Catholic newspaper publishes debate about HP - what do people think?

[Carol]

Geoff wrote:
> Sorry, but I'm going to disagree with you.
> 
> As a Christian, I have argued on many occasions that Harry is a
Everyman. He is like a Christian on his or her journey through life.
> 
> I believe as an evangelical that no mortal person can be Christ or a
Christ figure. Jesus is God in human form. He alone is immortal and
can forgive sin. We, as believers, can be Christ-like as we try to
live according to what Jesus taught. We will be transformed only when
we leave his life.
>
Carol responds:

I think we need to look at what Professor Rialti is saying, which is,
IMO, absurd:

To quote the article:
"First, he said, the books teach that "evil is good," and that
violence, lying, trickery and manipulation can be positive if used to
obtain something good."

Carol comments:
I suppose that his position is based on Harry's use of the
unforgiveables in DH, but the point isn't developed, so I'm not sure.

Article continued:

"But the deeper problem, he [Rialti] said, is that the books advocate
gnosticism, the idea that a select elite can develop special powers
and gifts through specialized knowledge that is hidden from most
mortals -- or "muggles," as normal humans are called in Rowling's books."

Carol comments:
That last idea, that special knowledge can enable an elite to develop
special powers and gifts, shows a misunderstanding of the books, in
which no Muggle can learn magic and those who are born with the gift
are taught to control it. (That Voldemort and the DEs abuse the gift
has nothing to do wit Gnosticism or any esoteric knowledge having
given them the power in the first place. Voldemort isn't Faust.)

While it's possible to present an alternate Christian interpretation
(Harry as Christ figure or Geoff's Harry as Everyman), I think that
Rialti's opponent's argument that the books are about love and
friendship and self-sacrifice might be more persuasive for readers who
don't want to see religious (or anti-religious implications) at all.

Or we could react as Msgr. Peter Fleetwood did to an earlier attacker
of the HP books, as cited in the same article:

"Msgr. Fleetwood told Catholic News Service in 2005 that he received a
copy of the book in 2003 and wrote Kuby [the author of another book
suggesting that the HP series is dangerous] a four-page letter
explaining where he thought she may have misunderstood or read too
much into the books. He said he never heard back from her.

"Msgr. Fleetwood said the most appropriate way to judge Harry Potter
is not on the basis of theology, but according to the criteria of
children's literature and whether children will read the books willingly."

I thought that response was eminently reasonable and appropriate for
all readers, Christian or otherwise.

Carol, who thinks that the article presents a balanced approach to the
argument, but it's significant that Msgr. Fleetwood has the last word