I recall a former Evangelical referring to fundamentalists quipping, “No fun and no mental,” and this is a good example of that: No fun, no reading a work of fiction. And no mental, you can’t read it because I’ve heard it’s bad and I can’t be bothered to verify it for myself before using my authority as a priest and teaching this to the faithful.
Fr. Ripperger and his fans strike me as a case of cult of personality and too often something dodgy comes out about the priest. Hopefully, misleading his fans about HP is the worst he does.
If someone tells me a book is ‘bad’ and cannot tell me in a concrete form with specific examples beyond the level of, ‘It Is coz I say it is’ or ‘A man I know was told by a man he knows who was told by another man’, type hearsay then I am not going to take such views seriously regardless of who is advancing them and that is definitely in part what I felt was going on with Fr. RIpperger’s talk on this subject.
In other words Father Ripperger again. Of course its no tragedy if one never reads these books and there are probably much better uses of our time but the fact people are promoting a false image of any form of literature or art based on hearsay, bad reasoning and use of logical fallacies is a danger in and of itself.
Certainly, sweeping statements about genres of fiction or particular books as been wicked or evil without bothering to assess their contents, reliance on hearsay and lack of critical thinking in making these sort of judgements and lack of reference fo the texts in question and looking at them in context. A reliance at times on media pronouncements by ‘celeberity’ priests who are judged to have special knowledge of reported to hold positions that do not actually exist in the Church. Distortions of what figures like the Holly Father have said on issues like this via simplifiying complex arguments and reductionism.
And once again, it isn’t occult. The “spells” are pig Latin or muddled up Latin phrases. Your source is spouting nonsense, and frankly, at this point, looking at Ripperger, Priest or not, this looks suspiciously like a very cultish admiration for a man who looks to be a pretty extreme Traditionalist. As with Father Gabriel Amorth, he has his dedicated following, but in no way does he appear to represent official Church positions on Harry Potter, since the Church has no official position on Harry Potter.
When you can point out an actual magic spell in HP, you let me know.
No, not by any definition of the occult that i’ve seen. The “occultish” elements in HP, specifically the Death Eaters, are the evil guys. It’s kind of like how the Jedis in Star Wars only use their powers for good, but the Sith use it for domination and murder, or how the good Elves and Ainur in Tolkien’s mythos use their inherent powers for good, but the bad guys like Sauron use their native powers for domination and evil.
And when you can demonstrate that they’re occult, you let me know.
Father Ripperger may know what he is talking about all things Catholic, he does not know what he is talking about as regards this work of fiction and plainly has not read it. You are setting up a false dilemma with the scare words, “occult fiction.”
For a bonus point let us reduce LOTR in the same way, "The Lord of the Rings chronicles the adventures of nine brave companions, among them a wizard, a warrior and the most unlikely hero of all as they struggle against he dark lord Sauron. This is reductionism of a very silyl kind.
“Scare words” lol does the truth of the harry potter trilogy being called occult fiction scare u?
It IS occult fiction!
And speaking for myself i follow the advice of ppl who know what theyre talking about on all matters pertaining to the occult. If u dont respect or agree with them or my willingness to follow that advice. Its not my problem.
Im not the only Catholic along with a million protestant Christians who feel that way about harry potter.
The issue is that some of Fr. R’s key examples are not about occult at all, but about someone with a clear mental illness.
You think that the Catholic Church would approve of someone sitting in a house burning down and praying to God about it and doing nothing else? Absolutely not. The Church would respectfully declare a mental illness in this individual.
Yet a singular priest can say “well she tried a Harry Potter spell” and declare it mistrust of God? What??? Do you not see how utterly foolish and dangerous this is…and not because of the occult? Attributing mental illness to a legitimate action of the occult makes it seem much less dangerous than it actually is.
According to the Vatican, all psychological issues must be ruled out before demonic activity is considered. So why is an “advanced” exorcist going off of a situation that clearly involves mental illness? Something dosn’t pass the sniff test.
His other claim is “a devil told him so” which is hardly rock-solid. Even when commanded to speak the truth by the power of Christ devils have still be know to lie. So that should be dismissed as probably inaccurate. And a good exorcist should know that. A good exorcist would NOT repeat words of a demon.
Other than those incidents the Father’s knowledge is based on off-hand falsehoods.
No doubt he has done some good for the world–but not every word is to be held as gold.
Have you actually read the books in question? The problem is for me to respect someone I have to have measure of trust that they actually have some knowledge concerning the texts in question. That’s not the case here, as far as contending that the LOTR is occult fiction you’ve outdone Father Ripperger as he doesn’t contend that as far as I am aware. My point in presenting a reductionsit summary of it was to show how doing that you can twist many things to sound the way you want.