WARNING: The following article is a discussion about the Lord of the Rings trilogy and may unintentionally contain "spoilers" for those who have not yet seen the movies or read the books. You have been warned: don't blame me if it takes away the surprise. ;-)

I remember my friends from high school telling me I should read JRR Tolkien's "The Hobbit" and the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I also remember thinking that I really didn't get into that kind of fantasy writing, so I didn't read them. But the powers that be had other ideas. About a year later, for a college theology course on ethics in modern times, the first book assigned to us was "The Hobbit". That first day, Fr. Roach (yes, that really was his name) assigned us to read the first chapter. I finished the book about 14 hours later. Before the end of the week, I had purchased the Lord of the Rings boxed trilogy set (with another copy of "The Hobbit" included) and read them almost obsessively. (It's probably a good thing I took that course early in my college career when I didn't have the more difficult and time-consuming engineering classes I had later. I might have failed them if I had.) Since that time, I have read those four books at least fifteen times. (At one point I even had the entire first chapter memorized verbatim.) I've also read most of Tolkien's other works as well. I even obtained permission from the publisher to transcribe the books into Braille. I own the videos of the animated versions of "The Hobbit" and the Lord of the Rings and now the extended DVD versions of both the first and second movies. I will be in the stores on the day the third movie is released in its extended version. I saw the third movie on its opening day and I think I spent the last hour of the movie crying. My point in all this is that I know my material and I'm a bit obsessed with LOTR. (Ironically, the university I attended is the proud owner of the original manuscripts of many of JRR Tolkien's works. Marquette University bought the archives in 1964, I believe, before the explosion of popularity of Tolkien's work. If I remember my numbers correctly, they bought the whole lot for just under $10,000. I can't even begin to imagine what it is worth today. But I digress...)

Tolkien himself, in a foreward for the authorized edition of "The Fellowship of the Ring" (published by Ballantine Books) wrote, "The Lord of the Rings has been read by many people since it finally appeared in print ten years ago; and I should like to say something here with reference to the many opinions or guesses that I have received or have read concerning the motives and meanings of the tale. The prime motive was the desire of a tale-teller to try his hand at a really long story that would hold the attention of readers, amuse them, delight them, and at times maybe excite them or deeply move them." Later on in that same forward, he again addressed this issue when he wrote: "As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical." While it cannot be denied that personal experience and belief influence a writer, it is also very clear that there was no intention on Mr. Tolkien's part to write the equivalent of a modern-day epic fable or impart any "moral of the story" to the reader. His joy was in the telling of a good tale and the study of languages-- very similar to the likings of hobbits.

With that said, it is still understandable why many, particulary those of the Catholic/Christian faith, feel it necessary to draw parallels between the characters in Tolkien's works and their religious teachings. (Mr. Tolkien was a devout Catholic.) The fall and subsequent return of Gandalf virtually begs comparison to the death and resurrection of Jesus. Sauron has many parallels to Satan and the ring itself can be seen as representative of the temptation of sin. And yet, it seems to me, that such parallels are perhaps simply a way to avoid having to condemn what is, in many aspects, a book that also goes against many Christian teachings.

For one thing, there is no concept of "One God, omnipotent and omniscient" in the LOTR. There is reference the Valar, but it is also clear that the Valar are plural and that they, while being vastly more powerful and wise than humans or even elves, are still not the "creators" of the universe known as Middle Earth. They may be its main organizers, its overseers and they appear to have the ability to take life (since it was they who granted men the gift of mortality), but they themselves are created beings, even if immortal. They also appear to be quite capable of being overcome by the evil force known as Sauron and of having their dominion over Middle Earth ended. None of these are qualities that are attributable or acceptable in describing the Christian God. Therefore, for those who insist on making comparisons between Christianity and Tolkien's work, they are ignoring the "fact" that Tolkien describes a world in which there is no One God but instead a multitude of gods, both good and evil (since it is hinted at that Sauron, as evil as he is, is but a shadow or servant of the great evil.)

The use of magic and fortune-telling is warned against in the Bible. Yet Gandalf is a wizard-- a magic user. Aragorn makes use of the palantir, a scrying device. The ring itself is magical. Bilbo uses it for his convenience (and to avoid those pesky Sackville-Bagginses) and Frodo, in the end, claims the evil magic as his own. When explaining to the hobbits what her mirror will show them, Galadriel says, "Many things I can command the Mirror to reveal." She later says to Sam, "For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe; though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem also to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy." Magic seems to be portrayed not so much as a "supernatural force" but as a form of energy that created beings can control and use for both good or evil. It seems that magic is itself not inherently evil rather that the intent of the user is what makes it evil. Yet despite the apparent dire warnings against the use of magic in the Bible, those whose intent is good suffer little or no harm from their use of magic and in most cases actually benefit from its use.

