Miracles and Magic.
A LATIN proverb says: "Si duo faciunt idem, non est idem" (if two do the same thing, it is not the
among all classes of people to condone the faults of their own kind but to be severe with those of others. The oracles of Delphi were divine to a Greek mind, but they were of diabolical origin according to the judgment of Christians. Jesus was a magician in the eyes of the pagans, while the Christians worshipped him as the son of God, and a man who performed miracles.
there are magicians who "conjure the clouds, and can make a stick look like a serpent, a mat like a centipede, a stone like a scorpion, and similar deceptions." 1
Simon Magus and his disciples were believed by the early Christians to possess power over demons; 2 but Simon was a competitor of the Apostles, and therefore his deeds were not regarded as divine. Before an impartial tribunal the methods and aspirations of both parties would
resemble one another more than the one-sided statements of Christian authors at first sight seem to warrant. The accusation made against Simon by Luke, of having offered money to the Apostles for communicating to him the Holy Ghost, does not prove a depravity of heart, as the later Christians thought; for Simon took the rebuke
in the proper spirit and apparently remained on good terms with the Apostles. The reports of the church fathers which make Peter and Simon rivals in working miracles, develop the story in the spirit of the age; they characterise the superstitions of the time; yet, although they probably reflect historical facts, they are as unreliable as are the charges of pagan authors hurled against the Christians.
The early Christians practised healing the sick by the laying on of hands and by praying; so did the Therapeutæ and other Gnostics; yet faith-cure and Christian science are not countenanced by the churches to-day.
Minucius Felix 1 puts the common notions, which in his days prevailed in Greece and Italy concerning the practices of the Christians, into the mouth of Cæcilius who describes them as a desperate class of vulgar men and credulous women threatening the welfare of mankind. He states that they are atheists, for they cherish a contempt for temples, spit at the gods, and ridicule religious ceremonies; that their own cult is a mixture of superstition and depravity; that they possess secret symbols by which they recognise one another; they call themselves brothers and sisters, and degrade these sacred words by sensuality. Further, it is said that they adore a donkey's head, and that their worship is obscene. The libel culminates in the assertion that the reception of new members is celebrated by slaughtering and devouring a child covered all over with flour, which is an obvious perversion of the Communion, but Cæcilius declares that it
is done because partnership in guilt is the best means of securing secrecy. Lastly, he adds, that on festival days they celebrate love feasts which after the extinction of the lights end with sexual excesses.
Similar accusations are found in various authors, and even the noble-hearted and high-minded Tacitus speaks of the Christians with contempt; while on the other hand the Christians do not shrink from ridiculing the holiest and noblest of paganism. For instance, Minucius Felix, a Christian of the highest type and best education, speaks of Socrates as "the Athenian buffoon." 1
Justinus Martyr in his Apologia makes the asseveration that the Christians are innocent, but leaves the question open whether the heretics, such as the Gnostics, might not be guilty of these abominations (App. II., p. 70), and Eusebius directly claims that the practices that prevailed among the heretics were the direct cause of the evil rumors concerning the life of the Christians.
While we must bear in mind that the moral rigidity of the Gnostics leaves upon the whole no doubt about the purity of their life, we may grant the probability of the presence of black sheep among them. But the same is true of the Christians, as we know for certain on the good authority of St. Paul who in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, after an enumeration of such sinners as will not inherit the kingdom (v. 8-11,--the passage had better remain unquoted) says, "and such were some of you." Accordingly, there can be no doubt that there were abuses in the Church of Corinth. St. Paul believes the rumor of a sin, "that is not so much as named among
the Gentiles," and the Second Epistle is the best evidence that the Corinthians did not deny the facts. They repent, whereupon St. Paul recommends charity toward the main offender (2 Cor. ii. 6-11), saying: "To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also."
