Whats a Christian to Do With Harry Potter

If you lot buy something from a Vox link, Voice Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.

And so what if you didn't grow up immersed in the wizarding world of Harry Potter?

For plenty of Americans — peculiarly millennials, who were children when the books first came to the US — that's an almost unimaginable hypothetical. The books shaped the imagination of millions of children, who flocked to midnight release parties, dressed as Harry and Hermione and Ron for Halloween, watched the movies, and even now frame their agreement of real-world political events in terms of Hogwarts and He Who Must Non Be Named.

But a sizable chunk of the aforementioned age cohort didn't read the books at all.

That wasn't because they just weren't into books, or because they didn't know about Harry Potter. It was because in some religious communities — particularly amongst bourgeois evangelicals, merely also some Catholics and Muslims — the Harry Potter series was viewed on a spectrum that ranged from suspicion to outright opposition.

To some, the reasons may exist obvious; to others, that makes no sense. But the phenomenon of bourgeois Christian opposition to Harry Potter succinctly encapsulates many of the forces that were at play inside that group two decades agone — and illuminates a whole group of young adults who felt excluded from the earth around them.

One of the biggest sources of Harry Potter opposition came from Focus on the Family

I'm amid the millennials who grew upwards not reading J.Grand. Rowling'south novels or watching the films for religious reasons. While writing this article, I've had hundreds of conversations through social media and in person with adults across the land who had the same feel.

For many of us, reading the novels wasn't outright forbidden, at least not through some kind of household decree; information technology was merely understood that it wasn't something we did in our homes. (I'd fall into this category.) For others, the opposition was much more overt. Some people spoke to me virtually bringing dwelling house the novels and having them taken away. Others felt ashamed about times when their parents told their teachers that they wouldn't be allowed to read the books along with the remainder of the form.

A Harry Potter fan in Australia reading the last book in the series.

Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images

The variety of these experiences helps illuminate the complexity of opposition to Harry Potter's world — something that'southward been bolstered as I've talked to parents who once opposed the books and take inverse their views, and others who still prefer not to let their children read them.

Many of us non-readers institute that our parents' opposition to Harry Potter dropped away as we got older, or as the series was completed and its overt Christian influences became clearer — and then were confirmed in 2007 past Rowling herself, who told MTV in an interview that she thought the Christian symbolism had been obvious. Even so, others I've talked to say their parents continue to oppose the novels, even removing them from their developed children's shelves if they move home.

To those who grew up with the books, that may seem slightly inexplainable. The stories of Hogwarts and the young wizards seem of a piece, in many means, with the battles of expert and evil contained in other archetype works of fantasy, including some explicitly Christian-influenced ones such as C.S. Lewis's The Chronicles of Narnia and J.R.R. Tolkien'south The Lord of the Rings. And then what accounts for this opposition?

The answer has a lot to exercise with some of the voices that were especially influential in conservative Christian civilization, and especially evangelical civilization, in the late 1990s and 2000s, when Harry Potter was growing into a literary phenomenon.

The most frequently cited voice of opposition among those I talked to was Focus on the Family, an immensely pop and influential evangelical parachurch operation, and in detail the organization's leader until 2003, author and psychologist James Dobson.

Dobson rose to prominence every bit a proponent of conservative social positions and relatively strict child-rearing practices. He founded his flagship organization, Focus on the Family, in 1977, and produced a daily radio bear witness by the aforementioned name that at its height was reportedly heard every twenty-four hour period by more than than 220 million people in 164 countries and in a dozen languages.

Japanese Harry Potter fans pose with their newly purchased copies of the Japanese version of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows at Kinokuniya Bookstore on July 23, 2008, in Tokyo.

Koichi Kamoshida/Getty Images

Focus on the Family is peculiarly influential in telling conservative evangelical parents how to navigate popular culture, which it does in two ways. It creates pop civilization of its own, combining entertaining stories that teach biblical lessons with relatively high production values — the long-running fictional radio drama Adventures in Odyssey is an particularly successful example — equally an alternative to mainstream entertainment. And it produces a publication called Plugged In, which describes itself as "an entertainment guide full of the reviews y'all need to brand wise personal and family unit-friendly decisions about movies, videos, music, TV, games and books."

Plugged In is hardly the but publication that does this — Christianity Today, where I was chief movie critic before joining Vocalism in 2016, has done information technology for years, as accept far more than conservative sites like MovieGuide — merely it'south 1 of the longest-running and most popular in being, partly due to its backing past Focus.

