Harry Potter, the 10 commandments, and "witches" [very long]

[Elizabeth Dalton]

No: HPFGUIDX 30790

Hi folks,

Once upon a time I was on another list that purported to be HP for Grownups
(though it wasn't). I wrote and posted a version of the following, which was
reasonably well received. I thought I'd post it here and see what you all
thought. As far as I know, this hasn't been done for the whole list of ten
before, though I understand someone else started the job. Doubtless they did a
better job than I will do, but hey, it's something. I did search the lexicon on
"commandments" and didn't find anything. So here goes....

--
This is intended as a brief analysis of the "morality" of the Harry
Potter books based on whether/how often the major protagonists violate the ten
commandments (plus an extra section at the end on witches and divination).
Naturally, this is a pretty limited standard by which to measure morality, even
from a Christian point of view, but I'm just not up for a detailed analysis from
a pseudo-pauline standpoint right now. And this is long enough. (Probably too
long. Sorry.)

Disclaimer: I'm a Quaker Universalist, which makes me either a very liberal
Christian or not a Christian at all (depending on your point of view); I regard
the Bible as a semi-historical record of the efforts of a particular culture to
understand the divine. Whether or not you, the reader, agree with me on this may
affect your opinion of what I write, naturally enough. These are only the
interpretations of one amateur theologian, not meant as definitive. Feel free to
hit "delete" now. :)

Additional note: my Bible is the Revised Standard.

Ok, here we go with the commandments themselves, in order:

1 - You shall have no other gods before me

No problem here, really. The Harry Potter universe seems to be devoid of any
references to God or religion. (Some might say that *that* is a major problem,
but my guess is that Rowling is simply avoiding identifying with any particular
church or sect. And the books haven't said so far what the inhabitants of
Hogswart do on Sundays. They do celebrate Christmas, which I find interesting.)

2 - You shall not make for yourself a graven image...

Again, no problem. One might argue that the statue of Salazar Slytherin in the
Chamber of Secrets counts, but the one using it is Tom Riddle/Voldemort, so we
can hardly blame Harry & co. for his actions.

3 - You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.

Nobody does this in the books, that I can see. Maybe it's in the dialogue that
JKR leaves out, to which Hermione responds, "Ron!" but we don't need to assume
that, as there are plenty of other things he could have said to get that
reaction.

4 - Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

Again, perhaps they do, and Rowling simply doesn't mention it. Not all days are
accounted for. (Ok, that one's a stretch, but we needn't assume they don't keep
the Sabbath, either.)

5 - Honor your father and your mother...

I think it's clear that Harry honors the memory of his parents. Indeed, hearing
others dishonor them is one of the few things that can put him over the edge,
e.g. at the beginning of PoA when he blows up Aunt Marge. It can be argued that
he has not always acted out of respect for the sacrifice they made for him, and
in fact Lupin makes this point in PoA, to Harry's great shame. Harry is not
perfect-- he's a child, after all, but he knows right from wrong.

Arguably, he doesn't honor his parental replacements, the Dursleys. On the other
hand, they don't treat him as their child. He certainly does respect Dumbledore
and McGonnagal, whom I feel are much more valid candidates for in loco parentis,
as the headmaster of the school and head of his house. Probably he should trust
them more, and go to them earlier when he runs into trouble, but I think his
history of not having adults who were trustworthy amply explains his unreadiness
to trust even such helpful adults. On the other hand, this behavior of his isn't
held up to the reader as being particularly good. See below for more on this.

6 - You shall not kill.

Not only doesn't Harry kill anyone, but he stops Black and Lupin from killing
someone whom he has every reason to despise. None of the other protagonists have
verifiably killed anyone yet, either. Voldemort, on the other hand, is clearly
identified as a villain by his disregard for the lives of others.

7 - You shall not commit adultery.

Well, all the kids are a bit young for this, I guess (and we don't know if any
of the staff are married). Certainly nothing is mentioned in the texts.

8 - You shall not steal.