The various aberrations among the Christians which
were very apparent in many of their most prominent leaders, such as Constantine the Great, must not astonish us, because Christianity originated in an age of unrest, and the new movement was the centre of attraction for all kinds of eccentricity. In spite of various excrescences, we cannot but say that Christianity opened to the world
new vistas of truth. Represented by such men as St. Paul, it tended toward purity of heart; but the same is true of the Gnostics and the Manichees. The accusations on both sides rest mainly upon partisan statements and cannot be trusted, or at least must be used with due reserve. But it is natural that here as always, the same things are no longer the same when reported of people of another faith. Thus the virtues of the pagans are to St. Augustine only "polished vices," and the heroism of Christian martyrs is mere obstinacy in the opinion of Roman prætors.
We look with contempt upon the Indian prophet who poses as a rain-maker, but read the story of Elijah with great edification, and while we justify the holy zeal of the latter, we would make no allowance for the severity of Indian reformers who fail to spare the lives of their rivals. One instance will suffice: Tenskwatawa, the Shawano prophet, preached in the beginning of the nineteenth century a nobler religion and a purer morality to the tribes of the prairie, and was revered by his followers as an incarnation of Manabozho
All these facts are so many instances which prove the truth of the proverb, that if two do the same thing it will not be regarded as the same thing: and thus the miracle of our own religion is mere magic and witchcraft in other religions.
* * *
One of the most characteristic features of the pre-scientific age is man's yearning for the realisation of that which is unattainable by natural means. The belief in
magic will inevitably prevail so long as the dualistic world-conception dominates the minds of the people, and in that period of civilisation supernatural deeds are expected as the indispensable credentials of all religious prophets. It is the age of miracles and witchcraft.
Now we know that wherever contra-natural things are believed, there the strangest events will be experienced by those who are under the suggestion of the, belief; and then at once a competition will originate between those who represent the established religion and others who perform, or pretend to perform, similar deeds. The former are prophets and saints, and they work miracles; the latter are wizards and witches, and their art is called witchcraft.
Miracles and witchcraft possess this in common that both are supposed to supersede the laws of nature, but there is this difference that the miracle is believed to be the supernatural power of one's own religion, while witchcraft is the miracle of heretics. Miracle is anything contra-natural that is legitimate; and witchcraft is the same thing, but illegitimate; the former is supposed to be done with the help of God, the latter with the help of Satan; the former is boasted of as the highest glory of the Church, the latter is denounced as the greatest abomination possible.
It is natural that wizards and witches are always represented as obnoxious, and it is said that their art is practised to injure the welfare of mankind. Nevertheless, miracles, 1 while some very mean deeds are counted as
good deeds if only performed by believers in other gods are branded as witchcraft. Moreover, all priests are unanimous in condemning the application of charms and spells, except those of their own religion, even though they be used for the best and purest ends. A faith-cure by heretics, and even a successful operation through the unusual skill of a surgeon, would be set down as deeds of darkness by those who believe in a religion of miracles, 1 but official processions with prayers and sprinkling of holy water are still employed, as could be observed during a late small-pox epidemic in French Canada.
The belief in magic is a natural phase in the evolution of mankind, producing the medicine-man who dispels diseases by charms, the prophet who by an appeal to his Deity (be it the sun-god of the American Indians, or the Baal of the Phœnicians, or El or Yahveh of the Israelites) undertakes to make rain, and the medium who vaticinates or foretells fortunes and calls the dead from Spirit-Land.
The rain-priests play a most important part in the life of all the American Indians. The snake-dance among the Pueblo Indians of Mexico is a prayer for rain. 2 Frequently the sun is invoked for rain. Dreams, visions, and ecstasies are regarded as the best means of divine revelation, and the medicine-bag possesses magic powers. The devotional spirit is not less intense among, the
pagans of the prairie than it was among the ancient Israelites and the early Christians. 1
What a strange mixture of occultism with exact observation,
based upon anatomical measurements, is contained in the chapter on "The Proportions of the Human Body." Mathematics, natural science, and mysticism are all combined in Agrippa's Occulta Philosophia, and the learned author is unable to discriminate between facts and fancy. 1