[Dancing Jane]

I wouldn't put too much stock in this article. Sounds like this Kuby lady sent her book to then-Cardinal Ratzinger. Card. Ratzinger or an aide of his wrote something to the effect of "thanks for the book, sometimes things effect kids and we don't notice it."

Then this man Michael O'Brien goes to LifeSite making a huge issue out of it. While I respect LifeSite, I really wouldn't accept any conclusions before reading accounts of this in a few more sources. If Cardinal Ratzinger really believed Harry Potter was harmful, why wouldn't he have addressed it himself, instead of just giving permission for others to pass along his thoughts on the matter?

[maryz]

That's exactly what it sounded like to me, too.

[hispanichoosier]

I wouldn't put too much stock in this article. Sounds like this Kuby lady sent her book to then-Cardinal Ratzinger. Card. Ratzinger or an aide of his wrote something to the effect of "thanks for the book, sometimes things effect kids and we don't notice it."

Exactly. Encouraging debate on an issue of culture is not the same as issuing a doctrinal note on the issue.

Then this man Michael O'Brien goes to LifeSite making a huge issue out of it. While I respect LifeSite, I really wouldn't accept any conclusions before reading accounts of this in a few more sources

I agree. Unfortunately, Mr. O'Brien is an author himself. He has written the apocalyptic novels Father Elijah and Sophia House. Thus, he may have some good points to make, but he's not a theologian.

If Cardinal Ratzinger really believed Harry Potter was harmful, why wouldn't he have addressed it himself, instead of just giving permission for others to pass along his thoughts on the matter?

True. When it comes to theological inquiry, giving permission for somebody to explore a moral and theological topic doesn't equal assent.