Ok. This is one with some substance to it. But I would argue, overall, that
Rowling is slowly building the realization in Harry & co. (and the readers) that
theft isn't going to solve any of their problems. This, in my mind, makes the
books *more* moral, not less. Let's look at some specific examples.

Borrowing the car in CoS was foolish, but Harry and Ron had every expectation
that Ron's parents would be able to retrieve the car later, so I don't think
that's exactly stealing, either. In any case, it was clear that both Harry and
Ron were made to understand just how spectacularly bad an idea this was.

Harry, Ron, and Hermione definitely stole boomslang skin and some other
ingredients from Snape in CoS. It was an ill-thought venture, and I would argue
that they subsequently saw the error of their ways. After all, it didn't get
them the information they needed, and caused Hermione a lot of trouble. (The
whole polyjuice incident seems to have been a setup for GoF, anyway.)

The business about getting food from the house-elves doesn't sound like stealing
to me, even though everyone calls it that-- the house-elves are happy enough to
give the food to them, and Dumbledore never lists the kitchens as being
off-limits in his annual speeches. Dumbledore himself tells Harry that James had
primarily used the Invisibility Cloak to steal food (end of PS/SS) and gives the
cloak to Harry anyway.

Notably, Harry *doesn't* steal items from Hogsmead, even though he could easily
have done so while wearing the cloak of invisibility.

I don't think liberating Buckbeak in PoA counts, either. He seems to have
belonged to either Hagrid or the school, and Dumbledore told the kids to do it
in any case. Presumably Dumbledore would have the capacity to give Buckbeak to
anyone he chose, if he's the school's property, and Hagrid would have simply set
Buckbeak loose, if he'd thought that would help.

Dobby does steal gillyweed on Harry's behalf in GoF. Harry didn't ask him to,
and probably wouldn't have accepted the theft for any reason other than to save
Ron's life (he thought). And as it turns out that this wasn't necessary, I think
Harry regrets having taken Dobby's "assistance"-- surely Snape must know where
the gillyweed came from, and Harry knows he doesn't need any more trouble from
Snape.

The best case against any of the protagonists, as someone else pointed out to me
once, is probably Fred and George stealing the Marauder's Map from Filch. Note
that this is the only real theft that can be pinned on even these two. And
they're probably the biggest rule-breakers of the bunch.

The Marauder's Map is an especially interesting plot device that Rowling makes
use of for a number of purposes, and it's interesting in terms of this topic, as
well. Can something be stolen from someone who was never the rightful owner in
the first place? I'm not arguing that two wrongs make a right, but certainly
Filch wasn't willingly given the Map by anyone who legitimately owned it, and
Fred and George were aware of that when they took it. In fact, it can be argued
that the one with the strongest claim at the time it comes into Harry's hands is
Harry himself. He is the only descendent of the original makers, all of whom
have since left the school. It would appear that "Mooney, Paws, Wormtail &
Prongs" gave the map to one of the other students before they left, and
subsequently it was taken by Filch. Fred and George don't know who made the map,
of course. But they do willingly give it to Harry for no other purpose than
because they like him and feel sorry for him for being confined to Hogwarts when
his other friends are out having fun in Hogsmeade. I guessI feel that this
benevolence on their part balances out their having taken the thing in the first
place.

Mind, this was misplaced goodwill on their part-- as Lupin and Snape make clear
later. But even Lupin feels that Harry should have the map, once the threat
everyone thought Sirius had represented was past. So in my view (which is not
black and white), this isn't a serious case of theft.

9 - You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Note that this doesn't say "lie." Harry and the others certainly haven't been
bearing false witness. But I'll go further and address Harry's truthfullness in
general. I think he's a notably truthful boy, actually. He does lie on a small
number of occasions. He generally regrets it instantly or shortly afterward, and
Rowling usually doesn't let him gain anything from his moments of
untruthfulness.

In the first book, he goes along with a lie Hermione tells, about the troll. I
think he was too surprised to do much else, on this occasion. He also
deliberately lies to Quirrell/Voldemort about what he sees in the Mirror of
Erised. Generally I'm not one for relative morality arguments, but in this case,
telling the truth to Voldemort would definitely have been a greater evil than
lying about what he'd seen.