In addition to Gandalf, there are other characters who exhibit very Christ-like qualities. Frodo's willingness to suffer and die for the salvation of all Middle Earth, Aragorn's sacrifices of personal happiness, his humility, his "descent" into the realm of the dead and his ability to release them from "limbo" as well as his overcoming temptation to always do what is right to save Middle Earth and even Sam's devotion to Frodo and his willingness to fill the needs of Frodo (ie, to serve) before his own can be compared to the acts/life of Jesus. While the debate among the Christian commentators continues as to who most represents Jesus (bearing in mind that Mr. Tolkien himself said he intended no inner meaning), I tend to believe that all of them are overlooking an alternative explanation: that each of us has within us the qualities of the Christ. We need only choose to recognize, accept and utilize them. This seems to be supported when Sam recognizes how the people in the epic tales of ages past had many chances to turn away from their path but didn't. They accepted that their actions could change the world for the better. Again, this is in direct contradiction to the Christian teaching that we are innately sinful and corrupt and that without God's mercy, we are helpless and worthless.

To my way of thinking, one of the most striking differences between the books and the teachings of Christianity is that evil is self-defeating when placed up against those whose intent is to do good. This can most notably be seen in the character of Gollum. Gollum's evil intent to murder the hobbits to take back the ring winds up providing Frodo and Sam with the thing they need most: a guide into Mordor via paths that aren't as heavily guarded as the Black Gate. His plot to have Shelob kill them and Frodo's subsequent capture results in the orcs fighting over the plunder and eventually killing each other, thereby completely eliminating the tower guard without Frodo or Sam having to do much of anything. We see this again as Frodo and Sam near the entrance to the Cracks of Doom and Gollum attacks a flagging Frodo. The attempt to take the ring gives Frodo the energy he needs to complete his journey. And finally, when Gollum attacks the invisible Frodo and bites off his finger, breaking his promise to serve the Master of the Ring (which had at that point been claimed by Frodo), he falls into the molten lava, thereby helping Frodo to fulfill his quest. Even Sauron is defeated by what had been his most powerful weapons: fear and despair. He succumbs to his fear that Aragorn has the ring and seeks to crush the proffered bait, leaving his most vulnerable spot unguarded. This message of a self-defeating evil that can be thwarted by man's intent to do good runs contrary to the Christian teaching that man needs God to save him from evil. That man's acts alone are not enough to overcome the evil in our world.

I could go on, but I hope by now, dear reader, you see my point. Tolkien's epic saga of the battle between good and evil is a saga that has been told a thousand times before, most notably (based on number of copies sold) in the Bible. And like the Bible, Tolkien's story can be used to support a variety of interpretations based on the beliefs and experiences of the reader. Both books can be read on many different levels, and the the richness and fullness of both continue to unfold with each successive reading. There is always something new to grasp; some new level of understanding that will suddenly hit the reader. And like the Bible, reading the LOTR trilogy can evoke intense emotions and be a very spiritual experience. The biggest difference that I see between Tolkien's work and the Bible is that it is clear that the authors of the Bible intended to impart a message to those who read it. Tolkien had no such intent. Intentionally or not, he respected each person's right to take from his story what they wanted (or needed) to take. Any group-- the specific faith/path makes no difference-- that claims the intended theme supports only their faith is quite simply mistaken. Mr. Tolkien's own words that his stories have no allegorical inner meaning can hardly be less clear. Yet I have no doubt that, just as the Bible is used to "prove" one faith over another, so too will Mr. Tolkien's works be used to "prove" one faith over another. The lesson about lessons is that no matter what the teacher says, the student will learn what the student wants to learn.

PS: Since this is my last article for this year, I wish you all a happy holiday season, no matter what path you follow. May the coming year bring you peace, prosperity and fulfillment and may the Love of the Divine manifest in your daily dealings with others, giving gentleness to your touch, softness to your tongue, understanding in your hearts and firmness to your resolve to continually grow in Love.

Namaste. Shalom. Salam. Peace.

Previous	Home	Index	Next

onespiritproject.com