Plugged In reviews were a fixture of life for many children growing upwards in conservative evangelical churches, peculiarly in the 1990s. Unlike some more hardline Christian review sites, Plugged In reviewers oft comment generously on the creative and technical value of a pop creative person's debut album or the latest franchise blockbuster. But they also draw, in some detail, the moral content of the cultural object and make recommendations based on those matters, outlining everything from spiritual elements to violent content to drug and alcohol apply.

The Plugged In review of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is fairly typical of the site. It mentions among its positive elements Harry and Ron's friendship, warnings against greed, and the sacrificial dearest of Harry's parents. It points out the story's employ of rule-breaking and trigger-happy content, along with Hagrid's gustation for butterbeer. And it devotes three measured paragraphs to the "stereotypical" presentation of witchcraft and wizardry in the book, and suggests the way dark magic is portrayed does not arrive seem desirable — all, on rest, practiced things, from a Plugged In perspective.

But the review also taps into what became the biggest opposition to the world of Hogwarts.

"On a cultural level, Rowling tin can be commended for steering young fans abroad from the so-chosen dark side," the review adds parenthetically. "Only from a spiritual perspective" — meaning, in the real world outside the books, according to the Bible — "it'south clear that there are not night and lite sides when it comes to witchcraft; it's all as black as sin."

In other words, though in the world of Harry Potter, magic tin exist used for skillful, in our world, governed past the rules of God and not fictional magic, all witchcraft is evil.

"The meaningless charms found in this book may not summon occult forces, but there are existent charms that exercise," the review suggests, and says that considering the world of magic that Rowling has created is then much brighter and more than interesting than the dull realm of Muggles, the books may hold an allure that is unhealthy for children. "Biblically speaking, to participate in the earth of witchcraft brings decease rather than a fuller life," the review's uncredited writer writes.

In the cease, while Plugged In praised the books in some modest respects, it also concluded that parents should "call up long and hard earlier embarking on Harry Potter's magic carpet ride."

And that mental attitude of suspicion toward the Harry Potter books' magic — and the worry that it would attract children to the occult — is perhaps the unmarried near influential source of opposition to the series amidst bourgeois Christians.

Harry Potter fans wait for the stars to arrive at the Harry Potter and the Bedchamber of Secrets world premiere on November three, 2002, in London.

Scott Barbour/Getty Images

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the about prominent voice in this opposition was James Dobson himself. He addressed the thing on his radio plan and issued a lengthy response to an erroneous assertion in a 2007 Washington Post commodity that characterized him equally having "praised" the series. A response posted to Focus on the Family's website stated that "this is the exact contrary of Dr. Dobson's opinion — in fact, he said a few years ago on his daily radio broadcast that 'Nosotros have spoken out strongly against all of the Harry Potter products,'" and that the Post reporter had not just acknowledged but "apologized for" the mistake.

The argument besides reiterated Dobson'due south opposition to the series: "Given the trend toward witchcraft and New Age ideology in the larger culture, information technology's difficult to ignore the effects such stories (albeit imaginary) might have on young, impressionable minds."

Some conservative Christians opposed Harry Potter as a gateway to the occult. Others sounded a notation of caution.

Dobson was far from the just bourgeois Christian leader who sounded a warning nigh the books. Just a quick Google search turns up articles, books, websites, and other resource alarm families away from the books and movies because of their connection to witchcraft. A Jack Chick tract chosen "The Nervous Witch," about Wicca and witchcraft, even features a character who says she got into "the craft" through the Harry Potter books.

In several states, parents sought to accept the books removed from schools, suggesting in some cases that they were continued to Wicca and thus their inclusion in schoolhouse libraries violated the separation of church and state.

Others, yet, were more measured than Dobson and those who suggested Christian families shun the books.

Chuck Colson, the erstwhile Nixon assistants official who became an evangelical leader, initially praised the books on his own radio broadcast in 1999. "If your kids do develop a sense of taste for Harry Potter and his magician friends," Colson said, "this interest might but open them upward to an appreciation for other fantasy books with a distinctly Christian worldview."

Merely vii years later, he had changed his heed without going then far equally to outright decry them; he said that while he didn't personally recommend the books or movies to Christian families, they were a adept opportunity to teach children to exercise discernment — that is, to examine them critically through the lens of their religion.

The bourgeois newsmagazine Earth, which regularly published reviews of the books and the movies every bit they were released, took a like tone. In a piece titled "More than Dirt Than Potter," published in 1999, Globe's book critic Susan Olasky and Anne McCain, a manager of children's education at a Presbyterian church in Virginia, examined how the newly popular books "can give Bible-conscious parents an enjoyable opportunity to teach older children how to think critically."

