I can't help wondering if Fr. Amorth actually read any of the books -- or just the foamier Evangelical critiques. I wonder, too, whether he's ever read any imaginative literature: does he condemn the whole world of fantasy, fairy tales, folk tales, classical and other mythology, legend, poetry? Perhaps, with Plato, he does; but recall that Chesterton said of Plato: "great and glorious as he remains, he has been the father of all faddists."
Father Amorth also criticized the disordered morality presented in Rowling’s works, noting that they suggest that rules can be contravened and lying justified when they work to one’s benefit.
Does he mean the "disordered morality" by which one risks his life for a greater good? The "disordered morality" by which kindness is better than cruelty? The "disordered morality" by which good triumphs in the end? Everyone I remember in the book who contravened rules and justified lying for their own benefit was clearly despicable scum -- Harry never did.
I'm afraid Fr. Amorth may have performed one too many exorcisms, else where do we get this: Father Amorth also sharply criticized the new approved ritual for exorcism, saying that the language of the rite lacked the force of the old version. And he complained that most bishops allow an exorcism to proceed only when there is demonstrable proof of a diabolic possession. An exorcism should also be recognized as a diagnostic tool, he said, and frequently the ritual helps to determine whether or not an individual is possessed. "Diagnostic" exorcism? Is that even orthodox?
Maybe it's just a case of "to the man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail." If I had kids, I would much rather they read Harry Potter than Heather Has Two Mommies or any of the rest of Kumbaya, Gaia-worshipping, multicultural leftwing tripe that makes up way too much of current children's literature.
Oops! Left out Agatha Christie and Father Brown!