When I started sending out book proposals over a year ago for God and Harry at Yale, part of me never believed that I was up to the task of writing a book. Books are long. They have chapters and indexes and titles. They take an awful lot of time and you have to fill up an awful lot of pages, and as I stared at the blank computer screen in front of me, I just didn’t think it would happen.
Until I was about three-quarters of the way through the draft, a part of me was sur that God and Harry at Yale would never be a reality. I had so much evidence to back my claim up: I’d never written a book before; I only had ten weeks to complete a draft; I didn’t really know what I was doing because I’d never written a book before (ooh, did I say that already?). Yet sentence by sentence and page by page, I created one, because despite everything that made me think writing a book was too lofty a goal, I trusted a gut instinct, a belief that I could complete it.

Though this is a story about writing and not about God, it’s still a story about faith. People who possess faith in God, or for that matter anything else, may or may not have compelling evidence to support that belief (see last week’s post), but they believe nonetheless. For some people, that faith feels solid or feels like a given while for others, it becomes a journey full of questioning and doubt.

Faith is also one of the central themes in the Harry Potter books. Certain characters seem to have no trouble trusting in the ideals of love while others find it a struggle or a journey. Consider Neville Longbottom. From our first encounters with him, Neville has undying loyalty to love and because of that, he remains loyal to Harry and Dumbledore’s Army even in the darkest days of the war.Luna Lovegood is another example of firm faith: she also remains loyal to the DA and to the ideals of love and friendship, as seen by the mural on her bedroom wall and the frequency with which she checks the DA coins. Of course, some may say that Luna’s faith has a kind of nutty dimension to it, too: she trusts in the existence of wildly-named beings no one else believes in, but that’s for another time!

There are also characters in the series for whom faith is more of a struggle, and Harry is perhaps the best example of this. Harry undergoes a crisis of faith in book seven which causes him to reevaluate everything Dumbledore was and everything he stood for. He questions whether to continue searching for Horcruxes and whether to trust in friendship or go it alone, among other things. It takes a lot of internal development for Harry to commit to these beliefs: he has to learn to negotiate evidence that contradicts them (i.e. Rita Skeeter’s book) and he must come to terms with the consequences of belief and loyalty to love (i.e. he must give his life). What is clear from Harry’s story is that faith is a journey for him, just as it is for many of us.

In this way, I’d like to suggest that the depictions of faith in the series mirror the way that many Christians live out their faith. For some, faith comes naturally, as it does to Neville and Luna, but for others, it feels more like a wandering, switchback-ridden path. This means that the Harry Potter books understand faith in a way that resonates with the way Christians understand it and experience it not at a dogmatic level, but at a gut one.

And so we conclude our last meeting together at the Hog’s Head. I hope that this discussion about faith will be meaningful to you, regardless of your beliefs. I also hope that these posts have been helpful in showing the way in which Christian thought is reflected in—and not contradicted by—Harry Potter. I look forward to reading all your thoughts, and keep in touch! I’ve really enjoyed being in class with you.

Grades will be posted on Monday at midnight following the completion of….ooh, sorry. Guess I got carried away there!
I believe that you’ll all be getting an A.

Get it? BELIEVE that you’ll be getting an A?

I have faith that you got it now. Oops…there’s another one.

All right, all right. Enough joking. Class dismissed.

Related Posts

• Poll Results and New Poll (Shades of Good)
• Who’s the Hero? Harry or Dumbledore?
• The Quad on the Quad
• A Friday Folly & A Friday Forum Reminder
• Enter Evil…and we’re not even talkin’ Voldy!

So other classes may be suspended for Labor Day, but not ours! Today we’re going to discuss revelation. Not the Book of but how God is revealed to humans. (As an aside, one of my professors once told me to remember that the biblical book is the Book of Revelation, not Revelations. Now every time I hear someone say Revelations, I think, “Oh no!” and now you will too!)

Anyway, when Christians talk about revelation (not the Book of) they’re talking about how they receive knowledge about God that is authoritative. We all know how hard it is to get truthful knowledge about other things—enter Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise’s marriage—so imagine how much harder it is to evaluate what’s true when it comes to an ineffable, abstract, possibly-non-existent being! That’s why Christians have said there are several reliable places in which God is revealed. These vary slightly from denomination to denomination, but I am going to talk about four common ones here: Scripture, reason, tradition, and experience. Together they are known as the Methodist Quadrilateral, and they are commonly accepted sources in many traditions.

