Thread: Is witchcraft today fundamentally different than that condemned in scripture?

I still struggle with this question. I often hear the argument that today's witchcraft is different than what is condemned in the Bible. That fictional witchcraft is not the same. I have to work through this to know what to let my children read as well as participate in, in terms of plays etc.

My gut reaction is that it is at root the same. It is rebellion from the created order and God's providence. It is the desire for powers that free you from God sovereign power.

Am I totally wacked?! I know many very faithful Christians who have no trouble reading the Harry Potter books. I, honestly, have a visceral reaction to them. I need to know if this is my conscience reacting or if it is a knee jerk fundamentalist reaction. Even the latter may not be wrong because the fundamentalists weren't wrong on everything.

Talk amongst yourselves.

Well I do not like the trends at the present time, with this witchcraft fasination and do not read Harry-Potter or any other occult stuff, there is some kind of vampire fasination out to.

But I have taken it to mean I am the weaker brother and do not lord my weakness over others, but if asked I speak my piece.

My gut reaction is that it is at root the same. It is rebellion from the created order and God's providence. It is the desire for powers that free you from God sovereign power.

that's my gut feeling too.
How could it ever be other than that? I don't think the being fictional changes anything. In a way it's worse, if you decree it "just a story" therefore harmless....and then let the imagination rip

I've been told that some, such as harry potter is based on certain aspects of witchcraft.

Originally Posted by JennyG

My gut reaction is that it is at root the same. It is rebellion from the created order and God's providence. It is the desire for powers that free you from God sovereign power.

that's my gut feeling too.
How could it ever be other than that? I don't think the being fictional changes anything. In a way it's worse, if you decree it "just a story" therefore harmless....and then let the imagination rip

I agree Jenny, how could it ever be anything other than what it is. Words have meaning and it's called what it is for a reason. We wouldn't write a book about pimps and prostitutes and say they are different than the pimps and prostitutes condemned in the scripture. Well hopefully we wouldn't.

Is there witchcraft in the Lord of the Rings?

the use of drugs as enchanments (marijuana, ect) is a form of witchcraft... (sorcery/pharmakia) and that is very prevalant today. i think that this type of practice is has at it's very roots the practice of witchcraft in days of old.

Originally Posted by Augusta

Originally Posted by JennyG

My gut reaction is that it is at root the same. It is rebellion from the created order and God's providence. It is the desire for powers that free you from God sovereign power.

that's my gut feeling too.
How could it ever be other than that? I don't think the being fictional changes anything. In a way it's worse, if you decree it "just a story" therefore harmless....and then let the imagination rip

I agree Jenny, how could it ever be anything other than what it is. Words have meaning and it's called what it is for a reason. We wouldn't write a book about pimps and prostitutes and say they are different than the pimps and prostitutes condemned in the scripture. Well hopefully we wouldn't.

You may have better success clarifying the issue if you think about different words. For some, elves are pretty much male fairies; for others, elves are non-mortal beings superior in many ways to man, though a little shorter. In one set of books a "wizard" was one who summoned and controlle demons; in another set of books, the technical term for manipulator of demons was "magician". When you are speaking about recondite or imaginary concepts, there is more fluidity of language than if the conversation involves the factual and quotidian.

Originally Posted by tlharvey7

the use of drugs as enchanments (marijuana, ect) is a form of witchcraft... (sorcery/pharmakia) and that is very prevalant today. i think that this type of practice is has at it's very roots the practice of witchcraft in days of old.

I think the modern day equivelent of that is drug abuse and drug dealing. NOT medicinal use through a physician.

I would agree that the former in animistic cultures now and then can be described as witchcraft.

Originally Posted by Re4mdant

Well I do not like the trends at the present time, with this witchcraft fasination and do not read Harry-Potter or any other occult stuff, there is some kind of vampire fasination out to.

But I have taken it to mean I am the weaker brother and do not lord my weakness over others, but if asked I speak my piece.

I'm not at all sure it's a sign of weakness, Martin - I think your reaction is right and Biblical!

