When Joseph Ratzinger became pope as Benedict XVI, media proclaimed that "the pope condemns Harry Potter". This was not strictly true. What happened was that in 2003, cardinal Ratzinger wrote a letter to German sociologist Gabriele Kuby. He expressed his appreciation of a book she had co-written, which was critical of the Potter phenomenon. Thus, no papal condemnation, only a conservative cardinal's support of some criticism.
No doubt inspired by Ratzinger, Kuby has continued her critique in a book titled "Harry Potter – gut oder Böse. Schwerpunkt volume 5". It has given rise to some debate in Germany. Kuby's criticism is more academically phrased than most evangelical and fundamentalist antipotterism, but the factual contents is not very different. The only reason it is interesting is because of the Roman Catholic and possibly papal connection.
1. Harry Potter is a global long-term project to alter culture. In the younger generation the books remove the inhibitions against magic. This promotes powers in society which Christianity had previously vanquished.
The claim is sheer speculation. There is no evidence to suggest that the practise of magic or belief in magic has increased as a consequence of these books. There isn't even any evidence that the books change young people's attitudes to magic. Even more baseless is the allegation that the Potter books are part of some sort of secret agenda or conspiracy to "change culture".
2. Hogwarts, the school for witchcraft and sorcery, is a closed world of violence and horror, curses and bewitchment, racial ideology and blood sacrifice, gore and possession. It is permeated by an atmosphere of deceit, which will be transferred to the young reader.
To begin, the description of Hogwarts is simply untrue. The Potter books belong in the English literary tradition of "Boarding school novels" which Kuby does not seem to be aware of. Like in most such books, the boarding school is a micro universe. It is not just a place that presents intrigues and problems, but also the only place where Harry is happy, because it is where he has friends and good teachers.
Further, it is impossible to predict the effects of literature on the mind of the reader. People aren't computers which are programmed in a simple, logical way. If we want to know what effect the Potter books have on readers, we must investigate the readers. Until Kuby can present such an investigation, her allegations are just fruits of her imagination.
3. Harry Potter is not about the struggle between good and evil. As the series progresses, the similarities between Harry and the completely evil Voldemort become stronger. In the fifth volume, he becomes possessed by Voldemort, which destroys his personality.
Kuby speculates about the fundamental mystery in the Potter series - i.e. the real relationship between Harry and Voldemort. We will probably not get the solution to this mystery until we read the seventh and last book. Kuby's analysis is hasty, and completely disregards that the struggle between good and evil is fundamental in all the books. It is also one of the best qualities of Rowling's writing, that evil is not just a monster which appears from nowhere in order for the main character to have an opponent. As the story progresses, the evils that Harry contends with become more realistic, closer to our own world. Think for instance of Umbridge in book 5 - an almost archetypal fascist!
It is also untrue that Harry becomes possessed by Voldemort. He is tricked, not possessed.
4. The world of humans is denigrated while the world of witches and sorcerers is glorified.
The world of "muggles" is hardly described at all, with the exception of the Durseley family which are hardly depicted as typical. The world of magicians has all the same problems, including corrupt politicians, tyrannical teachers, slandering journalists, class struggle and prejudice. What is denigrated in these books is prejudice, oppression, lust for power. What is glorified is friendship, trust, faithfulness, respect and love.
5. There are no positive transcendental dimensions. The supernatural is completely demonic. Divine symbols are misused.
The supernatural in the Potter books is simply a power, much like electricity. Good characters (like the Weasley family) use it to wash dishes and do other household chores, travel, play sports, and other mundane things. Hardly demonic! Whatever is evil in the Potter books, is not evil because it is supernatural. Voldemort would be a very bad guy even if he had no magical powers at all.
Kuby seems to demand that good books must have a full Christian ontology. With such a requirement, very few books indeed would qualify.
6. Harry Potter is not a modern saga. In classic sagas/fairy tales, witches and sorcerers are always depicted as evil. The hero escapes their power by practising virtue. In Harry Potter there is nobody who wants what is good.
What gives Kuby the right to demand that Rowling must adapt her fantasy world to the Grimm brothers or some other historic model? Besides, there are plenty of other modern sagas where magic and other superhuman abilities are used in the service of good. For example: JRR Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Astrid Lindgren, Terry Pratchett, Stephen Donaldson, Julian May, Mary Stewart, T.H. White, Katherine Kurtz and others.
7. With emotional manipulation and intellectual confusion, the reader's ability to differentiate between good and evil is defeated.
These books have been sold in over 50 million copies, and the movies have been seen by countless millions. If they had any negative effect on human ability to differentiate between good and evil, this should be visible in some way - in individuals or society. Kuby herself ought to be a very confused person since she has read the books. My guess is that she may very well be the only victim of the effect she claims...
8. It is a crime against the young generation to playfully seduce them into magic and fill their imagination with images of a world where evil rules, a world which not only lacks exits but is also portrayed as desirable.
I'd rather say that it is a crime against all honesty to use warped descriptions in order to create "moral panic" against good books. As an argument, point 8 merely repeats the allegations of point1.
9. Anyone who supports freedom of opinion should take a stand against a mass seduction and dictatorship of opinions which is propagated by a gigantic multimedia industry.
What has this got to do with Potter? It may be valid to criticize the power of the multimedia industry, but nobody is being forced or brainwashed into reading Rowling's books. They are just enormously popular, and they did not become so popular because of any commercial campaign. Readers simply dicovered them. And if you talk about freedom of opinion against mass seduction and dictatorship of opinions, perhaps your first concern should be religious prohibitionists.
10. Since the faith in a loving God is consistently counteracted, the indoctrination of using Harry Potter at school is intolerant and in violation of the (German) constitution. On religious and scientific grounds, it should be possible to refuse participation in Potter activities in schools.
Kuby completely fails to show in what way the Potter books counteract faith in a loving God. Religion is hardly even mentioned in these books. Personally, I would certainly like the books better if questions about life and death were given a clear Christian answer. But even though they do not, neither do they give answers that are in conflict with the faith. Rowling makes rather few points at all on metaphysics and none at all on ontology.
It's also interesting - and sad - to note that a catholic German sociologist uses arguments which are virtually identical to those propagated by right-wing American Bible fundamentalists.