"Truths sprinkled throughout the books are 'trail markers' that tin be used to point to God," Olasky and McCain wrote, pointing to the books' emphasis on wise counsel and the divergence between practiced and evil every bit positive — while likewise noting that the books may put "a grin mask on evil" and draw readers into the real world of witchcraft, though the Hogwarts world of wizardry bore little resemblance to the earth of Wicca.

A young Harry Potter fan in July 2005.

Stephen Chernin/Getty Images

World's reviews of the books and movies continued to be mixed through the end of the series, often noting the increasingly dark tone and the ways the moral order in Harry's world may confuse children about the moral order in our own.

When I spoke with Olasky about World'south accept on the series, she pointed to the magazine's ofttimes mixed opinions on the books and movies, saying that their main concerns had a lot to exercise with simply non knowing where the series was going — especially since they dealt and then powerfully with expert and evil.

"It was a world that kids were fatigued to," she said. "But y'all didn't actually know [at first] what the rules were. ... A thing would appear to exist this, then information technology would plow into that."

That was also of concern to the parents who read Earth, and to those inclined to carefully lookout man over what their children experienced. "I still think Christians should think about that," she said. "Should annihilation capture our imaginations similar that?'

To Olasky and other critics who saw the series from her perspective, the globe of Harry Potter wasn't necessarily dangerous because it was a throughput to witchcraft, Satanism, and the occult. They were more concerned with the ideas that impressionable children might blot from the immensely pop book, ideas that might conflict with biblical ideas about expert, evil, light, darkness, obedience, and other matters. And they were concerned with reminding parents not to allow their children to uncritically accept stories just considering they were pop — especially without knowing where the series was headed.

That perspective, which sought to protect children's developing imaginations from detail content, seemed obviously false to others. YA writer Judy Blume, for case, wrote a dismissive op-ed titled "Is Harry Potter Evil?" in the New York Times in 1999, linking opposition to the books to efforts to ban books ranging from Madeleine L'Engle's overtly Christian A Wrinkle in Fourth dimension serial to Blume's own novels from school libraries. Blume praised "subversive" books for the ways they adult her imagination.

But to more than protective parents, it made sense. And even those who might not have a hardline view against the books might take been inclined to avoid them, hearing the voice of alarm. That's how communities that grade around shared values, like religious or other beliefs, often work: In concert, they form practices and boundaries, and then support 1 another in maintaining those boundaries.

Children dressed as Harry Potter characters with their just-purchased copies of the German-linguistic communication edition of Harry Potter and the Social club of the Phoenix on November 8, 2003, in Berlin.

Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Not all conservative Christians opposed Harry Potter

There were also enough of conservative Christian critics and leaders who leaned positive or outright supportive of the series from the beginning. I such Christian writer, John Granger — who was described in Time in 2009 equally the "dean of Harry Potter scholars" — has written extensively about the series' connexion to Christian teachings in books such as Hidden Key to Harry Potter (now titled How Harry Cast His Spell) and Looking for God in Harry Potter. He also maintains the "Hogwarts Professor" blog.

Granger wrote his books in response to anti-Potter books, such equally Richard Abanes's Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magic and Connie Neal's What's a Christian to Do Virtually Harry Potter.

"The Christian content and continuity with English language literature traditions were missing from both books," Granger wrote to me by electronic mail. "I thought … that this symbolism interweaved in the storytelling was largely responsible for the series' success." Granger points to links present in the very first book: "A unicorn, a phoenix, a red lion, a Philosopher'south Stone, and a hero rising from the dead afterwards a sacrificial death are all in the kickoff book. All are traditional symbols of Christ."

When I asked Granger why he idea conservative Christians opposed the book, he said the series' use of magic suggested to some that at that place had to be some kind of conflict between the books and faith. "I received some dismissive and patronizing criticism," he wrote, but "Christian critics largely left me alone because, dissimilar Abanes and Neal, I argued from English literature and formalist analysis rather than through a biblical filter."

"Fortunately, all my ideas and understanding were confirmed by the last iii books, especially Deathly Hallows," Granger said.

A copy of a Harry Potter book burns in a bonfire during a protest outside the Christ Community Church Dec 30, 2001, in Alamogordo, New Mexico.

