Grace & Peace!
I think Alchemy gets a bum rap on all sides. Most see it as a pseudo-science, or the doman of fools who attempted to change lead into gold before proper chemistry was discovered. But Alchemy is much more than all that.
For the most part, the alchemists were not interested in what we would consider chemistry. Their worldview (which saw the universe as symbolic of a larger order of reality–would that we all shared the same worldview!) would not allow for the separation of physical science from potential spiritual applications which would arrive with the so-called Enlightenment. Changing lead into gold meant changing the soul, not a get rich quick scheme. Those who sought mere wealth were quickly deceived, frustrated, or broken. Those who found their riches in heaven embarked on a great quest. As the saying went “Aurum nostrum non est aurum vulgi,” which is to say, “Our gold is not the gold of the vulgar.” Those who are rumored to have completed what is called “The Great Work” were not particularly interested in temporal riches.
A great introuction to what Alchemy was all about is Titus Burckhardt’s classic simply called “Alchemy” which rectifies many misconceptions and re-enforces a view of alchemy which sees it as a “sacred science”, a discipline which is complementary to religion, though not essential to it.
For instance, is it any wonder that the Christian alchemists identified the Lapis Philosophorum, the Stone of the Wise, the completion of the Great Work, with Christ? Is it coincidence that the three major phases of the alchemical work (the Black–Nigredo, the White–Albedo, and the Red–Rubedo) mirror perfectly the three classical mystical phases of purgation, illumination and union?
My argument would be that there is nothing “magical” about alchemy, properly understood, but there is something mystical about it. It is a path of discipline–it is not for nothing that it is called by some the Yoga of the West. If should not be taken as a religion in itself, and should not be viewed as necessary to salvation or to a proper understanding of Christian symbol, ritual, or doctrine. But it can be quite helpful.
That having been said, are there some philosophical principles which may be inimical to Christianity? If there are, they are few and far between and are holdovers from a traditional, pre-modern mindset. The one that leaps most readily to mind is the idea of the prima materia (which may be interpreted as contrary to creation ex nihilo). Another is the anima mundi. But properly understood in their symbolic and cultural contexts, these ideas should not be perceived as threatening. Nor should they be perceived as doctrine.
I think that studying Alchemy should be akin to reading Origen–there are many glorious things to discover, but keep your wits about you!
Also, to those who would see Alchemy as heretically gnostic (as opposed to gnostic in the sense that St. Clement of Alexandria defined the term) because an element of secrecy was involved, I would remind them of the church’s Disciplina Arcani (Discipline of the Secret) which did not permit speaking the Lord’s prayer or the Creed in public for fear that others would not understand and would ridicule, in their ignorance, what are great treasures. The Disciplina is still seen in the “secret” praying of the Lord’s prayer mentioned in many old prayer books: Pater Noster (then in secret until) et ne nos inducas in tentationem sed libera nos a malo.
John Granger’s article “The Alchemist’s Tale” which discusses (of all things) the Harry Potter series in terms of alchemical symbolism, alchemy in English literature, and alchemy and Christianity, might be helpful(
touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-09-034-f). Stratford Caldecott’s journal “Second Spring,” while not dealing directly with alchemy, is a great site for those who are interested in what a traditional worldview looks like from a modern Catholic perspective (
secondspring.co.uk/index.htm). Highly recommended.
Under the Mercy,
Mark
Deo Gratias!
