There is no denying Harry’s popularity as ‘Book 6′ breaks all sales records.

And amongst certain branches of Christianity the debate seems to rumble on about whether or not Christians should be reading about ‘witchcraft’ and the like (a really good summary article of both positions here).

But having finished reading The Deathly Hallows yesterday, and also having watched Order of the Phoenix (OOP) on the same day, it strikes me that this argument is often carried out on far too superficial a level.

In the past I have defended the books on the basis of their general ‘moral framework’ of good and evil. But I now think that the reality is less positive than that.

In OOP, Sirius tells Harry, “We all have dark and light within us. What matters is the part we choose to act on.” Although positively this avoids the naive assumption that everyone is ‘good’, this kind of self-determinism is clearly a long way away from the Biblical picture of mankind helpless to choose the good without the work of the Spirit.

There is more to be said about the worldview of Harry Potter, but I am convinced that it is precisely because this mirrors so accurately the worldview of so many in the West that the book has done so well. In saying this I acknowledge firstly, that this may happen on an entirely subconscious level for many if not most readers and secondly, that it is also an excellent story which keeps its reader gripped.

So the ‘danger’ for Christians reading or watching HP, is that they do so with an uncritical mind, and begin to accept the worldview presented there, rather than critically evaluating it against the Biblical truth.

(For further reading, Hollywood Jesus provide a typically stimulating discussion of OOP here)

According to the recent High Court ruling, a school girl was not discriminated against when she was Banned from wearing a ‘purity ring’.

I think that this was a good result.

As Christians we are called to live in submission to the earthly authorities, except when to do so would be in contradiction with the clear command of God.

Although Christians are called to chastity except within marriage, there is no Biblical obligation upon us to wear a symbol to demonstrate that point. Our life and words are surely witness enough.

The school was not “ruling on religious truth” in banning the ring. It was simply enforcing a reasonable school uniform requirement.

On the other hand, there is a much stronger argument that this school and indeed all state schools in this country are “ruling on religious truth” inasmuch as a particular viewpoint on sex and sexual ethics is being promoted to the exclusion of all others.

But whilst we continue to swallow the lie that to be ’secular’ is to be ‘objective,’ there is little chance of us noticing that.

It was nice to see The Guardian, not usually slow to attack anything to do with evangelical Christianity, publishing a positive piece by Jonathan Aitken about the ‘problems’ at Wycliffe Hall.

Aitken seems to place some of the exaggerated newspaper claims in context, and in particular to suggest that they largely boil down to a ‘personal dispute’ of the kind which would not even raise comment if it took place in a different kind of organisation.

Of course, that such a disagreement has taken place within a Christian institution is sad, and that (as usual) different elements of the church seem so quick to argue and fight demonstrates a spirit a million miles from that of the Lord we all purport to follow.

What a comfort that our God is so infinitely more gracious and forgiving than we ever manage to be.