Let's start by noting how sociologists of religion have struggled to offer clear definitions of magic and religion given the diversity of religious and magical practices across time and cultures and the often complicated ways they overlap.
One common attempt to make a contrast between religion and magic has been to describe magic as a metaphysical technology, a means via a hex, spell or ritual to harness some natural or spiritual power/force in order to achieve a goal. Magic is a metaphysical tool to make something happen. In this, magic tends toward the pragmatic rather than the relational. Religion, by contrast, involves communal, cultural, and cultic rituals, practices, and observances that instantiate a relationship between a group and a deity. In contrast to magic, religions often involve moral codes that express relational commitment to the deity. Finally, where magic tends toward individual practice, religions function to bind together social and cultural groups.
But as I said, the lines are fuzzy here. For example, Roman religious observance had a lot of magical aspects. And some Christian practices, especially when it has fused with indigenous pagan practices, can also blend with the magical.
The reason for the blurring is easy to see. If magic is harnessing a power, and you're in a relationship with a powerful spiritual being, why couldn't you try to ask, persuade, or compel that powerful being to do things for you?
Here's where, I think, Sanderson's contrast between hard and soft magic can be illuminating. Recall, with hard magic the mechanism is transparent. We know how the magic works. Consequently, that mechanism can be used to solve our problems. By contrast, we don't know how soft magic works. Soft magic enchants our world, filling it with wonder and awe, but we cannot harness or use it to fix things in life.
As I share in the paperback edition of Hunting Magic Eels, Christianity is a soft magical world. By this I mean that our world is full of wonder and awe. God's divine presence fills all of creation. Hope and possibilities exist in our world that cannot be found within a purely materialistic view of the cosmos. Miracles happen. Angels are encountered unawares. As Gerard Manley Hopkins wrote, "The world is charged with the grandeur of God."
In describing Christian enchantment as "soft magic" I mean that, following Sanderson, we do not know how this enchantment "works." Neither can we control or manipulate it. We could say that there is a apophatic aspect to soft magic, a persistent mystery. Consequently, and this is key to the point I want to make, the soft enchantments of Christianity cannot be exploited to solve our problems. God is not a tool to get us something we want.
This is not to say God doesn't help us or answer our prayers. The point is that God is not at our disposal. God's ways are mysterious to us. We know that he is with us and working for our good, but many of our prayers go unanswered and God's plans are often inscrutable. Our experience with God is enchanted, but it's a soft enchantment.
And yet, and here's my second big point, many Christians are tempted to turn the soft, apophatic enchantment of Christianity into hard magic. We seek God as a solution to our problems, looking for a magical fix. But God is not a Cosmic Genie in the Bottle granting our wishes, or a Cosmic Vending Machine giving us what we want if we push the right buttons.
Relatedly, some Christians are tempted to think that God's designs are transparent to us. We can become overly confident in naming "God's will" in our lives. The humility of apophatic mystery is replaced with hubristic pronouncements about God's providential actions, intentions, and plans.
What I am suggesting is that Christian enchantment, our magical world, is soft, which is to say apophatic. God enchants our world, but in a way that is fundamentally mysterious and not at our disposal. And yet, there are some Christians who are tempted to turn the soft enchantment of faith into a hard magical system. And when this happens, a suite or problems and issues emerge. I'll turn to some examples of this in the posts to come.
