home; Strega Nona is a folk witch, and Santa Claus is a pagan myth. Dr. Suess books; If the cat in the hat doesn’t possess magic, then what means allow him to create such fantastic mayhem? Have you ever seen a fox in sox that tox (sorry, talks?) These books are harmless, teach good lessons, and encourage children to learn and love books. These books show children that the written word can open the mind and imagination, and reveal new ways to look at the mundane. Christians need to focus on things that really matter, and leave poor Harry alone..
Cori
Leave a Comment