|
作者
|
內容
|
|
Cissie
|
Posted -
2001/5/26 上午 11:26:31
|
|
|
波蘭神父指哈利波特為異端邪說
(中央社華沙五日法新電) 波蘭一家報紙五日報導，一
位波蘭神父抨擊暢銷兒童書籍「哈利波特」系列作品為
散布異端邪說，並呼籲羅斯勞地區的天主教徒禁止他們
的子女閱讀這本書。
據選舉日報報導，這位不知名的神父在羅斯勞的聖
奧古斯丁教會告訴他的信眾，英國作家羅林所寫的這一
系列書籍「散播異端邪說，兒童不應閱讀。」
這位神父說，年僅十一歲的書中主角是一名巫師的
徒弟，他的冒險過程「給讀者的印象是，這個世界是由
超自然的力量掌控，所有的問題都可以由魔法解決。」
這項報導並未公布神父的名字。
他被引述說，「哈利波特」書中所描述的是「所有
天主教徒都應反對的異端言行」。
波蘭文版的「哈利波特」已銷出數十萬冊，書迷即
將於十日在華沙舉行第一次全國聯誼會。
波蘭的三千九百萬人口中約百分之九十是天主教徒
。
What are your views, bros and sisters?
I think it is not a problem of reading or not reading it - rather, how should we guide those who read it.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2001/5/26 上午 11:58:39
|
|
|
If we haven't read it, no view can be given.
If you've read it, give your view la.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2001/5/26 下午 12:02:36
|
|
|
不過，若袛是因為故事書內容有講巫術而說是異說，那麼就與中世紀的 Witch Hunting 無甚分別。當然，傳媒的報導也有可能是以偏概全，未曾深入理解該位批評者的看法。
希臘神話和西遊記算不算是異說呢？
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2001/5/26 下午 12:04:22
|
|
|
那是故事書嘛, 又不是神學教科書, 我說明教張教主的乾坤大挪移是異端都說得通, 但每個人都知這是武俠小說嘛.
一句, 無聊!
|
|
Cissie
|
Posted -
2001/5/26 下午 12:17:09
|
|
|
如果小朋友有此"智慧",當然沒問題咯!
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2001/5/26 下午 12:21:07
|
|
|
有沒有看過該部故事書的人可以告訴我們，該部故事書所勾劃的世界觀是怎樣的？
|
|
Cissie
|
Posted -
2001/5/28 下午 04:13:32
|
|
|
當日想找來看卻賣光 - 要到中央圖書館逛逛。
|
|
Cissie
|
Posted -
2001/5/29 下午 05:50:24
|
|
|
先看soccerer's stone, 看過再說。
|
|
steve
管理人員
|
Posted -
2001/11/28 下午 09:20:18
|
|
|
A friend sent me this comment on Harry Porter.
Meanwhile, I found the first of the series, H.P. and the Philosopher's stone from my 9 year old niece's bookshelf, and I am reading it.
Subject: [哈利波特的真相]
這次暑假我回台灣，發現原來還有許多基督徒不知道「哈利波特」是不好的書，連基督教論壇報、某基督教書房﹝好像是校園﹞都有在賣。連我們教會中也有些弟兄姊妹在看。所以我特別把末次號筒月刊中有關「哈利波特」的內容整理出來，然後跟英文原文重新校對，發給了大家和寄給各基督教機構。
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Harry Potter? What Does God Have To Say?
本文譯自: http://www.lasttrumpetministries.org/
我寫下這個緊急的訊息，因為我曾經是一個巫師。我也是會發出咒語的占星家和算命家。我曾居住在幽暗和神秘的王國上。經由符咒和魔術，我是能夠喚起「控制未知數」的力量，所以能夠在超越星界平面上的夜風飛行。萬聖節是我一年中最喜愛的時間，我又被Wiccan巫術王國密謀及吸收。這些是在1960年代--- 當巫術正開始興盛時的事。
在1960年代的十年期間，1966年後，有一位名字叫作J.K. Rowling的女人出生。這就是在公元2000年以四本稱為「哈利．波特系列」的書來迷住世界的女人。這些書是導向性和指導性的巫術手冊，並設計為娛樂的模式。這四本書是J.K. Rowling用來教導巫術的書！我知道這些事，因為我曾一度深深地進入那世界。
在1960年代中的巫術是非常不同的。當時的女巫為數不多，而且技藝是非常秘密的。
在那靈性混亂的十年的結尾，我是奇蹟地被耶穌基督的能力和祂的血拯救出來。我也脫離了所有住在我裡面的邪靈的綑綁並得著自由。然而，當我開始參加正統的基督教會，我發覺那裏甚至有巫術留下來的標記。這些異教徒的節日和sabats是用來作為「基督徒節日」慶祝。
當時光飛逝，我觀察所謂的「基督徒」教會在妥協與聯合。我以驚愕的心觀察，來自東方宗教和「新紀元」的教義開始迷住會堂。這是惡魔的建立。光明會的陰謀家正在帶來單一世界宗教，將神祕主義巧妙地隱藏在它的教導中。
為了要把巫術成功地帶給世界以完成惡魔的控制，這一代必須要被勸誘和被教導以使他們的思想、談話、裝扮和行為像女巫一。......