Neil Jacobs/Getty Images

Granger, and many others similar him, came out in favor of the books. Christianity Today, which has often been considered the flagship publication of the American evangelical motility, published articles on both sides of the upshot but generally took a more than positive opinion. Some saw the stories — especially later on its conclusion, in which Harry seems to be cast adequately patently as a Christ figure — as reflecting the biblical story.

Still, the reasons for criticizing the series among those conservative Christians boiled downward to two chief camps. There were those who condemned the books equally conduits to witchcraft, and there were those who viewed them skeptically every bit being influenced past secularism, potentially undermining Christian values.

There were good reasons both of those camps were so influential, even among those who didn't read the books themselves, and they take a lot to practice with the timing of The Sorcerer's Stone'southward Us release, xx years ago.

The Satanic panic and stories circulating in evangelical Christians subculture may have bolstered opposition to Harry Potter

In my discussions with those who weren't allowed to read the books, or who didn't permit their children to read the books, the idea that the books' utilize of magic was tied to the real-world occult seemed foreign to many in retrospect, for i big reason: Many of those same children were allowed, even encouraged, to read C.S. Lewis'south Narnia series too as J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings series. (Some people who grew up in very fundamentalist communities said that even those were off limits, but that seems to exist a minority.)

And yet there are a few cultural reasons this item criticism caught on so powerfully. Most would require a whole book to thoroughly unpack, but two in particular are notable.

First of all, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone was released in the US in 1998 — right on the heels of the Satanic panic.

A rash of false allegations of Satanic ritual abuse of children by cults, made mostly against day care centers during the 1980s, were already beingness debunked during the '90s. But the retention of those accusations was notwithstanding fresh in the minds of many, especially since information technology continued to exist a pop cultural plot point in TV shows and movies.

The lingering sense that some of it could accept been true stuck around for years, subconsciously lending plausibility to the idea that Harry Potter and his friends were a subtle attempt to conscript children into Satan-worshipping cults or witchcraft-practicing covens. (The mutual conflation of Satanic worship, the Church of Satan, infidel religions, the occult, witchcraft, and other systems of practice and belief was likely role of this.) The Jack Chick tract referenced above — published in 2002! — is a proficient example of how the ideas behind the Satanic panic were still alive in some of Christianity'southward more than fundamentalist wings.

Another reason that Satanic panic-next ideas even so held currency by the end of the 1990s may be a pair of popular novels by Christian author Frank Peretti that sold millions of copies: This Present Darkness (1986) and Piercing the Darkness (1989). Both novels told stories of spiritual warfare in which angels and demons were literal characters struggling for the souls of ordinary Americans in a pocket-sized town.

The books paid detail attending to New Age spiritual practices: Meditation was portrayed as a fashion for people to go possessed by demons, insidiously pushed upon people by a powerful New Age grouping that engaged in practices that seem drawn from accounts of Satanic groups. And their special target was children.

It would be a stretch to say that Peretti'due south novels were responsible in some fashion for people'southward suspicions of the Harry Potter books. Merely given their enduring popularity — I checked them out of my own church building'south library and read them equally a young teen in the mid- to late '90s — their suggestion that children's susceptible minds were targets for New Age groups covering for demonic forces certainly supported the idea that a series of fantasy novels for children had the potential to harm those children.

Church building members sing as they circle a bonfire called-for Harry Potter books outside the Christ Community Church on Dec 30, 2001, in Alamogordo, New Mexico.

Neil Jacobs/Getty Images

And fifty-fifty setting aside the more than literalist takes on the occult contained in Peretti's novels, there's another factor; books similar This Present Darkness, Piercing the Darkness, and the 1992 follow-up Prophet (in which a TV news anchor becomes embroiled in a controversial investigation of a local abortion clinic) spiritualized the culture state of war that evangelicals in particular were attuned to in the 1980s and '90s.

That civilization war — a battle to shape the values of immature Americans through the things they see and experience in civilisation — has often been a source of fear and frustration for people across the religious and ideological spectrum over the past few decades. But conservative Christians are especially attuned to it, and Peretti's novels (and others like them) gave the sense that the things you might watch on Boob tube may non just change minds most "hot button" topics — sexuality, gender, ballgame, and so on — but too be bodily, literal battlegrounds between the forces of skillful and evil.

Even for parents who didn't take this quite then literally, a more metaphorical notion of spiritual warfare exerted considerable influence over their decision about what to allow into their children'south lives.