Originally Posted by py3ak

Originally Posted by Augusta

Originally Posted by JennyG

that's my gut feeling too.
How could it ever be other than that? I don't think the being fictional changes anything. In a way it's worse, if you decree it "just a story" therefore harmless....and then let the imagination rip

I agree Jenny, how could it ever be anything other than what it is. Words have meaning and it's called what it is for a reason. We wouldn't write a book about pimps and prostitutes and say they are different than the pimps and prostitutes condemned in the scripture. Well hopefully we wouldn't.

You may have better success clarifying the issue if you think about different words. For some, elves are pretty much male fairies; for others, elves are non-mortal beings superior in many ways to man, though a little shorter. In one set of books a "wizard" was one who summoned and controlle demons; in another set of books, the technical term for manipulator of demons was "magician". When you are speaking about recondite or imaginary concepts, there is more fluidity of language than if the conversation involves the factual and quotidian.

Had to look up recondite and quotidian. Ruben is pulling out the vocab on me.

Ok, any being utilizing extraordinary powers is at root practicing witchcraft, sorcery, etc. They are getting around the natural, God given, world and like Saul did when he couldn't use the right means to get an answer from God, instead went around God through the witch of Endor.

I can deal with LOTR a little easier, not saying I am right about it, because his magic is downplayed and even said to be passing away and dangerous (the ring, the dark Lord). Even the elves, who aren't necessarily magical but seem to have certain inate abilities (like angels), are leaving. He seems to deal a little more honestly with the magic. He is at least not flouting it as the author of HP does.

Originally Posted by Augusta

Originally Posted by tlharvey7

the use of drugs as enchanments (marijuana, ect) is a form of witchcraft... (sorcery/pharmakia) and that is very prevalant today. i think that this type of practice is has at it's very roots the practice of witchcraft in days of old.

I think the modern day equivelent of that is drug abuse and drug dealing. NOT medicinal use through a physician.

I would agree that the former in animistic cultures now and then can be described as witchcraft.

correct.. that is why it is important to note "as anchanments"...
spray painting my car in a closed garage may be stupid, but if i am doing it with the intention of altering my brain chemistry then that is a different thing!
the same goes for cough syrup, ect

I can deal with LOTR a little easier, not saying I am right about it, because his magic is downplayed and even said to be passing away and dangerous (the ring, the dark Lord). Even the elves, who aren't necessarily magical but seem to have certain inate abilities (like angels), are leaving. He seems to deal a little more honestly with the magic. He is at least no flouting it as the author of HP does.

I take your point here, but actually I have a slight problem with LOTR too.
I think it stems from seeing people (some I know personally) who appear to treat the book like the Bible. I don't mean that facetiously. I know people who give it the place in their inner/imaginative/intellectual/spiritual lives which ought to be occupied only by holy scripture.

I'll get you, my pretty!

Originally Posted by JennyG

I can deal with LOTR a little easier, not saying I am right about it, because his magic is downplayed and even said to be passing away and dangerous (the ring, the dark Lord). Even the elves, who aren't necessarily magical but seem to have certain inate abilities (like angels), are leaving. He seems to deal a little more honestly with the magic. He is at least no flouting it as the author of HP does.

I take your point here, but actually I have a slight problem with LOTR too.
I think it stems from seeing people (some I know personally) who appear to treat the book like the Bible. I don't mean that facetiously. I know people who give it the place in their inner/imaginative/intellectual/spiritual lives which ought to be occupied only by holy scripture.

I have see this too, and even a very respected christian man here in Denmark got captured with it, so much so, that he first noticed when he begane to learn to speak elve.

Originally Posted by JennyG

I can deal with LOTR a little easier, not saying I am right about it, because his magic is downplayed and even said to be passing away and dangerous (the ring, the dark Lord). Even the elves, who aren't necessarily magical but seem to have certain inate abilities (like angels), are leaving. He seems to deal a little more honestly with the magic. He is at least no flouting it as the author of HP does.

I take your point here, but actually I have a slight problem with LOTR too.
I think it stems from seeing people (some I know personally) who appear to treat the book like the Bible. I don't mean that facetiously. I know people who give it the place in their inner/imaginative/intellectual/spiritual lives which ought to be occupied only by holy scripture.

I have witnessed that too Jenny. Although I have witnessed that with a lot of things. People get all caught up in fads of all sorts, so I don't think that argument is very strong against LOTR. I may have a blind spot where LOTR is concerned for nostalgic reasons and because I have been a sci-fi/fantasy fan for many years and it is classic.