First, Scripture. Super unsurprisingly, Christians believe that the Bible says something truthful about who God is and how God relates to humans. I would say that of all the four sources I’m going to discuss this is the one that bears the least resemblance to Harry’s world. There are no books quite like the Bible in Harry’s world, but it’s interesting that the authoritativeness of books is definitely a hot topic: Tom Riddle’s Diary, the Half-Blood Prince’s textbook, and Rita Skeeter’s biography of Dumbledore are just several examples of books that actually sway people from believing what is true rather than revealing it. Books, it seems, are sketchy.

Next up, reason. Christians believe that when they think logically about God, it can reveal something truthful about the divine-human relationship. Reason is also important in Harry’s world. Characters like Hermione and Dumbledore use their smarts in the service of revealing love (aside: I said in a previous blog post that I consider love to be the equivalent of God in the series. You’re welcome to debate that, if you like). One great example is how Hermione creates S.P.E.W. for the liberation of house-elves after learning about and researching how they’re treated.

Third is tradition. When Christians talk about tradition, they’re talking about the traditions of the Church, and they consider those to reveal truth about God. The wizarding world also has its own set of traditions that reveal love—Christmas dinners and the opening banquet at Hogwarts are two examples that immediately come to mind.

Finally, experience. I think this is the most interesting source of revelation both for Christians and in Harry’s world. For Christians, experience is the most controversial of the sources because people can share the same event and yet have different experiences of it. Take Jon and Kate’s marriage. Two people in the same relationship and two very different takes on it! You can also consider how people react to violence. For one person, being in a car accident can be psychologically traumatizing while another walks away with a broken arm but nothing else. That makes experience a tricky source of revelation—if two people can have opposite experiences of the same event, then who’s right? This is a question that pops up in Harry’s world, too. Take Harry’s experience of Dumbledore in books 1 through 4. In those books, Harry sees Dumbledore is a reliable, almost infallible wizard whose protection is a given. Then note Harry’s experience of Dumbledore in the later books. He’s suddenly a person with many flaws, so many, in fact, that Harry wonders whether Dumbledore’s mission and values are worth trusting at all. And so book seven becomes a faith journey in which Harry must explore and decide for himself how his experiences of Dumbledore are trustworthy.

Wow, there is so much more to say here. I’ve touched upon just a few examples of how these sources appear in the series, but I hope you’ll think of many more! And so, this lecture is complete. Let the discussion begin!

Related Posts

• Poll Results and New Poll (Shades of Good)
• Who’s the Hero? Harry or Dumbledore?
• Faith in Harry’s world and ours
• A Friday Folly & A Friday Forum Reminder
• Enter Evil…and we’re not even talkin’ Voldy!

Danielle Tumminio’s guest-posting continues! Danielle is a contributor to Hog’s Head Conversations: Essays on Harry Potter. Her book, God and Harry at Yale will be available from Zossima Press later this year.

Hello, Harry Potter enthusiasts! Before we talk about evil (dum dum dum), I’m going to engage in the deadly sin of pride (can you name the other 6?) and say that God and Harry at Yale is now in to Zossima Press! Woohoo!

Okay, pride indulged. Now onto evil. Evil is a big thorn in the theologian’s side because it + God’s existence = logically impossible. Let me explain: Christians believe that God is all-knowing (omniscient), all-powerful (omnipotent) and all-good (omnibenevolent). If God is all these things, then evil shouldn’t exist: if God is all-knowing and all-powerful, then God should know evil is going to occur and then take steps to stop it. If God is all-good, then God would want to.

And yet, evil exists.
Hmm…..

So what’s a theologian to do? Different thinkers have come up with bundles of ways why God could allow evil (theodicies). Let’s look at two because they’re different enough that they can be contrasted when we consider what evil looks like in Harry’s world. Let’s begin with Augustine. Augustine said that evil occurs because humans have corrupted values and desires. In other words, their free will is tainted toward evil things. This is something they’re born with, the product of original sin, which began when Satan tempted Adam and Eve.

Iranaeus (an earlier theologian) and John Hick (a much later one) have a very different take on evil. They say that yes, we’re born with the ability to perpetrate evil, but it’s not because we’re tainted by original sin. It’s because we’ve got a lot of learning to do. Iranaeus and Hick say that we develop as humans, and part of that development is to grow into the likeness of God. We do that by having experiences of evil and learning from them.

You might already be able to see that Augustine and Iranaeus/Hick (we’ll call them the likeness theologians) have really different ideas about why evil exists. Here’s the big one: For the likeness theologians, evil exists so we can learn and in the process of learning, become more like God. For Augustine, evil exists for a not-so-elegant reason: original sin.

