Fantasy Magic Does Have Issues – A Part Two
You can find Part One of this article, and a lot of necessary context here.
Another example (of magic that isn’t Biblically condemned) is magic which is not innate but which does not originate from an exterior supernatural creature. In N.D. Wilson’s Ashtown Burials1 series, one of the protagonists is captured, altered, and given superhuman physical characteristics. When he uses these capabilities, he is not participating in ‘magic’ because there is no interaction with or invocation of the demonic. In my own story, something similar happens. Unlike in the previous example, the demonic is semi-explicitly involved in the installation of the new abilities. The use of those capabilities, however, although it might be at times unwise2, is not ‘sorcery’ in the Biblical sense. Why? Because the demonic is taking action or exerting power in the continued existence or actions of the physical alterations.
Some other types that do not (necessarily) fit into the Biblical category include magic inherent to the world, magic as science or as a tool (whether created by man or adapted from nature), and Art (in Tolkien’s Arda). Many of these instances, honestly, are called supernatural only because they don’t occur in our world; inside the fictional world, the magic is just as integrated to the world as physics or chemistry. For the characters to call it magic seems just as reasonable as calling a not-yet-understood chemical reaction ‘magic’, at least from an internal perspective. Summarily, magic which does not involve supplication to or interaction with the demonic (or malevolent supernatural) is not condemned by the Bible, is not, in the Biblical terminology, ‘magic’.
A note on miracles, before we move onto borderline cases and instances of ‘magic’ which actually fit the Biblical definition. Miracles are supernatural acts of God, though sometimes His power is wielded in the hand of men (Ex. 14:16). If we consider magic to be ‘supernatural acts’ or ‘supernatural acts via the power of a supernatural being exterior to the person’, miracles are technically magic. The distinction, of course, is that Biblically condemned magic derives from demonic (or is the search for such demonic power, often under a pseudonym), from unclean spirits, from creatures which are not God. ‘Magic’, if we want to term it differently, could be called ‘demonic miracles’, a framing which should make clear the essentially idolatrous nature of the practice, of seeking information and power (via what is essentially (mangled) prayer and worship) from a creature rather than the Creator. That’s it on miracles for today, though if you’re interested, check out this article; for the rest of this post, we’ll be exempting miracles from our analysis.
Borderline cases, where fantasy magic looks a bit too like real-world magic to be comfortable, do exist, though they’re not necessarily bad. In some systems, power is derived from exterior but not demonic persons (whether human or otherwise), though I’m not conversant with the particulars of any such. Generally speaking, it should be considered how close the beings in whom the power originates are to demons (supernatural beings will generally fall into a different category here than sci-fi power granters), as well as how the derivation and harnessing is accomplished (if it’s framed or looks like prayer or worship or other religious rituals, be very careful). A system wherein humans trade living space in their homes to fairies in return for the ability to make supernaturally pretty fireworks bears very little resemblance to the occult, but one where they invoke the names of the fairies in a ritual chant is starting to be suspicious.
Remember also the ‘knowledge that defiles’ which St. Patrick’s Breastplate invokes God’s protection against. Knowledge of the supernatural (see link here) is dangerous; often, the seeking or transmission of that knowledge is actually wrong. Why? Because the knowledge, particularly if shared in a lascivious or reckless manner, is a temptation towards sin, towards the power and mystery of the occult (the demonic), while utterly lacking actual value towards good. In other words, it tempts without edifying, satisfying only the depraved mind, the salacious interest. Fantasy magic which strays too close to the true occult can all too easily fall into the trap of being temptation without edification, of paving the way towards the occult; we should be careful, both in writing it and in reading it (to guard our souls against temptation).
Some fantasy magic, of course, actually fits the definition of Biblical ‘magic’ (sorcery): ‘practices endeavoring to harness or entreat the power of the demonic (in recognized3 or unrecognized form)’. Certain parts of D&D magic could be argued to fit this category (though not all- I’m referring specifically to the divine patron system4). Many books include bits like this incidentally, as connected to a magic system otherwise justifiable, due to the author not really seeing a difference. Very often the lines and terms are blurry, with ‘demons’ being remarkably different in essence from Biblical demons, or the patron beings straddling the line between deity and just-another-creature.
Reading these stories is not instantly damning anymore than reading Plato’s Republic or The Handmaid’s Tale would be. Like those other books, though, stories which contain these bits of the occult must be guarded against, that their theology might not seep into you unawares5. Further, if the story becomes steeped in the occult, if the details become a bit too realistic, it’s probably not worth reading; like de Sade, you can get through it with your soul intact, but you shouldn’t put yourself in the danger to begin with. Better to detour to the safe bridge five feet to the left (on a different bookshelf) than chance yourself crossing the chasm on a bridge whose floor is made out of blurry-edged circular saws.
These realistic magic systems can, however, be done without moral deviance, though generally this means less detail, not more. The One Ring, arguably eponymous to The Lord of the Rings, could be considered an example of realistic magic, as the wearer, by putting it on, accesses not only an amplification of his own powers but a large portion of the powers of Sauron, a pseudo-demonic being (depending on your interpretation, admittedly). This magic is, however, condemned. Putting on the ring, even for the briefest of moments, is incredibly dangerous, and the power of it is forever tempting those who chance being near it. Indeed, under this understanding, this grandfather of fantasy literature could actually be considered to be warning of the danger of the real life occult (though only incidentally to its theology on power and the desire for it).
My own stories actually operate partly under this rubric. The Count, antagonist of Why Ought I to Die?, is a sorcerer in the Biblical sense. I’ve carefully avoided more than incidental or surface level details in both that story and my current in-progress work (which features several sorcerous antagonists, though more traditionally pagan ones), and I have taken liberties with how the sorcery is expressed (I have no knowledge of actual flesh-mingling being a successful part of the real world occult and want no such knowledge if it is to be had). I have, however, consistently striven to portray it as evil, as deserving of the penalty God assigns it- death in this life and eternal death in the life to come, to keep it theologically (if not aesthetically) consistent with reality, with God’s Word6.
Fantasy magic does not always fall under the Biblical definition of ‘sorcery’, and even when it does, it is a part of reality and therefore permissible to include. We must, however, exercise discretion, being careful to understand whether and how our magic fits within the definition, how we depict it, and what parts of it we depict. There exists knowledge which harms and does not help; this should be avoided. Nevertheless, magic, and fantasy as a whole, is not inherently immoral. God has given us imaginations capable of creating strange and fantastic worlds; so long as we exercise those imaginations in writing stories which declare the truth concerning Him7, we do no wrong.
God bless.
Footnotes
1 – I like this series (though it’s aimed at an audience younger than me), but am still annoyed that the (unfinished, I think) fourth book is available for a minimum of eighty-four dollars, meaning I haven’t read it.
2 – The mental side-effects are not really emphasized in the story, to the extent of not really appearing, but they are present in the background. They may show up more prominently if I write a sequel.
3 – See this footnote from Part One.
4 – Being myself not a player, I’m running here off of fragmentary, incidental knowledge.
5 – Check out the article on such dangers which I wrote for another blog here.
6 – Hence why no demonic magic has ever or will ever actually resurrect a person in any of my stories, the giving and taking of life being by God’s will alone in Scripture (I hold that Samuel’s apparent resurrection by the medium in __ was likely a demonic deception, albeit one which spoke some truth out of either malicious triumph or divine constraint).
7 – See this article for more on the topic.
