[Fiction and fantasy are neutral and can be fine vehicles for literature, but
fantasy and fiction are given shape by their content. Fiction can be quite
influential, especially on children. Note: Magic is spelled here as "magick" to
refer to occult magick; "pagan" is used in the generic sense to refer to
non-Christian or pagan beliefs of the ancient world rather than to modern
Neopagan religions. The bulk of this article is on the last book, Harry Potter
and the Deathly Hallows, although there are opening brief comments on the sixth
book.]
John Granger, who has written on Harry Potter, says that the spell
Harry casts to conjure his guardian spirit, Expecto Patronum,
means that Harry is saying, "I wait for the Lord." However, patronus
(patronum is the form for the direct object) means, especially in
this context, guardian or protector.
Mariella Bozzuto, a Harry Potter fan who has a Master's degree in Latin,
states that Expecto Patronum means "I await a patron" but in the
context of Harry Potter, means something closer to "I await a guardian
spirit." She acknowledges that the word patronus is related to
the word pater, "father" in Latin. Bozzuto feels that "Harry is
not simply summoning a random guardian; he is looking for his father, or
a father figure, or anyone who will play that role for him. . . In a
sense, each time Harry uses the Patronus Charm he is
crying out: "I want to see my father!'" (http://tinyurl.com/2gkdh2).
However, Bozzuto apparently does not see any religious meaning here. One
must read a spiritual meaning into the text to state that the Patronus
indicates "Lord." As for Bozzuto's view that the Patronus spell
implies searching for a father figure, it is speculative at best,
especially since other characters, including adults, conjure Patronus
figures as well.
As pointed out in a previous CANA article, the Patronus spell is
similar to conjuring a thought-form or an animal spirit for protection.
To turn an occult spell into a metaphor for wanting to see the Lord is a
strange concept indeed, and is not supported by the context of the
books. One must already presume a Christian meaning to the books and
read it into the text in order to theorize such a meaning for the
Patronus spell. The clear reading is that the Patronus is a
protector or guardian spirit.
Many claim that when Harry's mother, Lily, died to protect her son,
this serves as an analogy to Christ dying for us. However, it's
explained in the fifth book and the seventh book that Harry is protected
because his mother's blood acts as a magical charm (33, 46, 47, 49, book
7). Dumbledore tells Harry that this is why Harry is put into his aunt's
home, because his aunt's blood carries the protection since she is the
sister of Harry's mother. But this charm wears off at age 17 - making
this supposed analogy to the sacrifice of Christ very weak indeed.
Christ did not die so we could have physical life on earth, but He died
so we could have eternal life with God. The sacrifice was the
willingness of Jesus to take on unimaginable suffering and death as the
penalty for sin. This sacrifice removed God's wrath on sin and provides
redemption through faith. Christ's death is not so much a protection as
it is a propitiation that offers redemption, and that redemption is
applied by grace through faith. To compare the atonement of Christ to
Lily's natural instinct to protect her son, and to compare the blood of
Christ shed for sins to Lily's blood being a charm only devalues the
message of what Christ did on the cross.
Harry's willingness to die towards the end of the book is pointed to
as symbolic of Christ's sacrifice. However, it is not even clear that
Harry dies (see next section). Moreover, Harry believed he had to die
because he contained a piece of Voldemort's soul and therefore,
Voldemort could not die if Harry was alive. Harry and Voldemort were
tied together in ways that cannot be a parallel to Christ and his
complete separation and distinction from Satan.
Moreover, the context of this book and of the whole series is a mixture
of occult and secular views, not Christian ones. Every CANA article on
the books has demonstrated how these books are not promoting Christian
values or worldviews. Without a Christian context - in fact, the context
is very unchristian - it is impossible to support the theory that these
books give the Christian gospel, as some claim.
Some have pointed to Christian symbolism in the books, but the meaning
of symbols changes over time and in cultures, and these same symbols
have also been pagan symbols. Even if one concedes that the unicorn, the
stag, the phoenix, etc. are exclusively Christian symbols in these
books, of what value is that when the behavior in the books is so
distinctly unchristian?
Speaking of the unicorn, it is the disembodied Voldemort (possessing the
body of Prof. Quirrell) who drinks the unicorn's blood in the first
book. How in the world is such a grotesque scenario a symbol of being
redeemed by the blood of Christ as claimed by John Granger (on a radio
program in which I was the other guest)? Christian symbols, images, and
terms do not mean the message is Christian. Christian references, if
they can be proved to even be such, can be merely cultural or
counterfeit, especially when interspersed with occult references that
are presented as good.