現在是公元2001年。所有神祕主義和巫術的根基都已立好。光明會主義者必須很快地行動，因為時間正在耗盡。
這是共產主義革命家列寧(Lenin)說，「給我一代的年輕人，我將會轉變整個世界」。現在整個年輕的一代被一個名字為J.K. Rowling的女人與她的四本關於巫術的書：哈利．波特系列所迷惑。
曾是巫師的我，能夠以權威來說：我查驗過Rowling的工作和哈利．波特的書，這些東西是祕術的訓練手冊。藉由這些書的內容，數百萬不知情的年輕人被教導如何去說、思想、穿著，以及行為像女巫一樣。孩子們被哈利．波特的書迷住，甚至甘願放棄電視、電動來讀這些書。
系列中的第一本書，標題為「哈利．波特和巫師的魔法石」，哈利•波特被帶到「Hogwart的巫術學校」。在這祕術的學校，哈利．波特學習該如何獲得和使用巫術。哈利也學習到一些新的字彙，例如：「阿茲卡班(Azkaban)」，「瑟西(Circe)」，「天龍星座(Draco)」，「厄里斯(Erised)」，「赫密士(Hermes)」和「Slytherin」；這全都是魔鬼真實的名字。這些不是小說中的人物！
這事有多嚴重？藉由閱讀這些東西，數以百萬計的年輕人學習怎樣與邪靈相交。他們以名字來開始認識他們。許多聲稱是基督徒的孩子們也開始以此填充他們的心思意念，同時那些願意作無知的父母們卻以別的角度來看待。
這些書的標題應該足夠讓我們了解這些書是多麼的邪惡和敵基督。在前面提及的第一本書的標題，「神秘的魔法石」，是真實的揭露。第二本書叫做「消失的密室」，而第三本書的標題是「阿茲卡班的囚犯」。
相當悲傷的，這露骨的巫術已被眾所週知和受敬重的「基督徒」領袖支持，例如證明自己是現代」「猶太出賣者」的詹姆士．Dobson博士和Chuck Colson。哈利．波特的書是純巫術和從鬼魔而來的東西。〝基督徒〞領袖卻藉著說「好巫術總是勝過壞巫術」來為他們辯護。
這是從地獄中孵化出來最古老的詐騙遊戲。作為一名真實的巫師，我知道關於兩方面「力量(the force)」的意義。顯然的，許多〝基督徒〞領袖也知道。當有著sabats和esbats的真實女巫結合為coven時，她們會彼此敬禮說「受祝福(Blessed be)」，當她們分開的時候，會說「力量與你同在 (The Force be with you)」。這兩方面的「力量」都是撒但。不該說是好方面的力量勝過壞方面的力量，而是耶穌基督的寶血會摧毀兩方面假想的惡魔「力量」。
高級的女巫相信有七位惡魔的王子，而第七位沒有名字的王子是指定給基督徒的。在coven的會議中，他被稱為「無名氐」。在哈利．波特的書，有一個稱為「Voldemort」的人物。這發音嚮導說他「一定不可以被命名的」。
在7月8日的午夜，數以百萬計的孩子擠進了各處的書店 --- 為了獲得系列中最新的第四本書，稱為「哈利．波特和火腳杯」。這些書在各地被帶入家裡，而這每一本書都有一個邪靈跟著，以將詛咒帶入那些家裡。7月8日也是自仲夏的witches' sabat的第18天(在占卜術上是3個6 )。7月8日也是自特許聯合宗教(United Religions Charter)在舊金山簽署的第13天。現在我們瞭解公立學校正在計劃在教室使用哈利．波特的巫術，把公立學校變成巫術訓練中心。
神會怎樣說有關書哈利．波特系列的書？在聖經的使徒行傳，我們在第19章18~20節中讀到下列的話語：「那已經信的，多有人來承認訴說自己所行的事。平素行邪術的，也有許多人把書拿來，堆積在眾人面前焚燒。他們算計書價，便知道共合五萬塊錢。主的道大大興旺，而且得勝，就是這樣」。
身為父母，如果我們允許我們的孩子閱讀巫術的書，我們將必須給神一個交代。只有那些屬撒但的東西被摧毀，神的話語才會強烈地在你的生活上得勝。這本小冊子被祈禱過，我希望它對你有幫助。如果需要我們進一步的協助，請連絡我們。
|
|
steve
管理人員
|
Posted -
2001/11/28 下午 09:21:28
|
|
|
But the comment sounds really fundamental....