Of course, there are problems for both Augustine and the likeness theologians. For Augustine, the issue is why God would allow evil to occur in the first place. For the likeness theologians, the problem is that people don’t always learn from their experiences of evil. Sometimes they’re not in a place where they can learn from them; sometimes there’s nothing to learn, and sometimes they die before they can learn.

Enter Harry and the gang. What’s interesting about Harry Potter (and you can dispute me here) is that we see both strands of thought represented. Take a character like Ron: Ron perpetrates an evil when he abandons Hermione and Harry in Deathly Hallows. He does this because he has massive insecurities (original sin?) that the locket Horcrux capitalizes on. But Ron also learns from his evil, with the help of the Deluminator. When he kills the Horcrux, it’s as if he conquers the insecurities inside himself (learns from evil and becomes in the likeness of love).

Coincidence, you may ask? I don’t think so. Here’s another example: Dumbledore. Dumbledore’s younger years were dominated by a predisposition to work for selfish ends (original sin), like when he hatches a plan for a wizarding revolution with Grindelwald because ostensibly it would give more freedom to his sister Kendra…and to him. Yet after Kendra’s death (an evil), Dumbledore learns from his mistakes and grows into the likeness of love.

So Harry Potter seems to blend the best of each strand of theological thought, which is kind of cool. Or at least I think it is. And this blend seems to explain other instances of evil in the books too—Harry’s involvement in Sirius and Cedric’s death are two examples that immediately come to mind, but I’m sure you can think of others.

Which I will now leave you to do! And until we meet again, may all be well with you!
P.S. In case you were wondering, the other deadly sins are gluttony, lust, sloth, wrath, greed, and envy.

Related Posts

• Poll Results and New Poll (Shades of Good)
• Who’s the Hero? Harry or Dumbledore?
• Faith in Harry’s world and ours
• The Quad on the Quad
• Is Voldemort Undead? or How to Lick a Lich

Greetings Harry Potter enthusiasts! Whether you used the Knight Bus, floo powder, or, um, your keyboard, I’m so glad that you found your way to my guest blogging at the Hog’s Head. I’m going to be hanging with you all for a few weeks, and I’m looking forward to chatting about one of my favorite topics: the relationship between Christianity and the Harry Potter books. But before we get to that, I thought I’d start by telling you a little bit about myself.

For the past two years, I’ve been teaching a seminar at Yale University on Christian theology and Harry Potter. It’s a full semester course that provides an introduction to key topics in Christianity and asks students to analyze how those ideas are present (or not) in the series. The class has been a huge hit on campus—over 70 students have signed up each term, even though the class is capped at 18, and going through their applications is both a challenge and great fun. I’m pretty sure no other instructor on campus gets to hear about how their potential students founded Quidditch Clubs in their high schools or read Prisoner of Azkaban over and over on rainy days in elementary school. I feel like the luckiest teacher in the world because of that: I know my students are passionate about the class, and that makes me passionate too.

Of course, I have a hunch—just a hunch, of course—that when they come to class, their interest in Christianity is, hmm…how to put this, well, not as powerful as their love of Harry and his friends. This isn’t always the case, but most of the time, it’s the wizarding world that draws my students to class, not Christian theology. After all, theology sounds kind of dull, doesn’t it? Theology. Theology. It’s got ology in it. Makes it sound serious.

But the thing is, I’ve been studying theology for about seven years now, first at Yale and then as a doctoral student at Boston University, and I can’t think of a more lively topic. Where else do you get to discuss what happens when you die? Or what it means to love someone well? Or what God is like? Those kinds of questions get to the heart of what it means to be human, and regardless of whether you’re Christian or not, I think these issues are really important in our lives because they ask each of us to think about who we are in relation to each other and the Divine. In other words, they’re the basics, the fundamentals of our existence. Kind of like the metaphoric atoms of our being, you know?

Anyway, two years ago when I started offering the class, a reporter from CNN asked if he could profile the course for an article that wound up on CNN.com. It was one of the top hits on the website when it came out, and since then, I’ve had the opportunity to talk about Harry and Christian thought outside of Yale. I’ve done a few radio programs and some really fun conferences (I never in my lifetime thought I’d give a talk on the theology of death to a group dressed as Draco Malfoy—it was one of the most unique and wonderful days of my life)! I just had an essay published in Travis’s new Hog’s Head Conversations book and (then I promise I’ll be done tooting my own horn), I’m just finishing up a manuscript for my own book, God and Harry at Yale, which hopefully will be released in a few months!

