Associate professor of church history princeton theological seminary baker book house



Download 4,25 Mb.
Page31/38
Date conversion27.04.2018
Size4,25 Mb.
1   ...   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   ...   38

123 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA ~Ma~a.gasoa,r, l~itsuraioina in

agdebnrg Cenes


at Seville in 1550, and at. Rouen and Bordeaux

in 1618.


At first the discipline in the convents for magda­

lens was extremely severe, but gradually it grew

lax, especially through the admission of those for

whom the order was not originally intended, until

in 1637‑40 a reformation was enforced at Paris,

Marseilles, Bordeaux, Rouen, and elsewhere by St.

Vincent de Paul. According to the new rule, which

was officially approved in 1640, the order was to be

divided into three grades. The first of these was

the Congregation of St. Mary Magdalene with strict

vows, which were assumed after a novitiate of two

years, and required fasting throughout Advent,

and on all Fridays, as well as frequent retreats, and

other acts of penance. The second grade of the

order was the Congregation of St. Martha, which

required no vows and permitted those who were

truly penitent and reformed to reenter the world

and marry. The third grade was the Congregation

of St. Lazarus, which forcibly detained those who

were entrusted to its care for reformation.

Numerous other Roman Catholic orders of more

recent times have devoted themselves to the rescue

of fallen women, noteworthy. among them being the

Order of Our Lady of Refuge, founded at Nancy by

Elisabeth de la Croix (d. 1649), the Sisters of St.

Joseph, established in 1821, and the Order of the

Good Shepherd, founded at Angers in 1828. The

first impulse toward similar work in Evangelical

circles was given by the work of Theodor Fliedner

(q.v.; see also DEACONE69, IIL, 2, a, § 2) at Kaisers­

werth beginning with 1833, and his example has

since found numerous followers. (O. ZtScxr.Eat.)

MAGDEBURG, ARCHBISHOPRIC OF: A

former archbishopric, named from an ancient city

of Germany, situated on the Elbe, 88 m. w.s.w. of

Berlin. The town was an important commercial

center as early as the reign of Charlemagne, and its

oldest church is supposed to date from this period.

In the tenth century, when the city belonged to

the diocese of Halberstadt, it contained a parish

church, and on Sept. 21, 937, Otho I. founded there

a Benedictine monastery, which he endowed richly.

Later he conceived the plan of transferring the

episcopal palace from Halberstadt to Magdeburg,

incorporating the monastery with it, and trans­

forming the bishopric into an archbishopric for the

Wends. In 955 he assured himself of the papal

sanction through Abbot Hadamar of Fulda, but

his plans failed on account of the opposition of

Archbishop William of Mainz, who refused to re­

linquish Halberstadt and proposed to separate

Magdeburg from the diocese of Halberstadt and

create of it a new bishopric among the Wends.

This plan was carried out. In the Roman synod

of Feb. 12, 962, Magdeburg was made an archbish­

opric with jurisdiction over all future Wendish di­

oceses, according to the emperor's wish. The final

negotiations took place at Ravenna in Oct., 968,

when Archbishop Hatto IL, who had succeeded

William seven months previously at Mainz, agreed

to the creation of the new archbishopric. Otho

appointed Adalbert, abbot of Weiasenburg in Al­



sace, the first archbishop. The archdiocese of


Magdeburg comprised the dioceses which already existed in Brandenburg and Havelberg, as well as the new bishoprics of Merseburg, Meissen, and Zeitz, thus stretching from the Saale and Elbe in the west to the Oder in the east. (A. Hwucg.)


BIBLIOGRAPHY'. Sources are the Geata archiepiscaporum Map­deburgenaium, and the Catalogi, ed. W. 8chum, in MGH, Script, xiv (1883). 381 aqq., 484‑488; Annales Magdeburp­enais, ed. G. H. Pertz, ib., xvi (1859), 105‑198; G. A. von Mtilverstedt, ReOesta arcAiepiscopatus Magdeburpenaie, 4 vole., Magdeburg, 1878‑99; and Die Mapdeb. 3ch6ppen­chronik, ed. W. Janieke, in Chroniken der deutschen Stttdte, vol. vii., Leipaic, 1889; Gams, Series episcoporum, p. 288. Consult: F. W. Hoffmann, Geschichte der Stall Magdeburg, 2 vole., Magdeburg, 1885‑86; W. Kawerau, Aua Mapde­burpa Verpangenheit, Halls, 1888; K. Uhlirz, Oeschichte lea Erzbistums Magdeburg, Magdeburg, 1887; C. Eubel, Hier­archic catholica medii a'uii, 2 vole., Miinater, 1898‑1901; Hauck, KD, vole. iii.‑iv.