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2001/11/29 上午 09:52:42
|
|
|
那些名字如果真的是撒旦的名字,則可要小心。不如,找來李亮及簡樂年神父請示一下吧 - 公教報的影評好像也讚這部小說所改編的電影。正如我早前說,成年信友未必中招,小孩子可不同!
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2001/11/29 下午 04:50:07
|
|
|
不要讓我們的孩子看任何事物吧,尋秦記是魔鬼的作為,蠱惑仔當然也是,嫦娥奔月也可能是,鵝頸橋下的阿毛是"本地化"了的女巫.不如去捉了她們來燒吧!
我是否傻了呢?!
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2001/11/30 上午 09:43:42
|
|
|
當然是傻咯,您提的那些都是fiction(包括"西遊記");這rowling女士故事中的"人物"卻是基督宗教裡面的撒彈；邏輯上"可能"有很大分別......
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2001/11/30 上午 09:51:19
|
|
|
口下!原來哈利波特不是fiction嗎?尋秦記的蠃政是假的?鵝頸橋阿嬸打的小人,我百分百保證確有其人. so what?
這樣的邏輯我當然唔明la,唉.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2001/11/30 上午 10:33:10
|
|
|
今期的sunday examiner的頁底有整版的篇幅討論harry potter, 有興趣的可以看看.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2001/11/30 下午 12:53:00
|
|
|
Good news, so that we can have a fuller picture. "Fiction" is of course fabricatons: part fabrications (like 3 musketeers, Jin Yong, and many others 'basing' on some history). They do not 'cause' any 'spiritual' effects - what if I pray to the devil? Do you think it will cause any effect on my spiritually? Have you heard of the 101 sharing by a receiving instructions then because she actively asked the devil to come to her (and got into trouble, of course)?
Xi You Ji is fiction - however you call hte Monkey King, 'he' would NOT respond. See if you dare to call those names set out in the previous posting! I dare NOT!
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2001/11/30 下午 03:13:38
|
|
|
Some will think "He" will respond, There is monkey king temple in Hong Kong. the people "playing "God Fight" call the monkey king all the time.
Still, everything can be an idol, when you don't trust God as almighty and etc. A our lady statue can be an idol too, if you think she is as same as God.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2001/11/30 下午 04:00:49
|
|
|
Sure, those "shen da" stuff did made a lot of harm - remember the "boxers" of 1900 who took onto this (too sensitive to say too much on this nowadays)?
Not succumbing to such does not mean that those stuff are by themselves O.K. without a properly informed guidance. Our Church does have a whole set of teachings on Mariology, does it? And our Catechism and our Bible do have elaborate treatment on idol worship.
Can we accord the same degree of caution to the Potter series please?
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2001/11/30 下午 09:30:30
|
|
|
Please Cecil,
tell me a little bit about the story in Harry Potter.
Are there reallty such scenes as "invocation" of the devil?
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2001/12/3 上午 10:32:59
|
|
|
Dear Augustine,
You have a fuller discussion of this in the 1 Dec issue of Sunday Examiner. Also, in the discussion threads under http://www.catholic.org.hk
I don't think the matter is as serious as what the pastor in trumpet ministry says. You CAN take a look of the series. It's not that objectionable, now that you know about the background. Have fun!
|
|
steve
管理人員
|
Posted -
2001/12/12 下午 03:29:09
|
|
|
An official view on Potter/anti-Potter :
Fundamentalism Afoot in Anti-Potter Camp, Says New-Religions Expert
Popular Culture Enjoys an Autonomy, Explains Massimo Introvigne
What does one of Europe's leading experts on new religious movements and sects think about Harry Potter?
Q: Many are critical of the Harry Potter books because they claim it is dangerous to expose children to witchcraft and the occult. What do you think?