Over the next few weeks, I’m really looking forward to sharing some of the things I’ve been thinking about as I’ve been writing this book. If you have anything you’d like to discuss, please post your topics here, and I’ll try to get to as many of them as I can! Possible topics include, but are not limited to, love, death, sacrifice, the Eucharist, sin, evil, the end times, grace…all the biggies! So until next week, may the force be with you! Oh wait, wrong series. Um, don’t fall in love with any vampires. Nope, still wrong! Uh, say hi to Buffy? Oh, I know! May all be well with you.

Related Posts

• Faith in Harry’s world and ours
• Theology Needs Literature
• Magic for Muggles

The rising sun had made everything look so different – all colors and shadows were changed – that for a moment they didn’t see the important thing. Then they did. The Stone Table was broken into two pieces by a great crack that ran down it from end to end. and there was no Aslan.

“Oh, oh, oh!” cried the two girls, rushing back to the Table.

“Oh, it’s too bad,” sobbed Lucy; “they might have left the body alone.”

“Who’s done it?” cried Susan. “What does it mean? Is it more magic?”

“Yes!” said a great voice behind their backs. “It is more magic.” They looked round. There, shining in the sunrise, larger than they had seen him before, shaking his mane (for it had apparently grown again) stood Aslan himself.

“Oh, Aslan!” cried both the children, staring up at him, almost as much frightened as they were glad. “Aren’t you dead then, dear Aslan?” said Lucy.

“Not now,” said Aslan….

“But what does it all mean?” asked Susan when they were somewhat calmer.

“It means,” said Aslan, “that though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back, into the stillness and darkness before time dawned, she would have read there a different incantation. She would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward. And now – ” … “Oh, children,” said the Lion. “I feel my strength coming back to me. Oh, children, catch me if you can!” …

It was such a romp as no one has ever seen except in Narnia; and whether it was more like playing with a thunderstorm or playing with a kitten, Lucy could never make up her mind.

~ C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, “Deeper Magic from Before the Dawn of Time”

Related Posts

• No Related Post

Christian Mythmaking: Why did Tolkien, Lewis, L’Engle, and Rowling create? How is story true? How does it make meaning? How does it place us in this world? The Christian “myth” is examined in light of fairy tale-tellers.

You can subscribe to the Hog’s Head PubCast through iTunes, and VOTE for the month of February at Podcast Alley (only 11 so far for February; Vote!).

Related Posts

• No Related Post

by Johnny

Halloween has come and gone (only 361 days left till the next one), but I want to briefly call to attention one important aspect of this fascinating holiday; that of confronting your fears with laughter and mockery. A while ago, I came across an interesting article by James B. Jordan (director of Biblical Horizons) titled “Concerning Halloween” exploring the Christian elements in Halloween. Jordan writes:

The concept, as dramatized in Christian custom, is quite simple: On October 31, the demonic realm tries one last time to achieve victory, but is banished by the joy of the Kingdom.

What is the means by which the demonic realm is vanquished? In a word: mockery. Satan’s great sin (and our great sin) is pride. Thus, to drive Satan from us we ridicule him. This is why the custom arose of portraying Satan in a ridiculous red suit with horns and a tail. Nobody thinks the devil really looks like this; the Bible teaches that he is the fallen Arch-Cherub. Rather, the idea is to ridicule him because he has lost the battle with Jesus and he no longer has power over us.

The idea of mocking Satan is not new. Martin Luther said, “The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn” and Thomas More said, “The devil…the prowde spirite…cannot endure to be mocked”. It is no wonder C.S. Lewis uses these quotes in his epigraph to The Screwtape Letters.

J.K. Rowling seems to recognize the power of laughter and mockery in overcoming fear. In Prisoner of Azkaban, we are introduced to a dark creature known as a boggart. A boggart, to quote Hermione, is “a shape-shifter” which “can take the shape of whatever it thinks will frighten us most” (133). When you encounter a boggart, there is already that fear element. The antidote, according to Professor Lupin, is laughter. This laughter is not a simple one; a nervous laughter will not work here. It “requires force of mind” because you need to “force it to assume a shape that you find amusing” (134). By saying the charm riddikulus and concentrating on what “ridiculous” shape you want the boggart to assume, the boggart will turn from your worst fear to something funny. This is a form of mockery at the expense of your fears.

