Why is Harry Potter hated by some Catholics for magic when lord of the rings has Gandalf who was a wizard?


#124

I think once you’ve read them, then reread in any order you please! I do all the time.

But if I was going to introduce someone to the series for the first time, I would want them to read in publication order, and to not read The Magician’s Nephew before The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe.

But that’s just my opinion, shared by many. :grin: YMMV.


#125

True. It would take out some of the mystery with The White Witch and Aslan.


#126

Exactly.

Going through the Wardrobe is the best first introduction.

Otherwise you lose the thrill of the “Aha!” moment when reading TMN and making all the connections.


#127

I might be the only person alive who did not enjoy Narnia… like, at all. LOL


#128

Banned from CAF!!

Hmm, wrong thread. But still…:stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

Others here have said the same before, but I’m not quite sure they’re human…:thinking:


#129

I believe such sentiments carry a laite sentua excommunication reserved to the Holy See.


#130

ROFL!!! Oh nooooo!


#131

First time posting-- I have read most of the comments on this topic, and most, like myself, see Harry Potter as completely harmless. I grew up reading these books, and not once did I ever think about the occult or abandoning God because of a fantasy story. Not everything is the the end of the world. Sometimes in life one must decide to relax and enjoy a good novel.


#132

Some people aren’t happy unless they are mad. Harry Potter gives some people something to be mad about.


#133

I think you mentioned you don’t like LOTR either? It’s probably more the case you just don’t care for the fantasy genre. Hey, my mother doesn’t either, she obsesses on spy thrillers instead (they bore me to tears)……to each there own :grin:


#134

Nah, I love fantasy! And science fiction. When I’m not on here, I’m a science fiction author. LOL.

LOTR, however, was written like a textbook and that’s not my thing. What I disliked about Narnia is that it just felt too sad. There was this underlying sorrow that just didn’t work for me.


#135

I’m not getting the textbook take on it, though. Sure, the Silmarillion reads like a history text, but the actual LOTR trilogy (Fellowship, Towers, Return) is classic literary form.


#136

We each interpret in our own ways. :slight_smile: That’s why we got this handy dandy Church to help us read Scripture. Haha. :wink:


#137

Quick question? Did you actually get into the “meat” of the novel, or did you get hung up in the Prologue?


#139

Nobody got the satire. And sadly the joke is ruined because you must explain it. LOL. Now nobody is laughing, we are all just confused.


#140

Whe. I was a kid, in the back pages of comic books, you could send away for books about magic (not illusionist tricks).

Along with X-ray specs and sea monkeys.


#141

I have been reading up on sedevacantism and this thread is so much more fun. Is there any possibility of a schism over this?


#142

My son said the same thing.


#143

I agree. The parts with Bombadil and Goldberry were some of my very favorite parts. I almost chose Goldberry as my username here. I was terribly disappointed it wasn’t included in the movie. My boys felt the same. :sob:


#144

The other omission that just kills me is The Scouring of the Shire. To see a faint glimpse of what might have happened to all of Middle-Earth had Sauron been victorious lends a gravity and weight to the story, and would have counteracted some of the sillier aspects of the films, such as the (incorrect) implication that pipe-weed was actually marijuana, or the (in my view) totally unwarranted portrayal of Merry and Pippin as ignorant, uncouth buffoons.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.