Like I said I am learning and hopefully conforming to the word of God, but it is so hard to buck the culture. Especially where it has invaded the church.

To me, it's all bad. The dark side. "What fellowship has light with darkness?"
I argue this over and over with one of my Christian brothers who is a strong evangelist, much used of the Lord, yet he love Halloween and horror movies. I just don't get it.

I don't have time for a full response right now, but here are two books that I found very helpful as I wrestled through this issue a few years ago:

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Fantasy-Your-Family-Exploring-Potter/dp/0875099750/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253830734&sr=8-18]Amazon.com: Fantasy and Your Family: Exploring the Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and Modern Magick (9780875099750): Richard Abanes: Books[/ame]


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Harry-Potter-Bible-Menace-Behind/dp/1600661521/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253830719&sr=8-13]Amazon.com: Harry Potter and the Bible: The Menace Behind the Magick (9781600661525): Richard Abanes: Books[/ame]

Great question and look forward to more answers. My pastor reads Harry Potter and doesn't equate it to Biblical witchcraft I disagree with him for now. I don't like LOTR either, however, I am reading a book about King Author and it has a "Merlyn" in it that seems on the shady side of this subject so.......

Originally Posted by OPC'n

Great question and look forward to more answers. My pastor reads Harry Potter and doesn't equate it to Biblical witchcraft I disagree with him for now. I don't like LOTR either, however, I am reading a book about King Author and it has a "Merlyn" in it that seems on the shady side of this subject so.......

As does:
The Iliad
The Odyssey
The Epic of Gilgamesh
The Aeneid
Beowulf
Canterbury Tales
Shakespeare
George MacDonald
C.S. Lewis
etc...

One obvious difference today is the fact that witchcraft is often criticised because of the materialism of our society. It is deemed child's play. According to a biblical worldview, it is Devil's play, 1 Corinthians 10:20.

One might also point out that the scientific man who is bent on twisting nature to his own ends is as much a sorcerer as Pharoaoh's magicians who manifested an ability to turn rods into serpents.

Originally Posted by coramdeo

To me, it's all bad. The dark side. "What fellowship has light with darkness?"
I argue this over and over with one of my Christian brothers who is a strong evangelist, much used of the Lord, yet he love Halloween and horror movies. I just don't get it.

I think Harry Potters lame, but I like Halloween. Uh oh.

Originally Posted by puritanpilgrim

I've been told that some, such as harry potter is based on certain aspects of witchcraft.

I ahve heard this also. It goes like this, "Don't you know that they teach real spells in those Harry Potter books?" But what I don't believe is that if a person said one of the spells a million times, is that anything would happen.

That being said, I also agree that the Occult is a danger and the whole Goth/Emo thing is crazy.

Originally Posted by armourbearer

One might also point out that the scientific man who is bent on twisting nature to his own ends is as much a sorcerer as Pharoaoh's magicians who manifested an ability to turn rods into serpents.

This excellent observation was anticipated by C.S. Lewis, who pointed out that the lust for control lies at the root of much science, as well as of much magic. In times past, people were interested in both, but went for the one that worked more predictably. Sir Thomas Browne has an interesting point that is rather similar:

Againe, I beleeve that all that use sorceries, incantations, and spells, are not Witches, or, as we terme them, Magicians; I conceive there is a traditionall Magicke, not learned immediately from the Devill, but at second hand from his Schollers; who having once the secret betrayed, are able, and doe empirically practice without his advice, they both proceeding upon the principles of nature: where actives, aptly conjoyned to disposed passives, will under any Master produce their effects. Thus I thinke at first a great part of Philosophy was Witchcraft, which being afterward derived from one to another, proved but Philosophy, and was indeed no more than the honest effects of Nature: What invented by us is Philosophy, learned from him is Magicke.

(Religio Medici, Sect. 31)

However, the point I want to make is that you can't assume equivalent concepts because the same word is used, when words not only have a range of meaning, but some terms are basically redefined by each author for their own convenience. One manual of contemporary witchcraft for the urban, professional witch recommends a spell for getting out of debt which involves burning some bills, blowing the smoke out a window, and pronouncing some words of freedom and liberation from debt - all while making payments.