He tells Dumbledore he has nothing to tell him, in CoS, when actually he's been
hearing the basilisk for a while at that point. (He later realizes the error of
this action, and even at the time, he doesn't feel good about the deception.) He
and Ron tell McGonnagal that they are trying to visit Hermione, when actually
they are looking for clues. Again, I think by the end of CoS Harry and his
friends are starting to realize that they should have gone to Dumbledore
earlier, rather than trying to deal with all this on their own. And the readers
have a chance to realize that Harry & co. don't always make the best decisions.

Harry outright lies to Snape about where he got the items he bought in Hogsmead
in PoA (and unfortunately, involves Ron in this lie as well). And Lupin gives
him a lecture that makes him thoroughly ashamed of *that* whole adventure.
Again, the readers are clear that Harry has made an error, and knows it. 

Probably the most extended bout of lying he commits is his set of homework for
Trelawney in PoA. I'm not sure what to think of this set of incidents, as she's
essentially asked for the impossible. (Trelawney is also not treated as a
respectable adult by any of the protagonists, even the other adults-- see
below.) But I would say that overall Harry and his friends are steadily learning
that lying is not a good idea. And the adult protagonists of the series have
definitely stressed the virtue of truth (Dumbledore, in particular).

10 - You shall not covet [other people's stuff]

I think the only thing Harry has seriously coveted was the Firebolt, and he
seemed to get over it (even before Sirius sent him one). Arguably he was
obsessed by the Mirror of Erised, but he managed to break free of that, as well.
Admittedly, it's hard to put this to the test, as he's used to nothing at the
Dursley's, and he's quite wealthy in the wizard world. But he really doesn't
seem like a greedy kid. Arguably, he covets Ron's family-- but he doesn't want
to take anything away from Ron, either, so I'm not sure that counts.

Now, as a special extra bonus, I'd like to address the "witch" and "divination"
issues.

For reference, there's a website that does a rundown of the Wiccan religion with
respect to Christianity that I thought had some points that applied to Harry
Potter, as well-- though I recognize that the Harry Potter books are not Wiccan,
and neither is Rowling. It's just that the heat directed at the HP books seems
to be largely based on the fact that they're about "witches", so it seemed that
the same arguments would apply. Here's the URL:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/witchcr5.htm

The section of this site that I find particularly interesting goes back to the
original Hebrew and Greek terms included in the Bible, and later translated into
other languages (including English). I feel that going to the Bible to find out
what it has to say about these issues is the best way to address them, and going
to the oldest possible sources is the best approach to that. Quoting from this
site, here are two sections of interest:

On Witches:

--
  Most conservative Christians believe that the Bible contains many
  specific condemnations of Witchcraft, and that these denunciations
  apply to Wicca as well. (e.g. Exodus 22:18 - "Thou shalt not allow a
  Witch to live.") Liberal theologians point out that the word in the
  Hebrew Scriptures that is commonly translated as Witch or Witchcraft
  really refers to the practice of reciting curses which are intended to
  hurt or kill other people. The Greek word in the Christian Scriptures
  that is translated Witch is unrelated to Wicca. It would be better
  translated as "one who concocts potions to kill people," or simply
  "poisoner."
--

Even Snape, who certainly claims to be able to "stopper death," isn't going
around poisoning people. And the "Unforgivable Curses" are called that for a
reason. The worst Harry and the other protagonists do is the full-body bind (and
Hermione feels just awful about it). Even against Voldemort, Harry doesn't try
to use the death curse. Only the villains are evil by this standard-- and in
fact, it is a big part of what defines them as evil.

Harry and the others do, however, learn some "hexes" that cause someone to slow
down, be covered with boils, feel ticklish all over, etc. I guess it depends on
where you draw the line in defining "hurt".

