two weeks of replies, ctl-F for YOUR name or topic

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 138886

> >>Betsy Hp: 
> > If Dumbledore didn't have a definite trust in Snape's overall
> > goodness, (snip) I *really* doubt he'd have allowed him to be a
> > teacher. (Not all Order members are teachers after all.)

> >>Catlady: 
> And not all teachers are Order members. I can't believe Dumbledore 
> had a definite trust in Lockhart's overall goodness, as he knew    
> about Lockhart's real line of work (Memory Charm: "Impaled on your 
> own sword, Gilderoy?")

Betsy Hp:
Yes, but Lockhart wasn't a member of a terrorist organization.  
Professor Sprout might not be an Order member, but she isn't off 
planning or participating in killing folks.  For Dumbledore to bring 
Snape into Hogwarts and put him in a position of power over the 
children under Dumbledore's charge means, to me anyway, that 
Dumbledore *must* have believed that Snape was no longer a Death 
Eater and had no sort of attraction to the Death Eater lifestyle.  
He must have believed in Snape's overall goodness.  Just as I'm sure 
he believed in Lockhart's overall harmlessness.  (And Lockhart *was* 
harmless until cornered, *anyone* can become dangerous when 
cornered.)

And Dumbledore did more than just hire Snape for a year-long 
position.  He hired Snape for the duration and made him a Head of 
House.  Dumbledore definitely trusted Snape; his actions show us as 
much.

Betsy Hp