Harry Potter is not a Horcrux

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 164484

hpcentaurwrote:
> >
> > Harry Potter is not a horcrux because then it would be against
JKR's religion (Christianity). In the real world if someone has a
other soul in him then the person is possessed, by a demon for
example. But if someone is possessed then the demon (other soul) takes
control of the body where it is in. If Harry was possessed then don't
you think that Voldemort would just take control of Harry without
having to do a ritual to come back to life?
> > <SNIP>
> >
> 
> Ken replies:
> 
> "in the real world" there isn't such a thing as a soul (that anyone
has ever been able to find) and in any case it's just a story so even
if Rowling believes in souls it doesn't mean she has to toe the party
line in her fiction.

Carol adds:
Nor is belief in possession "the party line" for all Christians. At a
guess, it's one of the elements of the story that the Fundamentalists
are railing *against." Belief in possession may be part of the Roman
Catholic tradition (note that it's usually Catholic priests who
exorcise the evil spirits in horror stories and films).

Belief in the human soul is another matter altogether, and is a key
component of all Christian denominations and many other religions, as
well. JKR as a Christian (a Protestant but not a Fundamentalist)
almost certainly believes in the soul, but I seriously doubt that she
believes in possession, which is not part of RL for most readers, either.

That does not mean, of course, that possession can't play a role in
her books. Ginny is possessed on and off throughout CoS, and Harry is
possessed briefly in OoP. Quirrell is, if not possessed, inhabited by
Vapormort for almost the entire first book. 

But Horcruxes and possession aren't exactly the same thing. The
Harry!Horcrux supporters (and I'm not one of them) aren't arguing that
Harry is possessed by Voldemort's soul, the ragged remnant of which is
now inside his own restored body. They're arguing that a *bit* or
fragment of Voldemort's soul, split off by the murder of Harry's
mother, entered the cut on his forehead and is now encased in the
scar, much as a soul bit is deliberately encased in an object (or
possibly a living creature like Nagini) to create a Horcrux. They
think that a Horcrux can be created accidentally. Some, not all, of
them think that the spell can be performed in advance (which still
doesn't explain how the soul bit got into Harry, who surely wouldn't
be an ideal container for the soul bit created from his own murder). 

At any rate, while I entirely agree with hpcentaur that Harry is not a
Horcrux, I disagree that her religion has anything to do with it. I
simply think that the arguments for an accidental Horcrux are
unconvincing, that the powers in his scar can be otherwise explained,
and that the whole concept would cause unnecessary plot complications
in an already complex plot. 

Carol, doubting that anyone on the list thinks that Harry is possessed
whether or not they think his scar is a Horcrux