Originally Posted by py3ak

Originally Posted by armourbearer

One might also point out that the scientific man who is bent on twisting nature to his own ends is as much a sorcerer as Pharoaoh's magicians who manifested an ability to turn rods into serpents.

This excellent observation was anticipated by C.S. Lewis, who pointed out that the lust for control lies at the root of much science, as well as of much magic. In times past, people were interested in both, but went for the one that worked more predictably. Sir Thomas Browne has an interesting point that is rather similar:

Againe, I beleeve that all that use sorceries, incantations, and spells, are not Witches, or, as we terme them, Magicians; I conceive there is a traditionall Magicke, not learned immediately from the Devill, but at second hand from his Schollers; who having once the secret betrayed, are able, and doe empirically practice without his advice, they both proceeding upon the principles of nature: where actives, aptly conjoyned to disposed passives, will under any Master produce their effects. Thus I thinke at first a great part of Philosophy was Witchcraft, which being afterward derived from one to another, proved but Philosophy, and was indeed no more than the honest effects of Nature: What invented by us is Philosophy, learned from him is Magicke.

(Religio Medici, Sect. 31)

However, the point I want to make is that you can't assume equivalent concepts because the same word is used, when words not only have a range of meaning, but some terms are basically redefined by each author for their own convenience. One manual of contemporary witchcraft for the urban, professional witch recommends a spell for getting out of debt which involves burning some bills, blowing the smoke out a window, and pronouncing some words of freedom and liberation from debt - all while making payments.

Bah . . .

Witchcraft is witchcraft.

Naturally. And cleaving means cleaving - but whether from or to is a matter for the context.

Originally Posted by py3ak

Naturally. And cleaving means cleaving - but whether from or to is a matter for the context.

I don't know what to think really. Do you think Harry Potter is ok?

Originally Posted by OPC'n

Originally Posted by py3ak

Naturally. And cleaving means cleaving - but whether from or to is a matter for the context.

I don't know what to think really. Do you think Harry Potter is ok?

"Harry Potter" nonsense, is NOT o.k.

Witchcraft is witchcraft.

Forbidden by the Word of God.

There is no excuse found under heaven or in the Word of God that allows any form of such foolish and mystical teachings!

Originally Posted by TeachingTulip

Originally Posted by OPC'n

Originally Posted by py3ak

Naturally. And cleaving means cleaving - but whether from or to is a matter for the context.

I don't know what to think really. Do you think Harry Potter is ok?

"Harry Potter" nonsense, is NOT o.k.

Witchcraft is witchcraft.

Forbidden by the Word of God.

There is no excuse found under heaven or in the Word of God that allows any form of such foolish and mystical teachings!

That sure looks the safest attitude to me.
An artixcle in this morning's Daily Telegraph is interesting.
Phillida Law the mother of Emma Thompson had some stone gargoyles stolen out of her garden 2 years ago (there was a pic of them - hideous imp things, I would personally pay good money to have them taken AWAY from my garden). She put up notices saying she had laid a curse on the thief.
Now she's had them left on her doorstep with a terrified little anonymous note saying "please lift the curse, I've been terribly ill since I stole these".
She says she got the inspiration for the curse from her daughter's role in Harry Potter.
I'm not too sure what to make of every aspect of that story, but I do know it doesn't make me any more disposed to embrace Harry Potter as a harmless piece of culture

Originally Posted by OPC'n

Originally Posted by py3ak

Naturally. And cleaving means cleaving - but whether from or to is a matter for the context.

I don't know what to think really. Do you think Harry Potter is ok?

I enjoyed the Harry Potter books as the epicification of the school story genre that's been around in British literature for quite some time. I wouldn't recommend them to provide role models, as great literature, or as your vehicle for exploring metaphysics; but I don't think a whole lot of the intelligence of anyone who would look to them for that in the first place. There are good, decent, weak and bad lessons that can be drawn from them. But since I suspect that moralizing (at least without having finished the book yet) is one cause of why people so often misread things, I don't put a lot of emphasis on that either.

But the ultimate answer is that I had no problem reading them myself, nor do I have any difficulty with others reading them. The audiobooks are nice company for long car journeys.

You might also enjoy my exposé of the real problem with Harry Potter in my guest post on my ex-loaned-dog's blog.

Wicked Witch of the West: Who killed my sister? Who killed the Witch of the East? Was it you?