The same concept is at play in Halloween. Many times we dress up as our favorite characters, but we also dress up as ghosts, goblins, zombies, and others. Many people are not afraid of these, but how about tombstones, skeletons, and the Grim Reaper? Are we making sport of death? I suppose, but keep in mind that even Paul mocks death when he quotes from Hosea 13.14, “O Death, where is your victory? O Death, where is your sting?” Halloween is a time when we confront our fears and mock them. Jordan said that “the defeat of evil and of demonic powers is associated with Halloween.” Is it any coincidence that J.K. Rowling had Harry Potter defeat the Dark Lord on Halloween when his mother’s love and sacrifice protected him against murder? I think not.

Riddikulus.

Related Posts

• No Related Post

“Dumbledore was gay;” Christian reactions to the statement; maternal and romantic love in the Harry Potter series

You can subscribe to the Hog’s Head PubCast through iTunes.

Pub Menu:

• John Granger’s response
• Dr. Amy H. Sturgis’s eyewitness report of the night
• The initial SoG discussion
• My essay: “Dumbledore is Gay: Welcome to the Culture War”
• The text of “The Ballad of Nearly Headless Nick”

Related Posts

• No Related Post

by Travis

Update: Comments at HogPro by Bob Trexler and Amy Sturgis are well worth your time.

If you’ve not been exposed to the “Culture War” before, welcome. J.K. Rowling has given you your introduction. I am hoping that after reading this post, you’ll run from the Culture War as quickly as I have. By “culture war,” I’m referring, of course, to the lines in the sand drawn around morality issues, usually involving some version of the Christian faith.

And there is no topic more likely to draw out the culture warriors that homosexuality. What you’re about to read is a stream of consciousness…it represents my developing thoughts on this discussion, and I hope it will be helpful. I try to play the objective moderator for most difficult discussions here…I’ll be stepping slightly out of that role here and there throughout this post and showing my hand a little more than normal. Stick with me, and I’ll be looking forward to your helpful comments and corrections (which I’m sure I’ll need).

If you’ve been following the discussion under my initial post on the subject, you know it’s been pretty heated. We’ve had quite a variety of comments and opinions:

• Adamant assertions of the sinfulness of homosexuality, with accompanying assurances of hellfire.
• Elation at Rowling’s revelation, accompanied by belief that she is making a much-needed move toward the acceptance of homosexuality in our culture.
• Speculation that Dumbledore believes homosexuality to be a sin, and was therefore celibate for the majority of his life.
• Outright anger that anyone would be so dumb or hateful as to think of homosexuality as a sin, with accompanying promises to never return to this website
• Reservations, concerns, and frustration
• Calm, reasoned responses
• Accusations of hypocrisy from just about everyone about pretty much everyone else
• And then there’s that one guy who’s absolutely giddy that he now has what he believes to be ironclad proof that Rowling will be going straight to hell without passing “Go” or collecting $200.

It’s scary in that thread. As someone who wants to run a discussion group where all opinions are welcomed, I’m trying my best not to delete opinions, but to warn about personal attacks. But let me say this to all: Please watch your tone, and do everything in your ability to communicate with grace.

Now, on to the analysis:

Rowling’s Author-ity

Ever since the end of Deathly Hallows, I’ve wondered just how much some of Rowling’s characters had gotten away from her. This happens to authors; as they write, characters take on a life of their own. If the author doesn’t recognize it, s/he can end up writing an incongruent character, and that is troubling to the reader. The discussion immediately after Book 7’s release was surrounding Severus Snape, and I think it is fair to argue that there’s an extent to which Snape ran away from Rowling. This brings up important questions about how we, as readers, should approach her canonical works as compared with her interview statements.

And that brings us to the first point I want to make: What Rowling says outside the canon does not have to affect your reading of the story. As Alastair commented:

One of the things that I most love about a good book is the manner in which it creates a space within which our imaginations can play, the ambiguities giving us the option of reading the book in many different ways. When an author settles ambiguities like this I feel cheated. It is Rowling’s task to write and it is our task to read; I wish that she wouldn’t do our part for us.

So that means this: We do not have to divide over Rowling’s revelation. There is absolutely nothing in the text itself that communicates anything clear about Dumbledore’s sexuality. Even as we continue to disagree on the subject of homosexuality, we can remain Potter fans together and continue to read the books as we see best. It is our task to read. Our imaginations can play.

Dumbledore’s Sexuality: Planned? Publicity?

It’s almost impossible to know whether or not Rowling’s statement about Albus’s being gay is something she thought and believed all along, or another example of her continually shifting views about her characters. (Where does Ron work again? When did Grindelwald die? Is Snape a hero? You get the picture). I think we can at least assume this much: if she did believe Albus to be gay prior to Book 7, she wasn’t going to say anything about it until after.

