[Chalky] NO, I cannot categorically deny any connection with Harry Potter. I mean, the HP franchise runs to getting on for a million words[1] and eight movies, it's quite likely that she slipped a reference in there somewhere. But if there is a connection, a) it's pretty tenuous and b) I'm not aware of it.
[INJ] NO, in so far as the AOTC can be said to have "an author", not alive.
[1]Wild-assed estimate.

[Chalky] With such a broad question I think we have to begin by defining our terms carefully: we need to decide, for one thing, whether our discussion is restricted to organised religions, or whether we are willing to adopt a more all-encompassing definition that includes notions of personal spirituality (as a side issue, we might also ask whether there is a difference between religion and, as you chose to express it, Religion with a capital R); for another, we need to think about whether we mean merely relevant to certain individuals (surely not the meaning we want to adopt, for otherwise the question must be trivially answered in the affirmative), or whether we mean relevant to society, history, the body politic, the social order, or something else; and if any of the latter, then precisely which aspects of society, and what criteria for "relevance" are appropriate? If we take as a starting point the notion that --

Oh wait. Never mind. As you were.