Faust, Opera, and Satan Worship
Sound like an odd combination? On any other day, the strange grouping of Faust, opera and Satan worship would undoubtedly be seen as some sort of free association exercise. Today though, it is a Yahoo News headline.
According to Y!News, a teacher decided to introduce about 260 first, second and third-graders to opera, and did so with a video about Gounod's Faust. This choice did not sit well with parents in the community: "I think it glorifies Satan in some way," said parent Casey Goodwin.
Isn't it touching? These parents are so committed to protecting their children! Three cheers for you, Bennett, Colorado!
Or not. Come on, these parents aren't concerned, they're just stupid! If they were really concerned about their children being exposed to violent images, mention of suicide, and the "glorification" of Satan, they wouldn't be sending their children to public schools anyway. You think that opera's bad? Wait 'til I tell you about what happens in the halls of my friends' schools every day! You wanna protect your children from that? Then pull them out of the school. Don't whine about a comparatively innocuous opera video.
Faust is a classic. It does not glorify Satan any more than Don Quixote glorifies windmills. You want to talk about glorification of Satan? Talk to me in eight years when half of your kids are listening to Slipknot. You want to protect Christian ideals? Stop buying your kids the latest Harry Potter book. Don't come cryin' to me because your kids saw some puppets talking about a classic opera.
It just makes you look stupid.
posted by jacob.thrasher @ 2/03/2006 12:18:00 PM
18 comments
18 Comments:COMMENT POLICY
Please refrain from the use of foul language. Any failure to comply will result in comment deletion.
Opera is boring. If I was a kid, I'd be up in arms also.
Harry Potter isn't all bad. The only people who say it's evil are those who haven't read it. I think that so long that you keep in mind that it's a FANTASY novel, and nothing in it is real, than you're okay.
And, Neo, not everyone has the money or time to send their kids to Christian schools or homeschool them. Maybe homeschooling by themselves is alright for some highschoolers, but are you going to leave a kidnergardener, first grader, or second grader or even some middle school students by themselves and honestly think they're going to try to learn anything? That doesn't work even for some college-age people. In a more perfect world, maybe, but since when has this world been perfect? I hate to say it, but you encounter non-Christian views everywhere, even at church. Even if you managed to send your kid to a Christian school or homeschool them, they are going to run into the same things in the real world that they would run into at a public school. It's impossible to shelter someone forever. I think the better thing to do is not completely protect someone for the outside world (because you're going to hit it someday, whether you'd want to or not) but make you that your children or them children you know can tell right from wrong. That's the problem in society today is that people don't know the difference.
Ah, Icho... I wish I had more time to respond. I'll address Harry Potter in a later post: suffice it to say, for now, that there are lots of fantasy stories that I think you would find offensive, even dangerous. The simple fact that something is "fantasy" does not make it right, because we as Christians must make other considerations.
As for homeschooling... So much to respond to.
"And, Neo, not everyone has the money or time to send their kids to Christian schools or homeschool them."
They would if they would vote for school vouchers. There is almost no free enterprise in American schools, because there is no competition. No competition means no incentive to improve. No incentive to improve means no improvement, and no improvement means the same crappy standards of behavior and "education" that have been doing kids a disservice since the inception of public education.
"Maybe homeschooling by themselves is alright for some highschoolers, but are you going to leave a kidnergardener, first grader, or second grader or even some middle school students by themselves and honestly think they're going to try to learn anything? That doesn't work even for some college-age people."
Most people don't have a problem with doing their homework, and that is what homeschooling IS. It's homework. It's learning to teach oneself, a skill that is ESSENTIAL to a functioning adult, and a skill that the public school system does not teach.
And how exactly does being in a group of other students make you more likely to do your work than if you were alone?
"I hate to say it, but you encounter non-Christian views everywhere, even at church."
You won't catch me disagreeing there... But read on, because that statement means you either did not READ my post, or were incapable of understanding it.
"Even if you managed to send your kid to a Christian school or homeschool them, they are going to run into the same things in the real world that they would run into at a public school."
Undoubtedly, unChristian influences exist everywhere. Did I ever say otherwise? That wasn't my point. I was attempting to point out the hyposcrisy of the parents in the story I linked to... the fact that they try to shield their students from puppets and classic literature, all the while sending the kids off to a system that assaults them on many levels every day.
"It's impossible to shelter someone forever."
Your point? As I said, I wasn't advocating "sheltering," but while you've brought out that point...
When did Jesus leave his parents protection and begin his ministry? Care to take a guess? I'll tell you that it wasn't in 1st grade. Or 12th.
"I think the better thing to do is not completely protect someone for the outside world (because you're going to hit it someday, whether you'd want to or not) but make you that your children or them children you know can tell right from wrong. That's the problem in society today is that people don't know the difference."