But the bottom line here is, it’s impossible to know whether she had planned this long ago, if it’s a recent change of mind, or a publicity stunt. And it probably doesn’t matter.

Update: Be sure to read this comment by Amy Sturgis, who was there. She makes it really clear, by providing context, that this was no publicity stunt.

Culture Wars: Navigating the Reactions

All the typical Culture War weapons are in play: Anyone who thinks homosexuality is OK is hell-bound and dangerous to our children. Anyone who opposes it is intolerant and hateful. I have things to say to both groups, but the take-home point is this: It’s never as simple as that, folks.

Note: In what follows, I’m using the terms “liberal” and “conservative” as they are generally used to define the sides of the Culture War. You’ll see later that I call on readers to abandon Culture War categories altogether.

To the “liberal” among us…

I’m starting with those on the side of the Culture War who might call their side the “Tolerant” side. This is the side that believes that anyone who thinks homosexuality is a sin is “hateful.”

I’m going to try to tread lightly on some very sensitive ground here. I think it’s important, though, for a Christian to be able to explain the homosexuality-sin issue in a way that brings understanding. Whether you agree with any of this or not is quite beside the point right now. I’m simply trying to help us understand each other better. Please, please be clear with me about anything in what follows that I’ve written poorly or that bothers you. Let’s all try to understand each other, rather than hiding in trenches and throwing grenades. (One important note: I’m using the term “Christian” in this comment as shorthand for what the Culture Wars call “conservative,” or what might be called “historical Christianity,” which, until very recently in the overall scheme of things, unanimously believed homosexuality to be a sin.) I need to learn as much as anyone else, so I’m hoping to inspire thoughtful, helpful, charitable discussion.

It’s been charged that it’s ok for a Christian to believe homosexuality to be a sin only if that Christians holds the opinion privately. To speak it publicly is to offend, and therefore to be in the wrong, and “intolerant.”

The problem for the Christian is this: to believe something is a “sin” doesn’t just mean, “You’re bad.” Christians believe all of us sin, and are indeed sinners. So to name one specifically isn’t to say, “You’re bad and I’m not.” And further than that, the Christian believes sin to be soul-damaging. If I saw a friend of mine committing adultery, it wouldn’t be intolerant for me to call him on it. If a friend saw me doing the same, I’d need him to call me on it.

So it’s impossible for the Christian to detach belief in something as a “sin” from everything that “sin” means.

Furthermore, the Christian cannot see sexual orientation and race as parallel issues. The Scriptures are very clear on race: Christ died for those of “every tribe, language, and nation.” The central redemptive act of the Christian story was one of racial reconciliation. There is no biblical precedent for racism, nor any indication that being of a certain race can be construed in any way as a sin. Not so with sexual morality. The two issues are vastly different for the Christian who believes the Scriptures are authoritative.

To the “conservative” among us…

I need to ask really important questions to those who have been entirely turned off to this series by Rowling’s recent statements: Why didn’t you turn away from the series when good characters committed sins in the canon itself? Why didn’t you feel abandoned by Rowling, betrayed by someone you thought was on your side?

The problem is this: because of the culture war mentality of American Christianity, whether we admit it or not, we’ve elevated this sin above all the others. While commenters did discuss at length issues like Dumbledore’s lying, Harry’s crucio, and the like, there were no Christians feeling betrayed and wanting to abandon the series altogether as a result of those things. And they were in canon. But as soon as Rowling makes this outside-canon statement, there’s a major blowup.

There’s a major hypocrisy there. We need to step back and spend a good amount of time examining ourselves, to discover the internal sources of this hypocrisy.

Abandon the Culture War

In order to have any genuine, non-hurtful discussion about this, we’re going to have to take a step back, take several deep breaths, and abandon the categories of thinking that our culture has trained us in. We’ve been in Culture War boot camp since birth, and the time has come for you and I to go AWOL. One commenter is so immersed in the Culture War mentality that he was absolutely beside himself with laughter about this whole thing, completely giddy that Rowling has given what he considers ironclad proof that … what? … that he was correct in his assertion that Rowling is not a Christian. Folks, that’s really disturbing. If you genuinely believe that Christ alone saves, and you know the consequences of not believing, there’s nothing appropriate about laughter in that situation at all.

To abandon the Culture War, we have to adopt an attitude of love, despite disagreement about a very highly-charged and deeply personal issue.