MAGDEBURG CENTURIES: The first attempt to write the history of the Church from the Evan­gelical point of view. The plan of this work was conceived by Matthias Flaciua (q.v.). He projected a church history from the original sources showing that the Church of Christ since the time of the apostles had deviated from the right course, a doc­umentary history of anti‑Christianity in the church of Christ from its beginnings to its highest develop­ment up to the restoration of true religion in its purity by Luther. From 1553 Flacius gave his efforts to the securing of patrons to aid the work financially, whom he found among German noble­men and wealthy citizens, in Augsburg, Niirem­berg, and elsewhere, and in obtaining collaborators. The active interest and assistance manifested by the Imperial Councilor Niedbruck, curator of the Royal Library in Vienna, proved especially valu­able. Libraries had to be searched for sources and documents; for this purpose Flacius himself un­dertook journeys in Germany, and his assistant Marcus Wagner of Friemar near Goths with great success traveled through Denmark, Scotland, Aus­tria, Bavaria, and other territories, while many manuscripts and books were purchased or donated by patrons. In Magdeburg Flacius, Johann Wi­gand, and Matthiius Judex stood at the head of the project and worked out the details of the plan. The Councilor Ebeling Alemann, and the physician, Martin Copus, were treasurers; assistants were trained in furnishing the necessary excerpts, which two learned masters put into shape. From Jena Flacius directed the entire work. Thus there ap­peared in Basel, 1559‑74, the Eccleaiasticd histtmia . secundum singulas certturicts . . . Per aliquot studiosos et pios viros in urbe Magdeburgica, hence called the Magdeburg Centuries. Centuries seven to thirteen were elaborated especially by Wigand in Wismar. Wigand and subsequently Stange­wald afterward worked on the three following cen­turies without completing them (the sixteenth cen­tury, compiled by Wigand, is in Wolfenbiittel in manuscript form); attempts made by several per­sons in the eighteenth century to bring the work down to date were also without result. The " Cen­turies " mark immense progress in ecclesiastical historiography, not only by the tracing of the sources and the completeness with which the ma­terial was collected, but also because there is ap‑





Xasee THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 124

Xavic


plied in them the pragmatic method of historical

development. The anti‑Roman interest sharp­

ened the vision and helped the authors of the work

to critical achievements that marked a new epoch.

While the division into centuries was an obstacle

to a good grouping of the material, and the one­

sided polemical anti‑Roman interest formed a bar­

rier to an unprejudiced appreciation of the develop­

ment of church history; nevertheless, there was

achieved the utmost that was possible within the

limits of the sharply defined dogmatic standpoint,

and the work furnished the weapons which Protes­

tantism needed in its struggle. The work, pestilenr

tisaimum opus, as it was called by the Roman op­

ponents, made a very strong impression upon the

Roman Church. Canisius urged the most learned

theologians to attack it, and many pens were set

in motion until in Cmsar Baroniua (q.v.) there was

found an able opponent who drew his material from

the Roman sources themselves. (G. KAwERAU.)

BxaLxoaaArny: F. C. Baur, Die Epochcn der kirchtichen



Geachichtaachreibunp, pp. 39 eqq., Tiibingen, 1862; B. ter

Haar, De Hiatoriopraphie der Kerkpeschiedenia, pp 121

eqq., Utrecht, 1870‑73; A. Jundt, Lea Centuries de Mapde­

bourg, Paris, 1883; 9ehaumkell, Beitrap zur Entatehunpa­

peachichte der Mapd. Centuries, Ludwigaburg,1898; Schaff,

Christian Church, i. 37‑38.