Well, I'm not going to disagree with you here... the idea is not to make the children believe there is no evil in the world, or hide them from it... the idea is to *protect* and *train* them until they are able to stand against the evil on their own. So we don't disagree... you just don't seem to understand my post.
Wow..........thats sad. Opera?
THATS what they'er worried about?
what happens when the kids get older.....it just gets worse. In fact, what those kids are being taught now is probably worse than the opera...
Ditto!
Ah, Harry Potter...
To answer your question, MVB, I don't view the simple act of reading Harry Potter as sinful.
I do consider the books to be... Philosophically lacking though. I'd rather address this in a post, but here's my short analysis:
In creating any worthwhile work of fiction, we can be certain that the story will contain both a protagonist and an antagonist. The protagonist, or hero, is usually the main character. He is naturally the character who is to be supported by the reader of the story; that is, after all, the whole point of fantasy stories.
Traditionally, the hero will have some admirable quality, and in many cases serves as something of a nominal role model. Now, this is NOT to say that kids are going to get involved with Witchcraft after reading Harry Potter. That's open to speculation and study, and I won't pretend to know the effects the series has on children.
What I AM, saying, though, is that in any good work of literature, the hero will have some sort of redeeming quality. Usually, this involves taking the moral "high road," exhibiting admirable character, and things like that. It is entirely possible to portray a flawed human as the protagonist (Spiderman for instance), but in order for the story to be worthwile, the flawed human must make the right choices. Otherwise, the tale becomes merely a practice in subjectivity, in nihilism.
Now we come to the root of my problem... is the protagonist, and namesake of the "Harry Potter" series truly admirable? Well, first of all, I've never read the books, though if I can ever get through with my worthwhile books, I would not shy away from studying it. Solely from what I have been told, Harry's behavior is not particularly admirable... not out-and-out evil, necessarily, but hardly helpful in his fight against "evil" and not to be emulated.
Many have made the point that Harry Potter's really a story about "good vs. evil," and since the good (presumably Harry) wins, everything's A-OK. This, however, operates under the assumption that Harry is somehow better than those he is striving against. Is he? Does he really have the moral high ground? To find out, we must judge his goals, and the means he uses to reach them.
To be completely honest, I don't know exactly what Harry is trying to achieve; I don't know enough about the storyline. Let us assume, then, that Harry's cause is a noble one. His ends, at least, are good. But what about his means?
His means, then, would consist of magic. Is this magic evil? I'm not going to say that just yet... read on.
In a supernatural struggle of good vs. evil, we have to consider the source of the supernatural intervention. Do the supernatural powers in Harry Potter come from God? That is very unlikely. Do these powers come from the devil? I find that to be equally unlikely. What we're left with, then, is a morally neutral power... perhaps we can say it comes "from within oneself?"
Then, if the power comes from within oneself, and is therefore morally neutral (philosophically a rather generous assumption) what power does the enemy use? It is my understanding that the enemy uses the same or similar magic; not of an inherently honorable or dishonorable source, but from "within oneself."
Now, if this is the case, what shall separate the good from the evil? Shall the means they use? Of course not, since they use the same means. Then, would their ends separate them? Well, in a sense, but that would involve the ends being used to justify the means... Harry operating on the same level as the "bad guys" to defeat them, much the same as a vigilante will sink to criminal levels in order to defeat criminals. Is this admirable? Hardly. There is little distinction between good and evil in the story, save good intentions on Harry's part, but if we allow the ends to justify the means, then we're traveling a dangerous road.
So, then, back to the original question: Do I believe Harry Potter to be evil, and the act of reading it to be sinful? In a word, no. I believe it to be a poor piece of literature, and I believe reading it is not a worthwhile pastime for Christians, as it tends to undermine their worldview, but at this time, I do not see anything inherently sinful in it.
Dang, and that was my short answer!!!
Edited
....Well, Harry Potter I don't think is a big deal. Harry Potter just has a magical talent. I haven't read a Harry Potter book for many years, but I'm pretty sure that Harry never goes and worships any Pagan gods or anything. I don't think they ever say that he is a Christian, but he doesn't cast spells with pentegrams or anything. I don't think it carries bad morals at all.
In the halls of my schools all that people do is gossip about each other. Some of the dorm students are definitely screwed up with drugs and all, but we don't have people selling them or anything. I've also only seen one real fight on my campus.
It is funny how parents try to shelter their kids from these petty little things, but leave them open to horrible things. I know people who are giant pot heads, but their parents don't let them see R rated movies......it's dumn. The thing is that most of them are doing these things to rebel against their parents because they have been so sheltered. So, I guess there kind of has to be a happy medium with the sheltering. I'm not a doctor, so whatever. WEll, I'm going to go drive around and be AWESOME. TTYL. PS: If any of yall are ever drunk and at a party or something, then call me and I will come get you!....unless you are "anonymous", because he is mean.