Dorothy: No, no. It was an accident. I didn't mean to kill anybody.

Wicked Witch of the West: Well, my little pretty, I can cause accidents, too!

If the theme of witchcraft or magic is an issue or temptation for you then don't read the books or watch the movies whether it be Harry Potter or LOTR or Narnia or a whole host of others.
If you don't like the genre then steer clear.
If you haven't read them, sure ask questions, seek people's opinions, but don't jump to conclusions or malign the names and characters of those who have.

I think the bible is quite clear that witchcraft and sorcery (magic) are very real phenomenons that are evil. Appartently how it works is by the power of demons. So if one is in tune with the demonic spirits that be they can apparently get things done to the glory of the demons. That is what I believe we must make clear in regards to the evil that magic really is.

However, there is a genre of literature in sci/fi fantasy that uses many similar terms yet different rules for reality and application. So it is fantastical and purely a story of fiction meant for entertainment only. I don't think this leads at all to real demon worship if those who are free to read it or watch it on TV are educated about the fictionality of it in respect to the reality of demonic activity.

So, it really comes down to what is your opinion of the value of entertainment? Is entertainment itself a waste of time, energy and thus a self indulgent sin or not? All untrue things that people entertain themselves with are of the same value as the fiction that is the Harry Potter books. None of it is true, yet all of it is time consuming.

I was a rabid (actually... this word is probably not sufficient to depict my obsession) reader of HP from the time I was 9 until I was about 15 or so. Then I took a hiatus, and came back for the last few books of the series but then my interest was very much abated.

I had an extremely-fantasy prone childhood. I didn't grow up in a Christian home, besides going to a United Methodist church. Harry Potter was the pinnacle of my active imagination. It was an escape for me - a world that I preferred to the real world. In fact, I was so immersed in it (writing fan fiction, re-reading the books over and over, participating in online forums, checking fan news everyday, etc) that the world started becoming more real to me than the real world. I actually started thinking that perhaps the real world isn't the real one, Hogwarts has to be because I spend so much time in it that it seems more real. It was all I ever talked about with my friends at school. I was proud of all the useless facts and trivia I knew about the books. I loved it more than anything. It was my life.



It was at its worst, and then I became a Christian when I was 13. The interest lessened but I still kept up with all the fan stuff, still loved it a lot, but Jesus was replaced as the primary love in my life. I began a process of letting go of the concept that Hogwarts is NOT the place I want to be more than anything else. Heaven with Jesus is.

After middle school I realized, by God's grace, how dangerous it was to be obsessed with this, so I decided to quit with all the fan stuff and re-reading... completely stop with HP for a while. When the next book came out, I continued then reading the remaining books, but I didn't follow the fan stuff anymore except once every now and then. The moment I finished that last book was one of the biggest "sigh of relief" moments in my life. I have completely moved on and now live a life apart from HP! Yay!

I am just so thankful that God has convinced me that the most fulfilling endeavour is the pursuit of knowing him.

Anyways, I don't know how this helps in the discussion, but I thought I would contribute my insight. It was probably more than you cared to know...

Ruben, you might have addressed this in your blog post, but I didn't read it...

So when I think of the dangers of HP, I actually just think of the worldview the book purports - basically that the ends justify the means. It's ok to break curfew, forget authority, etc if you know what you're trying to accomplish is the right thing. This is mainly why if I ever let my kids read them, they have to be age 16/17+.

I am not convinced that the magic part of the books is dangerous, but I am willing to be proved wrong.

What J.K. Rowling has done with these books is, I think, is appalling. She may later wish she had a millstone tied around her neck and been thrown into the sea. She has led little ones astray to love and admire character who commit abominations in the sight of God. I don't care that they are just fictional characters. The sins that follow in the reader are real. Something that causes you to approve and even laugh at sinful actions is not harmless. Romans 1:32

I haven't heard any good arguments to the contrary yet. I would beg everyone to rethink letting this type of literature (for lack of a better word) into you library and your life. If you insert homosexual in place of witch and make it a funny, riveting story about homosexuals, is it still harmless? Would you still think that children endeared to homosexual characters would not cause them to think lightly of that sin?