I spoke nigh this with Nancy Gibson, a conservative evangelical mother who began homeschooling her children in the 2000s. Gibson'due south older children didn't read the Harry Potter novels as they were coming out — the family unit didn't outright ban them, she said, but the communities they were part of discouraged people from reading them, generally under the influence of Focus on the Family unit. Merely Gibson's girl read the series during the summer afterward her outset year at a Christian higher, and her younger girl, now a teenager, has been reading them, with her parents' approval.

Gibson told me that information technology was often simply hard to know, as a parent in a community that was suspicious of pop culture, what was wise to allow their children to read. Resources similar those provided by Plugged In helped navigate that challenge, particularly for those parents who didn't accept time to read the books for themselves.

Gibson'southward experience seems aligned with those of many other parents, for whom navigating popular civilization is difficult no affair what their religious convictions are. Some parents are more permissive, or are engaged with pop culture in a way that lets them experience it alongside their own children.

But bourgeois Christians and evangelicals in particular accept for decades tended to view mainstream popular civilization with suspicion. And in the throes of the late Satanic panic, raging culture wars, and the sense that — even bated from these forces — children were likely being targeted by people opposed to their own values, warnings against Harry Potter presented themselves every bit a skillful enough reason to stay abroad. There was, after all, always Narnia.

So what happened to those who didn't read Harry Potter?

I've been reading Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone for the first time while working on this article. I know how the story goes, because by the time the movie series was reaching its conclusion, I was an adult and a working film critic, and I watched them all. (The third 1, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, is the best of the bunch.)

But I'd never gotten around to the books, then now I've read the showtime in the series. News wink: It'south pretty delightful. I was surprised past the wit and past the clever characterizations, and I like the careful attention given to building out the world of both Muggles and wizards. I wouldn't say I'thou very invested in it, only it'due south fun.

Would I accept liked them if I'd read them when they beginning came out? Probably. In 1998 I was 15, a hopeless bookworm who didn't watch many movies or Television shows but did read books like This Present Darkness. I had read and reread the Narnia series since I was in third or fourth grade, and I loved the movie versions that sometimes aired on PBS. I wasn't into fantasy all that much, but Harry's world feels plenty similar my own that I would accept enjoyed them. And as a bourgeois Christian teenager, I probably would have found a lot to praise in them — just like many others did.

A customer holds Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows at a bookstore after its release at i:01 am on July 21, 2007, in Berlin.

Andreas Rentz/Getty Images

Just I didn't read them. And to my recollection, I never asked my parents to let me, either. Different some of my peers, for whom being excluded from Harry's world meant being excluded from our historic period cohort'southward most of import obsession, I don't really mind. For me, my never having read Harry Potter has always been a point of curiosity more than than frustration, much like the fact that, until recently, I'd never seen Titanic. (In that location'south nudity and a sexual practice scene!)

Many American millennials who grew upwards in conservative Christian families share plenty of these touchstones, things in popular culture we knew nosotros shouldn't watch or read or do, or things nosotros thought we should engage with. The Simpsons was bad. A Walk to Call back was good. Nosotros kissed dating farewell. Dungeons & Dragons, the Smurfs, and the Care Bears were bad, as were Cabbage Patch dolls (the rumor was that they were possessed by demons), simply we probably read Left Backside. Plenty of young people got rid of their secular music and replaced it with Christian versions. A lot of us spent our evenings every October 31 at a church building "harvest party" instead of play tricks-or-treating. Rejecting a lot of mainstream pop culture was part of who we were.

That speaks strongly, in many means, to what it meant in the '90s and 2000s to exist a Christian kid or teenager. Many of our associations with our youth — particularly for those of u.s. who grew up evangelical — are more than tightly linked to the things in mainstream pop culture we weren't allowed to experience than to religious experience itself. In banning things like Harry Potter or "secular" music, evangelicals ofttimes tried to create alternating cultural products to make full the void.

That tendency hasn't died off, although there seems to be a higher tolerance amid evangelicals and other conservative Christians today for appointment with mainstream secular culture, less about the Plugged In style of tabulating objectionable content and more near analyzing and thinking critically about it.

Still, a generation of conservative Christian millennials like me arrived at adulthood without having had the same pop culture experiences as many of our peers. Maybe that'southward just a symptom of an increasingly niche-driven, fragmented popular civilization. Only for many I've talked to, it's too a source of sorrow. They miss having had a footing for talking to their peers almost something everyone enjoyed — and in the instance of Harry Potter, for many, it seems that the matter they were barred from might take, in the end, been 1 of the most Christian stories produced past mainstream culture in a long time.

harrillsobsed1976.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/31/17607988/harry-potter-boycott-evangelical-dobson-focus-peretti-satanic-panic

Share this post