I’ve Been Paged!

… By Christopher over at Against the Grain in his page over the Harry Potter novels and Pope Benedict XVI’s alleged disapproval of them.

Since the Holy Father’s election, Potter naysayers have been having a field day with a German-language article that claimed that the then-Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger had denounced J. K. Rowling’s mega-popular children’s series.  As the release date for the latest installment draws near, the frenzy has become even more strident.  So, the question is, did the Pope disapprove of the series?  The answer:  No, because no such statement has been offered by Pope Benedict during his pontificate.  Well, what about the alleged disapproval of Cardinal Ratzinger?  Here’s my response:

  • As far as I know, the letter sent to the German critic Gabriele Kuby has not been published.  According to Lifesite.net (the site that offers an article that blares "Pope Benedict Opposes Harry Potter Novels"), Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter was quoted by Kuby in a German-language interview she gave to the Zenit news agency.  If the letter has been published, then I would have to read it in order to determine whether the Cardinal had been giving a private opinion or was speaking in his capacity as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
  • According to Kuby, as mediated through the Zenit report, Ratzinger said: "It is good that you shed light and inform us on the Harry Potter matter, for these are subtle seductions that are barely noticeable and precisely because of that deeply affect (children) and corrupt the Christian faith in souls even before it (the Faith) could properly grow."  Please note that the glosses in parentheses are probably not Cardinal Ratzinger’s.  One would have to see the letter itself to confirm the context of the glosses.  Even if accurate, there is still a lot of context missing.  What exactly does the "these" in the clause that starts "for these are subtle seductions" refer to?  As of yet, there is no way to know.
  • Cardinal Ratzinger may simply be giving a politely general response to the concerns of a correspondent, affirming that her concerns for the faith of children are valid without necessarily affirming that the series itself indeed causes such dangers.  If the intriguing "these" simply refers to the concerns she raised and not to alleged problems in the Potter series, then the quote says nothing of the Cardinal’s opinion of the series.  Analogously, if someone wrote to Catholic Answers asking me if such-and-so liturgical abuse was a legitimate concern, I could say yes without saying anything about the particular circumstances at the correspondent’s parish. 
  • Let’s say for the sake of argument that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger has read the Harry Potter novels and agrees with the Potter critics that they are bad.  What does that prove?  If he was speaking privately as an independent literary critic, not much beyond the fact that they are not his cup of tea.  If he was speaking privately as a theologian troubled by theological issues in the series, then his opinion would carry the weight of the private analysis by an orthodox and well-respected Christian theologian.  Only if he had been writing as head of the CDF would magisterial authority begin to be a question.

The trouble with articles like the one on Lifesite is that they cause a lot of controversy without much substance.  The same was true a couple of years ago when Roman exorcist Fr. Gabriele Amorth nixed the Potter series.  Naysayers pounced on this and trumpeted it to fans of the series while failing to mention that Fr. Amorth was only speaking on his own authority and not the Church’s.  Now that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger has become Pope Benedict XVI, naysayers are hoping to stir the cauldron again.  Granted, the remarks should be discussed, even investigated, to ascertain what was said and the context in which it was said.  But misleading headlines and sensationalistic articles are not the way to foster calm and reasoned inquiry.

20 thoughts on “I’ve Been Paged!”

  2. Michelle,
    Thanks for the link and the post — in case you didn’t catch the humor of my quip about the issue having “potential for division on an international scale”, I agree completely with your assessment of the matter. =)

  4. “Let’s say for the sake of argument that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger has read the Harry Potter novels and agrees with the Potter critics that they are bad. What does that prove?”
    It proves that Benedict XVI is an exemplary Christian and courageous defender of the Catholic faith and that he did something, far from being something to be embarassed about, downplay or nuanced to death, that was in fact praiseworthy, something Catholics should be proud of and pay heed to, and is one the marks of a living saint.

  5. So…disliking Harry Potter is a hallmark of being a living saint? I guess I’m not one, then. I enjoy the books.
    Ack. Maybe it would be best not to get into that discussion here.

  6. It proves that Benedict XVI is an exemplary Christian and courageous defender of the Catholic faith and that he did something, far from being something to be embarassed about, downplay or nuanced to death, that was in fact praiseworthy, something Catholics should be proud of and pay heed to, and is one the marks of a living saint.
    Talk about begging the question!

  7. It’s interesting to note that George Cardinal Pell approved of the books and even enjoyed them. Even though he is a man of great orthodoxy, I still personally disagree with him. I like to play it safe and ask myself, WWJT (What would Jesus think?). Today we have people who practice wicca and claim that it is not evil, but for good. Still, we as Catholics would not want to portray wicca in a positive light. Likewise, the adventures of Harry Potter portray magic as being a positive tool in the fight against evil. This cannot be, though, since magic itself is evil (And i’m not talking about pulling rabbits out of hats, either).