Would you, yourself, be comforable writing a book of this nature? If not, why not? I really cannot imagine a Christian choosing such subject matter to write a story about. If you don't think it's ok for you why is it ok for J. K. Rowling and why would you read them? I don't think many would have but for all the hype that came of them. If they are skillfully written does that change the morality of reading them?

You're so absolutely right Augusta, I was looking for the function to press "thanks" several more times!
....another way of looking at it - if Harry Potter had been around in the first century AD, can you seriously imagine the Apostle Paul curling happily up with a copy?
Or can you picture Elijah or Isaiah or any of the prophets confronted with the books, and imagine what their reaction would be?

No it's of the same spirit as wichcraft in the Bible even if the outward rituals have changed.

Originally Posted by Augusta

I still struggle with this question. I often hear the argument that today's witchcraft is different than what is condemned in the Bible. That fictional witchcraft is not the same. I have to work through this to know what to let my children read as well as participate in, in terms of plays etc.

My gut reaction is that it is at root the same. It is rebellion from the created order and God's providence. It is the desire for powers that free you from God sovereign power.

Am I totally wacked?! I know many very faithful Christians who have no trouble reading the Harry Potter books. I, honestly, have a visceral reaction to them. I need to know if this is my conscience reacting or if it is a knee jerk fundamentalist reaction. Even the latter may not be wrong because the fundamentalists weren't wrong on everything.

Talk amongst yourselves.

Looking back through the thread, I realize I didn't actually address the original post.

Is today's witchcraft the same as ancient witchcraft? It depends. Are there satanists, idolaters, etc., trying to manipulate the world through illegitimate means? Yes. Are people being led astray by lying wonders? Yes. Are people attempting to contact the dead, and is that used by demons? Yes. Are there people involved in bizarre pseudo-religions? Yes. Are there people putting fake warts on their nose and clutching broomsticks? Yes. But these last are not quite in the same category as the others.

Is fictional witchcraft the same? Yes and no: it depends on the book, movie, TV show, etc.

Are you totally whacked? No, but you are wrong. One of the things we do, as little makers, is think, "What if things were like this?" It is not rebellion against the created order to imagine things that are contrary to fact, as that there is a very wealthy gentleman named Mr. Darcy whose pride is overcome by love, or that it is the year 3500 and faster-than-light space travel is a reality.

If I had the talent and discipline and an idea, I would have no qualms of conscience in writing a fantasy or science fiction novel. The fundamental principle that abusus non tollit usus is one of the things it seems fundamentalists frequently forget, so that point really may be some latent fundamentalism talking.

As to Paul, et al, I have pointed out before that the Apostle (who as probably the most self-disclosing penman of Scripture was the most likely candidate for something along these personal lines) does manifest acquaintance with the playwright Menander, among other heathen writers, going so far as to quote that comedian in inspired Scripture. So that doesn't leave me in the position of having to try to imagine his response. Of course, if use of the imagination is a problem, we'd better not do that in any case.

You say you haven't seen any arguments to the contrary: but there haven't been any arguments to establish it. There have been assertions and there have been feelings and there have been newspaper anecdotes.

Originally Posted by Megan Mozart

Ruben, you might have addressed this in your blog post, but I didn't read it...

Neither did I, actually.

When you raise a question about something being different, it is not out of the way to remark that no argument have been offered for its identity.

Secondly, I think you must have overlooked that I pointed out that in actuality there is the sort of witchcraft condemned in Scripture, but I also pointed out that there is something else referred to by similar terms which does not fit in the same category. I then proceeded to make the same distinction with regard to fiction that I had already made with regard to real life.

No one said we are free to imagine whatever we want; I pointed out that there are acceptable uses of imagination, so the fact that someone imagines something that is contrary to fact does not automatically make it evil.

No doubt there are good and bad motives for reading: but your ideas about Paul's reading habits or his motives can be nothing other than speculation. What can be shown from the text of Scripture is that Paul was aware of and found profit in pagan writings. I find it a little hard to believe that Paul enjoyed sports, but the evidence from his letters says otherwise.

If conscience were fully adequate to direct us, the Bible could have been a lot shorter. I am not recommending that you go against your conscience, but you can't make your moral feelings the standard for other people. Of course, I'm also quite happy to follow my conscience in this regard.

I take pleasure in many Biblical stories which have villainous behaviour. One needn't approve of Abimelech or of Mr. Toad in order to enjoy the story.