MAGEE, WILLIAM; Archbishop of Dublin;

b. at Enniskillen (70 m. s.w, of Belfast), County

Fermanagh, Mar. 18, 1766; d. at Stillorgan (5 m.

s.e. of Dublin) Aug. 18, 1831. He was educated at

Trinity College, Dublin (B.A., 1785), and became

fellow in 1788, and senior fellow and professor of

mathematics in 1800. Ordained deacon in 1790,

he became dean of Cork in 1813, bishop of Raphoe

in 1819, and archbishop of Dublin in 1822. He

was a determined opponent of the Roman Catholics

but still more of the Unitarians, against whom he

wrote several pamphlets. He wrote among other

works: Discourses on the Scriptural Doctrines of

Atonement and Sacrifice (London, 1801). His works

were collected in two volumes (London, 1842).

BIHLIOaIiAP87: Consult, besides the Memoir by A. H.

Kennet', prefixed to his collected Works, ut sup., DNB,

axxv. 313‑315, where further literature is given.

MAGEE, WILLIAM CONNOR: Archbishop of

York; b. at Cork Dec. 17, 1821; d. in London May

5, 1891. He was a grandson of William Magee

(q.v.). He was educated at Trinity College, Dub­

lin (B.A., 1842; M.A. and B.D., 1854; D.D., 1860).

He became curate of St. Thomas', Dublin, in 1844;

of St. Saviour's, Bath, in 1848; minister of the Octa­

gon Chapel, Bath, in 1850; perpetual curate of

Quebec Chapel in 1859; rector of Enniskillen in

1860; dean of Cork in 1864; dean of the Chapel

Royal, Dublin, in 1866; bishop of Peterborough in

1868; and archbishop of York in 1891. He was

Donellan lecturer at Dublin in 1865‑66. He was

the author of: Sermons Delivered al St. Saviour's



Church, Bath (Bath, 1852); Sermons at the Octagon

Chapel, Bath (Bath, 1854); The Gospel and the Age

(London, 1884); The Atonement (188?); Growth in



Grace (1891); Christ the Light of all Scripture (1892);

and Speeches and Addresses (1892).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. C. MaeDonnell, The Life and Correspond­

ence of William Connor Magee, 2 vole., London, 1898;

idem, in DNB, xxxv. 313‑318,


MAGIC.

Definition and Scope (§ 1). 7n Greece (§ 9).



Place in Religion (¢ 2). In Rome (§ 10).


In Babylonia (13).

In Egypt (§ 4).


Magic and the Early Church

($ 11).


Among the Hebrews ($ b). Medieval Magic (§ 12).

In India (§ 8). Black Magic (§ 13).

In Persia (§ 7). White Magic (§ 14).

Among Teutons and Celts Magic sad Modern Occultism

(4 8). (§ 16).

Magic is the alleged art of producing supernat­ural results by means of occult agencies, although in the widest sense of the term it includes Divina­tion (q.v.), and thus coincides with occultism. In the present article, however, the discussion of magic is restricted to the causation of supernatural phe­nomena by mystic conjurations or incantations which may be either benevolent or malevolent. In this form magic coincides in great part with Witch­craft (q.v.), although it is distinguished, on the one hand, by a more scientific method, and, on the

other, by asocial trend which aims at a z. Definition unification of magic operations by oc‑

tlnd Scope. cult traditions. Magic is divided, ac­

cording to the means employed, into

demonistic (operating with the aid of spirits), relig­

ious (regulated by the priesthood and the cult),

and natural (working simply through hidden powers

of nature), while with regard to its beneficent or

maleficent intent it is termed " white " and " black "

magic respectively.

Magic is an element of the empirical religion of all times and peoples, and belongs, like asceticism, sacrifice, and purification, to the constantly re­curring and ineradicable factors of the social life of mankind (see COMPARATIVE RELIGION, VI., 1, a, § 5). Among many wild tribes religion seems to consist almost entirely of magic, although the the­ory that all religion is a development of witchcraft and magic is open to grave objections. The ques­tion may even be raised whether magic is not a phase of religious degeneration rather than evolu­tion. The view prevailing in many circles that the religious conditions of modern savages constitutes the norm for reconstructing the religion of primi­tive man fails to recognize that the evidence in the life of ancient and of modern peoples shows a slow process of religious decay. It must be noted, fur­thermore, that savages are not found to advance from fetishism or animism (see COMPARATIVE RE­Llalorr) to a higher stage of religious life, nor are

magic and witchcraft (q.v.) the most a. Place in primitive forma of the religion of the