Despite possessing some good qualities, a boy who is a sorcerer,
motivated by revenge, studies the magick arts, and who lies so easily
cannot and should not be held up as a sacrificial Christ figure or even
as a mere role model.
Some claim that Harry figuratively dies in each book, including this
one, and is "resurrected." Harry comes close to dying but there is no
such thing as resurrection if there is no real death. Any correspondence
to the death and resurrection of Christ is so beyond possibility that it
is difficult even to entertain the idea. (In fact, the Resurrection
stone in the book, a magickal Hallows object, brings back dead people,
but they are not fully alive and cannot function normally).
The question of whether Harry dies in this book is unclear. After an
encounter with Voldemort, in which it seems Voldemort slays him with his
wand, Harry finds himself in a unidentifiable place resembling a train
station. Here he meets up with the dead Dumbledore who explains to him
that Harry has been tied to Voldemort through Voldemort taking Harry's
blood (in the fourth book in a ghastly and gruesome ritual) and so has
kept himself alive. Dumbledore tells Harry, "I think we can agree that
you are not dead" (712).
Given that Dumbledore tells Harry he is not dead, it seems that he (Harry) did not die but was close to dying, temporarily between life and death.
Harry, as the hero, should model behavior that we would want children
to learn from or emulate. Although Harry does do some good things, such
as saving his enemy Draco Malfoy, and Harry shows courage in many
situations, Harry has no remorse and few consequences from lying and
cheating; he seeks revenge in many cases; he hates; and he can be cruel
(examples of this behavior are documented in other CANA articles on
Harry Potter). Being brave and loyal to friends is admirable, but these
qualities by themselves are not moral since anyone -- good or bad -- can
be brave and loyal.
Before we can say the books are about good versus evil, we have to see
what the good is and how it is defined. It is apparent in this book, and
in the others, that good is based on how things turn out -- the ends
justify the means. This is pragmatism, a philosophy in which any action
can be rationalized for what is perceived as a good or useful end. But
it is not about what is good so much as what is expedient. Harry cannot
be a good hero simply by being the hero; and skillful fighting with
spells is neither admirable nor good, especially since magick is neutral
in the books but is denounced by God.
I can already envision the emails that will come in response to this
article (partly because I have received such emails in the past) -
emails defending Harry because of all the great things he has done. It
seems that this justifies any immoral actions on Harry's part. This is
the kind of thinking prevalent today, and it is coming mostly from young
people who email me. Does not that kind of reasoning and justification
disturb anyone else?
The popularity of the Harry Potter books does not give them a pass.
Test all things; hold fast what is good (1 Thessalonians 5.21).
Questions for Christian parents and readers are: Would Christians be
okay with the books if they weren't so popular? What if these books were
barely known? Would Christians normally think that books about a boy,
motivated by revenge and using the magic arts, are good for children to
read, and that books full of themes of death and torture are okay for
children?
What a contrast we see between a series promoting a hero who uses occult
arts with Acts 19.18-19, which tells us that former practitioners of
magick, upon their faith in Christ, burned their very valuable books.
Not only were they renouncing their practices, they destroyed books
worth a hefty amount of money (verse 19 tells us the total is "fifty
thousand silver coins" or drachmas, equivalent then to 50,000 work day
wages, or today to about $10,000 U.S. dollars). This was not about book
burning, but rather was a demonstration that they no longer placed any
value on their former practices. It was a visible and public sign of
cutting ties with their past. They had come to know the One with the
highest value of all: Jesus Christ, and the redemption by grace through
faith in Him.
Explaining away magick as a metaphor goes against the straightforward
narrative and the clear, literal reading of the text, especially when
specific occult practices and examples are referenced such as
divination, astrology, casting spells, potions mixed for spellcasting,
numerology, communication with the dead, amulets, charms, and
occult/pagan views of death.
There are positives in the books: adventurous story lines, comedy, Harry
and his friends doing good things for others, Harry's bravery, etc.
However, the books also contain disturbing and macabre material,
questionable moral actions, endorsement of occult practices, and other
material inappropriate for young people.
For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart.
Matthew 12.34
Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which
are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. Ephesians 5.4
But now you also, put them all aside: anger, wrath, malice, slander,
and abusive speech from your mouth. Colossians 3.8
Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word
as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that
it will give grace to those who hear. Ephesians 4.29
And many of those who practiced magic brought their books together
and began burning them in the sight of everyone; and they counted up the
price of them and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. Acts
19.19
Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Romans
12.14
See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do
good to one another and to everyone. 1 Thessalonians 5.15
Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of
God, for it is written, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the
Lord. Romans 12.19
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. Titus 2.11-14
~ Soli Deo Gloria!
| << Previous Page | 1 2 3 | Next Page >> |