A moral theology of divination. Is there one?
Pre-Vatican II moral theology makes a distinction between methods that explicitly or tacitly invoke “demons” (ouija boards, etc.) versus those that work by natural processes, such as divining rods for water or dowsing with a pendulum. This is a distinction not found in works after Vatican II, likely because the Council’s original implementers (Bugnini et al) were driven by a desire to de-emphasize private spirituality, belief in the miraculous, and belief in human interaction with the non-physical.
However, even the distinction made in pre-Vatican II (i.e. authentic) theology isn’t without problems. The discussion in the Manuals tends to lack detail; in fact it looks like something the authors aren’t comfortable discussing at all. What’s more, one can find the Manualists contradicting each other on the finer points, with the contradictions seeming to run along the “rigorist vs laxist” axis of approaching morality.
Of course, this brings me to some good old-fashioned Summa-style theologizing for Astrology. Maybe sometime in the future I’ll do the same with the Tarot and other methods.