Introvigne: As both a Roman Catholic and a social scientist, I regard this as an extremely interesting, yet dangerous, form of fundamentalism, a subject matter I have considerable interest in.
Fundamentalism, in general, consists in denying the autonomy of culture --and of the secular sphere in general, including politics -- claiming that there should be no distinction between religion and culture.
Fundamentalists, from a Catholic point of view, are not wrong in their diagnosis of a modern illness, that is, separation or divorce between religion and culture. It's their cure that is wrong.
Vatican II -- and Thomas Aquinas several centuries before -- teaches that religion and culture should not be separated; at the same time they should not be confused, because they are not one and the same. When Vatican II mentions the autonomy of the secular sphere, its operative word is "distinction," something different from both secularist separation and fundamentalist confusion.
Fundamentalism is rare among Catholics, but the anti-Potter crusade is an example of how Protestant fundamentalist ideas are getting disseminated in certain Catholic milieus as well.
There is little doubt that the Harry Potter books and movie are prime examples of a social production of popular culture that -- unlike, say, in the 17th century -- is not controlled, nor determined, by the Church or the Christian community.
Secularists would say not only that this is always good and positive, but that we should judge contemporary cultural products leaving entirely aside Christian moral values.
Fundamentalists reject, or even burn, all products of contemporary popular culture, because their modes of production, languages and styles are not intrinsically Christian. If we honor the Catholic teaching on the autonomy of the culture, yet retain the right to judge its products based on our own values, we cannot dismiss contemporary popular culture as a whole and should judge on a case-by-case basis.
It is an obvious fact that modern popular culture often uses the language of magic. This goes back to classics such as "Lord of the Rings," "The Wizard of Oz," "Mary Poppins" and "Peter Pan," not to mention much older stories such as Cinderella, Snow White and Sleeping Beauty.
The authors of what we call "supernatural fiction" do not necessarily believe in magic. Most of them don't. For instance, Bram Stoker, the creator of one of the ultimate novels of supernatural fiction, "Dracula," also wrote a book called "Famous Imposters" against all sort of superstitious and magical beliefs. Stoker was an Irish Protestant, married to a pious Catholic wife.
Most children understand that magic is used in fairy tales and juvenile supernatural fiction as a century-old language, and that this is fiction, not reality. If we dismiss the use of magic as a language, we should at least be fundamentalist to the bitter end, and go against "Mary Poppins," "Peter Pan" and "Sleeping Beauty," and insist that Cinderella puts a burkha on.
By the way, this is what not only the Taliban but even ruling Wahhabite puritans in Saudi Arabia do: All the titles and stories I have quoted were forbidden in Taliban Afghanistan, and most are in Saudi Arabia.
Of course, regarding magic as an acceptable language does not mean that we should not go on and examine what stories are told with this language. "Harry Potter," just as "Sleeping Beauty" or "Cinderella," pass this examination in my opinion with full flag, because the human values they teach are good natural values.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2001/12/12 下午 04:32:26
|
|
|
This is a very mature the rational approach. Even religion has the primary mission of 'to live and let live'.
When we condemn the Hk Govt. in its policies as being 'oppressive', let us also not forget that there is also 'the other side of the coin' for any authority to consider.
Similarly with cultural issues - to be broad-minded does not mean condoning heresies; to be able to see the good intention of a piece of government policy mean also mean 'lifting' the veil of prejudice, gathering information and relating sensibly your own desire in order to reach a workable and acceptable compromise.
|
|
s0375537
|
Posted -
2003/11/6 下午 10:55:01
|
|
|
巫術本是魔鬼的，不應鼓勵
|
|
Mitrophanes
|
Posted -
2003/11/12 下午 09:35:25
|
|
|
這位波蘭司鐸的良心似乎比較細緻一點﹐對“邪惡”勢力很是敏感。
但是不知道哈利波特的邪惡指數和馬嵩黨﹐泛基督教主義以及錫安主義相比又如何﹖
如果真要將天主教內“被邪惡勢力玷染的人”都送上火刑柱的話﹐不知在梵帝岡城又有幾人可以幸免﹖
|
|
carl
|
Posted -
2004/6/2 下午 10:58:09
|
|
|
不知所為，不是基督徒的答安，
書內很多都不是真的名字，摩法也不是真的，
如果是個個都會啦？
現時時下所用香薰療法，在中世是巫女的方法，
那現在又要視為巫術！！！回去中世紀獵巫吧。
不是很多人會原諒當時教會這些行動，
真的巫女巫師就無那麼多，借神之名殺人就很多。
|