  8. I’d suggest reading this essay, a critique of Michael O’Brien’s book, A Landscape with Dragons. It doesn’t address Harry Potter correctly, but contains a lot of points about the nature of fantasy in general, in my opinion, Potter naysayers tend to miss. O’Brien is one of the most vocal critics of Harry Potter, and this review evalutes his criteria for examining the morality of fantasy. The reviewer is an Orthodox Catholic who has read and reviewed plenty of fantasy, both the good and the bad. [url]http://www.pax-romana.net/refracted/michaelobrien.html[/url]

  9. If any magic in fiction is evil, then do you also disapprove of Lord of the Rings?
    I can try to find a lovely essay I read about the differences between Potter-style magic and LotR and real-world magic, if you’d like.

  10. “If any magic in fiction is evil, then do you also disapprove of Lord of the Rings?”
    Well, I look at it this way. If it wouldn’t be acceptable in real life, it’s probably not best to be encouraging young minds, who are easily moldable to be engaging in magic or to have heroes that are wizards. If someone wants to write a good fiction book, why don’t they stress the power of intercessory prayer or something along those lines to combat evil? Why is sorcery always the conduit for combating evil?I would love to see the kids of today have heroes like the saints and Jesus than people like Gandoff the Grey or Harry Potter. Just my opinion. Maybe it’s just me being a rigid old hardliner. Jimmy, please counter my argument if you like.

  11. Alois, Steven Greydanus has already addressed the issue of the morality of magic in film and literature. LawfulGood has posted the link above.

  12. The wizards & witches in the HP books do not practice Wicca nor are Wiccan ceremonies part of the books in any way. The magic in the books is of the flying broom & magic wand sort – it’s purely fantasy magic that could never happen here in real life. No demons are conjured, no Satanic purposes to the use of the magic the kids are learning. In fact, Rowling makes it quite clear that all students in the HP books are to take the Defense Against the Dark Arts classes. I do find some aspects of the HP books troubling but I just don’t find the arguements agains HP all that consistent or convincing.
    Alois, you do need to read the Greydanus piece, it’s extremely well done. Tolkien was a very devout Catholic. Read in that light, LOTR takes on a deeper relevance in the lives of Christians. And what of Lewis’ Narnia books the the Deep Magic used there? Isn’t it possible to write about magic in literature that has nothing to do with the sort of real world “magic” condemned in the Bible? Seems so. And, remember, the HP series isn’t finished. The jury’s still out until we know where Jo Rowling takes the last 2 books.

  13. ‘Are these magic cloaks?’ asked Pippin, looking at them with wonder.
    ‘I do not know what you mean by that,’ answered the leader of the Elves. ‘They are fair garments, and the web is good, for it was made in this land. They are elvish robes certainly, if that is what you mean…’ (Tolkien 361).
    I’m no expert on Harry Potter, but Tolkien takes great pains to distinguish “magic” in the LOTR from what we would consider magic (the attempt to change the nature of the created universe to satisfy our personal will). For instance, wizards in LOTR are not men (actually, the posthumous History of Middle-Earth series makes it quite clear that they are incarnate angels). And, of course, the elves are not men as such. The so-called magic conducted by both wizards and elves are thus powers within their proper sphere. Humans and hobbits never do any conjuring or “magic.” The closest they come is when they use the Ring of power, and that is a condemned act.
    Finally, it is worth mentioning that the Tolkien never justifies any evil act, even if good results from it. Providence often shows mercy to those who choose ill, but it never suggests that breaking sound rules is therefore acceptable (I’m thinking specifically of Bilbo and the Arkenstone in the Hobbit).
    If I recall, Fr. Amorth’s objection to Harry Potter had less to do with the presence of fantastical magic than it did with the novels’ disregard for authority combined with fantasy.

  14. Am I the only suspicious person who thinks the scans of the Ratzinger letters on LifeSite look like a hoax?

  15. “So…disliking Harry Potter is a hallmark of being a living saint? I guess I’m not one, then. I enjoy the books.”
    Benedict has been described as a living saint by an anonymous woman quoted by Cardinal Francis George soon after the election. Cardinal Francis also quoted another person as describing him as a “humble genius.”

  16. Humm, this reminds me.
    This not being spoiler-warning, I will not go into details, but in the latest book, Harry Potter is definitely growing out of the contempt for authority that was the source of a number of complaints.

  20. Codeine.

    How codeine effects the brain. Liquid codeine. Pseudoephedrine with codeine cough syrup. Cocaine and codeine. 222 isolate codeine. Codeine source of. What is codeine.

Comments are closed.