Okay, let me elaborate a little more on ol' Harry. First of all, he is a teenager, which is why he isn't one of those idealistic-type heroes. Most of the time, he just wants to completely avoid his 'destiny', but his headmaster, Dumbledore, is always there to remind him that he has to, as what is easy isn't always right. It would be easy to simply ignore Voldemort and his followers (They aren't too different from Hitler. They always go on and on about pure blood and other garbage like that. And they kill people for fun. They're bad, no ifs ands or buts about it.). His destiny is to destroy Voldemort completely, as he is on his return to power after he was destroyed more than a decade earlier trying to kill Harry after doing in his parents. His mother's love had protected him, which was a concept beyond Voldemort.
The subject of the source of magic is never touched on, but it is assumed to be like the superpowers in X-Men. You either are a witch or you aren't. If you aren't, you can't use magic and if you are a witch, you can't really not use it (Harry exhibited powers before he knew witches were real).
So that pretty much sums it up.
Man, when I was just a kid, I used to LOVE to eat Hershey bars and wash 'em down with Coke. That always hit the spot. Nothing was better than that.
Now that I'm older, I still really like that kind of stuff.
Never mind that I weigh 400 lbs, I'm on an insulin pump for diabetes, and all my teeth are rotten.
At least I would eat happily, unattended, without having to have any encouragement from adults. Not many diets an eight year old would have adhered to like that and joyfully gobbled up.
Don Quixote glorifies windmills?!? That's going to make for some interesting reading for English Class. :-)
"Most people don't have a problem with doing their homework."
You've never been to my school.
MVB:
sometimes to support a family, both parents must work. maybe not both full time, but still. only a small fraction of jobs out there actually pay people enough money to support a family.
omg...Harry Potter is a great read!
about the post...dang, people are weird.
good post though, Neo.
Here's the thing about Harry Potter:
Some people like it, and others don't. You can't force someone to see eye-to-eye with you. That's just not the way humans work.
Opera isn't all that bad, as long as you can understand what they are saying. I've read some of the Harry Potter books. They are great, but they do have witchcraft and sorcery in it, and those ARE real. They are not fantasy. They go right along with satan worship, too.
Neo you could with good editing make an awesome book! your posts and the comments are so interesting! I think a wide range of people would read it. it touches today issues and is totally HOT! just something to think about...
Joey
Oh, I absolutely agree. Harry Potter is a Satanic book that teaches kids black magic. Why, just last week I used an Imperius curse on my local priest to get him to admit God does not exist and Satan is mighty!
Yay for Harry Potter! Yay for Satan!
You can't really criticize the book without reading it. And if you don't want to read it... well... not necessarily your loss, but not your gain.
I think the issue isn't if Harry Potter *encourages* witchcraft. But does it *discourage* it?
Note: If you're not a Christian and you don't give a bat's rear end for following the instruction in the Bible, go ahead, read it. Don't let me stop you. ;)
If you *are* a Christian, then maybe you should be concerned about what Harry Potter doesn't discourage. It quite obviously doesn't discourage witchcraft - it turns it into some elite, exclusive small group in society who have magic powers. The book doesn't address where the powers come from - obviously they don't call to a God for them.
Hey Neo, I'm a fan of your blog, but your explanation of why Harry Potter is not a good piece of literature cannot be credible if you have not even read the works. I would never write something like that if I hadn't done my research. You cannot act like you have knowledge on a topic if in fact you do not know anything at all about it. Anyway, I like your blog. Keep it real!
Hi DCTalk89,
I'm glad you enjoy my blog! Oh, and I just checked your e-mail address... I know who you are now! Yay!
I would like to address something you said though...
"...your explanation of why Harry Potter is not a good piece of literature cannot be credible if you have not even read the works."
Is that really so? If you think about it, we all make judgments like that every day...
For example, I believe we both know Cambodia would be a really bad place to live. Of course, neither of us have lived there, but we both know that a place overrun by corruption, poverty and violence would not be a good place to call home.
Now, would you like to reserve judgment on Cambodia's living conditions until you've lived there yourself, or would you find it more convenient to gather information from a variety of sources and make your judgment based on what they say?
If, as you say, I could not make a judgment about a book or other form of art without first examining it firsthand, then there would be no purpose in movie reviews, book reviews, or music reviews, because the whole point of these services is to help people make judgments about whether or not certain movies, books and music are worth their time. In fact, even commercials and advertisements would be obsolete if we couldn't judge art without examining it firsthand, because the whole point of commercials is to bring us to a favorable judgment of the movie in question, without our having seen it yet.
Does that make sense?
Post a Comment
<< Home