Religion, civilized nations of antiquity. Neither

in Egypt nor in Babylonia does relig­ious development reveal polydemonistic magic as the source of their mythology and their cult, how­ever early magic rites and formulas were used among both nations. Magic is, then, essentially a symp­tom of religious decay and belongs to the latest period of religious evolution. In cases where it ap­pears at a relatively early stage in.a given people, it is seldom developed by the people in question, but is usually of foreign origin, being imported from degenerate neighboring tribes!


* ^F‑or the presentation of another view of ethnic magic, 88e WaLPAHATIVE RELIGION, VI„ 1. 8, § 5.







The Babylonians are usually regarded as the na­tion among whom magic, in the strict sense of the term, first appeared, although it moat be borne in mind that Babylonian here connotes Sumerian, and that the Babylonian Semites first became ac­quainted with magic through their Sumerian neigh­bors. The Medea and Persians were strongly op­posed to magic and sturdily resisted the priests of magic coming from Babylonia, India, and Egypt.

Neither the Medea nor the Persians

3. In can be regarded as the authors of the Babylonia. magic art which later spread from the Orient to Greece and Rome, but the real source of magic was the proto‑Babylonian priesthood of the region of the lower Euphrates, whose incantations, written in Sumerian, are doubt­less the oldest documents of their class. The Su­merisns seem to have been a " Turanian " people who left their original home in Central Asia and became fused with the Aryan stock south of the Caspian, especially with the Medea, and also with the Semites of the Euphrates valley (see Bwsx­LONIw, V., §§ 1‑2). This worship of the elements and their spirits to which the peoples of central sad northern Asia were devoted thus penetrated into the southwestern part of the continent. In the older magic texts, preserved in numerous clay tablets in the library of Aeshurbanipal (see A88YRIw, VI., 3, § 14), witchcraft is essentially a system of in­cantation to avert the power of evil demons, while various gods, especially Es, Marduk, Gibil‑Nuaku, and Sin, are invoked as protectors. The entire ob­ject was the averting of physical ills and the exor­cism of disease‑demons, thus presenting numer­ous parallels with the arts of shamanistic medicine men. It was only this older Babylonian magic, which was still influenced by Sumerian traditions, that was medical, for after the consolidation of the Babylonian kingdom in the second millennium B.c., divination superseded all other forms of magic in Babylonia while astrology spread from Chaldea throughout the west and made the terms Chaldean and astrologer almost synonymous.

In Egypt, which, like Babylonia, was one of the earliest homes of Oriental magic, witchcraft never became overlaid with divination, but always re‑

mained essentially a system of mad‑

;. In ical exorcism, practised by priestly

Egypt medical magicians, and based on sym­

pathetic cures, the conjuration of hos­

tile powers of nature, and the banishment of sick­

ness by amulets and the like. The magic papyri

of the New Kingdom contain incantations against

crocodiles and other noxious creatures, especially

serpents, as well as against all sorts of demons,

against the evil eye, and against sickness of every

kind, and many of their mystic words of power are

Assyro‑Babylonian in origin.

The ancient Hebrews, surrounded and influenced by two neighboring peoples which were adepts in magic art, also showed a strong tendency to witch­craft, as is clear from the rigid but ineffectual pro­hibitions in the legal code (Ex. xxii. 18; Deut. xviii. 10‑11; comp. II Kings xxi. 6; Iso. viii. 19, 20, Ivii. 3; Micah v. il). Both the divination of the Babylonians and the medical exorcisms of


126 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA


the Egyptians seem to have exercised a strong in­fluence on Israel, and the later development of pre‑

Christian Judaism favored an increased g. Among devotion to these forbidden arts. the Hebrews. This is shown by many of the Apoc‑

rypha and Peeudepigrapha of the Old Testament, especially Tobit iii., vi.; Enoch hzix., the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the late Jewish Testament of Solomon and various other Solomonic legends and incantations connected with the tradition of the queen of Sheba based on I Kings x. i‑10.

