Semantics is a tricky game to try and play. Actual reading of the article explains why the chosen words were used in describing this papyrus.
A tad bit confusing perhaps - but understood in the context of the piece.
"In a statement, Mazza said, “This is an important and unexpected finding as it is one of the first recorded documents to use magic
in the Christian context," while the first charm ever found to refer to the Eucharist – the Last Supper – as the manna of the Old Testament”."
Actually I previously read the entire article
Actually , early CHristians believed themselves to be completed Jews- having found the Messiah
Hassidic / Orthodox Jews wear a 'Phylactery' in a small leather box on their forehead with scriptures in the small leather box.
They do so as they are commanded to have the word of God before them- no magical charm - rather a sign of their commitment to follow the word of God in all their dealings.
A "charm"..? No ! a litteral commandment from God , according to their beliefs.
It is no more a 'charm' than a scapular is to Catholics ( a reminder of who you are).
Or a mezuzah is to a Conservative Jew, while on the doorway/lintel of a Jewish household containing part of the Torah, it is no 'charm '. It is a reminder !
True Christians believe that they are 'completed Jews' , as they already have found the Messiah.
To call it a magical 'charm' is to diminsh its importance, and demonstrates the authors ignorance !!