Why Does The Church Oppose Magic And What Counts As Magic?

[mortify ii]

Ah, I think you hit on something by accident here. It is quite possible that such rituals, tapping somehow into a primordial facet of the human experience, are indeed naturally effective at showing some spiritual benefit. But inasmuch as they are properly natural, they cannot in themselves be salvific. They cannot in themselves bring a man to the Faith. They cannot in themselves confer grace.

Faith, grace, salvation, are supernatural. That is why pagan rituals are in vain, and false religions 'worship' ineffectively. At best they can more or less correspond with the natural human desire for God. What they can never do is in any way correspond with the supernatural. To do so would be for them to do nothing less than accept the Truth of the Catholic Church.

 

Well my brother, as I said I don't understand it and can't explain it, but men and women who gathered at the foot of of a Naksibendi Shaykh did advance spiritually, and miracles occurred to prove that God's favor was bestowed. The "how" I can't explain and it boggles my mind to this very day. The explanation I'm leaning towards is that the esoteric is beyond exoteric doctrines and practices, and that a realm is reached that brings one closer to our own Faith. 

[Nihil Obstat]

Well my brother, as I said I don't understand it and can't explain it, but men and women who gathered at the foot of of a Naksibendi Shaykh did advance spiritually, and miracles occurred to prove that God's favor was bestowed. The "how" I can't explain and it boggles my mind to this very day. The explanation I'm leaning towards is that the esoteric is beyond exoteric doctrines and practices, and that a realm is reached that brings one closer to our own Faith. 

Which is more important to you: your experience in the rituals and practices of a false religion, or the teachings of the only true religion which you profess?

[The Hierophant]

I don't personally have anything positive to say about magic. Probably the most esteemed Western magician of the 20th century was Crowley and he ended up a penniless lunatic with a bad drug habit. So I am not trying to justify anything about magic.

 

I do think it's curious that Balthasar, a cardinal, would praise a book in defense of a Catholic Hermeticism. I'll have to take a look at the afterword myself and see what he says.

[ChristianGirlForever]

Well my brother, as I said I don't understand it and can't explain it, but men and women who gathered at the foot of of a Naksibendi Shaykh did advance spiritually, and miracles occurred to prove that God's favor was bestowed. The "how" I can't explain and it boggles my mind to this very day. The explanation I'm leaning towards is that the esoteric is beyond exoteric doctrines and practices, and that a realm is reached that brings one closer to our own Faith.

How do you know that these so-called miracles came from God? A great way for the devil to lead people away from the Church is to make this sort of thing look as if God is smiling down on it. Why could not the devil have caused these "miraculous happenings" in order that more Christians might go over to that side?

[beatitude]

How do you know that these so-called miracles came from God? A great way for the devil to lead people away from the Church is to make this sort of thing look as if God is smiling down on it. Why could not the devil have caused these "miraculous happenings" in order that more Christians might go over to that side?

 

This is not necessarily the case. I know people of other religions who are very devout in their prayer and who strive to live good lives and be close to God, and while I think they're mistaken in their theology, I don't think a loving God looks at them and goes, "Hmm, wrong religion, so I won't be giving comfort to your cancer-stricken twin sister, kthanxbai." God is generous and good, and there are many converts to Christianity who are able to identify his kindness and the working of his hands in their life long before they became Christian. But trying to do magic is distinct from praying, for reasons that have already been discussed, and I don't see how anything but harm can come out of the occult.

[Credo in Deum]

Magic is a lie.  Lying is a sin.  The Church is opposed to sin. 

[Basilisa Marie]

Dude, this thread. 

[Credo in Deum]

http://youtu.be/DTfwwbsRopM

[Nihil Obstat]

Dude, this thread. 

Yet another hard-hitting take-no-prisoners victory by Nihil Obstat.

 

http://youtu.be/1npWhzBJAzA

 

Edited July 15, 2014 by Nihil Obstat

[CrossCuT]

that video....mind blown. that is all.

[truthfinder]

Um wow, I think that video would have been useful when the US was doing LSD experiments.  

[Nihil Obstat]

Um wow, I think that video would have been useful when the US was doing LSD experiments.  

[truthfinder]

 

Um wow, I think that video would have been useful when the US was doing LSD experiments.  

 

Have you read about the Good Friday LSD experiments?

[mortify ii]

Mort's lesson on the Tarot coming to a local CCD class near you

 

;)

[The Hierophant]

I'm not so sure we should celebrate.  Let's think of the answers:

 

- Magic has an attitude of control and expectation, prayer supplication.  Originally I gave this some credence, but I want to partially retract that.  It is certainly true that many magicians who practice "theurgy" have an attitude of expectation, but so do many people praying the Rosary or Chaplet; we do not call the latter people magicians.  Moreover, some of what comes out in "theurgy" appears to be a devotional practice.

 

- Magic is wrong because it isn't right worship.  But that says something about magic, but doesn't get at the question of what magic is.  We could just as easily say that Catholic prayers are magic and that it is permitted magic.

 

If ritualism isn't the distinguishing characteristic of magic - as prayers many prayers are also quite formulaic and ritualistic - then I don't think we have a good answer.  So perhaps we could say the following:  'magic' is used in two senses, and the sense it is used in the Catechism is too narrow to encompass much of what is called "theurgy".  Those aspects of "theurgy" not covered by 'magic' in this sense of the word would be more properly called wrong worship.  In which case the question becomes - why, if it calls upon the God of Christians, would it be wrong worship?

 

A final possibility is that some of what esotericists call magic is actually not prohibited - it doesn't fall under the rubric of magic as 'magic' is used by catechists and is not wrong worship.  I'll admit that may be a very tiny sliver of Western esotericism, since much of it is also mucked with paganism, but there might be something to preserve here:  perhaps that's why Balthasar was so impressed with this Meditations on the Tarot, JPII had a copy of the German two-volume edition on his desk, and Ratzinger reportedly authorized a Russian edition (need more detail on this last point).