|
|
|
|
|
|
by wolverine876
1759 days ago
|
|
|
For a different perspective, Tolkien (in non-fiction writing) distinguishes two kinds of supernatural power: Magic, which is power over others and over the world, to manipulate and control; and on the other hand, supernatural power that is creative, enrichment with and for others, something that gives them hope in a dark world, and Tolkien associates Christ with the latter. Also, we can observe that religions have survived and thrived, while 'magic' has few followers and little endurance through the generations. |
|
|
Common terms for this distinction are thaumaturgy (magic done as an extension of human will) versus theurgy (magic done through the evocation of divine power.) And there's a long, strange history within Judaism and Christianity of what we would now consider "magic" (demonology, necromancy, talismans, etc.) attempting exert direct control over others and the world. Ironically, we know such practices often involved the clergy, because many of the rituals discovered in occult books involved Latin prayers and ecclesiastical elements, and few other classes would have been literate enough to write these things down.
This brings up another axis of magical classification, between "ceremonial" magic, such as what John Dee and other "mages" were up to (think wizards and books and sacred circles and such), and "folk" magic (think witches messing with herbs in the woods), the latter of which was often elements of pagan belief carried over into a Christianized culture.
The lines between "religion" and "magic" have always been a bit blurry, and mostly a matter of culture and politics. One person's sorcery is another person's religion and so forth.