Rowling, Postmodern?

As I’ve said before, this revelation comes as no surprise to many of us who have been arguing for years that the Harry Potter books contain deliberate and distinctly Christian elements. While I might be hesitant to call the Harry Potter series “postmodern literature,” it is most definitely influenced by what I might want to call “Pop Postmodernism,” which is usually some form of the tolerance doctrine. Question authority. Don’t be intolerant. Don’t be judgmental.

Christians have a problem of responding to this by saying something arrogant like, “Yes, I’m going to be intolerant, because Jesus told me to.”

Welcome to an exercise in missing the point. Jesus claimed to be the Only Way, but he didn’t tell you to be an ass about it. Quote all the Scriptures about homosexuality. Go ahead. Be a jerk. There was once a group of Pharisees who quoted Scripture to Jesus about the consequences of the woman caught in adultery. Remember how Jesus responded to the arrogant Scripture-quoters?

It’s no surprise whatsoever that Rowling, an advocate for tolerance, and heavily influenced by cultural postmodernism, would be accepting of homosexuality. I don’t believe the explanations that Rowling has given us an example of a person who realized being gay was wrong and so chose celibacy. I think Rowling believes homosexuality not to be a sin. I might even argue that Rowling probably believes that there is great value in other faiths. “Hogwarts is a multifaith school.” Remember, tolerance is key for Rowling.

The problem I’m having with my Christian brothers and sisters is the way in which so many are sitting up nice and high, evaluating and judging Rowling’s version of Christianity, which she freely admits she struggles with, and condemning her for it. Rowling is not a preacher. She is not an ordained minister. She is not writing theological treatises. She is a writer, struggling with her faith, and giving us a story that tells that struggle. She never claimed to be an evangelist, and she’s been quite clear in saying that she was not setting out to do what Lewis did with Narnia.

There is no checklist. Every Christian believes something incorrectly, and every Christian still wrestles with sin, with theology, and with faith. I’d urge my fellow Christians to keep in the very front of your mind that it is always by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Drop the checklist. No Christian has to pass your test.

I’m going to close this with an excellent comment by revgeorge, and then turn it over to you, my brilliant commenters. We’ve worked together through a lot of tough discussions here at SoG before, and this is probably our greatest challenge yet. I’m optimistic we’ll get through it. Thank you, all.

revgeorge:

To say that one cannot profitable read something just because the author is not doctrinally pure is really a stretch. Being a Lutheran minister, I certainly care about doctrinal orthodoxy, but I read lots of stuff that isn’t just from a purely Lutheran background.

To follow the logic of some people here, I couldn’t read anything by Tolkien & extol its Christian elements because Tolkien was a Roman Catholic & thus his theology is deficient. Nor could I read anything by Lewis & extol its Christian imagery because he was an Anglican. That’s just bunk.

Apparently some people think the only book Christians can read is the Bible, otherwise we risk falling prey to some kind of false spirituality. Well, the world is full of false spirituality, which is why we cannot read or watch or listen to anything uncritically. But we can read, watch & listen. Which is why being well grounded in the faith helps to keep us from being lukewarm.

At least Granger & Prinzi critically analyze the content of the HP books. Which stands in stark contrast to how books by Warren & Osteen & the Left Behind series are often treated by evangelical Christians. To listen to some of them talk you’d think those author’s books sprung from the very hand of God Himself!

So, the Harry Haters will never be satisfied. If JKR would espouse a perfect view of orthodox Christianity, live a spotlessly clean lifestyle, & get God’s approval from heaven, people would still criticize her & the books.

Related Posts

• No Related Post

by Johnny

I received an early morning surprise yesterday as I checked this site and clicked on the link to MTV News where J.K. Rowling opened up about the Christian content in the Harry Potter novels. I do have to say that it was inevitable. JKR told Evan Solomon in July 2000, “[T]here is so much I would like to say, and come back when I’ve written book seven.” Or how about Ernest Tucker who wrote in October 1999 that “Rowling, aware of the protest, said she couldn’t answer the questions about the book’s religious content until the conclusion of book seven”?

And now she has done it. JKR goes so far as to say that, at least to her, the religious parallels have “always been obvious.” More important, however, are her comments regarding the scriptures found on the tombstones of Kendra/Ariana Dumbledore (“Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” found in Matthew 6:21; not 6:19 as the article asserts) and James/Lily Potter (“The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” found in 1 Corinthians 15:26) in the last novel:

“They’re very British books, so on a very practical note Harry was going to find biblical quotations on tombstones,” Rowling explained. “[But] I think those two particular quotations he finds on the tombstones at Godric’s Hollow, they sum up — they almost epitomize the whole series.”