Throughout the Aryan and non‑Aryan peoples which surrounded the Semites of southwestern Asia magic is seen to appear at a relatively early period, although it did not exist in the very beginning. Nor did it disappear with development of civiliza­tion and learning, but, on the contrary, increased in extent and refinement. So it was among the Hindus (see BsaHnswrnsM), whose earliest phase of religion, as represented in the Rag Veda, was a

simple nature worship free from magic 6. In India. accretion, while the rise of the Brah‑

manic priesthood produced an extreme formalism with a tendency to exercise power over the gods by means of a correct performance of the prescribed offerings, prayers, and invocations. The Atharva Veda contains a vast number of ex­amples of formulas to be employed in such acts of magic, and the Sutras, or compendiums of ritual for the Brahmanic sacrifice, mark a still further ad­vance in religious formalism. Even the Buddhistic reform was unable to suppress the witchcraft under­lying Hinduism, and it was in Buddhism that the popular belief in a cult of magic appropriate to the spirits of earth, trues, mountains, fields, and houses found its most luxuriant development. If this be true of Hindu Buddhism it is still more character­istic of the Mongolian and Tatar neighbors of India, especially the Chinese and the shamanistic tribes of central and northern Asia. In modern China (q.v.) Buddhist bonzes vie with Taoist priests in the practise of magic and divination.

In Persia (see ZOROASTER, ZOROASTRIANISM), in like manner, magic forced itself upon a Mazdaism which was originally free from witchcraft. The Avesta bitterly opposed the magic arts of the " wizards " who derived their skill either from " Turan " or from Babylon, but toward the end of the Acheemenian period, as well as under the Arsa­cids, magic began to play so prominent a part in the popular religion of the Persians that the name

Magian became a designation for the y. In Persia. priesthood of Persia. Even the efforts

of the Sassanians to restore the an­cient pre‑Magian faith had only temporary success. As far as this later Persian or Parthian magianism was predominantly astrological or mantic in char­acter, it must be regarded as borrowed from Baby­lonia, but its magic elements in the narrower sense of the term, such se conjuration and amuleLa, doubtless came from the " Turanian " or Scythian peoples in the north.

Among the ancient Teutons a cult of the divinity of the fields and forte connected with the practise of magic was an important feature of religion at a





THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 128




very early period, although it reached its zenith only to be crushed by Christianity. Among the

Celts, in like manner, religion was & Among strongly infused with magic elements



Teutons which had reached a degree of refine­and Celts. went and complexity unknown to

the popular Teutonic witchcraft. This was due in great part to the organized priesthood of the Druids (q.v.), who were especially skilled in medical magic.

In Greece magic was an important religious fac­tor even in the Homeric and early post‑Homeric periods, as is clear from the story of Media in Ar­gonautic legend, Circe in the Odyssey, the magic goddess Hecate, Hermes the protecting herald of the gods and giver of dreams, and all other patron deities. That these ancient Hellenic traditions of magic were native in origin and not borrowed from

the East is shown by abundant evi­y. In dente, especially that which alludes

Greece. either to Thrace or Thessaly as the

early home of witchcraft. Yet at an

early time foreign magic found its way into Greece

both from Egypt and Babylonia or Persia. Nor

did the refinement of Greek civilization prevent the

warmest welcome and the moat varied imitations

of the magic arts of oriental " barbarians." The

medical magic of Egypt found no bar to its en­

trance, and neither the rationalism of the followers

of Hippocrates nor the mockeries of Lucian could

shake the pseudo‑philosophy of the wizards of the

Nile who flocked to Greece in increasing numbers.

Equally successful was the divination of Persia

and Babylon. All forma of prophecy, by astrology,

the raising of the dead, psychomancy, invocation

of the gods, clidomancy, hydromancy, lecanomancy,

and anthropomancy, were in constant use; while

the defense of " Persian " magicians as priestly sages

by Aristotle, Dio Chrysoatom, Apuleius, and Celsus

shows the esteem and influence enjoyed by these

adepts of eastern occult art among the Greeks during

the dynasty of the Diadochi and the Roman period.

