Grace & Peace!
Re: whether astrology is licit or illicit, as Joe Monahan mentioned, there was a time when the line between “good” uses and “bad” uses of it was rather thin. To make a distinction, at that time, between astrology and astronomy (a distinction we make because our world-view has changed significantly–i.e., we are more apt to believe in a mechanized universe of interlocking material components than in a universe that is a symbol of the Divine presence and filled with physical manifestations of spritual truths), to make this distinction would have been rather ludicrous and would pre-suppose an 18th Century European Rationalist/Enlightenment mentality in early 1st Century Palestine. I would argue that to enforce this mindset on any religious tradition is to do violence to the tradition, as history has shown.
Ahimsa spoke of astrology as a “sacred science” and, in fact, this is how it was viewed for some time (another sacred science was alchemy) and was practiced as such by saints, popes, and others and was not frowned upon. At the heart of a sacred science is this–the application of metaphysical principles to cosmology, or, in other words, the treatment of cosmology as a revelation of metaphysical principles. A sacred science, divorced from its proper religious (i.e. revelatory) context, becomes superstition very quickly and easily. Further separation from this context renders it a purely material science–Astrology into Astronomy, Alchemy into Chemistry–or destroys it completely.
The point being this–divination through astrology was certainly very popular, but viewing the movement of the heavens (“The heavens declare the glory of God”) as revelatory of God’s purposes does not presuppose an interest in prying into the future through divination–it presupposes a symbolic mindset, the universe as a symbol of God.
Let us remember, then, that what is disdained by the church in astrology and in many forms of divination are these points: 1–they can degrade the spiritual while encouraging superstition; 2–they can lead to fatalism and a denial of free will, and; 3–that attempting to see the future may be a sign of over-weaning pride in the one who attempts such things, particularly contrary to the will of God. Other forms of divination have the added censure of being believed to contain appeals to demonic powers.
The church is very zealous when it comes to the faith of her children. I believe there is a way to practice the sacred science of astrology which is licit–but I also believe that finding this way would require much effort (particularly as it would involve, for many, a complete change in world-view), and could potentially lead to a great spiritual fall. It is for this reason, I think, that the church condemns the practice–not because it is wholly bad, but because, given our fallen nature, the temptations to abuse it are too great, the spiritual risks involved too high. It is better, therefore, to leave such things alone.
Along those lines, let us remember that sacred sciences are by no means necessary for salvation. They may allow us to witness the working of God in the universe to a different degree (perhaps), but the witness the universe gives to such working without these sciences is overpowering as it is–it is difficult not to notice. And our salvation is based in Jesus, not on the working of any science, be it sacred, pseudo, or secular.
Under the Mercy,
Mark
Deo Gratias!