This is important because these “biblical quotations” form the foundation for a series that has been maligned by “Harry Haters” for reflecting anti-Christian values or the likes of Lev Grossman who see them as devoid of any religion for that matter.

The context of Matthew 6:21 deals with Jesus commanding his followers to store up treasures in heaven for your treasure reflects where your heart is. The most obvious example is Albus Dumbledore who knew this scripture too well and was filled with remorse over his obsession over the Deathly Hallows, thereby neglecting his family. His heart was not in the right place, because he was seeking earthly treasures. In the series as a whole, we see various characters’ “treasures” being a reflection of their hearts. From Voldemort to his Death Eaters to even Professor Quirrell, Lockhart, and Umbridge, we see that their treasures reflected the poverty in their own hearts. The treasures of greed and hate lead to opening yourself to possession, exploitation, torture, racism, and murder. For someone like Harry Potter, his treasure was the desire for a family and is reflected in his bravery and self sacrifice because of his love for his friends, whom he saw as his only family since his parents were murdered.

The context of 1 Corinthians 15:26 is as the article says is “one of the central foundations of resurrection theology.” It also reflects the theme of death that pervades the whole series. The series starts with Harry Potter orphaned because of the murder of his parents by Voldemort, and as the series progresses, more beloved characters die as casualties in the war. This theme of death is reflected in JKR’s own thoughts on the loss of her mother over a decade ago. She told Meredith Vieira back in July that:

Definitely, Mum dying had a profound influence on the books, because I had been writing about Harry for 6 months when she died. And on the first draft, his parents were disposed off really quiet and at an almost cavalier fashion. 6 months, and my mother dies, and I really think from that moment on, Death became a central, if not the central theme of the seven books. And, ummm, in many ways, all of my characters are defined by their attitude to death and the possibility of death.

This is why the scene of Harry seeing his parents and family in the Mirror of Erised was her favorite in the first novel. The greater implications of Paul’s words are the concept of a life after death, something that JKR struggles with:

“The truth is that, like Graham Greene, my faith is sometimes that my faith will return. It’s something I struggle with a lot,” she revealed. “On any given moment if you asked me [if] I believe in life after death, I think if you polled me regularly through the week, I think I would come down on the side of yes — that I do believe in life after death. [But] it’s something that I wrestle with a lot. It preoccupies me a lot, and I think that’s very obvious within the books.”

JKR mentions Graham Greene, who was a Catholic and the author of such works as The Power and the Glory, The Heart of the Matter, The End of the Affair, Brighton Rock, among others. I never read any of his works but several of his novels reflected one’s struggle with faith. Greene said at one time, “If you have abandoned one faith, do not abandon all faith. There is always an alternative to the faith we lose. Or is it the same faith under another mask?” Another time he said in an interview, “I don’t like conventional religious piety. I’m more at ease with the Catholicism of Catholic countries. I’ve always found it difficult to believe in God. I suppose I’d now call myself a Catholic atheist.”

JKR reflects that Greene’s struggle is her struggle and we can say that the Harry Potter novels reflect JKR’s own internal struggle dealing with such issues as death and life after death. This of course is very honest of JKR. Of course every Christian struggle one way or the other and it is these struggles that bring us closer to our faith rather than ceasing it. John Granger commented on this “struggle” in JKR’s interview with Meredith Vieira by saying:

Ms. Rowling has told her that her “struggling with religious beliefs and so on” are “quite evident” in Deathly Hallows. And they are. But this is not the struggle of a skeptic or of a school child who is beginning to re-examine mechanically held beliefs. This is the agony of the agnostic who knows that there is no knowing for certain rationally but that not believing has consequences and belief in many ways is always a choice. Seeing what happens to those who choose not to believe, or, to use another word Ms. Rowling contrasts Harry and Voldemort with, those who choose not to trust, Harry chooses to believe and to trust.

In the end, if I am interpreting JKR’s words correctly, we can see that despite her struggles, she, like Harry, chooses to believe and to trust. The MTV News article says what John Granger, Travis Prinzi, and others have known all along: that there is Christian content in the Harry Potter series and that JKR is a Christian herself. This news was a delight simply because JKR said that she would elaborate only after the series has concluded (I’m hoping this will be the first of many of JKR’s discussions on this). It only added to what we already read in the last novel because as JKR said, “You’ll have read it.”

Related Posts

• No Related Post