On Divination:

--
  There are many verses in the Bible that prohibit certain methods for
  foretelling the future by the ancient Israelites. These include Exodus
  22:18, Leviticus 19:26-26; 19:31; 20:6; Deuteronomy 18:10-11;
  Isaiah 8:19 and Malachai 3:5. Of these, Deuteronomy 18 is perhaps
  the most important. They forbade the Israelites from engaging in
  eight specific practices. Various translations of the Bible use various
  ambiguous terms or phrases here: augur, black magic, calls up the
  dead, charmer, consults with spirits, divination, enchanter, fortune
  teller, interpret omens, look for omens, magician, medium,
  necromancer, observer of times, sorcerer, soothsayer, spiritist,
  weaves or casts spells, witchcraft, and wizard. The terms magician,
  sorcerer, spiritist, and witch have many different meanings.

  Clearly, translators have had a great deal of difficulty selecting unique
  English words or short phrases to match the Hebrew text. Returning to
  the original words:

    1.yid'oni Making contact with spirits (not of God). This would
       probably forbid the New Age practice of channeling. 
    2.sho'el 'ov Making contact with the dead. This would probably
       prohibit a medium from contacting the dead, as in Spiritualism. 
    3.qosem q'samim Foretelling the future by using lots. This would
       condemn casting runes, using the I Ching or a similar system 
    4.m'onen Predicting the future by interpreting signs in nature.
       (e.g. predicting the harshness of a winter by looking at moss on
       trees, or fur thickness on animals in the wild, or whether the
       groundhog sees his shadow) 
    5.m'nachesh Enchanting (perhaps related to nachash, a snake;
       i.e. snake charming) 
    6.chover chavar Casting evil spells by magical knot tying 
    7.m'khaseph evil sorcery; using spoken spells to harm other people
    8.doresh 'el hametim Literally "One who asks the dead", probably
       via another method than sho'el 'ov 
--

None of the protagonists have deliberately done any of these things, unless we
count chatting with the ghosts who are all over the castle, who don't seem
inclined or able to make predictions. It's clear that the major adult characters
regard divination as chancy at best and generally not something to respect or
rely on. And the kids have learned the pointlessness of divination as well, as a
result of their class with Trelawney. (Perhaps that's why Trelawny is kept on as
a teacher-- something I've often wondered about.) The centaurs do read stars,
but they aren't human, and I'm not sure what laws should apply to them. They
don't tell anyone else what they see, in any case (except for cryptic remarks:
"Mars is bright tonight.")

Harry is also quite clear on the futility of trying to communicate with the
dead, as revealed in his experiences with the Mirror of Erised in book 1 and the
Dementors in PoA. He knows that hearing his parents' last words again won't
bring them back. He didn't deliberately bring back their "shadows" in the wand
duel with Voldemort, and knows there's no point in trying to cause that to
happen again.

It is true that Harry talks with snakes. I'm not convinced his actions at the
zoo or in the dueling club count as "charming," though. He doesn't control or
direct the snake. Even at the dueling club, I'm not sure he can be said to have
"charmed" the snake. (And Dumbledore seems to feel that Harry's ability in this
regard is a leftover from Voldemort's attack.) It's interesting that Harry takes
the rap for the same kind of offense that the Bible warns against; in the wizard
world, conversing with snakes is about as well looked upon as it is in
conservative Christian circles.

I'll sum this up as follows: In general, I feel Harry and the other protagonists
of the series are generally quite moral according to the Biblical references
I've quoted here. When they fail, this is typically pointed out to the readers
and the characters come to see that their actions were wrong and/or inadvisable.
In my mind, this is the reason most of these rules were set down in the first
place: because they are bad habits to get into, generally because they undermine
our trust in one another. In short, it's hard to see what the fuss is about. I'd
be happy to have any kids in my care pay as much attention to good and evil,
right and wrong as Harry and his friends do (though I'd prefer none of them to
have to deal with as big an immediate evil threat as Voldemort, obviously).

Peace,

Elizabeth
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
"I hold that skepticism is a religious duty; men [and women] should
question their theology, and doubt more in order that they might
believe more."
  -- Lucretia Mott, from a speech at the Free Religious Association on
  June 2, 1871. (_Lucretia Mott: Her Complete Speeches and Sermons_.
  Dana Greene, Edwin Mellon Press, 1980, p360).