Rome also possessed its magic and divination, which in their beginnings reached back to the regal epoch and were domiciled among the tribes living on the banks of the Tiber. The Etruscans intro­duced the cult of the Dii Averrecm"i. and all forms of auguries into Rome, although other neighboring peoples, such as the Marsi, likewise contributed

their quota. The introduction of :o. In eastern magic was bitterly opposed by Rome legislation as early as the reigns of Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius, while Caracalla condemned magicians to be burned alive or thrown to the beasts. Nevertheless the occult wisdom of the East was irresistible, and the diatribes of Pliny and Tacitus proved unavailing. Even the emperors favored magic; Nero accepted invitations to magic feasts, and Otho was a pro­npunced patron of magic, while Vespasian, Hadrian, and Marcus Aurelius were at least tolerant toward it and Alexander Severus gave it official subven­tion. In the reign of the latter and his immediate predecessors magic reached its climax in Rome, and not till the triumph of Christianity was it checked, and even then not extirpated.




The early Church was at times not unfavorable to magic. Thus Origen, in his commentary on Genesis (cited in Eusebius, Prceparatio Evangelica, book VI., chap. xi., Eng. transl., i. 280 aqq., Oxford, 1903), drew a distinction between divine and de­monic astrology, and in his polemic against Celsus ascribed a' certain reality and justification to the power of those who healed through magic. It was especially the Christian Alexandrians who expressed such views, following, on the one hand, such Hel­lenistic predecessors as Philo, and, on the other,

such neo‑Platonic philosophers as

ii. Magic Iamblichua and Synesius, one of the and the earliest sources of this nature being Early the philastrological dialogue known as

Church. Hermippua (Anonymi Christians Her­



mippus de astrologic dialogus, ed. W.

Knoll and P. Viereck, Leipsic,1895), which probably

dates from the fifth or sixth century. The New

Testament, however, except for the reference to

the " wise men from the East," which was regarded

as the fulfilment of Messianic prophecy (Ps. Lzaii.

10, 15; Isa. Ix. 1 sqq.), was unfavorable to magic.

Thus the Samaritan Simon is characterized as a

false prophet, as is the Jew Bar‑Jesus, who is termed

a "child of the devil" (Acts viii. 9‑11, xiii. 6‑11).

The tractate of " The Two Ways " at the beginning

of the Didache (q.v.) and at the close of the epistle

of Barnabas contains an explicit warning against

magic, which is ranked with witchcraft, idolatry,

drunkenness, impurity, and infanticide. After the

middle of the second century the Gnostics were con­

demned by the Church Fathers as the representa­

tives of accursed magic arts, and Irenaeus traced all

heretical Gnosticism back to Simon Magus. The

same charge of magic was made against Menan­

der, the Carpocratians, the Marcosiana, the Elke­

saites, the Ophitea, and heretics of every descrip­

tion. Side by side with this gnostic magic ran the

ancient pagan belief in the power of witchcraft.

After the beginning of the fourth century influen­

tial heads of the neo‑Platonic school sought to ex­

tend both theurgic and mantic magic, and the op­

posing measures of such Christian emperors as

Constantine, Valentinian L, Valens, and Theo­

dosius I. had but temporary efficacy. Even during

the centuries of the barbarian ware the aid of Tus­

can magicians was repeatedly sought, despite the

fulminations of Church Fathers like Ephraem Sy­

rus, Isaac of Antioch, Chrysostom, Augustine,

Gregory the Great, and Isidore of Seville.

Throughout the Middle Ages the conflict contin­ued. In the East collections of oracles and Apoc­rypha ascribed to Zoroaster, Daniel, Methodius, Leo the Wise, and other famous names were multi­plied and formed the basis of commentaries of Psellus the Younger, Roger Bacon, and Albertua Magnus, and also of such protagonists of the Ren­aissance as Pletho sad Ficinus. The Cabala added

its quota to occultism, furnishing the

a. Medi‑ magic pentagram, the Shem ha‑Mepho­oval Magic. rash, and the Agla. Innumerable so‑

clesiastical prohibitions failed to crush magic, though the early disapproval of witchcraft as a foolish superstition gradually developed, after the period of the crusades, into attacks upon a






127 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA acsr:io

1   ...   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   ...   38


The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2016
send message

    Main page