Dark Book - Draco - Calvinism

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 177329

Wynnleaf:
>   First, I'm a very strong Calvinist and I know my theology 
backward and forward, having, among other degrees, an undergrad 
degree in Biblical Studies from a college that teaches within 
Calvinist doctrine, and having studied under some of the best 
teachers of Calvinism in the 20th century.

lizzyben:

Thanks so much for offering your insights here. I was really curious 
about whether JKR's view actually reflects Calvinism or not.

Wynnleaf:
>   The idea, as I understand it, is that the characters in 
Slytherin are "ordained" to be in Slytherin and are reprobate.  That 
is, nothing they can do can make them "good."
>    
>   Characters in Gryffindor are "ordained" to be in Gryffindor and 
are therefore "the chosen" and are always considered "good," no 
matter what they do.

lizzyben:

That's about it. But it seems like, in the Potterverse, Slytherins 
are mostly incapable of good. Or if they do do good, it's for 
selfish reasons. While Gryffindors are consistently characterized 
as "good" because they are morally good & act in a noble, brave, 
chivalrous fashion. To JKR, it seems like character is set almost at 
birth - and people can't really change that character. So a bad kid 
will be a bad adult, and won't ever really be "good". She does seem 
(IMO) to consider Gryfs' *actions* to be superior to Slyths - so 
it's not so much that Slyths can't be good no matter what they do, 
but that they *won't* be good because they have bad character.

Wynnleaf:
>   The idea that being "chosen" means that it doesn't matter what 
you do, or how bad your actions are, you're still counted among 
the "good" just because you're chosen is actually considered 
antinomianism and is generally considered a heresy, even in Reformed 
(Calvinist) churches.  In Calvinism, the basic idea about actions is 
that if you're chosen by grace, then your *heart* is changed.  The 
focus is on heart change, not outward affilliation.  

lizzyben:

It seems like, in the Potterverse, the Sorting Hat can see into your 
heart & see your intrinsic nature. "You might belong in Gryffindor, 
Where dwell the brave at heart, Their daring, nerve, and chivalry 
Set Gryffindors apart" seems to imply that those of "good heart" 
will go to Gryffindor, while those who use bad actions or bad hearts 
get sorted Slytherin. ("Those cunning folks use any means 
To achieve their ends.") As Mus pointed out, the book says that 
Harry was "chosen" for Gryffindor, almost as a sign of grace or 
favor. So Gryffindor = those chosen by grace, of changed heart. But 
that breaks down pretty quickly, as posted below.

Wynnleaf:
>   If a person was first thought to have been chosen, but no 
corresponding change of heart was detected (generally through the 
person's actions and choices), then one would begin to seriously 
question whether the person were "chosen" at all.
So, if true Calvinism were really being played out symbolically 
in the HP series, I would think that someone would start to wonder 
why the supposed "good guys" were showing no greater goodness of 
heart than the bad guys.  

lizzyben:

That's what I wonder about. If Gryffindors are really supposed to be 
the "noble & good", why is it OK for them to to bad things? How can 
they be the good guys w/o showing goodness of heart? But sometimes 
it seems like JKR sees the characters very differently than we do - 
i.e. Hermione was totally justified in scarring Marietta, HBP!Ginny 
is funny & compassionate even though she hexes everyone, etc. So it 
seems like there's a big disconnect between what JKR is intending to 
portray & what really comes across. 

I do think that JKR believes that Harry, Hermione, Ron & the Gryfs 
have greater goodness of heart, & that they make better choices and 
take better actions. This was brought home in the Hogwarts scene 
where more Gryfs chose to stay than any other House, etc. It's just 
that her definition of "good" might be different from others'. If 
the Gryffindors really did show greater goodness of heart that the 
Slytherins, would that work as a Calvinist analogy?

Wynnleaf:
>   Many people outside of Calvinism assume that the belief is more 
organized around outward affiliation.  The "chosen" people all are 
identified by their verbal affiliation whereas what they actually 
do, how they act, the kind of people they are, doesn't make any 
difference.  But although common, that is a complete 
misunderstanding of Calvinist doctrine.  In reality, the sign 
of "election" is a changed heart.  Evidence of a changed heart and 
election is "made sure" by actions and choices that exemplify the 
state of the heart, not by claiming affiliation with a certain 
group.  

lizzyben:

So, choices and actions show that one has a changed heart. You can't 
claim to have a changed heart solely based on what group you belong 
to. But in Harry Potter, this gets messed up, because DD first tells 
Harry "It is our choices, Harry, that show what
we truly are, far more than our abilities." That seems to be in line 
w/what you have said above. But then DD says that Harry's choice to 
join a certain group (Gryfs) proves that he is better than the 
Slytherins. So in HP, it's both - your choices show your heart, AND 
claiming affiliation with a certain group proves you are "elect". 
It's like HP is using the misunderstanding of Calvinism that you're 
describing - that just belonging to a certain group makes you better 
than others. It's got the structure of Calvinism, but the actual 
morality is missing. 

There's a similar problem w/the "Christian message" of DH. JKR says 
that DH reflects her Christian beliefs, and this seems to play out 
w/Harry's death & resurrection - which seems to parallel the 
sacrifice & ressurection of Jesus. And Harry is repeatedly referred 
to as the "chosen one"/messiah. So Harry is Jesus. But how can he be 
Jesus when he's torturing people? Again, it's like the imagery is 
lifted, but the morality is left behind.

Wynnleaf:
>   If the HP series truly does send the message that being in 
Gryffindor makes you "good" or being in Slytherin makes you "bad," 
yet the actions and choices of the two do not reflect this, then 
that is *not* Calvinism, but antinomianism.  Do I think JKR, would 
consciously write something supporting that doctrinal position?  
Absolutely not. 
>    
>   wynnleaf

lizzyben:

Thank you! You've come up with the perfect word to describe the 
Potterverse - Antinomianism. 

an·ti·no·mi·an·ism 
NOUN: 1. Theology - The doctrine or belief that the Gospel frees 
Christians from required obedience to any law, whether scriptural, 
civil, or moral, and that salvation is attained solely through faith 
and the gift of divine grace. 2. The belief that moral laws are 
relative in meaning and application as opposed to fixed or 
universal.  
http://bartelby.com/61/39/A0343900.html

That seems to describe what JKR actually wrote much better than 
Calvinism (which has moral laws). Gryffindors, because they are 
Gryffindors, can break the school rules, can use Unforgiveable 
Curses, can hurt others, and it's all OK because they're members of 
the Good House & have faith in Dumbledore. I don't think that JKR 
would consciously write something that supports that position, but 
it seems to be what she's done.

Basically, IMO, I think JKR took some Calvinist precepts, added some 
Christian elements, threw in some Nazi imagery, added some revenge 
fantasy & wish-fulfillment, tossed in a large dose of 
dehumanization, added an overall flavor of antinomianism, and 
stirred it all together into a rancid mess. 


lizzyben